In the interest of holding people accountable for their BS I present you this friendly reminder.
I have her carrying Pennsylvania by 20 percent--a 60 percent to 40 percent margin of the two-candidate (Clinton and Obama) vote. That's better than she did in Ohio, where she won 55 percent of the two-candidate vote. But her showings there in the 6th congressional district (70 percent to 27 percent), the 17th congressional district (63 percent to 35percent) and the 18th congressional district (66 percent to 31percent) have influenced me; those areas are a lot like most of western and central Pennsylvania, where you also find very few blacks and upscale whites.
And this handy table:
Notice anything wrong?
That's right! Clinton won by less than 10% and by 150,000 fewer votes than Barone predicted.
Well, maybe he just had an off prediction, and everything else is going to go as he says.
Indiana by 20% for Clinton? Yeah, totally possible.
North Carolina by only 10% for Obama? If he's lucky!
40 and 30 point blowouts in WV and KY? OF COURSE, JUST LOOK AT PA!
Or maybe this is just the beginning of an embarrassing string of botched predictions
At least Barone gave himself an out (he should take it):
Of course my projections could just be plain wrong. Clinton could win Pennsylvania by an unimpressive margin on April 22 and get clocked in Indiana as well as North Carolina on May 6. Then you might see a cascade of superdelegates toward Obama, and the race might effectively be over.
Also, Chuck Todd called, he says the pledged delegate race is over:
Todd also did a nice analysis of the popular vote situation rooted in reality (hint: Hillary can't win by that measure either), anyone have video of that?