Pennsylvania minus four weeks

As Barack Obama weathers the Reverend Jeremiah Wright controversy, Hillary Clinton misspeaks. Compare and contrast …

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.

1,114 comments on “Pennsylvania minus four weeks”

Comments Page 19 of 23
1 … 18 19 20 … 23

  1. Ron & GG – before I travel today I’ interested – what percentage chance does Hillary now have of winning the nomination in your respective considered estimations?

    Ron, GG & Finns – No response yet on whether you will support Obama here on PB against McCain … …

  5. Meanwhile the Hillary Deathwatch continues to watch her ship sink. Today she sinks below 10%:

    http://www.slate.com/id/2187793/

    “So, with a dip in the polls, another superdelegate lost, mounting debt, and ugly numbers in Texas, the outlook in Hillaryland remains bleak. On Saturday, Clinton compared the race to a basketball game: “You know, we are in the fourth quarter and it is a close contest. We are running up and down. We are taking shots.” The metaphor would work if she mentioned that Obama is up by 124 points, he has the ball, and Clinton has been missing shots all quarter. All she has now is hustle.”

  7. ‘Ullo you reprobates,

    [When asked to clarify, Sen. Clinton replied, “I’ll stay in this race for a thousand years. A million years. A billion years.”]

    Bodicea Brutessa Clinton, the high-profile Bosnian War heroine and Democratic Party presidential nominee hopeful, has personally discovered the secret of eternal life.
    As a consequence, Mrs. Clinton has opted to run her campaign on Geological Time. The “True Grit” political performer will launch her Whitewater Mist Youth Dew before the Penn Primaries in a bid to “self-fund” her flagging campaign coffers, thereby courageously “raising her bar of beholden-ness” for potential Beltway donors and clarifying her “transparency index”.

  9. Clinton surrogate and Pennsylvania mayor Ed Rendell is a day early for April fools:

    ‘”I think during this entire primary coverage, starting in Iowa and up to the present, Fox has done the fairest job, has remained the most objective of all the cable networks,” Rendell told host Steve Doocy. “You actually have done a very balanced job of reporting the news, and some of the other stations are just caught up with Senator Obama, who is a great guy, but Senator Obama can do no wrong, and Senator Clinton can do no right.”’

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0308/Gov_Rendell_Fox_is_most_objective_cable_network.html

  10. This article IMHO is the biggest piece of drivel I have seen through the entire campaign. The moron predicts that Billary will win the popular vote. He makes a few assumptions about how much she will win the remaining primaries by, which he does concede may be a bit optimistic. The mathematicians will notice that his guesses are to one degree of accuracy, yet he actually bothers to report them to three degrees of accuracy in a pathetic attempt to make them seem less puerile.

    Pennsylvania 20.0%
    Indiana 20.0%
    North Carolina -10.0%
    West Virginia 40.0%
    Kentucky 30.0%
    Oregon -10.0%
    Puerto Rico 30.0%
    Montana 20.0%
    South Dakota 20.0%

    The responses from the bloggers are summed up by the one saying “Are you smoking crack?”

    http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/3/28/projection-clinton-wins-popular-vote-obama-wins-delegate-count.html#Comments

  11. Pancho,

    US polls are notoriously unreliable simply because of the voluntary nature of the voting system and the difficulty in getting reliable samples.

    Your new site has a “lost” of stats, charts and reeks of try hard pseudo scientific credibility. But, for me, it is the ability to join the dots with a believable interpretation of what the numbers mean. (I am underwhelmed by a site that can predict that one candidate will win 297.8 delegates).

    So, Votemaster’s track record becomes an important factor of credibility if you want to assess the true current situation when there is a difference between different sources of information about the same matter.

    But, as I say, pick your poison.

  13. EC 907

    The story is a beatup , as I think you know Hillary was trying to deflect requests for her to concede by using humour but the comedy company didn’t supply a more humorous punch line. Bill was good at it

  14. Pancho #898
    was addressed to Ron ….and in the blog said
    “To mount an argument about Clinton’s electability ”

    I do accept your #900 that the above was not intended to refer to me.
    The 2 main Pollsters do use different methods & produce different outcomes & I wonder how they weight average although Votemaster has some good past ‘form’

  15. 906
    Ron

    What in god’s name are you talking about?

