US presidential primaries: week off edition

We’re now half way through a quiet period in the presidential primaries calendar, which will end with the last major contests in Texas and Ohio next Tuesday. The graphs below show Democratic opinion polling over the past two weeks, bearing in mind that there are almost as many pollsters represented here as polls. The pollsters only record responses from “likely” Democratic voters, which makes it hard for them to get what would strike Australian observers as an impressive sample size: the range was 564 to 902 in Ohio, and 403 to 660 in Texas. Figures sourced from Real Clear Politics.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

742 comments on “US presidential primaries: week off edition”

Comments Page 2 of 15
1 2 3 15
  1. William

    I have no problem with your goodself

    simply put their is no debate on this site

    ESJ,glen,gp etcetra etcera etcera have some valid points that normally are drowned out in shite

    the ongoing degradation is quite boring and the lack of intellectual vigour is poor,coupled with a general lack of “real” humour and satire it has become a watering hole for a very narrow range of views.

    (more than once i have defended glen,esj and attacked kr,jen to ‘even” up ,but that aint what i came to this site for)

    also i use the psuedonym gusface- it allows me to protect my sources and feed info to the necessary people without disclosure

  2. Hello fellow Bludgers –
    (can I just say I feel a bit awkward with all the fuss re:ESJ: thanks for the concern, but I was annoyed not worried.)

    re : Nader.
    Maybe Al Gore should put his hand up now to really inject some chaos.

  3. I agree, Max… exciting as that convention would be.

    The best the Dems can realistically hope for (IMHO) is for Hillary to lose Ohio and Texas and have the weight of the Party convince her to retire from the contest.

    What price that scenario?

  4. You can’t have an Obama in the Whitehouse with the KKK still a happening thing. It won’t happen in the next 10 years at least. Those yahoo morons are intolerant to the max. Pols smolls, we are all hoping for the impossible.

  5. I think she will lose both and am inclined to think there’s a real chance she will step aside after that, but it’s not a scenario I’m hugely confident of…

  6. 50
    Greensborough Growler

    Another puff piece really Growls: one journo calls it ‘mania’, so then another reports it like it’s ‘news’.

    And round it goes.

    (At least the NYT story on McCain was sourced on the real live people who were there!)

    Anyway, so he wants ‘change’? Tell me who (in their right mind) in the USA would not?

    So, he’s already ‘changed’ the percieved wisdom of Hillary’s ‘slam dunk’ nomination. He’s changed the last century paradigm that white folks wouldn’t vote for a black one, and he’s changed the almost legendary apathy of young folk who don’t bother to get engaged.

    There’s a lot more, but hey, he’s not even president yet! LOL

  7. Do you think she’ll listen after narrow wins Ferny? I know that will mean she can’t catch Barry, but I think it dilutes the ‘leave now’ message – regardless of how much partisan Obama supporters may say it should be obvious…

  8. Growler @ 50. Nothing new there GG. Those kinds of comments have been following Obama since he announced his candidacy.

    And Centaur: The KKK haven’t been a ‘happening thing” for at least 20 years. They’re nothing more than a fringe lunatic cult whose influence is minor. If there’s one thing the primaries/caucuses are screaming, it’s that an awful lot of Americans are comfortable with a black man in a White House.

  9. Wayaway @ 60: I’m not sure she’ll listen regardless of what happens. The Party powerbase she needs, however, are indeed listening and I suspect she will be getting a tap on the shoulder if she gets anything less than thumping victories in TX and OH.

    Whether that will make her concede…..? As I’ve said elsewhere, I dont know if she has that kind of character but her chances of playing a major role in a Dem government will diminish with each passing day following 4 March.

  10. KR,

    I know this is hard for you to comprehend, but there are many people who have alternative views to yours re Obama. It is just that not much of that gets posted here without you and the Overbearing Obama Orifices (The OOO) working yourselves in to a lather of self righteous intellectual superiority and the ensuing never ending game of “abuse the poster who does not agree”.

    Another long time poster, gusface, has advised he has moved on because of the johnny one note tone of this blog. Another feather in your cap as you turn this site in to a meaningless outlet for boorish bragging blowhards.

    Hope you are satsified with your handy work.

  11. gusface –
    I am on the left of the political spectrum, and a member of the Greens. Not sure what you are expecting when you say that you want us (kr etc,) to “even up”, other than to embrace a more conservative position., which to date is not likely.
    As for some of the more light-hearted stuff – sorry if that is annoying.

