Was Obama Supposed To Win South Dakota?

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Barack, Democrats, Hillary, South Dakota

A meme has started that has the potential to hurt Obama tomorrow given that he was supposed to win South Dakota…at least according to PoliticalWire.

So how did this start? Well, there was a poll conducted in late March/early April by Dakota Wesleyan University that found Obama leading Hillary by 12 points (46 to 34). Here’s what they found at the time…

The poll of 527 North and South Dakota voters conducted from March 24 to April 3 indicated that 46 percent of South Dakota Democrats would vote for Obama in the upcoming June 3 primary, 34 percent for Clinton, and 10 percent are undecided. Of the remaining 10 percent, 6 percent said they would not vote and 4 percent said they would vote for someone else.

If you’re raising an eyebrow at the 20% undecided number, I’m right there with you, but this is the only thing I can find that supports the idea that Obama somehow had South Dakota locked up. There’s nothing else.

Fast forward to today, where American Research Group finds Hillary WAY out ahead in their latest poll, 60 to 34. Obviously I put much more faith in this ARG poll, considering it’s coming out 1 day before the primary and only has 6% undecided.

So, question to all of you…if Hill wins tomorrow in South Dakota, will that be a big upset?


This entry was posted on Monday, June 2nd, 2008 and is filed under Barack, Democrats, Hillary, South Dakota. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

16 Responses to “Was Obama Supposed To Win South Dakota?”

  1. Rob in Denver Says:

    Interesting comments in the link to PoliticalWire. The best? The one that says ARG stands for A Random Guess.

    Apparently ARGs record has been spotty and is to Clinton what Zogby is Obama.

  2. KPO'M Says:

    Note she has been campaigning there, while Obama’s been in general election mode. He’s working the “other SD” (superdelegates) today to try to put himself over the top regardless. I wouldn’t be surprised if Clinton wins SD, given the newspaper endorsement, the utter lack of polling until now, and the fact that he doesn’t really need many delegates.

  3. Ssue Says:

    I could only find one from last March too and I hope this one IS correct …. It will show that people will vote for whom they want no matter what the DNC wants. Their so-called Rules Committee’s decision to take away delegates/votes from someone on the ballot and give them to someone who chose not to be is plain damned unfair and certainly not my idea of a democracy. I got an appeal letter today from the DNC and I wrote a scathing note on it and sent it back in their own postagw-paid envleope. Democrats my butt!!! More like take who we run and suck it up!! NOT me. I will never donate to them again.

  4. SlouchingtowardBoulder Says:

    Can you imagine that? Little South Dakota could shake things up right at the end!

  5. Beth Says:

    Doesn’t matter, cuz McCain is gonna win in November. Obama and his ultra-liberal supporters have hurt the feelings of too many women. The issues won’t change their minds, cuz they’re angry at being shoved aside, by yet another male. Democrats are always right on the issues, and they still always lose.

  6. John Nail Says:

    This makes little sense- ARG has been way off on many states…I wish Zogby or one of the other more consistent pollsters or a local newspaper had something more concrete..

  7. Norm Levin Says:

    Don’t you just love all these sour grapes Hillary supporters who VOW never to vote for Obama or send money to the Democrats. Well folks, a party primary is run by the party. They set the rules. Hillary broke them. She didn’t win enough delegates.

    So go ahead and sulk. All the way until November. Maybe by then you’ll come to your senses and realize that John McCain is your worst feminist nightmare. He’s against women from suing for job discrimination, against equal wages…. AND has promised more Supreme Court judges in the mold of Alioto and Roberts.

    Say bye-bye Rove v Wade.

    Then you’ll really have something to sulk about.

  8. Bitter Nation Says:

    As a general rule, those who make threats the loudest do not intend to carry out those threats. Those who do intend, simply do it without dramatic overtures.

  9. susie Says:

    Oh please – stop with the Roe v Wade stuff – George Bush has been in the oval office for over 7 years and it’s not been repealed! John McCain is a true American hero – a patriot – who doesn’t count people like Ayers, Auchi, Pfleger, Wright in his close circle of friends! What Obama people don’t realize is that a vote for McCain is not a vote against Obama, it’s a vote for the second most experienced of the three remaining candidates to be POTUS, after Senator Clinton! Supporters of Senator Clinton, although uneducated, gun-toting, bitter, white hicks do actually read and what they have read about Obama has not shown them that he is even close to being experienced enough to be the nominee! 129 “present” votes in Ilinois State Senate. Why wouldn’t he commit himself to an answer? Was it not politically prudent for him to do so?

  10. Munk Says:

    Wow, some of you people are dense. Obama already has more than 50% of the 2118 pledeged votes required. Hence, he as already won the pledged votes race. No one in their right mind considered Florida and Michigan to be primary elections, they were beauty contest, that were unconstested, per DNC rules and per written agreement amongst the candidate, with Hillary being the only candidate running in the beauty contests. She “wins” the beauty contests in which she competes against herself, only. Now she wants those “votes” to count as prmary election votes. If the DNC had any balls, they would have told her so, they tried to appease her and now her nut force is out in full.

