...I'm having a tough time getting any blog posting done. So while I am tied up with my "day job" and working through a bit of writer's block, I figured the least I could do was offer you some entertainment!
As I'm sure anyone reading this has already heard, Hillary Clinton recently ran into some trouble about some factual discrepancies between her telling of her 1996 trip to Bosnia while First Lady, and what actually occurred on that trip.
First, a straightforward report from CBS News explaining the controversy:
And now, the good folks over at Barely Political have a little fun with it:
I hope that gave you a laugh half as big as the headache it gave the Clinton Campaign!
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Bragging Write[er's] Block !!!
Hello. If you've been checking the site for a new post, I apologize for the delay. Last week was very busy (and it was my birthday!), and when things calmed down over the weekend, I found myself with a case of writer's block.
But...I've got a few ideas bouncing around, and I will hope to have a new post for you no later than Thursday! Thanks for reading, and please stay tuned...
But...I've got a few ideas bouncing around, and I will hope to have a new post for you no later than Thursday! Thanks for reading, and please stay tuned...
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Could John Edwards Be the King (or Queen) Maker?
The Democrats, plainly, have a bit of a mess on their hands. By any reasonable measure, Barack Obama is leading Hillary Clinton. He's won more primaries and caucuses (29 - 15), he's won more votes (13,280,770 - 12,577,044), and he's won more pledged delegates (1403 - 1239).
So it's clear, right? Obama's obviously the frontrunner, and he has the nomination all but locked up, doesn't he? Well, no, not quite. So why, with such a numeric edge, is he unable to put Hillary Clinton away? There are a handful of reasons:
1) The Democratic Party's Nominating Process, Part A:
In the Democratic Party, the nomination is won differently than in the Republican Party. Pledged delegates are awarded proportionally, reflecting the popular vote tally. So, for example, while Obama did win the Alabama Primary on February 5th by a 55.8% to 41.7% popular vote margin, because of the proportional allocation of delegates, he only received 27 of the state's 52 delegates, while Hillary, despite losing rather convincingly, took 25 delegates. Such a system makes it very difficult for either candidate to put significant distance between him/herself and his/her opponent. (In the GOP, by contrast, regardless of how narrow or wide the victory, all delegates go to the winner). So even though Obama has won nearly twice as many state contests as Hillary, the manner in which delegates are awarded has prevented him from amassing the 2025 delegates needed to secure the party's nomination.
2) The Democratic Party's Nominating Process, Part B:
The other fundamental difference for the Democrats is the existence of the so-called superdelegates. As you've probably heard by now, superdelegates are a group of individuals (primarily various current and former elected officials) who are free to support any candidate they wish for the Democratic Nomination. There is nothing in the rules of the party specifying that a superdelegate must choose according to the popular vote in general, or in the case of current officeholders, the popular vote in their city, district, state, etc. There are nearly 800 superdelegates, and over 3200 pledged delegates (those delegates who are bound by popular vote to support one candidate over another). As 20% of the approximately 4000 delegates in total, the superdelegates can, and in this extremely close election will, play a very important role in selecting their party's nominee. In fact, at this point, neither Obama nor Clinton can secure the 2025 delegates needed to win the nomination solely through the pledged delegates that remain in the states who have yet to hold their primary or caucus. Currently Hillary actually has more superdelegates who have pledged to support her than does Obama, with 248 to his 212. There are, however, 344 more superdelegates who have yet to declare their support for either candidate, and it is these 344 individuals who will likely end up deciding the party's nominee.
3) The States Obama Has Not Won:
Among the states in which Hillary has bested Obama are several of the most populous states in the country (California, New York and Texas), several of the most important "swing states" for the General Election in November (Ohio particularly, but also Arizona, Arkansas, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Tennessee), and four states that are considered "must-wins" for a Democratic victory in November (California, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York). This, in fact, has been one of the arguments the Clinton Campaign has most frequently and vociferously made over the last month. If, they argue, Obama cannot win these crucial states now, there is a very good chance that he will not carry them in November which, if true, would mean a sure victory for John McCain. This is not as valid or clear-cut as the Clintons would like us to believe, however it's been repeated so often that it has become a source of concern for the Democratic Party, and another reason that Obama has been unable to put Hillary away.
