Pennsylvania minus one week

A merciful mid-campaign lull precluded the need for a “minus two weeks” thread, but things are well and truly picking up again now. Real Clear Politics’ Pennsylvania Democratic poll average has Hillary Clinton leading Barack Obama 47.4 per cent to 40.4 per cent, which is not as much as she would like. However, the most very recent poll from SurveyUSA puts it at 56-38 (UPDATE: Whoops, that’s not the most recent poll after all. There have been quite a few others since that have been around the RCP average). Statistical anomaly, or Obama’s elitist chickens coming home to roost? I report – you decide.

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.

1,655 comments on “Pennsylvania minus one week”

Comments Page 2 of 34
1 2 3 … 34

  1. Finns

    may I suggest a term like Friscogate or better still I’m sure you or others here can probably improve on ‘Friscogate’…anything but ‘bittergate’

    ‘bittergate’ is an attempt by obambotics & friendly Obama media to imply ONLY ‘bitter’ was used by Obama in San Francisco

    There were 7 slurs put in 5 categorys…. ..guns , religion , antipathy to anyone not like them , prejudical , anti immigrant , anti trade AND ‘bitter’

    Obama should be accountable for all 7 San Francisco slurs ?

  2. Oh come on Grinch and Finns –
    you cannot seriously believe that Billary are the best option.
    That leaves McCain or Obama, and I am going to trust in your Labor principles that you could never support a Repug.
    So get with the groove, boys. And hope that he is up to the job.
    (wouldn’t you just be terrified if you were he?…)

  5. Gawd….now we’re having an argument over what kind of ‘gate’ it is.

    IT’S FREAKIN’ BORINGGATE!

    The lack of anything to report has reduced us to this

  8. “It’s a classic Washington scandal. We screwed up by telling the truth'” – CJ on West Wing

    Once again West Wing art imitates life

  10. Ferny ,

    7ups-gate is big news in every media.
    It is only boring to those who already have a complete committment to Obama.

    Thats like saying core Hillary supporters are entitled to say all negative Hillary news is boring. The blog reasonably has to work both ways

  13. Ron, the nonsense of debating which ‘gate’ this should be is boring to those of us who are committed to substance.

  14. Here is an interesting take on Obama’s responses to gaffes: “Barack Obama’s counterpunching style”, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9601.html.

    The writers argue that

    “The response was signature Obama: Attack first, sort out the details later, if at all. No apology, no immediate regret, just a sharp counterattack. For a candidate sometimes mocked for being too soft to win a political fistfight, he has shown an uncanny ability to take a punch and then rear back and deliver one in return.

    When Obama responds this way, it leaves him open to charges that he’s undermining his so-called politics of hope. But, showing remarkable dexterity, he has a knack for using these flare-ups to pivot back to the central theme of his candidacy: that politics is broken, and he knows how to change it.”

    I don’t agree with the take that he immediately counterattacks to the detriment of all else when on the backfoot – his two noticable dangerpoints in this campaign have been during Wright (when he hit the ground then rose with a defining speech) and post ‘bitter’ (when he has attacked as well as clarifying intent). BUT he has been successful at directing and responding to attacks while seeming largely above the fray. This is something that Clinton has constantly been arguing that he will be unable to do against the Republicans. Seems to me he’s doing pretty well against quite an attacking machine.

  15. it’s kinda like all the “disasters” in Rudds campaign…you know…strippergate…burkegate…heinergate….reingate.

    these negatives don’t stick with the voters unless their is substance to them….you know…like voting for the Iraq War or somethin

  16. #25 GG

    ‘Fair suck of the sav’ great to see some people still use our great Aussie dialect.

    If the best the US can come up with is Mc Cain, Clinton and Obama for POTUS candidates they are in real trouble, strewth!

    Mc Cain= warmongerer
    Clinton= dishonest, untrustworthy
    Obama= All style no substance

  17. I find it spurious that whenever Obama makes a clear cut gaffe that the next day he comes out to face the media and then proceeds to claim to have been misrepresented and he didn’t mean his comments to be taken a certain way like he did nothing wrong. What baloney!

    Just for the record I’m no Clinton backer, and the only reason i was glad to see her win Ohio and Texas was to prolong the Democrat brawl. But i don’t have the time for Obama’s preachy rhetoric….

    McCain is looking less tainted every day, and when he should have no chance of winning he is looking a good bet come November. As much as it is over for Mrs Clinton she’ll not back down after all she can argue she’ll have 47-9% of the vote, but Obama will get it in the end.

