CBS News examines the age factor in the Democratic presidential race. Older voters favor Hillary, younger voters favor Obama. African-American voters are expected to favor Obama.

Younger voters turned out in Iowa and African American voters will turn out in South Carolina. But, CBS says, that may not be true for Tsunami Tuesday and that could work against Obama.

Obama’s weak performance so far among older voters substantially increases the odds against him scoring big victories in the slew of states voting on February 5th, "Super Duper Tuesday."

By the numbers: [More...]

John Edwards today said he's staying in the race, even though he got his "butt kicked" in Nevada. He said he makes no excuses for the loss. And, he reminds us, we're 3 states down with 47 to go. (Actually, Michigan makes it 4, although the results there like in Florida, may not count.)

Edwards arrived in South Carolina last night and will be campaigning there all week.

Edwards has put far more effort in South Carolina than Nevada, spending $2 million on advertising there -- twice what Clinton and Obama have spent there.

While Edwards said South Carolina was important, he said he would stay in the race even if he ran poorly there. "Absolutely," Edwards said on CNN's Late Edition. "I'm in it for the long haul."

Supporters of Barack Obama continue to spin the 13-12 delegate count story as if it proves he won in Nevada. Their sour grapes attitude is so unbecoming.

One more time, here's the deal.

• Nevada Democrats

  Just like in Iowa, what was awarded today were delegates to the County Convention, of which Senator Clinton won the majority. No national convention delegates were awarded.

  if the delegate preferences remain unchanged between now and April 2008, the calculations of national convention delegates being circulated by the Associated Press are correct.

The delegate count will occur in February at the county convention and in April at the state convention. No delegate totals can be predicted before then. [More...]

The Las Vegas Sun examines Hillary Clinton's win in the Nevada caucuses yesterday and provides these reasons she won:

• Foresaw a huge wave of new voters unlike in her failed Iowa campaign.
• Worked relentlessly to appeal to Hispanics from the ground up rather than the top down.
• Sewed up the support of many Culinary workers long before the union endorsed Obama.
• Dominated among women and then persuaded them show up to caucus.
• Won the final week of publicity with tough political gamesmanship.

Most of the remainder of the article focuses on internal campaign strategies. It mentions Clinton's strength among Hispanics and women, but interestingly, concludes with this: [More...]

Despite the ridiculous, pathetic and shameful attempt by the Obama campaign to spin the undemocratic and outrageous delegate selection system used in Nevada (and Iowa) as a "win," the Media, to its credit, did not bite. As Chris Bowers notes:

. . . [T]he media is instead covering who wins the popular vote of individual states. . . . [T]he media is covering is interesting and closer to the concept of one person, one vote . . .

Chris is strangely upset about this respect for the wishes of voters. I say thank gawd someone respects the voters, because the delegate allocation system sure does not.

The funny thing is if the Media did NOT cover it this way, there would be no reason to give Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, etc. much coverage at all. The delegate results in these states are virtually meaningless. They will have almost nil effect on the delegate count. The only primaries that would have the heft to merit big coverage would come on February 5 and after - when the a great proportion of the delegates will be chosen. These states would get the coverage of Mitt Romney's win in Wyoming.

More . . .

Update: The Las Vegas Sun crunches the numbers.

****

On the Nevada Democratic Party website today, there's a "clarification" of yesterday's statement about delegates. Today's statement:

Clarification** of Statement by Nevada Democratic Party Chair Jill Derby

(Las Vegas, NV) "The Nevada Democratic Party and its officials have taken great effort to maintain our neutrality in the presidential campaign and the integrity of our process. Today, two out of three Nevadans who caucused chose a Democrat instead of a Republican for president. That is an overwhelming majority vote for a new direction. Just like in Iowa, what was awarded today were delegates to the County Convention, of which Senator Clinton won the majority. No national convention delegates were awarded. That said, if the delegate preferences remain unchanged between now and April 2008, the calculations of national convention delegates being circulated by the Associated Press are correct. We look forward to our county and state conventions where we will choose the delegates for the nominee that Nevadans support."