4) Michigan and Florida:
Because both Michigan and Florida moved their primaries ahead on the electoral calendar in clear violation of the rules specified by the Democratic National Committee, the DNC decided last fall -- with the support of all the candidates and their campaigns -- that those states' delegates would not be seated (not counted, in other words) at the Democratic National Convention in August. As a result, the candidates and campaigns made a mutual pact not to campaign in those states since they would effectively be non-binding popularity/beauty contests with no delegates at stake. In Michigan, several candidates including Obama went so far as to have their names removed from the Michigan Democratic Primary ballot in deference to the DNC. Hillary did not. Not surprisingly, Clinton "won" the state, though with Obama's name not even on the ballot, her claims of victory were dubious at best. In Florida, Senator Clinton also "won", and much to the consternation of the other Democratic candidates, flew to the state on the night of the primary to again declare "victory" in a contest that was not considered legitimate. This is potentially the biggest mess of the 2008 Election for the Democrats, particularly given the importance of both states to a Democratic win in November, as well as the significant number of delegates at stake: 128 in Michigan and 185 in Florida -- 8th and 4th most in the country, respectively. (In fact, the numbers I listed at the beginning of this post for state contests, votes and delegates won did not include Michigan or Florida. If they are included with their original -- if not flawed -- results, the mathematical picture becomes far brighter for Hillary). Predictably then, once the Clintons found themselves in political peril after Obama's momentum (and numbers) grew, they argued that the delegates from both states should, in fact, be seated and counted. Obama and others have argued that this tactic is nothing more than an attempt by the Clintons to change the rules in the middle of the game -- a game in which they find themselves trailing. This argument is particularly absurd in Michigan given that Obama was not on the ballot, but not much more valid in Florida given that Obama did not even campaign or advertise there. With that said, because of how very close this race is, both the Clinton and Obama Campaigns have now agreed that some solution must be found in order for these two delegate-rich states to have their say in the party's nomination process. As I write, the precise solutions for Michigan and Florida have not yet been decided upon, and there are several ideas being considered. It seems almost certain, however, that in some form or fashion, both states will have a "re-vote" -- perhaps a vote-by-mail arrangement, or maybe even entirely new primaries. This bears watching closely, because the eventual course that the DNC and the two states take could have a significant impact on the ultimate outcome. The current state of limbo in which these states exist, however, is yet another obstacle to Obama's ability to clinch the nomination.
5) Hillary Clinton:
No, not Hillary's success as a candidate or her out-campaigning of Obama since, quite frankly, he's proven himself to be a better candidate and campaigner than she. What I am referring to, rather, is Hillary Clinton's uncommonly intense ambition, arguable stubbornness, and her vintage Clintonian trait of being willing to do anything and everything to win. Some candidates would acknowledge that winning the nomination in a traditional and uncontroversial fashion is nearly impossible at this point, and accordingly might withdraw from the race. But not Hillary. Some candidates would be unwilling to win in the manner in which she would now have to win -- namely by having the majority of the superdelegates select her over Obama such that she attains the 2025 delegates needed to win, debatably subverting the choice of the majority of voters. But not Hillary. Some candidates would refuse to resort to the "kitchen sink" strategy of throwing every negative the campaign could find at their opponent prior to the Texas and Ohio Primaries -- attacking a fellow Democrat and doing so at the risk of damaging that opponent's (and therefore the party's) potential electability in November. But not Hillary. No, in Hillary, Obama faces an opponent who will "not go gently into that good night". To be fair, this is a quality of hers that is likely admired by just as many who disdain it. Regardless of what one thinks of this aspect of Hillary's candidacy and personality, though, it's a very real hurdle for Obama to clear before he can be assured of the nomination.
So what happens now? Well, the next stop is Pennsylvania, which holds its primary on April 22nd. The media have set expectations such that the state is a likely win for Clinton. It is also generally acknowledged that it is a must-win for Clinton, and all signs do currently point to her beating Obama there, with the latest polls giving her a lead of between 13 and 19 points. The Obama Campaign almost seems resigned to this fate, recently lowering expectations for an upset win for him in the Keystone State. Should Obama upset Clinton in Pennsylvania, however, the race would be effectively over, and he would win enough support from a combination of undecided superdelegates and superdelegates switching from Clinton that he would secure the nomination . In the more likely event however that she does win in Pennsylvania, she and her campaign will argue that she has again won another large, populous state, and another state that is essential for victory in November. Pennsylvania offers a total of 158 delegates (only California, New York, Texas and Florida have more), and should she win by a margin consistent with the current polling data, she would stand to gain a significant number of delegates, more momentum, and the campaign would continue.
Next up would be the North Carolina and Indiana Primaries on May 6th. North Carolina, with 115 delegates, is something of a sleeper in my opinion, and a state whose importance I believe the media are currently overlooking. Conventional wisdom currently argues for North Carolina being favorable territory for Obama, an assertion backed up by recent polls that show him leading Clinton by 4 to 8 points. But it is here that I believe John Edwards -- somewhat forgotten by the press and potentially by the voters -- could be a difference-maker -- and potentially a king maker or a queen maker.
The expectations have already been established: Clinton should win Pennsylvania, and Obama should win North Carolina. As the race grinds on and remains tight, the only way I can see Hillary regaining sufficient momentum to realistically recapture frontrunner status is if she is able to defy expectations in such a way as to trigger the superdelegates to begin lining up behind her en masse. The best chance for such a moment would be for her to "upset" Obama in North Carolina, and this is the way I could see that scenario potentially playing out...
Should Hillary win Pennsylvania, she'll have some wind in her sails. Obama will still lead her in every measurable category, but the media, nevertheless, will still present her victory as momentous. If we assume she receives even a slight "bump" from a win in Pennsylvania, it's conceivable that Hillary and Obama would enter North Carolina in a dead heat, he in need of a win to reestablish his momentum, and she in need of a win to potentially regain the overall edge. In such a close contest, there would not be much needed to tip the scales in either candidate's favor. Enter John Edwards. A resident of North Carolina and one of the state's two senators from 1998 - 2004, Edwards could likely provide just enough of a boost for Clinton or Obama to put one of them over the top there.
