home

WAPO-ABC Poll: 2/3 of Dems Say Hillary Should Stay in Race With Either Ohio or TX Win

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 02:17:50 AM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton, 2008 (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A new poll by the Washington Post and ABC News finds 2/3 of Democrats believe Hillary Clinton should stay in the presidential race if she wins either Texas or Ohio. The poll results are here.

< Late Night: American Girl, Three Versions | The Press Wakes Up, Is It Too Late? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    WAPO-ABC Poll: 2/3 of Dems Say Hillary Should Stay in Race With Either Ohio or TX Win | 21 comments (21 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Of course she should (none / 0) (#1)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 03:05:44 AM EST
    I don't see the break out surge for the coronation.  

    Yep (none / 0) (#2)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 03:10:38 AM EST
    As I said before, a big win in Ohio isn't tiddly winks.  When a purple state says something, people should listen....well, but only if they want to win the election.

    Hah! to Richardson . Also, The Daily Show videos (none / 0) (#3)
    by andrys on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 03:43:14 AM EST
    Richardson, who drew no interest to his own campaign, tried to push Hillary out yesterday, saying whoever had less delegates on Wednesday morning should leave the race.  What an idiot.
    And the usual tv pundits aligned with Obama press her to get out.  They can't stand the idea of voters getting their due.
    "Math" is glorified when neither one can get the required 2000+.

    Anyway, here are the videoclips from The Daily Show interview with Hillary last night.

    Hillary - Part 1

    Hillary - Part 2

    I just don't understand (none / 0) (#5)
    by BrandingIron on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:17:46 AM EST
    anyone's reasoning to tell Clinton to get out after tomorrow when neither of them will be able to get to the number of delegates needed AND the race is just so close AND not all of the states have voted yet.  Are we Clinton supporters just supposed to say, "Welp, that's it!" and screw Pennsylvania, Indiana (my birthstate, heh), Mississippi, North Carolina...I mean, really?  Are the Clinton supporters in those states just supposed to say "Okay, we give up, we give into Obama!" and just...not even TRY in their primaries?  What logic are Obama people (and the media) using here?

    Wow, that sounds (none / 0) (#6)
    by BrandingIron on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:19:15 AM EST
    rather empty.  "The future"?  If he is the future (seeing what we've seen of him this past week as the media has woken up), then we are condemned to keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

    The party knows that (none / 0) (#7)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:46:30 AM EST
    The party knows that?  Who in the party knows that?  Who is hte party?  I thought the voters were still voting and trying to decide who represents the party, why do you want to take away the voice of the people?  

    I noticed... (none / 0) (#8)
    by p lukasiak on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:41:06 AM EST
    I noticed that the poll didn't ask if Obama should get out if he lost both states....

    and the poll provides encouraging news.... at least 40% of Obama supporters are not Obots (50% of respondents preferred Obama over Clinton, but only 29% thought she should get out if she won Texas or Ohio).

    I also noticed (none / 0) (#10)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 06:17:00 AM EST
    that the poll didn't ask John McCain if he should quit if he loses Ohio and Texas today.


    Parent
    If she wins (none / 0) (#9)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 06:15:05 AM EST
    both Ohio and Texas clearly she shouldn't quit.  If she wins just Ohio and loses close in Texas she shouldn't, and won't, quit.

    If she loses badly in Texas and winds up with a net loss in delegates today she needs to at least consider the possibility.  

    why? (none / 0) (#11)
    by p lukasiak on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 06:57:42 AM EST
    I mean, while I've been saying that a big loss in the popular vote in Texas should force either candidate to drop out (solely because that would mean that Texas would have to be "written off" in the GE), at this point in the campaign, with Obama finally getting some serious scrutiny, it would be contrary to the party's interest to just hand him the nomination.

    Hillary should not drop out until Edwards, Gore, and Carter say she should drop out.  And I don't see that happening anytime soon.

    Parent

    I am not advocating (none / 0) (#12)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 07:03:43 AM EST
    for her to step down regardless of what happens tonight.  However if Obama were to manage to gain delegates tonight I think she will be under a lot of pressure to step down.  There will be only 11 states left and she would be down nearly 200 delegates.

    A brokered convention would hurt the party.

    Parent

    just the opposite (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by p lukasiak on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 07:31:56 AM EST
    ...assuming current polling trends are correct, if Hillary comes out of today with a net loss in delegates, it will only be because of the Texas caucuses.

    And, IMHO, nothing could be more devastating to the "more delegates" argument than Texas caucuses that demonstrate a significant disparity between popular support in an election, and what comes out of caucuses.

    Parent

    And (none / 0) (#15)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 07:34:30 AM EST
    assuming she wins TX and OH in both delegates and the popular vote, should we then call for Obama to drop out? I wouldn't.  The same should be the case for HRC if she wins tonight.  It seems fearful of Obama's campaign and surrogates to call for her to drop out before the votes are even counted.

    Parent
    How so? (none / 0) (#13)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 07:22:50 AM EST
    By scrutinizing our nominee to make sure we get the best one?

    To call for either of them to drop out while they both still have a good chance is just un-democratic. And very Republican.  

    Parent

    What "hurt"? (none / 0) (#21)
    by SarahinCA on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:16:06 AM EST
    People continue to say this and I absolutely do not understand it.  What evidence is there?  What does it even mean?  A huge majority of dems say they will vote for whichever candidate is the nominee, so how exactly will allowing the candidates to ride out the primary process hurt the party?

    Parent
    I am with you (none / 0) (#19)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:47:31 AM EST
    Except the net loss of delegates thing. It is obvious with the bizzarro Texas system that will happen, even if she wins.

    So what happens if she wins 3 out of 4, but net loss of delegates? Wouldn't that be kind of a wake up call?

    Parent

    Important she keeps going (none / 0) (#16)
    by Saul on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 07:51:53 AM EST
    1. The other 10 states after today  have waited a long time to cast their vote and there voices, need to be heard.   It would be against everything Obama stands for if now he wants to silence the voices since his campaign has said its all about you.

    2. The last primary is in June and the longer the campaign  runs the more you find out about both candidates.

    3. There could be a scandal  between now and the convention and that is why the superdelegates need to keep their powder dry until then.


    You'd Think The Future Could Unite The Party (none / 0) (#17)
    by BDB on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:38:28 AM EST
    Or at least win Massachusetts.  

    Any Democrat Will Win Massachusetts (none / 0) (#20)
    by CST on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:37:22 AM EST
    And we aren't exactly known for picking our presidents.  I love my home state, but we are the "people's republic of massachusetts" not the entire United States.  

    Parent
    I have a request from the moderators (none / 0) (#18)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:45:37 AM EST
    Can we please stop this? I just read a few threads filled with the same kind of chatter. Its just empty rhetoric.

    Pretty please with sugar on it?

    Don't count on it (none / 0) (#22)
    by demfromphilly on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:51:45 PM EST
    The way Senator Obama and his people have disrespected Senator Clinton has caused many within my immediate circle to decide that if Senator Obama is the nominee he will not be getting their vote come November. Some will stay home, some will vote for McCain, and some will write Senator Clinton's name in. I am talking about truly loyal life-long Democrats who belong to the most reliable demographics. The Obama people are assuming that all the Democrats who have witnessed his kind of "inspiration" will vote for him anyway. I personally know 17 who will not. For as magnanimous as Senator Clinton has been about party unity after the primaries(Obama espouses none of this)we feel that we can not support him - we do not respect him.
    WAPO-ABC Poll: 2/3 of Dems Say Hillary Should Stay in Race With Either Ohio or TX Win | 21 comments (21 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment