« A Nice Little Primary Day Diversion
Today, I’m glad I’m not a Democrat »



Poll: Clinton Takes Lead In Texas Democratic Primary And Among Late Deciders

March 4th, 2008
By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief

Print Print

A new Zogby poll has good news for Senator Hillary Clinton and fits into some of the other polls that suggests the prevailing political conventional wisdom may have to be tossed out again: it shows Clinton narrowly taking the lead in Texas and winning over still-deciding voters.

The race in Ohio remains deadlocked:

On the strength of some strong campaigning in Ohio and Texas, Democrat Hillary Clinton of New York has retaken a narrow lead over rival Barack Obama of Illinois in Texas and has dead-locked the race in Ohio, a new Reuters/C-SPAN/Houston Chronicle survey by Zogby International shows.

The telephone surveys show Clinton had a second consecutive good day, and now leads Obama 47% to 44% in Texas. The two are tied at 44% in Ohio. It is notable that 7% in Texas and 8% in Ohio said they were yet unsure about who to support in the Democratic Party race, even at this late moment. The surveys also show support is somewhat soft in the race, and could still shift in the waning hours.

Other polls also have provided good news for Clinton.

Clinton’s rebound in the polls coincides with her decision to go after Obama on the national security issue via ads. She also sharpened her rhetorical attacks, and Obama was largely playing defensive for several days. Enough polls have now shown that the numbers are starting to trend in Clinton’s direction to indicate that the political obituaries about Clinton’s campaign may have been premature.

But several wild-cards remain.

One is that polls this primary season have often been accuracy-challenged. But in the case of Clinton’s campaign, there is now a trend. Read these. But it’s extremely close.

One poll that gives Obama a slim lead notes that his Big Mo is now Big Slo with Clinton making inroads, including among independent voters.

A lot will depend on each campaign’s ground operation on Election Day. Stellar ground operations that are below the media and blogosphere radar have to be factored in. In past primaries it was generally noted with surprise that Obama brought a lot of new voters in who weren’t previously considered seriously in the mix. Will he this time?

And what impact has the call by conservative talk show hosts had on urging Republicans to cross over and vote for Hillary to stop Obama had? Earlier in the campaign, news stories said many GOPers would cross over to vote against Hillary, as payback against the Clintons. But Rush Limbaugh and others have now been steadily urging Texas GOPers to vote for Clinton to halt Obama’s seeming advance. Will that be a factor?

But Zogby’s data shows that the key factors for Clinton’s seeming 11th hour rebound seems to be the toughening of campaign rhetoric and adept use of tough political ads, regaining her base and pickup some additional support as some Obama support has seemingly wavered. Zogby writes:

In Ohio, there have been no dramatic changes. This has always been close, except that now the undecideds are up to 8%, and the increase has come from the Obama column. It looks like a combination of questions raised about Obama’s capacity to lead the military, his stance on NAFTA, and questions about ethics have shaved a few points off his support.

Clinton has not closed the deal yet, but she has picked up some additional support among women and older voters. Obama continues to lead in the big cities of Ohio, and it looks like Cincinnati is keeping him in this game. He has been working it hard, and has received the endorsement of the mayor there. But Clinton has opened up a big lead among Catholics – which, translated, means white ethnics.

In Texas, Hillary had a slight lead in Sunday’s polling, which was enhanced by her lead in Monday’s polling, and those are the figures combined into the two-day rolling average of our poll. How did she pull ahead? She clearly increased support among white men and Hispanic men, mostly based on her late campaign focusing on her fitness for military command. She also enjoys strong support from white and Hispanic women. One thing that could prove significant is that much of Obama’s recent advances in the Houston area seem to have dissipated.

Among those in Texas who were just making up their minds in the last few days, Hillary now leads by four percent, which pretty much tells the story.

My DD’s Todd Beaton notes these trends and how it shows a “dramatic” upturn for Clinton in Texas and writes:

Interesting that it would hone in on the “fitness for military command,” seeming to imply, essentially, that the 3AM ad worked (although she was questioning Obama’s fitness on that measure on several fronts.) The idea that the ad would move male voters is especially unbelievable since it was widely considered a big ole dog whistle to women. And this Slate piece found that the ad only worked among those who were pre-disposed to supporting Clinton, i.e. it had no persuasive value. So, I’ll be curious to find what it was exactly that moved men to Hillary in the final analysis because I still doubt if the 3AM ad did her much good.

