Clinton Maintains Edge in PA Primary Polling

February 11th, 2008, posted by Greg Palmer

With Pennsylvania’s primary suddenly on the verge of relevancy, now may be a good time to revisit the last presidential poll in the state, conducted by Franklin & Marshall College in mid-January. Actually, it was done between Jan. 8 and Jan. 14 to be precise. And that is important because Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had at that point each won a contest and the race seemed fairly even, as it is now.

Clinton, for the uninitiated, has had a stranglehold on the Democratic field in state polls throughout the past year. And she continued that trend in the F&M poll, with a two-to-one lead over Barack Obama (40 percent to 20 percent). Exit polls nationally have given some good demographic insights into the candidates’ voter bases. While in Pennsylvania, Clinton dominates among nearly every category, there are some trend lines. Her biggest leads over Obama — at least in January — came among older voters, less-educated voters, working-class voters, religious voters and female voters.

Filed under:

dated info

On February 11th, 2008 Anonymous said:

The polling data is a month old. With the primary still two months away, I think we can calmly say that this info is likely not going to be accurate. The state’s voters knew very little about Obama in early/mid January.

If the primary is still contentious on April 22, expect clinton to win 55-45, but that doesn’t give her a huge number of delegates and likely still won’t put her above the magic number. If the April 22 date matters, we are going to an unsettled nomination convention in Aug b/c there simply won’t be enough delegates to push either candidate over the hump.

Primary effect?

On February 11th, 2008 Anonymous said:

If the Democrats are unable to decided on a nominee until the Convention, what effect will it have on upcoming General Election? I believe it will energize Democrats across the state, resulting in a higher turnout in the general. This could be critical as it appears McCain, an often independent and moderate Republican, will get the Republican nomination. In a state as contentious as Pennsylvania, the heightened buzz around a heavily contested nomination may significantly play a role. Of course, it could go the other way? Other thoughts?

2002 as an example

On February 11th, 2008 Anonymous said:

In 2002, the Dems had a particularly nasty primary for gov. Rendell and Casey beat on each other for several months while the R sat on the sideline. It got nasty.

My guess is that a competitive primary in general has that effect. The guy on the sideline is secondary until the primary is resolved. Out of the equation and forced to wait. Normally I would be concerned about fundraising efforts, but I think it’s become clear that Clinton and Obama can out-fundraise mccain any day of the week. But Obama and Clinton have scaled back the heated rhetoric and really aren’t bashing each other right now.

Personally, I agree with your assessment. We have two very energizing candidates that engage D’s pretty well while McCain is anything but a lock with the right.

Just my thoughts.

HISTORY IN THE MAKING

On February 12th, 2008 Anonymous said:

Play ball,we are watching history in the making.Regardless of the Democratic Candidate,history will be the primary-winner.Now the question of tommrow is,are we the people ready for the second part of our history lesson.Let the games begin,may the best history buff win.

History

On February 12th, 2008 Greg Palmer said:

I’m not so concerned about the party making history and I’ve never been sure why other people are. What’s important is competent governance and leadership… and maybe I’ll concede that the country needs a dash of inspiration.

Amen Amen

On February 12th, 2008 Anonymous said:

I agree, I would rather have a competent person for a leader than make history with a crooked or foolish leader.

Another thought. If Clinton or Obama turns out to be a bad president, it could set things back for other potential woman or minority cantidates for many offices. Some people will be saying, unfairly, “I remember the last time when we had xxx as president, it was a disaster. I’m going with the safe white male choice.”

I remember

On February 12th, 2008 Greg Palmer said:

How about this one. :-)

“I remember the last time we had a white dude as a president. It was terrible! The economy tanked, the government became even more crooked than it was before, and we got mired in a war we’ve got no chance of getting out of… I’ll never vote for those white dudes again.”

hahahaha

you're getting there

On February 12th, 2008 Anonymous said:

It’s not the white dudes… it’s the white dudes from Texas.

Still, point well taken and expressed. Maybe the reason Huckabee hasn’t won is b/c we expect governors from Arkansas to have affairs with interns.