margin of victory

The results from the latest Rasmussen poll are in, and while some like Goldni can see a bit of a silver lining, I think it shows

Despite the fact that Al Gore lost the state by 31 points in 2000, it is possible:

The presidential primary in Oregon today is quite unique - no one in the state will be going to the polls to vote. Back in 2005, they became the first and only state to have a 100% mail-in ballot.

Last night's results from the Democrat primary in West Virginia (and yes I joked about that) gave a huge margin of victory to Senator Clinton over Senator Obama.

North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley is finally going to weigh in on the Democratic primary:

Clinton, as of the Little Dork’s bedtime, is up 10% (9.5 according to Field hands). Pat Buchannan is on MSNBC curiously claiming that Clinton has “momentum in her favor.” Despite the near mathematical impossibility of her winning, and perhaps much to the pleasure of the press corps, we continue to call this a contest.

Over dinner, Sarah predicted Hillary by 6, and I predicted Hillary by 9. I think 9 is the more interesting number - it’s not quite double digits, but it’s enough to be considered a “convincing” margin of victory. A spread of 6 is a de facto win for Obama. Right now, at the time of this posting, the returns have Hillary by 8.

We’ve been hearing about it for what seems like years, but the Pennsylvania primary is finally here! It should be interesting. If Hillary loses, her campaign is finished. If she wins by five points or less, she may go on but her resources will dry up and the pressure will mount for her to withdrawal. If she wins by more than five points then she can fight on.

KAG at Knoxville Talks links to a WBIR story which suggests that the US Senate Democratic Primary might be a re-hash of the Clinton/Obama fight in Tennessee.

Ohio joins Tennessee in providing ample evidence that rural white Democrats will not vote for a black man: