home

Primary Prediction Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:18:56 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

Here's mine:

Clinton by 10 in Ohio. Clinton by 14 in RI. Obama by 30 in Vermont. Obama by 2 in Texas.

The first three are fairly conventional. But why do I think Obama wins in Texas? Because Zogby said Clinton would win Texas. Kidding. I'll tell you why. Because I think African American turnout will be through the roof, swamping every other factor in its path. That's the reason.

What are your predictions?

< GOP Talking Points | Is This True? >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Primary Prediction Thread | 73 comments (73 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Texas AA population is not very high (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by goldberry on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:46:05 AM EST
    Wiki reports the following demographics for Texas (2005):
    54.4% White; 10.9% African American, 3.6% are Asian American or American Indian, and 32.1% are Hispanics or Latino (of any race).

    I don't think the AA vote alone will be enough for Obama to give him the edge.  The hispanic vote breaks strongly for Clinton.  I think it's going to come down to white men and Republican crossover voters.  

    But the BIG question for me is has Clinton's team learned how to do the caucuses?  There was no magic elixer for Obama in the caucus department.  It was all about organization.  The Clinton campaign was taken by surprise by the DFA style GOTV efforts in the other caucus states.  But now that they've had time to reassess the caucus situation in Texas, were they able to put together a Haka for Hillary?  

    We shall see...

    when was that census done that wiki quotes? (none / 0) (#23)
    by Kathy on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:53:41 AM EST
    there are an awful lot of displaced aa'sin Houston  from LA and MS.  

    Parent
    Now that is an interesting point (none / 0) (#29)
    by Molly Bloom on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:58:45 AM EST
    Could Karl Rove's plan to not rebuild NO (and remember Bush put him in charge) to dilute the Democratic voting block in LA and thereby ensure GOP wins in LA have an unanticipated consequence? MyDD had a post yesterday about Texas not being a lock for the GOP this year.

    (Egad that is a run on sentence!)

    Parent

    You're right about the caucuses (none / 0) (#24)
    by RiderOnTheStorm on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:53:42 AM EST
    The ability of Senator Obama's campaign to organize large numbers of people quickly in caucus states has given that campaign a serious advantage.  I'm surprised that Senator Clinton's campaign wasn't equally prepared, and believe that's one of the many missteps by her operation that has served her poorly.  (Just so this is absolutely clear: this has nothing to do with the merits of either candidate and is just about the logistics of running a campaign.)

    It will be interested to see how this works out in Texas this evening (which, by the way, I've just noticed is having some of its own weather issues today).

    Parent

    Successful organisms adapt (none / 0) (#30)
    by goldberry on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:58:53 AM EST
    I think she had time, barely.  She certainly now has the money and there's plenty more where that $35M came from.  All she needs to do is ask.  But yeah, betting on supertuesday Big D states to close this out was a mistake.  In a way, the caucus state fiasco feels like an ambush.  Maybe it was a weakness that was cleverly exploited by Obama's camp but something about it just doesn't sit right with me.  

    Parent
    I mentioned this... (none / 0) (#39)
    by mindfulmission on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:04:21 AM EST
    ... in another thread (yesterday?), but census data is different than registered voter data.

    A more accurate look at the demographics would need to look at the racial breakdowns of actual registered voters.

    Parent

    Some more... (none / 0) (#64)
    by mindfulmission on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:16:29 AM EST
    According to Pollster, here are the racial breakdowns from the 2004 primaries:

    Latino: 24%
    Black: 21%
    Female: 54%

    Parent

    Valid data (none / 0) (#73)
    by spit on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:03:17 AM EST
    but I think it's also important to keep in mind that most of the time, the primaries are well wrapped up by the time Texas votes, so it's pretty hard to use the 2004 data set as a particularly solid foundation for turnout predictions, even if the candidates themselves weren't exciting the electorate to the degree we're seeing.

    I think turnout across lots of different fields has been astounding, so IMO that's partly a matter of which group has the greatest increase in turnout as a proportion of overall vote. Women, African Americans, Latinos, and young voters have all exploded this year.

