Mississippi: Obama 46, Hillary 40. Both lead 4:1 with their color, lose their gender

The racial voting is disappointing.

Overall: 0 46, H 40
Blacks: O 67, H 16
Whites: H 72, O 18

Curiously Clinton leads by 5 among men but Obama leads women by 15. The opposite is usually true. Similarly Obama almost always wins the rethug vote and indie vote, and usually by lopsided margins, but here Clinton dominates among both while Obama leads by 17 among Democrats, a group who usually loses. However, much of this can be explained by the racial overlap in party identification in the South. The few places Hill has beaten Obama among rethugs have mostly been in the South. Obama's alleged "crossover appeal" apparently dissappeared overnight on 3/3. What really happened is he never had it. Much of the rethug and indie vote he attracted was from folks trying to beat the strongest Democratic candidate, Clinton. It was in the rethug interest to vote for Obama from Iowa to Wisconsin. With Hill on the ropes, though, it makes sense for rethugs to vote for Clinton to keep the race going to April 22 and hence the switch of about 20-25% of rethugs and indies to the Clinton camp, although Obama still won both groups on 3/4. PA is thankfully a closed primary but except the rethugs to be back in Obama's corner in full force in May.

http://southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_37_265.aspx

The split has usually been around 90-10 (A-A to non-A-A).

If 90% of the A-A voters vote for Obama, and only 50% of the non-A-A, Obama should still win with at least 70%. For Obama to be leading by SIX percent is a sign of growing trouble.

Perhaps I'm looking at this wrong. I'm going to wait until a few more polls have been conducted to read the tea leaves.

--p!

That is with an 85-15 split. If he falls to even just a 70-30 split it would become 14-6, an overall average decline from a 14 point lead to an 8 point lead. If Obama lost even 15% of the black vote he would be severely damaged in the primaries. Where could he make up that 6 percent?

Here's my own math for Obama:

90% of the African-American vote;
plus
50% of the non-African-American vote.

Or,

65% * 90% = 58.5%
plus
35% * 50% = 17.5%

Total = 76%
Delegates = 15 (HRC = 5)

Assuming that NO non-African-American voters vote for Obama, he still gets close to 60% of the vote, at least 12 pledged delegates.

Insider Advantage is reporting 46-40 in favor of Obama; but IA is a new polling company and does not have a well-established track record.

My numbers for the African-American Democratic voting base in Mississippi may also be off. But in general, I'm in the same ballpark. If Barack Obama does not get at least 60% of the Democratic vote, he has some trouble on his hands.

Almost 37% of the population of Mississippi is African-American. Source: http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-5.pdf">The Black Population, 2000 (USCensus; PDF); but this does not contain detailed voting information.

--p!

Not according to that poll, anyway.

(which I don't see happening).

Jeez why did I ever clear out my ignore list?

And the MS primary will probably be much more in line with ARG. They have it at 58-34 Obama. They have Obama getting 87% of the black vote, which is much more than the 67% IA has him getting (I think you mixed up the black and white vote numbers). 87% is much more in tune with the vote in every other state that has voted.

ARG is a joke. Obama should win MS but if it is close it will be a blow to him.

And I personally dont think ARG is a joke anymore. Looking at their record over the past five contests leads me to believe that. They had Obama winning Wisconsin by ten, Hillary winning Ohio by 14, Obama winning Vermont by a little over 20, had Hillary winning RI by 12, and Hillary winning Texas by 3. Id say they have been pretty good over the past five weeks.

Still the point of 4:1 racial voting stands regardless of whether it is 67 or 72.

Hmmm...but ARG's MS poll has Obama ahead 65-28 among women. That is hard to believe and Hill should do better than 61% of the white vote. I think the truth is somewhere in between ARG and IA but if Hill can somehow keep it within 10 it will be a moral victory for her and blunt the modicum of momentum Obama may get out of winning a state he was expected to win big all along.

I expect the numbers to be a little more than that. There, the vote was 51% black and 44% white. in 2004, the vote in MS was 56% black and 40% white. Hillary will probably win around 70-80% of the white vote, while Obama will win 83-90 percent of the black vote. I believe that should Obama will therefore win around 59-41

If he doesn't win nine out of ten black votes things will be much closer. If Hill can somehow get Obama down to 3:1 among blacks and retains her white support in MS she will have a great result.

The "Obama competes in the south" math has always been a strange fantasy.

There are many AA voters in the deep south, and very few Democrats left. So the Southern Democratic parties are the most heavily AA of any because there just aren't so many deep south white dems anymore.

I was amazed to see people talking about Obama being competitive in SC or Alabama based on primary performance. Hillary cannot even compete with Obama in the Alabama Democratic Party, but she would out-poll Obama by 5-10 points in Alabama in a general election (and would lose horribly, too)

I've never seen a single Obama supporter on here say that he would be competitive in Alabama. Neither Dem would.

There is no state I have not seen suggested to be in play for Obama here on DU, including Alabama.

And surely you yourself have seen SC discussed that way. (Which is only about 2% less foolish an idea than Alabama)

And a week from now you'll probably see some Mississippi talk, too.

I'd like some proof, sir.

They had Hill up by 5, she won by 4.

"Moreover, in an entirely separate survey that we conducted of early voters, Clinton led by a 55%-to-43% margin. While much of this early vote is probably accounted for in the poll cited above – because we ask the inclusive question, “If the election were held today?,” the separate survey that measured Clinton’s clear edge among early voters may help explain Clinton’s overall edge in our poll."

Obama won early voters by a large margin.


The poll had two errors that cancel each other out (overestimating Clinton early voters and overestimating Obama's election day support)

"they truly support Hillary" argument b/c we all know that isn't true.

The funny thing is that if Obama kept his 75-21/70-30 rethug ringer support he would have won Texas but his "crossover appeal" vanished and his margin fell to the single digits when it temporarily, with PA in mind, no longer served the rethug cause by voting for Obama. The same thing happened with "independents."

14% undecided is a lot

This is Mississippi we're talking about.

break for Clinton.

I think this might be a pretty good tipoff that this poll is just a bit unreliable.

And white males will be disproportionately represented among the male vote. Given the racial voting going on in MS that explains the gender reversal.

many white male democrats left in Mississippi? It's not surprising that black females would be the largest group of Democratic voters there, but I'd still think that black male democrats would outnumber white male democrats.

Hence blacks make up a far larger share of Democratic women in MS than they do Democratic men.

The black voting population may be heavily female.

I think AA voters are 56% of the Miss. Dem party. If that subset is 60% female...

UNCLEAN! UNCLEAN!!!!



x(
rocknation

I am an AA woman, retired Army veteran who is voting for Hillary and plan to bring my neighborhood with me. I am hoping and praying for an upset on Tuesday.

:eyes:

Folks like MS Liberal are the backbone of the party, not the rethug and indie ringers who have given Obama his current lead.

but she's a personal embarrasment to me. It is what it is.

No, I'm not insulting Mississippi, I'm simply stating reality.

When I lived there, we used to say "Mississippi doesn't have bad race relations; we have NO race relations."