While Edwards was not successful in his own run for the White House in 2004 or 2008, and while he was unable to put North Carolina into his party's winning column as the Vice Presidential candidate in 2004, there likely remains enough affection for him in the state from the people who count -- the faithful Democratic voters who will go to the polls -- to allow him to potentially play king maker, were he to endorse Obama, or queen maker should he side with Hillary. Getting the nod from Edwards could also have national implications for whichever candidate receives it. Even though Edwards did consistently place third behind Obama and Clinton when he was in the race, his support could not be called insignificant, and again, when things are this close, not much is required to alter the dynamics of the race substantially. Both Obama and Clinton seemed aware of this in the wake of Edwards' withdrawal from the race, as both went out of their way to praise him and his candidacy, and to pledge to assume the role of championing the poor, Edwards' signature issue and cause. Indeed, both candidates even took valuable time away from campaigning to surreptitiously fly to Edwards' Chapel Hill, NC home, presumably in search of his endorsement, Clinton on February 7th, followed by Obama on February 17th. Despite the two meetings, no endorsement has followed.
I suspect an Edwards endorsement of Obama to be more likely, but I would argue that an Edwards endorsement of Clinton would be more significant. The reason that Edwards' support would be more important for Hillary is because the contest immediately after North Carolina and Indiana is the West Virginia Primary on May 13th, and West Virginia is a state whose demographics would seem very favorable to Clinton. A Clinton win in Pennsylvania, followed by a Clinton "upset" victory in North Carolina (presumably with help from Edwards), capped off with a third consecutive win by Clinton in West Virginia, just might provide her the momentum (and the media the narrative) to convince the superdelegates to decide that she is the candidate now on a roll, and that she is the Democrat with the best chance of defeating John McCain in November. She knows this, Edwards knows this, and I would watch carefully to see what Edwards does as the North Carolina Primary draws closer, and likely becomes more and more important in determining whether Obama or Clinton emerges as the Democratic Nominee.
So it's clear, right? Obama's obviously the frontrunner, and he has the nomination all but locked up, doesn't he? Well, no, not quite. So why, with such a numeric edge, is he unable to put Hillary Clinton away? There are a handful of reasons:
1) The Democratic Party's Nominating Process, Part A:
In the Democratic Party, the nomination is won differently than in the Republican Party. Pledged delegates are awarded proportionally, reflecting the popular vote tally. So, for example, while Obama did win the Alabama Primary on February 5th by a 55.8% to 41.7% popular vote margin, because of the proportional allocation of delegates, he only received 27 of the state's 52 delegates, while Hillary, despite losing rather convincingly, took 25 delegates. Such a system makes it very difficult for either candidate to put significant distance between him/herself and his/her opponent. (In the GOP, by contrast, regardless of how narrow or wide the victory, all delegates go to the winner). So even though Obama has won nearly twice as many state contests as Hillary, the manner in which delegates are awarded has prevented him from amassing the 2025 delegates needed to secure the party's nomination.
2) The Democratic Party's Nominating Process, Part B:
The other fundamental difference for the Democrats is the existence of the so-called superdelegates. As you've probably heard by now, superdelegates are a group of individuals (primarily various current and former elected officials) who are free to support any candidate they wish for the Democratic Nomination. There is nothing in the rules of the party specifying that a superdelegate must choose according to the popular vote in general, or in the case of current officeholders, the popular vote in their city, district, state, etc. There are nearly 800 superdelegates, and over 3200 pledged delegates (those delegates who are bound by popular vote to support one candidate over another). As 20% of the approximately 4000 delegates in total, the superdelegates can, and in this extremely close election will, play a very important role in selecting their party's nominee. In fact, at this point, neither Obama nor Clinton can secure the 2025 delegates needed to win the nomination solely through the pledged delegates that remain in the states who have yet to hold their primary or caucus. Currently Hillary actually has more superdelegates who have pledged to support her than does Obama, with 248 to his 212. There are, however, 344 more superdelegates who have yet to declare their support for either candidate, and it is these 344 individuals who will likely end up deciding the party's nominee.
3) The States Obama Has Not Won:
Among the states in which Hillary has bested Obama are several of the most populous states in the country (California, New York and Texas), several of the most important "swing states" for the General Election in November (Ohio particularly, but also Arizona, Arkansas, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Tennessee), and four states that are considered "must-wins" for a Democratic victory in November (California, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York). This, in fact, has been one of the arguments the Clinton Campaign has most frequently and vociferously made over the last month. If, they argue, Obama cannot win these crucial states now, there is a very good chance that he will not carry them in November which, if true, would mean a sure victory for John McCain. This is not as valid or clear-cut as the Clintons would like us to believe, however it's been repeated so often that it has become a source of concern for the Democratic Party, and another reason that Obama has been unable to put Hillary away.
