MyDD :: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage

Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage

by VAAlex, Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:17:24 PM EST

As the primary contest begins to wind down, I thought it would be good to review, at this point, what the Obama camp's predictions were for the rest of the contest from here on out:

State Obama Clinton
NC 53 45
IN 53 46
WV 43 55
KY 42 56
OR 52 47
MT 55 44
SD 57 42
PR 44 55

Now, as we've seen in the past -- especially Ohio and Texas, the camp's been pretty good at predicting not only the vote split but also delegates coming out of the states. Based on this, it seems that Obama's predicting a narrow NC and IN win. Looking at the demos of NC & IN and the voting trends so far, I think he has underestimated his margin in NC & overestimated his margin in IN. Perhaps he's also overestimated in KY & WV; we'll see. OR looks close too.

So while all this talk of Clinton's chances being 'make or break' in NC, it seems that the Obama team was already at that conclusion months ago: An 8% Obama win.

So, I'm going out on a limb: Obama wins NC by 13%.

So what do you all think? What margin will Obama win by, and why? Will the 36-40% African American state Dem. electorate decisively swing this to Obama, or could the large military population -- which Clinton has strongly emphasized in NC -- pull a surprise?

http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/Mar k%20Nickolas/blog/&blogId=1701

Update [2008-4-28 12:23:17 by VAAlex]: My bad, reversed the PR numbers ... they have been fixed. Update [2008-4-28 12:29:59 by VAAlex]:... and the South Dakota numbers have also been fixed. :)

Tags: predictions, Obama, Clinton, spreadsheet (all tags)

Permalink :: 46 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

The military have been going for Obama. He has the most donors from the military.

by Spanky on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:20:06 PM EST

Why are you assuming that Obama will win so many? (none / 0)

Are these old numbers?

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:23:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Meanwhile:

(Obama's staff) said they were no longer as hopeful as they once were that the contest could be resolved before June 3, the day of the last primaries. As a result, they were girding for six weeks of attacks by Mrs. Clinton and potential election defeats that could raise further questions among superdelegates . . . about Mr. Obama's strength as a general election candidate.

Another Hillary Supporter for Obama-Biden '08!

by Beltway Dem on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:21:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No (none / 0)

The small fraction of military members who donate to political campaigns prefer Obama. This is not a random sample of the members of the military.

99% perspiration

by DaveOinSF on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:03:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

while this is one of the first diaries to ask a valid question about margins, with due respect - this concept of win by, for either candidate - is a media creation. simply - they BOTH need to remain competitive in the remaining races or the narrative changes - period.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:21:08 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

I think the predictions are good and I think it will be about +3 or +5 for Obama in Indiana because of his superior ground game and massive early voting.

NC will be a blowout. Remember they didn't expect to win SC by large numbers either and we saw how that turned out.

by cranberry on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:21:10 PM EST

Even with Obama's terrible healthcare position? (none / 0)

Even with Obama's terrible position against universal healthcare?

http://www.google.com/search?num=100& ;hl=en&q=%22Jim+Cooper%22+healthcare +clinton-lite&btnG=Search

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:24:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Even with Obama's terrible healthcare position (none / 0)

Americans have a libertarian streak in them a mile wide.

John McCain on social security.

by heresjohnny on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:00:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Ok Goalposts:

NC - Obama wins by 25% (its a blowout)
IN - Obama wins by 5% (He is already up 10% due to early voting)

Anything less than that and Obama lost:-)

by Sandeep on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:21:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They have Obama winning Puerto Rico!!!? (none / 0)

Now, that is PRETTY FUNNY...

Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Without a REAL committment to it, we WON'T win in November.

by architek on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:21:23 PM EST

Re: They have Obama winning Puerto Rico!!!? (none / 0)

Fixed, that was a diarist error. :)

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:23:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They have Obama winning Puerto Rico!!!? (none / 0)

The diarist reversed the numbers.

Please keep in mind that Jesse Jackson won PR so to say that it is a completely unfavorable place for Obama because of a fake brown v. black divide is ridiculous.

by cranberry on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:24:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Didn't he predict a closer contest in PA both personally on the day of the election and with that crappy spreadsheet.

By the way if he loses Indiana he would be in a world of trouble.

Especially now that polls are showing her beating Mccain handily while he is struggling.

Have you seen the new AP Poll.

http://thepage.time.com/

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:23:17 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24352818/

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:24:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Oooh, can I play this game, too, and find any poll that shows Obama winning and play it off as proof?

Hooray for John McCain!

by ragekage on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:27:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Of course she has high poll numbers now. She JUST won a primary!! It's to be expected. It is also one of only three polls that shows her leading though.

