MyDD :: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35

New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35

by Obamafan, Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:03:56 PM EST

Finally we've the new Montana Poll out. I was eagerly awaiting this Poll
Billings Gazette/Mason-Dixon Poll/400 LV/MOE 5.0/May 19-21 (Oversample)
Montana Presidential Primary
Barack Obama 52 %
Hillary Clinton 35 %
Undecided 13 %

Also from the MT Mason-Dixon Poll
625 Registered Voters/MOE 4.0
General Election Match-Ups
John McCain (R) 47 %
Barack Obama (D) 39 %
Undecided 14 %

John McCain (R) 51 %
Hillary Clinton (D) 40 %
Undecided 9 %

Todd Beaton has an interesting Article about Puerto Rico describing a Baseline Poll which had Hillary up 50-37.
What I'm now predicting will drive every Clinton Supporter crazy.
I'm predicting Obama WILL win Clintons Popular Vote Metric.
Here is the Reason:
Per ABC News Obama is behind Clinton in the Popular Vote when you include Florida & Michigan by 180.000 Votes.
If Obama gets between 40-45 % in Puerto Rico and wins South Dakota & Montana blowout he'll win the Popular Vote on Hillary Clintons own metric. That will be cool

O-Fan

Tags: Montana Poll (all tags)

Permalink :: 29 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (2.00 / 1)

But Montana is full of working-class white voters. I was told that all working-class white voters hated Barack Obama with the fire of a thousand suns! This poll must be wrong.

Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

by mistersite on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:06:05 PM EST

you have to realize (none / 0)

That if Obama wins the popular vote under Hillary's tabulation, a new metric would just be created out of thin air. It would be "votes after March 5th" or something similar.

by highgrade on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:06:13 PM EST

Re: you have to realize (2.00 / 1)

They're already laying the foundation for that one... I've seen several Clinton-supporter diaries in the last two days making that case.

"B-b-b-but she won the second half!" Here in the Democratic Party, we play all four quarters, not just the last two.

Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

by mistersite on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:07:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you have to realize (none / 0)

I like how the Onion predicted the later-votes-count-more meme with "next vote wins!"

The primaries are over!
Focus on McCain

by really not a troll on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:46:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No surprise (none / 0)

35 might be Clinton's ceiling. I could see Obama getting 65% there easily.

by elrod on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:06:16 PM EST

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

I WANT THAT OBAMA WINS THE POPULAR VOTE ON HILLARYS TABULATION - PERIOD.

by Obamafan on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:09:17 PM EST

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

States that start with "M" DO NOT COUNT!*

*with the exception of Massachusetts and, after I realized I had lost, the great citizens of the great state of Michigan who are suffering as the slaves did in the 1800s, and as many people of Zimbabwe are suffering at present.

by Pat Flatley on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:11:30 PM EST

You know (none / 0)

I know mistersite was joking up there, but Montana is a very white, very ethnically and racially homogeneous state. What is the problem in Kentucky that doesn't exist in Montana?

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:13:54 PM EST

Re: You know (none / 0)

The Appalachian Mountains.

Obama doesn't have a white-voter problem, he has an Appalachian-voter problem. Fortunately for us, (a) that problem can be solved with strong support from other Democrats, and (b) the population not in the Appalachians is significantly greater than those in said region.

Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

by mistersite on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:43:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

New Metric Alert!! (none / 0)

States that start with an M after February 5th don't count unless they end in N so Michigan counts.

States that start with an S don't count so that it s why South Carolina didn't count and nor will South Dakota.

States that have lots of grass and big skies won't count because, well, they just won't count.

Once you take out those states, Hillary wins!

by sweet potato pie on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:21:12 PM EST

Re: New Metric Alert!! (none / 0)

NONSENSE, NONSENSE, NONSENSE, NONSENSE

by Obamafan on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:26:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Montana and South Dakota (none / 0)

They have significantly fewer Democratic voters than Puerto Rico.

by ajain on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:24:59 PM EST

Re: Montana and South Dakota (none / 0)

No, they don't have.

by Obamafan on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:26:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Montana and South Dakota (2.00 / 1)

And infinitely more electoral votes.

I thought that was the metric by which superdelegates are supposed to select Clinton.

Or was that last week?

Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

by mistersite on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:29:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But Montana and South Dakota (none / 0)

have hundreds of thousands more voters who can vote in the general election.

Of course, that's just a technicality.

by John Campanelli on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:34:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Montana and South Dakota (none / 0)

PR has very few "Registered Democrats".

by parahammer on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:37:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

Yee-Haw. Great news. And, honestly, I really don't think PR's a lock for Clinton. Why hasn't anyone polled there?

by NewOaklandDem on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:27:50 PM EST

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

Has anybody ever polled PR in a Democratic primary before? I don't think they know how to, and don't want to get all embarrassed when they're miles off.

by grass on Sun May 25, 2008 at 02:35:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (2.00 / 1)

Possibly that's true of mainland outfits, but PR almost certainly has homegrown pollsters who know how to navigate the waters.

by PantherDem on Sun May 25, 2008 at 02:45:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

I think a result similar to Oregon is most likely. I'll say 58-42 for now.

by Bobby Obama on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:29:45 PM EST

IF IF IF... (2.00 / 1)

We'll know soon enough.

by nikkid on Sun May 25, 2008 at 12:59:04 PM EST

O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

G
O
B
A
M
A
!

by xdem on Sun May 25, 2008 at 01:12:11 PM EST

Metrics (none / 0)

As far as Clinton and Metrics are concerned, there are plenty more metrics where that came from.

And you know where the new and improved metrics always come from.

by xdem on Sun May 25, 2008 at 01:14:18 PM EST

Re: Metrics (none / 0)

It's already agreed - when Alegra and SoCalDarlin both have identical diaries, you know what the new metric is.

by interestedbystander on Sun May 25, 2008 at 02:51:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

But why are we legitimizing Clinton's insane metric? Who cares who is ahead or behind with MI and FL included? I know it would fry Hillary's brain but still it's irrelevant.

by Becky G on Sun May 25, 2008 at 01:40:17 PM EST

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

It's fun - and when it happens, head will explode.

by interestedbystander on Sun May 25, 2008 at 02:51:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

It would be a good thing for 6/3 to be blowouts..
MT has my favorite GOV...

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Sun May 25, 2008 at 01:44:21 PM EST

Hawaii Delegates (none / 0)

Barring unusual circumstances Barack Obama will get 3 Hawaiian Superdelegates this evening which would bring 49 Delegates shy of capturing the Nomination.

by Obamafan on Sun May 25, 2008 at 02:23:41 PM EST

Re: New Montana Mason-Dixon Poll O 52 ; C 35 (none / 0)

States like Montana didn't count back when only Obama was winning them, but suddenly became evidence of a call to greatness when Hillary began winning in places like Kentucky.

No way. No how. No McCain.

by freedom78 on Sun May 25, 2008 at 09:11:27 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.