Rasmussen Pennsylvania Poll: Hillary 47%, Barack 44%

[Ariphaos]

Holy crap

The Democratic Presidential Primary in Pennsylvania is getting even closer. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state shows Hillary Clinton with 47% of the vote and Barack Obama with 44%. This election poll was conducted Thursday night, the night following a nationally televised debate between the candidates. Last Monday, Clinton was leading Obama 50% to 41%.

Obama’s support appears to be a bit softer than Clinton’s at this point in time. Six percent (6%) of Obama voters say there’s a good chance they could change their mind before voting. Only 2% of Clinton supporters say the same.

Overall, with less than a week to go, 9% of Pennsylvania voters remain undecided, 3% say there’s a good chance they will change their mind, and another 12% might change their mind. Among those who are certain how they will vote, Clinton leads 53% to 47%.

...

Obama is now well within 'winning' territory. I'm not -too- hopeful but I will be sorely amused if Clinton loses.

[Qwerty 42]

A margin this close would functionally put a nail in the coffin of Clinton's campaign, but Obama taking the state, I think, would be symbolic enough to force Clinton to drop out.

[Patrick Degan]

A margin this close would functionally put a nail in the coffin of Clinton's campaign, but Obama taking the state, I think, would be symbolic enough to force Clinton to drop out.

Normally yes, but then this is Hillary. She wouldn't take the hint.

Watch: if she does lose by even a thin margin, it will either be "Sen. Obama failed to make the victory he needed to prove he's electable" or "Pennsylvania doesn't matter".

[Pu-239]

Unfortunately, all those undecideds worry me, hasn't it been the trend that they usually break for Clinton?

[Darth Wong]

Unfortunately, all those undecideds worry me, hasn't it been the trend that they usually break for Clinton?

They remind me of momentum traders on Wall Street. It seems to me that they wait to see which way the wind is blowing right around election day, and then they go with it.

[CmdrWilkens]

Unfortunately, all those undecideds worry me, hasn't it been the trend that they usually break for Clinton?

The trend throughout the primary season has been that for those who decide 6mo-1 year before the election Hillary takes themajority by a pretyt decent chunk (something akin to 70-30). For those who decide 6mo-2mo, 2mo-2wks, 2wk-3days Obama claims the majority in a sort of bell curve (he gets a bare majority of the 6mo-1mo and 2wk-3days but cleans up in the 2mo-2wk). Finally Hillary usually gets those who decide on the day of or the last day before.

Basically if Obama can solidify his numebrs by the end of this week he should be okay and only whatever is left amongst the 9% undecided will be at risk after this weekend's news cycle.

[Darksider]

Unfortunately, all those undecideds worry me, hasn't it been the trend that they usually break for Clinton?

If there is such a trend, it's probably because our so-called "media" has been doing nothing but cheerleading for clinton.

The blatant anti-obama bias is sickening at times.

[Guardsman Bass]

The polls haven't exactly been reliable in many of the most intensely fought-for states - and I can't slightly help but be wary of a Rasmussen Reports poll. I remember one of my political science teachers was a pollster (Dan Jones of Dan Jones and Associates, if you want to look it up), and he warned us about Rasmussen polls, and pointed to an example where they claimed a margin of error that was far too small for their sample size.

[CJvR]

The blatant anti-obama bias is sickening at times.

Hey! The longer they can keep the show running the better, otherwise they would have to go out and dig for actual news...

[RedImperator]

The polls haven't exactly been reliable in many of the most intensely fought-for states - and I can't slightly help but be wary of a Rasmussen Reports poll. I remember one of my political science teachers was a pollster (Dan Jones of Dan Jones and Associates, if you want to look it up), and he warned us about Rasmussen polls, and pointed to an example where they claimed a margin of error that was far too small for their sample size.

Zogby is showing similar numbers. Doesn't necessarily prove anything, but at least now two polls have to be wrong instead of just one.

[Cairber]

I went to an Obama rally in downtown philly last night...there were more than 35,000 people there!!

[Darth Wong]

I went to an Obama rally in downtown philly last night...there were more than 35,000 people there!!

Well, Obama is strong in the cities and the universities, isn't he? It's all those rural fucktard Pennsylvanians who will vote for Hillary: the kind of people who put up those "Christian Owned Business" billboards I saw on the highway driving through the state.

[Cairber]

Yeah, he is big amongst cities, educated and youth. Ed Rendell won the governor position in PA by taking 4 or so counties (Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs). Obama's plan is basically to do the same. Hopefully people are pumped up after the rally and will get out to vote on the 22nd. I'm signed up drive some people to the polls and be a door knocker. I hate knocking on people's doors but I'm willing to do it to get this guy elected.

Hopefully lawn signs are a sign of who will win because Obama is kicking butt in that department here in Montco county

[CmdrWilkens]

The polls haven't exactly been reliable in many of the most intensely fought-for states - and I can't slightly help but be wary of a Rasmussen Reports poll. I remember one of my political science teachers was a pollster (Dan Jones of Dan Jones and Associates, if you want to look it up), and he warned us about Rasmussen polls, and pointed to an example where they claimed a margin of error that was far too small for their sample size.

Zogby is showing similar numbers. Doesn't necessarily prove anything, but at least now two polls have to be wrong instead of just one.

It was pre-debate but Quinnipiac, LA Times and PPP were both showing simlair narrowings, in fact PPP had Obama up which is almost certianly an outlier but still. The real outlier has been SUSA. The thing that worries me is that SUSA has been the most accurate this election cycle which would suggest that their voter model is probably the most accurate. They have consistently had Clinton keeping a double digit lead even as everyone else shows the race narrowing.

My big hope comes from the fact that the Quinnipiac poll right now has the largst sample size amongst the polls from the last week or so followed by the PPP poll. The latter (which admittedly is still a statistical tie) still shows 13% undecided so there is still a lot of movement left to be had.

[Glocksman]

I went to an Obama rally in downtown philly last night...there were more than 35,000 people there!!

Well, Obama is strong in the cities and the universities, isn't he? It's all those rural fucktard Pennsylvanians who will vote for Hillary: the kind of people who put up those "Christian Owned Business" billboards I saw on the highway driving through the state.

The irony is that those people will vote for McCain in the general election, not Hillary Clinton.

The 'rural' types may give her a margin of victory but the backbone of HRC's support has been lesser educated and/or older women.

[HemlockGrey]

Well, Obama is strong in the cities and the universities, isn't he? It's all those rural fucktard Pennsylvanians who will vote for Hillary: the kind of people who put up those "Christian Owned Business" billboards I saw on the highway driving through the state.

I don't think those people are registered Democrats anyway.

Ironically the major Philadelphia-associated politicians (the Mayor, the Governor) have endorsed Clinton while the patron saint of blue collar Catholic ex-coal workers, Bob Casey, has gone for Obama.

Was there any polling done in PA about the Jeremiah Wright stuff? That's the only thing I'd think would hurt him, and then mostly in white working-class Pittsburgh. Is there any polling showing how Obama's doing in Pittsburg versus Philly?

[Durandal]

An Indiana University poll is actually showing that Obama is now ahead in Indiana 50-45. If Obama manages to get within inches of Clinton in Pennsylvania (which the latest polls are showing him doing) and goes on to win both Indiana and North Carolina, I don't see how Clinton could possibly justify staying in the race.

If Pennsylvania is this close in the primary, Dean's going to have to grow a pair of balls and tell Hillary that there won't be a super-delegate coup and to take one for the team.

[Ariphaos]

The polls haven't exactly been reliable in many of the most intensely fought-for states - and I can't slightly help but be wary of a Rasmussen Reports poll. I remember one of my political science teachers was a pollster (Dan Jones of Dan Jones and Associates, if you want to look it up), and he warned us about Rasmussen polls, and pointed to an example where they claimed a margin of error that was far too small for their sample size.

Rasmussen has been pretty accurate since the 2004 elections, even though some of the news is grating. They caught Clinton's Texas bump right away and gave good numbers.

Some of the ways they aggregate things might make it easy for someone to think their sample size was messed up, though - particularly in the monthly versus daily presidential opinion tracking reports.

[CmdrWilkens]

The polls haven't exactly been reliable in many of the most intensely fought-for states - and I can't slightly help but be wary of a Rasmussen Reports poll. I remember one of my political science teachers was a pollster (Dan Jones of Dan Jones and Associates, if you want to look it up), and he warned us about Rasmussen polls, and pointed to an example where they claimed a margin of error that was far too small for their sample size.

Rasmussen has been pretty accurate since the 2004 elections, even though some of the news is grating. They caught Clinton's Texas bump right away and gave good numbers.

Some of the ways they aggregate things might make it easy for someone to think their sample size was messed up, though - particularly in the monthly versus daily presidential opinion tracking reports.

Their spot polls have been pretty good though. Any tracking poll obviously has problems as it take a couple days for bad samples to work their way out of the system. Also short term "controversies" which don't reflect real movement can sometimes appear (and stick around for a few days) in the tracking polls.

[Cairber]

The latest SUSA poll only has Obama down by 6...

link

That's a big turn around in one week. They had her up by 12 or so last week.

[Anguirus]

This just in: Stupid white hicks prefer Clinton

I don't think this article rated a thread of its own with this one up, but I wanted to share the following gems:

Whitmoyer said Obama's mention of guns as an emblem of rural culture was interpreted by local people as a sign that he will restrict their use if he becomes president.

"If he isn't for guns, he's against guns," Whitmoyer said. "He just cut his own throat with everyone who owns a gun."

Whitmoyer, who said he will probably vote for Clinton, also said he opposes Obama's support for gay rights, and is suspicious of his endorsement by TV host Oprah Winfrey.

"Anyone who walks with the true Christ is going to be against Obama," said Whitmoyer, whose license plate has the message 'I'm saved, Jesus is Lord!' He added: "Religion is going to hurt him."

Wright's sermon raised questions about Obama's patriotism in the mind of Robert Bressler, 74, a retired truck driver, having coffee in The Vale Family Restaurant in Muncy Valley.

"The guy demonized the U.S. and Obama still likes him." Bressler said. "We don't need him as president."

Are these enlightened souls typical of Muncy Valley? I'm especially struck by the raging Republitard Whitmoyer, solidly in the Clinton camp. Once upon a time Clinton would have been ashamed of friends like this...or at least pretended to be.

[Darth Wong]

Looks like the old Dixiecrat party.

[Alferd Packer]

Are these enlightened souls typical of Muncy Valley? I'm especially struck by the raging Republitard Whitmoyer, solidly in the Clinton camp. Once upon a time Clinton would have been ashamed of friends like this...or at least pretended to be.

If I had to guess, maybe he's a union man, so by habit he votes for Democrats. On Howard Stern's radio show, Artie Lange talks about time he spent working as a longshoreman when he was younger. When elections rolled around, a guy from the union would show up and say, "OK, here's how you're voting," and he'd rattle off exactly how they were to cast their ballots, or rather, what the union line was.

If you're doing that for fifty years and you vote Democrat each time, you might just do it in retirement because it's ingrained.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I'm just waiting for the massive "HILLARY WINS!" headlines that will appear even if it is only 51 - 49%, lauding how this is her "massive comeback" which makes her "poised to gain the nomination".

[Aeolus]

Looks like the old Dixiecrat party.

Rural Pennsylvania is more "southern" than North Carolina. Dixiecrat is exactly what they are.