Running Primaries Thread

There's a difference, though, in not being able to win straight up and not being able to overtake the other one straight up. I think that's the big key -- Obama, unless he goes riding around in a tank or does some other dumb shit, will have more delegates and more votes come convention time. That oughta carry a helluva lot of weight.

 

But it won't.

 

Yes it will.

 

If this is a brokered convention Hillary will get the nomination. Whether she deserves it or not.

 

OK.

 

And if she gets it that way, the nomination will be as worthless as WW II
German Marks.

 

Yep

 

Reading the Newsweek piece on William Buckley, I was struck by the notion we're seeing major changes in both parties right now.

The GOP has squandered the broad coalition of support and populism of Reagan. While the Dems are doing an Old School vs. New School battle. McCain getting the nom pisses off the Religious Right, which used to be the GOP's core. HRC will piss off a segment of the Dems, Obama another segment.

If there was ever a chance for a third party to make a serious run, this might be it.

 

NADER!

 

Obama dominated HRC in the major metro areas of Texas but fell to her in the outskirts. I thought that was a major telltale part for the campaign. Hopefully Obama can fight for the surrounding areas.

 

Being the total nerd I am, I combed over CNN's exit poll, fundraising and polling info to see where this is headed.

Interesting stuff from Ohio, which has similar demographics to Pa. Obama won voters younger than 40, but nearly as much as Clinton won over-40 voters, especially those older than 55. Twenty percent said race was an important matter in their vote, and of those Clinton got 59 percent to Obama's 39. Seventeen percent said gender was important, and of those Clinton won 60-40. By contrast, the 83 percent who answered no went for Obama, but only 53-45. White Democrats voted for Clinton over Obama 70-27. Despite the Dittohead call to Vote for the Worst (Hillary), Obama won indepdents (50-48) and split evenly on Republicans (49-49), although he won voters who called themselves conservative.

Did Clinton inspire you? Those voters who said yes (57 percent) went for Clinton 79-20. Those who said Obama (64 percent) went 65-34. Those who said no to Clinton went 79-18 for Obama. But those who said no on Obama went for Clinton 92-5.

Obama did narrow the fundraising gap to a few thousand dollars. But as in many states, Clinton starts with better name recognition and more brand loyalty than Obama. In that sense, it's impressive how far Obama has gotten.

So what comes next?

If fundraising is an indication, Obama will handily pick up Wyoming (Saturday) and Missisippi (March 11), given he has a sizable advantage in each state. Clinton may well use those losses as more evidence that Obama is only winning in states he can't carry in the general election.

In Pennsylvania, Obama faces many of the same problems he faced in Ohio -- a large, entrenched Democratic organization fully in support of Clinton, with a populace inclined to go in that direction. Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, like his counterpart Ted Strickland in Ohio, is firmly behind Clinton. Clinton is ahead in fundraising $2.2 million-$1.8 million (funds raised from within the state; certainly, outside money can come into effect, and Obama has outraised Clinton $138 mil-$134 mil), and she's outraised him in every county in the Philadelphia area. She's also ahead in the polls, although her lead is slipping. One poll reported by CNN had her at 45-31, but one in the last week or so said Clinton 49-43. Basically, Obama needs Pennsylvania to prove he can win a big state (outside of Illinois), and Clinton needs it, well, because she's still behind.

Especially with Indiana and North Carolina (May 6) proving to be fascinating primaries themselves. Clinton has the fundraising advantage in Indiana, mainly through the Simon family (owners of the Simon Mall empire and the Indiana Pacers), who have been big friends of, and fundraisers for, the Clintons for years. Also, Obama's Illinois love doesn't extend across the border. The biggest recipient of money from Lake County, Ind., (Gary and environs) is Clinton. Evan Bayh is in Clinton's pocket as well. But the latest poll (a few weeks ago) shows Obama leading 40-25, with 36 percent undecided.

North Carolina is a wild card because of John Edwards, who no surprise is still far and away the fundraising leader there. The latest poll on CNN shows Obama leading 45-31, but Edwards could have a huge influence one way or the other. Edwards is going to be getting a lot of fruit baskets for the next two months.

Later primaries: West Virginia (May 13), Clinton's fundraising is ahead by miles, then Obama is ahead in fundraising in Kentucky and Oregon (May 20) and Montana and South Dakota (June 3). No polls from any of those states, though.

So my guesstimate is:

Wyoming and Mississippi go for Obama.
Pennsylvania goes for Clinton, though not as big as Ohio.
Indiana and North Carolina are toss-ups.
West Virginia goes Clinton.
The last four states go Obama.
(No info available on Puerto Rico)

And... somehow a do-over happens in Michigan and Florida. Worse than giving anyone the nomination through some backroom deal is to do it without giving the voters of Michigan and Florida the right of a real primary.

By the way, the most interesting thing about the CNN fundraising chart? How John McCain won the Republican nomination without getting the big-money backers. The biggest Republican fundraiser, still, in Texas, Vermont, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina, Kentucky and South Dakota is Rudy Giuliani.