    On second thoughts, don’t bother trying to explain, it can only make things worse! LOL

  18. Kirribilli #893 & #894,
    if you are going to make an economic comment , make it a rational one rather than pretend regulation of financial markets has nothing to do with the Congress as you implied & its all Bush’s fault. They are all to blame in part

  19. KR,

    You profess to be knowledgeable about things economics. Can you gives a run down of this Opus Dei Prime bizzo. Seems like a bit of straight criminality but is it attached to the Sub prime disaster.

  22. 919
    Greensborough Growler

    GG, at least I actually know the limits of my own knowledge, unlike a few around here. LOL

    But yes Opes, (best renamed as Ooooops!), was a brokerage that offered huge margin accounts, kept a couple of special relationships, and seems to have overlooked their margin calls.

    OK, bad enough you might say, except in the fine print of their wonderful world of the exceedinlgy rich getting even more exceedingly rich on borrowed funds, was a little clause which said if the company (ie Opes) gets into trouble, then your shares, no matter how much equity you’ve actually put in (ie your own hard cash), then they really are owned by our lenders, and you all get bundled together.

    Apparently Chris Murphy has a bundle of such shares, was in partnership with the CEO, didn’t get margin calls over the last 6 months while his postion went into the red, a LOT of red.

    Now, all the punters are having their postiions liquidated by the ANZ who was the primary lender, and there’s SFA they can do about it. Most of them will get not a zack.

    And Oooops has a lot of explaining to do about why Mr Murphy was allowed to play with essentially free chips.

    Yep, dodgey.

    Not directly related to sub-p except that the market tanking is part of the global unwinding of leveraged positions. In other words, the game is over, cheap money and endless credit creation is kaput, and inflated assets are going to get the bejesus belted out of them. (US housing has already lost about $2 trillion! And much worse is coming down the pike)

    Interesting times, and watching the Fed trying to prop up this mudslide (apart from the nauseating picture of the cowboys getting the help of the taxpayers) with some Lego blocks is a sad farce of epic proportions.

  25. j/v #901 , you say you are interested on my opinion on 2 subjects & I’ll certainly not ignore a reasonable question such as you’ve put re Obama vs Hillary , although a different option was there & dismissed. I’ll do it in detail.

    The uncommitted SD’s can still deliver Hillary victory & any further disclosures on Pastorgate or the like, or even some current Polls showing McCain will easily beat Obama & McCain will less convincingly beat Hillary, may cause this.

    Their policys are not dis-similar notwithstanding Hillary’s healthcare policy is closer to the ALP than Obama’s whilst on foreign policy the reverse applies (BUT with the restrictions of office the foreign policy difference in reality will shrink)

    As the pool of uncommitted SD’s shrink , Hillary’s chances mathematically shrink BUT even the current committed SD’s can if they wish choose to be come uncommitted & in bloc switch 2 Hillary in the circumstances suggested in para 2.
    So politically , Hillary is not out of it completely

    As to discussing Obama overall , the difficulty with trying to critique solely & I repeat from a political analysis , is that his general message is so brilliantly delivered & its general thrust is so appealing after us all putting up with cynical and/or inept politicans , and also after knowing the warts of Hillary & McCain, that any adverse critique beyond that message as to his ‘judgement’ , ‘strength of convictions’, consistency etc is overpowered by & dismissed by the general message planted in many who wish to believe here & thats NOT how non idealistic non-rusted Democrat (Centre/Independent) voters will base their votes on , which is my focus.

    Finally , given Obama appeal is based on his ‘change message’ which is solely reliant on his ‘character attributes’ & ‘perfect’ US type standards , any hole significantly punched up to November in EITHER , leaves him somewhat unelectable amongst the Centre & Independent voters without which he can not win POTUS.

    Pastorgate’s relevance is that both 2 areas are exposed and whilst vs Hillary they came too late for her to really use against a ‘colleague’, McCain has not exploited Pastorgate yet in these 2 areas but he will.
    BUT ANY Pastorgate type history that comes out up to November will have the same effect. Its the perception perspective that Centre/Independents take in , whereas rusted on supporters tend to look more at clinical facts without the perception perspective
    However McCain is known …warts & all. Obma can be undone as per the above.

