• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

A democracy can’t function when people can’t distinguish facts from lies.

Russia bombs Ukraine’s maternity hospitals; Republicans in the House can’t sort out supporting Ukraine.

How can republicans represent us when they don’t trust women?

Please don’t feed the bears.

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

Trump’s legal defense is going to be a dumpster fire inside a clown car on a derailing train.

After dobbs, women are no longer free.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

The fundamental promise of conservatism all over the world is a return to an idealized past that never existed.

The party of Reagan has become the party of Putin.

Everything is totally normal and fine!!!

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

Following reporting rules is only for the little people, apparently.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

Don’t expect peaches from an apple tree.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Don’t Bet On Ohio

Don’t Bet On Ohio

by Tim F|  February 13, 200811:54 am| 75 Comments

This post is in: Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

Probably making the most out of a necessity, the Clinton campaign has gambled everything on big wins in Ohio and Texas to counteract Barack Obama’s ridiculous momentum in February states. Rudy Giuliani’s campaign manager thinks that is a great idea, and indeed recent polls have Hillary ahead by seventeen points.

That’s nice, but it won’t be enough. Let’s count off the reasons – a 17% win in both big states won’t provide enough extra delegates to overcome Obama’s lead, every poll is trending Obama’s way and Obama consistently outperforms the polls on election day. The last bit is especially interesting because i still don’t think that most people have entirely grokked what it means for a race with Obama in it. One Virginia poll had Obama up by 15 points, some last-minute tracking polls put him up by about 20; Obama won by almost 30 points.

Across the various states since February 5th it seems undeniable that Obama consistently outperforms expectations. This probably has a lot to do with momentum; polling necessarily happens before voting. But I suspect that a large part of the disparity comes from the fact that Obama is increasingly bringing in demographics that normally don’t vote (e.g. young voters, single women etc.) or normally don’t vote Democratic. I bet that pony mania is playing hell with likely voter formulas.

Anyhow, given that and the big mo’, I don’t think that a 17-point lead in Ohio is very good news for Clinton at all.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « I Hate Technology Open Thread
Next Post: Connect The Dots »

Reader Interactions

75Comments

  1. 1.

    Jen

    February 13, 2008 at 11:55 am

    Is Ohio an open primary? That could affect things too.

  2. 2.

    Dennis - SGMM

    February 13, 2008 at 12:00 pm

    Remember when Clinton was “the prohibitive favorite” with the polls showing her up by 20% or more in every venue? I suspect that most pre-election polling is already stale by the time that it’s completed.

    Ride, pony, ride.

  3. 3.

    Tom Shipley

    February 13, 2008 at 12:01 pm

    I actually like them against Toledo tonight.

  4. 4.

    Caidence (fmr. Chris)

    February 13, 2008 at 12:05 pm

    I don’t think that a 17-point lead in Ohio is very good news for Clinton at all.

    I think the logic involves inevitability, not delegate math. I hear that her goal will be to say “lookie I won the big states (and my hubby was preznit once) so you have to give me the keys! An’ I wanna pony. Now!”. The plan says that by saying that, the pavlovian training of the dems kicks in and they flock to her.

    While I’d love to believe your reasoned, adult concept of things, we’re dealing with Clintons here. Their personality doesn’t function normally, like ours does.

  5. 5.

    neil

    February 13, 2008 at 12:19 pm

    That SUSA poll might be good, but it seems to underweight independents compared to past Ohio elections. Of course, Obama cleans up among independents.

  6. 6.

    DrDave

    February 13, 2008 at 12:24 pm

    Rudy Giuliani’s campaign manager thinks that is a great idea

    Rudy’s campaign manager thought Florida was a great idea for Rudy, too. How did that work out again???

  7. 7.

    NonyNony

    February 13, 2008 at 12:35 pm

    Is Ohio an open primary? That could affect things too.

    Depends on what you mean by “open”. You have to declare your party allegiance when you take a ballot. I’ve been told that they can make you sign a “party affiliation” statement if you’ve changed your affiliation since the last primary you voted in, but I’ve never seen it happen. When I switched from Republican to Independent they didn’t make me sign anything. It was years later and a different district entirely when I switched from Independent to Democratic, so no one made me sign anything.

