PA PrimD: Mason-Dixon: Clinton leads Obama by 5

[Tender Branson]

New Poll: Pennsylvania President by Mason-Dixon on 2008-04-18

Summary:

Clinton:	48%
Obama:	43%
Other:	0%
Undecided:	9%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

Some of these less traditional political categories provided crucial margins for Mrs. Clinton. Hunters -- 16 percent of the total sample, favored Mrs. Clinton, 56 percent to 31 percent, while the two candidates were virtually tied among non-hunters.

The kegler cohort provided another decisive advantage for Mrs. Clinton. She was supported by 54 percent of those who said described themselves as bowlers. Non-bowlers, like non-hunters, were evenly divided between the Democrats.

Thirty-eight percent of the respondents said they owned a gun, and those voters were clinging to the Clinton candidacy by a margin of 53 percent to 28 percent. Mr. Obama, however, won a majority among non-gun owners, 52 percent to 45 percent.

While Mr. Obama is fairly abstemious himself, he managed to tie Mrs. Clinton among beer drinkers -- 44 percent each. Non-beer drinkers, on the other hand, supported Mrs. Clinton, 50 percent to 43 percent.

The Pennsylvania results echo a gender gap that has recurred throughout the nomination battle. Mrs. Clinton led among women, 51 percent to 44 percent. Mr. Obama had a smaller advantage among male voters, 47 percent to 44 percent. Other strengths for the national front-runner were black voters, younger voters, Protestants and residents of the southeastern corner of the state.

Blacks favored Mr. Obama by the overwhelming margin of 83 percent to 10 percent. White voters broke almost two-to-one for Mrs. Clinton -- 58 percent to 33 percent.

[Eraserhead]

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

[Alcon]

Someone had a little bit of fun with their poll and press release.

Even when they aren't the more accurate pollster, I Mason-Dixon.

[Tender Branson]

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

MD wasn´t very good so far. Their last OH poll had Clinton up 4. I´m still waiting for a possible Clinton surge among undecideds like in the last OH polls. But there is nothing like this happening so far ...

[Eraserhead]

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

MD wasn´t very good so far. Their last OH poll had Clinton up 4. I´m still waiting for a possible Clinton surge among undecideds like in the last OH polls. But there is nothing like this happening so far ...

Yeah and they also underrepresented Obama's support in Iowa and a few other important states. Still, they are a decent pollster (many would say one of the best). I wouldn't ignore this.

[J. J.]

The undecideds are just too high; I honestly think there is a Bradley effect, but probably not enough for a strategic Hillary victory.

[minionofmidas]

All this time I was telling myself: Yeah well, it's only the joke pollsters showing a close result. Then Mason Dixon comes along and gets my hopes up.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

If Clinton wins this by 5, is that enough? 

[J. J.]

If Clinton wins this by 5, is that enough? 

IMO, no, but the delegate count is key.  You could get a really strange result with some of the district delegates at +5, but it is very unlikely.

[© tweed]

If Clinton wins this by 5, is that enough? 

enough for what?  she can't win the nomination anymore (I actually find all of the discussion of this 'race' to be strange considering that when the numbers are crunched it isn't a race at all.)  enough for her to stay in?  well, there may be no result that forces her out.

[© tweed]

oh, and it appears as if losing by 3-5% is Obama's absolute ceiling here in PA unless something silly happens.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

If Clinton wins this by 5, is that enough? 

enough for what?  she can't win the nomination anymore (I actually find all of the discussion of this 'race' to be strange considering that when the numbers are crunched it isn't a race at all.)  enough for her to stay in?  well, there may be no result that forces her out.

To make a case to stay in. 

I don't think it is. 

[Gustaf]

I don't think it matters whether Clinton wins by 3% or 9% (at least not that much). As long as Obama doesn't win she'll stay in, and as long as she doesn't get above 10% it probably won't be enough.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm going to actually call this one now:

Hillary 53
Obama 47

[Lief 🗽]

I'll wait for the last SUSA and PPP polls, though this poll certainly makes me happy.

[minionofmidas]

I don't think it matters whether Clinton wins by 3% or 9% (at least not that much). As long as Obama doesn't win she'll stay in, and as long as she doesn't get above 10% it probably won't be enough.

Make that 20. 10 for staying in with a straight face and not losing her remaining credibility.

[Gustaf]

I don't think it matters whether Clinton wins by 3% or 9% (at least not that much). As long as Obama doesn't win she'll stay in, and as long as she doesn't get above 10% it probably won't be enough.

Make that 20. 10 for staying in with a straight face and not losing her remaining credibility.

This whole playing with numbers is a bit arbitrary of course. I agree a 10% win is probably not enough. I don't think it has to be 20% though. I make the cut at 10% because 10 is a nice round number.

[Sam Spade]

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

I don't know.  What do you think, bucko?

[minionofmidas]

I don't think it matters whether Clinton wins by 3% or 9% (at least not that much). As long as Obama doesn't win she'll stay in, and as long as she doesn't get above 10% it probably won't be enough.

Make that 20. 10 for staying in with a straight face and not losing her remaining credibility.

This whole playing with numbers is a bit arbitrary of course. I agree a 10% win is probably not enough. I don't think it has to be 20% though. I make the cut at 10% because 10 is a nice round number.

You should understand that Clinton's task is not to retain a reasonable shot at the nomination, but to regain one. And it's her last chance to do so, really. If she'd won Texas (as opposed to effectively tied) and blown Obama out of the water in Ohio (as opposed to merely won there), she would still have a reasonable shot now. That's not the case, however.

 

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

I don't know.  What do you think, bucko?

I don't know what he thinks, but 12 points still sounds about right to me...

[Sam Spade]

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

I don't know.  What do you think, bucko?

I don't know what he thinks, but 12 points still sounds about right to me...

It is refreshing to still know that other posters can't read my mind. 

Instead of being coy, I would posit once again that there are two key factors at work in PA we've got to always keep in mind in making a prediction:
1) What will be Clinton's white % of the vote (and margin, naturally)?
2) What will be the % of the vote that will be black?

You know the answer to these two questions, you have the primary vote answer.

I don't even consider the roughly 5% Other category who will vote in this election, because most likely they are Hispanic/Asian urbanites, who have voted consistently one way the primary cycle.

[minionofmidas]

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

I don't know.  What do you think, bucko?

I don't know what he thinks, but 12 points still sounds about right to me...

It is refreshing to still know that other posters can't read my mind. 

Instead of being coy, I would posit once again that there are two key factors at work in PA we've got to always keep in mind in making a prediction:
1) What will be Clinton's white % of the vote (and margin, naturally)?
2) What will be the % of the vote that will be black?

You know the answer to these two questions, you have the primary vote answer.

Eh, yeah. Thing is:

1) What will be the % of the vote that will be black?
2) What will be the total vote result?

You know the answer to these questions, you know the answer to what Clinton's white % of the vote is.

Oh, and:

1) What will be Clinton's share of the white vote?
2) What will be the total result?

You know the answer to these questions, you know what the black share of the vote was.

[Sam Spade]

Will this change Spade's 12%-15% prediction?

I don't know.  What do you think, bucko?

I don't know what he thinks, but 12 points still sounds about right to me...

It is refreshing to still know that other posters can't read my mind. 

Instead of being coy, I would posit once again that there are two key factors at work in PA we've got to always keep in mind in making a prediction:
1) What will be Clinton's white % of the vote (and margin, naturally)?
2) What will be the % of the vote that will be black?

You know the answer to these two questions, you have the primary vote answer.

Eh, yeah. Thing is:

1) What will be the % of the vote that will be black?
2) What will be the total vote result?

You know the answer to these questions, you know the answer to what Clinton's white % of the vote is.

Oh, and:

1) What will be Clinton's share of the white vote?
2) What will be the total result?

You know the answer to these questions, you know what the black share of the vote was.

I know that, stop trying to make it appear more complicated than it is... 

[jokerman]

Sam, do you think there's any possibility of the Philadelphia machine giving Clinton a unusually high proportion of the black vote?

[Mr. Morden]

Instead of being coy, I would posit once again that there are two key factors at work in PA we've got to always keep in mind in making a prediction:
1) What will be Clinton's white % of the vote (and margin, naturally)?
2) What will be the % of the vote that will be black?

[sarcasm]Wow, good thing we have you here Sam to explain these things to us.  What's next?  The key factor in the election is how many voters vote for Clinton vs. how many voters vote for Obama?[/sarcasm]

Sorry, sorry.  Couldn't resist. 

But seriously, aren't those the "two key factors" in *every* state that doesn't have a significant minority population that is not black?

[Sam Spade]

Sam, do you think there's any possibility of the Philadelphia machine giving Clinton a unusually high proportion of the black vote?

If Rendell's got half-a-brain (which he does), he will focus all of his efforts on the white machine members in Philadelphia County (excluding the few well-to-do areas in the center), while telling the black machine members to go off and play golf for the day, or something.  Philly is about half-white/Hispanic, half black and they don't live in the same area, so this shouldn't be too difficult.  Obama should be, of course, making up for this.  JJ/Phil should be the ones who can tell us whether this is occurring or not, from at least two important precincts, no doubt.

Of course, don't forget that Delaware County (Chester, for example) and Pittsburgh have decent sized (but not great) black populations.  Whichever, the blacks in PA are segregated into PA-01, PA-02 and PA-14 (the Pittsburgh central CD) - the rest of the CDs have insignficant black populations.