    And a concluding caution I’ve raised before: Howard beat Latham but Latham had the better Policys. But Howard still won. It was simply based on ‘trust’ , and this subject to Iraq becoming more chaotic , is McCain’s strong suit.

    Of course if Iraq deteriorates in chaos , then Obama or Hillary chances dramatically increase.

    This is my view and history suggests this site will treat this blog similar to those preceding

  27. Ron, thou dreamest, sirrah.

    [Ruthless, but probably useless
    As ugly as it is, the Clinton firewall strategy is stunning in its ruthlessness. It has been half a century since the major triumphs of the civil rights and party reform movements, yet a major Democratic candidate is attempting to secure a presidential nomination by exploiting racial divides and negotiating backroom superdelegate deals.
    But success is not likely.]
    http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3597/the_clinton_firewall/

  29. Kirribilli ,

    you were sprung sunshine and I can cut & paste financial & economic info & articles also but hey Obamabots

  30. No dream EC , others dream here , I do agree with the last line of your blog & would have thought that opinion was implicit in my blog to j/v

  31. ‘Obamabot’ is offensive Ron. I assume you mean that those who support Obama do so blindly. Yet, most on here who support Obama have put considerable thought into their position. There are no ‘robots’ here.

  32. Afternoon Budgers on this glorious April Fool’s day –
    I can see Ron is in full swing trying to still run the line that it will be better for us all if Hillary wins.
    Nice try – wooden stake time.
    it is interesting that we Obama supporters are constantly being lampooned as blind to the realities. Pretty amusing really when you look at the polls and the pundits- but then what would they know.

  34. [If the fight over whether to count the results in Florida and Michigan makes it to the Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clinton will not have enough pledged votes on the 169-member Credentials Committee to deliver a majority decision in her favor, according to an analysis conducted for Politico.]
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080401/pl_politico/9298;_ylt=AtP6qAHERJIvb3KUOQTKAhCs0NUE

    All this excitement and it’s still only Penn minus 3/52.

    Ron, you and I and the rest of the disparite band of misfits who visit here and tap out our thoughts are “commenters”. By virtue of the fact that Mr. Bowe holds the whip in one hand and his PB Title Deed in cyberspace in the other, William is the “blogger”.
    Imprecise terminology can have a direct bearing on one’s capacity for rational thought and thus, commenting ability. As we are “pals”, I’d normally let this sort of thing pass through to the keeper, but you’ve gone and upset Grover by directly sledging her as some sort of automaton and clearly, she don’ like that. Here’s hoping you can do the gentlemanly thing, Ron. Mate.

  35. “Of course if Iraq deteriorates in chaos , then Obama or Hillary chances dramatically increase.’

    ahem – ‘deteriorates into chaos’-As opposed to the peaceful and stable place it is currently?
    Are you serious?????

  36. #927
    Enemy Combatant
    That article about the ‘Clinton Firewall’ was rather good. The detailed deconstruction of the racial chasm was better than anything else I’ve seen as to explaining the play of race in the race.

  37. Jen #935 Perhaps a better formulation would be “If the chaos in Iraq reaches a level that convinces even the myopic and info starved American public that the surge has not ‘worked’…”

  38. OK you Obama Dreamers. I give up. after being pulped into pieces days after days. i surrender, i succumb. i am now on board on the Obama cho-cho train. i am now a pledged delegate of Obama’s juggernaut. Hillary and go and get stuffed. Rudd is right not to endorse Hillary as he did on Rove. Pastorgate is just another Pastagate to be eaten raw as in the sushi train.

  40. #927: EC, thanks for that article. This piece of information is especially damning of Hillary’s firewall approach:

    [A late March NBC News poll reports that if a candidate “loses among delegates selected by voters but still wins the nomination,” a plurality (41 percent) of Democratic voters believe that candidate would be “not legitimate.”]

    This is why she has become a liability. She can only win by having the superdelegates overturn the outcome of the primaries, but because she then runs the risk of being viewed as “illegitimate”, she will have trouble pulling in the votes to actually beat McCain. A lot of Democrat voters might instead choose to stay home.

