Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up here, seeing as we're all dying of thirst for new poll numbers. It's a timely poll, conducted 4/23 - 4/24, and the numbers couldn't be closer:

Clinton 47%
Obama 48%

The demographics released show a familiar refrain:

Voters over 60:
Clinton 59, Obama 35

Women:
Clinton 53, Obama 45

The Young (18-29):
Obama 66, Clinton 33

The General Election:
McCain 51, Obama 43
McCain 52, Clinton 41

Update [2008-4-24 21:43:33 by VAAlex]:: Don't know what I was thinking not including the source ... mea culpa! http://www.southbendtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080424/NEWS07/284272668/1129/News

Tags: clinton, Indiana Poll, obama, Research 2000 (all tags)

Comments

21 Comments

Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

LA Times and the Downs Center had Obama up by 5% in the latest polls before this one you cite, although SUSA had Clinton by 16%.

I think SUSA was an outlier though.

by kingsbridge77 2008-04-24 05:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

I think SUSA did the polling for the Downs Center.

by elrod 2008-04-24 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

They did the polling, but the methodology was all Downs. In other words, not a real SUSA poll.

by jaiwithani 2008-04-24 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

But SUSA had been the best so far this cycle...the polling in Indiana has been even weirder than the PA polling.  

by bosdcla14 2008-04-24 05:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Who conducted this poll for the newspaper?

by elrod 2008-04-24 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Research 2000.

by VAAlex 2008-04-24 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Conducted by Research 2000, a Republican polling firm.  

by Beltway Dem 2008-04-24 05:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

The last time Indiana went Democratic in a presidential election was in 1374.

(Actually 1964)

by johnnygunn 2008-04-24 05:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

LOL

by elrod 2008-04-24 05:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

People I talk to say that Indiana is getting "Virginiafied".  It was the heart of Reagan country not so long ago, but they're electing more-and-more Democratic lawmakers and they just seem to be trending Democratic.

It may not turn blue this year or even in four years, but it's a great place to target, at least if you're like me and you believe in the 50-state-strategy.  Anyway I'm looking forward to this primary.

by Mostly 2008-04-24 06:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Absolutely -
There is no reason for the Democratic not to make Indiana a MAJOR target.
Remember, the Rethugs have targetted the "Six Pack" with surprising results.

Question - Which six Dukakis states are iffy for either Obama or Clinton?
The "Six Pack" - WA, OR, MN, WI, IA, & WV.

by johnnygunn 2008-04-24 06:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

My opinion?

Against Hillary Clinton, John McCain might be able to scare people in Washington and Minnesota, but she'll ultimately carry them, unless McCain chooses Tim Pawlenty as his VP - then she's got a problem in MN.  She'll have a bigger problem with Oregon and Wisconsin but she'll probably carry those as well, but she'll have to spend time and money there.  I'm pretty sure WV is automatic for her, but I don't think she can carry Iowa.

Barack Obama has got Washington, Oregon, Minnesota easily, unless as mentioned above, Pawlenty is McCain's VP.  Wisconsin should be easier for him than for Clinton, but he'll have to work for it.  Iowa is 50/50, and he's got no shot whatsoever at West Virginia.

by Mostly 2008-04-24 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

I don't think Clinton wins West Virginia. The coal mine unions are gone and voters there go on "values" issues these days. There's a reason Gore and Kerry got blown out in WV. Back in 1988 the unions were very strong and in the midst of some major strikes. Those days are gone.

Clinton obviously does better than Obama, but she doesn't carry the state against McCain.

by elrod 2008-04-24 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

uh no, a republican is not carrying this state,

well you give us Obama, and no MN goes Blue, with Hillary I dunno, but Pawlenty is not popular, he only won because BOTH damn times we had a 3rd party that split the damn democratic vote and let him walk in.

Fing annoying!!!!

by TruthMatters 2008-04-24 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

This will be an interesting election.  Neither side has any real demographic (as in Clinton in Ohio or Obama in South Carolina) or political (as in Clinton in PA with the state apparatus endorsing her) advantages.

The last election like this was Texas.  It's a level playing field.

by Mostly 2008-04-24 05:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Clinton has Bayh, who is supposedly hugely popular in the state, while Obama has a neighboring media market, so Indianapolis should be a knockout for him. They both have some advantages, so it will be interesting to see what happens.

by VAAlex 2008-04-24 05:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Actually Clinton has the demographics (white working class) and the machine (Bayh is the most powerful dem in the state).

But Obama has the fact they are a neighbor and share part of the Chicago media market so to Indiana Obama isn't a scary new kid, they've known him for around 5 years already.

by Cheebs 2008-04-24 06:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Bayh doesn't have machine pull. He's like Bob Casey - not very useful for an endorsement.

by elrod 2008-04-24 06:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

Right.  There's a difference between someone like Evan Bayh, whose influence is from being popular and influential, and Ed Rendell, who has the power to tell his local people that their asses had better get the vote out for Hillary Clinton or else.

Also, the white working class is perfectly willing to vote for Barack Obama.  It's a slight uphill climb, but it's not impossible.  I hate to sound like broken record, but where Obama hits a brick wall is Appalachia - that's Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and West Virginia mostly.  They're unbelievably culturally conservative.

by Mostly 2008-04-24 06:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

The Democratic Party in Indiana is heavily concentrated in Indianapolis and the NW. However, there are many Democrats in Southern Indiana, which will go for Hillary (except Bloomington). A big player may be the Indy suburbs. My guess is that the northern suburbs around Carmel and Fishers will go heavy for Obama. It's the sort of upper income suburban area that has been strong for Obama all along. The southern suburbs around Greenwood and Martinsville (former KKK stronghold) will not embrace Obama. Hendricks County will be stronger for Clinton too, but there aren't many Democrats there. Anderson and the far eastern suburbs will be stronger for Clinton (the mayor endorsed Hillary).

If Andre Carson works his Indianapolis machine, Obama will rack up big wins in the city.

by elrod 2008-04-24 06:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Indiana: Obama 48% - Clinton 47%

It will be a wash on one side or the other... we should look to NC

by CardBoard 2008-04-24 06:13PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads