Polls released this morning suggested Clinton was able to stay afloat in March 4th states, but I did warn that that batch did not contain any numbers from Texas, which is shaping to be the most difficult state for Clinton. Now, new polls released this afternoon suggest a very troubled road away for the New York Senator in the Lone Star State, and don’t forget that a loss here could spell the end of her career.
To make matters worse for Hillary Clinton, the unions that have newly endorsed Obama seem to be determined to boost the Illinois Senator. UFCW has a new ad running on his behalf in Ohio, and Marc Ambinder reports that SEIU looks ready to spend more than $700,000 on helping him win Ohio and Texas. Given that one of Obama’s main weaknesses has been blue-collar voters, union efforts could help him make inroads in Clinton’s constituencies. Though the Clinton campaign is mocking Obama for welcoming this help less than two months after he blasted Edwards for receiving independent help by unions, which Obama dismissed as special interest “Washington money.” (Clinton has done a very good job of making it difficult for Edwards to jump in the race and endorse Obama.)
Two Ohio polls, first, paint a contrasting picture:
- PPP shows a very tight race, 50% to 46% in Clinton’s favor. PPP notes that GOP and independent voters are flooding the Democratic primary now that the GOP contest is over and supporting Obama 80% to 13% and 64% to 33% respectively. Clinton is ahead among registered Dems 56% to 40%.
- ARG, meanwhile, shows Clinton ahead 49% to 39%, in line with what we saw this morning.
In Texas, however, Clinton is losing ground:
- Rasmussen shows a toss-up, 46% for Hillary and 45% for Obama.
- ARG shows Obama way ahead, 50% to 42% — it is worth noting that ARG was the only pollster to have Obama up already a week ago (48-42), which suggests that their model turnout significantly differs other pollsters’. ARG results in most states have looked like outliers.
- And finally, in what is perhaps the most important poll of the day, CNN shows Obama up 50% to 46% in Texas, an improvement from Clinton’s 50-48 lead last week. While Obama’s lead is within the margin of error, the trendline in his favor is confirmed by the other polls and he has one more week to build on his momentum. CNN does point out that Clinton’s support among Latinos is holding firm.
Keep in mind that the primary vote only decides 2/3rds of the delegates, and that most estimations hold that Clinton would have to win by a significant margin to get a delegate lead in those 2/3rds given the Texas allocation rules. A large primary win for Hillary in Texas is looking increasingly unlikely… And then Clinton will also have to face the caucus results, which could be disastrous for her in Washington state is any example (she lost the primary by 3% and the caucus by 36%), getting Obama a significant portion of the third of delegates awarded through the caucuses. Bill Clinton is already pushing back on the caucuses (in a strategy the CLinton campaign started in the days following Iowa): “The doors open at 7 and they close at 7:15. It would be tragic if Hillary were to win this election in the daytime and somebody were to come in at night and take it away.”
What constitutes a loss for Clinton in Texas, or what constitutes a victor? Does she need a primary win, a primary delegate lead or an overall delegate lead? Will she lose if she get the first but not the rest? Will she be deemed the winner but not by enough to continue, and would she use a win on points to get out of the race gracefully?
If Obama wins the primary vote and by extension the primary delegates and caucus delegates then there is noway the Clinton campaign can spin this as anything but a defeat. It should be remembered that in both TX and OH she was 20% ahead until recently and both states have large numbers of her “base” so even if she wins the TX primary by 2% that can hardly be called a victory for her.
Hopefully after March 4th she wont have the luxury of designating yet another firewall and take the hint. If she loses TX but wins OH I expect Mark Penn will drop the “big state” victory message and say that TX doesn’t matter because it is Republican. Although Obama will have won 3 of the top 10 states with NC still to vote - which would likely give him 4 of the top 10 - not bad.
Watch the Democratic Party commit political suicide next week. It seems difficult for Hillary to stay in the race if she does not only win Texas and Ohio, but win in a convincing manner. It is very clear that the nature of the Texas vote is very disadvantageous to her. With McCain so clearly in command, many republican leaning independents are republican themselves will go and vote for Obama. And so it will be that the Democratic party, a major national party, will nominate the most unqualified candidate since William Bryan Jennings, and like Jennings of old, Obama will go down to glorious defeat in November. but the crazies in the party that orchestrated this will be happy. What do they care if McCain keep us in Iraq for another 8 years? They will be selling flowers at the airports and trying to get you to watch the latest Obama speech, so you joint the movement! As we speak, the republicans have already started the “deconstruction of Obama”. Today was the “flag in the lapel” issue. Totally bogus but you just watch! Michelle will be the new Hillary. You just watch. And he is still black, not great advantage in the south, with a Cuban flag and a picture of Che Guevara in his Houston headquarters. Totally bogus too, these were just the stupid kids he cultivates, volunteers at that. But you just watch, there goes Florida! Prediction, if he is lucky he will break 40% on election day. And all those superdelegates from the south, elected official, will be doing a lot of hand wringing, when they get dragged down in defeat, wondering what possessed them to back Obama in the first place. I am buying pocort to watch this train wreck!!!
Sadly, I share your pessimism. Given the unstoppable momentum of the freshman senator from Illinois, our fate may indeed be sealed. I can only hope Democrats will increase their numbers in the House and Senate exponentially. That would take away some of the sting.
Unfortunately I think we are heading for disaster. If Obama’s numbers are low in the general, or folks like me, (I am incredibly pissed off with this idiots from the far left), are discouraged and do not show up to vote, a lot of congressional seats that today seem solid might not be so on election day. This is a total failure of the center of the democratic party to put forward a candidate that can win in November. In spite of the ranting of the right, the republican electorate were wise enough to select a nominee that can win in November. Left to the Limbaughs and Hannitys of the far right, the GOP would have nominated a sure looser like Thompson or Romney. In spite of themselves, the republican base selected a viable candidate in McCain. The Dems were not as wise. The left has been is so embolden and deluded by the success of 2006 that they don’t seem to realize that America is fundamentally a very conservative country. Fair indeed, but basically a center left country at this time. I listen to Air America and wonder sometimes if these folks think they are in Sweden or Norway. Anyway just listen to right wing talk radio and you wil get an idea of what is coming down the road. It will not be pretty!
hmmm . . . this is a suspiciously one-sided thread.
I am an Obama supporter, but I think it is an overstatement to suggest that Hillary Clinton’s career is over if she loses the nomination.
I think she will make a wonderful Senate Majority Leader. Hopefully beginning in 2009.
I share some of your concerns about Obama’s ability to stand up to the right’s attacks, but I don’t think he should be written off. His speaking ability and likeability, fairly or not, could get him far. Remember both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were very popular during their terms in office. They had very different positions and agendas, but they were able to sell them to the American people.
Also, do y’all really believe that Hillary would be that much more successful in November. Yes she is strong-willed and can respond to attacks, but she is not very likeable, and she stirs up more hatred among Republicans than anyone else.
I am not saying Hillary is finished. In all honesty I don’t have any emothional investment in Hillary not any particular candidate. But I wanted a democrat in the white house in Jan 2009. And I don’t think Barack is it. I think that this is all smoke and mirrors, and he is uneletable. I think either John Edwards or Hillary would have had a better chance to win in November. This election is important. The Supreme Court is on the line. Iraq is on the line. How is it that when all the stars are so well aligned for a Democratic take over, we manage to blow this? We have allow the republicans to select our nominee. A trojan horse in the Democratic Party! Just watch!
Many democrats were saying the same things about JFK in 1960.