Clinton To Take Wisconsin?

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

New Wisconsin polling numbers out released by CNN Feb 18

Clinton 49% Obama 43%

Clinton to come from behind and win Wisconsin?

Thoughts?

[Senator Ben]

Great if it's accurate.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Those are ARG's numbers. Enough said.

[TheresNoMoney]

Those are ARG's numbers. Enough said.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[agcatter]

This could be her breakthrough state.  I've half way been expecting this.

[Verily]

It's ARG, people. Don't get too excited.

[agcatter]

Are you sure?  ARG was released yesterday.  This is the same poll that has been around a couple of days?

[MSUfan]

Recent polls show Clinton has a chance in Wisconsin at ending Obama's winning streak. According to an American Research Group poll conducted February 15 and 16, the two candidates are in a statistical tie, with Clinton at 49 percent and Obama at 43 percent. The poll's margin of error is plus-or-minus 4

Straight from CNN. It is the ARG poll.

[Verily]

Are you sure?  ARG was released yesterday.  This is the same poll that has been around a couple of days?

CNN is just reporting on it today, but, yes, it's the same poll, 49-43. The only other poll to come out recently was the PPP poll with Obama up 13. The MSM has not yet cottoned on to the fact that ARG picks numbers from a hat and still treats them like a serious pollster.

[IDS Judicial Overlord John Dibble]

LOL, CNN reporting an ARG poll that favors Hillary might be inadvertently inconvenient for Hillary provided she loses Wisconsin. It makes it more difficult to spin a loss as expected.

[J. J.]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

[agcatter]

What other polls.  I've paid attention and we're just not getting any polls. Kind of weird.

[MSUfan]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

[J. J.]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

[HappyWarrior]

CNN=Hillary Lovers united network.  They always give Hillary better chances and spin then she actually has.

[MSUfan]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

[J. J.]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

[MSUfan]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

Once again, it was one week ago from one polling company. Not saying Obama will win, but there hasn't been a tightening worth noticing.

[Verily]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

No. The last time Rasmussen had polled the race was exactly never.

The only pollster to have enough polls to constitute a trend is Strategic Vision, which gave:

Feb 2007: C+15
May 2007: C+13
July 2007: C+16
Sept 2007: C+22
Nov 2007: C+18
Dec 2007: C+7
Feb 2008: O+4

But, given how spread out the polls were, the earliest we can even really look at trends is starting from November.

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

Correct, CNN has identified the poll to which I refer as an ARG poll.

Now the issue some will be talking about, is that Obama is all rhetoric and not solutions, after using words from Deval Patrick speeches.

David Gergen has said this is not the issue you want the media talking about the eve of the Wisconsin vote.  He says it is not palgarism, but a dumb mistake.

Personally, I do not believe this should rise to the level of a major issue, but, if this throws Obama off track and causes him to fall backwards, and even to lose Wisconsin, then this will be seen as a major mistake on his part.

He should have known, as a smart politician, to avoid this type of potentially controversial and damaging behavior.  It is simply not worth it, given what is at stake, and given the closeness of the contest.

[J. J.]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

No. The last time Rasmussen had polled the race was exactly never.

The only pollster to have enough polls to constitute a trend is Strategic Vision, which gave:

Feb 2007: C+15
May 2007: C+13
July 2007: C+16
Sept 2007: C+22
Nov 2007: C+18
Dec 2007: C+7
Feb 2008: O+4

But, given how spread out the polls were, the earliest we can even really look at trends is starting from November.

As you know, I never look at one poll; I've been looking at the different polls out there, and it seems to be tightening.

[Verily]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

No. The last time Rasmussen had polled the race was exactly never.

The only pollster to have enough polls to constitute a trend is Strategic Vision, which gave:

Feb 2007: C+15
May 2007: C+13
July 2007: C+16
Sept 2007: C+22
Nov 2007: C+18
Dec 2007: C+7
Feb 2008: O+4

But, given how spread out the polls were, the earliest we can even really look at trends is starting from November.

As you know, I never look at one poll; I've been looking at the different polls out there, and it seems to be tightening.

I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion. Discarding ARG, we have, in the past few days:

[Before the SV poll, we'd be going back to December.]
Strategic Vision: O+4 (the oldest, Feb 10)
PPP: O+11 (Feb 12)
Rasmussen: O+4 (Feb 13)
Research 2000: O+5 (Feb 14)
PPP: O+13 (Feb 17)

PPP is apparently using a different turnout model than everyone else, which explains their results. It is important to note that, not only are these all of the recent polls (save ARG), the polls on this post are the only polls to show an Obama lead.

[J. J.]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

No. The last time Rasmussen had polled the race was exactly never.

The only pollster to have enough polls to constitute a trend is Strategic Vision, which gave:

Feb 2007: C+15
May 2007: C+13
July 2007: C+16
Sept 2007: C+22
Nov 2007: C+18
Dec 2007: C+7
Feb 2008: O+4

But, given how spread out the polls were, the earliest we can even really look at trends is starting from November.