    Parent

    I believe Texan Hispanics are much more Republican (none / 0) (#61)
    by JoeA on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:18:39 AM EST
    than the Texan African Americans.  If that holds true then even if that data is correct then it is quite conceivable that in terms of turnout African Americans and Hispanics make up a similar share of the turnout.

    Parent
    my .02... (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by mike in dc on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:52:44 AM EST
    Obama wins Texas, possibly by as much as 10.
    Clinton wins Ohio, but by less than 10.
    Obama wins Vermont handily, probably 60-40 or better.
    Obama pulls off an upset in RI, on the heels of the poll that showed him within 5 over the weekend, and his rally in Providence.

    Net result, Obama wins 3 out of 4, nets another 20-25 delegate advantage, and Clinton drops out a week or two later, once the superdelegates start to move firmly behind her opponent.

    Heck if you are right (none / 0) (#42)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:05:58 AM EST
    Then you will have true magical powers, because no one would see this coming. And it would end the race for sure.

    Parent
    Kathy Millett is banned and all (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:17:32 AM EST
    22 comments today have been deleted.

    Predictions..... (1.00 / 0) (#21)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:51:19 AM EST
    We will still be seeing our youth picked off in Iraq and Afghanistan a few at a time in 2012.

    We will still have the highest prison population on earth in 2012.

    We will still have military installations in around 100 countries that we cannot afford in 2012.

    Kinda makes today's voting seem pointless.

    I think (none / 0) (#1)
    by rooge04 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:19:36 AM EST
    that Hillary takes Texas because Hispanic turnout will also be through the roof.

    April fool of myself (none / 0) (#3)
    by koshembos on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:24:48 AM EST
    Let me behave stupidly and try to predict Texas: Hillary by 10. Please, don't come after me with a bat (should have tried it 40 years ago).

    Is your name John Zogby? [nt] (none / 0) (#8)
    by JoeA on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:28:16 AM EST


    Parent
    Oy (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:25:18 AM EST
    Actually I am going to leave you up so that Jeralyn can see what happens to these threads.

    Kathy Millett is banned and all (none / 0) (#60)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:18:33 AM EST
    22 comments today have been deleted.

    Parent
    Clinton edges Texas by 2. (none / 0) (#5)
    by JoeA on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:27:12 AM EST
    Texas -  Clinton by 2
    Ohio - Clinton by 13
    RI - Clinton by 10
    Vermont - Obama by 20

    Delegate wise it comes out as a wash.  Obama wins a few more in the Texas Primary than Clinton,  then picks up a load in the caucus.  These and his extra delegates from Vermont are matched by Clintons from Ohio and RI.

    One thing really going for Obama in Texas,  along with potentially high African American turnout in his favour (and I really cannot see the media narrative and Clinton ad's in the last week doing anything to stop this demographic going for Obama 85-15),  is the huge early voting.  I think he could have won early voting by 5-10% and this could help him hold on against a late Clinton surge.

    There,  I've had it both ways!

    Peering into the crystal ball, I see... (none / 0) (#6)
    by RiderOnTheStorm on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:27:50 AM EST
    Vermont: Obama 65, Clinton 35
    Rhode Island: Clinton 55, Obama 45
    Ohio: Clinton 53, Obama 47
    Texas: Obama 51, Clinton 49

    One of many wildcards is the miserable weather in Ohio today.  Another is the use of paper ballots (a good thing, but only if they're ready for it); and still another, in all these states, is the question of whether poll workers are ready for the high turnouts they may see.

    I sincerely hope that everyone who wishes to vote gets that chance, and that their votes are recorded and counted properly.  As long as that's done, then let the voice of the people be heard.

    You think Obama will take RI? (none / 0) (#7)
    by JoeA on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:27:53 AM EST
    Optimistic,  I'll give you that.

    I suck at predictions.... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:28:16 AM EST
    I do think that Obama will win Texas. And Hillary will win Ohio. But I am prepared to be surprised.

    jesus. (none / 0) (#50)
    by kangeroo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:13:03 AM EST
    is it just me, or does it seem like you're eagerly rooting for hillary to lose?  schadenfreude, i tell ya.

