Obama to Head to Missouri Seeking Rural Support

Barack Obama edged out Hillary Clinton in the Missouri by one point. She won everywhere but Kansas City, St. Louis, Jefferson City and Nodeway. In some rural parts of the state, she got 70% of the vote. She got more votes from Democrats than Obama, but he got a large share of the Independent vote.

McCain won a contested primary in Missouri against Huckabee and Romney. Missouri has voted Republican in recent general elections. Its last vote for a Democrat was for Bill Clinton in 1996. A Rasmussen poll last week showed Missouri would vote for McCain over Obama, 47 to 41%. Hillary did better, a statistical tie with McCain.

Missouri is a classic swing state in Presidential Elections that almost always awards its Electoral College Votes to the candidate who wins the White House. George W. Bush won those 11 Electoral Votes four years ago by winning the popular vote 53% to 46%.

Missouri selected its delegates this weekend: Hillary and Obama got equal number of pledged delegates and currently split the state's superdelegates equally.[More...]

At Saturday's convention, the Obama and Clinton camps selected the last of their delegates. Each has 36 pledged Missouri delegates. Of the state's 16 superdelegates, 10 are split between the two rivals, while six remain uncommitted.

There was plenty of support for Hillary at the convention. Her supporters clearly didn't view the race as over, and the headline reads, Democrats Divided.

Missouri Congressman Ike Skelton on Friday joined 14 other Congresspersons from swing states to express their view that Hillary is the more electable candidate against John McCain in November and the best candidate for the party and the country.

Exit polls for Missouri's Feb. 5 primary are here.

Where's Obama headed tomorrow, while West Virginians are voting? Missouri.

< How Big Is Appalachia Anyway? | Defense Begins Closing in Rezko Trial >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I don't blame him. (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by rooge04 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:31:18 PM EST
    He's gonna look pretty bad losing by 40 points to the already-declared dead loser.   And then we can blame it on racist West Virginians.

    Bet he wishes he could take his name (none / 0) (#49)
    by Cream City on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:56:32 PM EST
    off the ballot in West Virginia, too.

    Then Brazile would find a reason to amend the roolz again, as for Michigan and Florida, to take away all of West Virginia's delegates.  (Shoot, I shouldn't have given them the idea.  Donna "Watch Me Walk Out" Brazile, if you're reading this, just kidding. . . .)


    Missouri. How counterintuitive! (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Joan in VA on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:35:27 PM EST
    Makes as much sense as talking about Vietnam.

    very savvy move... (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:36:04 PM EST
    on Axelrod's part.

    Show that Obama is aware of his weaknesses and is going to address them while avoiding putting them directly on display by trying and failing to make any inroads in KY.  

    Puts the lie (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:39:19 PM EST
    to the canard that he has a gazillion SuperDelegates in his back pocket.

    It's obvious that he has lots of contingent support.


    He is wooing superdelegates, not rural voters. (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by magnetics on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:47:45 PM EST
    that is the only thing that makes (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by bjorn on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:55:14 PM EST
    sense....there really won't be anywhere he can hide tomorrow so I don't think it matters where he goes.

    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by BDB on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:53:14 PM EST
    Of course, if I was a Super Delegate I might be asking myself why Obama is having to shore up support in a state that borders his home state and he won (granted, not by much).  

    And (none / 0) (#52)
    by cal1942 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:54:45 PM EST
    it's for appearance only just as you say. He won't actually convince any Missourians.

    Here's a not so little electoral tidbit:

    Ohio has been carried by the winner in 11 straight elections.

    We've went through a few "new maps" during that period.


    Ike Skelton was a real coup (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by vicsan on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:36:28 PM EST
    for Hillary. I'd love to know what TLers from Missouri think about Hillary's chances there and do they believe McCain would beat BO? Which Dem has the best chance there against McCain? It looks like Hillary does right now.

    Rasmussen polled Hillary last week? I thought he said he was excluding her in his polls since BO was "the winner of the Dem nomination?"

    I have a home one mile from MO (5.00 / 0) (#12)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:46:32 PM EST
    I was completely shocked that he won.
    I think Hillary has a solid chance in Nov and I do not think Obama has a solid chance.
    but that probably does not surprise you.

    Clinton got a super-del in Texas today, too (none / 0) (#50)
    by Cream City on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:59:20 PM EST
    But do we see the media coverage of that?  No.  Well, it's only a Latino Congressman, anyway.

    And on realclearpolitics.com, Obama's count went down by one super-delegate during the day today.  But I can't seem to find any coverage of that.


    We know he's not good at geography (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by stillife on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:36:49 PM EST
    Maybe he got MO confused with WV?

    He thought the abreviation for (none / 0) (#26)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:58:15 PM EST
    Lower Arnold meant Los Angeles.

    Why doesn't he try KY? (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by davnee on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:38:26 PM EST
    You know the place voting next week.  Plenty of rural voters there to try out his new and improved just folks message (if he has one).  But then that would actually dignify the vote in KY and we can't have that.

    You Know obama Tap Dances To His Own Tune (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:44:47 PM EST
    Going to MO goes to his arrogance.  He sincerely thinks he can put one over on the electorate.  I do not see him winning MO against McCain.  Like it or not some of those independents are suffering from buyer's remorse by now and will go with McCain.  Hillary's chances of winning MO look better if she is the nominee.

    He wants (none / 0) (#54)
    by cal1942 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:31:12 AM EST
    to taint a huge Clinton win in KY while declaring total victory after winning Oregon.

    So that's 4 states out of Obama's 57 or 59 or 58 that he'll claim should be ignored.


    Ooh, I bet Clare McCaskill's leg (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by Anne on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:42:07 PM EST
    is tingling...

    Honestly, Obama has become almost a caricature of a real person, to the point that I'm expecting him to get a call from James Lipton about appearing on "Inside the Actors' Studio."

    And, I guess it's been a long day, and I'm punchy, because when I read that he was seeking "rural support," all I could think was, "he'd connect so much better with ordinary people if he would just call it a jock strap."

    Maybe I need dinner...

    For that laugh (none / 0) (#17)
    by samanthasmom on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:50:26 PM EST
    you can charge your dinner to my credit card.

    Lipton only interviews... (none / 0) (#46)
    by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:05:49 PM EST
    ...good actors.

    Obama is the political equivalent of Steve Gutenberg.  He was good in Police Academy, but that seems to be about it for range.  (I mean, when Bruce Jenner out-acted him in Can't Stop the Music, it was pretty embarrassing.  When Felipe the "Native American" Village Person blew Gutenberg off the screen with his performance, well...)


    Cmon Now Guttenberg Showed He Is A Pretty (none / 0) (#47)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:36:21 PM EST
    good dancer on Dancing With The Stars...

    He's wasting his time (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by standingup on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:45:43 PM EST
    coming here.  We are the Show Me State and he has shown the rural, conservative Dems all they need to know with his comments in San Francisco.  He didn't have them before the Feb 5 primary and it's very unlikely he will change many minds post his statements about guns and religion.  

    See my comment above. He knows that. (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by magnetics on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:49:57 PM EST
    He knows he doesn't have a chance with the rural voters, but he's after the superD's.  Another example of choosing the sizzle over the steak.

    He can try (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by standingup on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:32:28 PM EST
    but I think a lot of them understand the problem he is facing in Missouri and a lot of other states.  

    SF Comments And Rev. Wright (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:57:21 PM EST
    The combination is lethal in rural conservative areas of MO. I agree they weren't impressed before and now the barriers are even higher.



    You have to imagine that mcCaskills (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:59:25 PM EST
    only way to survive is to become a cabinet officer.

    Probably True But 1st Obama Has To Win GE (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:13:18 PM EST
    I worked and contributed to Claire's campaign in 06.  I knew she would not be progressive but never thought that she would be quite this bad on Iraq and FISA. I had decided prior to the primary season that she would not receive my vote when she ran for reelection.

    I think Claire (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by standingup on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:37:33 PM EST
    won because more people were voting against Talent.  I will sure have a hard time voting for her again and know many people who are unhappy with her voting record so far.  She will be in a very weak position against a decent Republican challenger.

    There Is No Way I Could Talk Myself Into Voting (none / 0) (#43)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:45:27 PM EST
    for anyone who was willing to vote to take away my constitutional protections.

    that's why she's so (none / 0) (#35)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:15:07 PM EST
    partisan about it all.

