The Clinton campaign has to be muttering to themselves that they've seen this movie before and they don't like the ending. This graph shows datapoints from polls of the Pennsylvania Democratic primary contest. (source: pollster.com):

The three most recent polls show the gap in this race narrowing considerably:
| Clinton | Obama | |
| InsiderAdvantage | 45 | 43 |
| PPP | 43 | 45 |
| Rasmussen | 47 | 42 |
The chart above follows a familiar pattern that we have seen repeated in race after race:
Connecticut
Georgia
Missouri
South Carolina
Wisconsin
Even states that Hillary has won show the same pattern:
California
Ohio
Nevada
New Hampshire
Texas
There are precious few states that show the reverse trend: Hillary gaining and Obama falling as the primary or caucus approaches. Oklahoma is the only one that looks close to me.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that as the two candidates campaign in a state, Hillary's ratings tend to fall and Obama's tend to rise. Obama has been able to close huge gaps in many of these states; sometimes not enough to win but certainly enough to blunt any significant gain in delegates for Hillary.
Now we see the same pattern happening in Pennsylvania. The good news for Obama is that there are still 19 days left to go before Pennsylvania holds its primary. If Obama had had more time to close the gap in states like California he might have won them.
All of which makes me much more optimistic that Obama can actually beat Hillary in Pennsylvania. I would have given him about a 5% chance to do that just two weeks ago. Now, I think he's got about a 40% shot. Obama's organization is simply fantastic--outmaneuvering the Clinton campaign at every turn, blowing them away at fundraising and grass-roots organizing throught the Internet, and Obama himself is a great campaigner.
It will be very interesting to see whether Obama can keep closing the gap in Pennsylvania or he hits a plateau.



Comments (4)
At least part of this pheno... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Jim Addison | April 4, 2008 2:09 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
At least part of this phenomenon of Obama catching up as the primary approaches can be accounted for by his monetary advantage. Reportedly he sunk $24 million in the failed efforts to win Texas and Ohio; while he didn't win either, he did close up the gaps for his money.
If the PA trend holds, or stabilizes near the current readings (the RCP average has Obama trailing by only 42.2 - 47.6 today), it spells big trouble for Hillary. It won't make a huge difference in the delegate count from PA, and we know she can't catch him in pledged delegates anyway, but the psychological impact would be huge. Her recent momentum will have been dissipated, and super delegates with their moistened fingers in the wind will begin moving even faster to jump on Obama's bandwagon before it leaves them behind.
Of course, the expectations game often works both ways, and the falling margins for Hillary in the polls reduce the expectations for her there, so she no longer needs to bury him, just win by significantly more than the polls predict. She could survive with a 9-point win, perhaps; anything less portends collapse.
1. Posted by Jim Addison | April 4, 2008 2:09 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 4, 2008 02:09
2. Posted by Steve Crickmore | April 4, 2008 10:30 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Obama is in an excellent position..He wasn't expected to win Pennsylvania now he is getting close to a 50/50 position with all the new registering of Democratic voters in the state..As Jim suggests even if a close loss for him let's say under five points, may be actually be a win for him, given Hillary's expectations going into the primary four weeks ago.
2. Posted by Steve Crickmore | April 4, 2008 10:30 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 4, 2008 10:30
3. Posted by Larkin
| April 4, 2008 1:39 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Her recent momentum will have been dissipated,
In reality, Hillary never had any momentum in March. She fell further behind in the delegate race during that month. Obama won more delegates in Texas and more than made up her 9 delegates in Ohio with wins in Mississippi and Wyoming. Plus he scooped up some Edwards delegates from Iowa and has been steadily racking up superdelegates.
She's not quite done yet, but I sense we're getting close.
3. Posted by Larkin
| April 4, 2008 1:39 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 4, 2008 13:39
4. Posted by annie kaplan | April 5, 2008 10:47 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There are still ten states coming. Michigan and Florida will have to be addressed. Voters have to be recognized and counted. As Roosevelt said so wisely: There are no sacred rules, only sacred principles.
The #1 tenet of democracy is to encourage and recognize the individual vote.
Giving Obama 50% of the votes in Florida and Michigan is not democratic - no matter how you look at it. Obama is going to steal votes from Clinton and the other candidates who stayed on the ballot.
So Mr. Obama, who campaigned in Florida (indeed, he was the only democratic candidate with ads in Florida) is being awarded a lot more than what he got and deserves.
As for Michigan, he was on the ballot at first, then decided to take his name off it but still urged his supporters to vote uncommitted. Well, all the uncommitted votes (his, Edwards's...) were less numerous than Hillary Clinton's votes.
Notice Obama didn't urge his supporters not to vote because it was against the rules -- but to vote uncommitted so he would have a sense of how he fared there. To give him 50% of Michigan votes would be to show the Michigan voters how little they count.
For those who just think Florida and Michigan's votes should not be counted at all, well come November if Mr. Obama is the democratic candidate, a lot of the disenfranchised voters from those states will think "Wait a second, our votes did not count when he needed to crush Mrs. Clinton, but now that he needs to crush Mr. Mc. Cain, he needs them?"
I happen to be one of Hillary's volunteers here in Pennsylvania and there is an excitement, an energy, a feeling of inclusiveness - young and old, females, males, African Americans, Asians, Jews, GLBT, Latinos, Pacific Islanders, Blue Collars, White Collars, Academics... -- that is astonishing.
Obama may have more money but remember Kerry? He had more money poured into his campaign than any other presidential candidate before him.
At the end of the day, the one with the true power was the voter in the booth, and despite the hype (the rallies, the get out the votes frenzy, the bussing, the concerts, the appeals, Bruce Springsteen etc..) Mr. Kerry lost. He got fewer votes than Mr. Gore got in 2000!
Annie Kaplan, Pennsylvania.
4. Posted by annie kaplan | April 5, 2008 10:47 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 5, 2008 10:47