It’s now with a learned suspicion that I report on the latest round of polls to be release concerning the next states up for grabs in the Democratic primaries. Two Virginia polls came out, and they both pointed to an easy Barack Obama win. The first, conducted by the Insider Advantage, has Obama leading Hillary Clinton by 15 points - 52% to 37%. All the data for that one was taken on the 7th, so a little less than 2 days after Super Tuesday. The second poll was taken by SurveyUSA, and that has Obama up by 20 points to Clinton - 59% to 39%.
It’s interesting to note that while the Insider Advantage poll has an 11% uncommitted report, the SurveyUSA poll has only 2% for their uncommitted. It’s a somewhat strange disparity. The percentage of the lead is, but not exactly notable. You see, you only have to gather polling data in 2 different suburbs and you’re going to get different data. Both of these polls had over 500 respondents, which are higher than a lot of other polls that get flaunted. So the data is going to be somewhat reliable. But the difference in the uncommitted vote is very strange. Especially considering the wide margins Obama is leading by. You would think that it would be one or the other, too, at this point in time.
The second state to get polled was Maryland. Back in January, from the 6th to the 9th, the Baltimore Sun conducted a poll which showed Obama leading Clinton by 13 points even then - 39% to 26%. The 35% that is unaccounted for there is split between John Edwards, who was still running at the time, and the genuine uncommitted vote. That data would have been gathered after Iowa, and may very well have been suffering from the New Hampshire effect (where the polls for that state went up ridiculously high, only to see Obama lose the state). More recently though, SurveyUSA has released a poll on Maryland with data gathered from the 7th to the 8th of February. So this too is in the wake of Super Tuesday, though allowing 3 some days for respondents to digest all the information from the 5th. This poll has Obama leading by 19 points - 52% to 33%. This means that there’s a 15% uncommitted here.
Again, I see that 15% as rather high, given the state and the state of the race. It could just be that the old Edwards supporters still haven’t found a home in Obama or Clinton, and combine that with the genuine uncommitted. If trends are anything to go by, Obama will eat up 55%-60% of the Edwards supporters, taking away as much as 8% or 9% of that 15%. This would push him to a 60%+ number, giving him three-fifths of the delegates, and Clinton just two-fifths. With 70 delegates up for grabs (the state has 99: 70 tied to the vote, and 29 superdelegates (quite a lot of superdelegates I think)), a wide margin is good. Going on the three-fifths/two-fifths calculation, 42 would go Obama’s way, 28 to Clinton. And, again, after the vote, there would be a further 29 superdelegates up for grabs (assuming none have endorsed anyone yet - a fact not likely). With a difference, the gap would be closed, between the two, to a 50-something delegate difference including superedelegates.
And that’s going on Maryland being the very next stat. It isn’t: Washington, Louisiana, Nebraska, and the U.S. Virgin Islands all come before it on the 9th - these results will be coming in tomorrow - with Maine on the 10th. Virginia, Maryland, and D.C. are all on the 12th. Maryland, then, could be the state that gives Obama the lead on Clinton. It’s a very real prospect.
And here’s a little factazoid for my readers: This is the first Saturday post I’ve written since the 22nd of December.
And here is something else for everyone: Tomorrow Andrew and I fly up to Queensland for a week. I’ll seek out an Internet connection to at least check the results of the primaries that are coming in. If it’s easily accessible (that is to say, free) then I’ll try and write a post about them. We touch back down in Sydney the evening of Sunday the 17th. But I won’t be totally absent from blogging to then. I really will endeavour to post something while I’m up there. So keep checking in!
Thomas.
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 10, 2008 at 2:18 pm
whydidyoudoit
According to the demographics, I should be voting for Hillary Clinton: I’m a white, 60-year-old, highly educated woman from the Northeast. But I’m voting for Obama. I’ve waited all my life for a viable woman candidate for the presidency, but this is not the right woman. I want a woman of the highest ability and virtue, who would serve as a glorious role model to all young women. Hillary Clinton is not that woman.
She rode into power with her husband, and together they’ve acquired a long and seriously flawed history of self-serving and secretive financial and political dealings. The most cursory research will prove that true. She started out her political life supporting the racist Barry Goldwater. She is as comfortable with deception and trickery as George Bush. When I hear woman saying, “Oh, but that’s how you get things done in Washington,” I literally cringe.
I am passionately supporting Barack Obama. He can beat the Republicans; she cannot. Obama has attracted Independents and even Republicans to his camp, and in a general election they would vote for him, but not for Clinton. Clinton voted for the war, and has never apologized for it. Obama has spoken out against it from the beginning. Obama brings us hope–and not just that. Take a serious look at his ideas and experience.
Please, I beg of you, Sisters young and old: wait for the right woman. Then we can be proud.
Diane Wald
February 13, 2008 at 2:29 am
whydidyoudoit
The Clinton campaign didn’t have a healthcare plan befor it felled and they don’t have one now. Well to be honest, if everyone is a goverment employee, then the Clinton healthcare plan will work for everyone. Unfortunately some are self employed, independent contractors or work for private employors or small business. Under the Clinton healthcare plan these people would be penalized if they don’t pay for their healthcare. This means that most of your family members and friends will have their paychecks garnished. We all know that it doesn’t stop there if it is a goverment enforcement. There will be fines and then misdemeanors which is a criminal offense defined as less serious than a felony. Why did Ms. Clinton decide on this approach? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out. Big business, big Corporation call it what you will, they want their money back and in order for Ms. Clinton to get their support in her race to presidency she is giving victory to one side (the healthcare providers) by promising to them that she will have the poeople wages garnished if they continue to give healthcare. Thus allowing her to shout the words “UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE” This is a shady tactic and makes fools out of every american that falls for this trick. The Obama healthcare plan is for the people. Poor people, middle class and rich people can rest assured that there is no tricks or penalties in the Obama healthcare plan. VOTE OBAMA!!