Ultimately, Clinton’s late surge is due to, well, late-deciding voters breaking for her.



This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 4th, 2008 at 5:51 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, Primaries, Ohio, Texas, Approval Ratings, Barack Obama, 2008 Elections, Polls, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 5 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Hey everybody. Joe from Oho. I have encouraging new! I called for a few hours and still calling (my target is 100 today) found that the undecided voters are leaning towards Hillary especially the seniors. The issues that concern them are health care, VA benefits and Obama's lack of experience. I am getting a good feel about OHIO. My instincts don't usually prove me wrong. Keep calling if your out there. Hillary could use any and all support. WIN ONE FOR THE BUCKEYE STATE!!!
    • ^
    • v
    And just one more piece of information. Senator Obama is being supported by Senator Joe Lieberman as the candidate of change although he has endorsed Senator McCain. The point is Senator Lieberman helped support Senator Obama's Senatorial Campaign in 2006. His vote was the last vote that pushed through NAFTA. Senator Obama has said Senator Clinton was for NAFTA. If Lieberman voted for NAFTA why would he not reject his support as the Democratic Candidate. You decide. I have to get back to calling. HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT.
    • ^
    • v
    Possible sidebar story on Texas polling accuracy is that, failing to learn from their California experience, pollsters continued to poll in Texas without much use of Spanish speaking pollsters.
    • ^
    • v
    I am so happy to hear about Ohio, I have been praying for Hillary for months now and I believe that Hillary will be our next President. This country needs her, and while watching her at the Texas Town Hall last night, when she mentioned taking our Constitution out and dusting it off, there was an outburst of applause. The Bush Administration has all but destroyed our Constitution, trying to rewrite what our forefathers spent months writing and wars and lives to defend. We need Hillary Clinton, and I pray that those who are undecided will look deep into their hearts and ask themselves, who would they want answering the phone at 3am. Hillary is much more qualified, Obama knows this, yet still wants to run a campaign that merely repeats the same thing over and over again. Hillary voted for the war, most of us would have given the information the Bush administration supplied to congress. Bush lied, we all know that, all but Obama it seems.
    • ^
    • v
    I sincerely hope that all the new voters/first-timers, do their research. Obama is so new that even someone like myself, whose first presidential vote was cast in 1980, has to do a ton of research on him. My biggest concerns are his inexperience, this rezco mess, and concerns that have stemmed from his church; the United Church of Christ in Chicago.

    As for Rezco, I am more than a little worried about the judgement of Obama. He knew this person for well over a decade. He helped Obama's political ambitions for most of their "friendship." I say friendship because you'd have to be very naive to believe that their relationship was anything less than friendly considering the huge amount of donations Rezco generated for Obama and the land deals that they were involved with. I know Obama admitted it was a "boneheaded" move, but it was beyond stupidity considering Obama knew he had presidential ambitions.

    Don't close your eyes to what the republicans will do with this Rezco-gate. This will not go away. Rezco is in deep legal trouble and Obama had real ties with him. The elephants are going to trample him with this mess.

    Then as I continued my research I read how Obama relagated to very mundane and simplistic legal tasks when he joined his first law firm. Why? Because he needed to learn the ropes. Do we need another president "learning" the most powerful position of earth as he goes? That is more than worrisome. I mean if he could admit that he needed to learn his legal trade slowly, then why the heck can't he get some more experience in Washington before he tackles a job that affects every american?

    Lastly, is his pastor and church. I don't know about you, but my chuch and my pastor have a very significant affect on my life. They are my spiritual guide. But, I will be fair; and just strongly suggest that it be researched. Some might conclude that this comment could be racially motivated. It is not. I am a minority. My best friend is african american. There are just some things that truly bother me. You will have to decide for yourself. It is the United Church of Christ in Chicago. I think tucc.org You might have to do a web search if that is not it.

    Obama seems to be a man with many attributes, especially as an political orator. He appears to be on the road to a very promising career in political service. If he gets the nomination I cannot, in good consicence, vote for him until I am sure that he can run this nation.

    All I know is that I am an American and a Christian (democrat) first and my heritage, while very important and precious, comes second.

    I pray that all of you do your research.
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« A Nice Little Primary Day Diversion
Today, I’m glad I’m not a Democrat »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.