4) Michigan and Florida:
Because both Michigan and Florida moved their primaries ahead on the electoral calendar in clear violation of the rules specified by the Democratic National Committee, the DNC decided last fall -- with the support of all the candidates and their campaigns -- that those states' delegates would not be seated (not counted, in other words) at the Democratic National Convention in August. As a result, the candidates and campaigns made a mutual pact not to campaign in those states since they would effectively be non-binding popularity/beauty contests with no delegates at stake. In Michigan, several candidates including Obama went so far as to have their names removed from the Michigan Democratic Primary ballot in deference to the DNC. Hillary did not. Not surprisingly, Clinton "won" the state, though with Obama's name not even on the ballot, her claims of victory were dubious at best. In Florida, Senator Clinton also "won", and much to the consternation of the other Democratic candidates, flew to the state on the night of the primary to again declare "victory" in a contest that was not considered legitimate. This is potentially the biggest mess of the 2008 Election for the Democrats, particularly given the importance of both states to a Democratic win in November, as well as the significant number of delegates at stake: 128 in Michigan and 185 in Florida -- 8th and 4th most in the country, respectively. (In fact, the numbers I listed at the beginning of this post for state contests, votes and delegates won did not include Michigan or Florida. If they are included with their original -- if not flawed -- results, the mathematical picture becomes far brighter for Hillary). Predictably then, once the Clintons found themselves in political peril after Obama's momentum (and numbers) grew, they argued that the delegates from both states should, in fact, be seated and counted. Obama and others have argued that this tactic is nothing more than an attempt by the Clintons to change the rules in the middle of the game -- a game in which they find themselves trailing. This argument is particularly absurd in Michigan given that Obama was not on the ballot, but not much more valid in Florida given that Obama did not even campaign or advertise there. With that said, because of how very close this race is, both the Clinton and Obama Campaigns have now agreed that some solution must be found in order for these two delegate-rich states to have their say in the party's nomination process. As I write, the precise solutions for Michigan and Florida have not yet been decided upon, and there are several ideas being considered. It seems almost certain, however, that in some form or fashion, both states will have a "re-vote" -- perhaps a vote-by-mail arrangement, or maybe even entirely new primaries. This bears watching closely, because the eventual course that the DNC and the two states take could have a significant impact on the ultimate outcome. The current state of limbo in which these states exist, however, is yet another obstacle to Obama's ability to clinch the nomination.
5) Hillary Clinton:
No, not Hillary's success as a candidate or her out-campaigning of Obama since, quite frankly, he's proven himself to be a better candidate and campaigner than she. What I am referring to, rather, is Hillary Clinton's uncommonly intense ambition, arguable stubbornness, and her vintage Clintonian trait of being willing to do anything and everything to win. Some candidates would acknowledge that winning the nomination in a traditional and uncontroversial fashion is nearly impossible at this point, and accordingly might withdraw from the race. But not Hillary. Some candidates would be unwilling to win in the manner in which she would now have to win -- namely by having the majority of the superdelegates select her over Obama such that she attains the 2025 delegates needed to win, debatably subverting the choice of the majority of voters. But not Hillary. Some candidates would refuse to resort to the "kitchen sink" strategy of throwing every negative the campaign could find at their opponent prior to the Texas and Ohio Primaries -- attacking a fellow Democrat and doing so at the risk of damaging that opponent's (and therefore the party's) potential electability in November. But not Hillary. No, in Hillary, Obama faces an opponent who will "not go gently into that good night". To be fair, this is a quality of hers that is likely admired by just as many who disdain it. Regardless of what one thinks of this aspect of Hillary's candidacy and personality, though, it's a very real hurdle for Obama to clear before he can be assured of the nomination.
So what happens now? Well, the next stop is Pennsylvania, which holds its primary on April 22nd. The media have set expectations such that the state is a likely win for Clinton. It is also generally acknowledged that it is a must-win for Clinton, and all signs do currently point to her beating Obama there, with the latest polls giving her a lead of between 13 and 19 points. The Obama Campaign almost seems resigned to this fate, recently lowering expectations for an upset win for him in the Keystone State. Should Obama upset Clinton in Pennsylvania, however, the race would be effectively over, and he would win enough support from a combination of undecided superdelegates and superdelegates switching from Clinton that he would secure the nomination . In the more likely event however that she does win in Pennsylvania, she and her campaign will argue that she has again won another large, populous state, and another state that is essential for victory in November. Pennsylvania offers a total of 158 delegates (only California, New York, Texas and Florida have more), and should she win by a margin consistent with the current polling data, she would stand to gain a significant number of delegates, more momentum, and the campaign would continue.
Next up would be the North Carolina and Indiana Primaries on May 6th. North Carolina, with 115 delegates, is something of a sleeper in my opinion, and a state whose importance I believe the media are currently overlooking. Conventional wisdom currently argues for North Carolina being favorable territory for Obama, an assertion backed up by recent polls that show him leading Clinton by 4 to 8 points. But it is here that I believe John Edwards -- somewhat forgotten by the press and potentially by the voters -- could be a difference-maker -- and potentially a king maker or a queen maker.
The expectations have already been established: Clinton should win Pennsylvania, and Obama should win North Carolina. As the race grinds on and remains tight, the only way I can see Hillary regaining sufficient momentum to realistically recapture frontrunner status is if she is able to defy expectations in such a way as to trigger the superdelegates to begin lining up behind her en masse. The best chance for such a moment would be for her to "upset" Obama in North Carolina, and this is the way I could see that scenario potentially playing out...