  12. OK.
    We have a problem.
    It would seem that those of us who have supported Obama on PB are being seen as some kind of rabble who refuse to see merit in other view points. Can I say that while I do see where these differing views come form, and that they may indeed prove to be right, that my reasons for supporting Obama are as valid as those of you that don’t. It seems as if by definition according to some of you, that they must be some how ratbag reactions, rather than considered.
    Which begs the question – why is his support to date so strong? Or is everyone in the US who also thinks this way also mistaken?

  13. I agree, Max… exciting as that convention would be.

    The best the Dems can realistically hope for (IMHO) is for Hillary to lose Ohio and Texas and have the weight of the Party convince her to retire from the contest.

    What price that scenario?

    $1.80?

    I think odds of Obama willing one of the two are about $1.30 (in my eyes.) Texas isn’t yet a dead heat – Hillary is still marginally ahead but undecideds will wander to Obama’s camp.

    Ohio is looking less likely. March 4 is barely eight days away, still a solid 8 point lead to Clinton.

    Either way, I think Obama winning two is unlikely. Having said that, one is probably enough – although Hillary still has the option of holding on until Pennsylvania, which she will probably sweep. It comes down to competing factors:
    – This really is her one and only shot at the presidency, and she knows it.
    – Protection of the Clinton (her) legacy + Democratic unity for ’08

    Who knows?

  14. #51 – Gusface – “lack of intellectual vigour is poor, coupled with a general lack of “real” humour and satire”. I support your stand entirely.

    I would go further to say that sometimes this blog site feels like a lynch mob led by you know who. that’s why i always try to take the mickey out of them.

    baby, please dont go.

  15. Jen,

    Nice one. Only consider the bit you like.

    Read the bit about “never ending game of abuse the poster who does not agree”.

    That is where the problem lies.

    Oh, BTW have a look at William’s graphs. They show Hillary in front according to the polls in Texa and Ohio.

    William, is there a similar chart for Pennsylvania vis a vis Glen’s observation @ 24.

  16. Jen @ 68

    Your comment does bring up an interesting question. Have Obama and Hillary created a divide within traditional Democratic supporters that cannot be mended. I know that this topic has been touched on serval times in the media but I have seen nobody come to a conclusion.

  17. GG, the polls for Pennsylvania at Real Clear Politics are here. Two are recent enough to be of interest: one from the week after Super Tuesday showing Clinton leading 52-36 (sample 577), and one from a bit over a week ago showing her leading 44-32 (sample 303).

  18. I’d like to say, reluctant as I am to get involved, that I am an Obama supporter. I have, relative to others, a strong view on the upcoming election. My posts are obviously biased to that point. But I I have ever discredited somebody for thinking differently. Nor have I said the equivalent to ‘the game is over, so lets stop talking ‘what if’ and celebrate it.’ There is a reason for this – besides the fact I don’t think the game is over, but also because it shuts people out of the debate. I would love for a Clinton fan to tell us why they think she is the better choice. It’s fascinating to observe different opinions. And this is before the Republican arguments become intriguing.

    Hell, if all we were considering was the political spectrum, I’d be a Republican through and through. A Ron Paul Republican I imagine, although some of his ideas are a bit wacky. But I digress.

    I know what it feels like to be in the minority. I was last year. Last year, a visit to this blog would feel like the Greens and Labor were to two major parties of Australian politics, and the Liberal an disorganised bunch of right wing xenophobes who are coming to take your children. It sucked, and because of this my participation was drastically limited. This year started much more fun, because everybody following the US election had different views and expressed them as such.

    If this site, post March 4, becomes simply another outlet for people to praise Obama and slam McCain, it is going to become very boring very quickly. I’m not interested in that. I’m interested right now in seeing the end of the Clinton/Bush era, and for some new ideas and people in charge. Once that’s secured, then I hope to have more time to examine the two candidates much more thoroughly. It may be that Obama is a risk not worth taking. But that’s for time to tell.

    Instead I’ll say this. If you stand (or sit) there and proudly announce your support for every single one of your candidates proposals, then you need to seriously examine yourself. Issues should be questioned. Motives should be examined. Debate should flare up. And you should be able to announce your disagreement with policies from both sides. But exchanges should not be reduced to a level of dribble, or personal attacking, or ganging up on others. I expect that type of crap from far left or (if any are about) far right blogs. But this is a neutral site, to observe and discuss the political arena. So take it elsewhere.

