Interesting story in Politico today on how Pennsylvania voters resent James Carville’s ‘Alabama’ comparison:

“People think it meant that basically there are two areas of the state where people can read and write and treat people with a certain amount of respect and the rest of the state is redneck trailer trash,” said Larry Ceisler, a Philadelphia public affairs consultant with ties to the Democratic Party. “It ended up being a slander on people who are living in those places. I would like to see the line retired.”

A quick observation: what are they saying about the state of Alabama?

Carville is a Clinton loyalist, but in his defense, he was referring to the strong socially conservative, churchgoing tradition in the sparsely dense center of the state. It’s not his fault that his analogy is so apt, nor that the people of Pennsylvania can’t control their narrow minded anti-Southern bias.

Seriously–the South isn’t incest-ridden, backwoods, redneck hillbilly trailor trash. If people are seriously taking offense to this comparison, then they should look at themselves and their own biases.

Also noteworthy, a Public Policy Institute poll has Obama taking the lead over Clinton in Pennsylvania, 45-43. I haven’t been able to look at the specifics of the poll, but based on precident, PPI has been better than most polls.

My nerves are a little shocked, I’m getting a root canal in about an hour so wish me luck!

Amazin.g. Two new polls out today:

In a PPIC poll, in the general election, Obama beats McCain handily in California, while Clinton narrowly edges him out.

Obama   49
McCain  40

Clinton 46
McCain  43

Could Clinton lose California?

Meanwhile, his numbers in Conneticut have jumped as well

Obama   52
McCain  35

Clinton 45
McCain  42

Says the Q-poll:

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton initially was the favorite among Democrats before the Feb. 5 primary, but lost to Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, 50-47 percent. In a hypothetical matchup, Obama is now in a stronger position than Clinton against Arizona Sen. John McCain in the state’s general election. Independent voters support Obama, 45-38 percent and voters younger than 45 back him, 63-30 percent.

There is also an NBC poll out today that show Obama weathering the Wright storm. Watch Tim Russert break down the poll numbers.

The national media is reporting enormous sums of money being spent on advertising in Ohio. For Obama campaign, somewhere on the level of $23 million dollars compared with $14 million for Clinton.

To make things more complicated, the two major unions that endorsed Obama are running their own separate advertisements in support of his candidacy, UCFW & SEIU. Factoring in the free-advertising from labor unions, Obama is out-commericialing (not a word) Clinton 4-1 in Ohio.

Recent polls in Ohio show Clinton in the lead, but Obama’s got the momentum. According to Pollster.com, which averages polls:
NBC’s Chuck Todd reported today that the Obama campaign bought 2 minute blocks of time in both Ohio & Texas. 2 minute Obama campaign commercials will run during the 5 PM, 6 PM, 10 PM & 11 PM local news broadcasts in both states this upcoming Monday night.

I do not expect Obama to win Ohio. Sure, he’s polling within 10 percent of her in a state that had him down 30 points just a month ago, but I think that Clinton’s economic message and her sense of “experience” will resonate with voters more forcefully in a state that is economically crippled.

Thinking on the reverse, Obama has always exceeded expectations. In Iowa, polls leading up to the caucuses indicated an excruciatingly close rate with Clinton & Obama neck and neck at 30% each. Obama won by 8%. In Virginia, polls showed that Clinton would lose, but only by a few percent… Obama took the state with a 20 point victory. In Wisconsin, the Clinton campaign invested time and money trying to defend the average working class Democratic voter, typically a Clinton supporter. The campaign thought they could pull it close, if not win an upset… Obama won by a substantial margin, almost by 20 points.

The point being that despite what the polls have predicted, Obama has consistently won by substantial margins. He has exceeded expectations (excluding the notable New Hampshire exception). His campaign is turning out disenfranchised and atypical voting blocks—African Americans and youth namely. And recently, by cutting into Clinton’s core base.

The Rule of 50:
1. If you’re a female over 50 OR
2. If you make under $50,000 a year
You’re a Clinton supporter.

This equation held up in the early states and into Super Tuesday. She won both voting blocks by substantial margins. But in Wisconsin, Virginia and Maryland, she lost both (critical voting constituencies) narrowly.