    As for “winning big” in Ohio – I don’t think it’ll happen. I mean, it could happen – we’ve traditionally got the right demographics (older, conservative-leaning) for Clinton to win a sizeable margin. But – it seems like the OSU college students are even MORE active here in Columbus than in the last election cycle (where they were incredibly active in comparison to earlier ones). I think the turnout among the college students will be larger than in ’04, which will sway things for Obama. AND – Ohio likes winners. If Clinton is being perceived as a “loser” coming into Ohio, she’s going to lose some level of support. Those two things combined may not push Obama over the top to win the state, but it’ll likely make it much, much closer than Clinton will really need to declare “victory.”

  8. 8.

    zzyzx

    February 13, 2008 at 12:36 pm

    17 points is significant. However, Obama will have three weeks between WI and OH/TX to cut into that lead.

    First, though, he has to win WI and HI to keep the momentum argument going.

  9. 9.

    scott

    February 13, 2008 at 12:37 pm

    As a political junkie and proud librul Democrat, I still don’t grok Obama.

    But it’s clear he has an appeal that’s undeniably deep and getting wider by the day. Jen mentioned the open primary aspect of this. As a former VA resident, I can tell ya that that does play into this. Who suffers? Well, McMaverick does because even those people who buy into the Villager’s bullshit maverick label, they look at a cranky 71 year old man who’s beyond wooden or a 46 year old man who’s a great orator. Clinton loses because some of those people who just as often as note vote Repug get a chance to cross over giving Obama that much more of a margin.

    I’ve got a buddy in NoVA who usta be on Darth Cheney’s staff. He voted for Dumbya in 00 but held his nose and voted for Kerry in 04. He’s flat out stated he’d vote for Obama in a heartbeat, never for Clinton. As he puts it “there’s no black man in America who has as much negative baggage as Clinton”.

    We might be seeing a confluence of “Clinton Fatigue” and “Jesus Fatigue” this year. The country will be better if both come to pass.

  10. 10.

    Scotty

    February 13, 2008 at 12:41 pm

    17 points is significant. However, Obama will have three weeks between WI and OH/TX to cut into that lead.

    I think that is fairly significant. It seems the more people see of him the more they are impressed, or at least more willing to vote for him. Does this mean the more Clinton is seen/heard the more likely people turn away from her?

    First, though, he has to win WI and HI to keep the momentum argument going.

    Obama is pretty much a shoe-in for Wisconsin. So even if he does lose Hawaii (not likely) he’ll be pulling 1 out of 2. That one being a larger share of delegates.

  11. 11.

    Scotty

    February 13, 2008 at 12:44 pm

    And here comes the negative ads. This is all Clinton has left to work with.

  12. 12.

    TheFountainHead

    February 13, 2008 at 12:48 pm

    If Obama loses Hawaii I’ll eat my cat.

  13. 13.

    crw

    February 13, 2008 at 12:48 pm

    Ohio is one of the hardest hit states in the ongoing economic meltdown. I don’t think Ohions are going to be as receptive to Obama’s emotional message of hope and change for the better. To pull it out he’s going to have to wonk out a bit on economics and get specific addressing their very real insecurities.

    On the bright side, for the general, I don’t see how McCain can take Ohio if he keeps focusing on national defense and foreign policy.

  14. 14.

    jnfr

    February 13, 2008 at 12:49 pm

    On the surface, I would think Clinton should be competitive in Wisconsin. That she’s practically conceded that election says to me that her campaign is fading.

    I’m still waiting to see Obama take a high population, working class state. If he wins in Ohio, Texas, or Pennsylvania, it’s all over.

  15. 15.

    Gus

    February 13, 2008 at 12:52 pm

    They went there. Off topic hilarity. I don’t know how to embed links, but RedState is calling our current economic problems the “Pelosi recession.” According to one of the shit-for-brains commenters, “Even though they haven’t been able to get any of their idiotic agenda passed, just talking about it for the last 15 months has been enough to trash the economy.” That is some powerful rhetoric!

  16. 16.

    jcricket

    February 13, 2008 at 12:55 pm

    Let me start with the idea that if Obama wins Ohio, Texas and/or PA and really picks up any kind of delegate lead heading into convention season, he has to be made the nominee, even if he doesn’t have the numbers to “lock”. There’s no other way to avoid demoralizing the Dems at that point.

    However, let’s suppose Clinton wins Ohio and Texas and maybe PA by a reasonably large margin. Add in the possibility of an Edwards endorsement (who knows) for her. Also add that it’s nearly mathematically impossible for Obama to sew up enough delegates to actually secure the nomination before the convention.

