Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama appears to be consolidating a lead over Hillary Rodham Clinton among most constituent groups in Texas except Hispanics, according to a new tracking poll.
The survey found Obama leading 48.2 percent to 41.7 percent over Clinton statewide. The poll, conducted Tuesday through Thursday for the Houston Chronicle, Reuters and C-SPAN by Zogby International, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.
On the Republican side, U.S. Sen. John McCain appears headed to victory in Texas over former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Texas congressman Ron Paul of Lake Jackson. McCain led with 53.4 percent support to Huckabee's 26.8 percent and Paul's 10.7 percent in a survey that had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.1 percentage points. McCain led among all groups, including self-identified conservatives.
The results are within the poll's 3.8 percent margin of error for likely Democratic primary voters in Texas, so statistically, the race is a tie.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Obama, you did in 2004 talk to farmers and suggest that NAFTA had been helpful. The Associated Press today ran a story about NAFTA, saying that you have been consistently ambivalent towards the issue. Simple question: Will you, as president, say to Canada and Mexico, "This has not worked for us; we are out"?
SEN. OBAMA: I will make sure that we renegotiate, in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about. And I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far.
That is something that I have been consistent about. I have to say, Tim, with respect to my position on this, when I ran for the United States Senate, the Chicago Tribune, which was adamantly pro-NAFTA, noted that, in their endorsement of me, they were endorsing me despite my strong opposition to NAFTA.
And that conversation that I had with the Farm Bureau, I was not ambivalent at all. What I said was that NAFTA and other trade deals can be beneficial to the United States because I believe every U.S. worker is as productive as any worker around the world, and we can compete with anybody. And we can't shy away from globalization. We can't draw a moat around us. But what I did say, in that same quote, if you look at it, was that the problem is we've been negotiating just looking at corporate profits and what's good for multinationals, and we haven't been looking at what's good for communities here in Ohio, in my home state of Illinois, and across the country.
And as president, what I want to be is an advocate on behalf of workers. Look, you know, when I go to these plants, I meet people who are proud of their jobs. They are proud of the products that they've created. They have built brands and profits for their companies. And when they see jobs shipped overseas and suddenly they are left not just without a job, but without health care, without a pension, and are having to look for seven-buck-an-hour jobs at the local fast-food joint, that is devastating on them, but it's also devastating on the community. That's not the way that we're going to prosper as we move forward.
Canadian TV reports that Obama told Canadian government officials that his NAFTA bashing is just a campaign rhetoric. Watch the following video:
In fairness, we should note that the Obama campaign denies this Canadian TV report. Should you believe Canadian TV or Obama? I'm suspicious of the Obama denial. He has been known to say one thing and then do something else. For example, on January 26, 2006, on "Meet the Press," Obama told Tim Russert he wouldn't seek the presidency in 2008. In 2004, Obama ruled out running on a national ticket in 2008, suggesting he lacked the necessary experience. If he changed his mind about running in 2008, what else is just campaign rhetoric?
Trevor Phillips, one of Britain’s most influential black figures, accuses Barack Obama of cynically exploiting America’s racial divide and warned that Obama could prolong the rift:
In truth, Obama may be helping to postpone the arrival of a post-racial America, and I think he knows it. If he wins, the cynicism may be worth it to him and his party. In the end he is a politician and a very good one; his job is to win elections. He may even beat Hillary to the nomination (though I'd be surprised). But the harbinger of a post-racial America? I don't think so. Obama's boosters compare him with JFK (see below). But I think he has a more recent role model, whose charm, skill and ruthless cynicism he may come to emulate. I'm talking, of course, of William Jefferson Clinton.
Phillips gets to that conclusion after discussing Shelby Steele's theory that there are two kinds of influential black figures in US public life. The "challengers," such as Garvey, Malcolm X, and Jackson, "wield power by making whites feel guilty about the old crime and only allowing the guilt to be relieved in return for concessions of one kind or another." The second type, "bargainers," such as Poitier, King, Bill Cosby and Oprah Winfrey, strike a different deal by saying to white America: "I will not use America's horrible history of white racism against you, if you will promise not to use my race against me." [See Steele's new book about Obama, "A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can't Win"]
I have lots of problems with Obama. I think Obama is a naive, extreme-left-wing LIBERAL, who talks of hope of achieving Camelot by governing in a nonpartisan manner. Despite his call for change -- and who doesn't want to change things -- Obama hasn't even made an effort to do anything in a bipartisan, let alone nonpartisan, way. Nevertheless, I have never thought of Obama's candidacy of exploiting the racial divide. No, that was done by Bill Clinton, on behalf of Hillary's campaign.
