(POL) Official Super Tuesday Thread

[albionmoonlight]

Monday predictions:

Obama does much better than expected on the Democratic side. Clinton wins NY and NJ by small margins. She also wins Arkansas and Oklahoma by decent margins. Obama wins all the other states, some by large margins, others by razor thin margins. A flood of endorsements follows (Gore, Edwards, Richardson), and he ends up getting the nomination by the end of the month.

Romney does much better than expected on the GOP side. Huck's supporters end up flocking to him as the "not McCain." He ends up winning a few states very closely (including California). Because of the winner take all rules for the GOP, this puts him in a pretty good position afterwards. It ends up becoming a two man race for the GOP instead of the McCain walkover that was expected.

Odds of me being right on both predictions: ~25% or less.

[Jas_lov]

It's looking like Romney is surging in the most important state of the day, California. McCain's lead has shrunk ever since Schwartzeneger endorsed him. Romney just wanted a split there, but winning the state would be huge. Also keep in mind that not all GOP states are winner take all, including California. McCain is going to win N.Y., N.J., Arizona, probably Missouri and Connecticut which are all winner take all though. The only winner take all states Romney will likely win are Utah and Montana. He needs to take a majority of the states to keep it close, and I don't think that'll happen.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/republican_delegate_count.html

The Democrat race will likely not be settled after tomorrow. Unless one candidate is able to sweep all of the close states like California, Connecticut, Alabama, Missouri, and the majority of the states that haven't been polled yet. Many states are closed primaries that benefit Hillary. I think it'll basically be a wash and noone will come out that far ahead.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

[Fighter of Foo]

I think Obama absolutely dominates tomorrow. This race feels like a referendum on an incumbent(Hillary) much, much more than it should. In races involving incumbents, undecideds typically break for the challenger by a margin of around 4:1. Since Hillary's not a true incumbent I don't think Obama will see that big of a bump, but I do think he's the big winner tomorrow.

http://www.pollingreport.com/incumbent.htm

I'm very heavy on Obama to become President at 7:2 so take that for what it's worth.

"Yes, we can" vs. "Yes, she can." There you have the key difference between the two campaigns.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/02/if-in-doubt-pla.html

No clue on the R side. It's a train wreck in slow motion and even if McCain ends up as nominee Republican numbers as a whole are so far in the toilet it's hard to envision him winning the Presidency.

[st.cronin]

My guess is both are actually very close, and nothing is settled.

[Big Fo]

Is it strange that on both sides, the current favorite is commonly regarded to have a worse chance in the general election than the main challenger? I can't say I've been around long enough to follow many Presidential elections in depth.

[st.cronin]

Is it strange that on both sides, the current favorite is commonly regarded to have a worse chance in the general election than the main challenger? I can't say I've been around long enough to follow many Presidential elections in depth.

I don't that's true on the Republican side. McCain right now is the favorite, and he's considered to be their strongest GE candidate by most people.

[Buccaneer]

even if McCain ends up as nominee Republican numbers as a whole are so far in the toilet it's hard to envision him winning the Presidency

You must not follow any of the head-to-head polls.

[SackAttack]

I'd like to go on record as saying I don't know what the fuck will happen in California tomorrow.

[JPhillips]

Buc: You've told me that polls don't mean anything!

As for tomorrow I expect Obama will roughly tie Clinton for delegates, but I still think he needs to win CA to garner enough positive media coverage. If Hillary wins NY, MA, NJ, and CA he'll face a very tough media environment even if the delegate count is very close.

On the Republican side I think Romney will win CA, but it will be close and they'll roughly split the delegates. McCain will clean up in winner take all states and while he won't win it all tomorrow, he'll be far enough in front that Romney will concede sometime this week.

[Buccaneer]

Buc: You've told me that polls don't mean anything!

As for tomorrow I expect Obama will roughly tie Clinton for delegates, but I still think he needs to win CA to garner enough positive media coverage. If Hillary wins NY, MA, NJ, and CA he'll face a very tough media environment even if the delegate count is very close.

On the Republican side I think Romney will win CA, but it will be close and they'll roughly split the delegates. McCain will clean up in winner take all states and while he won't win it all tomorrow, he'll be far enough in front that Romney will concede sometime this week.

Ah, but those would be for exit polls. I do have the RCP site linked since they have been pretty good.

[DaddyTorgo]

I still haven't decided who i'm voting for

[albionmoonlight]

I still haven't decided who i'm voting for

It would be cool if you post after you vote to let us know what went through your head and how you ended up finally making your decision.

I wish that my state voted tomorrow; it would be neat to have a voice during an election about which people are actually excited.

[Young Drachma]

Hillary tears up again. This time at Yale.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/images/02/04/art.clinton1.gi.jpg (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/02/04/sot.clinton.personal.cnn?iref=videosearch)

[Maple Leafs]

Obama's campaign is saying they'll consider tomorrow a win if he comes within 100 delegates. So that seems to indicate he expects to lose, but keep it close.

[DaddyTorgo]

It would be cool if you post after you vote to let us know what went through your head and how you ended up finally making your decision.

I wish that my state voted tomorrow; it would be neat to have a voice during an election about which people are actually excited.

talking it through, i've decided to vote hillary

[Buccaneer]

talking it through, i've decided to vote hillary

So the crocodile tears did it for you, huh? :) We will go from fake sincerity in biting ones lower lips to shedding a tear when you want people to believe you?

[Big Fo]

I don't that's true on the Republican side. McCain right now is the favorite, and he's considered to be their strongest GE candidate by most people.

Maybe I'm giving too much credence to the whole "superconservative Republicans and their talk radio shows hate McCain" thing, I guess they'll still support him in the general election.

Olberman just asked a pundit if the Super Bowl result could affect voter turnout in NY, NJ, and MA. :D

[Buccaneer]

Maybe I'm giving too much credence to the whole "superconservative Republicans and their talk radio shows hate McCain" thing, I guess they'll still support him in the general election.



Esp. advocated by self-centered blowhards? The neo-cons are one type of conservatives and may or may not have anything to do with other types of conservatives, ranging from social to fiscal to isolationists. From what I have followed over the past 30 years, one doesn't presume to speak for the others.

[Jas_lov]

Maybe I'm giving too much credence to the whole "superconservative Republicans and their talk radio shows hate McCain" thing, I guess they'll still support him in the general election.

Olberman just asked a pundit if the Super Bowl result could affect voter turnout in NY, NJ, and MA. :D

I think they'll come around in the general, but what I don't get is why there's all this dislike for McCain and all of this love for Romney being the only conservative left. Hasn't Romney held as many "liberal" positions as McCain in the past? He was elected the Governor of Massachussetts for God's sake.

But whoever is the nominee is going to have a tough time running away from Bush which I think was Foo Figher's point. If Obama wins the democratic nomination, it could be a landslide. Hillary would make it interesting, but I still think she'd win. It'll probably come down to the same swing states it does every year and does anyone really see the Democrats losing any states that Kerry got? I live in Iowa and I think they'll pick this state up easily. Our democrat governor was elected by a decent margin and the democrats picked up two house seats here in 06. Also, the state legislature became democratically controlled. Then they've just gotta win a state like Ohio or Florida and it's game over.

[JPhillips]

Maple: I'd bet they think they'll come out ahead in delegates, but now they'll beat expectations. 100 delegates is too close if they really think they're behind.

[DaddyTorgo]

actually what did it for me was this:

hillary and barak are basically (more or less) a wash domestically (and that's giving a lot of credit that maybe isn't due to how much effect a president can have on large-scale domestic policy issues).

what wins out for me is the image of "Barak Obama traveling to Palestine to meet with Arab leaders with his wife" versus "Hillary Clinton traveling to Palestine to meet with Arab leaders along with Bill Clinton."

So essentially what tips it for me is the fact that I feel that the Clintons (combined) have a better shot at restoring our international standing than the Obama's.

[Young Drachma]

actually what did it for me was this:

hillary and barak are basically (more or less) a wash domestically (and that's giving a lot of credit that maybe isn't due to how much effect a president can have on large-scale domestic policy issues).

what wins out for me is the image of "Barak Obama traveling to Palestine to meet with Arab leaders with his wife" versus "Hillary Clinton traveling to Palestine to meet with Arab leaders along with Bill Clinton."

So essentially what tips it for me is the fact that I feel that the Clintons (combined) have a better shot at restoring our international standing than the Obama's.

That's one hell of a Harvard v. Yale game. But I'd take Harvard in that one, easily.

Thanks for sharing your rationale, though. Voting is a personal choice and at least you've made a decision. I can't say I have.

[DaddyTorgo]

That's one hell of a Harvard v. Yale game. But I'd take Harvard in that one, easily.

Thanks for sharing your rationale, though. Voting is a personal choice and at least you've made a decision. I can't say I have.

lol meaning what (harvard vs. yale?)


I don't know...i think domestically either one is going to be forced to adapt what they want anyway and it's going to go through so many committee's and iterations that by the end it will not even resemble their original plan, so saying "well obama wants healthcare done this way versus hillary's plan done this way" seems kind of...i don't know...a hollow rationale for choosing one over the other.

then again, I could change my mind between now and tommorrow night.

[Young Drachma]

lol meaning what (harvard vs. yale?)


Barack and his wife are both Harvard Law alums. Bill and Hill both went to Yale Law. That's all.

[DaddyTorgo]

Barack and his wife are both Harvard Law alums. Bill and Hill both went to Yale Law. That's all.

aaah. I knew that about barak, but not about his wife, so I didn't put the pieces together.

gotcha.

[IMetTrentGreen]

Obama has been polling ~4% under his turnout so far, probably because those polling places only call established voters, not the young and apathetic that Obama is inspiring to get out.

At least I hope that's the case. He needs the undecideds tomorrow.

[digamma]

It would be cool if you post after you vote to let us know what went through your head and how you ended up finally making your decision.