    Not sure what the point of that post actually was really.

  19. Stephen Connor –
    My guess is that this division will mostly settle once the candidacies are settled. I can’y imagine that true Democradts will vote for Republican over Clinton, even if they would have preferred Obama Certainly I would hope she wins if she ends up the candidate, although claerly while ther is hope I would love to see the Clean Sweep that Obama represents.

  20. Ooops…

    Line three, my previous post, should start with: “But I don’t think I have”

    Not sure how that got cut from the final version…

  21. Growler

    Can we take your comments as constructively based

    Lets assume I am the WORST of the offenders to which you refer

    Yet I have been VERY guilty (happily) of going over the top in favour of Obama.
    Hell , at one stage I was the Captain of good ship Obama until the crew mutiny

    Further ESJ & I share nothing in common except the same blog and we equally treat each other with the disdain we believe is warranted

    Yet over the past 72 hours late at night I’ve had indepth discussions and/or debates with Gusface , Scorpio & Generic Person…ALL of which ended civiley

    Your point as I understand is maintaining diversity of opinion.
    The question is can a self regulation formal mechanism assist OR do we ‘hope’ things improve at the risk of losing further valuable bloger’s like Gusface.

    William can not do it all.
    Jen as your most passionate supporter here I honestly do not think Growler was making the point you think he was. You should not change your views at all

  22. Ron,

    You are not the worst.

    Agree that I don’t expect anyone to change their opinions. Just have a bit more tolerance for other opinions that you may not agree with.

    That said, Blogging can be a contact sport. But, the aim should be to maim, not kill other bloggers.

  23. then perhaps to avoid the ‘killing’ rather than just ‘maiming’ is some sort of protocols or self regulation mechanism worth considering Growler

  24. GG-
    Agreed. I really don’t like it that gusface has departed. Nor ESJ.
    Although, to be fair, others of us have copped a bollicking at times and not left, so perhaps resilience is required as well as tolerance.
    Besides if it was too harmonious and reasonable the entertainment value would IMHO be greatly diminshed. And there are deadly-serious pseph sites out there for the purists. Let’s not forget that most voters are not political experts, and so perhaps we are a pretty good reflection of the broader voting public- zealots, sledgers, moderates, swingers (the voting kind) and all.
    Anyway – I love it here, and would hate to be instrumental in the demise of the site.

  25. Good grief, I’ve been sourcing some bad polls recently… they had Obama level/in front in both Texas and Ohio… reality check noted.

  26. I’m going to blame the American spirit infecting us all, the Aussie election and Glan and Gus and others was fantastic save for the attacks on Ms Cornes who didn’t do me the favor I needed of her winning.

  27. jasmine- Australian Story tonight about Nicole Cornes should be excellent. Graham Cornes evidently says he still wants to punch out Tony Jones for that appalling interview on election night. I really hope Jones has apologised for that effort, it was on a par with Caroline O’s performances. I think she’s going to run again.

  28. The issue should not be about how many of each supporters type there are, but rather how they conduct themselves. Obama supporters dismissing alternative views are no worse than the pettiness of those who argue that the sheer fact that there are more Obama supporters is a negative.
    As an Obama supporter I would have no issue posting in a place with many Hillary or McCain supporters so long as discussion was respectful.
    Likewise there can be some confusion on this blog when people see refuting a point as a form of attack.

    People need to stop being uptight on the internet from both sides.

  29. 67
    William Bowe

    Thanks William, and perhaps for ‘consistency’ you could look at Growler’s abusive effort too?

    Or doesn’t that “meet the standards he hypocritically demands of others”?

    So this…

    It is just that not much of that gets posted here without you and the Overbearing Obama Orifices (The OOO) working yourselves in to a lather of self righteous intellectual superiority and the ensuing never ending game of “abuse the poster who does not agree”.

    …meets your standard then?

    Oh, perhaps it’s just my ‘myopia’ impeding my judgement, but hey, good for the goose as they say, or is this only about “Overbearing Obama Orifices “?????

  30. If someone pops up on this (or any other blog for that matter) and calls the other posters ‘wankers’, and then spits the dummy and leaves, I’d call that pretty mature behaviour.

    Speaks volumes about the poster, and nothing about the variety and intelligence and general good humour that exists on this blog. In the main, most people here are fairly well informed, amiable, and helpful.