As for the spreadsheet, lets keep in mind that they always had Obama losing PA.

by cranberry on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:29:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

And if Hillary fails to win any of her must win states- NC, OR, MT, SD- she''l be in a world of hurt?

John McCain: Cheney with a temper

by wrb on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:48:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (2.00 / 1)

I'll go out on a limb, too.

North Carolina - Obama by 7%
Indiana - Clinton by 6%

Both will be seen as evidence of Obama's inability to close the deal.
At this point, all the big mo is with Clinton.

by johnnygunn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:25:17 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (2.00 / 1)

I'd probably go with your numbers as things stand, but it's HRC who failed to "closed the deal" with the Democratic nomination despite having led by 20-30% margins for years on end (and in PA she led by 20% as recently as the 2nd week of March).

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:54:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (2.00 / 1)

It all depends how you define Clinton's lead in the second week of March. Sure, there's outliers from PPP and ARG (+20, +26), but most polls from the second week of March on showed Clinton with a low double-digit margin. If you want to say she led by 20%, you can, but I can also say she led by 12% that same week.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:07:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

These are the first 4 polls after 3/4: (none / 0)

(i.e. once the race focus turned to PA)
RCP

C O C-O Date
55    36    19.00    3/10/08 (SUSA)
45    31    14.00    3/10/08
56    38    18.00    3/9/08
52    37    15.00    3/5/08

That's a solid 16.5% average margin.

And, that 19% one is from SUSA, generally considered the best public pollster this cycle. So, essentially her post 3/4 lead (which was also her 2007 average lead, which was 19.5) was cut in half, despite a series of attacks on Obama, including that disgraceful ABC "debate" gift (the "debate" and the spin after it were worth a few millions dollars of free negative attack advertisements for HRC, w/o any backlash towards her) from Stephanopoulos just days before the vote.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:54:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These are the first 4 polls after 3/4: (none / 0)

I'm not arguing that Obama doesn't cut the margin, I'm arguing that it's disingenuous to keep arguing that she 'led by 20%'. Yes, she did, but only if you're being selective about which polls you're pulling from.

And you argued "second week of March". That's March 10-14. The polls show +12, +13, +14, +19. That's a 14.5% margin. Again, not 20%.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:09:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I meant when the race shifted to PA after 3/4 (none / 0)

"second week of March" is technically 8-14 which is not your 10-14 either, Mr. Stickler.

The race shifted to PA on 3/5 and the first 4 polls posted above showed what the starting point was when it did.

Then there was her 2007 average of ~20%.

So, about 20% was, indeed, the advantage Hillary Clinton started with, either way. And she lost 10% out of that to win only by 9.3% or so.

This is a pattern, state after state. She has had huge initial advantages in polls (national and most states) through out 2007, which only shrank dramatically time and again or she lost them.

The fact that Obama beat her in some 30 states (and leads her), despite starting significantly behind her in almost all of those states, is a testament to a miserably failed Clinton campaign.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:23:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I meant when the race shifted to PA after 3/4 (2.00 / 1)

Ok, fine, if you want to argue that she led by 20% in 2007, be my guest. And no, it was not about 20% either way, it's either 16.5% or 14.5%. Neither of which is around 20%.

If we want to be accurate and say that she only won by 9.2% let's also be accurate and say exactly what the poll margin was around the time. What's good for the goose ...

And as I've argued before, I do think he outgamed the Clinton campaign, but I don't think it was a miserable failure. She's definitely learned her lessons, and has run more or less a good campaign after February. And number of states won determines exactly nothing. If it did, we'd be guaranteed Republican presidents for a millennia to come.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:29:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He's also ahead with an ess. insurmountable (1.00 / 1)

pledged delegate lead (the metric that the system designed by the Democratic party for the nomination uses to measure people's will), not just in states won, and he's also ahead in popular vote by 600K (in the aggregate of states where he contested and campaigned) which is significant given that he was coming from behind 15-30% deficits in polls before voting began.

She has run a somewhat tighter campaign since Feb, but the primary reason (yes, there were several secondary reasons) she did well in the contests since then has been "kitchen sink", "3 AM" and other relentlessly negative attacks on Obama (and strong demographic advantages for her in PA and OH and institutional/machine advantage in PA).

Considering what Obama faced in terms of negativity thrown at him, he did reasonably well since after Feb in weathering that storm and closing the large deficits in TX and PA (and thumping her in MS) down to single digits.

OH was the only state where Obama failed to do well enough, all things considered, I think.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:43:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

... whereas (none / 0)

HRC failed to do well enough in 30 odd states.

Well, OK, obama should've done a bit better in CA and MA too, in addition to OH.

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:45:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

swissfun, behave yourself (none / 0)

and stop the TR abuse as you've engaged in here as you have in other cases (if you don't want reciprocation or just want to behave).