I wish that my state voted tomorrow; it would be neat to have a voice during an election about which people are actually excited.

I decided on my drive home today (i) to vote and (ii) to vote for Obama. I am a registered Democrat, and California has a modified closed primary, meaning if you have registered with a party affiliation, you are locked into voting in that primary. I've been considering a general election vote for McCain, so I had been considering passing on the Super Tuesday primary.

Driving home, I was listening to an Obama speech from the Meadowlands rally along with clips from Shriver's speech yesterday. It motivated (moved is probably too strong a word) to want to vote, and it does come down to the whole "how listening to Obama makes me feel" kind of thing. Hillary, Obama and McCain are close enough together on my hot button issues that this "feel factor" is able to carry some weight for me. I also like the idea of not having a Bush or Clinton on the ticket. And I'm somewhat optimistic (though some may call it naive) that Obama could generally make a broad portion of the population like him.

So, call me an Obama girl (for tomorrow, anyway).

[Young Drachma]

http://www.nataliedee.com/020408/im-gonna-vote-for-mccain-cause-hes-a-white-dude.jpg

(http://www.nataliedee.com/)

[Arles]

Interesting that Hillary gets a spot on the Letterman show tonight. Nice bit of free advertising on the eve before super Tuesday. I'm sure CBS will even it out by having Obama on Monday, May 26. One day before the huge Idaho primary ;)

[Buccaneer]

Interesting that Hillary gets a spot on the Letterman show tonight. Nice bit of free advertising on the eve before super Tuesday. I'm sure CBS will even it out by having Obama on Monday, May 26. One day before the huge Idaho primary ;)

I thought there were some federal laws about this or did the Clintons file an exemption for this as well?

[ISiddiqui]

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/E/htmlE/equaltimeru/equaltimeru.htm

Congress reacted quickly by creating four exemptions to the equal opportunity law. Stations who gave time to candidates on regularly scheduled newscasts, news interviews shows, documentaries (assuming the candidate wasn't the primary focus of the documentary), or on-the-spot news events would not have to offer equal time to other candidates for that office.

The FCC has also labeled shows such as The Phil Donahue Show and Good Morning America news interview programs.

[mrsimperless]

Does anyone know what Hillary's stance is on 1984? I've searched through her website but haven't been able to find anything. On Obama's site it is plain as day that he wants to completely get rid of Guantanamo, restore Habeus Corpus and will not tolerate torture of any kind. I could see Hillary getting into office and leaving things the way they are now. (or worse)

[ISiddiqui]

Does anyone know what Hillary's stance is on 1984? I've searched through her website but haven't been able to find anything. On Obama's site it is plain as day that he wants to completely get rid of Guantanamo, restore Habeus Corpus and will not tolerate torture of any kind. I could see Hillary getting into office and leaving things the way they are now. (or worse)

She wants to close Guantanamo:

http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/news/statements/record.cfm?id=273211

As for torture, she is against it, but will make an exception for a "ticking time bomb" scenario (but has recently backed away from that a bit). She's also against rendition.

[Fighter of Foo]

You must not follow any of the head-to-head polls.

Not in February, no.

There's a slight chance for McCain if Hillary is the nominee; any other matchup will result in a huge Dem win.

[ISiddiqui]

As Bucc said, follow the head to head polls.

McCain knows how to play the game (look at how he ran Romney around ragged about the timetable issue). I fear Obama won't be able to keep up with the political tricks McCain has (who, btw, also has a tendancy to attract independants).

I think if McCain wins, it'll be close regardless of who the Dems put up. Hell, they could put up the clone of FDR and it'd be close. Romney would get run over by Michael Dukakis.

[albionmoonlight]

This seems to sew up what we know this election season:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/5/2921/03211/473/450068

Two polls of California done by two respected polling outfits. One shows a huge Obama win. One shows a huge Clinton win. Other than that, they agree completely.

*Note--reading Daily Kos can be harmful to your mental health. The fact that I was on there shows just how tooseriously I am taking these primaries. Please try not to hold it against me.

[ISiddiqui]

Two polls of California done by two respected polling outfits. One shows a huge Obama win. One shows a huge Clinton win. Other than that, they agree completely.

LOL. Well, I guess we'll just have to wait until they count the votes :D.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Not in February, no.

There's a slight chance for McCain if Hillary is the nominee; any other matchup will result in a huge Dem win.

We heard this all in 2004. Dubya doesn't have a prayer.

For all the handwringing over McCain's leaning to the center, when election day comes in November, the conservative base will still vote for him. The conspiracy theories of mass defections at the party core when push comes to shove in the general election are highly exaggerated.

I think Obama will likely end up the Dem candidate. His performance when he has to start giving specific policies rather than the general political 'uniting' talk that he's used thus far will show whether he can win the election.

[chesapeake]

A little morning polling information, pulled from the National Journal:

The latest tracking polls from Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby show Barack Obama leading Hillary Clinton 49-36% in CA, Obama-HRC 45-42% in MO, and HRC-Obama 46-41% in NJ among Dem LVs. Among GOP LVs, it's Mitt Romney-John McCain-Mike Huckabee 40-33-12% in CA, McCain-Huckabee-Romney 34-27-25% in MO, and McCain-Romney 53-24% in NJ.

[ISiddiqui]

Reuters/Zogby is so freaking wierd. Everyone else has slight lead for McCain in California, and Zogby has 7 point lead for Romney!

Who are they polling?!

[Fighter of Foo]

We heard this all in 2004. Dubya doesn't have a prayer.

For all the handwringing over McCain's leaning to the center, when election day comes in November, the conservative base will still vote for him. The conspiracy theories of mass defections at the party core when push comes to shove in the general election are highly exaggerated.

I think Obama will likely end up the Dem candidate. His performance when he has to start giving specific policies rather than the general political 'uniting' talk that he's used thus far will show whether he can win the election.

The conservative base now only consists of the 25% who still give Bush a positive job approval.

In 2004 there were more people who voted in the republican primary than the democratic one. This year it's close to 2:1 Dem. Combine this with the high negatives for anyone with an 'R' next to their name and the fact that Republicans did not pick up a single seat in the mid term elections. In addition, the economy will probably be in the toilet by November. Bush had none of those factors against him, and there was NO ONE who said he "doesn't have a prayer," so drop that ridiculous strawman argument right now.

Now explain to me how McCain or any of the other Republican candidates are supposed to be competitive, much less win.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

The conservative base now only consists of the 25% who still give Bush a positive job approval.

In 2004 there were more people who voted in the republican primary than the democratic one. This year it's close to 2:1 Dem. Combine this with the high negatives for anyone with an 'R' next to their name and the fact that Republicans did not pick up a single seat in the mid term elections. In addition, the economy will probably be in the toilet by November. Bush had none of those factors against him, and there was NO ONE who said he "doesn't have a prayer," so drop that ridiculous strawman argument right now.

Now explain to me how McCain or any of the other Republican candidates are supposed to be competitive, much less win.

1. The approval rating of Dubya has little to do with whether the Republican core voters will support the next Republican candidate.
2. Show me a correlation with turnout in primaries vs. turnout in the general election. It simply isn't there.
3. The economy is in its current state with a Republican president with low ratings and a Democratic Congress with even lower ratings. As Barack says, we did it together.
4. McCain is a much different candidate than Dubya. Whether he wins or not is up in the air, but it's certainly not a Democratic steamroll in the general election as you are trying to imply.

[ISiddiqui]

Now explain to me how McCain or any of the other Republican candidates are supposed to be competitive, much less win.

I strongly suggest you look at the head to head polling. Sure, if the candidate was Romney or Guiliani, you'd be right. Republican candidates would lose badly. But McCain is considerably different, with mass independant and liberal appeal, especially for his willingness to buck the party line and work with people like Sen. Clinton and Sen. Kennedy.

[Fighter of Foo]

1. The approval rating of Dubya has little to do with whether the Republican core voters will support the next Republican candidate.
2. Show me a correlation with turnout in primaries vs. turnout in the general election. It simply isn't there.
3. The economy is in its current state with a Republican president with low ratings and a Democratic Congress with even lower ratings. As Barack says, we did it together.
4. McCain is a much different candidate than Dubya. Whether he wins or not is up in the air, but it's certainly not a Democratic steamroll in the general election as you are trying to imply.

1. My point is that there aren't very many republican core voters left

2. "We find that voting in primaries has a positive and significant effect on voting in general elections and significantly increase the vote share of the party holding the primary, suggesting that the arguments that primaries by their existence decrease voter turnout and hurt parties holding them have no support." http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p62407_index.html

3. "For the past several months, Congress' approval ratings have been as low as, and often lower than, George Bush's unprecedentedly low ratings. Various media pundits and right-wing advocates use this fact constantly to insinuate that Bush is not uniquely unpopular and Americans have not really turned against Republicans, but rather, there is just a generic dissatisfaction with our political institutions, or more misleadingly still, that Americans are actually angry at Congress for not "doing enough" (by which it is meant that they are excessively investigating and obstructing and not "cooperating" enough).
But the reason for these low approval ratings is as clear as it is meaningful -- the overall ratings for Congress are so low because Democrats disapprove of the Democratic Congress almost as much as Republicans do. There is nothing unusual about how Republicans or independents rate the Democratic Congress; the only aspect of any of this that is unusual is that Democrats rate the Congress so low even though it is controlled by their own party. Virtually every poll demonstrates this."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/21/congress/

4. This is the same John McCain who wants to stay in Iraq for the next 100 years even though the majority of Americans think the war was a mistake and is currently bankrupting our country? Riiiiiiiiiiight.

[Fighter of Foo]

I strongly suggest you look at the head to head polling. Sure, if the candidate was Romney or Guiliani, you'd be right. Republican candidates would lose badly. But McCain is considerably different, with mass independant and liberal appeal, especially for his willingness to buck the party line and work with people like Sen. Clinton and Sen. Kennedy.