    The two candidates are then tied in terms of delegates, or Hillary has some slight advantage.

    Why would Hillary not be equally entitled to the nomination at that point. Obama’s “momentum”? Hillary is old news/politics of the past? Doesn’t seem convincing to me. Despite press leanings otherwise, or wishes and hopes of the blogosphere/Obamamaniacs, it would seem (in this scenario) that she got slightly more delegates than Obama, so she managed to convince plenty of Democrats (including super delegates) to vote her way.

    I understand the desire to claim things are a “done deal”, and I will fully get behind Obama at the point where these big contests are over if he pulls into a lead of any reasonable size. But if he doesn’t, I think the ride’s gonna be fairly bumpy in terms of jockeying for the nomination.

    And I just hope Obama fans can see that it might not be “unfair” or “wrong” for Hillary to get the nod in that scenario.

  17. 17.

    Zifnab

    February 13, 2008 at 12:56 pm

    17 points is significant. However, Obama will have three weeks between WI and OH/TX to cut into that lead.

    First, though, he has to win WI and HI to keep the momentum argument going.

    Wisconsin is one of the most open primaries in the nation, with a single straight ticket that you can vote off of as you please. It’s practically a general election, just with more candidates to choose from.

    I have little doubt that Obama will soar in such a contest.

  18. 18.

    Sasha

    February 13, 2008 at 12:58 pm

    In the same vein but more interesting, perhaps, is the last Texas poll that I can find taken in the closing days of January that shows in Texas Clinton at 48% and Obama at 38%. The previous poll at the end of December had Clinton 45% and Obama 28%. Texas may not be a slam-dunk either.

  19. 19.

    Sasha

    February 13, 2008 at 12:59 pm

    Ack. I meant to source those numbers. IVR Polls. http://ivrpolls.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=1

  20. 20.

    Zifnab

    February 13, 2008 at 1:03 pm

    However, let’s suppose Clinton wins Ohio and Texas and maybe PA by a reasonably large margin. Add in the possibility of an Edwards endorsement (who knows) for her. Also add that it’s nearly mathematically impossible for Obama to sew up enough delegates to actually secure the nomination before the convention.

    The two candidates are then tied in terms of delegates, or Hillary has some slight advantage.

    Why would Hillary not be equally entitled to the nomination at that point[?]

    If Hillary somehow magically took Ohio and Texas and maybe Pennsylvannia by reasonably large margins. And Edwards endorsed her. And Obama still didn’t have the votes to lock up the nomination. And the two delegates were tied or Hillary had a slight lead. And monkeys started flying out of my ass. I suppose you would have a point.

    However, that’s not what anyone is particularly worried about. The general fear is that Obama and Hillary will remain neck-and-neck without any future blowouts. The convention will come down to Super Delegate counts. Obama will hold the majority of standard delegates, but Clinton will twist arms to wring out a majority of super delegates.

    Thus we have a convention in which Obama controls the popular momentum and the electoral mandate, but Hillary has the upper hand in insider Beltway politics. If Clinton takes the nomination on these grounds, many people – independents more than liberals, no doubt – will be soured on the Democratic ticket.

    Whether that’s right or wrong, fair or unfair, isn’t much of an issue either. A brokered convention that drops the popular candidate for the establishment candidate will be bad for the business of the Democratic Party as a whole.

  21. 21.

    TheFountainHead

    February 13, 2008 at 1:05 pm

    The two candidates are then tied in terms of delegates, or Hillary has some slight advantage.

    I think by the time we get to those states, her lead would have to be very significant, at least two to one. Barring some large stumble on Obama’s part, I can’t see how that is in the cards for her.

  22. 22.

    Billy K

    February 13, 2008 at 1:06 pm

    17 points is significant. However, Obama will have three weeks between WI and OH/TX to cut into that lead.

    If he can cut that in half (I bet he can) by the primary and more or less split the delegates, that’s all he needs. Same with Texas, though I’m betting he eeks out a win.

  23. 23.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 1:08 pm

    I do tend to wonder if Obama will pick some key endorsements, say Edwards or Gore, soon. That would really change the dynamic.

    My guess is that Ohio ends up being pretty close.

