Who Should Drop Out? 22% Say Clinton, 22% Say Obama

As if you needed any further proof of how divided this Party is right now, it's glaringly displayed in the Rassmussen Poll of Democratic likely voters.

22% of Democrats Want Clinton to Drop Out; 22% Say Obama Should Withdraw

Twenty-two percent (22%) of Democratic voters nationwide say that Hillary Clinton should drop out of the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination. However, the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that an identical number—22%--say that Barack Obama should drop out.

A solid majority of Democrats, 62%, aren’t ready for either candidate to leave the race.

And this statement pretty much sums up sentiments on KOS:

Forty-seven percent (47%) of Obama supporters think Clinton should drop out. Thirty-eight percent (38%) of Clinton supporters say Obama should drop out.

And then we have:

Six percent (6%) of Democrats would like both Clinton and Obama to drop out of the race.

(Hard-Core Gore/Naderites?)

Putting it in better prospective is the sidebar on the page:
Percentage of Democrats Who Think Clinton Should/Shouldn't Drop Out

Should Drop Out
22%
Shouldn't Drop Out
56%

Percentage of Democrats Who Think Obama Should/Shouldn't Drop Out

Should Drop Out
22%
Shouldn't Drop Out
62%

Presented for your perusal, without Opinion. (At least up here!)
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/...

•  Tips/Recs/Flames?

  TIA!

  by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:15:07 AM PDT

  •  Whom ever that is behind

    should drop out. If Obama had been behind, he would have dropped out a long time ago. Obama is a true DEM, he will never knowinly divide us.

    by christine20 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:20:30 AM PDT

    •  I Think He Actually Has More Character

      Than you're giving him credit for.  The point of this process is to select the nominee who will serve the party best in the General Election.  Obama believes he is that man, as do I.  And if he were in a situation where mathematical possibility allowed him to win the nomination I would expect him to stay in it.

      by TooFolkGR on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:26:15 AM PDT

      •  Remember-This Was Supposed To Be REPUBLICANS

        cutting each other's throats, while Hillary was acting all "Presidential" and such.

        They had NO PLAN for continuing on past Super-Tuesday.

        If she runs her Administration, in the same way she has run this campaign, WE ARE SCREWED, and we damn well BETTER be fearing who's answering that phone at 3AM....

        "Oopsy! I didn't plan for that!!"

        by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:30:31 AM PDT

  •  am I crazy

    but isn't the person behind with no chance to catch up the one who should drop out.

    I think it was insulting to even ask if Obama should drop out since he is leading in all counts.

    by ronnied on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:24:25 AM PDT

  •  how can 22% want Obama to withdraw

    when he's ahead in every possible metric?

    by Nathaniel Ament Stone on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:38:36 AM PDT

    •  they don't know that yet

      by slinkerwink on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:47:04 AM PDT

    •  people aren't interested in pesky details

      such as who may be ahead. It's all about emotional investment in a candidate now. Besides, I read so many people writing about how Obama should drop out because he's a liar, he disenfranchised MI and FL, he's sexist, he's dividing the party, he's racist, etc.

      It really seems that our country has become a nation of sore losers....and sore winners. The close margin of so many recent elections has made large numbers of people question their legitimacy. Meanwhile, the other half acts as if it has received a mandate from the people. I'm tired of close elections...

      by mertmh on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:54:26 AM PDT

•  Has Gravel withdrawn? I know he switched

  parties, but is that enough to stop the Gravelanche?

  by DemocraticLuntz on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:15:29 AM PDT

  •  You ask

    I deliver

    by LaEscapee on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:42:11 AM PDT

•  useless poll. n/t

  by word player on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:15:35 AM PDT

•  McCain

  by anotherCt Dem on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:16:06 AM PDT

  •  The poll option I wanted.

    by lineatus on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:19:37 AM PDT

•  History Provides the Pressure

  I am honestly not trying to self-aggrandizingly self-promote, but I wrote a diary this morning on how the historical pressure is affecting the way the candidates are judging whether they should stay in or go.  

  In the history of the Democratic and Republican parties, only three nominated candidates have ever lost their election to successfully be nominated and win again.

  Thanks for your diary on this today.

  Swedescott's Diary: There Are No Successful Second Acts in Presential Politics

  by Swedescott on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:19:37 AM PDT

•  Hillary seems to be doing more damage to herself

  by staying in. I also think she inadvertently aids Obama by means of inoculation. Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

  by pd1969 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:20:31 AM PDT

  •  It's Clear That Nearly An Equal % Of Clintonites

    Feel the same way about the "Young Upstart", Obama...

    Keep in mind, that for many, this scenario never entered thier minds...