The head to head polls are meaningless 9 months from election day. Hell, primary polling more than a week old is meaningless. The meta factors I list above are infinitely more important than a head to head poll of prospective nominees in February.

[ISiddiqui]

The head to head polls are meaningless 9 months from election day. Hell, primary polling more than a week old is meaningless. The meta factors I list above are infinitely more important than a head to head poll of prospective nominees in February.

That's kind of a ridiculous statement to make after making comments about a matchup and then saying things like any other Dem than Clinton will wipe up the floor with McCain.

Seems to me to be ignoring the facts to pump up your boy, Obama.

Of course things could happen to shift the public perception between now and then, but then you can't make blanket statements as to who will beat who in November, IMO.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

My point is that there aren't very many republican core voters left.

Yes, they've all just vacated the party. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Fighter of Foo]

Well I gamble heavily on this stuff, so yeah I can. :)

Hillary has high negatives. She's a polarizing figure. What do you want me to tell you? If she didn't, she'd wipe the floor with any Republican too.

[Fighter of Foo]

Yes, they've all just vacated the party. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

There's a lot fewer of them now than 4 years ago. You can track the number by following Bush's approval rating. That equals the core republican base +/- a few percentage points.

[ISiddiqui]

Well I gamble heavily on this stuff, so yeah I can. :)

Hillary has high negatives. She's a polarizing figure. What do you want me to tell you? If she didn't, she'd wipe the floor with any Republican too.

I think this shows that you haven't really seen the appeal of McCain, every after his comments about Iraq. If its McCain as the nominee, NO Dem is wiping the floor with him.

[ISiddiqui]

There's a lot fewer of them now than 4 years ago. You can track the number by following Bush's approval rating. That equals the core republican base +/- a few percentage points.

Um... there is PLENTY of core Republican base which doesn't like Bush. I personally know a few.

[Arles]

There's a lot fewer of them now than 4 years ago. You can track the number by following Bush's approval rating. That equals the core republican base +/- a few percentage points.
I don't know where this logic comes from. I voted for Bush both times and am extremely disappointed in his performance for the past two years. I guess that I am no longer a republican, right?

Just because you don't approve of a sitting republican president doesn't mean you won't vote for Romney or McCain.

[Fighter of Foo]

I'm not making this stuff up.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312

"Even more striking than the changes in some core political and social values is the dramatic shift in party identification that has occurred during the past five years. In 2002, the country was equally divided along partisan lines: 43% identified with the Republican Party or leaned to the GOP, while an identical proportion said they were Democrats. Today, half of the public (50%) either identifies as a Democrat or says they lean to the Democratic Party, compared with 35% who align with the GOP.

Yet the Democrats' growing advantage in party identification is tempered by the fact that the Democratic Party's overall standing with the public is no better than it was when President Bush was first inaugurated in 2001. Instead, it is the Republican Party that has rapidly lost public support, particularly among political independents. Faced with an unpopular president who is waging an increasingly unpopular war, the proportion of Americans who hold a favorable view of the Republican Party stands at 41%, down 15 points since January 2001. But during that same period, the proportion expressing a positive view of Democrats has declined by six points, to 54%."

[ISiddiqui]

Instead, it is the Republican Party that has rapidly lost public support, particularly among political independents. Faced with an unpopular president who is waging an increasingly unpopular war, the proportion of Americans who hold a favorable view of the Republican Party stands at 41%, down 15 points since January 2001.

And, of course, a McCain nomination wouldn't bring back in the indeps? Like McCain always has? I know, a lot of Republicans have started to call themselves Libertarians (an annoying habit) because of this President. But there is no doubt that they'll run back in a flash when McCain or Romney is the nominee.

[Fighter of Foo]

I guess that I am no longer a republican, right?

Just because you don't approve of a sitting republican president doesn't mean you won't vote for Romney or McCain.

Where did I write that? How did you get there? This is why I hate talking politics.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I'm not making this stuff up.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312

I'll grant you this. You're really good at linking a lot of articles that support your bias leanings. Quote all the polls you want. Just because there's a lot of Republicans who don't like what Dubya was as a president doesn't mean that they are any more happy with what the Democrats are as a party or as a congressional governing body.

[Fighter of Foo]

And, of course, a McCain nomination wouldn't bring back in the indeps? Like McCain always has? I know, a lot of Republicans have started to call themselves Libertarians (an annoying habit) because of this President. But there is no doubt that they'll run back in a flash when McCain or Romney is the nominee.

Oh I agree. It's just that this year anyone with an R next to their name is starting on average 7-8 points behind anyone with a D. That's a big disadvantage.

[ISiddiqui]

Oh I agree. It's just that this year anyone with an R next to their name is starting on average 7-8 points behind anyone with a D. That's a big disadvantage.

Like I said, not if you read the head to head polls. And this time you can't use the "It's February" thing, because you said "STARTING on average". :cool:

[Fighter of Foo]

I'll grant you this. You're really good at linking a lot of articles that support your bias leanings. Quote all the polls you want. Just because there's a lot of Republicans who don't like what Dubya was as a president doesn't mean that they are any more happy with what the Democrats are as a party or as a congressional governing body.

Because I only gamble on what will happen and I don't vote, I'm probably the least biased person here. If I am biased, I lose $$$.

If you'd like to add something else to the discussion please do, but take your bias bullshit someplace else.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Because I only gamble on what will happen and I don't vote, I'm probably the least biased person here. If I am biased, I lose $$$.

If you'd like to add something else to the discussion please do, but take your bias bullshit someplace else.

:rolleyes:

Congrats on being a gambler.

[Arles]

All that means is that 7-8% of the "rank and file" GOP from 2002 now wish to be considered "independents" because of their frustration with Bush. I don't see how that relates to them voting for Hillary or Obama. The best case would be that they just sit out, but I'm guessing all the hub-ub leading up to November will have them voting (even if it's just to keep Hillary/Obama from office). If Bush were on the ticket, I think that analysis may have some merit - but he's not.

Another point is that data you list was from 2002, which was probably the high point in republican unity. If you look at 2004, the advantage was 47 Dem - 41 Rep and Bush still won. So, if Bush (who helped create the negative trend) can win with a mid-level deficit, I'd guess a new candidate could also win with a slightly larger deficit.

Also, t for those of you valueing head-to-head, check out this poll by CNN back in Feb, 2004:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/18/elec04.prez.poll/index.html

In a head-to-head contest, 55 percent said they would choose Kerry for president over Bush, who drew the support of 43 percent. Edwards led the president 54 percent to 44 percent.

According to Polls, either Edwards or Kerry would have walked over Bush back in early 2004. Once the candidates are chosen and the real campaign begins, these polls have a tendency to do some pretty big shifting. Right now, no one knows much about the policies of these guys (esp Romney and Obama) and we are in the "platitude courting phase" in each party.

[Fighter of Foo]

Like I said, not if you read the head to head polls. And this time you can't use the "It's February" thing, because you said "STARTING on average". :cool:

I'm confused. You start with whoever self-identifies with your party (i.e. registered republicans). That's your base. As a candidate, you then try to do 2 things:

1) get your base to turnout
2) win over indys

If your base is high enough, 2) doesn't matter. We already know what the base numbers are nationally for each party. I posted it above. That's the start. The head to head polls at this point are essentially only measuring indy support, which can't accurately be measured until a week or two after both conventions finish.

[Galaxy]

You gamble on elections?

[Young Drachma]

All that means is that 7-8% of the "rank and file" GOP from 2002 now wish to be considered "independents" because of their frustration with Bush. I don't see how that relates to them voting for Hillary or Obama. The best case would be that they just sit out, but I'm guessing all the hub-ub leading up to November will have them voting (even if it's just to keep Hillary/Obama from office). If Bush were on the ticket, I think that analysis may have some merit - but he's not.


I know more than a few of these people and consider myself among them. I don't think that the GOP nominee is going to get many of them to convert in November. I think people will sit on their hands come election day, vote third party or not bother at all.

Where I live now and where I'm moving are both places where my vote won't have a demonstrable impact on the final results, making me more likely to vote as I would normally (for the third party candidate that best represents my viewpoints) since neither of the presumptive major party candidates will come close.

I do know that younger people who have tended towards the GOP either because of family commitments, legacy or other such reasons are more and more considering Obama. Which is just downright strange on paper, but one good example of a difference between Hillary and Obama are their healthcare plans.

Obama is smart enough to realize that independents and fence-sitters who would vote for him are not going to want mandatory health care plans enacted, where Hillary's plan has mandates. Doubtful they'd get passed to begin with, but it does leave her progressive base happy with her for that reason.

But that's just one clear example where he's already angling for people in the centre and on the right of centre to vote for him and the fact that he's positioning himself that way in the primaries signals that he'll either live or die by the whole "unity" candidacy deal.

So while in the past, I doubt it'd do much for him. I think this year that the unique turn of events of the past eight years have really made a guy like him palatable to a voting populace that would normally dismiss him on face.

But we'll have evidence to weigh whether any of it means anything later tonight and beyond.

[Fighter of Foo]

Start here:
http://www.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

This is for larger amounts of $$$:
https://www.intrade.com


Bodog always puts up really soft lines for all Presidential and Senate races. In 2006 they had a line up for someone running unopposed. Max $50 though :(

Pinnacle often has lines up too, but you need to be "Canadian" or non-US to bet there.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

All that means is that 7-8% of the "rank and file" GOP from 2002 now wish to be considered "independents" because of their frustration with Bush. I don't see how that relates to them voting for Hillary or Obama. The best case would be that they just sit out, but I'm guessing all the hub-ub leading up to November will have them voting (even if it's just to keep Hillary/Obama from office). If Bush were on the ticket, I think that analysis may have some merit - but he's not.

I'd actually vote for Bush over Hillary if that were the current election. It has little to do with whether I like Bush and a whole lot to do with how much I don't like Hillary. I'm willing to consider Obama once I hear what his actual policies are. I don't know much of anything about him at this point. I like McCain as a moderate change for the Republicans.