    However, there’s been a small handful that instigate abuse incessantly, and have been always been ready to engage in unpleasant personal attacks for virtually no obvious reason.

    If they leave, I have no doubt other posters will ‘fill their niche’, but that’s Darwinism for you!

    By the way, Clinton could still win this, and I’ve never said that she absolutely could not, although it’s been looking less likely at the Obama wins rolled over her.

  31. Ralph was once an inspirational anti-coprporate warrior. I liked a lot of what he said and did to the likes of GM, but he’s in denial about his 2000 role that gave us The reign of The Imbecile.
    In 2004 Ralph pulled ~.3% of the national vote. In 2008 the 74 year-old is not a Player in any meaningful sense of the word. He’s a mere matchstick man standing on Obama Beach about to be swept away by a surge of hopes and dreams.

    Looking at both sides now, it’s politics’ illusions Ralph recalls, he really doesn’t know realpolitik at all. (Sorry Mistah Diamond)

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080224_two_views_on_naders_candidacy/
    ——————-
    Ring-ring……..ring-ring……pah-lick..

    “Hi, Nader HQ, how may I help you?”

    Pause…………….

    “Certainly, sir, right away”…..*presses hold*

    “Say, Ralph, it’s a Mr. Anton Chigurh, says he wants to make you an offer you can’t refuse.”

  32. 90
    Greeensborough Growler

    I’ve made some effort to understand what you’re talking about Growls, but alas, it eludes me for some reason.

    William makes the rules, and I abide by them as best I can, (considering some of the gratuitous abuse served up), and I’ve made my contribution to his “bandwidth”, so under those conditions, I’ve got as much right as anyone to express an opinion.

  33. #89 – KR – “By the way, Clinton could still win this, and I’ve never said that she absolutely could not, although it’s been looking less likely at the Obama wins rolled over her” – mellow a bit have we? or a bob each way.

  34. 93
    The Finnigans

    I’ve just found that being misquoted continuously so as to justify juvenile attacks rather boring Finns.

    And it ain’t over till it’s over and the fat lady has sung. (Mind you, I’d prefer my little wager to pay, but that’s not really the point is it?)

  35. It’s ~24 hours since Ralph tossed his toupee into the ring. Let’s cast an optic over the board odds, shall we?

    President – WINNER- Cbet
    OBAMA, Barack 1.68
    MCCAIN, John 2.90
    CLINTON, Hillary 4.50

    Well whaddya know, there has been bugger-all movment for the last 3 days. Bubkes. Zippo. Rien. Or topically, and perhaps a tad too cutely, NADA!

    Cisco’s side-kick called it first.
    [43
    Pancho Says:
    February 25th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
    The Finnegans, Nader’s run is absolutely no threat to Obama or his supporters………..]

    Ole, hombre!

  36. surely the yanks are on to Nader by now.
    I’m hoping he is a non-event – a bit like the P. Hanson re emergence in our campaign: everyone was over her.

  37. KR,

    Have no desire to continue this battle of wills. I have said what I want to say and it is your choice whether you wish to take any notice.

    However, I want to put on record that I thought the John Howard eviction evlovement was pisstakingly funny and I enjoyed every moment.

    Let’s get over ourselves and move on.

    Cheers.

  38. Obama on Nader from today’s new York Times:

    When it comes to Ralph Nader, Senator Obama tends to circle him as a mongoose might a cobra.
    That is, he rejects the likely three-time presidential candidate’s criticisms of him, but is careful to toss out a compliment his way before dismissing him.
    “Ralph Nader deserves enormous credit for the work he did as a consumer advocate,” Mr. Obama said in Lorain, Ohio,. “But his function as a perennial candidate is not putting food on the table of workers.”
    Mr. Obama, who briefly organized with a Nader-influenced group as a young man, suggested that Mr. Nader tends in recent years to assume that candidates’ are fatally flawed if they fail to recognize the wisdom of his views.
    “He seems to have a pretty high opinion of his own work,” Mr. Obama said a day earlier.
    After Mr. Nader criticized Mr. Obama on M.T.P. today, Mr. Obama responded: “I think his view is if, unless it’s Ralph Nader, that you’re not tough enough. I mean that’s been his view. He thought that there was no difference between Al Gore and George Bush, and eight years later, I think people realize that Ralph did not know what he was talking about, and so, I mean honestly I’m, at this point, obviously much more concerned with winning the Democratic primary than I am to responding to those issues.”

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 15
1 2 3 15