Clinton Closes In On Obama in Texas

March 1st, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

According to the latest Zogby International poll (reasonably reliable), Hillary Clinton is closing in on Barack Obama in Texas. A couple of days ago, Obama was leading by 6%. That lead has decreased to only 2% now. 43% of Texas Democratic Primary goers say they’ll vote for Clinton, against 45% who say they support Obama.

In Ohio, meanwhile, Obama is closing in on Clinton. They’re now tied there. Both receive some 45% support at this point in time. Fox News, meanwhile, still has Clinton in the lead.

What does this all mean? Simple. Both are too close to call. It also means that Clinton is still allowed to hope that she’ll win this thing. And, of course, it means that Obama can’t afford to take it easy. He has to fight back, for a double victory for Clinton will basically tie them once again. At least in perception.

More at Talk Left (h/t for the link to the Fox poll) and Taylor Marsh.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Paul
    March 1st, 2008 at 22:11
    Reply | Quote | #1

    A close win is not good enough for Clinton.  She needs to beat Obama by 10 points in both Texas AND Ohio to stay in this thing.  Maybe she should take that female golf reporters advice about how to beat Tiger Woods:  "take him (in this case Obama) out back and lynch him."

  2. casualobserver
    March 1st, 2008 at 22:23
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Hardly. With the expectation burden now squarely on the Barackstar, a deadheat result will be mean Clinton has regained a bit of momentum back.

  3. Michael van der Galien
    March 1st, 2008 at 22:32
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Paul that’s nonsense. A close victory is good enough for Clinton. She needs to, at this point in time, prove that she’s still in this thing.

    If she wins, by the way, I think it’s time to talk about a brokered convention. No?

  4. MO
    March 2nd, 2008 at 02:47
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Casual Observer wrote "…a deadheat result will be mean Clinton has regained a bit of momentum back."

    A few weeks ago, Clinton was continuously in the press reminding people to just wait until March 4th primaries because Texas and Ohio were her firewall states.  She was leading by double-digit numbers in both Ohio and Texas.  It amazes me how Clinton supports and her camp spin, spin, spin, spin, spin, spin, spin.  Obama has come from 20 points behind in just a few weeks, and yet you say that if they tie, Clinton has gotten momentum back.  All the contrary…it means that she  lost her firewall, lost supporters, and lost face.

  5. Interested
    March 2nd, 2008 at 14:03
    Reply | Quote | #5

    last I checked the Dem’s polls I had heard that Clinton was ahead in TX but Obama closed in and tied it.  and he was closing in Ohio.  I had not heard the one where he was ahead.

    However TX splits up it’s delegate votes depends on if a close vote matters or not.

  6. Richard Andre
    March 3rd, 2008 at 07:09
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Where is the firewall that she was building? Has the firewall been compromised?  I cannot believe they have no shame in trying to fool the public again, by lowering expectation.  Here again, the Clintons claimed a week ago that they were building an insurmountable security force; unfortunately, it seems that it is about to crumble.They start to sound like the other candidate from New York who was building a firewall in Florida.I hope that she is candid enough to quit the race as Bill Clinton stated that she must win both Texas and Ohio in order to remain competitive.Hillary, please, do not lower expectation; get ready to quit if you do not win both state, OH & TX, so we could start shaping the contest to win in November.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500