[DaddyTorgo]

nothing better than cnn.com for exit-polling, is there?

[ISiddiqui]

The head to head polls at this point are essentially only measuring indy support, which can't accurately be measured until a week or two after both conventions finish.

That's not true and you realize that. They don't just ask indeps, but people across the board, which include the Rep and Dem core voters as well. It's a good starting point as any, especially when the Rep we are talking about has more appeal to moderates and indeps than he does to hard core conservatives.

[path12]

As Bucc said, follow the head to head polls.

McCain knows how to play the game (look at how he ran Romney around ragged about the timetable issue). I fear Obama won't be able to keep up with the political tricks McCain has (who, btw, also has a tendancy to attract independants).


I'm not buying the McCain=independents thing this time around. I think he burnt a lot of bridges with independents with his flat out courting of the right wingers over the past year or so. If Obama can grab the nomination, I think the independents break his way much more so than towards McCain.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Just curious. Does anyone else have a state that has a lot of 'sabotage' votes cast? I live in Missouri and you can request a ballot for either party, regardless of any party affiliation. I know quite a few republicans who requested Democratic ballots simply to vote for Clinton in the hopes that she can secure the nomination, which would seem to favor the Republicans in a general election.

I know some states don't allow this kind of voting. Does anyone know how many states do allow it?

[Jas_lov]

Head to head polls show McCain as the Republicans best show to win in November. Romney would lose in a landslide. But other than that, those polls are meaningless until we get down to two. Arles posted a poll that had Kerry up by 10% in February and look what happened. I'm one of the people Foo is talking about and I won't be voting for John McCain. It's obvious there's a shift from Republican to Democrat. Republicans were wiped out in 2006. There seems to be a lot more turnout for Democrats in the primaries. McCain will get independents, but so will Obama. Who do you think those guys will side with, the guy who wants to leave Iraq or the guy who wants to stay there for 100 years?

[Alan T]

I'm not buying the McCain=independents thing this time around. I think he burnt a lot of bridges with independents with his flat out courting of the right wingers over the past year or so. If Obama can grab the nomination, I think the independents break his way much more so than towards McCain.

I am an independant/moderate voter, and I can not participate in today's primary because Massachusetts has closed primaries. For me, I'm not as fond of Mccain as I was a few years ago, but he is the only Republican candidate that i would consider voting for. It is more of a statement of how much I don't want Clinton in the White House than what I think of Mccain.

Right now, I am leaning heavily towards Obama if he gets the nomination. I'm also trying to convince my in-laws who live in California to vote Obama today, but I think they're leaning towards Clinton for who knows what reason!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Who do you think those guys will side with, the guy who wants to leave Iraq or the guy who wants to stay there for 100 years?

This is what I was discussing earlier when I said I'd be willing to consider Obama once I know some of the specifics behind his policies. It's easy to say that he'll just take the troops out of Iraq and be done with it. It's another thing to present his foreign policy and let everyone know how he will deal with terrorists in foreign lands once we have pulled all of those troops out of those countries. I'm not saying that there isn't an alternative solution.......it's just that he hasn't presented it yet in any specific form.

[Warhammer]

I'll sum this up for everyone:

Clinton wins the Dem. nomination = Republican win in November
Obama wins the Dem. nomination = Democrat landslide in November

[ISiddiqui]

I'm not buying the McCain=independents thing this time around. I think he burnt a lot of bridges with independents with his flat out courting of the right wingers over the past year or so. If Obama can grab the nomination, I think the independents break his way much more so than towards McCain.

The primaries so far have shown that McCain is doing very well with independant voters. They've given him victories in the open primaries that have been held. When it is a closed primary, he does much worse.

[ISiddiqui]

I'll sum this up for everyone:

Clinton wins the Dem. nomination = Republican win in November
Obama wins the Dem. nomination = Democrat landslide in November

And I'll sum up my response: Bullshit

:D

[path12]

The primaries so far have shown that McCain is doing very well with independant voters. They've given him victories in the open primaries that have been held. When it is a closed primary, he does much worse.

But the turnout for open primaries has been 2-1 Democratic vs Republican. I don't doubt that McCain is getting the lions share of independent votes in the Republican primaries. But Obama is getting the lions share of indep votes in the Democratic primaries, and I believe that he would get a far larger share than McCain if the general came down to the two of them.

[Galaril]

1. The approval rating of Dubya has little to do with whether the Republican core voters will support the next Republican candidate.
2. Show me a correlation with turnout in primaries vs. turnout in the general election. It simply isn't there.
3. The economy is in its current state with a Republican president with low ratings and a Democratic Congress with even lower ratings. As Barack says, we did it together.
4. McCain is a much different candidate than Dubya. Whether he wins or not is up in the air, but it's certainly not a Democratic steamroll in the general election as you are trying to imply.


I see Obama and has superior debating/speaking skills crushing McCain in debates.

[Galaril]

Just curious. Does anyone else have a state that has a lot of 'sabotage' votes cast? I live in Missouri and you can request a ballot for either party, regardless of any party affiliation. I know quite a few republicans who requested Democratic ballots simply to vote for Clinton in the hopes that she can secure the nomination, which would seem to favor the Republicans in a general election.

I know some states don't allow this kind of voting. Does anyone know how many states do allow it?

So, I guess lying and cheating isn't just a republican value and not just isolated to your presidents, huh?:D

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I see Obama and has superior debating/speaking skills crushing McCain in debates.

And that may very well be the case. I think McCain/Obama debates would actually be very entertaining. As I said, I'm willing to consider Obama, but I want to hear him actually talk about specific policies. Also, I could see McCain pulling a Bob Dole (i.e. trying to look so presidential that he doesn't let his personality come through). IMO, it does seem as though McCain is a bit looser this time than in his previous presidential runs. Obama does a great job of keeping an even keel, even under attack from Hillary.

[Arles]

If I had to guess, I would start out with all matchups being close. With the 24-hour news cycle and cable TV, politics is much more of a "team sport" than it was when Reagan won back in the 80s. Both side will pretty much start out with 40% of the popular vote regardless of the candidate. If you discount the 1-3% of the 3rd party (maybe Bloomberg?), that leaves a 20% window up for grabs. Here's how I see that 20% going:

Hillary-McCain = 9-11
Hillary-Romney= 8-12
Obama-McCain=12-8
Obama-Romney=11-9

From an electoral standpoint, I'd say the republican wins all the red states that Bush won in 04 but AZ, CO, NM, FL, IA and OH regardess. For the Dems, they win all but PA, WI, MI, NH and maybe MN. So, it comes down to which democrat has a better shot at the West and which republican can hold OH, FL and make a run at PA. IMO, the democrat is Obama and the republican is Romney. Still, if Romney ran against Obama, I think it would be extremely close and one of those 278-260 type finishes. Even if Hillary ran against McCain or Romney, it still would be close as there just isn't much wiggle room in likely voters. In February, everyone's excited about the new blood (heck, Dole was favored over Clinton in 96). But things tend to get back to an equilibrium point by October and that's where the final margin is usually decided.

[ISiddiqui]

But the turnout for open primaries has been 2-1 Democratic vs Republican. I don't doubt that McCain is getting the lions share of independent votes in the Republican primaries. But Obama is getting the lions share of indep votes in the Democratic primaries, and I believe that he would get a far larger share than McCain if the general came down to the two of them.

Maybe, maybe not. I think a lot of people voting for Obama don't necessarily know his views on things, just bold pronouncements for unity and change. I think if it comes down to McCain and Obama, McCain may start pulling up stuff like Obama being the most liberal Senator based on his votes, even more liberal than Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, and some independants may say, wait a sec...

Obama hasn't really had to face someone hammering him for being too liberal, because, well... Clinton isn't going to do that and get on the good side of Dem voters. McCain, OTOH, will... and we'll have to see which way the indeps go, left or right (and somehow McCain has a perception of being a moderate).

[Warhammer]

And I'll sum up my response: Bullshit

:D

My whole premise is that the one person that can save the Republican party is Hillary Clinton. That said, I think a Republican loss in 2008 is going to be healthy for the country. The Republican Party needs to do some soul searching right now. If they win, there won't be any soul searching.

Mc Cain will win the vote of the independents in a race against Clinton. Look at how Hillary has looked against Obama. She should crush him easily, but the more that people look at the two of them, the more they prefer Obama to her.

That said, I don't think a Hillary or McCain presidency is going to be any different. I would see more scandals with Hillary in office than McCain.

Obama crushes McCain because he has a rosy vision for the future. He really is a throwback to Reagan in that regard. Reagan was in turn a throwback to Kennedy. Sure, their policies are different, but they all believed that the USA was the greatest nation on this Earth and that we have the ability to improve the world.

[Coffee Warlord]

If Steve from the Dupage County Ron Paul Office calls me one more time and tells me to make sure I vote for the right delegates, I'm going to stab him.

[path12]

Maybe, maybe not. I think a lot of people voting for Obama don't necessarily know his views on things, just bold pronouncements for unity and change. I think if it comes down to McCain and Obama, McCain may start pulling up stuff like Obama being the most liberal Senator based on his votes, even more liberal than Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, and some independants may say, wait a sec...


I found it quite interesting that in 2004 Kerry just happened to have the most liberal record and in 2008 Obama just happens to also. Makes me wonder about the group putting that list together -- after all, who decides which positions/votes are "liberal"? I also think that Obama's campaign premise of coming together is far more centrist than the campaign that Hillary is running for example.

I see where you're coming from and you could well be right that an Obama/McCain matchup would be closer than I see it from the deep blue Northwest, but I just can't help but feel that a) voters are taking this election very seriously very early, b) there is a deep distrust generated by the past eight years of this administration and c) an unwillingness to just go along with media pronouncements and generalizations. All of those factors point to a big shift election this time around. I think it's close if Hillary is the Dem nominee, I don't think it's nearly as close if Obama is.......and I don't think it really matters who the Republican nominee is.

[ISiddiqui]

Obama crushes McCain because he has a rosy vision for the future. He really is a throwback to Reagan in that regard. Reagan was in turn a throwback to Kennedy. Sure, their policies are different, but they all believed that the USA was the greatest nation on this Earth and that we have the ability to improve the world.

I think that's an incredibly rose glasses view of things. McCain is optimistic about America's future as well and he's also a savvy politician. He'll find ways to point to the fact that Obama is liberal on X, Y, Z position and some indeps may realize that while Obama was talking about unity and change, they didn't realize he meant that much change.

There are few folks running today who don't look at the country with optimism. I think the problem is, is that folks that just run on optimism are going to have a difficult time when their policies are become center stage instead.

Reagan was lucky in that Carter was running for re-election. But McCain is seen as been a bit more distant from this administration while being in the same party. I do think that Democrats who back either Clinton or Obama are underestimating the appeal of John McCain to moderates and independants.

[Jas_lov]

West Virginia convention is going on now. The winner gets all of the 18/30 WV delegates.

1st round results...

MIKE HUCKABEE - 375 votes (33%)
JOHN McCAIN - 176 votes (16%)
RON PAUL - 118 votes (10%)
MITT ROMNEY - 464 votes (41%)

Ron Paul is now eliminated and his and the rest of the delegates will re-vote in the 2nd round for the other 3. I wonder if Paul's votes will go to Huckabee.

[Jas_lov]

Yep, Mike Huckabee is the winner of WV and 18/30 delegates there. What happened was McCain voters saw voting for him as a lost cause and went for Huckabee over Romney.

[Fighter of Foo]

I see where you're coming from and you could well be right that an Obama/McCain matchup would be closer than I see it from the deep blue Northwest, but I just can't help but feel that a) voters are taking this election very seriously very early, b) there is a deep distrust generated by the past eight years of this administration and c) an unwillingness to just go along with media pronouncements and generalizations. All of those factors point to a big shift election this time around. I think it's close if Hillary is the Dem nominee, I don't think it's nearly as close if Obama is.......and I don't think it really matters who the Republican nominee is.

This is astoundingly accurate.

[path12]

This is astoundingly accurate.

Aw, shucks. :cool:

[Crapshoot]

I'll grant you this. You're really good at linking a lot of articles that support your bias leanings. Quote all the polls you want. Just because there's a lot of Republicans who don't like what Dubya was as a president doesn't mean that they are any more happy with what the Democrats are as a party or as a congressional governing body.

Et Tu, Brutus? you're lecturing someone on bias?

The Pew Research center notes that party identification has given Dems their biggest advantage in a long, long time. McCain is perhaps the only GOP candidate who may be able to bite into that and win this election for them.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Et Tu, Brutus? you're lecturing someone on bias?

I've crosseed party lines a few times. I'm certainly not a straight ticket voter. Not sure where you see my opinion as being bias. I've already stated that I'd consider Obama as long as I understood his policies.

[SackAttack]

I don't know where this logic comes from. I voted for Bush both times and am extremely disappointed in his performance for the past two years. I guess that I am no longer a republican, right?

Just because you don't approve of a sitting republican president doesn't mean you won't vote for Romney or McCain.

I don't want either of those guys.

Just one reason why:

I'm really kind of horrified at the idea that both of them want a national sexual predator registry. Either lock sexual predators up for life, or treat them as you would any other criminal who's paid their debt to society. The idea that we have this special class that needs to be tracked for the rest of their lives and impeded from living a normal life is, to me, in direct contradiction with the 14th Amendment.

If recidivism is so high in that group that they cannot be considered to be rehabilitated, why are we releasing them?

I just don't get how you can have two guys claim that they want judicial strict constructionists on the bench, and then support something like this.

[Fighter of Foo]

Can't format poll

[Young Drachma]

I've crosseed party lines a few times. I'm certainly not a straight ticket voter. Not sure where you see my opinion as being bias. I've already stated that I'd consider Obama as long as I understood his policies.

I think that he's been out there speaking on the issues. But because he's a good speaker, the media only covers the speaking events where he "inspires" or whatever by making good sound bytes.

Andrew Sullivan had to say this last year about him (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/obama/4) (he's a supporter of Obama, though, I'm not sure he was at that time of this story)

Earlier this fall, I attended an Obama speech in Washington on tax policy that underwhelmed on delivery; his address was wooden, stilted, even tedious. It was only after I left the hotel that it occurred to me that I’d just been bored on tax policy by a national black leader. That I should have been struck by this was born in my own racial stereotypes, of course. But it won me over.

...And the persistence of race as a divisive, even explosive factor in American life was unmissable the week of Obama’s tax speech. While he was detailing middle-class tax breaks, thousands of activists were preparing to march in Jena, Louisiana, after a series of crude racial incidents had blown up into a polarizing conflict.

I think the myth of him not being strong on policy just isn't true. I just think it's a matter of way he's covered and the natural of the beast at this time of year.

[DanGarion]

It sucks being a registered Lib. since I don't get to participate in the top battles. Heck I don't even know who these guys are on my ballot!

[lordscarlet]

It sucks being a registered Lib. since I don't get to participate in the top battles. Heck I don't even know who these guys are on my ballot!

That's why I am a registered democrat. The only way I can participate in meaningful elections (those would be the democratic primary) is to register as a democrat. It will be a cold day in hell the next time a Republic is chosen by the District of Columbia.

I vote Statehood-Green. :)

[timmynausea]

I've crosseed party lines a few times. I'm certainly not a straight ticket voter. Not sure where you see my opinion as being bias. I've already stated that I'd consider Obama as long as I understood his policies.

Let me try to clarify: Obama voted for the PS3 before he voted against it.

[KWhit]

It sucks being a registered Lib. since I don't get to participate in the top battles. Heck I don't even know who these guys are on my ballot!

Then why would you be a registered libertarion?

And why would anyone be a registered independent?

Wouldn't it make sense to register as one of the two major parties so that you could vote in the primary? And then once the general election comes around, you can vote for whomever you want?

What am I missing?

[SackAttack]

Then why would you be a registered libertarion?

And why would anyone be a registered independent?

Wouldn't it make sense to register as one of the two major parties so that you could vote in the primary? And then once the general election comes around, you can vote for whomever you want?

What am I missing?

Avoid election spam in the mailboxes would be my guess.

[st.cronin]

Then why would you be a registered libertarion?

And why would anyone be a registered independent?

Wouldn't it make sense to register as one of the two major parties so that you could vote in the primary? And then once the general election comes around, you can vote for whomever you want?

What am I missing?

I have lived in states where registered independents could vote in party primaries. You just, obviously, couldn't vote in more than one primary.

[NoMyths]

I am a registered Independent. We're allowed to vote in the South Carolina primaries.

I voted for the forces of good.

[KWhit]

I understand that. I mean why do it in states that don't have open primaries?

[ctmason]

I registered as an Independent in Arizona because at the time I didn't realize that it wasn't an open primary state.

That was five years ago and I'm going to get around to changing that one of these days.

But seriously, I have never changed it because I work for state government and am not interested in being identified as a member or a supporter of any political party. Bad for the career.

[Young Drachma]

Then why would you be a registered libertarion?

And why would anyone be a registered independent?

Wouldn't it make sense to register as one of the two major parties so that you could vote in the primary? And then once the general election comes around, you can vote for whomever you want?

What am I missing?

I was registered Republican my whole life until last election cycle, when I changed my registration to Libertarian. I did it solely as a protest, though. Since leaving there at 19, I've never lived in a state that was a 'swing' state in an election year and as a result, it makes it easier for me to vote my conscious except in close races or situations where I have a strong preference one way or another.

I don't think it's worthwhile to vote for the "major" party candidates solely to "have a say" because in the end, if you're willing to sacrifice your ideas because of a flawed system and to have token participation, then really, you're agreeing with the idea that the system ought to be the way it is and the people with the most money and influence ought to get to dominate the landscape.

If fewer people with convictions thought "screw this, I'm going to vote the way I want to vote rather than believing I can't impact anything," especially in local races, more 'change' would happen organically as a result.

But as it stands now, people are either willing to stand pat, participate nominally or not at all and it's in part responsible for why we're in a lot of the situations we are from top to bottom politically.

Now that I'm moving from here, I'll change my registration again before this November when I re-register to vote, but...it'll probably be to Republican again, rather than independent.

Mostly because I used to be and depending on where I am, I figure it's more useful to be involved locally in a party even if you disagree with the federal issues than to just sit out if you're close on things. But where I live now, I had little use for the partisan yokels who ran things and so, I just wanted no parts of working with any of them.

[Jas_lov]

These shouldn't be taken too seriously, but Drudge has exit polls for 14 states on their website- Obama ahead in 9 of them, Clinton in 5. They have him with 75% in Georgia so we'll see how accurate it is now that Georgia poll numbers start coming in.

Obama is now the projected winner of Georgia. Republicans too close to call.

[miami_fan]

Ummmm if race is playing no part in the Dems race, why is everyone so concerned about whether white male voters would vote for him?

[Jas_lov]

I don't think anyone cares except the media.

[Vegas Vic]

There has just been a huge shift in the Intrade share prices for the Democratic nomination. Obama shares are now trading at 58.8 and Clinton shares are trading at 42.0.

[Buccaneer]

I understand that. I mean why do it in states that don't have open primaries?

As a registered independent since the 1980 election, it is a matter of principle and continued distaste for big-machine, party politics. I have not and will not register as a R or D to vote in the primaries, no matter how much the machines want me to do so.

[Buccaneer]

I'm trying to remember what the GA polls had shown. Early results has Obama up by +37%. (I know, probably just one precinct in downtown Atlanta)

[Jas_lov]

McCain wins Illinois and New Jersey. Romney wins Massachussetts. John McCain wins Connecticut.

[Jas_lov]

Huckabee won Alabama. Georgia too close to call between Huckabee and McCain.