    Obama, having won the pledged votes, no senator, superdelegate or government official, will cast their vote for Hillary. The Democratic party will unite and defeat McCaine in November, sans the nuts in our party.

  11. DBX Says:

    Susie, all I can say is that you ought to educate yourself a bit more on these candidates. You obviously have not examined either candidate’s experience very much. So let me help out. Obama has done far more legislatively than Hillary, especially in the US Senate, where Obama has successfully passed legislation to control nuclear proliferation and Hillary has successfully passed, uh, congratulations for the Syracuse men’s basketball team winning a tournament. It’s all there on THOMAS. But so far you have simply looked at the two candidates’ ages and decided the older one is more experienced and that’s all that matters. And you neglect to even acknowledge that Hillary’s experience includes helping Wal-Mart with their unethical practices like union busting, creating so much distrust that she ruined the best opportunity to get universal healthcare in a generation, and voting for an illegal war in the Middle East that is bankrupting this country.

    By the way, the reason Roe hasn’t gone yet is no-one has litigated it for a while. It will disappear soon enough, if McCain gets to replace Justices Stevens and Ginsburg, who are highly likely to retire in the next few years. Don’t take stuff for granted like that.

  12. Benjamin Says:

    Susie – Do the court math, GW hasn’t had the votes to overturn Roe V. Wade. Another 4 years and the right supreme court justice and it would be entirely in striking distance. It takes time to dramatically reshape the supreme court and the republicans haven’t had that time yet.
    As for McCain not having people like Ayers, Auchi, Plfeger, Wright… McCain surrounded himself by corporate lobbiests and his political friends include Bush, Cheney, and a lot of other people who have ran our nation into the ground. You want another 4 years of high ranking cabinet offices and heads of departments that should be in charge of doing what’s best for America as a whole being populated by industry executives and others who have dual allegiances? If you think discounting that and not voting for someone because of who someone happens to know as opposed to who someone is indeed, then go for it. We’ll get the president we deserve no matter what.
    I was just hoping this would be the year that we the people decided to vote for someone who was going to look out for our best interests instead of oil companies, pharmaceuticals, etc.. etc.. etc.. John McCain is definetly not the one who is going to do that. I mean my God, the guy is a broken record “Iraq Iraq Iraq”. I think he’s running for president of Iraq at this point as he doesn’t seem to have much to say about this country.

  13. Michael Says:

    SSue,
    Please tell me why it is that Cintonites are bitter about Michigan votes, huh? From where I sit, Clinton netted 24 votes she was NOT entitled to in the first place under the rules that SHE agreed to? How many times must you all be reminded of what should be obvious. You whined until we had to have that circus because she was behind, now you’re whining because she didn’t get four votes? Wow! Imagine how it would have been since there were enough votes among the members to split them right down the middle! And 13 of the 27 that could vote (8 were undecided) were Clinton supporters! I would say that they appeared to be much more level-headed and reasonable about the whole thing then her followers. They know they shouldn’t have been there in the FIRST place. Talk about sour grapes! Get a grip!

  14. Indy Says:

    Obama is a typical Chicago/Cook County good-ole-boys Democrat who has kissed all the right hiney (like endorsing Daley for another term as mayor). “Change you can believe in”….LOL. Hundreds of thousands of taxpayer money to pet projects of Pfleger the activist priest…

    Clinton is a known quantity, and McCain is the un-republican in many ways. My dream ticket is McCain/Clinton. That would really shake things up. No-bama for me, no way.

  15. cynic756 Says:

    DBX

    You have not done your research at the proper government sites. I have and Obama lacks pitifully in serious legislation and votes. Susie, I won’t list it all here but both the congress site and illinois site (.gov) are the accurate information providers. Most of the bills passed in the Illinois senate by Obama were authored by Emil Jones who took Obama under his wing and admits it. After his first year Obama was rarely there, voted present rather than making a decision, and “pushed the wrong button” six times. This pattern continued in Congress. The majority of the time Obama was campaigning on the taxpayer’s dollar for the next position.

    Obama provided much pork, his wife sat on boards equivalent to Wal-Mart and provided these which $$. The Sun-times, and tribune cover this.

    Clinton’s record far surpasses Obama’s with respect to productive legislation. She is known as a work horse in congress and her campaign complained that she preferred to spend her time in the senate which hurt her campaign.

    BTW – no one will touch Roe vs. Wade. Women are a very strong voting block that neither party wants to lose. Bush, who is pro-life, could have in the 7 years we were a defact one party system and did not.

  16. Donklephant » Blog Archive » Drudge Claims Clintons Expect 25 Point Win In South Dakota Says:

    [...] Yesterday I wrote about the false meme that Obama somehow had South Dakota tied up. Today we’re seeing the “Wow, Hillary could win this big” meme starting to take shape. [...]

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: