|
Title: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Tender Branson on March 11, 2008, 11:05:28 AM New Poll: Pennsylvania President by Survey USA on 2008-03-10 (https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/PRESIDENT/2008D/polls.php?action=indpoll&id=4220080310019)
Summary:
Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=c9ce82e9-4cb0-4b64-983c-509ce4fc0ee6) Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Tender Branson on March 11, 2008, 11:08:29 AM North-West PA:
Clinton: 79% Obama: 19% South-West PA: Clinton: 58% Obama: 27% West-Central PA: Clinton: 76% Obama: 17% South-Central PA: Clinton: 55% Obama: 40% North-East PA: Clinton: 58% Obama: 33% South-East PA: Clinton: 48% Obama: 46% Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Tender Branson on March 11, 2008, 11:10:55 AM If you ask me: A lost cause.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on March 11, 2008, 11:10:59 AM Ouch.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Sam Spade on March 11, 2008, 11:14:25 AM About what I would expect (maybe a little high, but...). Still time to get it closer, obviously. But we all know how many problems he's going to have in west PA and NE PA.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck on March 11, 2008, 11:23:56 AM He's got a month to campaign there and he has an assload of money still. PA's demographics are great for Hillary and the campaign there hasn't even started. Give it a week or two.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 11, 2008, 11:25:05 AM Has Obama started campaigning here? If so, to what degree?
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Democratic Hawk on March 11, 2008, 11:27:29 AM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap
Dave Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: agcatter on March 11, 2008, 11:52:14 AM Interesting. Wow. 80% of the vote is white and Obama gets 29% of it? Fortunately all those white Democrats will all come back home in November and vote for Obama.
Yeah, sure they will. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Jake on March 11, 2008, 12:16:52 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Democratic Hawk on March 11, 2008, 12:49:28 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. I read a commentary by G. Terry Madonna of Franklin & Marshall College and it would seem that Obama must ramp up big margins in Philadelphia and its suburbs as well as doing well in what he calls the swing areas: the Lehigh Valley (Allentown) region and south-central PA (Lancaster, Dauphin, Cumberland and York) to stand even a hope of winning the primary Obviously, white blue collar Democrats, and regions in which they are dominant, gravitate towards Clinton in a Democratic primary- but how does that bode well for Obama in a general, given that homogenously white areas are absent of the racial cleavages that could work against him? Nevertheless, given that an ugly a win for Clinton could have wide reaching implications for Obama should he be the Democratic nominee, couldn't it still overstate her strength as a general election candidate in PA? I know this is SUSA but the most recent Rasmussen general election poll; Feb 17, i.e. before Clinton's big OH and TX comeback) had: Obama 49% / McCain 39% McCain 44% / Clinton 42% A new poll is to be released tomorrow and I'd be surprised if Clinton isn't up and Obama down against McCain Clinton has certainly received a huge bounce in the PA Democratic primary, leading by 52 to 37 (March 6) but only by 46 to 42 (February 28) Dave Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: they don't love you like i love you on March 11, 2008, 12:52:50 PM Interesting. Wow. 80% of the vote is white and Obama gets 29% of it? Fortunately all those white Democrats will all come back home in November and vote for Obama. Yeah, sure they will. How's that anymore ridiculous than expecting the black vote to come back to Hillary (which she gets an even lower percentage of)? Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Tender Branson on March 11, 2008, 12:53:22 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. I read a commentary by G. Terry Madonna of Franklin & Marshall College and it would seem that Obama must ramp up big margins in Philadelphia and its suburbs as well as doing well in what he calls the swing areas: the Lehigh Valley (Allentown) region and south-central PA (Lancaster, Dauphin, Cumberland and York) to stand even a hope of winning the primary Obviously, white blue collar Democrats, and regions in which they are dominant, gravitate towards Clinton in a Democratic primary- but how does that bode well for Obama in a general, given that homogenously white areas are absent of the racial cleavages that could work against him? Nevertheless, given that an ugly a win for Clinton could have wide reaching implications for Obama should he be the Democratic nominee, couldn't it still overstate her strength as a general election candidate in PA? I know this is SUSA but the most recent Rasmussen general election poll; Feb 17, i.e. before Clinton's big OH and TX comeback) had: Obama 49% / McCain 39% McCain 44% / Clinton 42% A new poll is to be released tomorrow and I'd be surprised if Clinton isn't up and Obama down against McCain Clinton has certainly received a huge bounce in the PA Democratic primary, leading by 52 to 37 (March 6) but only by 46 to 42 (February 28) Dave I think both should be more or less tied or ahead of McCain tomorrow. Maybe Obama by 0-3%, Clinton by 3-8%. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Democratic Hawk on March 11, 2008, 01:04:08 PM Interesting. Wow. 80% of the vote is white and Obama gets 29% of it? Fortunately all those white Democrats will all come back home in November and vote for Obama. Yeah, sure they will. How's that anymore ridiculous than expecting the black vote to come back to Hillary (which she gets an even lower percentage of)? Unfortunately, there appear to be signs that Obama, as of now, could face more difficulty attracting Clinton voters in November than Clinton would Obama's Dave Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 11, 2008, 01:04:59 PM Interesting. Wow. 80% of the vote is white and Obama gets 29% of it? Fortunately all those white Democrats will all come back home in November and vote for Obama. Yeah, sure they will. How's that anymore ridiculous than expecting the black vote to come back to Hillary (which she gets an even lower percentage of)? It's more reflexively Democratic? It's not as if Democrats are bleeding margins among blacks as they are among, say, white voters in industrial Penn. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 11, 2008, 01:06:38 PM South-East PA: Clinton: 48% Obama: 46% LOL! Great results overall, of course. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Sam Spade on March 11, 2008, 01:06:47 PM Gotta love uni pollsters who act like they actually know something...
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 11, 2008, 01:08:09 PM Gotta love uni pollsters who act like they actually know something... ? The University of SurveyUSA? Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Democratic Hawk on March 11, 2008, 01:13:58 PM I think both should be more or less tied or ahead of McCain tomorrow. Maybe Obama by 0-3%, Clinton by 3-8%. I'd like to think that Obama is going to be further ahead than Clinton. It reaffirms that come a general, he'd do better among men, Independents and cross-over Republicans than she would but given that , as of now, she has such a commanding advantage in the primary I'm not optimistic In January's Rasmussen, McCain led Clinton 48% to 42%; Obama, 46% to 38% but it was very different last month with Obama leading McCain 49% to 39% with Clinton trailing 44% to 42% So if Obama is still ahead of McCain, tomorrow, I'll be :) Dave Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Democratic Hawk on March 11, 2008, 01:14:49 PM Gotta love uni pollsters who act like they actually know something... Who's that? G. Terry Madonna? Dave Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Sam Spade on March 11, 2008, 01:20:09 PM Gotta love uni pollsters who act like they actually know something... ? The University of SurveyUSA? Nah, I was talking about the commentary Hawk posted. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Democratic Hawk on March 11, 2008, 01:28:35 PM Gotta love uni pollsters who act like they actually know something... ? The University of SurveyUSA? Nah, I was talking about the commentary Hawk posted. I'm not a uni pollster :P ;D ;) Speaking of uni polling, that of Indiana State for IN-08 in 2006, was ridiculed, IIRC, for overstating Ellsworth's lead over Hostettler, by 15% than 23%, but come the day it was 61% to 39%. No-one else predicted a 22% winning margin Dave Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 11, 2008, 01:29:12 PM Gotta love uni pollsters who act like they actually know something... Who's that? G. Terry Madonna? Dave Haha...Madonna does know something! He is a political idol here. :) Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 11, 2008, 01:43:55 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. I remember reading that large numbers of Republicans and Independents (upwards of 40,000) have recently switched to Democratic, likely to vote in the Dem Primary. I would bet a high % of these would be in SEPA. The black population is about 1% higher in Ohio than Pennsylvania, however PA does have a larger amount of middle to upper middle class whites than Ohio does. They both have a large working class white population which Clinton obviously will do very well in PA as she did in Ohio, but you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 11, 2008, 01:47:49 PM but you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. He will do well here but well enough? Hillary is actually leading him thus far. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: bullmoose88 on March 11, 2008, 01:49:40 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. I remember reading that large numbers of Republicans and Independents (upwards of 40,000) have recently switched to Democratic, likely to vote in the Dem Primary. I would bet a high % of these would be in SEPA. The black population is about 1% higher in Ohio than Pennsylvania, however PA does have a larger amount of middle to upper middle class whites than Ohio does. They both have a large working class white population which Clinton obviously will do very well in PA as she did in Ohio, but you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. That's interesting, can you find the link...I havent seen that on the local newspaper sites...but I'd be interested to read about it. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 11, 2008, 01:51:11 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. I remember reading that large numbers of Republicans and Independents (upwards of 40,000) have recently switched to Democratic, likely to vote in the Dem Primary. I would bet a high % of these would be in SEPA. The black population is about 1% higher in Ohio than Pennsylvania, however PA does have a larger amount of middle to upper middle class whites than Ohio does. They both have a large working class white population which Clinton obviously will do very well in PA as she did in Ohio, but you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. That's interesting, can you find the link...I havent seen that on the local newspaper sites...but I'd be interested to read about it. I don't think it's true. They have covered the fact that people will switch but I haven't seen the numbers yet. I think they'd wait until a few days before or after the deadline to switch (in about two weeks, I believe). Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Ben. on March 11, 2008, 01:58:32 PM The funny* thing is that now the Dems are going to spend millions of dollars and hours of tv time bashing each other up in a campaign thats likely to get very negative in a state which, come the general, is going to be a key battle ground for both parties... is it only me that sees a really big problem for the Dems (regardless of the nominee) in all of this?
*Of course "funny" might not be the right word depending on your point of view. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 11, 2008, 02:02:58 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. I remember reading that large numbers of Republicans and Independents (upwards of 40,000) have recently switched to Democratic, likely to vote in the Dem Primary. I would bet a high % of these would be in SEPA. The black population is about 1% higher in Ohio than Pennsylvania, however PA does have a larger amount of middle to upper middle class whites than Ohio does. They both have a large working class white population which Clinton obviously will do very well in PA as she did in Ohio, but you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. That's interesting, can you find the link...I havent seen that on the local newspaper sites...but I'd be interested to read about it. I don't think it's true. They have covered the fact that people will switch but I haven't seen the numbers yet. I think they'd wait until a few days before or after the deadline to switch (in about two weeks, I believe). I remember reading it somewhere, I'm at work now so don't really have time to search for it, but will post a link tonight or tomorrow night when I have more time to look. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on March 11, 2008, 03:06:42 PM Smash is wrong. There are plenty of bourgeois suburbs in Ohio, it's just that they aren't all (or rather; almost all) concentrated in just one metropolitan area.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: minionofmidas on March 11, 2008, 03:08:14 PM Smash is wrong. There are plenty of bourgeois suburbs in Ohio, it's just that they aren't all (or rather; almost all) concentrated in just one metropolitan area. What the hell are you basing this crap on? Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on March 11, 2008, 03:14:01 PM Smash is wrong. There are plenty of bourgeois suburbs in Ohio, it's just that they aren't all (or rather; almost all) concentrated in just one metropolitan area. What the hell are you basing this crap on? :D Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 11, 2008, 03:47:24 PM Smash is wrong. There are plenty of bourgeois suburbs in Ohio, it's just that they aren't all (or rather; almost all) concentrated in just one metropolitan area. I wasn't trying to suggest that it didn't exist in Ohio, but rather its larger in PA than Ohio. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Jake on March 11, 2008, 11:49:03 PM you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. No? Northeast of Cleveland? Outside of Cincy? Columbus 'burbs? Certainly more prone to vote Republican in Ohio, but many of the Democratic votes that pushed Rendell, Sestak, Murphy, etc. into power were made by disaffected Republicans (Montco recorded 104,000 votes in the 2007 Primary - 39,000 Dems and 60,000 Republicans). Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: they don't love you like i love you on March 12, 2008, 11:44:13 AM Smash is wrong. There are plenty of bourgeois suburbs in Ohio, it's just that they aren't all (or rather; almost all) concentrated in just one metropolitan area. And they all vote mostly Republican. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 12, 2008, 08:56:22 PM Could PA be any worse for Obama than OH? There is, of course, ample time for Obama to campaign and close the gap Dave Actually, yeah it could. PA is closed which will reduce crossovers by a significant amount simply because Obama now has two weeks to re-register independents and Republicans where they could simply request to change affiliation at the polling station. Pennsylvania also has a slightly smaller percentage of blacks and unlike in Ohio, Obama won't have the endorsement and machine of the mayors of the bigger cities (Rendell, Nutter, and Street are backing Hillary; Mallory and Jackson backed Obama). All in all, it could get very ugly for Obama, like 15 point margin ugly. I remember reading that large numbers of Republicans and Independents (upwards of 40,000) have recently switched to Democratic, likely to vote in the Dem Primary. I would bet a high % of these would be in SEPA. The black population is about 1% higher in Ohio than Pennsylvania, however PA does have a larger amount of middle to upper middle class whites than Ohio does. They both have a large working class white population which Clinton obviously will do very well in PA as she did in Ohio, but you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. That's interesting, can you find the link...I havent seen that on the local newspaper sites...but I'd be interested to read about it. I don't think it's true. They have covered the fact that people will switch but I haven't seen the numbers yet. I think they'd wait until a few days before or after the deadline to switch (in about two weeks, I believe). No hard data on how many people switched from Independent and Republican to Democratic, and all three saw gains since the fall, but the differences are quite stark. Republicans have added 3,312 those enrolled in neither gained by approx 8,000 and democratic enrollment increased by 65,397. The largest Democratic gains were in Montco, Delaware and Chester. Quote Dems Surge by 65,000 in Pa. By PETER JACKSON – 2 days ago HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Pennsylvania Democrats have added more than 65,000 voters to their rolls since last fall, a reflection of the high level of interest in the contested race for the party's presidential nomination and the state's April 22 primary. The number of Democrats increased 1.7 percent — from 3,883,378 in November to 3,948,775 as of March 4. GOP enrollment grew by 0.1 percent, from 3,245,271 to 3,248,583, during the period. The interim totals, drawn from a computerized statewide voter registry, were provided by state elections officials Monday. The Associated Press compared those numbers against the registration totals in last year's election, which featured races for judicial and municipal offices. Campaign spokesmen for Democratic candidates Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama both sought to share in the credit for the increases. Sean Smith of Obama's campaign said supporters of the Illinois senator were working to recruit Republicans, independents and people not registered to vote for the Democratic Party even before the campaign became active in Pennsylvania last month. Last weekend, 1,200 volunteers canvassed shopping malls and went door to door to court more new registrants, he said. "It's exactly the kind of shoe-leather work that our campaign has been known for," Smith said. Clinton spokesman Mark Nevins contended the increase reflects disenchantment with the GOP and President Bush, as well as the allure of "two impressive candidates" for the Democratic nod. It's "a rebuke of the Republican brand by the Pennsylvania voters," he said. Clinton, a senator from New York, began a two-day swing through Pennsylvania in Scranton on Monday. Former President Clinton was scheduled to stump for her in western Pennsylvania on Tuesday while she visits Harrisburg and Philadelphia. Obama planned to tour and meet with workers at a wind-turbine plant in suburban Philadelphia on Tuesday. Mike Barley, a spokesman for the state Republican Party, said he believes many of the new Democratic registrants are independent-minded Republicans who are caught up in the excitement of the Democratic race. Sen. John McCain of Arizona has clinched the GOP nomination. "We feel pretty strongly that, come November, we're going to get those people back," Barley said. The Democratic primary is open only to registered Democrats. Voters have until March 24 to switch or join parties. The Democrats' biggest registration gains were in three suburban Philadelphia counties — Chester, Delaware and Montgomery. While the GOP still holds the registration edge in those counties, those largely white-collar communities often cross party lines and are considered swing areas for Democrats in statewide races. The number of voters registered in neither of the major parties also increased, from about 984,000 to nearly 992,000, the new figures show. http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g73v_gaMTeTWhOZQ8iJuo5NQTCzAD8VAR9IO0 Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on March 12, 2008, 09:05:14 PM Obama planned to tour and meet with workers at a wind-turbine plant in suburban Philadelphia on Tuesday. Anyone else find that funny? Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 12, 2008, 09:08:12 PM you really don't have an area in Ohio like suburban philly, which is an area Obama will do quite well in. No? Northeast of Cleveland? Outside of Cincy? Columbus 'burbs? Certainly more prone to vote Republican in Ohio, but many of the Democratic votes that pushed Rendell, Sestak, Murphy, etc. into power were made by disaffected Republicans (Montco recorded 104,000 votes in the 2007 Primary - 39,000 Dems and 60,000 Republicans). An off year election has a bit of a different dynamic. Even with the GOP enrollment edge in suburban Philly (which continues to decrease) its still going to result in the white primary vote having a larger % of educated middle and upper middle class voters than in Ohio. Thats not to state working class whites won't make up a large portion of the white vote in PA, they will just not to the extent they did in Ohio. Obama has done well with white liberals (especially social liberals) you clearly have more of them in suburban Philly than you do in suburban Cleveland, Columbus & certainly suburban Cincy. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on March 12, 2008, 09:20:57 PM its still going to result in the white primary vote having a larger % of educated middle and upper middle class voters than in Ohio. Hmm... perhaps. But not by much, certainly not by as much as you seem to think. Quote Thats not to state working class whites won't make up a large portion of the white vote in PA, they will just not to the extent they did in Ohio. Ah, but how are we defining working class here? If we accept that class is, to a great extent, as much about culture as anything else, then I don't actually think that's true. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 12, 2008, 09:28:18 PM its still going to result in the white primary vote having a larger % of educated middle and upper middle class voters than in Ohio. Hmm... perhaps. But not by much, certainly not by as much as you seem to think. I'm not trying to suggest Obama will win PA, I think Clinton will. However, some of the talk has been she will win it by a larger portion than she did in Ohio, and I think that will be really hard for her to accomplish with the educated middle to upper middle class white vote being a little higher in PA. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 12, 2008, 09:29:44 PM its still going to result in the white primary vote having a larger % of educated middle and upper middle class voters than in Ohio. Hmm... perhaps. But not by much, certainly not by as much as you seem to think. I'm not trying to suggest Obama will win PA, I think Clinton will. However, some of the talk has been she will win it by a larger portion than she did in Ohio, and I think that will be really hard for her to accomplish with the educated middle to upper middle class white vote being a little higher in PA. PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary - and it's a closed primary. Was Ohio closed? Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 12, 2008, 09:33:05 PM PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary 60 and over by state, 2004 exit poll: Ohio: 20% Pennsylvania: 22% A lot? Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 12, 2008, 09:55:06 PM its still going to result in the white primary vote having a larger % of educated middle and upper middle class voters than in Ohio. Hmm... perhaps. But not by much, certainly not by as much as you seem to think. I'm not trying to suggest Obama will win PA, I think Clinton will. However, some of the talk has been she will win it by a larger portion than she did in Ohio, and I think that will be really hard for her to accomplish with the educated middle to upper middle class white vote being a little higher in PA. PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary - and it's a closed primary. Was Ohio closed? No, but a closed primary would also result in a higher % of African Americans than an open one would. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 12, 2008, 10:17:44 PM No, but a closed primary would also result in a higher % of African Americans than an open one would. But having an open primary doesn't reduce the number of black voters, and unless Clinton does better (in net) among the crossover voters, that would only be good for Obama. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 12, 2008, 10:20:08 PM PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary 60 and over by state, 2004 exit poll: Ohio: 20% Pennsylvania: 22% A lot? More olds died in Ohio since then. Next. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 12, 2008, 10:25:05 PM PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary 60 and over by state, 2004 exit poll: Ohio: 20% Pennsylvania: 22% A lot? More olds died in Ohio since then. Next. Change between 2000 and 2006 in population over the age of 65, U.S. Census: Ohio: 13.3% to 13.3% (unch) Pennsylvania: 15.6% to 15.1% (-3.2%) Next. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 12, 2008, 10:26:14 PM PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary 60 and over by state, 2004 exit poll: Ohio: 20% Pennsylvania: 22% A lot? More olds died in Ohio since then. Next. Change between 2000 and 2006 in population over the age of 65, U.S. Census: Ohio: 13.3% to 13.3% (unch) Pennsylvania: 15.6% to 15.1% (-3.2%) Next. LOL at the naive. Who believes the U.S. government figures these days? Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Flying Dog on March 12, 2008, 10:29:26 PM PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary 60 and over by state, 2004 exit poll: Ohio: 20% Pennsylvania: 22% A lot? More olds died in Ohio since then. Next. Change between 2000 and 2006 in population over the age of 65, U.S. Census: Ohio: 13.3% to 13.3% (unch) Pennsylvania: 15.6% to 15.1% (-3.2%) Next. LOL at the naive. Who believes the U.S. government figures these days? Yeah....facts...schmacks. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 12, 2008, 10:29:49 PM PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary 60 and over by state, 2004 exit poll: Ohio: 20% Pennsylvania: 22% A lot? More olds died in Ohio since then. Next. Change between 2000 and 2006 in population over the age of 65, U.S. Census: Ohio: 13.3% to 13.3% (unch) Pennsylvania: 15.6% to 15.1% (-3.2%) Next. LOL at the naive. Who believes the U.S. government figures these days? In that case, I refer you to: State of Ohio. "Single Year of Age by Sex Estimates for Ohio: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006." (http://www.odod.state.oh.us/cms/uploadedfiles/Research/p101000003(1).xls) Pennsylvania State University. "Population Demographics -- State of Pennsylvania." (http://pasdc.hbg.psu.edu/pasdc/data_and_information/data_by_type/Population_Demographics.html) Both of which agree with me: Ohio basically static, Pennsylvania a slight fall, definitely not more olds dying in Ohio. punkass r-pa. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 12, 2008, 10:31:26 PM PA also has a lot more older voters - Strong for Hillary 60 and over by state, 2004 exit poll: Ohio: 20% Pennsylvania: 22% A lot? More olds died in Ohio since then. Next. Change between 2000 and 2006 in population over the age of 65, U.S. Census: Ohio: 13.3% to 13.3% (unch) Pennsylvania: 15.6% to 15.1% (-3.2%) Next. LOL at the naive. Who believes the U.S. government figures these days? In that case, I refer you to: State of Ohio. "Single Year of Age by Sex Estimates for Ohio: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006." (http://www.odod.state.oh.us/cms/uploadedfiles/Research/p101000003(1).xls) Pennsylvania State University. "Population Demographics -- State of Pennsylvania." (http://pasdc.hbg.psu.edu/pasdc/data_and_information/data_by_type/Population_Demographics.html) Both of which agree with me: Ohio basically static, Pennsylvania a slight fall, definitely not more olds dying in Ohio. I...have no idea why you are seriously responding to me. Anyway, I was under the impression PA had far more old people but I guess that's not the case. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Alcon on March 12, 2008, 10:34:06 PM Because I didn't realize you were kidding until about the point where I typed "punkass r-pa" :P
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 12, 2008, 10:35:55 PM No, but a closed primary would also result in a higher % of African Americans than an open one would. But having an open primary doesn't reduce the number of black voters, and unless Clinton does better (in net) among the crossover voters, that would only be good for Obama. I know it doesn't reduce the amount of black voters, but black voters would make a larger % of the overall vote in a closed primary than in a open one. Thats not to say a closed primary doesn't benefit Clinton it would. With the exception of Mississippi and a couple others the overall results in the open Primaries were more friendly to Obama than the Democrats in those states. What Obama loses by not having the crossover voters while not fully made up for, is partially made up for by a higher % of black voters. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 12, 2008, 10:36:52 PM No, but a closed primary would also result in a higher % of African Americans than an open one would. But having an open primary doesn't reduce the number of black voters, and unless Clinton does better (in net) among the crossover voters, that would only be good for Obama. I know it doesn't reduce the amount of black voters, but black voters would make a larger % of the overall vote in a closed primary than in a open one. Uh, ok, and the percentage of independents and Republicans who have favored Obama has gone down to 0. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Jake on March 13, 2008, 12:36:39 AM An off year election has a bit of a different dynamic. No shit. We're talking about a 61%-39% registration difference; ie, 21,000 Democrats and 0 Republicans would've had to have stayed home last April to even bring the numbers even. There wasn't any reason for more Republicans to turn out; neither party had contested Commissioner races, neither had any opposed row office races, and they obviously weren't pouring out in droves to vote on judges as only 71% and 61% of folks cast votes in the GOP primary for state judges. And you said it yourself, Montco is filled with professionals, higher income folks, 87% white, etc. There's no reason for the normal Democratic off year election downturn to occur here; both party's voters should be about equally as likely to vote. Seems there's one conclusion to draw here Smash. Voters in Southeast PA are still registered majority Republican of those stating a party, and thus are ineligible to vote in this race on April 22. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: they don't love you like i love you on March 13, 2008, 12:41:12 AM No, but a closed primary would also result in a higher % of African Americans than an open one would. But having an open primary doesn't reduce the number of black voters, and unless Clinton does better (in net) among the crossover voters, that would only be good for Obama. I know it doesn't reduce the amount of black voters, but black voters would make a larger % of the overall vote in a closed primary than in a open one. Uh, ok, and the percentage of independents and Republicans who have favored Obama has gone down to 0. Not really. Many will switch registrations. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 13, 2008, 12:48:58 AM No, but a closed primary would also result in a higher % of African Americans than an open one would. But having an open primary doesn't reduce the number of black voters, and unless Clinton does better (in net) among the crossover voters, that would only be good for Obama. I know it doesn't reduce the amount of black voters, but black voters would make a larger % of the overall vote in a closed primary than in a open one. Uh, ok, and the percentage of independents and Republicans who have favored Obama has gone down to 0. Not really. Many will switch registrations. Not enough compared to those that have turned out in open primaries for the other side. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Jake on March 13, 2008, 12:57:42 AM Not really. Many will switch registrations. Define "many". Because we've seen plenty of open or modified primaries where you could walk into the polling place and either just take a ballot or re-register on site, but we've not seen many of the truly closed, must be registered a month before, can't change your registration at the door, etc. primaries this cycle. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Verily on March 13, 2008, 01:08:43 AM Not really. Many will switch registrations. Define "many". Because we've seen plenty of open or modified primaries where you could walk into the polling place and either just take a ballot or re-register on site, but we've not seen many of the truly closed, must be registered a month before, can't change your registration at the door, etc. primaries this cycle. Maryland's exit polls might be useful here. Edit: 13% Independent, 3% Republican. Maryland was closed. (Some of the self-identified independents may be perennially registered as Democrats, others may have registered just for the primary. Obviously, the self-identified Republicans all re-registered.) Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 13, 2008, 09:10:29 AM An off year election has a bit of a different dynamic. No shit. We're talking about a 61%-39% registration difference; ie, 21,000 Democrats and 0 Republicans would've had to have stayed home last April to even bring the numbers even. There wasn't any reason for more Republicans to turn out; neither party had contested Commissioner races, neither had any opposed row office races, and they obviously weren't pouring out in droves to vote on judges as only 71% and 61% of folks cast votes in the GOP primary for state judges. And you said it yourself, Montco is filled with professionals, higher income folks, 87% white, etc. There's no reason for the normal Democratic off year election downturn to occur here; both party's voters should be about equally as likely to vote. Seems there's one conclusion to draw here Smash. Voters in Southeast PA are still registered majority Republican of those stating a party, and thus are ineligible to vote in this race on April 22. Granted, but that advantage is diminishing. The areas of the state where the Democrats are making their greatest enrollment gains is in suburban Philly. they will make up a higher % of the Democratic Primary vote than they have in the past. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Jake on March 13, 2008, 10:09:44 AM I'll add, in Ohio 31% of voters were Republicans or Independents. They were basically equal (49-49, 50-48 Obama). Clinton beat him 56-42 among Democrats. He lost white Democrats 70-27.