    It’s over for Hillary and has been for a long time, but if she keeps persisting with race politics in order to steal the nomination, she will not only do Obama damage, but also herself, and her party.

  41. Finns -Yay!! what colour nostil clips?
    Robert#937 – Blind Freddy as they say… how could anyone NOT know that it is an unmitigated disaster, and has been since day 1. (and Clinton supported it btw)

  42. I know I could be shot down in flames because the following video is strait off the Obama campaign site. Thing is – its a little production about a school in the South Broncs and a dialogue between a teacher and a bunch of students in which kids are talking about how the election is feeding into their lives – kids coming to school early to get the latest poll results – kids inspired and talking about what they could be. It’s simple stuff – but if you have ever lived in a world where you potential and your avenues are type cast before your first day of school – you will appreciate this clip.

    http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid900881681/bclid900480414/bctid1478199102

  43. Noocat, I think it is those tactics rather than the fact that she is still in it that is really irksome. If she was just fronting up to debates putting forward her policies and noting what she perceived as weaknesses in Obama, that would really be par for the course. But the race stuff (fairytale, Jesse Jackson, Ferraro) the McCain stuff (Commander in Chief, true patriot) dredging up the pastor business – it’s all just so base. Add to that the strongarming of party leaders, not disassociating herself with the slanders like that of Carville, and the claim that she would fight on the convention floor rather than accept a loss make it kind of sad.

  44. Jen & Robert , you are abit rough , I used the desciption
    “subject to Iraq becoming MORE chaotic” the line before !
    The fact is I accidently left off the word “more” in the following line., thats all.

    lUnfortunately I put up a view in #925 :

    Firstly it did address what SD’s may be considering ( & why) , did imply Hillary’s chances were unlikely but possible (and why)
    Was there a disagreement to that , whats the purpose of this blog then

    Secondly I put up a view of a likely Obama vs McCain contest and where I considered were Obama’s weakness for a Mccain offence (& why) and where critical needed voters for Obama were & how he could lose them (& why) and the overall strengths McCain has
    ….there was no need to highlight McCain’s weakness’s as they are known

    but no debate , whats the purpose of this blog or is an alleged non supporters views are simply ignored

  45. Finns,

    Probably a more realistic post would be to say that while you could never vote for Obama, the constant badgering between the two Democratic candidates, combined with your weariness at the fact she consistently ‘mispeaks’ has convinced you that the left needs a good kick up the arse this year, and needs to lose to teach them a lesson so that they pick more ethical candidates of principal in the future. As a result, you are shifting your support to McCain.

    Nader would also have worked, although that would have probably been a tad too unbelievable.

  46. Pancho- agreed.
    She is looking desperate and sleazy- not unlike Bill in the old days. People are sick of this stuff: didn’t work here despite all the best efforts of the now-defunct Liberal party, and it won’t work there with the addition of a body count increasing daily in Iraq and people losing their homes.
    She is identifying herself with the old tactics – racism, smear, scandal, lies, threats: she should know better.
    I used to admire Hillary Clinton. Now I think she is a sad ageing woman who didn’t know when to quit. Bit like Zsa Zsa Gabor after the zillionth facelift`-no one is fooled anymore.

  48. Ron-
    I would hardly say your views are ignored. Disagreed with – indeed.
    As for our comments on mcCain/Obama- I think you are right in terms of the potential attacks on him. I just hope and believe that a lot of average voters (non-rusted ons) are no longer so easily fooled. They’ve had Bush and co. for 8 years and not much is going right. And once the dem candidate is decided the focus will be on all the issues where the repugs are weak – economy, sub-prime disaster, Iraq, climate change, not to mention having a candidate who is just too old to be credible.

    max-
    wash your mouth out.
    btw: Love the West Wing`- addicted.

  49. 929
    Ron

    I was what?

    “sprung”?

    By whom? You?

    That’s hysterically funny! You make some assinine comment, about something you clearly don’t a friggin’ clue about, and then have the gall to say I’m ‘sprung’ by your oh so clever trap!

    That’s ripe!

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 19 of 23
1 … 18 19 20 … 23