Weekend State Primary/Caucuses

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:14:13 AM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will compete in three states today and one tomorrow. Today's states are:

Louisiana (primary -- Obama heavily favored to win due to the large, 32% African-American vote)

Washington State (caucus, but weird rules, as they have a primary next week. Only the caucus votes count.) The New York Times says this is the race to watch today. Hillary has the support of the both the states' Senators, while Obama has the support of the Governor. All three are female.

Nebraska (caucus, Obama favored to win.)

On Sunday, Maine holds caucuses. Hillary is expected to do well there, even though caucuses usually favor Obama.

The total at stake: 161 delegates in Washington, Louisiana, Nebraska and the Virgin Islands and 24 delegates in Maine.

An Obama sweep today does not mean Hillary is out of the race -- her campaign is expecting a big Obama win and concentrating instead on the big states of Ohio and Texas which vote in early March. [More]

As to the candidates' different strategies, the New York Times writes:

Two distinct road maps are taking shape. Obama’s strategy is geographically broad and depends on smaller states to help him amass delegates, while Clinton is counting on a few, delegate-rich states to carry her to the nomination.

The trio of contests on Tuesday — in Virginia, Maryland and the District — are expected to offer a demographic advantage to Obama because of the sizable number of African American voters in all three places. But Clinton is expected to be competitive tomorrow in Maine — the winner of the New Hampshire primary almost always is. And by focusing on health care, Clinton hopes to add to her strength among women, who have been the backbone of her strong finishes in previous races around the country.

< Washington Showing How NOT To Run An Election | Will Obama's Wave Crash at the Shore? >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Weekend State Primary/Caucuses | 18 comments (18 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Superdelegates confusing you? Try the (none / 0) (#1)
by ding7777 on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:33:33 AM EST

Credentials Committee.

At the two-month mark the responsibility for who gets seated at the Convention (if there is a dispute) gets handed off to the Convention Credentials Committee.
The DNC gets to appoint, and has appointed, 25 "standing members" to that committee - being careful not to skew it toward backers of any one candidate.
But the full committee will have 186 members, determined - all according to rules long since set down - based on some kind of formula that basically has to do with who won which delegates.

non-edited version

Wisconsin is shaping up to be a big battle. (none / 0) (#2)
by Geekesque on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:38:34 AM EST

If Clinton doesn't keep it close in the February 12 states, she's going to need a win on February 19 very badly. My guess is that she'll throw everything she has at Wisconsin, which isn't a bad state demographically.

I don't think so (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Jeralyn on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:43:30 AM EST

She is counting on the big states in early March, Ohio and Texas, and then if needed, Pennsylvania. The Feb. states all favor Obama and they are working around that.

I guess the question is, will her loss in the Feb. states change the mind of the voters in the March states? That's a valid question, in my opinion. It's not the best timetable for her, but I don't think she needs to win on Feb. 19....she just needs to keep her March voters.


: What she probably needs to do (none / 0) (#4)
by andrewwm on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 11:47:44 AM EST

Is keep the votes relatively close in most states. Then she can just say that the states were unfavorable to her and it won't generate that much momentum, likely. But if Obama runs up the score like he did on states favorable to him on Super Tuesday, she's in big trouble.
So, she shouldn't abandon the states that vote pre-3/4, because a string of major blowouts would look really bad.

: The bigger question is whether she can generate (none / 0) (#7)
by Geekesque on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:52:52 PM EST

big margins in those states. If she wins Ohio and Texas by ten delegates each but loses MD and VA and WA by twenty delegates each, she comes out on the losing end.
The key stat from Super Tuesday was she pulled more than 60% in only one state, but that he pulled 60% in nine states.
His margin from Illinois and Georgia cancelled out her wins from New York and California.

I'm calling Wisconsin narrowly for Obama. (none / 0) (#5)
by Ben Masel on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:05:34 PM EST

3-7 edge on pledged delegates. Only 2 of our 8 Congressional districts have an odd number of delegates. Clinton will take the extra in Sensenbrenner's district, with Republican women crossing over. I'll call Petri's district's odd delegate for Obama, not with a lot of confidence.

Baldwin's and Obey's go Obama, but it's pretty iffy whether his majority's enough for 5/3 and 4/2 delegate splits, respectively.


Did you see source of poll favoring Clinton (none / 0) (#13)
by Cream City on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 02:28:56 PM EST

50-41, released two days ago? I saw the results and date on another site but not the source. It has been two months since any polling, so I'd really like to know if this is one of the well-done polls . . . or just a call-in radio talk-show "poll." :-)

And despite her endorsement, I'm still calling Gwen Moore's district for Clinton. And I don't know how much Barrett's endorsement will mean; like BTD's, it seems "tepid," and he hasn't been out there for BO.

For Milwaukee hardcore Dems, a lot may depend upon whether BO shows up for the big annual event next Saturday. Clinton confirmed again, but BO won't do so yet (although he sort of said he would, earlier).