    Hillary was supposed to be measuring Oval Office drapes by now. And a LOT of DC Corporate Dems, and thier supporters, have a LOT riding on this...

    by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:22:31 AM PDT

    •  And some of them own

      media outlets.

      by kitebro on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:24:26 AM PDT

•  No one asked me.

  I say Hillary should drop out, so up her percentage to 22.1 percent.

  by QuestionableSanity on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:21:12 AM PDT

•  I've said it before - emotions are raw...

  ...these numbers won't be as bad once Hillary's out.  And I'm sorry Barry in MIA, Susan Hu, et al, but it is really Obama's victory, despite what Wolf Blitzer, James Carville and the Clintons have led you to believe.

  Her supporters have to have their 5 stages of grief and then they'll be fine, although I suspect that the groups that do split towards McCain are Democrats over 55 and white southerners (most of them, but not all).

  by jamesparenti on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:21:17 AM PDT

  •  I have a whole family of white Southerners

    who will be voting for Obama, so please don't place us all in this category. I imagine that there will be many white Southerners who will not, however.

    by mertmh on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:57:24 AM PDT

    •  I said most of them, not all...

      ... and I'm basing this on what exit polls showed after contests in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and so on.  In Louisiana, for instance, only 1 in 10 whites said race factored into their decision . . . but only 1 in 10 of them voted for Obama, so clearly one thing was being said to pollsters and another was being done in the voting booth.

      I'd love to proven wrong on this, and to be clear it's amazing that Obama is getting as much support as he is among southern whites, but those exit polls show a pretty clear-cut trend - one that isn't limited to that demographic.

      by jamesparenti on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:06:10 AM PDT

      •  yes, minorities of whites voted for Obama

        in all Southern states, I believe. However, I think this was also the case in many of the NE states, wasn't it?

        Anyway, a whole generation of white Southern Democrats left the party, I think, so most of those who remain fall into your over-55 category, who likely won't vote for Obama. Maybe the younger generation will begin to vote Democratic again, but who knows?

        I'm really not quibbling with you...just providing an exception to the rule.

        by mertmh on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:20:13 AM PDT

        •  Yes, that's the other demographic...

          ... that breaks against him.  And I would say that the same type of person can be found in suburbs and especially exurbs around cities like Chicago, Minneapolis, etc.

          by jamesparenti on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:32:29 AM PDT

•  Um...

  How the hell can you justify wanting Obama to drop out??? Ahead in delegates, popular vote, states won. Drop out? That's just silly.

  by Goldmund on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:21:31 AM PDT

  •  When you're in denial,...

    ...anything is possible.

    by boran2 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:22:30 AM PDT

•  why should Obama drop out he is ahead

  by calalaila2008 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:22:02 AM PDT

  •  because "it's not his turn"

    by Stroszek on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:26:49 AM PDT

•  Yeah, the person who is winning should drop out

  That makes a lot of sense.  

  by ThatPoshGirl on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:22:40 AM PDT

•  This poll

  demonstrates the ignorance of the polled.

  Obama is ahead.  In every legit metric.  His percentage should be zero.

  Hillary has very little chance.  Her percentage should be in the 80s.  At least.

  This kind of glaring ignorance is why I generally don't give a shit what other Americans, or humans for that matter, think.

  by jre2k8 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:24:58 AM PDT

  •  And Your Comment...

    ...demonstrates the ignorance of the commentor.

    There is only one metric that determines our nominee, and that is "Who receives majority of delegate votes at the convention."  Not "who is ahead," or "who has won the most states," but "who has a majority."

    Currently neither of them have a majority, and neither of them have any shot at getting a majority with the remainder of the contests on the table (unless Hillary's current baggage goes nuclear and she loses the rest of the contests 80-10 or something).  SuperDelegates could make this happen also, by publicly pledging to support one of the two candidates in such numbers that it is a foregone conclusion they will have a majority.

    As of yet however, that has not happened.

    Therefore the correct answer is, "According to the only metric that matters, we still don't have a nominee.  Therefore neither of them should withdraw."

    I know I would be pretty miffed if their roles were reversed and Obama were withrdrawing.

    by TooFolkGR on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:29:23 AM PDT

    •  What?

      I guess you're right, Superdelegates could make it happen.  But what is the likelihood?  You see, there is an easy way to use math to deduce probabilities, and make good, sound judgments based on those probabilities.  We usually call this "statistics".  In science, we use these probabilities to explain a likelihood that conditions of a hypothesis have been met.  Based on those conditions and the statistical outcome, we can make decisions about the implications of our findings and begin to formulate new hypotheses.  

      I know that little explanation may appear a bit patronizing, but apparently there is a large group of people who don't know how to properly use maths.  

      The probability that Clinton gets enough new delegates, pledged or otherwise, or enough new popular votes, or enough new states between now and convention time is very, very small.  Even with only descriptive statistics and no actual probabilities (p < ?), we know that Clinton must win almost 70% of everything from here on out to even tie Obama.  So let's get real here: you cannot say, with a straight face, that there is any real chance for Clinton to win the nomination at this point.  So, based on the math, what can Hillary possibly do at this point?  The only logical answer that I can think of is to damage the Democratic Party and diminish our chances of sweeping change this November.  

      The logic of anyone wanting Hillary to continue is beyond me (but apparently not beyond Rush...that should tell you something).

      by ScienceRocks on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:42:22 AM PDT

    •  Hillary has a giant math problem.

      If the media reported it, her drop-out numbers would be far higher.  Her metrics are daunting to say the least.  She cannot, barring some catastrophic event, challenge Obama on elected delegates.  And make no mistake, elected delegates is THE metric that matters.  

      I don't think you want to get into an intellectual pissing match with me, chap.

      by jre2k8 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:45:36 AM PDT

    •  I disagree

      As much as I like Obama- and he's pretty much the only presidential candidate I have ever liked in my adult life (90s till now)- I would NOT want him to tear apart the party by staying in a race that he had less than a 10% chance of winning.

      by mertmh on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:01:06 AM PDT

  •  Well, the missing metric is why...

    Why do these 22% want either candidate to drop out?  Remember, almost 30% of the population think that Bush is a good President.  But my guess is that when you look at the "why", it becomes clear that a good chunk of that 30% likely actually believe in what Bush is doing. My guess is that a good chunk of that 30% also believe we should have some form of theocracy. If the "why" is flawed, then when we can't seriously consider the conclusion.  So, my guess is that most of the 22% saying that Clinton should drop, believe this because she is losing, and only hurting Obama's campaign at this point.  The 22% wanting Obama to drop?  Good question.  I wonder what they believe?

    by ScienceRocks on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:31:01 AM PDT

•  800 likely voters, margin of +-3.5%, 95% conf....

  No wonder I think pretty much all polls are bullshit. This one is well up there in the "illustrates nothing" category.

  by skod on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:25:46 AM PDT

•  What 5 people voted for Obama to withdraw?

  Ridiculous!

  by Lady Bird Johnson on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:29:34 AM PDT

  •  This Poll Makes 2 Things VERY CLEAR

    1- There is a real divide in this Party.

    2-KOS does not speak for the MAJORITY of Democrats, only half of them...

    by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:33:12 AM PDT

    •  No,

      It's a majority.  The majority of voters have backed Obama. The majority of states have backed Obama.  A majority of delegates are backing Obama.  I'd say that's a majority.

      Here, just in case you need it:

      Majority

      by ScienceRocks on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:45:54 AM PDT

    •  If you're a supporter of one candidate,

      you want the other guy to drop out. The poll really doesn't show anything, beyond, I suppose, that the average voter doesn't really pay very much attention to the math.

      by lieblingskartoffel on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:46:12 AM PDT

•  I guess this proves activism is still fringe...

  It's amazing that more americans don't see the necessity of rallying behind the presumptive nominee.

  by OwlMonkey on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:30:58 AM PDT

  •  Presumptive Nominee? Who Is That?

    Last time I checked, NEITHER candidate is going to be able to go into Convention with a Delegate Majority.

    And in this Party, the only thing that REALLY matters is the FIRST BALLOT.

    I support Senator Obama, but I think MANY here have put the cart, WELL ahead of the horse!!

    by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:35:34 AM PDT

    •  Yes, Presumptive.

      pre·sump·tive (prĭ-zŭmp'tĭv) pronunciation
      adj.

        1. Providing a reasonable basis for belief or acceptance.
        2. Founded on probability or presumption.

      There is a reasonable basis for believing that Obama will win the nomination: he has more votes, states, and delegates.  I'd say that's reasonable.  

      This belief is supported by further probability that Clinton cannot match Obama's numbers given the remaining contests, the proportionally allocated delegates, and the worst case scenario polls.

      So, the probability that Clinton gains the support she needs to surpass Obama for the nomination is very small, and therefore provides us a reasonable basis to believe that Obama will be the nominee.

      Presumptive.

      by ScienceRocks on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:52:33 AM PDT

•  The answer seems simple to me

  HIllary can stay in the race until after the North Carolina/Indiana primaries.  If after these primaries she has not made a significant dent in Obama's delegate lead and the Michigan/Florida votes are still in limbo (which appears to be the case, as they are about dead)then she should drop out of the race and put her efforts into getting her base to support Obama and unite the Democratic party.  It seems simple to me.

  If the roles were reversed, I would expect that out of Barack and I trust he would do that.  I would also be ashamed if Barack stole the nomination with superdelegates.  Why would Hillary want to do that in the first place...I see no way she could win the general if she wins the nomination in that fashion.  Maybe that is just me though.

