Obama & Hillary neck and neck...

[Phantom]

on intrade at least. This is for Dem nomination.

Intrade Prediction Markets

Last price for Hillary = 49.2 (down 13.9 today)

Last price for Obama = 49.4 (up 10.9 today)

This of course doesn't mean anything other than where people are putting their money...

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by Phantom

on intrade at least. This is for Dem nomination.

Intrade Prediction Markets

Last price for Hillary = 49.2 (down 13.9 today)

Last price for Obama = 49.4 (up 10.9 today)

This of course doesn't mean anything other than where people are putting their money...

yeah but I think it means more then people put thier money on what they think the outcome will be. These odds makers are usually pretty good.

[Thorgrim]

I think people are putting their money on what they think will hit 55%, and they think hillary will hit 45%...i do not think these are a lot of "hillary to lose"/"obama to win"

[JaJae]

Hillary's campaign is a race against time. Throughout this campaign she has only lost support and Obama has only gained. I'm hoping Obama can stick it out and stick to his morals. He's on track to do well in the upcoming primaries.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Hillary's campaign is a race against time. Throughout this campaign she has only lost support and Obama has only gained. I'm hoping Obama can stick it out and stick to his morals. He's on track to do well in the upcoming primaries.

Why is Hillary's campaign a race against time?

Don't tell me Obama didn't get huge momentum out of January...huge...and he loses California by 10 points

If Obama sweeps the next few minor states, and then she loses it all on March 4th...but that's a month away, and there is no reason to think primary voting states like Ohio are going to get Obama-mania while California had a month to watch him get the best media coverage god could ask for and didn't

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Why is Hillary's campaign a race against time?

Don't tell me Obama didn't get huge momentum out of January...huge...and he loses California by 10 points

One state. Don't act ignorant to the fact that Obama stole many states from Hillary who had 20+ leads since the primaries started. Hillary was winning in most states in the nation. Obama has taken the popular vote in most states. But you know this, hence the reason only one state was mentioned in your reply.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

One state. Don't act ignorant to the fact that Obama stole many states from Hillary who had 20+ leads since the primaries started. Hillary was winning in most states in the nation. Obama has taken the popular vote in most states. But you know this, hence the reason only one state was mentioned in your reply.

Because it goes from 370 delegates...to base states like NY/NJ&IL/GA...to finally a 70 delegate state

Which is really important, a 370 delegate state or a 70 delegate staet

Hillary won every primary except a >1% "loss" in Missouri and 4 points in Connecticut...Obama really kicked ass

I mean, you could highlight Obama's Alaska win...where 400 people voted total...in the entire state...400 people...LL could have won that state

I'm pissed at Obama and Hillary, because this "oh we're so close!" shit is such a waste of time

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Hillary won every primary except a >1% "loss" in Missouri and 4 points in Connecticut...Obama really kicked ass

What the hell are you talking about?

You're spinning this so far I can't even decipher how you can come to such a ridiculous conclusion.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Because it goes from 370 delegates...to base states like NY/NJ&IL/GA...to finally a 70 delegate state

Which is really important, a 370 delegate state or a 70 delegate staet

Hillary won every primary except a >1% "loss" in Missouri and 4 points in Connecticut...Obama really kicked ass

I mean, you could highlight Obama's Alaska win...where 400 people voted total...in the entire state...400 people...LL could have won that state

I'm pissed at Obama and Hillary, because this "oh we're so close!" shit is such a waste of time

Face it dude Super Tuesday was Obama's night and a microcosm of Hillary's failings.

1) Missouri and Connecticut was supposed to be sure bets for her, she lost them. This is a snapshot of the support she lost to Obama the last few months, from in the bag to a lose - I don't give a shit what the percentage point spread was, because to the regular folk it looks like a win.

2) Mass, NY and CA were never in play as she held huge leads for months. Hill is a Senator from NY and Bill was beloved in Cali. So that bonanza is disengenious, of course she will win NY and Cali. When we take those easy wins away, it shows how poorly she actually did. Obama won more states and won States he was not supposed to win. What states did Hill win that she wasn't supposed too?