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama has won Illinois. Hillary Clinton has won Oklahoma.

[Cringer]

So I just saw the only 1 minute of Super Tuesday coverage I have seen all day. CBS taught me (because their own words came out sounding like this) that Obama won Georgia because he is black and lots of black people voted today, and the it's pretty shocking that white men would vote for Obama over Clinton.

I think I have seen CBS national news once or twice in the last couple years, and now I know why. Is the rest of the coverage so brilliant and racist sounding?

[RPI-Fan]

The Exit Polls have Romney winning Mass -- surprised that they're so convincing he'd be projected to win!

[Jas_lov]

Hillary Clinton has won Tennessee.

[st.cronin]

Hillary Clinton has won Tennessee.

CNN has it "too close to call."

[Jas_lov]

I saw it on MSNBC.

[miami_fan]

So I just saw the only 1 minute of Super Tuesday coverage I have seen all day. CBS taught me (because their own words came out sounding like this) that Obama won Georgia because he is black and lots of black people voted today, and the it's pretty shocking that white men would vote for Obama over Clinton.

I think I have seen CBS national news once or twice in the last couple years, and now I know why. Is the rest of the coverage so brilliant and racist sounding?

I have also learned that Clinton is winning because women are voting for her.

[SackAttack]

Tennessee has been bouncing all over the place. Saw at one point it was 76-16 Clinton over Edwards, then 45-40 Obama over Clinton, then 49-40 Clinton over Obama...

Yay small sample size.

[Racer]

Hillary Clinton has won Tennessee.

I saw this also. My question is how do they have enough information to declare her the winner when she is only up by 4% with less then one percent of the vote in?

[st.cronin]

I wouldn't trust exit polls today.

[RPI-Fan]

I saw this also. My question is how do they have enough information to declare her the winner when she is only up by 4% with less then one percent of the vote in?

Exit polls...

[Jas_lov]

I saw this also. My question is how do they have enough information to declare her the winner when she is only up by 4% with less then one percent of the vote in?

Exit polling I guess. Maybe it showed her with a big lead. I'm not sure how they called it so early when it's so close, but they did. The obvious ones like Obama in Georgia make sense, but Tennesee didn't when it was still fairly close. But MSNBC reported it so it must be true.

[Jas_lov]

Hillary Clinton and Mike Huckabee have won Arkansas.

[RPI-Fan]

Georgia got a lot more interesting! Went from 38-33-25 (Huckabee-McCain-Romney) to 34-31-31!!

[Jas_lov]

There has just been a huge shift in the Intrade share prices for the Democratic nomination. Obama shares are now trading at 58.8 and Clinton shares are trading at 42.0.

It's now 52-47 Obama over Hillary on intrade.

John McCain has won Delaware.

[RPI-Fan]

Mass is going to be too close to call, I think. Obama has steadily held on to a small (but notable) lead in CT...

[st.cronin]

CNN is now calling Tennessee for Clinton.

Have there been any surprises yet?

[Buccaneer]

I find Clinton projecting to win OK telling on a couple of fronts. Sort of like winning Utah.

[Jas_lov]

No surprises yet. Hillary has a 10% lead in Missouri.

[Buccaneer]

Have there been any surprises yet?


Huckabee winning a Southern state other than Arkansas.

[Jas_lov]

Huckabee winning Georgia and sweeping the south would be a surprise. Obama pulling off upsets in Mass. or N.J. would be as well, but Clinton is leading both at the moment.

[RPI-Fan]

Obama is opening up the lead in CT... what were the polls going into today, there?

[st.cronin]

So, what does that mean, Huckabee winning some southern states? Does that mean McCain wins this thing easily, or does it make it a race?

[Buccaneer]

So, what does that mean, Huckabee winning some southern states? Does that mean McCain wins this thing easily, or does it make it a race?

Race with whom? Huckabee? Hardly.

[RPI-Fan]

So, what does that mean, Huckabee winning some southern states? Does that mean McCain wins this thing easily, or does it make it a race?

McCain is prone to gaffes, so who knows. If Romney is able to take a good chunk of the California delegates and keep McCain far from the magic number, Huckabee might have time to organize. The most likely result of a Huckabee Southern sweep would be for him to pledge support to McCain in exchange for VP consideration. Huckabee will never have the money to flat-out beat McCain.

[Jas_lov]

The rcp average had it 42-38 Hillary in connecticut polls.

[Jas_lov]

New Jersey, Massachussets, and Missouri aren't even close. Hillary is leading them all by double digits.

[Buccaneer]

New Jersey, Massachussets, and Missouri aren't even close. Hillary is leading them all by double digits.

Then it would depend upon CA. :(

[timmynausea]

The delegate splits will make this interesting for the Democrats. Apparently in a couple of states (Mass. at least) it's possible that the winner of the popular vote could actually end up with less delegates. In other states, big wins in popular votes won't necessarily mean big wins in delegates. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

[Jas_lov]

Hillary Clinton declared projected winner in Massachussetts.

[SackAttack]

McCain is prone to gaffes, so who knows. If Romney is able to take a good chunk of the California delegates and keep McCain far from the magic number, Huckabee might have time to organize. The most likely result of a Huckabee Southern sweep would be for him to pledge support to McCain in exchange for VP consideration. Huckabee will never have the money to flat-out beat McCain.

I think Huckabee would be more likely than Romney to get the VP nod.

McCain needs somebody to inspire the conservative wing of the GOP to vote in November unless Hillary gets the nod.

[Jas_lov]

Hillary Clinton has won New York.

[Buccaneer]

In looking at the early Kansas results, it probably says that all of the Dems are concentrated in Lawrence.

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama has won Delaware.

[Jas_lov]

Hillary Clinton has taken back the lead on intrade.

[Jas_lov]

Fox News projects Hillary Clinton the winner of New Jersey.

[LloydLungs]

One thing to keep in mind is that big cities tend to report late. I would expect some of these large Clinton margins (like in Mass, NJ, MO) to come down a bit as the night wears on. Whether it will be enough for Obama to take the lead, we'll see.

[Buccaneer]

God, I hate the thought of this again. Might as well put a picture of Bush/Cheney, it would have the same effect.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/02/05/super.main/t1land.clinton1.ap.jpg (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/05/super.main/index.html)

[Jas_lov]

John McCain wins New York and all of its delegates.

[Coffee Warlord]

God, I hate the thought of this again. Might as well put a picture of Bush/Cheney, it would have the same effect.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/02/05/super.main/t1land.clinton1.ap.jpg (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/05/super.main/index.html)

She triggers my gag reflex every time I see her. Ugh.

[Jas_lov]

Even though Obama has lost Mass and N.J and maybe Missouri, there's still Minnesota and Kansas where he's leading the very early results, the whole southwest, Utah, Montana, and California.

[Buccaneer]

Romney's "Debacle in the South" appears to be real. How much did he campaign there? Yankee Northeasterner just don't play well there.

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama wins Alabama.

[Scoobz0202]

The almost landslide in Missouri is really the only thing that has kind of surprised me so far. And I am an Obama supporter. Going into these primaries he was close in Alabama, Colorado, Connecticut, and Missouri. He is leading in Connecticut and Alabama. And like I said, Missouri has kind of surprsied me. We got the whole western half of the nation though. Let's go California.

[RPI-Fan]

If Cali is a 50/50 split and everything else stays as it is right now (with the exception of the big city effect making Obama closer but not winning some states), I think we know absolutely no more than we did going into tonight. Which favors Obama, because as time goes on he has had a steady upward trend with not many blips.

[GrantDawg]

I can't help but think the Huckabee upsets in both wins and number 2 positions puts him in the power seat. Would he be willing to be a number 2 to either canidate? I really wonder. I have a feeling it would be hard for him to run with McCain, but he would have to throw a lot of support on Romney for the rest of the way (and very quicly) for it to make any difference for Mitt.

[Swaggs]

I'm surprised that Clinton appears to have won Mass. so easily. I thought the Kerry and Kennedy clan endorsements would make that a very tight one.

[Greyroofoo]

Barack Obama wins Alabama.

Not surprised since if only because I've seen Obama ads here and no Clinton ads.

[Buccaneer]

I'm surprised that Clinton appears to have won Mass. so easily. I thought the Kerry and Kennedy clan endorsements would make that a very tight one.

Mass. Dems can talk about peace, love and brotherhood with the best of them but when it comes down to it, there are still some old-school issues.

[Jas_lov]

So far Hillary has 160 total delegates to Obama's 109, not counting super delegates.

So far John McCain has 291 delegates to Romney's 91 and Huckabee's 58.

[Jas_lov]

John McCain wins Oklahoma.

[Jas_lov]

Mitt Romney wins Utah.

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama wins North Dakota.

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama wins Utah.

[Galaril]

Mass. Dems can talk about peace, love and brotherhood with the best of them but when it comes down to it, there are still some old-school issues.

I agree. I see it everyday here.

[SirFozzie]

Romney had been trying to position himself as "A vote for Huckabee is a vote for McCain".. but from what I've seen.. Huckabee's done well, but any delegates he's taking would be from ROmney.

[Jas_lov]

Sounds like Huckabee is going to keep marching on.

[SirFozzie]

Love this note from Real Clear Politics:

9:13PM - A note to the media: Mike Huckabee is not dead. He's ahead narrowly in Missouri, has already won Arkansas, Alabama and West Virginia and looks competitive in Arizona. If today is a bad day for Mitt Romney, it's a great day for Huckabee. Of course, if the Republican race comes down to a McCain-Huckabee battle, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter will be hurling themselves from windows later this evening. - REID WILSON

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama wins Kansas.

[Jas_lov]

Fox News projects Barack Obama wins Connecticut.

[SackAttack]

Looks like it's been mostly the South and West for Obama versus mostly the Northeast for Hillary.

Sounds familiar somehow.

[Vegas Vic]

he would have to throw a lot of support on Romney for the rest of the way (and very quicly) for it to make any difference for Mitt.

There is no data to suggest that Huckabee voters would have voted for Romney if Huckabee wasn't in the race. Exit polling in Florida indicated that McCain was the second choice of the majority of Huckabee's voters.

In light of what has happened tonight, you could make a strong case that Romney is taking votes away from Huckabee.

[Jas_lov]

Of the states that haven't been called yet, Mike Huckabee is leading Georgia and Missouri over McCain, Barack Obama is leading Minnesota by a considerable margin, Mitt Romney is leading Minnesota over McCain. Hillary still up big in Missouri. Obama up big in Colorado and Idaho.

[Scoobz0202]

What states are still voting.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Exit polling in Florida indicated that McCain was the second choice of the majority of Huckabee's voters.

I believe that's a case of people seriously trying to fuck with the exit pollers (which was an interesting topic of conversation on the Atlanta radio coverage tonight, by some of the more serious local analysts/straight news people, not the talkshow types).

I can't begin to imagine any Huckabee voter going with McCain over Romney for any reason other than the distrust of Mormon issue.

[GrantDawg]

There is no data to suggest that Huckabee voters would have voted for Romney if Huckabee wasn't in the race. Exit polling in Florida indicated that McCain was the second choice of the majority of Huckabee's voters.

In light of what has happened tonight, you could make a strong case that Romney is taking votes away from Huckabee.

I didn't say he was. I was discussing him as using his position as a running mate, if he was interested. I would guess if pushed he would rather run with Romney than McCain, but he could not possibily chose Romney unless he could somehow pull his support for Romney pretty quickly.

Of course, you put up another interesting thought. What if Romney decides he would rather be a running mate for Huckabee? Neither option is very likely, just wondering aloud.

[bhlloy]

So, anybody care to make a guess at where we are in the Democratic race heading into tomorrow?

As far as I can see, Obama is still in touch, but unless he wins CA by a couple of points at least, it's not a great night for him (or at least not as good as it looked like it was going to be when GA came in). Does that pretty much sum it up?

[Jas_lov]

Delegate Scorecard

Democratic
(Needed to win: 2,025)
Delegates
Clinton 443
Obama 376

Republican
(Needed to win: 1,191)
Delegates
McCain 337
Romney 133
Huckabee 85
Paul 4

[JPhillips]

I believe that's a case of people seriously trying to fuck with the exit pollers (which was an interesting topic of conversation on the Atlanta radio coverage tonight, by some of the more serious local analysts/straight news people, not the talkshow types).

I can't begin to imagine any Huckabee voter going with McCain over Romney for any reason other than the distrust of Mormon issue.

I think the Mormon issue is very big for a lot of Huckabee's voters. I know several southern conservative Christians that thought Mormonism is a cult and I can't imagine any of them voting for Romney.

[Jas_lov]

Mike Huckabee has won Georgia. He's also leading in Missouri and Tennessee.

[LloydLungs]

So, anybody care to make a guess at where we are in the Democratic race heading into tomorrow?

As far as I can see, Obama is still in touch, but unless he wins CA by a couple of points at least, it's not a great night for him (or at least not as good as it looked like it was going to be when GA came in). Does that pretty much sum it up?

I think that's right. I think Obama would have been happy with this result a week ago, and he's definitely still in it, but the Obama camp probably had their hopes up for a little more given the feeling of momentum over the past couple of days.

NJ is into single digits now. Missouri is as well, but it's probably too little too late there. Obama will have won more overall states at the end of the night, but not most of the the big ones. Doesn't sound like California is going to happen from a percentage standpoint, although the delegate difference probably won't be too wide.

I think Hillary will end up eke-ing out the nomination, as I have from the beginning.

[Vegas Vic]

I didn't say he was. I was discussing him as using his position as a running mate, if he was interested. I would guess if pushed he would rather run with Romney than McCain, but he could not possibily chose Romney unless he could somehow pull his support for Romney pretty quickly.


Actually, I think that McCain and Huckabee actually like each other personally. They seem to have a cordial relationship, and I haven't heard any negative comments between them. On the other hand, both of these guys genuinely dislike Romney.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I know several southern conservative Christians that thought Mormonism is a cult and I can't imagine any of them voting for Romney.

I've battled with that for several days, had finally found a way to convince myself that it was an issue that could be handled ... and was then unexpectedly out of state for a funeral today and ended up not voting after all. {shrug}

[Glengoyne]

Love this note from Real Clear Politics:

9:13PM - A note to the media: Mike Huckabee is not dead. He's ahead narrowly in Missouri, has already won Arkansas, Alabama and West Virginia and looks competitive in Arizona. If today is a bad day for Mitt Romney, it's a great day for Huckabee. Of course, if the Republican race comes down to a McCain-Huckabee battle, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter will be hurling themselves from windows later this evening. - REID WILSON

Here's hoping it rains pundits.

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama wins Minnesota. West coast polls including California close in 5 minutes.

[Buccaneer]

Actually, I think that McCain and Huckabee actually like each other personally. They seem to have a cordial relationship, and I haven't heard any negative comments between them. On the other hand, both of these guys genuinely dislike Romney.

More than "both of these guys", you know?

[Swaggs]

Has Ron Paul given any indication as to whether or not he will continue on after tonight?

[Galaril]

I am really surprised at how Obama is kicking Clinton in the midwest/west states. I think if evrything goes it appears now and Obama can hang close in Cali it will really come down to Ohio and Texas which from tonight might favor Obama. Certainly Clinton will have figure out how to incorpoarte Obama into here team if she does take the Nomination.

[Jas_lov]

Barack Obama wins Idaho. Mitt Romney wins North Dakota.

[Jas_lov]

John McCain wins Arizona.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I can't help but chuckle at the graphic at foxnews.com which shows Romney as the projected winner in Utah with 0% of precincts reporting and 0 votes counted.

I understand it of course, I just got a giggle out of seeing it that way.

[SackAttack]

Has Ron Paul given any indication as to whether or not he will continue on after tonight?

Until such time as he decides to run as a Libertarian, he's got no reason not to continue in the Republican race. He's not hurting for funding, and the more delegates he can amass, the more clout he'll have if Huckabee or Romney can stay close to McCain.

[LloydLungs]

Obama has made up over 20,000 votes in Missouri over the last half hour or so. Still 20,000+ behind. Sounds like St. Louis County is coming in. Depends on how much is left.

[Warhammer]

I am really surprised at how Obama is kicking Clinton in the midwest/west states. I think if evrything goes it appears now and Obama can hang close in Cali it will really come down to Ohio and Texas which from tonight might favor Obama. Certainly Clinton will have figure out how to incorpoarte Obama into here team if she does take the Nomination.

With the crap that has gone back and forth between them behind the scenes, I can't see how he takes a spot on her team.

[mauchow]

Clinton off to a hot start in Cali.

[Jas_lov]

Hillary Clinton wins Arizona. Obama within 5% in Missouri.

[Young Drachma]

He's gaining really fast in Missouri. Wow.

[miami_fan]

NPR is calling Missouri for Clinton

[Jas_lov]

McCain needs to hold off Romney in California to stab the final dagger in his heart.

[SackAttack]

Hillary Clinton wins Arizona. Obama within 5% in Missouri.

Around 3% from what I'm seeing. Unless NPR knows something we don't, seems a little premature to call it.

[LloydLungs]

NPR might be jumping the gun just a little bit. Missouri is going to end up being effectively a tie, although Clinton may barely hang on from a popular vote standpoint. Man this is a wild year.

[JPhillips]

The Democratic rules are complicated as hell, but it certainly looks like the split will be very close to even. Does Obama's cash advantage come into play now in TX, PA and OH?

And if this isn't decided after TX on March 4th, PA will get a month and a half of campaigning before the April 22 contest. Hell my vote on May 6th may actually mean something.

[SackAttack]

Blink. That update took it from 45-44 for Obama in Utah to 50-42.

Apparently there are tons of morons voting for Edwards out here, though.

[ISiddiqui]

CNN had some interesting exit poll stuff from California. Obama slightly won whites and won HUGE with blacks, but Clinton won big with Latinos and HUGE with Asians (for some reason). Now to see how it all falls into place.

[sterlingice]

Barack Obama wins Kansas.

My wife and I went to the caucus tonight in Lawrence and it was ridiculously crowded. This is the first caucus in Kansas since 1992 as in the previous elections, Kansas was after Super Tuesday and the election was already decided.

It doesn't sound like much, but nearly 5000 votes were counted from the 80K people in the city (~60K registered voters, maybe 2/3rds Democrat). We got there at about 6:10 for the caucus that starts at 7 and the lines were huge.

It was fun

SI

[Jas_lov]

Missouri is also extremely close on the Republican side between Huckabee and McCain. Within 1,500 votes.

[Young Drachma]

CNN exit polls say that Obama won the white vote and obviously the black vote in California, but got trounced 2:1 for Hispanics and lost the Asian vote 75%/25%.

It'll be interesting to hear his speech. I imagine he has a doozy since he's back on his home turf and all, but...I think just from a "we didn't lose anywhere we should've won" standpoint, he'll at least be able to spin it as a "great day" in the long journey towards the nomination or whatever.

[SackAttack]

Looks like CNN just called Idaho and Colorado for Obama.

Who the hell had Idaho going for the black guy in the pool?

[Buccaneer]

My wife and I went to the caucus tonight in Lawrence and it was ridiculously crowded. This is the first caucus in Kansas since 1992 as in the previous elections, Kansas was after Super Tuesday and the election was already decided.

It doesn't sound like much, but nearly 5000 votes were counted from the 80K people in the city (~60K registered voters, maybe 2/3rds Democrat). We got there at about 6:10 for the caucus that starts at 7 and the lines were huge.

It was fun

SI

See my previous quip about Lawrence, KS. :)

[Young Drachma]

Looks like CNN just called Idaho and Colorado for Obama.

Who the hell had Idaho going for the black guy in the pool?

Probably the 15,000 people showed up at that rally in Boise.

[SackAttack]

Probably the 15,000 people showed up at that rally in Boise.

Yeah, well, I'd been hearing for years that Idaho was the home of the survivalist/white supremacist nuts.

I guess maybe those folks don't vote?

[JonInMiddleGA]

I know the vote totals in Idaho are small but ... foxnews says 47% of precincts reporting and it's 1,298 to 395. That's less than 1700 votes so far. There were lines almost that long today at some Georgia precincts, and 1/3rd the size of the Lawrence, KS caucus SI mentions up the thread. Are those numbers posted really right?

[JonInMiddleGA]

I guess maybe those folks don't vote in Democratic primaries

Fixed that for you ;)

[Young Drachma]

I know the vote totals in Idaho are small but ... foxnews says 47% of precincts reporting and it's 1,298 to 395. That's less than 1700 votes so far. There were lines almost that long today at some Georgia precincts, and 1/3rd the size of the Lawrence, KS caucus SI mentions up the thread. Are those numbers posted really right?

It was a caucus. And there are barely any Democrats in these parts, so I can't imagine there are too many more in Idaho, despite the larger population.

[Buccaneer]

Looks like CNN just called Idaho and Colorado for Obama.

Who the hell had Idaho going for the black guy in the pool?

I think many are still missing point about where the Dems in the west are located. In Idaho, that would mean the college towns only (and a few celebs up in Ketchum area). The Reps in Idaho wouldn't even bother to show up to effect the outcome. Same thing in WY and MT where they are all concentrated in Laramie and Bozeman, plus the celebs in the resort areas.

[SackAttack]

Fixed that for you ;)

Yeah, touché.

Sweet, Obama within ~9k votes of Clinton in Missouri and still 7% of precincts left to count.

[Buccaneer]

Ok, what everyone else said while I was typing too slow.

[SirFozzie]

Blink. That update took it from 45-44 for Obama in Utah to 50-42.

Apparently there are tons of morons voting for Edwards out here, though.

Absentee ballots from before he quit.

[JonInMiddleGA]

It was a caucus.

My bad (and thanks for the correction).
I mentally had it as a primary not a caucus.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Absentee ballots from before he quit.

I don't think that's all of it though. Edwards also had surprising showing (for example) in Tennesse, including some of the early returns which don't typically include early ballots/absentee ballots as they're usually the last ones counted.
Presumably a good portion of those are simply "not Clinton"/"not Obama" votes.

[Buccaneer]

I hope the delegates in CA will come close to even despite the votes.

By the way, no surprise about the Asian votes in CA. You have to spend a lot of time in SF and other places to know why.

[Young Drachma]

I think many are still missing point about where the Dems in the west are located. Same thing in WY and MT where they are all concentrated in Laramie and Bozeman, plus the celebs in the resort areas.

Yeah, in Laramie I know most contested democratic primaries don't generate more than a few hundred voters. It's just not very big. Cheyenne and Casper are far more influential in that way. (Casper even had a gay mayor for goodness sakes..)

Laramie just isn't very big and students here don't really vote at all unless they're conservative. Or they vote in their hometowns in Wyoming.

[Young Drachma]

Obama is being way more policy specific -- in sound bites -- in his speech tonight than he has in any of the others. And I know he's doing to quell the talk of "we don't know where he stands.."

But it's late and people probably aren't listening. But...he is doing it in a way that he hadn't in his previous speeches after primaries.

And it's funny how his youth-laden crowds would rather just chant "Yes We Can" a lot and prefer he didn't say so much.

[Buccaneer]

Yeah, in Laramie I know most contested democratic primaries don't generate more than a few hundred voters. It's just not very big. Cheyenne and Casper are far more influential in that way. (Casper even had a gay mayor for goodness sakes..)

Laramie just isn't very big and students here don't really vote at all unless they're conservative. Or they vote in their hometowns in Wyoming.

That's interesting.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I hope the delegates in CA will come close to even despite the votes.

Isn't that pretty much the expectation at this point?
(and even for the past several days?)

[sterlingice]

See my previous quip about Lawrence, KS. :)

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/img.php?year=2004&st=KS&type=map&off=0&elect=0&fips=20 (2004)

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/img.php?year=2000&st=KS&type=map&off=0&elect=0&fips=20 (2000)

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/img.php?year=1996&st=KS&type=map&off=0&elect=0&fips=20(1996)

(keeping in mind, this site uses Red for Democrat and Blue for Republican)

Using the last 3 presidential maps, guess which county is Douglas (where Lawrence is)? ;)

SI

[JonInMiddleGA]

Using the last 3 presidential maps, guess which county is Douglas (where Lawrence is)? ;)

The one that looks like somebody cut off the southern half of Utah?

[Galaril]

CNN had some interesting exit poll stuff from California. Obama slightly won whites and won HUGE with blacks, but Clinton won big with Latinos and HUGE with Asians (for some reason). Now to see how it all falls into place.

Being married to an asian and having lived in an asian country for over 11 years I can speak to this. In california especially Asians haven't been the best opf friends with African americans and from everything I have seen it goes both ways(generalization of course)

[Buccaneer]

SI, very nice work.

[ISiddiqui]

Obama is being way more policy specific -- in sound bites -- in his speech tonight than he has in any of the others. And I know he's doing to quell the talk of "we don't know where he stands.."

But it's late and people probably aren't listening. But...he is doing it in a way that he hadn't in his previous speeches after primaries.

And it's funny how his youth-laden crowds would rather just chant "Yes We Can" a lot and prefer he didn't say so much.

LOL, I do like that. It seems to indicate that the crowd really don't care about his policy positions. They just like his style and want to change "Yes we can".

It is quite a break from the past though. Perhaps that criticism has finally gotten to him. Though I'm sure the Republican operatives are writing down all the programs and promises he has spoken of and calculating the cost so that the number can be used in the 1st general election debate if need be.

[st.cronin]

Fox news projects McCain to win Missouri. That would be big, from what I can tell.

[Buccaneer]

The one that looks like somebody cut off the southern half of Utah?

So is that one of your red states that will easily go to Clinton and not McCain?

[JonInMiddleGA]

So is that one of your red states that will easily go to Clinton and not McCain?

Wasn't on my list, since I said "Southern".

[ISiddiqui]

Being married to an asian and having lived in an asian country for over 11 years I can speak to this. In california especially Asians haven't been the best opf friends with African americans and from everything I have seen it goes both ways(generalization of course)

So that isn't just a big stereotype... huh, interesting. Well, that could definately explain things.

[Buccaneer]

By the way, no surprise about the Asian votes in CA. You have to spend a lot of time in SF and other places to know why.

Being married to an asian and having lived in an asian country for over 11 years I can speak to this. In california especially Asians haven't been the best opf friends with African americans and from everything I have seen it goes both ways(generalization of course)

1 + 1 = 2

[LloydLungs]

Obama now leads in Missouri with 97% in.

[Buccaneer]

So that isn't just a big stereotype... huh, interesting. Well, that could definately explain things.

Damn Imran, we got to get you out of the East Coast once in a while. :)

[sterlingice]

SI, very nice work.

Well, they're not my maps. They're from http://uselectionatlas.org/ Great site, if you haven't seen it. It has presidential maps going back all the way to the 1700s, iirc.

SI

[JonInMiddleGA]

Obama now leads in Missouri with 97% in.

Maybe I'm just a little out of it (especially since I haven't touched the TV since I got home a couple of hours ago) but ... wasn't this one called by every network & wire service for Clinton somewhere around 930pm?

If so, I have to go with a big "WTF" to all of them. I mean, this shit really isn't brain surgery folks, if (as someone mentioned up the thread) St. Louis area votes weren't in at all then there's no way in Hell I can understand why anyone would even attempt to call the state yet.

edit: I've sat through enough of these things to know that there's certain geographic areas you have to watch and can't always just guess at until you get a good bit of real data. Has every experienced analyst at every outlet simply stopped working and they've suddenly been left with rank amateurs?

[Buccaneer]

Obama now leads in Missouri with 97% in.

One of the best come from behind victories? But then again, it probably depends on what order they counts the votes and from where.

[sterlingice]

Obama now leads in Missouri with 97% in.

Just saw that. Huge swing.

SI

[SirFozzie]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Bermans_count_606534.html

Obama's camp currently projects they will take a 606-534 lead on delegates

[Buccaneer]

Well, they're not my maps. They're from http://uselectionatlas.org/ Great site, if you haven't seen it. It has presidential maps going back all the way to the 1700s, iirc.

SI

I am familiar since I do make a living working with software like that.

[Jas_lov]

Hillary Clinton has won California.

[sterlingice]

I am familiar since I do make a living working with software like that.

You a GIS hack?

SI

[SackAttack]

Maybe I'm just a little out of it (especially since I haven't touched the TV since I got home a couple of hours ago) but ... wasn't this one called by every network & wire service for Clinton somewhere around 930pm?

If so, I have to go with a big "WTF" to all of them. I mean, this shit really isn't brain surgery folks, if (as someone mentioned up the thread) St. Louis area votes weren't in at all then there's no way in Hell I can understand why anyone would even attempt to call the state yet.

I've watched enough election results in Missouri in the last, oh...12-16 years that I know better than to predict it for either candidate before the St. Louis votes start coming in. That always seems to screw me up.

[LloydLungs]

wasn't this one called by every network & wire service for Clinton somewhere around 930pm?

If so, I have to go with a big "WTF" to all of them. I mean, this shit really isn't brain surgery folks, if (as someone mentioned up the thread) St. Louis area votes weren't in at all then there's no way in Hell I can understand why anyone would even attempt to call the state yet.

I'm only aware of NPR calling it, but I could have missed something. St. Louis ALWAYS comes in late in Missouri. I'm guessing it and Kansas City are in now, but there's only 2% left to count.