    The important thing is this: the Democratic party is badly divided once again. It’s 1968 all over again. There’s on way they can beat a maverick centrist like McCain. They’ll be lucky to hold onto even one House of Congress.

  24. 24.

    jcricket

    February 13, 2008 at 1:08 pm

    I don’t know how to embed links, but RedState is calling our current economic problems the “Pelosi recession.”

    Not gonna work. No one outside of the blogosphere and San Fransisco cares/knows about Pelosi. They know Bush. They know Clinton. They know Obama. They know McCain.

    Even their whole attempt to call it the “Clinton recession” never caught on outside of right-wing blogistan (seriously).

    Democrats do need to do a better job of pinning failures on the Republicans who caused them. There are so many failures and Republicans to blame it’s hard to pick just one. Equally important, Democrats need to do a better job claiming credit for their success. Not enough to be like “look, see, things are incrementally better”.

    Find a way to sell the success and people will associate it with you and keep voting for you.

  25. 25.

    rob

    February 13, 2008 at 1:09 pm

    I live in Ohio and will be voting in my first primary (I am almost 50). Ours is usually so late that it doesn’t matter.

    I will be voting for Obama, but at this point my wife will be voting for Clinton. But I suspect she will forget to vote, and I won’t remind her.

    I hope all I have to do is go to my normal voting location. Which is in a church, and just feels wrong to me, I would rather vote in a school or somewhere a little more neutral.

  26. 26.

    Kirk Spencer

    February 13, 2008 at 1:10 pm

    I have another possible reason Obama keeps outperforming polling expectations.

    The models are wrong.

    To ‘make sense’ of the numbers received, polls are massaged. They’re massaged to match normal turnout of various components – age, race, education, so on and so forth. The likely voter models are worse – they try to estimate how many of those who SAY they’ll turn out WILL turn out.

    The democrats are pulling record number turnouts everywhere. This breaks the models – the “unexpected voters” don’t fit.

    And it seems the majority of the unexpected excess want Obama.

    A digression. D turnout is so much larger than R turnout, even when both are higher than normal, even in states that are “solid red”. I begin to wonder if this will repeat in the actual elections – if we can expect D turnout to be as enthusiastic in November. If so… we’re looking at making McCain look like McGovern.

  27. 27.

    chopper

    February 13, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    I’m still waiting to see Obama take a high population, working class state.

    outside of IL?

  28. 28.

    jcricket

    February 13, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    Whether that’s right or wrong, fair or unfair, isn’t much of an issue either. A brokered convention that drops the popular candidate for the establishment candidate will be bad for the business of the Democratic Party as a whole.

    I can agree on that. If they are neck and neck in delegate count, with the situation as you described, I don’t know what the answer is, honestly.

    I know Obamamaniacs would claim his momentum and popular appeal are all that matters. Clinton fans would say delegate count matters, party apparatus/support (i.e. the super delegate lead she has in this scenario) matter.

    This is why Howard Dean’s already floating the whole trial balloon about the DNC stepping in to prevent a brokered convention. What about (hypothetically), Obama being offered the VP slot (this is if he is behind b/c of the super delegates)? Do you think that would be enough to blunt the impact to the people who supported him?

    I’m fine, btw, with him trying to convince super delegates to “switch sides” well before this whole thing plays out/gets decided. If he can get a lead in both those groups of delegates, I can’t see how the nomination isn’t his for the taking.

    I think the nightmare scenario is neither Clinton nor Obama “going for it” (whatever the suggestion of the DNC is) and the brokered convention with squabbling all over national TV.

  29. 29.

    The Grand Panjandrum

    February 13, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    A little hindsight makes me believe that SC was what Malcolm Gladwell calls the Tipping Point. This primary season has now gone viral for Obama.

    Things can happen all at once, and little changes can make a huge difference.

    Once Bill and other HRC surrogates were goaded into making imprudent remarks that could be construed as bringing race into the election, the Clinton strength in the African American constituency all but disappeared. Period. Game cover.

    Obama then had time to utilize his superior campaign strategy and oratory skills to begin the erosion of other Clinton constituents. He fought the Clinton Machine to a standstill on Super Tuesday. The entire Republican party couldn’t do that! He has now made inroads into the women’s vote. Not decisive, but enough to tilt the balance to his favor.

    The Latino vote in Texas is much too diluted to make a difference, if indeed they do go for Hillary. But as people get to see Obama close up and in person they are frequently swayed by his powerful message. Ohio and Texas will go for Obama.