  18. 64/65

    You’ve both put this thing in perspective, and for the tedious trawling over an offhand remark to get so much attention speaks volumes of how little substance there is in this campaign.

    Clinton is suddenly Annie (git ya gun) after years of being anti-gun, and it makes you wonder what she will not do or say for votes. Talk about patronising!

    At least Obama’s made a point: the white working class has been baited on guns and god by Republicans and look at all the good its done them.

    Hard to argue with that.

  20. Also, just for the record (and largely in response to some of the moralising above) you’re all aware that the remarks were made at a private fundraiser in a supporter’s house right? They were recorded by a blogger, Mayhill Fowler, who then posted them on the Huffington Post. This does not excuse the stupidity of the choice of Obama’s words, or the fact that he should have realised that there is no such thing as a ‘private event’ these days (though no reporters were invited), but this was not a stump speech or anything similar. And, as previous speeches of Bill Clinton, and the notes of meetings by Harvard academic Theda Skocpol with the Clintons have since illustrated, the Clintons share these exact same opinions. The politics and fallout are of definite interest, but dissecting the ‘slurs’ and the rest of it are a bit rich.

  21. If I was an American voter I often wonder who I would vote for considering voting is not compulsary. I would probably vote for Obama but with no enthusiasm, I certainly wouldn’t help in his campaign or donate money to his cause. At least in Oz we had a real choice and Kev has been a sh*t hot performer so far 🙂

  22. What’s interesting is Hillary suddenly attacking not only Obama but Gore, Kerry and now Edwards too! Is this pure suicide on her part? Maybe she knows Gore and Edwards are about to endorse Obama?

  23. Progressive,

    What is the common thread between Gor, Kerry, Edwards and throw in Howard Dean.

    They are all losers.

    Tying Obama to losers is the theme.

  24. Progressive

    Edwards was always going to endorse Obama leading up to the North Carolina primary…if needed.

    Kerry has already endorsed Obama.

    Sounds like Gore and Carter are getting ready.

    But no worry….Annie Oakley is still blazin away

  25. 16
    Darryl Says:
    April 15th, 2008 at 10:31 pm

    Someone correct me, but don’t the dems just need one state to fall? PA, OH, FL?

    Both Gore and Kerry carried Pennsylvania.

    One more big state like Ohio or Florida would’ve done it for Kerry. For Gore, any state (big or small) would have sufficed.

  26. GG

    i actually agree with you.

    these losers endorsements do nothing for Obama electorally. He is running against the establishment and is doing it beautifully.

    the only thing it might do is force her to quit…but even that is debateable.

  27. “The struggle between Obama and Clinton has raised the level of interest in Presidential politics there considerably.”

    This makes me wonder that if it is Obama’s presence that has increased this interest in politics then will they all stay home in disappointment and disinterest on election day if he doesn’t get the nomination?

    I am also amazed that McCain is the best the Republicans can come up with for head of the USA. I don’t believe he is as stupid or easily manipulated as Bush despite the bomb bomb rhetoric.

    The whole bunch seem much of a muchness except maybe Obama. But will it make any difference to Australia who wins?

  28. 76
    HarryH – Sorry but no body runs against the Establishment…

    Obama is just a part of it like Clinton hell anybody who is anybody and got into D.C is part of the establishment. Obama takes money from oil companies and is bankrolled by wealthy elitists and Clinton is backed by the Democrat top brass who are nostalgic of the Bill Era.

    Politics is a dirty game and to say Obama is immune from the ‘politics’ of Washington is ignorant.

    The first question one must ask ones self when weighing up a candidate is to ask what types of things must this person have done to get to where they are.

    The only person that comes close to not being part of the Establishment is McCain and even he is not clean either!

  29. Since I’m not eligible to vote in the US elections, my sentiments are really absolutely irrelevant. But if was entitled to vote, I wouldn’t take exception to Obama’s philosophising (a very elite pastime if there ever was one) about white trash, guns, god and alienation. Bitter ain’t the half of it, I’d imagine. Down the bottom of the food chain in small-town America, people have reason to be very sore indeed. And if was one these people – gawd I am almost white and I am trashy in my own target-shopping way – I would feel truly deeply repelled by Hillary’s nakedly hypocritical and bilious burst of indignation. She is vile.

  30. I saw Obama for what he was at the start, a phoney. I came very close to switching sides, enamoured by rhetoric on his videos etc

    But its a whole load of baloney, he uses words, but theyre so cliche and so sucker up politician-ish its makes me wanna throw up.