Should Hillary win Pennsylvania, she'll have some wind in her sails. Obama will still lead her in every measurable category, but the media, nevertheless, will still present her victory as momentous. If we assume she receives even a slight "bump" from a win in Pennsylvania, it's conceivable that Hillary and Obama would enter North Carolina in a dead heat, he in need of a win to reestablish his momentum, and she in need of a win to potentially regain the overall edge. In such a close contest, there would not be much needed to tip the scales in either candidate's favor. Enter John Edwards. A resident of North Carolina and one of the state's two senators from 1998 - 2004, Edwards could likely provide just enough of a boost for Clinton or Obama to put one of them over the top there.
While Edwards was not successful in his own run for the White House in 2004 or 2008, and while he was unable to put North Carolina into his party's winning column as the Vice Presidential candidate in 2004, there likely remains enough affection for him in the state from the people who count -- the faithful Democratic voters who will go to the polls -- to allow him to potentially play king maker, were he to endorse Obama, or queen maker should he side with Hillary. Getting the nod from Edwards could also have national implications for whichever candidate receives it. Even though Edwards did consistently place third behind Obama and Clinton when he was in the race, his support could not be called insignificant, and again, when things are this close, not much is required to alter the dynamics of the race substantially. Both Obama and Clinton seemed aware of this in the wake of Edwards' withdrawal from the race, as both went out of their way to praise him and his candidacy, and to pledge to assume the role of championing the poor, Edwards' signature issue and cause. Indeed, both candidates even took valuable time away from campaigning to surreptitiously fly to Edwards' Chapel Hill, NC home, presumably in search of his endorsement, Clinton on February 7th, followed by Obama on February 17th. Despite the two meetings, no endorsement has followed.
I suspect an Edwards endorsement of Obama to be more likely, but I would argue that an Edwards endorsement of Clinton would be more significant. The reason that Edwards' support would be more important for Hillary is because the contest immediately after North Carolina and Indiana is the West Virginia Primary on May 13th, and West Virginia is a state whose demographics would seem very favorable to Clinton. A Clinton win in Pennsylvania, followed by a Clinton "upset" victory in North Carolina (presumably with help from Edwards), capped off with a third consecutive win by Clinton in West Virginia, just might provide her the momentum (and the media the narrative) to convince the superdelegates to decide that she is the candidate now on a roll, and that she is the Democrat with the best chance of defeating John McCain in November. She knows this, Edwards knows this, and I would watch carefully to see what Edwards does as the North Carolina Primary draws closer, and likely becomes more and more important in determining whether Obama or Clinton emerges as the Democratic Nominee.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
(At Least) Seven More Weeks to Go...
First of all, congratulations to Senator John McCain who officially clinched the Republican Nomination tonight. He surpassed the 1170 delegates necessary to officially win the nomination, and with Mike Huckabee's withdrawal tonight, that's a done deal.
Not so for the Democrats, however...
I didn't think it would happen, but Hillary Clinton won Ohio tonight and, as I write (11:40pm), she's clinging to a lead in Texas as well, poised to potentially win both primaries.
Even if she ends up losing Texas, it will be by an extraordinarily narrow margin. And based on the tone of her speech this evening in which she said: "We're going on, we're going strong, and we're going all the way," it's quite clear that Hillary has no intention of giving up or giving in anytime soon.
Also as I'm writing, Obama is giving his concession-esque speech, and it's interesting to watch him attempt to maintain the frontrunner vibe -- something we'll no doubt see much more of in the days and weeks to come -- though it seems a bit less believable after his substantial loss in Ohio. Perhaps it's unfair that tonight's results are so clearly viewed as negative for Obama, but such is the life of the frontrunner.
So, my friends (as John McCain might say), prepare for more debates, more negative campaigning, and the makings of an internal battle within the Democratic Party of potentially epic proportions -- a battle rife with danger for a party that finds itself suddenly quite divided.
I'm signing off for the night, but looking forward to no fewer than seven more weeks of the race for the Democratic Nomination...
Not so for the Democrats, however...
I didn't think it would happen, but Hillary Clinton won Ohio tonight and, as I write (11:40pm), she's clinging to a lead in Texas as well, poised to potentially win both primaries.
Even if she ends up losing Texas, it will be by an extraordinarily narrow margin. And based on the tone of her speech this evening in which she said: "We're going on, we're going strong, and we're going all the way," it's quite clear that Hillary has no intention of giving up or giving in anytime soon.
Also as I'm writing, Obama is giving his concession-esque speech, and it's interesting to watch him attempt to maintain the frontrunner vibe -- something we'll no doubt see much more of in the days and weeks to come -- though it seems a bit less believable after his substantial loss in Ohio. Perhaps it's unfair that tonight's results are so clearly viewed as negative for Obama, but such is the life of the frontrunner.
So, my friends (as John McCain might say), prepare for more debates, more negative campaigning, and the makings of an internal battle within the Democratic Party of potentially epic proportions -- a battle rife with danger for a party that finds itself suddenly quite divided.