Btw, the campuses in Milwaukee just aren't gearing up yet much for either one, even though BO had an office in the city first. I hear there is more going on at campuses elsewhere -- I imagine that is so for Madison? But Milwaukee has far more college students, combining all of the campuses.

It will be interesting to see if the great GOTV effort that made Wisconsin second in the country in 2004 for young voters will hold again here.


Young voters, fraudulent poll? (none / 0) (#17)
by Ben Masel on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 09:56:19 PM EST

The silly marriage amendment, more than 2004, changed youth culture, making voting hip. Perhaps moreso for off-campus kids than college students. My 51,000 votes in the Primary in '06 were not especially concentrated on campuses. For example, my Campaign page had 61 young (18-23) "friends" in Beaver Dam.

____

I'm suspecting the pro-Clinton poll report is an utter fabrication. Nothing on it at wispolitics.com


: Oops. ARG. (none / 0) (#18)
by Ben Masel on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:04:41 PM EST

posted before reading downthread.
dubious methodology. They asak "If between Clinton and Obama" but there'll be other names on the ballot. Gravel plus the dropouts.
They also don't explain what criteria they use for "likely Democratic Primary voters." Have they changed their age distribution to reflect the new reality?

Yep, it's ramping up in Wisconsin now (none / 0) (#12)
by Cream City on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 02:22:16 PM EST

with phone banks and doorbell ringing and more today, at least for Clinton (probably for BO, too, but I haven't heard about them). And I just saw word of the first Wisconsin poll in two months -- but am still looking for which pollster did it.

If it's one of our local ones, it could be useful.
If not, who knows? But it's Clinton 50, Obama 41.

BO did get Obey's endorsement today and has other good ones -- the governor and our AA congresswoman. But Clinton has some great ones, too, with our first congresswoman ever, Tammy Baldwin, and our first elected woman lieutenant governor ever, Barbara Lawton, both much admired by women in major Dem strongholds in the state. (Milwaukee, Madison, Janesville/Beloit, La Crosse, and sometimes Green Bay. The rest of the state is so red that Wisconsin was the closest blue state to turning red last time. It ought to be watched closely in this primary and the months to come -- we need DNC resources! but haven't seen them.)

Thankfully, Clinton -- who has been here many times before (and always to far bigger crowds than expected, even years ago) -- has committed to coming here for the Dems' biggest annual event, in Milwaukee next Saturday. No confirmation from BO yet, although there was an earlier sort-of pledge.

Clinton also has committed to a radio debate in Milwaukee. Also no word from Obama yet on that, but he's focused on the caucus states now. So we will see. . . .


ARG has a poll out (none / 0) (#14)
by rebecca on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 03:33:25 PM EST

ARG Poll
Clinton 50
Obama 41
Other 1
Undecided 8

Democrats go for Clinton 56% Independents 41%
Democrats go for Obama 36% Independents 50%


: That's it! Thanks -- but (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Cream City on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 04:20:05 PM EST

oh, no, it's ARG.
Well, maybe they aren't wrong all of the time. :-)

Focusing on later primaries (none / 0) (#6)
by cannondaddy on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:36:12 PM EST

is now callled "pulling a Rudy". Hope that works out better for her.

: She'll vigorously contest the next few primaries (none / 0) (#8)
by Geekesque on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:53:54 PM EST

She has to, even if it doesn't change a single delegate.
Her big problem is going to be generating big margins in TX and OH.

: No, it's different than Rudy (none / 0) (#11)
by dmfox on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:46:20 PM EST

Rudy won zero primaries, and was getting knocked around by Ron Paul. Clinton has already won some huge states. I think a string of losses will be bad for Clinton, but by no means catastrophic.
If she loses Ohio and Texas though, I think that would end things in a hurry.

I can't imagine (none / 0) (#9)
by NJDem on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:54:08 PM EST

she'd really try and 'pull a Rudy.' Hopefully she knows that she must remain competative and pick up as many delegates as possible. The new flow of money should help.

I really think that (none / 0) (#10)
by Kathy on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:15:00 PM EST

you make a big mistake when you underestimate Hillary Clinton.

She has been beating expectations all of her life.

count on an obama win... (none / 0) (#16)
by lennonist on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 05:07:10 PM EST

... in Nebraska. I know this isn't news, but when I entered the caucus, I thought the obama crowd was the caucus as there was a huge crowd gathered and a much smaller one seemingly behind them. It was a chaotic, charged atmosphere and it took me a second to realize that the small Clinton crowd weren't the workers gathered at the back but were rather the supporters of the current front runner.

It was easily 5 to 1 for Obama, which wasn't really a surprise given that 12,000 Obama supporters showed up on Thursday night in downtown Omaha, more than the venue held.

From what I saw, Obama will win big. I don't think it will even be close.

So, while a big win in Louisiana can be explained by citing demographics, what does a huge Obama win mean in Nebraska? I think it's bad news for HRC, but we'll see what the results say.