LATEST RAS. MISS. POLL: Obama up 53-39

RASMUSSEN'S LATEST

Mississippi Democratic Presidential Primary
Mississippi: Obama 53% Clinton 39%

SEE http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/mississippi/mississippi_democratic_presidential_primary

She sure has her work cut out for her.

What happened to triangulatin' Hil's big mo'?

...for Hillary to catch up when Obama's wins tend to be so large? I can't see her shaving much off that number before the vote. She ekes out wins while Obama hands her her arse over and over.

I’ve said it a few times. You better practice it too, YES YOU CAN!!! cause you'll have to.

State begins with an "M".

unless R=31 | 30 | 28 | 29

I won't explain it to you, as that's somewhat insulting.

extremely large Black population.

Open primary?

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/03/rushing-to-reas.html

Go and check the exit polls. In Wisconsin, Republicans made up 9 percent of the Democratic primary vote. Obama won them 72-28 over Clinton. Just as tellingly, 14 percent of primary voters said they were "conservative," and Obama won them 59-40, a bigger margin than he won with liberals or moderates. Tactical voters who said Obama stood a better chance of winning in November? They went for him 87-13.

Now, look at Ohio. Once again 9 percent of voters were Republicans, but Obama and Clinton split them evenly, 49-49. Once again, 14 percent of voters were "conservatives," and Obama and Clinton split them 48-48. (Obama did better with them than he did with liberals and moderates.) Those tactical voters who thought Obama could win gave him a 80-18 victory, a margin twelve points smaller than the margin in Wisconsin.

It's a similar story in Texas, where Limbaugh has the most listeners of any of these states. Obama won the Republican vote 52-47, but conservatives (22 percent of all voters, up from 15 percent in the Kerry-Edwards primary) went against Obama. For the first time since Super Tuesday, they were Clinton's best ideological group: She won them 53-43. And Clinton won 13 percent of the people who said Obama was the most electable candidate.

Ohio didn't wind up being very close, but Clinton won the Texas primary by about 98,000 votes out of 2.8 million cast. If the exits are right, about 252,000 of those voters were Republicans, and about 618,000 were conservatives. Clinton truly might have won the Texas primary on the backs of Rush Limbaugh listeners.

It could be very close if this is the case. I'm glad PA is a closed primary.

I was thinking it was an open primary.

in 2 of the 4 congressional districts in the state. And one of the remaining 2 districts is almost all black. So that leaves only one white district with no competitive Republican race- the one on the coast.

... so the final vote may be much closer if MS has malicious crossovers as seen in TX (and OH?).

Sounds odd, but Al breaks down the state by Congressional District, as he has been doing for weeks and uncannily calling most races very closely. There are only four congressional districts and the state has been gerrymandered a bit to group most of the blacks in one of the CD's, leaving each of the other three 3/4 white. Luckily for Clinton, these each have an odd number of delegates given to them, so even a one-vote win will net her a delegate.

It's much harder to net delegates in a CD with an even number of delegates. For example in a four delegate CD, in order to win the delegates 3-1 it would take 62.5% of the vote--the midpoint between 50% and 75%. A 60%-40% win in a four delegate CD results in a 2-2 split.

Likewise, in a six delegate CD, to get a 4-2 delegate advantage a candidate would need to be closer to 66.67% than 50%, i.e., 58.34%.

Here's the link to Al at ruralvotes.com/thefield

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=861

this time; but it has also worked against Hillary and may have against some of our other candidates.

So much for the voice of the people.

After the election, the whole primary process needs to be revised. It sucks, big time.

states (like PA).

Obama was able to amass a substantial lead in pledged delegates because Hillary "The Fighter" surrendered many states without contesting them. The people at her campaign must have been real slow math students, because they didn't seem to realize that their gains in a state like New Jersey could be wiped out by Obama's gains in a state like Idaho if they didn't put up a fight. And when Barack wins, he wins big--he netted 25 delegates in Virginia.

And now Clinton is relying on another big state. PA seems like Ohio, but I think Obama will get it much closer than the ten point Ohio margin. He will have six weeks to campaign in the state, giving him time to visit the small towns and rural areas as he did in Iowa, and not just relying on big events in big cities. She will be fortunate to net the nine delegates she did in Ohio. And Obama should net more than that two weeks later in North Carolina, so Pennsylvania will be negated. Finally I heard someone in the corporate media say this today when Russert mentioned it.

Feb. 5th (Super Tuesday). She didn't. They've been making excuses for every loss since (and even before). They concentrated on big donors and big states-to their big dismay.

And look out for the Limbaugh Effect, it doesn't take much to shave off a delegate here or there.

Rural Votes has been indispensible during this election season... one of my must-read sites.