I'm signing off for the night, but looking forward to no fewer than seven more weeks of the race for the Democratic Nomination...
Snapshots from Ohio Today (a.k.a. "BraggingWrites" Live from Ohio! -- Part Four)
The Ohio State Capitol. (It was cold, gray and rainy in Columbus today).
CNN set up shop in a parking lot across from the Capitol. (He was nice enough to wave to me).
Even the BBC was on the scene! (And the Brits are apparently smart enough to find shelter for their camera crew and reporter)!Thanks to my trusty iPhone for the good pictures.
"BraggingWrites": Live from Ohio! -- Part Three
Back in the Columbus Airport and, as feared/predicted, delayed. (For anyone reading this who does NOT live in NYC, count your lucky stars when it comes to air travel. New York is a terrific city, but the airports are horrendous and trying to fly TO New York is maddening. Today we are delayed due to "Low Ceiling" at LaGuardia).
Moving on and continuing from "Part Two"...
Scenario Three -- Obama wins Ohio and Clinton wins Texas: I see this as unlikely based on the most recent polls, however were it to happen, the result would essentially be the same as Scenario Two.
Scenario Four: Clinton wins Texas and Ohio: Wow! This would be a heck of a story. Even though only three weeks ago Hillary had very large leads in both Texas and Ohio, the Obama Phenomenon and its accomanying media coverage have changed the nature of "the story" in today's contests such that if Hillary wins both states, it would be a huge "comeback", much like her January victory in New Hampshire. Is that a valid storyline? Yes and no. Not really when you look at the totality of the campaign, however the media have very short memories, and if Hillary wins both, it's hard to see that not being billed as big turnaround. So if this scenario comes to pass and if it is indeed given the "comeback" moniker, what then? Well, one way to put it is that you'd probably see jumping and shouting in addition to the drinking and high-fiving on the part of Republicans. Why? Because the battle between Hillary and Obama will DEFINITELY continue through April 22nd and the Pennsylvania Primary. And if things continue that much longer, there begins to be the real possibility that the fight for the Democratic Nomination could go all the way through August and the Democratic Convention. (Were this to occur, I think you'd see out-and-out euphoria on the part of the GOP). Even if it weren't to go all the way to the convention, it would absolutely last until April 22. Six more weeks of the battle means six more weeks of Hillary and Obama at each other's throats, and if you think the tone of the campaign has taken a negative turn in the last week or two, you ain't seen nothing yet. This is the best-case scenario for John McCain, certainly, as his General Election opponent (whether Clinton or Obama) would come to that battle significantly more bloodied and beaten by another member of his/her own party. McCain, meanwhile, could sit back and let Clinton and Obama do the "dirty work" for him, tearing each other down. Rather than having to turn his focus to the Democratic opponent, McCain could instead spend that time raising all-important campaign cash and beginning to lay out his plans and themes for the American people -- all the while staying "above the fray" and looking increasingly more appealing to voters than the undoubtedly combative Democrats.
As a political junkie, I can't imagine a more exciting and interesting outcome. But...as I have always said...today is when the polls no longer matter, and when political predictions are moot. Today the voters of Texas and Ohio have their say, and what they decide will have a significant impact on Campaign 2008. Stay tuned, folks, and enjoy the political theater!
Looks like we are boarding soon -- so potentially only a minor delay. Also, my hands are starting to hurt after typing all of this on my Blackberry! So either way, this is "BraggingWrites", signing off from the Buckeye State!
Moving on and continuing from "Part Two"...
Scenario Three -- Obama wins Ohio and Clinton wins Texas: I see this as unlikely based on the most recent polls, however were it to happen, the result would essentially be the same as Scenario Two.
Scenario Four: Clinton wins Texas and Ohio: Wow! This would be a heck of a story. Even though only three weeks ago Hillary had very large leads in both Texas and Ohio, the Obama Phenomenon and its accomanying media coverage have changed the nature of "the story" in today's contests such that if Hillary wins both states, it would be a huge "comeback", much like her January victory in New Hampshire. Is that a valid storyline? Yes and no. Not really when you look at the totality of the campaign, however the media have very short memories, and if Hillary wins both, it's hard to see that not being billed as big turnaround. So if this scenario comes to pass and if it is indeed given the "comeback" moniker, what then? Well, one way to put it is that you'd probably see jumping and shouting in addition to the drinking and high-fiving on the part of Republicans. Why? Because the battle between Hillary and Obama will DEFINITELY continue through April 22nd and the Pennsylvania Primary. And if things continue that much longer, there begins to be the real possibility that the fight for the Democratic Nomination could go all the way through August and the Democratic Convention. (Were this to occur, I think you'd see out-and-out euphoria on the part of the GOP). Even if it weren't to go all the way to the convention, it would absolutely last until April 22. Six more weeks of the battle means six more weeks of Hillary and Obama at each other's throats, and if you think the tone of the campaign has taken a negative turn in the last week or two, you ain't seen nothing yet. This is the best-case scenario for John McCain, certainly, as his General Election opponent (whether Clinton or Obama) would come to that battle significantly more bloodied and beaten by another member of his/her own party. McCain, meanwhile, could sit back and let Clinton and Obama do the "dirty work" for him, tearing each other down. Rather than having to turn his focus to the Democratic opponent, McCain could instead spend that time raising all-important campaign cash and beginning to lay out his plans and themes for the American people -- all the while staying "above the fray" and looking increasingly more appealing to voters than the undoubtedly combative Democrats.