I disagree with Mr. Phillips. I see Obama's campaign as evidence we are making racial progress in America. I'm not about to vote for him, but that has nothing to do with Obama's race. It has everything to do with the fact that I agree with Senator McCain when he describes Obama's endless mantra as an "eloquent but empty call for change."
Pollution has turned branches of at least three tributaries of the Han river -- a branch of the Yangtz -- red:
The Xinglong, Tianguan and Dongjing rivers were all affected by the pollution, according to the state news agency Xinhua.
A chemical spill is thought be the cause, but the source has not yet been identified and an investigation has been launched.
Gao Qijin, a water company official in Xinguo, Jianli County, told Xinhua that the water in the Dongjing river had become red with large amounts of bubbles.
The pollution has also contaminated water supplies for about 200,000 people in central China.
Meanwhile, Beijing is diverting water north for the Olympics, which means that in China's arid north, provinces already experiencing water shortages could be pushed deeper into crisis threatening the livelihoods of millions of people.
A new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll finds Senator McCain is seen as the "strongest leader," that he has the "best experience," and is better able to fight terrorism and deal with the situation in Iraq:
When compared to either Democrat, McCain is rated as the "strongest leader." He easily outpaces both when voters are asked who has the "right experience to be president," beating Obama by 31 points and Clinton by 12.
This is the second poll in two days showing Senator McCain ahead of either Democratic nominee:
In head-to-head contests, the poll found, McCain leads Clinton by 6 percentage points (46% to 40%) and Obama by 2 points (44% to 42%).
The result could be called a statistical tie because it is within the poll's ±3 percent margin of error. Yesterday Gallup reported similar polling results.
The Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll also found McCain is viewed favorably by 61% of all registered voters, including a plurality of Democrats. He even beats Obama on being best able to handle the economy, 42% to 34%.
A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds likely voters say they prefer McCain for president over Obama 48% to 47%. McCain leads Hillary 50% to 46%. The results could be called a statistical tie because it is within the poll's ±3 percent margin of sampling error.
McCain is doing better than expected because McCain is able to attract support beyond just Republican voters. McCain attracts more support among likely voters who identify as Democrats than either Democratic candidate attracts among Republicans who are likely to vote. McCain is also competitive with Obama among independent voters and leads Clinton by 10 percentage points among this group.
The USA Today/Gallup poll, conducted February 21-24.
Gallup Poll Editor in Chief, Frank Newport goes over the details in the following video report:
Keep in mind these numbers are within the polls sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points for Democratic respondents, so statistically, the race is a virtual tie.
"If she wins Texas and Ohio I think she will be the nominee. If you don't deliver for her, I don't think she can be. It's all on you," the former president told the audience at the beginning of his speech.
Yesterday, Hillary advisor Harold Ickes, "dropped a hint that March 4 will produce a decision point":
"I think if we lose in Texas and Ohio, Mrs. Clinton will have to make her decisions as to whether she moves forward or not," he said. He paused, then added: "as she has at the end of every other state."
According to the Houston Chronicle, Ickes would not go as far as Bill Clinton and proclaim Texas and Ohio must-win states:
"I wouldn't want to fly in the face of President Clinton," Ickes said. "What I will say is it is important that she do very, very well."
There is still a week before the Texas primary, but unless Hillary pulls off one of those miracles Mike Hukabee is still looking for, we can stick the fork in this campaign.
Gallup reports most Americans think John McCain and Barack Obama would unite rather than divide the country as president, but view Hillary Clinton as more divisive:
The public is most likely to view Obama as a unifying force, with 66% believing he would do more to unite the country and 30% saying he would do more to divide it if he were elected. McCain is a close second, with Americans viewing him as more of a "uniter" rather than a "divider" by a 59% to 36% margin.
On the other hand, Americans believe Clinton and Mike Huckabee are more likely to divide Americans than bring them together. Forty percent say Clinton would unite Americans as president, but the majority, 57%, say she would do more to divide them. One of the reasons Clinton may be seen as more of a divider is her long history as a partisan politician in the public eye.
Gallup Poll Editor in Chief, Frank Newport has the details:
Hillary's high negatives aren't news. We've been talking about this for more than two years.
Recent Comments