    I am not a Missouri voter, but (none / 0) (#56)
    by magnetics on Tue May 13, 2008 at 01:34:18 PM EST
    I heard her in a Senate hearing cheering for more contractors as the 'wave of the future ' for the US military.  Ouch!  Just what we need -- a mercenary army.   Anyone been reading Machievelli lately?

    Check This Out. obama Has Big Plans For (none / 0) (#48)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:37:14 PM EST
    other states also.  Of course, I say good luck with that.



    Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of 2000 (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by SunnyLC on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:53:08 PM EST
    Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Election Night 2000

    Think not??

    I'll take you back to that fateful night in a moment.

    But first, listen to strategist David Axelrod on WCCO, the CBS affiliate in Minneapolis, MN the night of the May 8 Indiana and North Carolina primaries. (The video is the top left "thumbnail" located just above the video player in the event the current news plays rather than the Axelrod video; you will also have to endure a short Coldstone Creamery ad).


    MORE MORE MORE in the full blog post...at

    LOL (none / 0) (#34)
    by Edgar08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:15:00 PM EST
    "..went to the polls in record numbers from Florida to California...."

    Should say "from Georgia to California..."


    I hope... (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by NYCDem11 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:57:16 PM EST
    the voters of these next states, particularly WVA and KY, feel as offended as I do that Senator Obama dares not to compete and actually fight for their votes. What happened to the every-state-counts bandwagon? Every day I feel more cemented in my belief that so many politicians and media pundits would simply prefer to see Hillary fail than to actually nominate the very best candidate; and that it is Senator Obama who will do just about anything to win, including dismissing the citizens of Appalachian states, along with the voters of MI and FL. So much for the party of the people and change we can believe in. This is Obama's time to step up to the plate and put into action his unifying message. Why isn't he leading and controlling the dialogue?

    A big loss tomorrow should give pause to super delegates, if they will only muffle their ears against the deafening and irrational call for Senator Clinton's withdrawal.

    The trick with (none / 0) (#28)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:01:24 PM EST
    NC was that it showed Obama's support among AAs was not going to slacken.

    That sorta killed it all for Clinton.


    Why should Obama waste (none / 0) (#32)
    by 1jane on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:12:20 PM EST
    campaign money? Clinton's debt is now estimated at 20 million.

    Because he hasn't won yet. (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by Democratic Cat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:28:15 PM EST
    Cool Cat (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Cate on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:58:47 PM EST
    You got that right!

    Tweety was in full swing today (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by bjorn on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:58:08 PM EST
    He said Clinton voters are very "bitter" and blaming everyone else for her loss...so maybe Obama should go on Tweety's show tomorrow where they can talk about bitter clinton voters instead of losing W. Virginia.

    Every (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:20:09 PM EST
    body is bitter to Obama supporters. They certainly have the corner on elitism don't they?

    Well, it will all be shaken loose in Nov. Then I guess Obama will be the one who is bitter.


    No No No -- I was bitter yesterday. (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ellie on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:21:33 PM EST
    Today, I'm clingy.

    IMO this Unity Ticket news seems like just a softer version, through clenched teeth, of go away HRC and give the man your votes.

    Interwoven in this "feelgood" full court press is the inevitable complaint about the damage that SHE -- though not Obama -- is doing to the party. Rilly, the guy couldn't be nicer, always and forever more, amen.

    Maybe this is what got TeamObama skittish enough to step back their WWTSBQ whup fest and (allegedly) reconsider a Unity Ticket invitation. [/as if]

    The endorsement to end all endorsements:

    While Dukakis says he expects Obama will win the nomination, he does not believe Clinton should withdraw until after the last primary. In fact, the former Massachusetts governor says this long tough battle for the nomination may have made Obama better prepared to face John McCain. Dukakis went from a huge lead to a crushing defeat against George Bush Sr. [...] (Dukakis: Obama more prepared for McCain NECN TV, May 12, 2008)

    I expect when TeamObama read that, someone had to hold back his ears while he hurled his eyeballs out and waited a good long while before his stomach settled.

    There's still a sense that they're giving it to Obama no matter what. (cf other Dems "praising" HRC, incl. John Edwards in a very p!ssy appearance.) I'm still not voting Obama though.