Obama's Pop. Vote LEAD = 600K | Clinton & McCain = WAR Authorizers

by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 03:02:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (2.00 / 1)

NC is a blowout. Obama 58-42

I think she wins Indiana, barely: 52-48 or 51-49. Which is enough of a "win" to keep her going on the theory that Obama can't close the deal, but she may actually lose delegates (as they are, fair or not, clustered in the regions Obama is likely to win - Indy, Gary, etc.). The math will get even more difficult, and whatever mo she gets from Indy will be trounced by the results in NC.

The popular vote precipice will also become almost impossible for her to reach without counting Michigan, and nobody who is serious is going to count Michigan.

Long story short: If she wins NC, she has a legit shot at being the nominee. Otherwise, I don't see it without a 10+ win in Indiana.

by jbill on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:25:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (2.00 / 1)

I think he will be wrong on IN and lose

I will go

North Carolina - Obama by 8-12%
Indiana - Clinton by 8%

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:27:54 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Don't forget that Indiana is NOT like it's neighbor Ohio. The delegates are heavily concentrated in urban areas/college towns, and the rural areas are more "farm" votes . . . that have been more open to Obama.

I think he can squeak out a win with his massive advantage in NW Indiana/Indianapolis . . . coupled with a respectable loss in the rural areas.

by FOB92 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:04:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

If Obama wins Indiana, I think the race ends.

by mefck on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:28:52 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

And if he doesn't? Curious to know your thoughts because there are some for whom the race has already ended.

by Sandeep on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:24:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

What did their memo say about PA?

I think +13 for NC may be just about right for BO.

IN still a toss up.

TexasDarlin blog

by TexasDarlin on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:29:46 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

They had him losing by 5 points. So they were off by 4. I'm going with +3 for Obama in Indiana. They have been dead on for this whole primary season with the exception of Maine in which they thought that they would lose to Hillary by 3 points.

by cranberry on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:31:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Their spreadsheet had Obama losing Pennsylvania by 5: 47-52. Final margin was 9.2.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:31:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (2.00 / 1)

New AP poll released today has Hillary beating John McCain nationally by 9 points. Obama only beats McCain by 2 points.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/0 4/poll_clinton_has_better_chance.php

by karajan72 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:44:04 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

The military presence help Obama...Remember what happened in heavy military VA.

I think he will do better than this in OR but lower in KY.
When ya think KY, remember this Saturday and the Derby song they play rememberin' the good old days..
(I think if Obama breaks 40 in KY it's big news..)

ah the good days when slaves were happy..
"Tis summer, the darkies are gay" or
"The time has come when the darkies have to part"
original lyrics here..(think of this as this song is played)
http://freepages.music.rootsweb.ancestry .com/~edgmon/stkentuckyhome.htm

"If you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud"...Arlo Guthrie

by nogo war on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:49:02 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Obama will win NC by 12%
Obama will win IND by 3%

"No matter what happens, I will work for the nominee of the Democratic Party because we must win in November." -Hillary Clinton

by fugazi on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 12:55:32 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

12% is too less for Obama in NC. I heard (from the posters above) that everybody is going for Obama in NC - the military, the AAs, the liberals and the state is younger than SC with more colleges.

So Obama should win NC by 20-25%.

by Sandeep on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:28:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

"OR looks close too."

The latest poll has Obama up 52-42

John McCain: Cheney with a temper

by wrb on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:33:54 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

As the whole diary was centered on the Obama camp's predictions, that's what I was talking about.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:36:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

I suspect the Clinton camp is going to regret having argued for the importance of late momentum. The last 3 states (SD, MT & OR) all look like strong Obama wins, maybe blowouts.

He's up 12 in SD and while there is no polling for MT, it sure isn't Hillary country.

John McCain: Cheney with a temper

by wrb on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:44:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

W.V. & Ky (none / 0)

The numbers are way off for W.V. & Ky. Those will be a much larger margin.

by del on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 01:59:34 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Does Obama's campaign actually release numbers predicting their performance? I find that unlikely (and unwise) but I don't understand what you mean by "Obama camp's numbers".

by bobbank on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:09:06 PM EST

Re: Obama Camp's Predictions: Setting the Stage (none / 0)

Bloomberg got their hands on an internal spreadsheet & published it.

It has been remarkably accurate

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 208/Obamas_projections.html

John McCain: Cheney with a temper

by wrb on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:16:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obvious? (none / 0)

Hardly.

I find it hard to believe any can still think Hillary is the stronger general candidate, considering the damage she's already done to herself what she'd have to do to get the nomination.

John McCain: Cheney with a temper

by wrb on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 02:47:43 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.