    HRC leaves the campaign shortly after March 4th.

  30. 30.

    Zifnab

    February 13, 2008 at 1:23 pm

    I’m still waiting to see Obama take a high population, working class state.

    Does Virginia or Maryland count?

  31. 31.

    Tim F.

    February 13, 2008 at 1:23 pm

    The models are wrong.

    To ‘make sense’ of the numbers received, polls are massaged. They’re massaged to match normal turnout of various components – age, race, education, so on and so forth. The likely voter models are worse – they try to estimate how many of those who SAY they’ll turn out WILL turn out.

    I think that I said that.

  32. 32.

    zzyzx

    February 13, 2008 at 1:27 pm

    I’m still confused how someone’s whose message is that Obama is mainly winning in red states that won’t really matter in the general is making her firewall be Texas of all places.

  33. 33.

    Wilfred

    February 13, 2008 at 1:27 pm

    Why would Hillary not be equally entitled to the nomination at that point.

    I read somewhere that going in to yesterday Obama was leading by 200,000 popular votes. I think he added another 300,000 or so, probably more. All this talk about delegates obscures the fact that people are actually voting in droves for Obama. He should stress that in his campaign and let people decide for themselves who deserves it more.

  34. 34.

    Andrew

    February 13, 2008 at 1:31 pm

    Does Virginia or Maryland count?

    No, Virginia is too Republicanny, and Maryland has too many Democrats.

  35. 35.

    Capri

    February 13, 2008 at 1:47 pm

    Perhaps someone can answer this. Aren’t most polls conducted via phone surveys? And, if so, do they use land lines exclusively?

    Don’t many younger folks use their cell phone as their only phone?

    How many of those uncounted voters only use a cell phone and are invisible to the polling process?

  36. 36.

    Billy K

    February 13, 2008 at 1:55 pm

    Perhaps someone can answer this. Aren’t most polls conducted via phone surveys? And, if so, do they use land lines exclusively?

    Don’t many younger folks use their cell phone as their only phone?

    How many of those uncounted voters only use a cell phone and are invisible to the polling process?

    Thsi has been much debated as of late (the last two elections). Your questions are valid. I’ve never heard a good answer.

  37. 37.

    fester

    February 13, 2008 at 2:00 pm

    I have a quick piece on the politics of Southwestern Pennsylvania and how it is plausible that Obama and Clinton are fundamentally tied for the delegate count if the election was to be held today. This region of Pennsylvania is demographically and economically similiar to eastern Ohio (excluding Cleveland) and could be a useful thought exercise.

    Clinton’s model of success has been to rack up 65/35 splits with female voters, and non-white, non-black voters, 60/40 splits with white voters and not get blown out like she is a Republican with the African American vote. Both Virginia and Maryland saw her be blown out like a Republican with the African American vote, and then basically split within the MOE the groups she needs to dominate to have a chance. I think this will be a continuing trend.

  38. 38.

    fester

    February 13, 2008 at 2:01 pm

    whoops link is here:

    http://cernigsnewshog.blogspot.com/2008/02/virginia-exit-polls-and-pennyslvania.html

  39. 39.

    4tehlulz

    February 13, 2008 at 2:10 pm

    I’m still confused how someone’s whose message is that Obama is mainly winning in red states that won’t really matter in the general is making her firewall be Texas of all places.

    PotD candidate

  40. 40.

    jcricket

    February 13, 2008 at 2:11 pm

    I think Obama has one (very good) way to seal the deal. Wins in Ohio and Texas, carried there by his momentum, would make it almost a sure thing he’d win in PA as well. At that point if Hillary didn’t drop out (or whatever) it’d be a waste/shame/wrong, regardless of whether he’s got 2000+ delegates.

    However, if Hillary wins those states (and PA) it is tied, she’s arrested some of the “momentum” and we are all forced to continue our argument about whose favorables (delegates, super delegates, party apparatus, experience, demeanor, appeal, ability to play win at pool, etc.) are the bestest.

    I don’t think there’s a “knockout blow” amongst any of the talking points for either side. At which point we can continue going round and round in circles as is the blogospheric way.

    It’s like the economy. Be prepared for a bumpy ride and an uncertain outcome.

  41. 41.

    J. Michael Neal

    February 13, 2008 at 2:20 pm

    Perhaps someone can answer this. Aren’t most polls conducted via phone surveys? And, if so, do they use land lines exclusively?