    Hey, it turns out I was still quite bitter!


    Poblano's model shows both losing (none / 0) (#2)
    by jcsf on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:35:12 PM EST
    Missouri, I believe.

    The spreadsheet doesn't mention Clinton's chances, but it isn't one of the states listed as Clinton winning, that Obama won't win (while Florida is a state that based on the demographic model, Clinton would win, Obama would lose, for example).

    Well rub it out then. (none / 0) (#21)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:54:38 PM EST
    how old you'll?

    Do you actually remember a winning map?


    Rassmusam Poll in Missouri 5/6 (none / 0) (#31)
    by 1jane on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:07:48 PM EST
    Clinton viewed very favorably 17%
    Obama viewed very favorably 23%
    McCain viewed very favorably 17%

    I checked the spreadsheet and find Pablano's model has Obama and Clinton in a deadheat. This will be a fun election to watch.

    The delegate math shows Obama needing 155 to win the Democratic nomination contest. The delegate math shows Clinton needs 327.5 to win the Democratic nomination.

    May 20 is the day many are projecting as the day Obama will declare victory. We may have this contest come to a close in 11 days.


    Rasmussen - MO - 5/8 (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Josey on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:26:25 PM EST
    The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds John McCain leading Hillary Clinton by nine percentage points, 50% to 41%. He leads Barack Obama by an even larger margin, 53% to 38%.

    Twenty-one percent (21%) of Missouri Democrats currently say they will vote for McCain while Obama attracts 14% of GOP voters. McCain has the advantage among unaffiliated voters.

    In the unlikely event that Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Presidential nomination, McCain has a smaller advantage in Missouri. He leads the former First Lady by a statistically insignificant margin, 45% to 43%.


    which (none / 0) (#42)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:42:12 PM EST
    means that there's a big difference.

    If those (none / 0) (#53)
    by cal1942 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:23:19 AM EST
    counts include SDs they should be discounted.  SDs can change their votes in an instant.

    I also want to know what constitutes half the vote plus one.  Is it with or without Michigan and Florida?

    If Obama's celebration (sounds like election night 2000 and the Ellis intervention) assumes the exclusion of MI and FL he will have increased his level of loathsomeness and that level is already near near the pinnacle.


    Missourians like McCaskill? (none / 0) (#13)
    by MichaelGale on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:46:46 PM EST
    Is she popular?

    not the ones I know. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:48:50 PM EST
    and I know quite a few.
    they didnt like her BEFORE she endorsed Obama.

    Man, that is one (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by vicsan on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:53:57 PM EST
    candidate I am hoping LOSES her reelection. She has been just plain old nasty toward Hillary. I actually donated money to McCaskill's campaign. I want my money back!

    I cannot believe how hateful she is. She obviously does not like Hillary.


    McCaskill (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Cate on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:07:36 PM EST
    McCaskill was a "Blue American" and the left blogs solicited donations for her (remember Michael J. Fox did those ads for her as he thought she supported stem-cell research?). Anyway, once she was elected, she became a 'rubber-stamp' for Bush. But, when she came out for Obama, she was amazingly forgiven by the lefty blogs.

    That Is For Sure (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:17:55 PM EST
    Missourians on DKos that were totally against McCaskill because of her votes suddenly were swearing that they always loved her. At first I couldn't believe it and then it dawned on me that supporting Obama was more important in their eyes then Iraq and FISA.

    11/07 Favorability Ratings (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:06:09 PM EST
    48% Approve 47% Disapprove

    I haven't seen a poll since then. Endorsing Obama may help with AA community but I believe it hurts her with conservative Dems.

    Claire has consistently voted with Republicans on Iraq, FISA and immigration and is extremely proud of her bipartisan creds. I didn't approve of her performance prior to her endorsement so nothing has really changed in that respect.


    I see this as (none / 0) (#55)
    by mg7505 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:58:46 AM EST
    a strategy to start 'looking like a winner' instead of going to the states and trying to get their votes. Too bad he doesn't have the same fighting spirit as Hillary, who campaigned aggressively even in North Carolina.

    Obama's behavior really strikes me as arrogant -- like saying that she can do whatever she wants, he doesn't care because he's off to the real races. How do KY and WV voters feel about this?