Update from central Las Vegas frontlines

Sorry to step on Todd's story about the poll but wanted to leave you with an update on how it looks from my little corner of the Nevada campaign.

I've felt all along that Obama's strength is too concentrated to put him on top unless all the supporters of other candidates broke against Hillary. That hasn't happened. Thats in part because she has absorbed some of the other campaigns -- hiring the Biden state director (and taking over the Biden office), hiring Richardson staffers, and getting a lot more help in the last 2 weeks than she got previously from AFSCME in terms of mail, phones, etc.

Whats astonishing to me is that I haven't seen much evidence of a  Culinary field presence, at least in my precincts --- which are pretty heavy with CUlinary membership. Maybe its at work or on the phones, but usually their field presence at this point in an election is very evident.

Just got back from my morning lit drop -- I've been leaving the Edwards policy book and flyer beside the morning papers on driveways of democratic households -- and still don't see very much lit from either of the other campaigns on doorsteps, which I usually would the day before an election. In fact, the only flyer in the gutter was one of my own, which must have blown away yesterday.

I'd say the poll -- while unlikely to be very good as a survey -- is a good reflection of the distribution of support in my own precinct. I'll have to get all my people out and hold them to be viable. (Thats a bitter pill to swollow after all this time but thats how elections go.) My district has a lot of lower-income appartments that I have not canvassed heavily; if those folks turn out, which is where Culinary's turnout machine can really matter, that could completely change the math, and he'd win it big.

But in another neighboring precinct, if our supporters come out and hold for Edwards, we should win it.

Two other precincts in my district are very competitive due to digilent field work by precinct captains, though the lack of Edwards visibility may hurt us in terms of turnout and late deciding habitual voters.

One of the things I'm interested to see on Saturday is if in fact local volunteers are qualitativley better than out of state or paid staff. IN other words, all the precincts I've noted above have been worked for us by local volunteers in their own nbhds. The Obama and Clinton pcs seem to have worked only their own blocks, judging by the distribution of early supporters. But in the last 2 weeks, they've had the benefit of massive tv and radio advertising, intensive mailing, live and recorded calls from call centers, visibility in terms of yard signs, and more staff and volunteers from allied groups in from out of state. I'm hoping that the advantage of a local contact might be felt in our final rounds of calls and contacts that we began last night.

A final problem I'm encountering which is a part of every campaign but really frustrating in a caucus -- last minute losses of precinct captains and firm supporters. Illness, family emergencies, last-minute trips, or in one or two cases, simple irresponsibility have meant we may not be represented very strongly in some precincts where we do have a good # of supporters. I don't know if  the other cmapaigns are having the same problems.

Some good news for us -- big story in today's Sun on Edwards as the "forgotten candidate" and good tv coverage yesterday of all the events.

Off now to the last Edwards rally and then a final day of voter contact.



Display:


thanks for this post (2.00 / 2)

and for all your hard work in your precinct and others nearby.

I regret the decision by the Edwards campaign not to advertise in Nevada. That must be hurting him with late deciders. I am hoping for a reasonably strong third-place showing for him in Nevada. I want him to keep winning delegates.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:14:27 AM EST

I think he realized after Iowa (2.00 / 1)

that the unions in Nevada were not going to come off the fence for him.

I suspect that's when he decided to focus on SC after NH, rather than NV.

He has added a lot of campaign events in NV this week, but I assume it was too late to make any ad buys there.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:23:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think he realized after Iowa (2.00 / 1)

It really seemed like it made more sense to go after NV rather than SC, because of the union presence, and because it seems tough for him to make inroads in the black vote this year.  Still, I don't know all that the campaign knows, and I wouldn't be surprised if his organization is in much better shape in SC because of 2004.  I still don't get how he hopes to make a mark there.

You must be jealous of a state where the campaign literature shows up on your doorstep for only two weeks, as opposed to months and months.  A lot of trees were killed for the sake of you early states!


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:45:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think he realized after Iowa (none / 0)

Edwards may believe that he can make a mark in SC by pointing out that he is from the region, was actually born in the state.  


by georgep on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:54:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

obviously, we don't have all the info (2.00 / 1)

at the hands of the campaign. That's why I try not to second-guess their strategy, even when I disagree. But I would also have thought that it would make sense to campaign hard in NV, not just SC.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:58:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: obviously, we don't have all the info (2.00 / 2)

I generally leave the second-guessing to framecop, but it just seems to me that when Edwards won 37% of the black vote in 2004, compared to the sub-5% numbers he gets in the polling this year, that suggests a problem very difficult to overcome.  I hope they know something.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:04:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think he realized after Iowa (none / 0)

Edwards had to campaign in South Carolina, a "native" state, to retain credibility.  Moreover, I think he has to do well there, winning or a close second, or has campaign becomes either done or dead man walking, take your pick.