    Don’t many younger folks use their cell phone as their only phone?

    How many of those uncounted voters only use a cell phone and are invisible to the polling process?

    Thsi has been much debated as of late (the last two elections). Your questions are valid. I’ve never heard a good answer.

    That’s because there is no good answer. It isn’t that pollsters are looking for a good answer, but haven’t found it yet. It’s that there’s no good answer to find.

    When a significant part of the population you are trying to model becomes unavailable to sample, you’re screwed. All of the pollsters I know are on the academic side, though Charles Franklin is a good friend, and he’s sort of branching out. They’re scared of their data. They know it’s screwed up, and they try to build in weights to fix it, but they aren’t terribly confident that they are right.

    Survey research is facing something of a crisis. Along with the problem of people with no landlines (which also includes a lot of poor people with no phone at all), refusal rates have been going up. If anything, that’s a bigger problem than not being able to reach part of the sample, because you can’t use weights to try to deal with it.

  42. 42.

    Splitting Image

    February 13, 2008 at 2:21 pm

    “I don’t think that a 17-point lead in Ohio is very good news for Clinton at all.”

    It is significant. Michael Dukakis had a 17-point lead over George H.W. Bush in 1988.

    The fact that she needs to win Wisconsin to stop Obama’s momentum is significant as well. Howard Dean famously said “We must win Wisconsin” to keep his campaign afloat.

    If Clinton does manage to stop Obama’s momentum at this point and pick up enough delegates to get a clear win, she’ll have earned her reputation as a campaigner and will be able to claim she deserves the nomination on merit.

    I don’t think that’s going to happen.

  43. 43.

    Neal

    February 13, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    I’m still confused how someone’s whose message is that Obama is mainly winning in red states that won’t really matter in the general is making her firewall be Texas of all places.

    Damn, money shot.

  44. 44.

    gogiggs

    February 13, 2008 at 3:00 pm

    Anecdotal, for what its worth, etc…

    I live in Ohio. I’ve always been registered Independent and have never voted in a primary. This year I plan to register as a Democrat and vote for Obama. Same with my best friend.

  45. 45.

    gypsy howell

    February 13, 2008 at 3:13 pm

    Survey research is facing something of a crisis. Along with the problem of people with no landlines (which also includes a lot of poor people with no phone at all), refusal rates have been going up.

    Why not just ask the NSA what people think? They’re already eavesdropping on everything we say and write anyway, so it’s not like they don’t know. Marketing research and polling could be a new profit center for them.

  46. 46.

    libarbarian

    February 13, 2008 at 3:20 pm

    Do We Really Want Another Black President After The Events Of Deep Impact?

    Really. Do we?

  47. 47.

    Lee

    February 13, 2008 at 3:22 pm

    Anyone know the stats for Texas?

    I can’t seem to find any.

  48. 48.

    libarbarian

    February 13, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    As if that is not enough, history shows us that, besides carrying the baggage of a guaranteed asteroid strike, black heads of state also give terrorists extra motivation to destroy the United States. During the presidency of 24’s David Palmer, there were no fewer than four nuclear bombs smuggled into this country. That’s four more than under any white president.

  49. 49.

    Beloh

    February 13, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    Isn’t Ohio the home of Diebold? Don’t they decide who wins?

  50. 50.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 4:46 pm

    There’s on way they can beat a maverick centrist like McCain. They’ll be lucky to hold onto even one House of Congress.

    Nope, your prediction versus mine, right here, mark it.

    Dem 60, Rep 40. Those are your popular vote tallies on Nov 5 for president. That’s the margin .. or it could be greater, it could exceed the Goldwater cockslap.

    Notice, I didn’t even say who the Dem was. If it’s Obama, it’s 65-35. Mark it down, and if you want, put some money on it. I’ll go into three figures with a bet, show me the money.

  51. 51.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 4:48 pm

    During the presidency of 24’s David Palmer, there were no fewer than four nuclear bombs smuggled into this country. That’s four more than under any white president.

    Comedy gold.

  52. 52.

    NickM

    February 13, 2008 at 5:12 pm

    ThymeZone – I’d bet against you, because I think it’s sure money – but I want you to be right too badly.

    I agree that the Republicans are scared shitless of an Obama candidacy. The movementarians who run the party are coming down from a 14-year-long meth binge and realizing as they wake up that they’re in bed with John McCain. They are not going to be very motivated to do much of anything for him, not even vote. Unless Billary pulls their nuts out of the fire by engineering a convention victory – increasingly unlikely, I think – the movementarians are going to be on the losing end of a well-earned and historic defeat. But not 65-35. And Hillary could win but not anywhere close to 60-40.

  53. 53.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 5:16 pm

    Well, I can only handle so much action, let’s see what DougJ wants to do and then if I can handle some more of this action.

    I suppose we’ll get in trouble for gambling on the blog.

    Oh well. We’re talking Monopoly Money, right?

    Heh.

  54. 54.

    Jen

    February 13, 2008 at 5:20 pm

    I’m still waiting to see Obama take a high population, working class state.

    In addition to the ones he’s taken, which have been mentioned, he’s leading by 10 points in NC, and we have 115 delegates. I am torn by my desire for him to have this thing in the bag by March 5, and my desire for him to campaign here…

  55. 55.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 5:27 pm

    I am torn by my desire for him to have this thing in the bag by March 5, and my desire for him to campaign here…

    Let’s get him ovet the top as quickly as possible, save our money and energy for the Big Show in September.

  56. 56.

    zzyzx

    February 13, 2008 at 6:08 pm

    Also, isn’t MO considered a high population working class state?

  57. 57.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 6:12 pm

    If it’s Obama, it’s 65-35. Mark it down, and if you want, put some money on it. I’ll go into three figures with a bet, show me the money.

    That’s assuming McCain picks Alf Landon as his running mate, right? It wouldn’t be as strange as you think, they were born in the same year.

  58. 58.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 6:19 pm

    I do think McCain’s weaker than is widely believed. He’s just too old. And if he wants to debate Obama on specifics, Obama will clean his clock. The thing about McCain is that he’s just not that bright. And Republicans are wrong about virtually everything on substance.

    So if McCain really tries to makes this about substance it will be tired, old, not especially bright man trying to beat a 40 something former Harvard Law editor, while arguing positions that are wrong and which he probably doesn’t even believe himself. I don’t see him winning with that.

    McCain’s best chance is to go as nasty as possible, but that undermines the whole good guy/straight shooter thing he’s fooled the press into believing. When his surrogates start spreading rumors about illegitimate kids and ties to Al Qaeda, even David Broder won’t be able to claim he’s such a good guy anymore.

  59. 59.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    That’s assuming McCain picks Alf Landon as his running mate, right?

    Um, no Doug, if we bet now, there are no running mates.

    The running mates are not part of the bet.

    Because you see, there are no running mates now.

  60. 60.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 6:31 pm

    Um, no Doug, if we bet now, there are no running mates.

    Did you get the parties to sign off on this? They’ve agreed that if two anonymous commenters on an obscure political blog agree to place a bet on the spread of the 2008 election, then they in turn will agree to have the candidates run without choosing running mates? I must say I’m impressed.

  61. 61.

    Tim F.

    February 13, 2008 at 8:09 pm

    Anyone know the stats for Texas?

    Do they even know how to poll Texas? Try to think of the last national election or primary when Texas’s vote was in doubt.

  62. 62.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 8:27 pm

    Did you get the parties to sign off on this? They’ve agreed that if two anonymous commenters on an obscure political blog agree to place a bet on the spread of the 2008 election, then they in turn will agree to have the candidates run without choosing running mates? I must say I’m impressed.

    Hmm. I am forced to choose between thinking that you are trying to be funny and failing miserably, or, that you are really dense. I will go with the former, as a courtesy to you.

    See, here’s the thing: If you want to toss off my invitation to bet with a reference to running mates, you have have actual running mates. We don’t, now, because … um … we don’t nominees and until we do we won’t have those mates. Ergo, if we bet now, the mates don’t matter, do they?

    C’mon Doug, you can just admit that you don’t want to put your money where your mouth is. It’s not a crime, you won’t get arrested. Just say it: I don’t have enough confidence in my prediction to make a wager on it.

    This will contrast you with me, you see. I am willing to put my money where my mouth is. Name your ticket. $50? $100? More? I am open for business.

  63. 63.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 8:46 pm

    Okay, what’s the bet? Sixty five or better for Obama you win, less than sixty five you lose?

