Barack Obama winning yesterday's caucuses in Washington state was not a surprise. The smashing margin of victory was.
Moreover, it feeds a clear narrative favoring Obama from this weekend, what this another huge victory in Nebraska to go with wins in Louisiana and Maine as well. Breaking out the broom is always a pleasant thing to do in a tight delegate race.
And even as that much-reported delegate race remains close, the calendar looks good for Obama. A follow-up sweep of the Potomac Primary on Tuesday followed by a win on potentially favorable ground when Hawaiian Democrats caucus and Wisconsin voters go to the polls on the 19th would look mighty impressive.
Even with the tightness of the delegate race that looks close to intractable for the Democratic party at this point, Obama winning every contest between Super Duper Tuesday and the big March 4th contests including Ohio and Texas would not only be quite a feat, it would likely create an exceptionally positive wave of publicity.
Washington's own decisive results simply underscore that potential.
Posted by Eric Earling at February 10, 2008 04:45 PM | Email ThisLefties tend to resort to coercion and worse, as soon as their 'peace and love' administration runs into opposition. And by his voting record, Mr. Obama aint no rightie.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on February 10, 2008 05:21 PMA few thoughts: Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it. A vast percentage of the Gen Y crowd that will supposedly get out in droves to vote for Sen. Obama are ignorant of history, thanks to our pathetic educational system.
The ADD world that surrounds Gen Y is not a world-saavy one.
JFK was more specific about how he would affect than Obama has been.
The National Review shows that Obama is the most liberal senator in the Senate. However, Progressive Punch shows him to be the 43rd most liberal senator. I believe that the truth lies somewhere in between. I would like to know more about his connections with the Islamic religion. I read that his half-brother or brother (?) was involved in the revolution in Kenya - affected by Islamists and he communicated several times with him and it was alleged that he was interfering in some way with politics in Kenya (his father's home country). That report will likely stay conveniently buried until after November, unless an alternative source seeks it out. Also, we all would like to have some insights how he plans to bring this country together and effectively change America.
Unintended consequences of an Obama presidency would include raising and indoctrinating the younger generation with the ideology of David Matthews (former SP poster - circa 2007), along with inviting more Islamist enclaves to this country, thanks to his purported policy on open borders.
Posted by: KS on February 10, 2008 05:49 PMGoing into the caucus I would have guessed a 2 to 1 margin, coming out, I was inclined to expect a 3 to 1 margin.
As it was, he got a 2 to 1 margin, which is in line with the caucus results we've seen for him in the Super Tuesday caucus states and Nebraska. Even Maine has gone to Obama at nearly 60%.
Clinton is hoping that she can regain the lead by winning Texas and Ohio, but she might end up with the same fate as Giuliani did in Florida, with so much momentum in Obama's camp that even a split of the delegates will not be enough for Clinton to right her seemingly sinking ship.
Posted by: Daniel K on February 10, 2008 06:03 PMSome talk says the Dem numbers are several times higher than the GOP, but I've seen no confirmation. Each Party should please publish the numbers, when the counting is done.
Posted by: Constant Voter on February 10, 2008 07:16 PMAgain, what happened in Washington was a caucus, where working class people who were working on Saturday, or people who don?t understand / are intimidated by the caucus system don?t participate. These include a lot of members of the working class base of the democratic party.
So yes, Barack does better in Caucuses, and also Primaries that have a high turnout of black voters. Maine = Caucus, Washington State = Caucus, Nebraska = Caucus.
Hillary will lose the Potomac Primary by 60-40, since these states and district have large black populations, and if they come to the tables to vote, they will route her as their support is with Obama.
Wisconsin (Primary on Feb 19th) just released new poll numbers after the Caucus results yesterday - Clinton 52%, Obama 38%, 10% undecided/other.
So Obama is most likely to carry all the caucuses plus the potomac primaries, Clinton will take the Wisconsin primary.
Clinton is looking forward to Ohio and Texas in March. Ohio with its huge working class blue collar vote, which Obama loses with voters, and Texas, with its big Latino population, which also does not go for Obama.
Last poll done for Pennsylvania within the past month shows Hillary way ahead - with just 20% support for Obama. Again, Pennsylvania is another state with a lot of blue collar jobs.
Posted by: DustinJames on February 10, 2008 07:55 PMAgain, what happened in Washington was a caucus, where working class people who were working on Saturday, or people who don?t understand / are intimidated by the caucus system don?t participate. These include a lot of members of the working class base of the democratic party.
So yes, Barack does better in Caucuses, and also Primaries that have a high turnout of black voters. Maine = Caucus, Washington State = Caucus, Nebraska = Caucus.
Hillary will lose the Potomac Primary by 60-40, since these states and district have large black populations, and if they come to the tables to vote, they will route her as their support is with Obama.
Wisconsin (Primary on Feb 19th) just released new poll numbers after the Caucus results yesterday - Clinton 52%, Obama 38%, 10% undecided/other.
So Obama is most likely to carry all the caucuses plus the potomac primaries, Clinton will take the Wisconsin primary.
Clinton is looking forward to Ohio and Texas in March. Ohio with its huge working class blue collar vote, which Obama loses with voters, and Texas, with its big Latino population, which also does not go for Obama.
Last poll done for Pennsylvania within the past month shows Hillary way ahead - with just 20% support for Obama. Again, Pennsylvania is another state with a lot of blue collar jobs.
Posted by: DustinJames on February 10, 2008 07:56 PMI figured Obama would do better in the west than Monica's Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife. She seems more of an east coast-appeal candidate.
Posted by: Michele on February 10, 2008 08:15 PMHave to agree with you on Clinton will be the nominee because of the fact the Billary crowd is one of the sleeziest teams around. They have not yet begun to slime. They just fired their Latina co-director after a win in CA, Latinos here went for Obama. So, much for loyalty with the first grifters. I think they will win because:
a. Superdelagates will break for Clinton. Hint: does anyone remember those FBI files in Hillary's possession
b. Right now, delegates from Michigan and Florida do not count. Hillary was the only candidate to participate in those primaries, if I am not mistaken. Look for a credentials report to break her way.
c.Where the heck did she get $5 million to loan her campaign? Look for paid "consultants" and lots of grease to ease Billary's skid to the nomination.
I am hoping that Black people will be so turned off by these two grifters that the lock the dems have had on the Black vote will be substantially loosened. Not to worry, Duffman, I don't expect the republicans to pick up the Black vote, they are too inept.
Anyhow, we arrive at the same conslusion for different reasons. Old age and treachery do overcome youth and skill.
Posted by: WVH on February 10, 2008 08:21 PMI think Obama might have secret health problems we're not aware of. I think 2012 is his last stand.
Posted by: FreedomLover on February 10, 2008 10:44 PM1. Upcoming Contests: I would agree that Obama looks in good shape for the contests prior to Mar 4. I would disregard the one Wisconsin poll. Obama is from neighboring Illinois, has the Wisconsin Governor endorsement, has long-standing congressman David Obey's endorsement (shift from Edwards), and hasn't yet campaigned that much in Wisconsin. I would say wait a week and then see how the poll is shaping up.
2. Hillary's Campaign: For someone who is running on the experience theme and being a better manager than Obama, how is it that her campaign is in much more disarray and she is having to replaced campaign managers? Obama's campaign has turned out to be a lot better managed and a lot more in tune with today's technology and how to use it. His win in caucus states across the country demonstrate that he is better at organizing people. One definition of a good manager is how well they organize the people reporting to them to carry out their tasks. On this aspect, Obama is beating Clinton.
3. Clinton new Campaign Manager: Less we forget, her new campaign manager was her former White House Chief of Staff who destroyed Vincent Foster records and who allowed unlimited White House access to foriegn lobbyist, Chung. Does she really think that this is a "good" impression to present forth in her campaign?
4. The Chelsea news: It looks like Chelsea has replaced Bill on the campaign trail to try to shore up the youth vote. It is unfortunate that the Clintons want to force someone who they have tried to hide from media all her life so front and center. Chelsea has already made mistakes, like being in a polling place in Conneticut (I believe) after it opened (innocently and she wasn't campaigning--just delivering coffee and lingered too long talking to one of the workers there).
Posted by: tc on February 11, 2008 10:42 AMLink: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=716415
Posted by: tc on February 11, 2008 10:57 AM