RSS
February 6, 2008
Obama Won
It's pretty simple- he got the most states and the most delegates. That's it. Sure, Hillary had her voting demographic victories last night, with Hillary keeping Latino support and Hillary did get New York and California, but at the end of the day those things are only important as the delegates they get you. Clinton's Northeast Sweep didn't pan out as well as hoped, with Connecticut going to Barack. Speaking of Connecticut, Obama had a surprising number of white voters last night, which should put to rest any question about his ability to draw a plurality. The best thing the Clinton campaign could hope for out of this is that the media would take a look at her wins in those two states and declare her the front runner again- but so far, that doesn't seem to be happening.
The race now takes a turn which should -- emphasis on should since absolutely nothing is a sure thing in this campaign -- favor Obama heavily. In the span of four days- 9th to the 12th- primaries and caucuses are being held in Washington, Louisiana, Nebraska, the Virgin Islands, Maine, D.C., Maryland, Virginia, Hawaii, and Wisconsin. Barack should be able to win a majority if not all of these states, considering how strong his base support -- African-Americans, liberals with college degrees, and younger voters -- is in these places.
Some of these states -- Hawaii, Nebraska, and Washington -- are caucus states. Caucuses favor Barack, considering only dedicated supporters come out for them, and Obama has a more dedicated base then Clinton (she wins more soft support). The momentum out of these states should allow Obama to put up respectable numbers on March 4th in Clinton Country, i.e. Texas and Ohio.
And I haven't even mentioned his significant lead in the money game on Hillary, which comes to the tune of slightly over $20 million. This money is key for Obama, because it allows him to travel at will, and polls have shown the the more voters get to know Obama, the more they like him. Hillary's attempts to get free advertising via weekly debates will probably fizzle, considering there have been already been 18 debates.With money and momentum on his side, all Obama had to do was survive Super Tuesday. But with more states and more delegates, he didn't just survive yesterday -- he aced it.
Photo by Allison Harger via Flickr
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
[ report this ]
Clinton loans herself $5 million:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/06/clinton-loans-herself-5-million/
[ report this ]
I think either side would be hard pressed to declare a winner yet. If anything, the contest is more protracted than ever.
[ report this ]
The race does get longer because of this, rdm, but I see that only helping Obama. He's in a pretty unique position of being the newcomer AND having significantly more cash, so he will be able to introduce his message to soft support pretty easily. Of course, Hillary could try to remake herself as she did post-Iowa, but I'm not sure how well that would work. Mark Penn, Clinton Family Pollster, is already trying out a new message, saying Barack is the establishment candidate. I think that'll be a tough sell.
[ report this ]
Yeah, as it turns out - Hillary won more delegates on Super Tuesday. Perhaps you'd like to rewrite this entry?
[ report this ]
well said sir.
[ report this ]
i believe hillary is still leading delegates, at least including the super-smarmy, super-undemocratic superdelegates. that said, the race is clearly far from over and i hope obama prevails. if not, say hello to president mccain.
[ report this ]
MSNBC.com shows Obama 838-834.
AP's latest count (Super Tues. only) = Clinton 739-706.
Regardless of what the count REALLY is, it's clear that Obama has momentum in his favor -- just a week ago, when Edwards was still in, it didn't look like it would be this close b/w Clinton&Obama
[ report this ]
@cephyn- I would like to rewrite this post, but only because I used the word "Hillary" three times in one sentance.
And Andy took the words write out of my mouth. (internet mouth?) It's also worth noting that the folks at TPM Election Central say that NBC has the most accurate numbers so far because " they represent not a momentary conclusion during an ongoing tally, but a calculation of where the totals will end up when all the returns are factored in". So yeah.
[ report this ]
In for hillary crying again.
[ report this ]
In for hillary crying again.
[ report this ]
So you're taking the one contrarian source because they're using projections instead of actual tallies. Got it.
[ report this ]
Actually, I'm using MSNBC because CNN is just going with fully determined seats, which takes too long; CBS, ABC, FOX News and WaPo are incorporating Super Delegates into their reports, and I wanted to only talk about Super Tuesday. Got it?
[ report this ]
OK so you're still going off projections only. With the projected total separated by only 4 delegates, and with the current running total Hillary up 729-722 (http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/super-tuesday-delegate-tracker.html)
at best this post is premature, and at worst - downright wrong.
[ report this ]
Are we calling Clinton by her first name because she's a woman?
[ report this ]
Cephyn, the nature of this post is commentary. While we usually stick to straight reporting on politics, it's fun to mix in some opinion/commentary, especially with our primary election now in the rear-view mirror.
[ report this ]
I believe we are calling Clinton by her first name because there has already been a president Clinton. The same way we called Bush "George W" until fairly recently.
[ report this ]
Or it could just be a way to mock her just as you pointed out Bush was mocked by being called "Dubya". It's demeaning even if it's not sexist.
[ report this ]
@Raul: Have you noticed her campaign? It's Hillary '08 on all the signs and such. She's as sexist and demeaning as I am if that's the case.
Proof: http://www2.demstore.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/scstore/Clinton/?E+scstore+done
[ report this ]
Hold up- I just realized the link I gave was not the actual store of the campaign. Here's the real one, which actually proves my point even more-
http://www.hillarystore.com/
[ report this ]
raul -- if it's demeaning to refer to Sen. Clinton as Hillary, then why does so much of her campaign propaganda, bumper stickers, etc. say simply "Hillary for president." Just look at her website.
I was kind of disgusted by the first-name-thing myself when I noticed Cristina signs everywhere in Argentina. Cristina Kirchner recently became their first female president and was preceded by her husband, Nestor's '03-'07 presidency.
[ report this ]
The fact that Obama won a lot of Midwestern and traditionally Republican states pretty handedly should be reason enough to make him the Democratic nominee.
McCain will be tough to beat, and pitting up someone who voted very similarly to him in the Senate (i.e. Hillary) won't do much for Democrats.
Plus the fact that Hillary can't get male or independent votes...does anyone seriously think she's the one that can take down the GOP??
[ report this ]
That's true. I suppose if she wants to be cozy with voters by going with her first name, then it's within everyone's right to refer to her by her first name. My bad.
Anyway, I think it would benefit Clinton to portray herself as a fighter for the working class Democrats, the union members. She won California through their support, and in turn she can portray Obama as the one being championed by the rich, wealthy, Hollywood liberals. However, that will be tough considering the support she has received from rich, wealthy liberals in the past.
[ report this ]
i love how the fact that obama seems to have a lead among white male democrats is being spun as a virtue rather than the ugly reality that it is: many white men, including and not limited to hipsters, are still deeply sexist.
it's 2008, and somehow what a majority of white men in the democratic party want is being framed as something that is good for all of us? please. i can make up my own mind, with research and reading and listening and discussion. i don't need shepard fairey's sanctimonious posters or common's lazy videos.
hillary clinton's unrivaled grasp of domestic and foreign policy stands in clear, stark contrast to obama's lack of experience: a grand total of 3 years in federal government. his messages are vague, unspecific, short on facts, and loooong on rhetoric.
he is the one who has introduced acid negativity into this campaign. i find his self-righteousness deeply troubling, arrogant and divisive.
[ report this ]
Well geeze Elmer, I support Obama because he gets most of his money from small individual contributors.
That makes me a sexist?
Clinton has even gotten money from Rupert Murdoch. I place more importance where a candidate gets their the money, because that tells me who the candidate will be most loyal to, if elected.
[ report this ]
you really want to know who won? add up the popular votes. i'm guessing hillary won, right? right?
[ report this ]
um...last I checked, 1,000 was a greater number than 902:
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8196350?source=most_viewed&nclick_check=1
Hillary Clinton won.
maybe laist wants to do some updates today?
[ report this ]
um...last I checked, 1,000 was a greater number than 902:
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8196350?source=most_viewed&nclick_check=1
Hillary Clinton won.
Maybe LAist wants to do some updates today?
Well, jrb, then you must not mind that Obama got money from Rezko (in his personal AND professional life)--and from Exelon, the country’s biggest nuclear plant operator. So he yokes small individual contributors TOGETHER with huge corporate ones--awesome!
Look--my point is that Obama is a politician too, with all the attendant conflicts of interest. If you support him, go for it--but his desire to portray himself as holier than thou is bullshit. He's no more holy than you or I. Or Hillary.
[ report this ]
Hey Elmer, if you are a Clinton supporter you must be a racist.
BTW, do you still beat your wife?
[ report this ]
Alright, let's see what we got here:
@elmer- The numbers you are posting include Super Delegates, which I was not talking about in the article. I was only talking about Super Tuesday,as I've mentioned earlier.
I'd recommend you check out http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914
which has only the delegates, with no pledged SDs. While this shows more then SupTues numbers, Hillary was leading before Super Tuesday, and now Barack is leading. So yeah.
And you want to talk about special interests? Hillary was on the board of Wal-Mart. I also question your idea that Hillary has an "unrivaled" grasp of domestic and foreign policy. The grasp wasn't smart enough to vote against the war in Iraq, after all.
@wrappedcherry- If this were the Republican side, you'd most likely be right. But the Democratic primaries hand out delegates proportionally
@everyone else- I messed up on Wisconsin and Hawaii- their primaries/caucuses are on the 19th, not the 12. My bad.
[ report this ]
go huckabee!!!!
[ report this ]
Honestly - I don't think Hillary Clinton can win the white house. I don't know a single Clinton supporter who would stay home on election day if Obama were the nominee. However, I know many Obama supporters (mostly Repubs who are disenchanted with how religious the GOP has gotten) who will never ever vote for a Clinton.
Add to this that John McCain will almost certainly be the GOP candidate. If he is, evangelical Christians who were almost single-handedly responsible for the last 8 years of GWB will stay home on election day and not vote for John McCain. But only if Obama is the Democrat he faces. There is only one person that this voting block hates more than John McCain, and that person is Hillary Clinton. They will get out the vote with a fury if she has a chance at becoming president. Trust.
So ask yourself, is pulling for Clinton worth jeopardizing a best case scenario of 4 more years of GOP leadership and worst case, 1-2 years of President McCain and 2-8 years of Vice-turned-President Huckabee???
[ report this ]
This idea that Obama is a better candidate simply because people will vote against Clinton, or stay home and not vote at all, is way too cynical for this stage of the race.
My biggest question to Obama supporters, so I can get a better handle on what his support is about, is this: what is it about him that you find inspiring? And what will this inspiration cause you to do that is different from what you do now (besides vote?) Anything? And why is it important that the president of the US be "inspirational"--isn't that the job of spiritual leaders and artists?