Running Primaries Thread

Tightened up a little bit, though the Western counties are still out there.

Looking like an Obama win at plus three delegates, if I had to guess.

Turnout will be a record.

 

And your point is what, that Wyoming's caucuses are just as good an indicator of what happens this fall as the primaries are in the bigger states? And, even if it were, that Wyoming should be as important in the calculations as they are?
That's delusional.
Caucuses are a blight. They should be done away with tomorrow. And I do notice that Ohio is not on your list, and that is in play, and it is absolutely vital.

 

My point is that winning a primary or a caucus in a state is no indicator of winning it in the general election. Ask Mike Dukakis if you don't believe me.

But they are how we choose a nominee.

And the irony is, caucuses used to be a blight -- sparsely attended, dominated by folks who went the way the local machine told them to go. Now that a candidate is changing that, suddenly we have a focus on the "undemocratic" nature of caucuses. Well, there are valid arguments to be made, there, and I'd like to see some changes.

But there is a reason states have them, too, ones that get ignored by Clinton partisans. They create activists. People who caucus become invested in the process and are going to be around to knock doors and make phone calls -- not to mention donations -- come the general. Caucuses both favor and promote candidates who emphasize organization and new voter outreach. And, probably the trump card, they're cheaper.

Oh, and Hillary Clinton has to win Florida and Ohio in the general. Obama puts a lot more states in play and is less locked into that model -- which didn't work out so well for Democrats the last two times around, I might add.

That said, I think they both could carry Ohio -- and I sure as shit don't think that winning or losing a closed primary there is proof positive of anything. I'm not sure either can carry Florida against McCain. So, yeah, I prefer the guy who can win even with a loss there.

Finally, my original point, which you went out of your way to avoid, was very simple. Wyoming isn't in play. Neither is New York. But they both get to have their say in the nomination. So either your original post had no point, or your point escaped me.

Edit: Scratch my turnout numbers. I can't find anything approaching reliable.
Suffice to say, it was good.

 

Obama changes the game.

 

What does that mean?

I get a kick out of the Clinton-spin, which is to say -- "we won these states like New York and California and those are states we have to win and he's winning states that the other side is likely to win in November so ours are more important" -- and that's total bullshit.

If anything, the guy who has shown a pulse in red states is the one who has a better chance of stealing said states in November because there is no way in hell a Republican is going to win New York and California come November regardless of who is on the donkey side of the ticket.

As for Ohio -- Obama would carry the same voters Hillary would carry because Ohio is a state that doesn't give a shit about the war and thus McCain's strength in that area is not really going to be a factor. Clearly every poll that I've seen, especially in Ohio, says Ohioans trust the Democrats in the area of the economy more than the Republicans which means either Obama or Hillary will run very well there.

However, as Zeke so aptly pointed out -- if Hillary loses Florida and Ohio in November, turn out the lights, the party is over whereas Obama might be able to steal some of the other states in order to compensate for it.

It never ceases to amaze me how the Clinton spin machine continues to feed the media and there is never any question about it.

 

And if you don't believe me and Zag (has that sentence ever been typed before ) check the SurveyUSA maps...

http://www.surveyusa.com

McCain has to defend a LOT more of the country against Obama.

In my analysis:

The states that Clinton can win against McCain that Obama can't: Arkansas.

The states that Obama can win against McCain that Clinton can't: Iowa, Virginia, Colorado and Missouri.

Then, factor in the states where Obama isn't likely to win, but is very capable of making McCain spend time and money on to a much greater degree that Clinton: Kansas, South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, South Carolina.

The only state that I can see Clinton forcing McCain to defend is West Virginia, but I might have missed something.

I've left Nevada and New Mexico off both lists because I can't see a clear difference between Obama and Clinton there and McCain's home state status in Arizona further muddies the waters.

Further, I assume McCain wins Florida and either Clinton or Obama win Ohio. That leaves me with Obama with a 4-1 lead in possible swing states and a 5-1 lead in strategic influence states. Now, I realize that all states aren't equal, but it still looks to me like Obama has more and better ways to the presidency and a huge advantage as far as making McCain play defense -- the importance of which should not be overlooked in what's shaping up to be a Democratic year.

So, yes, I'd say that's a completely different game.

 

It's a shame the Democratic party introduced these caucuses for the first time this year. If they were ingrained into the political system, Clinton could have been prepared for them.

 

For political junkies (and/or Chicago folks) only:

The Democrats are going to win the special election in the Illinois 14th tonight -- Denny Hastert's old seat, despite the NRCC dumping a ton of money in to try and protect it.

Bill Foster is beating Jim Oberweis 53-47 with 94 percent of the vote in.

It's a pretty good bellwether for the Dems nationwide.

It's also a superdelegate pickup for Obama, as he stumped for Foster.

Coattails, baby.

 

Nobel winner calls Hillary's claims of helping the Irish peace process a "wee bit silly" ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml

 

What, you don't think she was single-handedly brokering peace in Kosovo just because she went there with Sinbad?

http://wonkette.com/365393/clinton-managed-crisis-with-sinbad-sheryl-crow