He has to be disappointed that he didn't get some of the union support that went to Obama.  I originally thought he'd get the SEIU endorsement.  I guess the union leadership is being very pragmatic to an extent.

I agree with whomever it was who has been saying that Edwards' strategic mistake was not going after Obama early and hard.  Hillary was/is the Establishment candidate.   There's room, in terms of niches in political ecology, for one candidate to be the anti-Hillary.  Obama seized it early with the rock star phenomenon and Edwards never really contested him for the niche, at least not successfully.


by InigoMontoya on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 03:25:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks for this post (2.00 / 1)

Edwards is airing a lot of ads in South Carolina. I think the polls underestimate his support a little here, though I could be wrong. I'm hoping that he eats into some of Clinton's strength among white women. My wife's mom (a soft Clinton supporter who likes all the candidates) attended one of his events about a week ago and couldn't shut up about how good-looking he is. I don't know how she will vote (I've been able to warm her up to Obama as well, but she just loves the Clintons), but I do think Edwards could exceed expectations here.


by DPW on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:36:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope he will exceed expectations (2.00 / 1)

His problem, obviously, is that the black vote seems to be split between Obama and Clinton. He would have to win an overwhelming share of the white vote, or improve his standing among black voters, to make it competitive in SC.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:37:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope he will exceed expectations (none / 0)

Actually, I'd be willing to be that Edwards finishes second in the black vote in SC after Obama...


by mcdave on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:52:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I haven't seen any poll (none / 0)

suggesting he is close to second place among black voters in SC. I would love to be wrong about that, though.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:59:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope he will exceed expectations (2.00 / 0)

My desire for that to be true is exceeded only by my desire to bet actual money with you on that proposition.  Dude, it might be received wisdom in the Obamasphere that every black person now believes Hillary is an evil race-baiter, but that's not actually how it is.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:59:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks for this post (none / 0)

I hope he's right too.  I think the Obama campaign did some very effective negative campaigning in SC against the Clintons.


by Kingstongirl on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:18:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks for this post (none / 0)

I believe he did advertise in that last few days.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:26:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Mysterious Campaign Decisions (none / 0)

In general, radio advertising and robo-calls are not that expensive, and can be slapped together very quickly, then pushed into saturation, particularly when you are reaching out to a fairly small universe of people: Reno/Washoe plus Las Vegas/Clark County.  

I do not understand why the Edwards campaign failed to execute at least these inexpensive strategies in Las Vegas/Clark. I think that failure was a blunder.

On the other hand, maybe they know something I don't.  Obviously, they can study the numbers from their phone banking.  Do they hope for a limited universe turnout?  Despite blanket Obama and Clinton media buys, saturating Las Vegas/Clark?  Once they went saturation, you had to match.  Radio and robo-calls would seem to have been the inexpensive way to do it.

I would hate to think that it had to do with accepting public financing...hmmmm...which I guess...limits the total media expenditure a candidate can spend on the entire campaign?


by Demo37 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:16:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (2.00 / 2)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/18/ 04846/6848/626/438712


by rclouse on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:14:37 AM EST

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (2.00 / 1)

Wow. Kudos to JRE.


by lonnette33 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:19:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

Thanks for the on-the-ground update.  As an Obama supporter it's kind of depressing, but I'm nonetheless glad to get a read on what's actually happening.    


by HSTruman on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:16:23 AM EST

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

According to reports I've read, the Culinary (and the SEIU to an extent) have been doing massive GOTC drives at their workplaces and homes of union members.

I expect Clinton to win, but a win by Obama would be fantastic. Clinton remained a good 20 points ahead up to last week, and has continue to lead in every poll but one. The idea that Obama would pull out an easy victory was exaggerated and pushed by the Clinton campaign.


by mattmfm on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:32:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

My thought was that Culinary endorsed too late to put together a proper field plan. But maybe they are doing all workplace organizing and you are not seeing it. Their efforts may be concentrated on the at-large caucuses where the vote of each additional attendee can count for more than additional votes in the precincts.


by souvarine on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:18:19 AM EST

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

Intersting.


by lonnette33 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:20:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I bet they are using phones too (none / 0)

Just a guess, but the unions that endorsed candidates in Iowa did a lot of phone-banking.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:24:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (2.00 / 1)

Great post desmoulins. You and desmoniesdem do such a great job with these types of on the ground reports.


by lonnette33 on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:24:27 AM EST

those disappearing firm supporters (2.00 / 1)

cost Edwards that third delegate I was trying to win in my precinct.

Presumably other campaigns also had firm supporters who flaked out at the last minute, but I am still annoyed by the ones I knew about who were not there for Edwards when it counted.

I have been told that only 85 percent of people who sign a supporter card for a candidate end up caucusing for that candidate. Others switch or do not show up for whatever reason.

It is very frustrating.

The good news is that many people you didn't know about may show up to caucus for Edwards tomorrow.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:26:49 AM EST

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

I guess, if I understand this correctly, Nevada works in a way similar to Iowa in that high levels of concentration in a few precincts are not desireable (as is the case here with the culinary in-work caucuses concentrated on the Las Vegas strip) but you want a more evenly distributed performance throughout the state.  

Smart move on the part of Clinton to go after the Biden and Richardson apparatus in the state.  With both Biden and Richardson throwing their non-viable support towards Obama in Iowa we could have seen Obama go after them, but apparently that did not happen, or if it did, not successfully.  


by georgep on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:34:36 AM EST

Biden did not throw his support to Obama (none / 0)

I know Biden supporters, and I trust the Biden precinct captain in my neighborhood. There was no directive from the campaign to push supporters to Obama.

Richardson was a different story.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:36:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Biden did not throw his support to Obama (none / 0)

I thought there was a directive (although not explicit or official) for precinct captains to steer Biden and Richardson supporters to Obama.  

It makes sense in a self-preservation sort of way.  Had Clinton won Iowa, this thing could be all but over already, so, while they may be closer aligned with Clinton in general, at the time both Biden and Richardson had an interest in extending the race past Iowa.  


by georgep on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:51:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

there were rumors about that (none / 0)

but every Biden supporter I've talked to has said there was no directive to go to Obama.

In contrast, the Richardson precinct captain confirmed to me that the campaign asked him to seer people to Obama. I know this happened in other precincts too. However, that doesn't mean all of Richardson's supporters went to Obama. In my precinct, just as many came over to Edwards.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:57:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

I'm not necessarily disputing the diarist's claims about distribution of support, but I was reading My Silver State (a Nevada progressive blog) and noticed a post about how plentiful Obama signs are in many of the more conservative areas away from larger towns. I know nothing about Nevada, however, so feel free to ignore anything I say on the matter.


by DPW on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:41:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

concentration and at-large precincts (none / 0)

I think you are mistaken about the at-large precincts. My understanding is that under the NV caucus rules the at-large votes are treated differently than the precinct votes.

Regular precincts award a fixed portion of delegates regardless of the number of voters who show up, while at-large precincts award a number of delegates proportional to the number of voters who caucus in that at-large precinct. This is one issue that Bill Clinton was addressing here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=RvdBIreW96M


by souvarine on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:30:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: concentration and at-large precincts (none / 0)

To clarify my reasoning, if Culinary turns out a large number of members to vote in the at-large precincts then they will have a large impact on the NV result. Since Culinary controls the at-large precincts they can concentrate their efforts and win more delegates. Everyone else must avoid concentrating their efforts because they are turning out voters for the regular precincts, where each additional vote does nothing to add delegates.

We will see what happens tomorrow, but I think this gives Obama a significant advantage in NV.


by souvarine on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:40:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: concentration and at-large precincts (2.00 / 1)

Not really. You're right that teh # of delegates awarded to the at large pcts is proportional to turnout but theres still a cap of about 100 delegates per at large precinct. So there's a limiit to how much they could have; if all at-lareg precincts reached the highest point on teh sliding scale in terms of turnout, they would still amount to about 8% of the total delegates.

Also, Obama is not gonig to necessarily win all those delegates. Edwards will have some supporters, and Clinton will get strong support not only from some casino & hotel workers but esp from casino management, which can also participate, plus any other worker who works within a 2.5 mile radius. Indeed, because so many bartenders, waiters and dealers work for tips rather than wage, and get no pay if they take a break (and risk not being able to sign back in for their shift), there's a good chance that there won't be such massive turnout of workers as you are implying.

Clinton is comparing apples and oranges when he talks about a 10-1 ratio.

The whole purpose of the suit adn the way that the Clinton surrogates played it up has been served; lots of people now believe that strip workers have an unfair advantage. (I just heard somoene on a call-in show complain that they were getting paid to vote.) That's translated into something that I would never have thought possible a couple fo months ago -- the resentment aganist the Clinton machine has dissipated, and how there is a growing sense I'm picking up of peole who are far to the left of Clinton and who spoke a few weeks ago of never supporting such a candidate backed by what we call here the "gaming party" now gravitating towards her.

By the way, NSEA has been making robo-calls to its members explaining that it brought the suit to defend their right to vote (??!!) and that "some ...don't want you to vote". No mention of a campaign but the idea is clearly to drive turnout among a demographic of the electorate (largely white, heavily female) in which Clinton does very well.


by desmoulins on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:11:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: concentration and at-large precincts (none / 0)

That's very interesting stuff.  Bill Clinton attracted a lot of derision from the pro-Obama side of the blogosphere for saying Obama was the candidate of the "establishment" in Nevada because of the Culinary endorsement (a comment they completely distorted, but whatever) but maybe the Big Dog will get the last laugh.

The LV Sun endorsement editorial also suggested that as much as the pro-Obama bloggers tried to claim the "intimidation" meme had been conclusively debunked, the issue still has legs and there's evidence to support it.

A lot of folks in the blogosphere seem to enjoy making silly assumptions about stuff they know nothing about.  For example, some claimed that the lawsuit would lead to a massive backlash among union voters (not just Culinary voters), on the grounds of solidarity or what have you.  Well, as the robo-calls suggest, the lawsuit was union against union, and there's plenty of room for the Clinton folks to exploit the sentiment that Culinary workers were getting special privileges that other union folks didn't enjoy.  I'm not surprised at all to hear you say it's looking like more of a mixed bag.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:29:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: concentration and at-large precincts (none / 0)

Thanks for explaining the caps and the max percentage, I was beginning to worry Culinary could engineer a blowout for Obama. Is there a good link that summarizes the overall delegate math in NV?

Regardless of the merit of the suit I expected it to have the impact you describe. It was a way to leverage free media to dilute the advantage Culinary brings to Obama.


by souvarine on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:35:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: concentration and at-large precincts (none / 0)

Is there a good link that summarizes the overall delegate math in NV?

no, sadly. Thats why there's been so much confusion. If you go to the nvdemscaucus.com website, you can read the delegate rules and at the very end, it describes the at large precincts.


by desmoulins on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 03:14:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

asahopkins' caucus calculator (none / 0)

has been adjusted for the Nevada math:

http://www.caucusmath.com/


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 04:05:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: concentration and at-large precincts (none / 0)

Ah, good.  Thanks for explaining.  I could not have imagined that the at-large precincts would have had that much power (compared to everywhere else.)  That would have made the agreement on this months ago quite the idiotic move for anyone involved in this.   With impact of the at-large precincts limited and colleges not really a big factor there (I believe you explained about UNLVs and other college's attendees transient nature) we are looking at GOTV efforts to be the overriding story here.    

Question:  Do you have a read on the women vote?  Are they going to come out in force?  In NH the women vote broke all previous records, and even in MI long-standing records were broken, despite the fact that MI was not even awarding delegates.   I am wondering, since this is a caucus, not a primary, if there is word about women participation in numbers larger than usual?

Also, how is the newspaper endorsement issue affecting the race?  I understand the Journal is to the right, while the Sun is left-leaning.  Is it very pronounced so, in other words, are the ideological differences in readership so pronounced that a Sun endorsement can actually be a boost and a Journal endorsement can actually hurt a Democratic nominee?


by georgep on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 06:15:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: concentration and at-large precincts (none / 0)

I'm sensing low turnout -- lotsa people whom I had pegged as likely attendees have to work, travel, illness, etc. It could be they're just politely saying "not edwards." Endorsements matter little - came too late to get a lot of attention, one way or the other. Women -- yes, clear pattern of older women for Clinton but will they vote? Can't say. I gotta say I'm wondering where all the Hillary field workers are; not in my precint. One Obama canvasser today (Again from out of state) and me out on the streets this afternoon.

back to the phones.


by desmoulins on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 08:09:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the different caucus rules in NV (none / 0)

are unlikely to help Edwards. If he is close to viability, but just below the threshold, precinct captains for Obama and Clinton will not be able to throw a little support his way. My understanding is that supporters of viable candidates will not be able to realign.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:39:26 AM EST

Re: the different caucus rules in NV (none / 0)

Right, but if any of the three are not viable in a precinct, they get to realign, correct?


A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy. - Teddy Roosevelt
by minvis on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:47:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

yes, but I can't imagine (none / 0)

there will be many precincts where Clinton or Obama fall below 15 percent.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:49:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: yes, but I can't imagine (none / 0)

Sure there will. I think Obama lacks strength in a lot of areas which have few to none of his key groups: Af-Ams, young professionals, Culinary and SEIU members.


by desmoulins on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:14:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

well, I thought Obama would struggle (none / 0)

to reach 15 percent in the neighborhoods dominated by white people over 50 in Iowa, but looking at the precinct-level returns from my county (the largest in Iowa), Obama was viable everywhere except for two or three rural precincts that only assigned 1 or 2 county delegates.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:41:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the different caucus rules in NV (2.00 / 1)

They can before the end of the first allignment period. The question is if they will be willing to do so. I hope to post an article tonight on what I expect to happen in the caucus rooms.


by desmoulins on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:13:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

Second choice is really going to make a big difference in many of these caucus locations. Both the Zogby and Mason-Dixon polls have Edwards in the low teens (12-14). If these numbers hold true, he's not going to be viable in many precinct locations. That is 10% up for grabs.


by mattmfm on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:10:10 PM EST

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

Yes, that's it...it's a big conspiracy against John Edwards.


by mattmfm on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:02:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (2.00 / 1)

No, 2nd choice is not going to matter a lot. There will be few to none who caucus for non-viable candidates (Biden, Richarsdon supporters have been heavily contacted by other campaigns; Kucinich has only miniscule pockets of support). I think there will only be a handful of undecideds in each precinct.


by desmoulins on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:16:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

Bush wants broad tax cuts

Dont know whether its really in connex with Vegas, but its strange Bush suggests it 1 day ahead of a primary


by ccokz on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:51:32 PM EST

I Am Glad This is a Causus (none / 0)

I am glad that Nev is a caucus state. The reason I say this is that I think it will maximize the effectiveness of the Cullinary Union's support for Obama.  

My understanding is that HRC polls better then Obama among hispanics.  Thus, all the union's GOTV would possibly do nothing more then bring a disportionate number of HRC supporters if this was a primary.  Hopefully, in a caucus, where you have to vote publically, the Union will be out in force and that will make the individuals going against the union more likely to vote the "right way" from my prospective.  Despite this, I stil expect HRC to win Nevada based on her hispanic support.

Regardless of how Nevada turns out, unless Obama can do better among hispanics in the upcoming primary then he is polling now, February 5th will be a real challenge for him. I dont think Super Tuesday is going to be determined by momentum as much as it will be determined by "demographics."  The winner will be who can build the larger coalition.  Hispanics will be a key block on that primary day.


Andy Katz
by Andy Katz on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 12:59:56 PM EST

Thats great for tomorrow (none / 0)

But if Obama's problems among non African American voters continue he is toast the rest of the way.  

Feb 5 will be largely made up of primaries with mostly registered Democrats, and African American turnout, while always important, will be no wheres near the factor it is in SC.


by dpANDREWS on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:09:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thats great for tomorrow (none / 0)

They're also states that Obama has had groundwork in places for a good two months.


by mattmfm on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:44:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thats great for tomorrow (none / 0)

I am not sure exactly what you mean here because Obama has done very well in Iowa and NH, both states having miniscule african american populations.  

So far, Obama has done consistently better among younger and wealthier whites, plus independants and Republicans.  He tied HRC in the union, working class votes in Iowa and lost them in NH.  

Many analysts have likened his supprt to Hart and Bradley, with the difference that he also has African Americans.  If he received all the "Hart" votes plus the AAs, he wins.  However, I suspect that he "bleeds" a certain amount of woman voters to HRC who, in this analogy, were "Hart" voters.  

Thus, I think as it stands today, he and HRC are close, which I think the national polls are also showing, though HRC is ahead.  Among white voters, he just needs to either recapture the same level of union-working class support he did in Iowa or recapture the upscale women vote (I believe he tied HRC among women in Iowa, though he might have slightly beat her).

Now, obviously, saying this is what he "needs" to do is not saying it will be possible for him to do so.  We'll see.


Andy Katz
by Andy Katz on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 04:20:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Am Glad This is a Causus (none / 0)

You know, of course, that the secret ballot was the first and most fundamental progressive reform. I'm glad that we can finally dispense with the notion that Obama and his supporters are particularly progressive. They want only to win, they have no ideological core.


by souvarine on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:11:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (none / 0)

As I understand the at-large precincts, it's more important for the Culinary Union to effectively block Clinton or Edwards voters than it is to keep adding higher Obama totals.


by hwc on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:10:07 PM EST

Re: Update from central Las Vegas frontlines (2.00 / 1)

This is an interesting point that might well be true. I had not thought about it.


by desmoulins on Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 02:16:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.