Let's review. Approximately 679,000 of 2,187,000 voters were not Democrats. Article posted recently said 65,000 new Democrats registered while Republican numbers grew by 3,000 and Indies by 8,000. Now, total registration grew by 76,000. How many of those registrations are GOP/IND -> DEM and how many are new Democrats? Impossible to know, but that's another very important question. And that's ignoring that 65,000 is less than a tenth of the total that voted in Ohio, and PA should have more total voters. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 13, 2008, 10:26:12 AM I'll add, in Ohio 31% of voters were Republicans or Independents. They were basically equal (49-49, 50-48 Obama). Clinton beat him 56-42 among Democrats. He lost white Democrats 70-27. Let's review. Approximately 679,000 of 2,187,000 voters were not Democrats. Article posted recently said 65,000 new Democrats registered while Republican numbers grew by 3,000 and Indies by 8,000. Now, total registration grew by 76,000. How many of those registrations are GOP/IND -> DEM and how many are new Democrats? Impossible to know, but that's another very important question. And that's ignoring that 65,000 is less than a tenth of the total that voted in Ohio, and PA should have more total voters. The newly registered Dem voters make up approx 2% of the current Democratic enrollment. That is something which will obviously increase by the time the deadline rolls around. Also its very likely that the newly registerered are probably more likely to turn out. So your probably looking at the newly registered Dems making up 5-6% or so of the Democratic Primary vote. The biggest increase in enrollment is coming from SEPA, and that is very likely to favor Obama, regardless what the split is between Republican and Indies switching parties and just new voters entirely Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Jake on March 13, 2008, 10:39:10 AM For 2% of the electorate to make up 6% of voters turnout will need to drop to 33% of the electorate with every new voter voting.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 13, 2008, 10:42:37 AM For 2% of the electorate to make up 6% of voters turnout will need to drop to 33% of the electorate with every new voter voting. Its probably going to be closer to 3-4% when its all set and done. Turnout is going to obviously be really high across the board, but newly registered will likely see even higher turnout. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Gustaf on March 13, 2008, 02:48:43 PM Smash, your argument makes no sense. It's true that it would be worse for Obama if the closed primary made him lose black voters in addition to losing independents and Republicans but the fact that it isn't doesn't really constitute a good thing. It's not like the black percentage rising actually means any gains for him, since the percentage of white Democrats increase as well. If I have 40 voters and 20 of them are mine and you kill 10 of them it's true that the remaining 10 became 33% instead of 25% of the electorate but it doesn't really help the fact that I lost half my voters.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Smash255 on March 13, 2008, 02:56:47 PM Smash, your argument makes no sense. It's true that it would be worse for Obama if the closed primary made him lose black voters in addition to losing independents and Republicans but the fact that it isn't doesn't really constitute a good thing. It's not like the black percentage rising actually means any gains for him, since the percentage of white Democrats increase as well. If I have 40 voters and 20 of them are mine and you kill 10 of them it's true that the remaining 10 became 33% instead of 25% of the electorate but it doesn't really help the fact that I lost half my voters. I wasn't suggesting it would help Obama. I was saying one thing that tends to get overlooked is that it would also result in a higher % of African Americans, which diminshes though doesn't completley negate the impact of not having the crossovers. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: 12th Doctor on March 15, 2008, 03:23:16 AM I love this state, because even in our utter stupidity we exhibit our greatness.
Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Gustaf on March 15, 2008, 05:49:33 AM Smash, your argument makes no sense. It's true that it would be worse for Obama if the closed primary made him lose black voters in addition to losing independents and Republicans but the fact that it isn't doesn't really constitute a good thing. It's not like the black percentage rising actually means any gains for him, since the percentage of white Democrats increase as well. If I have 40 voters and 20 of them are mine and you kill 10 of them it's true that the remaining 10 became 33% instead of 25% of the electorate but it doesn't really help the fact that I lost half my voters. I wasn't suggesting it would help Obama. I was saying one thing that tends to get overlooked is that it would also result in a higher % of African Americans, which diminshes though doesn't completley negate the impact of not having the crossovers. Eh, no. It does not diminish anything. You're saying "does not compeletely negate" as if it negates at all. But it doesn't. Read my post again. Of course, if you remove some Obama voters the remaining Obama voters will be a higher percentage than they were before. If all Democrats except you were disenfranchised your share of the total electorate would rise stupendously. But it would neither "diminish" nor "negate" the fact that you would be in the minority. It's just a logically unescapable corrollary of the first point. Title: Re: PA PrimD: Survey USA: Clinton far ahead of Obama Post by: Keystone Phil on March 15, 2008, 11:14:10 AM I love this state, because even in our utter stupidity we exhibit our greatness. :) |