As you know, I never look at one poll; I've been looking at the different polls out there, and it seems to be tightening.

I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion. Discarding ARG, we have, in the past few days:

[Before the SV poll, we'd be going back to December.]
Strategic Vision: O+4 (the oldest, Feb 10)
PPP: O+11 (Feb 12)
Rasmussen: O+4 (Feb 13)
Research 2000: O+5 (Feb 14)
PPP: O+13 (Feb 17)

PPP is apparently using a different turnout model than everyone else, which explains their results. It is important to note that, not only are these all of the recent polls (save ARG), the polls on this post are the only polls to show an Obama lead.

I have not said Obama will lose (though it's very possible); I have said the race seems to be tightening, and is probably below the 5-7 points you've cited.

[Verily]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

No. The last time Rasmussen had polled the race was exactly never.

The only pollster to have enough polls to constitute a trend is Strategic Vision, which gave:

Feb 2007: C+15
May 2007: C+13
July 2007: C+16
Sept 2007: C+22
Nov 2007: C+18
Dec 2007: C+7
Feb 2008: O+4

But, given how spread out the polls were, the earliest we can even really look at trends is starting from November.

As you know, I never look at one poll; I've been looking at the different polls out there, and it seems to be tightening.

I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion. Discarding ARG, we have, in the past few days:

[Before the SV poll, we'd be going back to December.]
Strategic Vision: O+4 (the oldest, Feb 10)
PPP: O+11 (Feb 12)
Rasmussen: O+4 (Feb 13)
Research 2000: O+5 (Feb 14)
PPP: O+13 (Feb 17)

PPP is apparently using a different turnout model than everyone else, which explains their results. It is important to note that, not only are these all of the recent polls (save ARG), the polls on this post are the only polls to show an Obama lead.

I have not said Obama will lose (though it's very possible); I have said the race seems to be tightening, and is probably below the 5-7 points you've cited.

"I've been looking at the different polls out there, and it seems to be tightening."

I've provided you with "the different polls out there", all of them. There is no evidence of tightening, none whatsoever. The race does not tighten because J. J. says so. You've become as bad as some of the Obama hacks on this forum for making up "facts" to fit your own views of what is going on in the race.

I won't deny that Clinton may win tomorrow by some fluke. But it is not something indicated by polls, by news coverage, by collections of Wisconsin anecdotes, by fundraising, by endorsements, or by anything but J. J.'s analysis of non-existent polls showing the race in Wisconsin tightening.

[J. J.]

I'm not crazy about ARG or Zogby, but some of the other polls have been showing a tightening of the race.

  All the polls have show'd a basic 5-7 pt Obama lead. No tightening of what you speak.

Rasmussen's 'bots put it at 4 points last week.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70545.0

His margin was larger, IIRC.  It looks like the race is tightening.  That doesn't mean a Clinton victory, but it does mean a closer race.

No. The last time Rasmussen had polled the race was exactly never.

The only pollster to have enough polls to constitute a trend is Strategic Vision, which gave:

Feb 2007: C+15
May 2007: C+13
July 2007: C+16
Sept 2007: C+22
Nov 2007: C+18
Dec 2007: C+7
Feb 2008: O+4

But, given how spread out the polls were, the earliest we can even really look at trends is starting from November.

As you know, I never look at one poll; I've been looking at the different polls out there, and it seems to be tightening.

I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion. Discarding ARG, we have, in the past few days:

[Before the SV poll, we'd be going back to December.]
Strategic Vision: O+4 (the oldest, Feb 10)
PPP: O+11 (Feb 12)
Rasmussen: O+4 (Feb 13)
Research 2000: O+5 (Feb 14)
PPP: O+13 (Feb 17)

PPP is apparently using a different turnout model than everyone else, which explains their results. It is important to note that, not only are these all of the recent polls (save ARG), the polls on this post are the only polls to show an Obama lead.

I have not said Obama will lose (though it's very possible); I have said the race seems to be tightening, and is probably below the 5-7 points you've cited.

"I've been looking at the different polls out there, and it seems to be tightening."

I've provided you with "the different polls out there", all of them. There is no evidence of tightening, none whatsoever. The race does not tighten because J. J. says so. You've become as bad as some of the Obama hacks on this forum for making up "facts" to fit your own views of what is going on in the race.

I won't deny that Clinton may win tomorrow by some fluke. But it is not something indicated by polls, by news coverage, by collections of Wisconsin anecdotes, by fundraising, by endorsements, or by anything but J. J.'s analysis of non-existent polls showing the race in Wisconsin tightening.

And they show a race tighter than 5-7 points and the trend seems to be that the margin is shrinking, based on what you've posted.  We'll probably know be this time tomorrow, but I'm getting the sense that this is tightening and fairly close race.

Some of it has to do with Clinton's very aggressive tactics.  This was suppose to be a fairly solid Obama win; it sure doesn't look like it will be twelve hours out.  Sorry if the possibility of a Clinton victory offends you, but it sure doesn't look like the impressive Obama victory a number of Obamites were expecting.