  Why do Democrats make this so hard?

  Hillary, you are entitled to nothing.  We appreciate a lot of the work you have done, but please don't let this go too far(lord knows it is getting ugly as it is).  This election had been tailor made for Dems to win and now it is in question...don't let this happen!

  by bleigh82 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:33:32 AM PDT

  •  The Clinton's Are Carpet-Bombing Indiana

    They are all over the state, and getting HUGE crowds.

    Add in Indiana's wide open primary, with the "Rush Factor" (Yes, it will play HUGE, here), and they surely see that they can have a BIG win here...

    by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:37:37 AM PDT

    •  It's not going to be huge

      Chicago is next door....give it time.  I'll be there every weekend, along with tons of people, working hard to GOTV for Obama.  I think we'll see a Missouri, where Obama pulls it off.

      by foxsucks81 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:40:14 AM PDT

      •  Yes I imagine you will have a halo effect like in

        Winsconsin! Gary is right near Chicago and has lots and lots of African americans as does indinapolis.

        by bten on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:45:00 AM PDT

      •  1st And 7th Go Obama, Everything Else Clinton

        In my humble opinion....

        the only caveat to that would be the 9th, which i'd put in the tossup category.

        by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:48:19 AM PDT

        •  The 8th has very liberal areas could go Obama

          You have Iowa went for Obama, Wisconsin went for Obama, Missouri went for Obama narrowly, Kentucky hasn't vote yet. There is a ring around Illinois that has all voted for Obama. Indiana would be different. It is also the most Republican. Obama has done well in Republican states. I have to see polls. Of course Clinton has Bayh which is huge. It is a very very interesting race.

          by bten on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:53:50 AM PDT

        •  The district vote isn't going to mean much

          IN-1, IN-2, IN-7, IN-8, IN-9 = 6 delegates.  

          IN-3, IN-4, IN-5 = 4 delegates

          The only one with an odd number is IN-6 (5 delegates)

          by Fro on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:06:07 AM PDT

    •  I think Hillary

      has a chance in Indiana...but I doubt she can win huge there.  Time will tell I suppose.

      by bleigh82 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:42:14 AM PDT

    •  Obama is MIA so far in Indiana....

      which is too bad. I think he has a fair chance of winning the state even though the Dem elites have aligned with Clinton (mostly before Obama rose to the lead).

      I hope he pays attention to the state. Especially come to the north and northwest (IN-02). This has lots of undecided Dems.

      by IndySteve on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:11:38 AM PDT

      •  10 campaign offices are opening up

        Most of the people who have been campaigning here are Bill and Chelsea.  Hillary's just done 3 events.

        Obama was here first and got a lot more coverage.

        by Fro on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:17:07 AM PDT

•  The one that's losing the election nt.

  by SteamPunkX on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:37:05 AM PDT

•  Looks bad for Obama

  Gallup also had a poll showing that almost 30% of Hillary's supporters would not vote for Obama in the general election.  I think why you have 22% of democrats calling for Obama to quit the race is that they feel he is unelectable, should either quit or accept VP and that Hillary has the best chance of winning in November.

  by karajan72 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:52:53 AM PDT

  •  Clinton's Building The Case For "Party Unity"?

    Of course, ANYTHING that doesn't put them on top is "Disunity".

    We better be prepared for it, when it comes...

    by IndianaDemocrat on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:55:17 AM PDT

  •  Those are the hardcore Hillary lemmings

    They've been pretty much brainwashed.

    by Fro on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:15:06 AM PDT

•  this poll question whether Obama should drop

  out is idiotic?
  Why would you query about the winner dropping out?

  The fact Hillary is losing and has a 5% chance of winning is a more valid premise.

  All this so-called evenhandedness is all a ploy to make the race seem closer than it really is.

  by calalaila2008 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:53:23 AM PDT

•  never underestimate a Clinton

  I think all you people who are saying Hillary is out are probably in for a world of hurt.  You were probably only born in 1992..so you don't remember the Clintons.  This power couple has endured and triumphed over impeachment, Ken Star investigation, countless republican congress investigations, right wing bashing, republican right wing attacks.  A deficit of 100 or so delegates is child's play to the Clintons.  They have over and over again left their naysayers in the dust.  I'm just saying.....don't delude yourself.  It ain't over.

  by karajan72 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 09:59:13 AM PDT

•  McCain

  That's my vote for "who should drop out".

  by N in Seattle on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:05:53 AM PDT

•  This shows how destructive it would be...

  to force someone to drop out (if that could be done). Let the process play out. We are the DEMOCRATIC party and should choose the nominee through elections.

  I think that will be evident in June, and we'll see the SD's go with the electoral winner. That is the best way to bring people together and respect the process.

  by IndySteve on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 10:07:51 AM PDT