Moreover Obama did gain 40% in Mass because of the endorsements (he was polling only 20% before) so that helped him gain a lot of delegates.

3) He won more states and by bigger margins than the states Hillary won

4) The next few states coming up are advantageous to Obama which will only add to his momentum

5) The white vote spread has narrowed giving Obama a stronger hand. I suspect the same will happen to the latino vote

6) The overall delegate spread between Hill and Obama is almost nothing so she cannot claim front runner and presidential inevitability

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

Face it dude Super Tuesday was Obama's night and a microcosm of Hillary's failings.

1) Missouri and Connecticut was supposed to be sure bets for her, she lost them. This is a snapshot of the support she lost to Obama the last few months, from in the bag to a lose - I don't give a shit what the percentage point spread was, because to the regular folk it looks like a win.

2) Mass, NY and CA were never in play as she held huge leads for months. Hill is a Senator from NY and Bill was beloved in Cali. So that bonanza is disengenious, of course she will win NY and Cali. When we take those easy wins away, it shows how poorly she actually did. Obama won more states and won States he was not supposed to win. What states did Hill win that she wasn't supposed too?

Moreover Obama did gain 40% in Mass because of the endorsements (he was polling only 20% before) so that helped him gain a lot of delegates.

3) He won more states and by bigger margins than the states Hillary won

4) The next few states coming up are advantageous to Obama which will only add to his momentum

5) The white vote spread has narrowed giving Obama a stronger hand. I suspect the same will happen to the latino vote

6) The overall delegate spread between Hill and Obama is almost nothing so she cannot claim front runner and presidential inevitability

Thank you for posting this.

Also:

Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign said today it has surged to a 28-delegate lead following the crucial Super Tuesday contests, with top campaign staffers declaring that the Illinois senator fought off Hillary Clinton’s efforts to emerge as a strong front-runner last night.

“Through the first 26 states, we have won more states, won more delegates, won more total votes than Sen. Clinton,” Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said this morning. “It’s clear the (Clinton’s) strategy was predicated on trying to secure the Democratic nomination last night, and on that score they failed miserably.”

Plouffe said Obama has emerged with a delegate lead of 910 to Clinton’s 882, a tally that foretells an extremely close battle that will only intensify in the crucial days ahead. Clinton aides could not immediately be reached for their take on the numbers.

Obama claims lead in delegate count - BostonHerald.com

Let's see if this fortells the truth.

[Thorgrim]

CT was not a sure thing...and Missouri? Polls I saw from CT had Obama leading...i have no idea how "well look at how much obama won in state x, that's important...well he barely won in state y, that means nothing"

She had a big lead in EVERY state for months, and Obamaniacs were talking about him winning MA for weeks

California was never in play, okay i've been reading a different internet...MSNBC said he'd win by double digits

Winning small caucuses (like 400 vote Alaska) gives you "a state" but it means close to nothing

hillary did not blowout the white vote in FL or SC, and ofcourse not IA or NH...however i saw exit polls showing double digit leads by Clinton among whites

Her hispanic lead has been consistent and NEVER changing

Obama had a pledged delegate lead going into super tuesday

[Thorgrim]

its completely unknown, by anyone, who won the Delegate final count of 2/5, and all signs ive seen point to Hillary winning the popular vote nationwide on 2/5

[David Octavius]

She had a big lead in EVERY state for months, and Obamaniacs were talking about him winning MA for weeks

Well thats them but the polls spoke a different story, I don't see how you quoting polls for one thing (CT) does not apply to this thing - probably because it would show you are wrong

California was never in play, okay i've been reading a different internet...MSNBC said he'd win by double digits

Must be, because most polls had Hillary winning easy

Winning small caucuses (like 400 vote Alaska) gives you "a state" but it means close to nothing

Yea thanks for shitting on GA, AL, and MS who's population may not be Cali, but are strategically important states come the general election. CT and Kansas (as far as I know) was not a caucus but Minnesota had a huge Caucus

hillary did not blowout the white vote in FL or SC, and ofcourse not IA or NH...however i saw exit polls showing double digit leads by Clinton among whites

Yes she does have double digit leads but it was much wider just a month ago, don't act like Obama did not make serious inroads here

Her hispanic lead has been consistent and NEVER changing

That's what people said about her African American support - remember those silly arguments about if Obama is black? We don't hear that anymore.

And people said her lead among white and women voters would stay as large, those didn't either. SO what makes you think it wont happen to this group? Ethnic groups are not monolithic, individuals choose who they want to support and every time Obama speaks he gets more of those individuals.

[Thorgrim]

She won white democrats by 30 points in Missouri (cnn.com)

Hillary outperformed the field poll (considered the gold standard in California polls), and multiple polls that had Obama winning...suffolk poll, rasmussen, reuters, etc

Here is a respected poll showing Obama winning CT...which had been shown in the past by other outfits like rasmussen/reuters/etc
Poll Report Popup

The "old talk" was that she was winning in ALL groups, which obviously changed...but as I said she had a solid latino and less solid but good white lead in Nevada in the middle of january, feb 5th she still had it...no reason to think it will go away

only things that will change is she faces unfavorable caucus settings (she kicks ass in primaries) and some states with heavy black population centers (Maryland)

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

She won white democrats by 30 points in Missouri (cnn.com)

Hillary outperformed the field poll (considered the gold standard in California polls), and multiple polls that had Obama winning...suffolk poll, rasmussen, reuters, etc

Here is a respected poll showing Obama winning CT...which had been shown in the past by other outfits like rasmussen/reuters/etc
Poll Report Popup

The "old talk" was that she was winning in ALL groups, which obviously changed...but as I said she had a solid latino and less solid but good white lead in Nevada in the middle of january, feb 5th she still had it...no reason to think it will go away

only things that will change is she faces unfavorable caucus settings (she kicks ass in primaries) and some states with heavy black population centers (Maryland)

There were 22 states that voted yesterday. You REALLY need to stop trying to make an over-encompassing point by singling out one or two states to prove your point as if it signifies a trend. It's ok if what David is saying is true. We don't need to hear fallacy after fallacy trying to downplay the truth. Individual states do not signify trends. Using individual states to support your argument is foolish.

[Thorgrim]

why, if i go state by state would i change anyone's mind...im giving you exit polls from a bunch of different states, expanding it to 22 (remember it looks as though she won the popular vote and she has a chance of winning the final 2/5 delegate count) would just be making the same points, in the same districts, because basically every racial trend I used comes from the NATIONAL exit polls

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

why, if i go state by state would i change anyone's mind...im giving you exit polls from a bunch of different states, expanding it to 22 (remember it looks as though she won the popular vote and she has a chance of winning the final 2/5 delegate count) would just be making the same points, in the same districts, because basically every racial trend I used comes from the NATIONAL exit polls

You're selectively choosing states to attempt to defend from trends. Which is fallacious. I could selectively choose individual states and make Obama look like the next coming of Christ to politics. It's a horrible way to debate and a waste of time.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

You're selectively choosing states to attempt to defend from trends. Which is fallacious. I could selectively choose individual states and make Obama look like the next coming of Christ to politics. It's a horrible way to debate and a waste of time.

I picked the one non base state that had above 70-some delegates, and it was 370...jees what state do YOU think is "
"better" and why...and why does that show Obama is the man?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I picked the one non base state that had above 70-some delegates, and it was 370...jees what state do YOU think is "
"better" and why...and why does that show Obama is the man?

No you picked the state that could best spin your rhetoric while deflecting the entire premise of our posts, as usual. The reality is Super Tuesday was a major comeback for Obama, he reversed many trends and stole a lot of votes from Hillary over the past month in many states. Hillary was hoping to clinch the election today, but because she slipped in almost every single state she's now an uncertainty. She is now donating millions of her own money as well as continuing to accept any and all money from lobbyists to stay competitive. Obama has the momentum and he's slated to do well in the upcoming primaries.