    Parent
    I can go with your prediction (none / 0) (#10)
    by Molly Bloom on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:32:08 AM EST
    except I think Ohio will be HRC by 5.

    If Hillary has less than double digit wins in Texas and Ohio, what is the future of her campaign? Obviously she can and should continue as long as there is some viable way of reaching nomination.

    I am not sure that the SCLM (I prefer Eric Alterman's term) will give her much positive press no matter what she does and the super delegates... well aren't they the people who are spineless?  

    If she wins both (none / 0) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:38:42 AM EST
    she goes on and is in a pretty interesting position. Michigan and Florida come back to the fore.

    Parent
    Add to that (none / 0) (#46)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:09:26 AM EST
    the press/coverage factor if she does win the two big states.

    Parent
    Additionally, I think ... (none / 0) (#53)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:14:44 AM EST
    the press starts turning on Obama because he isn't letting them write the story they want to write about him.

    They want to write the Obama Phenomena Story.  If he loses both, that story is damaged.

    Parent

    I think there is a problem for Obama .... (none / 0) (#75)
    by Annie M on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:06:43 AM EST
    if he doesn't win Ohio or Texas.  If he doesn't win at least one big state it will raise questions as to why he couldn't put this away when he had the opportunity to do so.  (Particularly if he outspent Hillary 2-1 and had the momentum of 11 wins.)

    Parent
    Since neither (none / 0) (#13)
    by sas on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:41:53 AM EST
    she nor Obama will get the 200+ they need for the nomination, both should continue to go for it.

    The DNC has to do something about Florida and Michigan.

    Either way it will be the super delegates who decide.  I do not envy them with that job.  Either way they will alienate about half the Democrats.

    The ONLY hope of beating McCain is to have them both on the same ticket.

    The problem is (none / 0) (#83)
    by Fultron on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:50:17 PM EST
    that as Obama's lead in pledged delegates grows, especially if he wins Ohio and/or Texas, the pressure on Hillary to drop out will become enormous. If she quits, there will be no need to go to superdelegates, no need to worry about the mess in MI/FL, no need to spend more money and time attacking each other, etc. That's how the Obama camp and the media will play it, and the DNC powers-that-be might just go along.

    Parent
    BTD (none / 0) (#14)
    by lisadawn82 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:42:01 AM EST
    I think you're correct on OH, VT and RI.  As for Texas, I think that my Super 8 Ball probably has a better chance at a correct prediction than anyone else.  It's going to be really interesting to see who is going to turn out and in what numbers in TX.  

    I concur, mostly, (none / 0) (#15)
    by andgarden on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:42:22 AM EST
    but I think Hillary will win TX by 1-2 pts.

    Why do you think HRC will (none / 0) (#74)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:04:33 AM EST
    win TX?

    Parent
    my predictions (none / 0) (#17)
    by mindfulmission on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:45:07 AM EST
    Obama wins TX: 53-47
    Obama wins VT: 65-35
    Clinton wins RI: 53-47
    Clinton wins OH: 51-49

    ? i'm just baffled. (none / 0) (#56)
    by kangeroo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:16:14 AM EST


    Parent
    AA turnout (none / 0) (#26)
    by p lukasiak on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:55:56 AM EST
    It seems to me that early polling included high turnout within the AA community, based on the consistent pattern in other states.  At least in the SUSA poll in Texas, the proportion of the AA vote has gone down over time, not because they expect lower turnout among AA's, but because they're seeing evidence of higher than originally projected turnout in other groups -- most notably Hispanic voters.

    As for my predictions...

    TX -- a virtual tie, with only 20,000 or so votes between the two candidates out of over 2,000,000 cast

    OH -- C 53  O 46
    RI -- C 57  O 42
    VT -- C 39  O 60

    I would like to believe... (none / 0) (#31)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:59:15 AM EST
    that the Latinos will save Hillary in Texas.