As a political junkie, I can't imagine a more exciting and interesting outcome. But...as I have always said...today is when the polls no longer matter, and when political predictions are moot. Today the voters of Texas and Ohio have their say, and what they decide will have a significant impact on Campaign 2008. Stay tuned, folks, and enjoy the political theater!
Looks like we are boarding soon -- so potentially only a minor delay. Also, my hands are starting to hurt after typing all of this on my Blackberry! So either way, this is "BraggingWrites", signing off from the Buckeye State!
"BraggingWrites": Live from Ohio! -- Part Two
OK...where were we?
So as I was saying earlier, the Obama Campaign will try to paint anything other than HUGE Clinton victories in Ohio and Texas as an effective victory for Obama, and a sign that Hillary should face the mathematical reality and withdraw from the race.
Again, while the mathematical reality is daunting for Hillary, I suspect a victory in even ONE of either Ohio or Texas -- even by the slimmest of margins -- will be enough for she and her campaign to continue on to the Pennsylvania Primary on April 22nd. That's right -- a full SIX WEEKS away. The very idea of the Democratic battle between Clinton and Obama continuing well into next month is enough to cause the GOP, as Republican Strategist Mike Murphy said Sunday on "Meet the Press, to be "drunk and high-fiving". As a political junkie, I might join in the merriment!
So let's look at a few possible scenarios for tonight's results, and then at what could and/or should transpire...
Scenario 1 -- Obama wins Texas and Ohio:
- If Obama wins both Texas and Ohio tonight -- regardless of the margin of his victories -- the Democratic contest will be over. Clinton would either accept reality and withdraw of her own volition, or the pressure from others within the Democratic Party for her to withdraw will be too great for her to overcome. (In full disclosure, this is the outcome I predicted last week after watching the final debate between Clinton and Obama).
Scenario 2 -- Obama wins Texas and Clinton wins Ohio: This one is tough. Even as recently as a week ago, this outcome would still have likely spelled the end of the Clinton Campaign. But in the last week, it strikes me that the Clintons have been able to effectively "move the goal posts" or "lower the bar" such that she would declare an Ohio victory to be significant enough to merit continuing her campaign. She would argue that she's won the most important states for the General Election in November (California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts -- and, she would claim dubiously -- Florida and Michigan). Obama, on the other hand, would make the case that his delegate lead is just simply insurmountable, and he would probably have the backing of the vast majority of Democratic Party heavweights. He (echoed by chorus of Democratic pooh-bahs) would call for Hillary to withdraw. He would also throw cold water on her claim of victories in Michigan and Florida. In Michigan, Obama was not even on the ballot; in Florida the candidates all agreed not to campaign. Both were the results of the DNC's penalization of the two states for moving their primaries ahead on the political calendar. In the end, I don't think she could survive this scenario, because I think the pressure on her to quit would be tremendous, and the prospect of the damage her ultimately futile battle could do to the Democratic Party would only increase that pressure. But...and this is a BIG "but"...Hillary does NOT want to lose, she does NOT want to quit, she REALLY wants to be President, and as I've written here several times before, the Clintons won't hesitate to fight and aren't afraid to fight dirty. This scenario, therefore, is a bit of a wildcard.
Back to meetings and work...I will wrap this up with "Part Three" when I am in the Columbus Airport waiting for my inevitably delayed flight to LaGuardia...
So as I was saying earlier, the Obama Campaign will try to paint anything other than HUGE Clinton victories in Ohio and Texas as an effective victory for Obama, and a sign that Hillary should face the mathematical reality and withdraw from the race.
Again, while the mathematical reality is daunting for Hillary, I suspect a victory in even ONE of either Ohio or Texas -- even by the slimmest of margins -- will be enough for she and her campaign to continue on to the Pennsylvania Primary on April 22nd. That's right -- a full SIX WEEKS away. The very idea of the Democratic battle between Clinton and Obama continuing well into next month is enough to cause the GOP, as Republican Strategist Mike Murphy said Sunday on "Meet the Press, to be "drunk and high-fiving". As a political junkie, I might join in the merriment!
So let's look at a few possible scenarios for tonight's results, and then at what could and/or should transpire...
Scenario 1 -- Obama wins Texas and Ohio:
- If Obama wins both Texas and Ohio tonight -- regardless of the margin of his victories -- the Democratic contest will be over. Clinton would either accept reality and withdraw of her own volition, or the pressure from others within the Democratic Party for her to withdraw will be too great for her to overcome. (In full disclosure, this is the outcome I predicted last week after watching the final debate between Clinton and Obama).
Scenario 2 -- Obama wins Texas and Clinton wins Ohio: This one is tough. Even as recently as a week ago, this outcome would still have likely spelled the end of the Clinton Campaign. But in the last week, it strikes me that the Clintons have been able to effectively "move the goal posts" or "lower the bar" such that she would declare an Ohio victory to be significant enough to merit continuing her campaign. She would argue that she's won the most important states for the General Election in November (California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts -- and, she would claim dubiously -- Florida and Michigan). Obama, on the other hand, would make the case that his delegate lead is just simply insurmountable, and he would probably have the backing of the vast majority of Democratic Party heavweights. He (echoed by chorus of Democratic pooh-bahs) would call for Hillary to withdraw. He would also throw cold water on her claim of victories in Michigan and Florida. In Michigan, Obama was not even on the ballot; in Florida the candidates all agreed not to campaign. Both were the results of the DNC's penalization of the two states for moving their primaries ahead on the political calendar. In the end, I don't think she could survive this scenario, because I think the pressure on her to quit would be tremendous, and the prospect of the damage her ultimately futile battle could do to the Democratic Party would only increase that pressure. But...and this is a BIG "but"...Hillary does NOT want to lose, she does NOT want to quit, she REALLY wants to be President, and as I've written here several times before, the Clintons won't hesitate to fight and aren't afraid to fight dirty. This scenario, therefore, is a bit of a wildcard.
Back to meetings and work...I will wrap this up with "Part Three" when I am in the Columbus Airport waiting for my inevitably delayed flight to LaGuardia...
"BraggingWrites": Live from Ohio! -- Part One
Good morning.
I've just boarded a plane at LaGuardia, preparing to head into "the belly of the beast": Columbus, Ohio.
I'm actually going to Columbus to see two clients, but I'd be lying if I claimed not to be a little excited to be "on the ground" in one of the two pivotal primaries being held today.
(As a quick aside, this is the first time I am attempting to post via my Blackberry, and since I may not be in front of a computer for awhile, I hope this actually posts to my blog and looks normal)...
With that said, back to "Super Tuesday II" as at least one cable news network has labeled today, when Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont all will hold their primaries. As has been the case for the last several primaries/caucuses, today is not terribly exciting for the Republican Party, but it is very significant for the Democrats. Looking briefly at the GOP, though, today does hold some significance given that McCain could actually win enough delegates with a strong showing to OFFICIALLY win the Republican Nomination. His ultimate GOP victory remains a forgone conclusion regardless, so let's focus on where the real action is: The Democrats.
So what's the story on the Democratic side? Well, I guess that depends on whom you ask. The campaign of Democratic frontrunner Senator Barack Obama will tell you that unless Senator Hillary Clinton wins Texas AND Ohio by substantial margins (e.g. 10+ points), the delegate count and, more specifically, her deficit in delegates relative to Obama, becomes mathematically daunting, if not impossible for her -- and this is not entirely untrue. Because of the Democratic Party's system of rewarding delegates proportionally (as opposed to the winner-take-all system employed by the GOP), even if Clinton wins in both states, unless she indeed does win big, she would barely dent Obama's delegate lead.
Ok...I'm being told to "turn off all portable electronic devices" and so my blog-by-blackberry attempt will have to take a brief pause. I will be back a bit later between my meetings as time allows, as there's more to say about yet ANOTHER big day in the 2008 race for the White House!
(p.s. Another downside of blogging-by-blackberry is lack of spell check! Apolgies for any typos)!
I've just boarded a plane at LaGuardia, preparing to head into "the belly of the beast": Columbus, Ohio.
I'm actually going to Columbus to see two clients, but I'd be lying if I claimed not to be a little excited to be "on the ground" in one of the two pivotal primaries being held today.
(As a quick aside, this is the first time I am attempting to post via my Blackberry, and since I may not be in front of a computer for awhile, I hope this actually posts to my blog and looks normal)...
With that said, back to "Super Tuesday II" as at least one cable news network has labeled today, when Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont all will hold their primaries. As has been the case for the last several primaries/caucuses, today is not terribly exciting for the Republican Party, but it is very significant for the Democrats. Looking briefly at the GOP, though, today does hold some significance given that McCain could actually win enough delegates with a strong showing to OFFICIALLY win the Republican Nomination. His ultimate GOP victory remains a forgone conclusion regardless, so let's focus on where the real action is: The Democrats.
So what's the story on the Democratic side? Well, I guess that depends on whom you ask. The campaign of Democratic frontrunner Senator Barack Obama will tell you that unless Senator Hillary Clinton wins Texas AND Ohio by substantial margins (e.g. 10+ points), the delegate count and, more specifically, her deficit in delegates relative to Obama, becomes mathematically daunting, if not impossible for her -- and this is not entirely untrue. Because of the Democratic Party's system of rewarding delegates proportionally (as opposed to the winner-take-all system employed by the GOP), even if Clinton wins in both states, unless she indeed does win big, she would barely dent Obama's delegate lead.
Ok...I'm being told to "turn off all portable electronic devices" and so my blog-by-blackberry attempt will have to take a brief pause. I will be back a bit later between my meetings as time allows, as there's more to say about yet ANOTHER big day in the 2008 race for the White House!
(p.s. Another downside of blogging-by-blackberry is lack of spell check! Apolgies for any typos)!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)