    Yeah Hillary lies and stumbles, so does everyone else, she’s got the brains and the experience

    I just see Obama as some guy who’s good with words and acts like he’s some sort of saviour of America.

  31. Kina….will it make any difference to Australia?

    I guess not. A republican might be better on trade and agriculture. A democrat might be better on foreign policy and the environment. In a more general sense, any POTUS that can unify the country, fix the government’s finances and keep the US out of any more stupid wars would have to be good for everyone, including us.

  32. Glen @ 76, you really are just a troll.

    How much, and from which oil companies?

    Or is just small amounts from individuals who happen to work for oil companies?

    As far as I can tell, he takes in between $30M and $50M a month, ‘long-tailed’ – that is, lots of small donations.

    From what I can ascertain (google is your friend) he has taken a total of about $215,000 from people employed by oil companies and no money – because it is illegal – from oil companies directly.

  33. Glen

    well bugger me Glen….here was i thinking Obama was running as the anti establishment candidate. But thankfully you are here to set me straight.
    Maybe you can email the Obama campaign to let them know that nobody can run as anti establishment.

    Oh and thanks for letting me in on the secret that no candidate is ACTUALLY anti establishment. Your enlightenment is staggering sometimes.

    The plebs are smart enough to know though that if THEY fund Obamas campaign and Big Money and Pac Money fund Billary and Bomb Bombs campaign, then they are in with a chance with Obi.

  34. Peter it has been discussed on early forums about the companies who have given money to Obama and individuals associated with the oil industry.

    Peter we live in a Democracy if you consider people who voice an opinion different to yours as trolling you obviously don’t support free speech!

  35. Glen – more trolling and misdirection.

    How is calling a spade a spade, and a troll a troll anything remotely like a free speech issue?

    You are caught out. He takes nothing from oil companies, and next to nothing from employees of oil companies.

    Money from oil company employees are not making a noticeable difference to the campaign. If you doubled their contributions, or removed them entirely it would make no discernible difference – the money is lost in the noise. He takes in millions a month, and those donations are not even rounding error.

  36. PJN,
    What is a “troll”? (Stupid question, I know, but the word does seem to be mainly used on this site as term of abuse against other bloggers, rather than having any precise definition that gives its use some point).

  40. SeanofPerth and Glen

    Welcome to the site !

    The Obama supporters average 10 to every 1 Obama doubter
    your addition improves the odds abit

    HarryH , be careful of defending Obama on ‘oil companies’ , I’ve got some info on Obama which is on the public record in his own words and can not be refuted
    but Pastorgate and 7ups-gate have side tracked me

  43. If Obi was a racehorse, he would have won the Triple Crown as a three year old. The Kid’s all class.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_of_Thoroughbred_Racing

    Quote of the Day
    “The problem was that I just mangled it, which happens sometimes. As a wise older woman who was talking to me the other day said, ‘You misspoke, but you didn’t lie.'”
    — Sen. Barack Obama, in a meeting with the editorial board of the Philadelphia Inquirer, on his recent “bitter voter” comments.

    Shut the bitter-gate, The horse has bolted!

  44. EC,
    He’s got the nomination, bittergate or no bittergate. Why the game goes on, I’m not sure.
    Whether Obama’s victory in the nomination is a good thing, now that is something that the jury is still out on, in my view.

  45. appologies Dyno , my oversight.

    I was trying to encourage more diverse views here because the ratio here of
    10 core Obama to 1 Obama doubter/Clinton supports could be improved with more diverse opinions and as a general doubtor welcome

    But for all non committed Obama supporters there is a warning.
    Some of the hardline Obama supporters operate as a wolve pack and have successfully scared off previous independently minded bloggers , so you need a thick skin and humour

    As to ‘troll’ definition , Dyno , I do not know what it means and have avoided a dictionary and blithly assume its TLC …then smile

  46. ‘he would have won the Triple Crown as a three year old’

    No hope , he can not go around corners.
    Non cornered ? , try the Newmarket

  47. Ron @ 90

    Oh God please save me. this just keeps getting ridiculouser and ridiculouser.

    Ron has Oilgate tucked up his sleeve until Pastorgate and Bittergate pass.

  50. Glen, a couple of months ago you were telling us Obama is an Al Qaeda plant. Now you say he’s the establishment’s boy. So which is it?

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 34
1 2 3 … 34