    Not too sure about the caucus stage, but at least with the popular vote.

    ugh (none / 0) (#32)
    by mindfulmission on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 08:59:57 AM EST
    You make all Obama supporters look bad.

    No worries (none / 0) (#40)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:05:23 AM EST
    We Hillary supporters mostly just roll our eyes at these comments. I like the engagement with thoughtful people who support someone a different candidate. I even like to talk to McCain supporters. :-)

    Parent
    LOL, not really....... (none / 0) (#43)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:06:14 AM EST
    ...my kids are Obama supporters and they would never be so disrespectful of other people's opinions. At least I hope not. They never liked Kool Aid when they were little, I can't see them developing a taste for it now.

    Parent
    Umm, he's an AA. Like that's a mystery? (none / 0) (#34)
    by goldberry on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:01:18 AM EST
    They will make mountains out of molehills over there.  
    But Obama has made a point of scarfing up all of the AA voters.  Live by the sword and all that.

    Predictions. (none / 0) (#35)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:01:51 AM EST
    Obama wins Texas and Vermont.

    Clinton wins Rhode Island (I haven't been following Rhode Island, just going by CW here).

    Ohio ends up a tie or a small Obama victory.

    Also. . . (none / 0) (#36)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:02:07 AM EST
    the Knicks win the Stanley Cup.

    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#51)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:13:29 AM EST


    Parent
    Just to add some context. (none / 0) (#54)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:15:40 AM EST


    Parent
    Ugh...the Knicks.... (none / 0) (#52)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:13:53 AM EST
    there's one institution in worse shape than the union...my beloved Knicks.

    Parent
    My predictions (none / 0) (#38)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:02:35 AM EST
    No matter the outcome of the votes: The media will behave boorishly tonight. Sen. Obama will utter the words "hope" and "change" in his speech this evening. Sen. Clinton will say "Thank you Ohio!" Chris Matthews' head will explode.

    Must see TV.

    Indeed, (none / 0) (#65)
    by nemo52 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:34:38 AM EST
    The media will behave boorishly tonight.  That's as far as I can predict!

    Parent
    Just one win and she goes on (none / 0) (#41)
    by Saul on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:05:43 AM EST
    I see no need for her to quit if she says looses Tx by 2 and wins Ohio big.   She goes on.
    You got 10 primaries to go and time is on her side.  You never know what the press might discover about Obama is time goes on. I could not believe that at the press conference in his last moments he tried to blame the questioning that was coming at him on Hilary.  Moreover, any negative facts on Obama could swing the super completely to her side.  So you ride it out no matter what.  You come to far to just quit and she does not remind me of a quitter which in my opinion is a positive presidential quality. It was Obama that said that all votes should count and that this election is all about you.  Would look kind of hypocritical if he or his campaign team, or surrogates would tell Hilary to drop out.  What is he afraid of if he thinks he is the sure winner.
     

    I used to be good at predictions ... (none / 0) (#44)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:06:15 AM EST
    but this year I'm terrible.

    But here's how I see it.

    Obama has had a terrible last few days.  So some of his natural advantages have been undercut.

    I think he tried to make the case in OH, it was a valiant effort, but no sale.

    Clinton wins OH by at least 10%, but I really won't be surprised if it went higher than that.

    In VT, Obama does that Barbabra Eden thing he does at caucuses and wins by at least 20%

    Clinton takes RI by at least 12%.

    Now Texas.  Polls seemed indicate that Hillary was leading with early voters.  And convention wisdom would suggest Obama would do better with day of voters.

    But I think a strange thing happened.  Finally, Hillary's experience message worked.  The red phone and follow up ad played well in TX.  Exit polls will list "experience" as the top issue on voters' minds.

    Hillary builds on her early vote lead, and wins by between 4-6%.

    Republican mischief voters vote both ways, canceling each other out, and have little or no impact.

    Keep dreaming..... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:10:44 AM EST
    Even St. Obama is powerless at the feet of the military industrial complex.

    I'd have your bullsh*t detector checked out, it appears to be malfunctioning.  But we'll see in 4 years where we're at...I surely hope you're right.

    It looks like another attempt by Obama (none / 0) (#55)
    by Manuel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:15:59 AM EST
    supporters to play the race card.  I hope his campaign isn't behind this.

    It's a little scary how enthusiastic they are (none / 0) (#59)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:18:17 AM EST
    They are smearing one of our hardest working, most admired Democratic women... and the Clinton family in general over very thin "evidence"

    They should be ashamed.

    Parent

    BTD doesn't respond to me (none / 0) (#57)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:16:20 AM EST
    He feels hurt that I called him out for taking Drudge's word as a source I guess.

    Site problems (none / 0) (#67)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:45:05 AM EST
    Sorry.

    Parent
    Anyone with the guts to call Texas for Clinton? (none / 0) (#62)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 09:20:28 AM EST
    I know, I know... Zogby ruined it.  Nobody wants to go out on a limb and predict a Texas victory for Clinton because they might end up on the bench with Zogby, lol.

    Well I will go ahead and be the first to say....

    I'm not sure!

    Out on a limb (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by waldenpond on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:57:01 AM EST
    Ohio Clinton by 6
    RI Clinton by 5
    VT  Obama by 20

    and yes, I'll go out on a limb and say Clinton squeaks by in Texas. I like what I've seen from Rasmussen and Reuters and I hope it will carry through today. I want someone who gets up at 5:30 am to go greet employees getting of their shift change to take it.  I say, a pox on Zogby.


    Parent

    I predict ... (none / 0) (#63)
    by chemoelectric on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:08:34 AM EST
    ... that we will find out tonight.

    Guessing (none / 0) (#66)
    by 1jane on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:40:33 AM EST
    Obama wins TX by 4.
    Obama wins OH by 3.
    Obama blowout in Vermont.
    Clinton wins RI by 5.

    Obamas army of volunteers (none / 0) (#68)
    by thereyougo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:48:35 AM EST
    worry me,but, I saw an interview at a Houston flea market of 7 or 8 people for an idea how the ground game was going. 4 said Hillary 1 said Obama 1 didn't know 1 wasn't voting and 1 for MacLame.

    A little heat and Obama is wilting under the pressure can't be good for the next round of contests.

    Interesting about the caucuses. If her people regrouped and got their 2cts in instead of the Obama people just voting and leaving, I think it will show in the delegate count. We shall see.

    Oh, what the heck (none / 0) (#69)
    by Lou Grinzo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:51:11 AM EST
    I stink at this, but why not play along:

    OH: Clinton by 8

    RI: Clinton by 12

    VT: Obama by 25

    TX: Clinton by 2, but she narrowly loses the delegate count, triggering another round of arguments about how desperately we need to reform the primary process

    I wish I could find the source (none / 0) (#70)
    by ChrisO on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:51:49 AM EST
    but I read somewhere that voter registration among people transplanted from New Orleans to Houston is quite low, so I'm not sure that will be a factor.

    As for the AA vote in general, haven't you heard that it's racist to discuss Obama and the AA vote? 90 pecent of AA voters choose Obama because they agree with his polcies, apparently. Only Bill Clinton would be racist enought to assume that the AA vote is a natural constituency for Obama.

    Predictions (none / 0) (#71)
    by sar75 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:54:24 AM EST
    Texas - Obama +2
    Ohio - Clinton +6
    Rhode Island - Clinton +8
    Vermont - Obama +26

    Clinton will probably claim this is enough to go forward, and God bless her - she has every right to go on and should if she wants. Obama will say "Do the math," and will have a good case to make. Barring blowout wins in the remaining states, Clinton will almost certainly end up at the convention with fewer pledged delegates, fewer states won, and fewer popular votes.  Superdelegates may rally to her side.  I find that unlikely, but will accept that outcome, because them's the rules.  If that happens, I think it will be impossible for her not to choose Obama as her VP.

    As an Obama supporter, I will admit this much:  Clinton/Obama would be a force of nature, and probably the Democrats best hope. Heck, it'd be unstoppable.  Clinton/anyone else and Obama/anyone else - risky risky. At the same time, for a variety of reasons that don't belong here, I think Obama/Clinton would not work.

    Just some predictions.  Two great candidates who've given us the best primary season in - I'll say it - history.  

    Clinton Wins (none / 0) (#76)
    by marirebel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:12:42 AM EST
    by 8 in Texas,

    by 14 in Ohio!

    I think Women and Latina/os will vote in record numbers for Clinton.

    Ok, I'll jump (none / 0) (#77)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:18:49 AM EST
    Gut feeling, with media, polls, and general "blowing in the wind."

    Clinton +4 TX
    Clinton +15 OH
    Clinton +10 RI
    Obama +20 Vermont

    Oh this is gonna hurt tomorrow...

    Adding to this (none / 0) (#78)
    by Marvin42 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:33:56 AM EST
    Anyone wondering what the Clinton camp has been doing about caucuses? Do you think they are happy to let them be dominated as have been, or have they been prepping, and will it make any difference?

    Parent
    Caucus efforts (none / 0) (#79)
    by waldenpond on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:21:53 PM EST
    Probably inappropriate not to have the source (Politico?) but... a Clinton campaign memo was out to supporters that it was important to maintain balance in the caucus process.  If an caucus is being led by an Obama supporter, it encouraged getting a Clinton supporter to serve as secretary.

    Parent
    Hillary's Camp (none / 0) (#85)
    by sumac on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 02:51:40 PM EST
    has been getting the word out about the caucuses and how important it is to vote twice - woo hoo Texas Two-Step.

    Parent
    I think you are right BTD (none / 0) (#80)
    by s5 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:26:55 PM EST
    Except I'll give Clinton a slightly narrower win in Ohio. More like 5%. I don't think either have them can pull a double digit anything in either of the big states.

    Clinton takes Ohio (none / 0) (#81)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:27:11 PM EST
    although I have no prediction as to by how much.  Can't understand why Vermont and Rhode Island would split, unless caucus v. primary is the determining factor.

    I reserve judgment on TX until I can find out if HRC was ever photographed there in a Stetson.

    P.S.  The Houston Chronicle on line has an amazing Obama ad you cannot avoid when you click on the site.  Quite dominant. Information re voting in the primary AND in the caucuses today.

    RI and VT (none / 0) (#82)
    by spit on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:39:20 PM EST
    are very different places. RI actually has a decent chunk of blue collar industrial type workers, the so-called "beer track" folks, and a lot of very poor to working class voters in and around Providence. VT has a whole lot of hippies, indy-left voters, etc, and Burlington is much more like Portland, ME or a tiny, tiny Boston than it is like Providence.

    Clinton takes OH I think by a decent chunk. I don't know who takes TX, but I think it'll most likely be within a few points either way.

    Parent

    Polling (none / 0) (#84)
    by waldenpond on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 12:54:56 PM EST
    Is exit polling dependent on 'official poll watchers'?  There is an article on Politico that Obama's people didn't meet the requirements to be official poll watchers.  What is the function of official poll watchers?

    Here are mine (none / 0) (#86)
    by fladem on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 03:35:28 PM EST
    Ohio, Clinton +13
    Texas, Clinton +5
    Vermont, Obama +20
    RI, Clinton +4

    I think there is a shot of an Obama surprise in Rhode Island.  I also think polling is overstating the african american turnout in Texas.

    Here's the rub, though:
    Delegate Prediction: Clinton +13

    Obama will win the Texas Caucus, and may even win the most delegates on the night.

    Clinton cannot overcome Obama's pledged delegate lead - they can only win by stringing together a series of wins.  The problem is that can't string enough together.

    The only path Clinton has to the nomination is a re-vote in Florida and Michigan.  By winning those two in real contests, her argument to the super-delegates would be stronger.

    If there is no re-vote, Obama is going to win the nomination.  All Clinton is doing is playing Ted Kennedy to Obama's Jimmy Carter and in the process destroying our chances in the fall.  

    Primary Prediction Thread | 73 comments (73 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment