California up for grabs (!)

A bunch of new polls show Obama anywhere from up 4 points in California (Zogby) to down 2 (Field) to down 9 (Mason-Dixon). And Drudge says a new Rasmussen poll, not published yet, will show Obama up 1.

In comments, Derek urges caution with regard to Zogby's reliability -- and he's previously questioned Rasmussen as well. But with multiple polls showing Clinton's lead in the Golden State narrowing, and a huge number of undecideds still out there (Zogby and Mason-Dixon say 16%, Field says 18%), it's clear the biggest Super Tuesday prize is up for grabs. As Greg Sargent says, "Bottom line: We have no idea what's going to happen on Tuesday."

If we assume that Hillary is a de facto "incumbent" against Obama's hordes for change, Tuesday's vote may be an epic showdown between the Incumbent Rule (which says that late-deciding voters tend to break overwhelmingly in favor of the challenger) and the Bradley Effect (which says that many white voters who tell pollsters they're "undecided" are actually planning to vote for the white candidate).

One other thing that's really interesting: Mason-Dixon says Clinton leads Obama among Hispanics in California, 68% to 18%. But in Arizona, the same polling firm, polling at the same time, found Obama winning the Hispanic vote, 53% to 37%!

Comments

[Mad Max, Esquire]

So apparently Obama has caught up with Hillary in NJ. That is a shocker to me.

[Derek]

I think it's clear that the California margin for Clinton has shrunk considerably, but I'm not willing (yet) to say it's "up for grabs." And a recent Field poll (respectable!) shows a 2-point lead for Clinton. Nevertheless, given that 25% of absentee ballots have been cutting heavily (60-40) for Clinton, Obama will need some massive turnout momentum on Tuesday.

But, I freely acknowledge that the momentum is entirely in Obama's favor right now. The only question is, how much? Well, and will it be enough?

[Derek]

I should also add that I'm highly skeptical of a huge Obama win on Super Tuesday, but I think that, barring a massive collapse, Obama has no reason to despair. The next month's worth of caucuses trend strongly in his favor: WA, NE, LA; DC, MD, VA; HI, WI. That gives him a great chance at snagging some states with helpful endorsements, college-educated liberal populations, and high African-American concentration. Then it's close to (if not beating!) Clinton entering March 4, where OH, TX, RI, and VT matter.

[Brian Foster]

given that 25% of absentee ballots have been cutting heavily (60-40) for Clinton

And how do we know this?

[Brian Foster]

Mason-Dixon says Clinton leads Obama among Hispanics in California, 68% to 18%. But in Arizona, the same polling firm, polling at the same time, found Obama winning the Hispanic vote, 53% to 37%!

No crosstabs at your link, unfortunately, so this is just a guess -- but perhaps CA had a female-heavy Hispanic sample while AZ had a male-heavy one. Given that Hillary generally leads among women and Hispanics, her lead among Hispanic women should be especially great. OTOH, she tends to trail among men, so a Hispanic man is at cross-purposes. Probably not by itself to explain such a disparity, but it might have something to do with it.

[Derek]

Sorry, Brian.

First, the Field poll is curious: it had 43% of its sample as absentee voters (but not designated "already voted"), and Obama actually leads 32-31.

Second, the Gallup poll said 20% have already voted, and it contrasts a "low turnout" election figure of 51-33 with a "high turnout" election figure of 47-35.

Third, the SUSA poll shows 23% have already voted, 56-23.