It’s going to be a nail-biter:
PRINCETON, NJ — Barack Obama has now cut the gap with Hillary Clinton to 6 percentage points among Democrats nationally in the Gallup Poll Daily tracking three-day average, and interviewing conducted Tuesday night shows the gap between the two candidates is within a few points. Obama’s position has been strengthening on a day-by-day basis. As recently as Jan. 18-20, Clinton led Obama by 20 points. Today’s Gallup Poll Daily tracking is based on interviews conducted Jan. 27-29, all after Obama’s overwhelming victory in South Carolina on Saturday. Two out of the three nights interviewing were conducted after the high-visibility endorsement of Obama by Sen. Edward Kennedy and his niece Caroline Kennedy.
Clinton’s lead in the three-day average is now 42% to Obama’s 36%. John Edwards, who dropped out of the race Wednesday after Gallup conducted these interviews, ended his quest for the presidency with 12% support. Wednesday night’s interviewing will reflect the distribution of the vote choice of former Edwards’ supporters as well as the impact, if any, of Hillary Clinton’s popular vote win in Florida on Tuesday.
These national numbers are a critically important indicator of the political environment when voters in more than 20 states go to the polls next Tuesday. At the moment, Obama has the momentum among Democrats nationally.
I think I’m just going to stick my head in the sand until next Wednesday. But you should, you know, tell your neighbors to vote or something.
I’m still of a mind that the Florida count would have been much different if there hadn’t been such a large proportion of mail in ballots cast.
and don’t forget the indpendants. . .it was a closed primary, so they couldn’t vote. I imagine if Obama had been able to campaign at University of Miami and FSU etc, it would have been a whole ‘nother ball game
That’s a big cut. That is totally a nail biter then. My local coffeeshop has been Obama’d and since they have (unreliable) wifi I’m going to be over there Tuesday night, though I would really prefer to vote, then sleep and wake up to Obama emerging as the front runner.
Speaking of Obama’d:
That’s not all for Obama. Caroline Kennedy was there with him in AZ too, as was their governor, Napolitano.
But still.
This kind of turnout is what wins for us in November.
I heard 12,000 tried to get into this event in Phoenix. The crowd you’re seeing is a lot smaller than that. Thousands were left outside.
Watch that daily Gallup poll closely. While it doesn’t break down state-by-state, it should give a feel for where the Edwards supporters are going, generally.
Some were going there already. Even before Edwards stepped down, an Edwards supporter told me she was going to vote for Obama because she want to waste her vote on someone who wasn’t going to win.
Today, several Edwards people I know told me they were switching to Obama too. I feel bad for them – I know how hard it is to lose your dream. Some of the women and a few men I know are going to choose Clinton over Obama. But most people I know are going with Obama now.
I’m blanking here…what happened then that made Obama dip and the Clinton’s rise? There was a debate the night before, right?
Actually the 20th was when it started to trend toward Obama.
Nevada caucuses? Maybe everybody bought the “I have more delegates so I won” story. Or maybe the fact that he was just willing to try that story and put up a fight made his poll numbers rise.
Obama’s just coming out with a speech aggressively going after Clinton. Timing is strength and the Edwards’ voters are looking for someone to respect their cause, so is the new speech feathered to draw them in? These next few days are gonna be loud!
he unveiled, what appears to me to be, a more aggressive stance against clinton(s) today in denver:
l’ve not heard any of his speeches, so l can’t judge if this is a new approach, or a continuation of an existing theme. given what’s now at stake tuesday with a 2-way race, he appears to be dialing it up a notch.
lTMF’sA
I think I’ve seen all of his major speeches and several versions of the stump speech by now. I haven’t seen this one yet but he seems to really have stepped it up a bit against The Clintons. This is what he needed to do because so many seem to think that there’s no real difference between Obama and Clinton. Maybe not in policy positions but there are huge differences in their style and approach to handling issues. I’m glad to see he’s found an artful way of saying it without launching harsh attack ads and the like.
The real test is how Hillary responds. Will she use this as an excuse to stop behaving in a civil manner? I think she’ll turn really ugly. Tomorrow’s debate should be interesting. And her ads could turn ugly as well. And will Bill be able to contain his venom?
Let her turn ugly . . by doing so she repels the casual voter. Obama is quite the underrated strategist.
Yes, I am starting to see the strategy that’s been in play. Joe Sudbay @ Americablog articulated it well today:
Obama’s strong comments about Hillary today were, in part, a dog-whistle to Bill. We’ll see if Bill can control himself (or has been leashed).
It isn’t popular on the tubes to say that Obama ever has a strategy. His supporters always seem to deny it. Like he’s a saint.
It would be silly to suggest that Obama doesn’t have a strategy. I’m a supporter and I’m glad he’s got a strategy – a better one that his opponents. And you may be able to put a leash on the Big Dog, but he’ll still bark and bite, defending what he thinks is his. It’s his nature. Maybe a muzzle is what they need.
I loved the picture in this post:
I agree. But many of his online supporters are silly.
Obama’s camp did whatever they could to make sure that Bill’s negative statements stayed in the mind of the media (and therefore in the mind of the American public). Bill helped a lot by making that stupid Jesse Jackson statement. But even if he hadn’t made that statement Obama’s camp would have had to keep pushing Bill’s negatives. They saw an opportunity to neutralize Bill right before Super Tuesday. And with Bill neutralized, they could start overtly reminding the public of Hillary’s negatives AND of the negatives of the Clinton administration that no one wanted to talk about. Now we have Yahoo headlines like this: “Obama says Clinton would be a step back”. It’s not just a message of change; it’s a reminder that going back to the Clinton years isn’t always a positive.
It’s a risky strategy but it’s what he needs to do if he’s going to beat her on Super Tuesday. She has tremendous name recognition. He needs the public who recognizes her name to have a moment of pause.
Bill could have been a very effective counter to this strategy if he had stayed out of it until now or only stayed positive. But Bill’s fall from grace was helped a lot by the media and the Obama camp.
I just hope he can clearly articulate some of his positions, because people do want to know. But if he does that, and if the debate is a draw or better, he’s going to do well on Feb 5.
CA is not his yet. But it’s remarkably close here now.
I listened to the entire speech streaming live online from a Denver radio station. It seemed a lot different to me in that he clearly pointed out what he felt were the differences between himself and Hillary, but the summaries are incorrect in that he did not use her name. But it was very clear the audience knew who he meant.
All the issues and his positions were in my mind liberal/progressive–close Gitmo, expand AmeriCorps, restore habaeus corpus, end the war during my first term, no torture, increase the minimum wage, no tax breaks to those who are well off or companies that send jobs overseas, and so on. More details about policy than I’ve heard before.
Crowd was on fire, but quieted quickly to let him get on with his speech.
Oops. TV station, so I could see him and the crowd.
Once again I’m reduced to choosing who I vote against. Shit.
Edwards was my guy. And up until the Nevada caucuses I didn’t really have a second choice. But starting with Nevada and since, the more I’ve seen of Hillary — and Bill — the less I want either one of them back in the White House. It’d be a stretch to say I’m really for Obama, but Tuesday I guess I’ll go vote against Hillary and Bill.
I hear you.
I was talking to a co-worker today who was truly concerned that Billary would lose us the election. I think he’s more anti-Clintons (definitely plural) than he is pro-Obama, but he does not feel bad voting for Obama, either.
Same here. I wanted Edwards. I was not against either of the others. More like equally lukewarm. But what I saw from the Clinton campaign in Nevada and after, especially the antics of Bill, just disgusted me. In comparison, Barack is looking better by the day.
Also remember that the FL vote had a ballot question about reducing property tax which brings out older, more Clinton leaning voters.
Just FYI. Its only 8:36 in NJ and I’ve had three calls from pollsters since 6:30. None previously. Heating upo. Telling kids to not answer the phone.
i hope you can drag 10 or 20 people with you to the polls.