  64. 64.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 9:00 pm

    The bet is 60 – 40 straight up. Obama v McCain. Total popular vote only.

    $50 minimum.

  65. 65.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 9:01 pm

    Sorry, Clinton 60 – 40, Obama 65 – 35.

  66. 66.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 9:07 pm

    So 60-40 or better for Clinton you win, 59-41 or worse for Clinton you lose?

    And 65-35 or better for Obama you win, 64-36 or worse for Obama you lose?

    If those are the terms, than I’m down. Mark me down!

  67. 67.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 9:11 pm

    Cool. We probably should make the arrangements offline or else we’ll get slapped or the blog will get slapped for gambling? I don’t know. Don’t want to get anyone in trouble. For the imaginary gambling, I mean. Heh.

    Have your people contact me people.

  68. 68.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 9:11 pm

    Er, my people. My pirate talk comes out at times like these :)

  69. 69.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 9:16 pm

    I’m a little worried about the Diebold machines, but I just don’t think that Obama’s nailed down the over 50 years/under $50,000 domestic minivan driving vegan soccer mom demographic yet. That’ll keep him under 65 percent.

  70. 70.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 9:21 pm

    Any other year I’d agree with you, but I think we are looking at all new dynamics this year.

    I think we are going to see massive Dem turnout, and demographic shifts. I think this is a realignment year.

    I think Obama changes the game. I think the GOP machine goes after him and loses votes with every attack. Everything they think they know about national politics, on its ear.

  71. 71.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 9:25 pm

    Also, and remember I live in Arizona … McCain just sucks.

    I mean, you have no idea how bad this guy sucks and will suck at this level. His Remember The Vietnam War campaign is just a little late.

  72. 72.

    DougJ

    February 13, 2008 at 9:28 pm

    I hope you’re right TZ. But I have a tendency to get too optimistic about these things. Would you believe that after the Patriots beat the Colts, I was predicting they’d go 19-0?

  73. 73.

    ThymeZone

    February 13, 2008 at 9:44 pm

    Everybody was predicting 19-0. But nobody counted on the Giants playing that great defense.

    Im obviously being optimistic, but I think that this year is going to be historic in a number of ways.

    But I’d love to lose by two percentage points to you. That gives me a Dem landslide and a new outlook on political life.

  74. 74.

    Conservatively Liberal

    February 14, 2008 at 1:04 am

    I’m still confused how someone’s whose message is that Obama is mainly winning in red states that won’t really matter in the general is making her firewall be Texas of all places.

    Good catch there! I have thought the very same thing, but I think I have figured it out. The reason she is counting on Texas (and Ohio) is that the right hates her so much that she knows they will cross party lines to support her now so McCain can trounce her in the general.

    Other than that, I have no idea why the red states that go for Obama now don’t matter, but the red states that go for Hillary next month will matter.

    Clinton logic? She is special? Because? ;)

  75. 75.

    Chuck Butcher

    February 14, 2008 at 3:46 pm

    I predicted wben HRC announced that she wouldn’t wear well over time with actual exposure. The broken “inevitible candidate” model hurts her badly, that was her real edge. As it gets more badly broken the votes for the “power player” candidate evaporate.

    I was pretty much raised in Ohio, there was a conservative streak, but it was an odd one. I don’t see Ohio as reliable Clinton country this time around. Someone noted OSU, there are a lot of colleges in Ohio and back a ways (ok, I’m no longer young) Ohio had a top notch educational system – this bodes poorly for HRC with the Boomers. Regarding hurting blue collars, I’d vastly prefer to be told the candidate cares and there’s real hope, versus a bunch of obscure detailed economic voodoo. Bad times engender a desire for hope, heck, that’s primarily what FDR did, gave hope. The guvmint dollars didn’t play that strongly on the economy.

    I’m no Obama fan, I’m an HRC opponent, both suck for my reasons, but he’s got the stronger and I think winning approach. As far as the General goes, TZ there’s no way I’d take your bet. The bad end of that is taking a look at who the Repubs are that will survive…man they’re gonna really suck.

    Just for the heck of it, in won delegates Obama holds between 130-140 lead, near splits in OH, PA, TX aren’t going to do it for HRC.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • TBone on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:53pm)
  • WaterGirl on Hey Lurkers! (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:52pm)
  • Dorothy A. Winsor on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:51pm)
  • TBone on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:49pm)
  • cain on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:48pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!