Yesterday's statement (and background): [More]

The Guardian reports on Rudy's strategy of foregoing the early states to focus on Florida.

Shorter version: Rudy's last stand.

My take: A loss in Florida will be a body blow. But Tsunami Tuesday, with California, New York, New Jersey and others still count. Don't underestimate him and don't over-estimate McCain. Rudy still needs defeating. Ignoring him or dismissing him is not the right strategy. It's what he's hoping for, that while others see him as laying low in the weeds and stop paying attention, he's been making gains pounding the pavement in Florida with a ten day advantage over his rivals.

Will it work? Hopefully not. But it's not over yet. From the Guardian: [More...]

Source for numbers: MSNBC vote tally by county and Nevada Dems.

Hillary won in other counties besides Clark. She also won in Lincoln, Lander, Lyon, Mineral and Nye. I feel like that's getting lost in the discussion.

From all the disparate reports about delegates tonight, I can see I'm not the only one who doesn't understand how the caucus and primary votes translate into delegates locally and then at the national level.

I just came across this article by L. Sandy Maisel, director of the Goldfarb Center for Public Affairs and Civic Engagement at Colby College. I have no idea if he's correct or not, but he sounds authoritative. He describes the process for Democrats as follows:

The Democrats allocate delegates in proportion to the vote a candidate receives in a primary or caucus. If Obama gets 60 percent of the votes in a state with 100 delegates, he would get 60 delegates, and the other candidates -- those who surpass a threshold of 15 percent -- will receive the rest, divided according to their vote totals. The strategic implication of this rule is that a candidate should not desert a state simply because he or she will not win it. That candidate still will pick up valuable delegates. Thus, Obama is campaigning in New York and New Jersey and Clinton in Illinois.

On Tsunami Tuesday and superdelegates: [More...]

I hope we all can see now how horribly undemocratic the Iowa Caucus system (used today in Nevada) is. Frankly it is so undemocratic that it makes a mockery of the histrionic hue and cry we are seeing in some precincts.

Barack Obama and his supporters spent a week, rightly in my opinion, decrying attempts to change the rules at the last moment for the Nevada caucus. But he makes a mockery of that complaint when he celebrates the most outrageous form of voter disenfranchisement - the delegate awarding system. Chris Cilizza explains:

The disparity between the raw vote total and the delegate apportionment is centered on the fact that Obama beat Clinton in the state's sparsely-populated northern reaches and more rural areas -- a statewide showing that left him with a narrow delegate victory if not a popular majority.

In simpler English, the votes in the more populous regions of Nevada were given LESS WEIGHT than votes in less populated regions. In case someone needs a history lesson, this was the issue in the famous "one person, one vote" case - Baker v. Carr, which led to Gray v. Sanders still the most important voting rights case that I can remember.

More . . .

Mike Huckabee gave a very gracious speech after the South Carolina Republican primary was called for John McCain.

I've read a lot of comments wanting McCain to lose in S.C. because he'd be tougher for a Democrat to beat.

I disagree. I don't think the S.C. results means McCain will win the Republican nomination. McCain will face a tough battle in Florida and tougher ones on Feb. 5. If Huckabee and Romney aren't considered serious contenders by then, it will be McCain and Giuliani. I think Republicans will choose Rudy.

The last thing I want is for Giuliani to have a viable shot at the Presidency. He could be a far a more difficult ultimate opponent than McCain.

My prediction: McCain's lead won't last. He's too old and the polar opposite of change that is so important to voters. The Tsunami states of Feb. 5 won't go for him.

I'm hoping Huckabee and Romney do well in Florida and on Feb. 5. Anybody but Rudy.

It looks like McCain, based on exit polls, which is bad news for Dems. He clearly would be the toughest to beat. Actual results here. Comment on South Carolina or other topics if you wish.