The parallels between Ohio and Wisconsin are many. They’ve both suffered from outsourcing as a result of NAFTA (which was implemented during the Clinton Administration), they both have a strong traditional Democratic base and for the most part, they’re middle class. Basically, Clinton voters.

Once upon a time Obama was the candidate of the affluent, the educated, the young, the Black and among men. But recent trends reveal he is reaching into the heart of Clinton’s voting base, and pulling the life from her campaign.

I think Ohio is unpredictable in nature. It’s a microcosm of American society and I am hesitant to rely on recent poll numbers or trends.

Two things will happen: Clinton will narrowly win or Obama will narrowly win. There is no room for Clinton to win the substantial victory she so desperately needs.

One thing is for certain: Ohioans can end this race on March 4th by voting Obama.

All the media pundits are singing the same old chorus, Hillary Clinton is finished. We’ve heard it before (recall New Hampshire).

But is it possible they’re right this time? Let’s look at this empirically.

First, the investment market. There are some websites that allow people to gamble on everything from sports and games to politics. Its an investment market-and its based on people buying and selling stocks of “Hillary Clinton” or “Barack Obama” based on their chance of winning the Democratic nomination. Before the advent of polls as an indicator of public opinion, newspapers would print betting odds. Essentially, this is the same thing. People literally betting their money.Second, if you’re an investor, the reason you’re looking so favorably at Sen. Obama might be this from Pollster. It’s a graph showing his growing momentum in the state of Texas, catching up to Senator Clinton ever quicker.

The moral of the story? The pundits in the media, analysts, investment markets, and polls are lining up behind Sen. Obama.

Maybe he could actually win this thing?

I feel like the term hasn’t been fairly applied this political season. In January when Obama won Iowa, he had the mo… when Clinton won NH a few days later she had the mo briefly. Then things faded, Nevada didn’t matter and South Carolina pushed Obama into Super Tuesday… We kind of entered Feb. 5 feeling as though each candidate had an equal record: 2 Wins- 2 Losses.

Then momentum kicked in. After big victories on Feb. 5, Obama continued to win states across the country. Nebraska, Washington State, Louisiana, Virginia, Maryland, DC, the Virgin Islands, and last night… Wisconsin and Hawaii.

What sucked for Hillary about Wisconsin is that it was a state tailor made for her to win. A bunch of beer drinking, cheese eating, average Americans who like to kick the tire, lift the hood and talk about the issues that are important to them. A state which isn’t diverse. All along we’ve been told by the Clintons that ‘oh, well he only won the south because they’re all black’, and ‘oh it’s a caucus state…”

Well not Wisconsin. The voters were middle class, middle of the road Democrats, and the end result was a decisive 58-41 win. According to exit polls:

Obama Won:
Women (51-49)
All age groups under 65
All education levels
All regions of the state — urban, suburban and rural
Voters without college degrees (50-4
Democrats (50-49)
Whites (53-46)
White men (59-3
Voters who decided in the last week (58-42)

And now lets look forward to Texas. Here is what Momentum looks like. Obama was 20 points down in the state just a month ago. Now, it looks something like this:
CNN/Opinion Research, Feb. 19, 2008
Clinton 50%
Obama 48%
MoE +/- 4%

SurveyUSA, Feb. 18, 2008
Clinton 50%
Obama 45%

American Research Group, Feb. 17, 2008
Obama 48%
Clinton 42%

I feel like the term hasn’t been fairly applied this political season. In January when Obama won Iowa, he had the mo… when Clinton won NH a few days later she had the mo briefly. Then things faded, Nevada didn’t matter and South Carolina pushed Obama into Super Tuesday… We kind of entered Feb. 5 feeling as though each candidate had an equal record: 2 Wins- 2 Losses.

Then momentum kicked in. After big victories on Feb. 5, Obama continued to win states across the country. Nebraska, Washington State, Louisiana, Virginia, Maryland, DC, the Virgin Islands, and last night… Wisconsin and Hawaii.

What sucked for Hillary about Wisconsin is that it was a state tailor made for her to win. A bunch of beer drinking, cheese eating, average Americans who like to kick the tire, lift the hood and talk about the issues that are important to them. A state which isn’t diverse. All along we’ve been told by the Clintons that ‘oh, well he only won the south because they’re all black’, and ‘oh it’s a caucus state…”

Well not Wisconsin. The voters were middle class, middle of the road Democrats, and the end result was a decisive 58-41 win. According to exit polls:

Obama Won:
Women (51-49)
All age groups under 65
All education levels
All regions of the state — urban, suburban and rural
Voters without college degrees (50-4
Democrats (50-49)
Whites (53-46)
White men (59-3
Voters who decided in the last week (58-42)

And now lets look forward to Texas. Here is what Momentum looks like. Obama was 20 points down in the state just a month ago. Now, it looks something like this:
CNN/Opinion Research, Feb. 19, 2008
Clinton 50%
Obama 48%
MoE +/- 4%

SurveyUSA, Feb. 18, 2008
Clinton 50%
Obama 45%

American Research Group, Feb. 17, 2008
Obama 48%
Clinton 42%

First Read NBC News: The statistical front-runner: No matter how one slices the election results from last night, there’s no denying that Obama is the statistical front-runner. He’s got a 100-plus pledged delegate lead and even has the lead if you factor in superdelegates. Here’s our math: The NBC News election unit hard count stands at 1078 to 969. If you factor in the unallocated pledged delegates, our estimate rises to approximately 1128 to 1009 in Obama’s favor (margin of error +/- 5 delegates). Toss in the superdelegates and Obama’s lead is 1306 to 1270 (again +/- 5 delegates). What does this mean?

For Clinton to overtake Obama for the pledged delegate lead — which we think is the single most important statistic for the superdelegates to decide their vote — she’ll have to win 55% of the remaining delegates. Assuming next week goes Obama’s way in Wisconsin and Hawaii, that percentage rises to 57%. Toss in likely Obama victories in Vermont, Wyoming, Mississippi, Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota, then Clinton’s percentage need tops 60% of the remaining delegates available. And this is simply for her to regain the pledged delegate lead…

By Popular Vote
Obama 9,373,334 50%
Clinton 8,674,779 46%
Others 726,095 4%

Also interesting:
David Wilhelm, Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign manager, is set to endorse Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) this afternoon

Associated Press:
Top Democrats, including some inside Hillary Clinton’s campaign, say many party leaders — the so-called superdelegates — won’t hesitate to ditch the former New York senator for Barack Obama if her political problems persist. Their loyalty to the first couple is built on shaky ground.

The fear inside the Clinton camp is that Obama will win Hawaii and Wisconsin next week and head into the March 4 contests for Ohio and Texas with a 10-race winning streak. Her poll numbers will drop in Texas and Ohio, Clinton aides fear, and party leaders will start hankering for an end to the fight.

Hillary Clinton’s website currently says, “Keep the momentum going!” Her 3% victory gives her campaign the right to claim that she’s building momentum. But is it?

I would say (as once released in a memo by Clinton Chief Strategist Mark Penn following Obama’s Iowa victory) “Where’s the bounce?” Where is Hillary’s bounce after winning New Hampshire?

Barack Obama was endorsed by the Nevada SEIU and the major Culinary Workers Union that represents over 60,000 union members. Next Saturday, they will surely be a force in Nevada’s democratic primary. As it stands, they’re one of the major political aparatuses in the state of Nevada, and with their ground support working in conjunction with Obama’s all ready impressive Nevada field operation, I see a serious race building up in the nation’s first western caucus.

And today Obama was endorsed by former Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry (D-MA). A huge endorsement that lends the Obama campaign the support of more establishment Democrats. Adding to Kerry was the endorsement of South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson, and Rep. George Miller of California. Says MSNBC’s Chuck Todd:

California congressman George Miller (D) is also backing Obama’s presidential campaign. This is perhaps the closest thing to getting a Nancy Pelosi endorsement as you can come without actually getting it. Miller is incredibly close with her politically. He wouldn’t be doing this without her consent of sorts.

Tons of endorsements following his New Hampshire loss: unions, senators and a representative with a close connection to the Speaker of the House. But where are Hillary’s endorsements? Where’s her bounce?

Certainly not in the fund raising battle. In the first 8 days of this month, Obama raised $8 million dollars compared with Hillary’s $3 million. The morning after his loss in New Hampshire, he received $500,000 in contributions online.

And lets be honest, no one in the press wants to see Hillary win. No one wants to report that the establishment candidate trumped the little guy. It’s no wonder they hyped the polls and coverage in the days leading up to New Hampshire… it’s just not a good story.

And in the realm of poll numbers- traditionally after a victory in an early state, your candidate makes gains. Hillary’s win may have slowed Obama’s momentum, but it certainly has not killed it. He is still leading by wide margins in South Carolina and his field operation in Nevada is growing stronger. (Still no polls out of Nevada yet).

Insider Advantage, Jan. 9, 2007
Obama 40%
Clinton 33%

Rasmussen, Jan. 9, 2007
Obama 42%
Clinton 30%

Honestly, Hillary will have to destroy him with win after win to kill his momentum. She can claim she has it, but in reality, she has neither the poll numbers, nor the endorsements, nor the finances to demonstrate it. Obama is a runaway train in the Democratic party; he’s emblematic of a movement and I don’t know if the Clinton’s can stop it.

I guess we’ll see.

New Hampshire Final Results
Clinton 39%
Obama 37%

First thing’s first. I think this discussion of the Hillary Clinton “surge”, “comeback” and/or “decisive victory” is overplayed if not factually inaccurate.

For reasons unknown and unforeseen, every poll taken in New Hampshire was wrong. Obama went into the New Hampshire primary with an RCP average of 8.3%. New Hampshire polls had Obama up; a Suffolx University poll had him up by 5, and WMUR by 9.

But I dispute the media calling this a victory for the Clinton campaign. It was extremely close, and a win is a win for the Clintons. But don’t make the mistake of thinking that she had to “overcome” anything–the only thing she had to “overcome” was lowered expectations as a result of faulty polling.

Tomorrow, several media and consulting firms have a lot of explaining to do.

Obama has two enemies: Hillary Clinton and John McCain. For Obama to be victorious in New Hampshire he must win over enough Democrats to beat Hillary Clinton, and enough independents to beat John McCain. Remember that New Hampshire is notoriously independent (45%).

Winning Democrats:
Target: Hillary Clinton

Barack Obama could win the Democratic vote in New Hampshire. Many polls have him pulling even with Clinton. Lets look an ARG poll out today:

American Research Group, Jan. 5., 2008
Among NH Democrats:
Clinton 34%
Obama 32%

Rasmussen Reports gives Sen. Obama a 65% chance of winning the New Hampshire primary. Many polls have him tied with Hillary among Democrats. A CNN/WMUR poll shows 60% of New Hampshire independents and Democrats planning to vote in the Democratic primary see Obama as an agent of change. Rasmussen’s poll shows Obama leading in the quality of electability, and what we’ve seen from Iowa is a strong urgency to vote against the establishment.

With Clinton’s aura of inevitability vanished, with her electability argument diminished, and with Obama’s message of change, I think it’s very possible for him to win New Hampshire. Clinton is currently struggling to define her message in the shadow of a devastating loss.

TIME magazine has a great piece on the Clinton Campaign’s internal turmoil.

Winning Independents:
Target: John McCain

Reports the Washington Post:

In virtually every demographic category where Obama found his greatest strength in Iowa, New Hampshire’s electorate has at least as many or more of those voters, based on a comparison of the entrance polls from Thursday’s caucuses in Iowa and from the 2004 Democratic primary in Hampshire.

Take independents. They constituted 20 percent of the caucus electorate in Iowa on Thursday, but four years ago in New Hampshire they constituted nearly half (48 percent) of the Democratic electorate.

Obama is competing with McCain for that independent vote. In Iowa, he won 51% of the Iowa independent vote.

Reports the New York Times:

Polls here say that almost two-thirds of these voters are leaning Democratic, making them particularly critical to Mr. Obama’s effort to win a second contest in a row. Meanwhile, Mr. McCain is trying to tap into this pool of voters to edge out former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.

I think that Obama’s fresh appeal, that appeal to change, will give him more support than McCain in New Hampshire among independents.

New Polls
American Research Group, Jan. 5, 2008
Obama 38%
Clinton 26%

Concord Monitor, Jan. 5, 2008
Obama 34%
Clinton 33%

CNN/WMUR, Jan. 5, 2008
Obama 33%
Clinton 33%

Rasmussen Reports, Jan. 5, 2008
Obama 37%
Clinton 27%