The news that seems to be getting all the attention today is the McCain campaign buying it's VP candidate $150,000 worth of clothing.
Personally, even though this spending by the McCain campaign might be illegal, I still think it's a stupid story. One point though: Under the Obama tax plan, Palin's $150K wardrobe would get a tax break. LOL.
The bigger story today is that the state of the race is still pretty stable. Obama is still leading in the polls by 5 or 6 (and may have gained a point or two over the last couple of days), early voting is still going great for Obama, and McCain is still flailing away trying to get any positive traction (and I don't think that al-Qaeda endorsement of McCain for president counts).
With 13 days left until election day, and not counting chickens, things are looking good.
Dan Hamilton's shared items
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
A Must Read For Polling Junkies
I try not to obsess over polls. Unfortunately, I tend to forget that. Luckily, Nate Silver's wonderful fivethirtyeight.com is around to satisfy my poll cravings.
Nate has an absolute must read on tracking polls today. He breaks down each tracking poll, noting the time released, the poll's track record, strengths and weaknesses.
If your reading my blog, I am sure your are reading his. If not, you should be.
Nate has an absolute must read on tracking polls today. He breaks down each tracking poll, noting the time released, the poll's track record, strengths and weaknesses.
If your reading my blog, I am sure your are reading his. If not, you should be.
Labels:
2008 Election,
Politics,
polls
Monday, October 20, 2008
McCain: Realistic or Delusional?
So, they finally have given up on Iowa and also Colorado?
What's that leave? Pennsylvania!
Good God. Just go back to Arizona and campaign there the next 14 days Senator McCain. javascript:void(0)
What's that leave? Pennsylvania!
Good God. Just go back to Arizona and campaign there the next 14 days Senator McCain. javascript:void(0)
Labels:
2008 Election,
John McCain,
Politics
Republican Election Spending
A quick thought. Last week, at the height of the Obama lead in the polls, there was some talk here and there among pundits that the Republicans should divert money from McCain to some of the closer US Senate races - a la Bob Dole in 1996.
Now, there have been cases reported of Republicans redistributing resources (e.g. Michigan, some cut back on McCain joint ads with the RNC) but, from what I have seen so far, there has not yet been a wholesale flight of money from McCain to Republican Senators in tight races.
If it is going to happen, my guess is that it will happen this week. It will be very instructive to see what the RNC ad buys are for this coming weekend and next week. If you see a lot of cash to try and prop up Republican Senators, then you can probably assume that the big shots in the Republican party have wriiten off John McCain.
Also, look to see where McCain spends his time next week. If he does a lot of appearences in states where the Republican Senator is in trouble, the race for the White House us probably over (of course, given how bad McCain/Palin is doing in the polls, they could be told to stay away from those states too).
Finally, what kind of cool aid is the McCain campaign drinking? On a conference call today, Rick Davis from the McCain campaign said that McCain's polling shows a tight race in Iowa. Unless something had drastically changed on the ground, Iowa has not been in play for weeks. Obama has been up big for weeks in all the polls in Iowa. Yet, for some reason McCain continues to think that he has a shot there. In fact, as I recall, McCain made a visit to Iowa recently and the pundits were all asking why. Has the McCain campaign left the reality based community or do they know something that nobody else does? This is puzzling and worrying at the same time, on a variety of levels.
Now, there have been cases reported of Republicans redistributing resources (e.g. Michigan, some cut back on McCain joint ads with the RNC) but, from what I have seen so far, there has not yet been a wholesale flight of money from McCain to Republican Senators in tight races.
If it is going to happen, my guess is that it will happen this week. It will be very instructive to see what the RNC ad buys are for this coming weekend and next week. If you see a lot of cash to try and prop up Republican Senators, then you can probably assume that the big shots in the Republican party have wriiten off John McCain.
Also, look to see where McCain spends his time next week. If he does a lot of appearences in states where the Republican Senator is in trouble, the race for the White House us probably over (of course, given how bad McCain/Palin is doing in the polls, they could be told to stay away from those states too).
Finally, what kind of cool aid is the McCain campaign drinking? On a conference call today, Rick Davis from the McCain campaign said that McCain's polling shows a tight race in Iowa. Unless something had drastically changed on the ground, Iowa has not been in play for weeks. Obama has been up big for weeks in all the polls in Iowa. Yet, for some reason McCain continues to think that he has a shot there. In fact, as I recall, McCain made a visit to Iowa recently and the pundits were all asking why. Has the McCain campaign left the reality based community or do they know something that nobody else does? This is puzzling and worrying at the same time, on a variety of levels.
Labels:
2008 Election,
John McCain,
Politics,
Republican
Vote Early
With 15 days to go, the national polls seem to have tightened a bit. What was an average Obama lead of 7 or 8 points is now down to 5 or 6. But, the polls of the battleground states are still looking good for Obama. Of course, battleground polls have been lagging behind the national numbers all fall. Something to keep an eye on.
So the first big story on early voting trends came out today. Georgia, Iowa, North Carolina, Nevada and Ohio early voters are predominantly democrats. Republicans hold an edge on early voters in Florida and it looks to be about even in Indiana.
McCain needs all these states so the democratic advantage in Ohio and North Carolina is hopeful for Obama. Florida is a concern, especially since I am afraid the Obama campaign may be falling into the "Florida trap" by spending a lot of time and effort there in what may be a lost cause. Maybe it's the ghost of 2000 but I just don't trust the polls out of Florida showing that Obama is ahead.
So the first big story on early voting trends came out today. Georgia, Iowa, North Carolina, Nevada and Ohio early voters are predominantly democrats. Republicans hold an edge on early voters in Florida and it looks to be about even in Indiana.
McCain needs all these states so the democratic advantage in Ohio and North Carolina is hopeful for Obama. Florida is a concern, especially since I am afraid the Obama campaign may be falling into the "Florida trap" by spending a lot of time and effort there in what may be a lost cause. Maybe it's the ghost of 2000 but I just don't trust the polls out of Florida showing that Obama is ahead.
Labels:
2008 Election,
early voting
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Finally Fall
Fall officially started several weeks ago but, here in New Jersey it has been unseasonably warm. Until today. There's a chill in the air and, despite my spending a lot of money to remove two large trees a couple of years ago, leaves all over my yard, seemly overnight.
Labels:
General
Colin Powell Endorses Obama
I don't think endorsements mean too much, but this one could push some rational republicans over the fence.
Labels:
Barack Obama,
Colin Powell,
Politics
Been busy
Well I have been busy for the past several weeks. Since my last post, a lot has happened in the Presidential race. I won't rehash it all, but with 16 days to go, it looks like Barak Obama will be the 44th President of the United States.
Of course, 16 days is an lifetime in politics. Remember that just over 16 days ago, this race was tied, so anything can happen between now and November 4.
I've been asked to help out the Obama campaign in PA for the last 3 days of the election so that should be interesting. In the meantime, I hope to have this blog updated more frequently. One of the things that I find is I have a hard time trying to find the time to sit down and write posts. But, I may have found a solution. I have never been a big fan of email posts, but I think I might have stumbled upon a great little app for my iPhone that will let me post more frequently. Well see.
Of course, 16 days is an lifetime in politics. Remember that just over 16 days ago, this race was tied, so anything can happen between now and November 4.
I've been asked to help out the Obama campaign in PA for the last 3 days of the election so that should be interesting. In the meantime, I hope to have this blog updated more frequently. One of the things that I find is I have a hard time trying to find the time to sit down and write posts. But, I may have found a solution. I have never been a big fan of email posts, but I think I might have stumbled upon a great little app for my iPhone that will let me post more frequently. Well see.
Labels:
General
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
An Audacious Head Fake?
So, as everyone knows John McCain has decided to engage is gutter politics and will probably throw the Kitchen Sink at Obama the next 3 weeks.
Obama's obviously got a 3 tier response - first, talk about the economy; second, run positive biography Ads; and third, hit right back (e.g. Keating Five). But, come the end of Tuesday's debate Obama could have a fourth tack: take John McCain aside and say "lay off or I am coming after Arizona".
What! Arizona? McCain's home state? Am I crazy? Maybe not....
I try not to look at Karl Rove's election analysis but this caught my eye yesterday:
http://www.rove.com/images/0000/0088...
So I was looking for the remaining red states where it might behoove the Obama campaign to out some token money into and maybe have a rally. I was looking for red states where McCain's lead was < 10 pts. Here's the list:
Arkansas (McCain +9)
Georgia (McCain +8)
and...drumroll please:
Arizona where Rove puts McCain at +8
Now, if you have been following the election at all, you probably have heard that Georgia is an Obama "wish state" - they have put up a bit of an effort there to try and see if increase voter registration and youth and african american turn out could put the state in play. The last I heard (any please comment below if you know different), that doesn't look like it will pan out. But, Arizona is McCain's home state and he's only up 8? Obama is up 17 in Illinois. McCain should be way ahead of that. So I did more digging:
Pollster's got Arizona at 51.4% McCain to 38.9% Obama. But look at the polls that make up that aggregate:
Rassumussen on 9/29: McCain 59, Obama 38
ASU on 9/28: McCain McCain 45, Obama 38, Undecided 15
ARG on 9/14: McCain 56, Obama 39
OK. Not looking too good but two things jump out: first the polls are kind of getting long in the tooth on October 8, could the massive shift Obama has seen in the last week have played out in Arizona? Second, that ASU undecided number of 15...
So over to Nate Silver and what does he say about Arizona? Well, his model has got McCain winning 94% of the time (he's got Obama winning IL 100% of the time). The 538 projection for Arizona has it at McCain 54.4% and Obama 43.1% with a Margin of Error of +or- 7.7%.
SO...
Now you are saying - OK..McCain's a virtual lock on Arizona - what's your point? Well the points are the following:
First, McCain is not Mr. Popularity or Mr. Congeniality in Arizona. As late as June, the McCain campaign was projecting Arizona as a possible swing state.
Second, Obama probably (and this needs to be confirmed) has zero investment in Arizona.
So the play is this:
Throw a little ad buy in Arizona and, drop in for a rally on the way to Colorado or Nevada and see what the internal polls show.
If there is movement, lay it out for McCain: lay off the gutter attacks or be forced to spend money and campaign in your home state. If there is no movement, reap the publicity of actually campaigning (even for a couple of hours) in McCain's home state.
Now look, the only way McCain looses his home state is a 400 plus electoral vote landslide for Obama (and maybe not even then). But, what an audacious head fake this would be.
Thoughts?
Obama's obviously got a 3 tier response - first, talk about the economy; second, run positive biography Ads; and third, hit right back (e.g. Keating Five). But, come the end of Tuesday's debate Obama could have a fourth tack: take John McCain aside and say "lay off or I am coming after Arizona".
What! Arizona? McCain's home state? Am I crazy? Maybe not....
I try not to look at Karl Rove's election analysis but this caught my eye yesterday:
http://www.rove.com/images/0000/0088...
So I was looking for the remaining red states where it might behoove the Obama campaign to out some token money into and maybe have a rally. I was looking for red states where McCain's lead was < 10 pts. Here's the list:
Arkansas (McCain +9)
Georgia (McCain +8)
and...drumroll please:
Arizona where Rove puts McCain at +8
Now, if you have been following the election at all, you probably have heard that Georgia is an Obama "wish state" - they have put up a bit of an effort there to try and see if increase voter registration and youth and african american turn out could put the state in play. The last I heard (any please comment below if you know different), that doesn't look like it will pan out. But, Arizona is McCain's home state and he's only up 8? Obama is up 17 in Illinois. McCain should be way ahead of that. So I did more digging:
Pollster's got Arizona at 51.4% McCain to 38.9% Obama. But look at the polls that make up that aggregate:
Rassumussen on 9/29: McCain 59, Obama 38
ASU on 9/28: McCain McCain 45, Obama 38, Undecided 15
ARG on 9/14: McCain 56, Obama 39
OK. Not looking too good but two things jump out: first the polls are kind of getting long in the tooth on October 8, could the massive shift Obama has seen in the last week have played out in Arizona? Second, that ASU undecided number of 15...
So over to Nate Silver and what does he say about Arizona? Well, his model has got McCain winning 94% of the time (he's got Obama winning IL 100% of the time). The 538 projection for Arizona has it at McCain 54.4% and Obama 43.1% with a Margin of Error of +or- 7.7%.
SO...
Now you are saying - OK..McCain's a virtual lock on Arizona - what's your point? Well the points are the following:
First, McCain is not Mr. Popularity or Mr. Congeniality in Arizona. As late as June, the McCain campaign was projecting Arizona as a possible swing state.
Second, Obama probably (and this needs to be confirmed) has zero investment in Arizona.
So the play is this:
Throw a little ad buy in Arizona and, drop in for a rally on the way to Colorado or Nevada and see what the internal polls show.
If there is movement, lay it out for McCain: lay off the gutter attacks or be forced to spend money and campaign in your home state. If there is no movement, reap the publicity of actually campaigning (even for a couple of hours) in McCain's home state.
Now look, the only way McCain looses his home state is a 400 plus electoral vote landslide for Obama (and maybe not even then). But, what an audacious head fake this would be.
Thoughts?
Labels:
2008 Election,
Barack Obama,
Politics
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
The Other Side of the Palin Pick
I have always considered Jerome Armstrong a "sky is falling", "glass half empty" kind of guy, even more so since Hillary Clinton was beaten in the primaries but, he very well may have a point on Palin.
Basically, he says that the truly horrid VP roll out means nothing because Palin has energized the base and thereby put into play the GOP ground game for the election.
Definitely worth a read.
Basically, he says that the truly horrid VP roll out means nothing because Palin has energized the base and thereby put into play the GOP ground game for the election.
Definitely worth a read.
Labels:
2008 Election,
John McCain,
Sara Palin
Palin: the new Eagleton
OK. I'm going on the record here. Sarah Palin will withdraw as McCain's VP.
Why?
Well, she is just getting killed as are republicans trying to defend her. It seems like every hour there is a new revelation about her and none of it is good.
So far I count the following:
1. Troopergate: They have got a confession on tape from an aid and emails. I suspect they will be able to prove abuse of power
2. for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it
3. Member of the Alaska Secessionist Party
4. Directed fundraising for Indicted Sen Stevens' 527
5. Totally unqualified for the job
oh and...
6. Has a 17 yr old who is 5 months pregnant (although I put this at the bottom of the disqualifying items since it should not matter at all)
This VP rollout was just so so badly managed by the McCain campaign. It is clear they did not vet her at all, no matter how much they deny it.
So, I can safely say she will not be on the ballot come November. If I had to hazard a guess, if she has another bad news day tomorrow, by Wednesday afternoon she will withdraw. If she can somehow survive the week, I give it no more than 2 weeks.
Why?
Well, she is just getting killed as are republicans trying to defend her. It seems like every hour there is a new revelation about her and none of it is good.
So far I count the following:
1. Troopergate: They have got a confession on tape from an aid and emails. I suspect they will be able to prove abuse of power
2. for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it
3. Member of the Alaska Secessionist Party
4. Directed fundraising for Indicted Sen Stevens' 527
5. Totally unqualified for the job
oh and...
6. Has a 17 yr old who is 5 months pregnant (although I put this at the bottom of the disqualifying items since it should not matter at all)
This VP rollout was just so so badly managed by the McCain campaign. It is clear they did not vet her at all, no matter how much they deny it.
So, I can safely say she will not be on the ballot come November. If I had to hazard a guess, if she has another bad news day tomorrow, by Wednesday afternoon she will withdraw. If she can somehow survive the week, I give it no more than 2 weeks.
Labels:
2008 Election,
John McCain,
Politics,
Sara Palin
Friday, August 29, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
DNC 2008: Day 2
Well, day 2 is over. The red meat was served with a dessert of Unity.
Thoughts:
Sebelius: Ok speech, but I see now why she was not picked as VP. The majority of her speech covered Obama's economic proposals and the delivery was a little flat, but she had a great dig on McCain:
Strickland: Good speech, although, again, not someone who fires up a room but an awesome line:
Casey: Very good speech, again average delivery. I heard Carville on CNN say that the Democrats have some pretty major league talent at the top of their talent pool after Clintons speech (more on that below) but, I must say after Obama and Clinton and (hopefully) Biden, there seems to be a big drop in ability to give a speech. In any event, Casey also had an awesome line:
Rendell: Delivered a speech that was pretty "meaty" lots of digs, but I still think he underperformed given his reputation.
Before I get to the big 3, some pleasant surprises:
Dennis Kucinich: wow. he was fired up and ready to go. maybe too much, and, on reflection being surprised by Kucinich is probably normal.
David Patterson: what a surprise. Why this guy had to inherit the NY Gov. office is beyond me.
The "Real People": every one of the folks who came out and told their stories was very good, especially Lilly Leadbetter.
Xavier Becerra: very good.
Rahm Emanuel: I know why he's such a behind the scenes guy, and I expected him to come out and just hammer away but he was underwhelming. I have seen talk here and there that he may be a president/vice president some day. He's got a ways to go.
Deval Patrick: Very well done and delivered although I think it could have been more energizing.
Ok, now for the big 3 speeches:
Mark Warner: Pretty good speech. I was a little apprehensive about him, but he did OK and I am not sure this was a "keynote" worthy speech. But that's OK because the last 2 speeches of the night made up for it.
Brian Schweitzer: Just awesome how he took a speech on energy independence and just fired out the delegates is beyond me. What a character! My favorite dig (no pun intended):
After Schweitzer's speech, I would thought Clinton would have an even harder task than the one she faced, but, I have to agree with the CW (and I am not a Hillary fan) that she hit a grand slam. I watched a lot of her speeches during the primary and have to say this was the best speech I have ever seen her give.
She set the tone right off the bat:
And the key quote:
She went after McCain pretty hard:
And she finished great.
Now, I do wish she had addressed the commander in chief BS that she let loose in the primaries as that is what the rethugs went for after her speech. But overall I don't know what else Obama supporters could have asked for.
So where does that leave us?
Well, first, I wish the hell they would get control of the delegates more. Their constant unruliness during the speeches is annoying and is taking away from the non-prime time speakers. Moreover, even the cable news channels are not showing speeches due to the fact, I suspect, that nobody seems to be paying attention. Every now and then the will stop their constant prognosticating and cut to the podium but only after the delegates have gotten ahold of themselves and start responding to the speakers. You can be sure that the rethugs are going to sit still and silent for 4 hours each day next week and, as a result, a lot of their non prime time speakers are going to get cable news time.
Second, the PUMAs are DOA after Clinton's speech. She has rightfully chastised them. If Obama can't get them, they were never going to be gotten and they need to be written off.
Finally, Day 3 and 4 have been teed up (just as I suspect the Obama campaign had hoped) with Michelle Obama's wonderful speech and Clinton's near pitch perfect unity speech. Biden has to come out and just let loose on McCain and Obama has to give the best speech ever (and given his track record, that is a very very high bar indeed).
Thoughts:
Sebelius: Ok speech, but I see now why she was not picked as VP. The majority of her speech covered Obama's economic proposals and the delivery was a little flat, but she had a great dig on McCain:
I’m sure you remember a girl from Kansas who said there’s no place like home. Well, in John McCain’s version, there’s no place like home. And a home. And home. And home.
Strickland: Good speech, although, again, not someone who fires up a room but an awesome line:
George W. Bush came into office on third base… and then he stole second. And John McCain cheered him every step of the way.
Casey: Very good speech, again average delivery. I heard Carville on CNN say that the Democrats have some pretty major league talent at the top of their talent pool after Clintons speech (more on that below) but, I must say after Obama and Clinton and (hopefully) Biden, there seems to be a big drop in ability to give a speech. In any event, Casey also had an awesome line:
John McCain calls himself a maverick, but he votes with George Bush more than 90% of the time. That’s not a maverick, that’s a sidekick.
Rendell: Delivered a speech that was pretty "meaty" lots of digs, but I still think he underperformed given his reputation.
Before I get to the big 3, some pleasant surprises:
Dennis Kucinich: wow. he was fired up and ready to go. maybe too much, and, on reflection being surprised by Kucinich is probably normal.
David Patterson: what a surprise. Why this guy had to inherit the NY Gov. office is beyond me.
The "Real People": every one of the folks who came out and told their stories was very good, especially Lilly Leadbetter.
Xavier Becerra: very good.
Rahm Emanuel: I know why he's such a behind the scenes guy, and I expected him to come out and just hammer away but he was underwhelming. I have seen talk here and there that he may be a president/vice president some day. He's got a ways to go.
Deval Patrick: Very well done and delivered although I think it could have been more energizing.
Ok, now for the big 3 speeches:
Mark Warner: Pretty good speech. I was a little apprehensive about him, but he did OK and I am not sure this was a "keynote" worthy speech. But that's OK because the last 2 speeches of the night made up for it.
Brian Schweitzer: Just awesome how he took a speech on energy independence and just fired out the delegates is beyond me. What a character! My favorite dig (no pun intended):
We simply can’t drill our way to energy independence, even if you drilled in all of John McCain’s backyards, including the ones he can’t even remember.
After Schweitzer's speech, I would thought Clinton would have an even harder task than the one she faced, but, I have to agree with the CW (and I am not a Hillary fan) that she hit a grand slam. I watched a lot of her speeches during the primary and have to say this was the best speech I have ever seen her give.
She set the tone right off the bat:
No way, no how, no McCain
And the key quote:
I ran to stand up for all those who have been invisible to their government for eight long years. Those are the reasons I ran for president, and those are the reasons I support Barack Obama for president. I want you -- I want you to ask yourselves: Were you in this campaign just for me, or were you in it for that young Marine and others like him? Were you in it for that mom struggling with cancer while raising her kids? Were you in it for that young boy and his mom surviving on the minimum wage? Were you in it for all the people in this country who feel invisible?
She went after McCain pretty hard:
it makes perfect sense that George Bush and John McCain will be together next week in the Twin Cities, because these days they're awfully hard to tell apart.
And she finished great.
Now, I do wish she had addressed the commander in chief BS that she let loose in the primaries as that is what the rethugs went for after her speech. But overall I don't know what else Obama supporters could have asked for.
So where does that leave us?
Well, first, I wish the hell they would get control of the delegates more. Their constant unruliness during the speeches is annoying and is taking away from the non-prime time speakers. Moreover, even the cable news channels are not showing speeches due to the fact, I suspect, that nobody seems to be paying attention. Every now and then the will stop their constant prognosticating and cut to the podium but only after the delegates have gotten ahold of themselves and start responding to the speakers. You can be sure that the rethugs are going to sit still and silent for 4 hours each day next week and, as a result, a lot of their non prime time speakers are going to get cable news time.
Second, the PUMAs are DOA after Clinton's speech. She has rightfully chastised them. If Obama can't get them, they were never going to be gotten and they need to be written off.
Finally, Day 3 and 4 have been teed up (just as I suspect the Obama campaign had hoped) with Michelle Obama's wonderful speech and Clinton's near pitch perfect unity speech. Biden has to come out and just let loose on McCain and Obama has to give the best speech ever (and given his track record, that is a very very high bar indeed).
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
DNC 2008: Day 1 Thoughts
First off some thoughts on day 1 of the Democratic National Convention:
I watched most of the convention on CSPAN yesterday, so I (thankfully) missed most of the talking heads and heard all of the speakers. The big take away for me is this: Michelle Obama's speech was a home run. The best of the night. Ted Kennedy's tribute and speech was very moving and probably should have been bumped later in order for it to be shown on the networks.
As for the rest, as is typical for democrats, the conventioneers were an unruly bunch for nearly everything except the Kennedy and Obama speeches, which took away from some very good speakers. Pelosi's speech was OK as was McCaskill's, I thought Jim Leach's speech was excellent, sadly he is not a great speaker and the refusal of the delegates to shut up hurt him. Jessie Jackson, Jrs. speech was very well done, he was probably the best after Obama and Kennedy.
The big controversy is whether the first night was wasted by not going after McCain more. I have to agree that the delegates are hungry for and need "red meat" attacks, but last night was probably not the night to do it. We will see what tonight holds.
As for tonight, Clinton is the big speaker and she has a lot on the line (as does Obama). Early word is that Mark Warner, the keynoter, will not be going after McCain so the task will fall on Clinton.
Finally some random thoughts:
* Bill Clinton needs to STFU. It has almost come to the point that Obama may have to dis-invite him from speaking. How fast can Gore get to Denver to take his spot?
* The press seems more concerned with the Hillary Dead-Enders than the delegates seem to be.
* Picking Warner as the keynote may have been a mistake. We will see tonight.
* The Obama girls were awesome and I loved the way the corrected their Dad's misstatement of what city he was in.
* Hillary Clinton needs to put an end to this roll call controversy.
* Why the hell can't the networks show the conventions for more than 1 hour a night? You would think they could take 2 weeks every four years.
* The Cable news shows have too many rethugs on. I hope the dems get equal time next week. (and an idea: Biden and Obama should show up at the RNC next week)
I watched most of the convention on CSPAN yesterday, so I (thankfully) missed most of the talking heads and heard all of the speakers. The big take away for me is this: Michelle Obama's speech was a home run. The best of the night. Ted Kennedy's tribute and speech was very moving and probably should have been bumped later in order for it to be shown on the networks.
As for the rest, as is typical for democrats, the conventioneers were an unruly bunch for nearly everything except the Kennedy and Obama speeches, which took away from some very good speakers. Pelosi's speech was OK as was McCaskill's, I thought Jim Leach's speech was excellent, sadly he is not a great speaker and the refusal of the delegates to shut up hurt him. Jessie Jackson, Jrs. speech was very well done, he was probably the best after Obama and Kennedy.
The big controversy is whether the first night was wasted by not going after McCain more. I have to agree that the delegates are hungry for and need "red meat" attacks, but last night was probably not the night to do it. We will see what tonight holds.
As for tonight, Clinton is the big speaker and she has a lot on the line (as does Obama). Early word is that Mark Warner, the keynoter, will not be going after McCain so the task will fall on Clinton.
Finally some random thoughts:
* Bill Clinton needs to STFU. It has almost come to the point that Obama may have to dis-invite him from speaking. How fast can Gore get to Denver to take his spot?
* The press seems more concerned with the Hillary Dead-Enders than the delegates seem to be.
* Picking Warner as the keynote may have been a mistake. We will see tonight.
* The Obama girls were awesome and I loved the way the corrected their Dad's misstatement of what city he was in.
* Hillary Clinton needs to put an end to this roll call controversy.
* Why the hell can't the networks show the conventions for more than 1 hour a night? You would think they could take 2 weeks every four years.
* The Cable news shows have too many rethugs on. I hope the dems get equal time next week. (and an idea: Biden and Obama should show up at the RNC next week)
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Looks like it is Biden
Well, so much for the text message....
Shortly after midnight on August 23, the news networks, and major newspapers began reporting that Barack Obama asked Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware to be his VP.
Unless this is some brilliant head fake (and the evidence seems to be the following: the secret service showing up at Biden's home, and at least a couple of anonymous democratic officials confirming it as well as statements from the camps of other VP hopefuls that they were told that they had not been picked), it looks like this is the real deal.
As I mentioned the other day, I thought Biden was probably Obama's second pick. I thought he would pick Kathleen Sebelius. I guess not, but I am happy it is Biden. He brings a lot to the table and it is going to be fun watching him tear John McCain up.
Some random thoughts....
* Biden is 65. So clearly he is not going to be President (he would be 74 if Obama/Biden gets 2 terms)
* I hope the story of how the pick was made comes out someday. It has to be a good one.
* Don't be surprised if Biden's son is named/runs for his senate seat (not sure how Delaware would pick Biden's replacement)
* My parents live about 10 minutes from Biden. Hope he doesn't shut down the roads a lot over the next four years (LOL)
Shortly after midnight on August 23, the news networks, and major newspapers began reporting that Barack Obama asked Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware to be his VP.
Unless this is some brilliant head fake (and the evidence seems to be the following: the secret service showing up at Biden's home, and at least a couple of anonymous democratic officials confirming it as well as statements from the camps of other VP hopefuls that they were told that they had not been picked), it looks like this is the real deal.
As I mentioned the other day, I thought Biden was probably Obama's second pick. I thought he would pick Kathleen Sebelius. I guess not, but I am happy it is Biden. He brings a lot to the table and it is going to be fun watching him tear John McCain up.
Some random thoughts....
* Biden is 65. So clearly he is not going to be President (he would be 74 if Obama/Biden gets 2 terms)
* I hope the story of how the pick was made comes out someday. It has to be a good one.
* Don't be surprised if Biden's son is named/runs for his senate seat (not sure how Delaware would pick Biden's replacement)
* My parents live about 10 minutes from Biden. Hope he doesn't shut down the roads a lot over the next four years (LOL)
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Back in the Saddle: 76 Days until E-Day
As usual for me, posts to this blog have been few and far between. What can I say, life happens. But, as of today, there are 76 days until election day. I am going to try and get at least one post a day from here on out. Hopefully these posts will be more than just a recap of the days news however, for today at least, it will have to be just a summary of where I think the election stands.
So, here goes...
Obviously right now the issue consuming the most attention is who will be Obama's VP. The conventional wisdom is that it is going to be Joe Biden. I am not so convinced.
The thinking behind Biden is that he would help shore up Obama's perceived weakness in national security and be a great attack dog. However, I think Obama is not thinking that way. He has made it clear that he is confident in his ability to handle foreign policy and does not view it as a weakness at all and that the primary criteria for his selection is going to be someone who he can work with, agrees with him on his "new politics" philosophy.
If I had to guess who his pick is going to be I would put my money on Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas. Picking her fulfills all of the criteria listed above and all the criteria Obama has laid out to the press for his VP.
Now, the Clinton lovers will probably go ballistic over this pick but I view that as an added benefit to picking Sebelius. Obama has made it pretty clear he has bent over backwards to accommodate the Clintons (prime time convention speaking slots, roll call votes, the stupid statement in the party platform about the "18 million cracks in the glass ceiling", changing portions of his health care proposal to reflect the Clinton plan, helping Clinton retire her debt) and, up until now, he has gotten little to show for it (see Bill Clintons statements re: qualification for president, compliments regarding John McCain's environmental record). By picking Sebelius the message to the Clinton dead enders is this: Hey. Here's a qualified women who shares my philosophy. If you really think its Hillary or no one else then you are a bunch of hypocrites and I don't need you. Either get on board the train or not.
Is it a gamble? Yes. Right now the polls show that where Obama is under performing is with democrats (he is getting about 80% of the self-identified democrats in most of the polls I have seen, which is less than Kerry got). If he can bump that up to about 90% of self-identified democrats, he wins the election. Picking a women (even though it is not Hillary) would do two things: attempt to lure some of those dems back into the fold and, given who Sebelius is and her record, make a serious play for the rational wing of the republican party.
So, that's my guess. As to the timing: I would not be surprised if he did not announce until Saturday morning although I think the Obama campaign is open to announcing earlier, depending on the news cycle (for example, how much air time is the new - and most likely flawed - Zogby poll showing McCain with a lead for the first time going to get? If it gets too much, then maybe the VP announcement comes to get it out of the headlines).
So, here goes...
Obviously right now the issue consuming the most attention is who will be Obama's VP. The conventional wisdom is that it is going to be Joe Biden. I am not so convinced.
The thinking behind Biden is that he would help shore up Obama's perceived weakness in national security and be a great attack dog. However, I think Obama is not thinking that way. He has made it clear that he is confident in his ability to handle foreign policy and does not view it as a weakness at all and that the primary criteria for his selection is going to be someone who he can work with, agrees with him on his "new politics" philosophy.
If I had to guess who his pick is going to be I would put my money on Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas. Picking her fulfills all of the criteria listed above and all the criteria Obama has laid out to the press for his VP.
Now, the Clinton lovers will probably go ballistic over this pick but I view that as an added benefit to picking Sebelius. Obama has made it pretty clear he has bent over backwards to accommodate the Clintons (prime time convention speaking slots, roll call votes, the stupid statement in the party platform about the "18 million cracks in the glass ceiling", changing portions of his health care proposal to reflect the Clinton plan, helping Clinton retire her debt) and, up until now, he has gotten little to show for it (see Bill Clintons statements re: qualification for president, compliments regarding John McCain's environmental record). By picking Sebelius the message to the Clinton dead enders is this: Hey. Here's a qualified women who shares my philosophy. If you really think its Hillary or no one else then you are a bunch of hypocrites and I don't need you. Either get on board the train or not.
Is it a gamble? Yes. Right now the polls show that where Obama is under performing is with democrats (he is getting about 80% of the self-identified democrats in most of the polls I have seen, which is less than Kerry got). If he can bump that up to about 90% of self-identified democrats, he wins the election. Picking a women (even though it is not Hillary) would do two things: attempt to lure some of those dems back into the fold and, given who Sebelius is and her record, make a serious play for the rational wing of the republican party.
So, that's my guess. As to the timing: I would not be surprised if he did not announce until Saturday morning although I think the Obama campaign is open to announcing earlier, depending on the news cycle (for example, how much air time is the new - and most likely flawed - Zogby poll showing McCain with a lead for the first time going to get? If it gets too much, then maybe the VP announcement comes to get it out of the headlines).
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Clinton Debt = $21 Million, Just Say No, Obama
The LA Times is reporting this morning that Clinton is $21 Million in debt. Given the fact that this race is over and Obama has (or soon will) win, there has been alot of speculation that Obama will offer to help Clinton pay down the debt. I say no...
Look, any reasonable observer knows that winning this race was a long shot for Clinton after March 4 and the Obama winning streak. ( see this Chuck Todd post for the breakdown). We also know that Clinton was out of powder (i.e. money $$) at that time. Yet, she still chose to vigorously continue her campaign. That was her right.
Yet, as it became more apparent that her hopes were becoming slimmer as OH, TX, PA, et. al, failed to change the dynamic of the race, she has still (rightly or wrongly) refused to suspend her campaign. She has continued to spend, spend, spend. The result? Mountains of debt and vendors unpaid (although if I were her, I'd tell Mark Penn that he's never going to collect what she owes him).
Now that Obama has won the majority of pledged delegates, all the pundits keep saying is it is all about how Clinton exits the race. All signs point to the fact that she will not get out until after June 3. Again, that's her right. But, how the heck can she justify the spending?
More importantly, how can Obama and his supporters justify helping her pay off this mountain of debt? Speculation is that Clinton is going to position herself to negotiate with Obama that in exchange for her suspending her campaign, Obama will help her pay down this debt. At this point though, unless Clinton is willing to suspend within days, I have to think that Obama has to say no. He cannot justify this to his supporters.
How is Obama going to go to his supporters and ask them to help pay for the debt that was incurred by Clinton after most reasonable people knew her chances were slim to none? Even worse, how can anyone justify paying down the additional debt that is going to be incurred by Clinton to campaign in the June 1 and June 3 states?
Moreover, where the hell were Clinton's financial people? How could they let this happen? I can't believe that they deluded themselves into thinking that it was worth it. I mean, what is the best possibility right now for Clinton? She gets half of MI & FL and says she finished the primary season but still lost? Maybe she gets to influence the health Care plank of the platform and gets some sort of veto power over the VP choice (I take it for granted that the VP will not be Clinton for a lot of reasons, the biggest being that she brings nothing to the ticket that Obama does not already have). Is this worth $21 million plus?
Historically when candidates ran out of money the gracefully exit the race. It is well past time to Clinton to do so on that basis alone. For her to continue now and then have the audacity to come back to Obama in two weeks when it is over and ask him to help with her debt is morally wrong. It is unfair to Obama, his supporters, and democratic chances in November as she will be diverting monies that should rationally go to the presidential campaign and/or down ticket candidates.
Obama has to just say no.
UPDATE: I should have made this clearer in the post originally, Obama cannot give Clinton the $21 million out of his fund raising coffers. What he can do is host raisers for Clinton and/or ask his donors to contribute and/or give Clinton access to his donor DB (which is probably the most coveted political DB in existence today - I am sure down ticket candidates are just salivating at getting access to it). So the real question is whether Obama should do these things on Clinton's behalf. I still say no way.
Look, any reasonable observer knows that winning this race was a long shot for Clinton after March 4 and the Obama winning streak. ( see this Chuck Todd post for the breakdown). We also know that Clinton was out of powder (i.e. money $$) at that time. Yet, she still chose to vigorously continue her campaign. That was her right.
Yet, as it became more apparent that her hopes were becoming slimmer as OH, TX, PA, et. al, failed to change the dynamic of the race, she has still (rightly or wrongly) refused to suspend her campaign. She has continued to spend, spend, spend. The result? Mountains of debt and vendors unpaid (although if I were her, I'd tell Mark Penn that he's never going to collect what she owes him).
Now that Obama has won the majority of pledged delegates, all the pundits keep saying is it is all about how Clinton exits the race. All signs point to the fact that she will not get out until after June 3. Again, that's her right. But, how the heck can she justify the spending?
More importantly, how can Obama and his supporters justify helping her pay off this mountain of debt? Speculation is that Clinton is going to position herself to negotiate with Obama that in exchange for her suspending her campaign, Obama will help her pay down this debt. At this point though, unless Clinton is willing to suspend within days, I have to think that Obama has to say no. He cannot justify this to his supporters.
How is Obama going to go to his supporters and ask them to help pay for the debt that was incurred by Clinton after most reasonable people knew her chances were slim to none? Even worse, how can anyone justify paying down the additional debt that is going to be incurred by Clinton to campaign in the June 1 and June 3 states?
Moreover, where the hell were Clinton's financial people? How could they let this happen? I can't believe that they deluded themselves into thinking that it was worth it. I mean, what is the best possibility right now for Clinton? She gets half of MI & FL and says she finished the primary season but still lost? Maybe she gets to influence the health Care plank of the platform and gets some sort of veto power over the VP choice (I take it for granted that the VP will not be Clinton for a lot of reasons, the biggest being that she brings nothing to the ticket that Obama does not already have). Is this worth $21 million plus?
Historically when candidates ran out of money the gracefully exit the race. It is well past time to Clinton to do so on that basis alone. For her to continue now and then have the audacity to come back to Obama in two weeks when it is over and ask him to help with her debt is morally wrong. It is unfair to Obama, his supporters, and democratic chances in November as she will be diverting monies that should rationally go to the presidential campaign and/or down ticket candidates.
Obama has to just say no.
UPDATE: I should have made this clearer in the post originally, Obama cannot give Clinton the $21 million out of his fund raising coffers. What he can do is host raisers for Clinton and/or ask his donors to contribute and/or give Clinton access to his donor DB (which is probably the most coveted political DB in existence today - I am sure down ticket candidates are just salivating at getting access to it). So the real question is whether Obama should do these things on Clinton's behalf. I still say no way.
Labels:
2008,
Barack Obama,
debt,
Hillary Clinton
Monday, March 3, 2008
March 4 Predictions
Well, I suppose I should post my predictions for tomorrow night's democratic primaries.
Right now the conventional wisdom seems to think that Ohio & Rhode Island will be won by Clinton,Vermont by Obama and Texas as a toss-up. I suppose I could go with the conventional wisdom. The polls certainly support this view. But, I am going to go out on a limb here - mostly because the polls have been wrong.
So here goes, for posterity sake:
Ohio: Obama win by 1%. Counting will go late into the night. Why? I think Ohio is going to be a combination of Wisconsin and Missouri - remember that the networks called Missouri for Clinton, but then retracted and then Obama finally won. I think thats going to be the case here. Now, most polls show Clinton up by an average of 6%, and the NAFTA/Canada flap probably has hurt Obama. Even the Obama campaign seems to have written off Ohio. But I just have a feeling the pollster's models are not taking everything into account. So I'll stick with my pick: Obama by 1%.
Vermont: Obama by 15%. This is pretty much in line with the conventional wisdom.
Rhode Island: Sometime around 8 PM tomorrow night, the networks will call RI for Clinton, noting that she has finally broken Obama's 11 state winning streak. Clinton by 10%
Texas: Its a dead heat right now. There's all kinds of talk about how Clinton might win the popular vote but Obama will win the caucus. Again, I'm going out on a limb: Obama wins the popular vote and the caucus. Obama by 6% in the popular vote. Don't be surprised if we don't know the result until the next day.
So there it is. I predict Obama will end the Clinton campaign tomorrow night. Come Wednesday, we'll start to see the super delegates flock to Obama.
Right now the conventional wisdom seems to think that Ohio & Rhode Island will be won by Clinton,Vermont by Obama and Texas as a toss-up. I suppose I could go with the conventional wisdom. The polls certainly support this view. But, I am going to go out on a limb here - mostly because the polls have been wrong.
So here goes, for posterity sake:
Ohio: Obama win by 1%. Counting will go late into the night. Why? I think Ohio is going to be a combination of Wisconsin and Missouri - remember that the networks called Missouri for Clinton, but then retracted and then Obama finally won. I think thats going to be the case here. Now, most polls show Clinton up by an average of 6%, and the NAFTA/Canada flap probably has hurt Obama. Even the Obama campaign seems to have written off Ohio. But I just have a feeling the pollster's models are not taking everything into account. So I'll stick with my pick: Obama by 1%.
Vermont: Obama by 15%. This is pretty much in line with the conventional wisdom.
Rhode Island: Sometime around 8 PM tomorrow night, the networks will call RI for Clinton, noting that she has finally broken Obama's 11 state winning streak. Clinton by 10%
Texas: Its a dead heat right now. There's all kinds of talk about how Clinton might win the popular vote but Obama will win the caucus. Again, I'm going out on a limb: Obama wins the popular vote and the caucus. Obama by 6% in the popular vote. Don't be surprised if we don't know the result until the next day.
So there it is. I predict Obama will end the Clinton campaign tomorrow night. Come Wednesday, we'll start to see the super delegates flock to Obama.
Labels:
Politics
Saturday, March 1, 2008
The End or the Beginning of the End?
I am slowly coming to the realization that we may be heading to the worst possible situation - a fight for the democratic nomination all the way to the convention. We are now 3 days from March 4 and it is looking like the primaries are going to deliver us a split decision. We may well be at the exact same place we are now on March 5th. If we are, this race is a whole new ball game.
So here's the scenarios:
1. Rhode Island: Clinton Win, Vermont: Obama Win, Ohio: narrow Obama win, Texas: Obama win: I put this as the least likely scenario (10% chance) simply because I don't see an Obama win in Ohio.
The most recent polls put Ohio in Clinton's column:
ARG: Clinton 51, Obama 44, Undecided: 4
Zogby (for what it's worth): Clinton:45, Obama: 45, Undecided: 6
Rasmussen: Clinton: 47, Obama:45
Fox/Opinion Dynamics: Clinton: 46, Obama: 38, Undecided: 14
SUSA: Clinton: 50, Obama: 44, Undecided: 3
Now, polls have been all over the place this year, none of them have been very reliable but, it seems apparent that Clinton has solidified her position in Ohio. We'll see how the late breakers are going when polls come out tomorrow and monday, but the Obama camp can't be hopeful. I suspect the Obama campaign saw this in their internals earlier this week when they left Ohio and went back to Texas and Rhode Island (most likely just to try and keep Clinton's Ohio numbers down) before returning to Ohio tonight.
Clinton's base - folks over 65 and folks who make less than 50K/year are clearly in her camp, and there may be a tinge of racism to overcome in Ohio (see also Ed Rendell's comments on Ohio's neighboring state, PA):
The only hope for an Obama win in Ohio is for the Obama GOTV to outperform and, for these <50K Hillary supporters to stay home.
Which brings us to scenario #2....
2. Rhode Island: Clinton Win, Vermont: Obama win, Ohio: Narrow Clinton win (6 pts or less), Texas: Obama win: I put this as the most likely scenario (50%).
But, there does seem to be some concern here too. Obama appeared to be pulling ahead in Texas the middle of this past week, but the most recent polls seem to show a Clinton come-back:
ARG: Obama:47, Clinton: 47, Undecided: 4
Zogby (again, for what its worth): Obama: 45, Clinton: 43, Undecided: 8
Rasmussen: Obama: 48, Clinton: 44, Undecided: 8
SUSA: Obama: 49, Clinton: 45, Undecided: 3
it looks like Obama has the upper hand in Texas, but as this comment at myDD states, it looks like, over the past couple of days, Clinton's base (<50K/year, >65, Hispanic) is coming home to her at the end.
Which brings us to scenario #3...
3. Rhode Island: Clinton Win, Vermont: Obama win, Ohio: Narrow Clinton win (6 pts or less), Texas: Clinton popular vote win, delegate loss. I rank this as a possible outcome Tuesday (30%) and it is clear that this is what the Clinton camp is hoping for.
I'll address this scenario in more detail below, but lets get on with the remaining possibilities for now...
4: Rhode Island: Clinton win, Vermont: Obama win, Ohio: Narrow Clinton win (6 pts or less), Texas: Clinton win (popular vote and delegates). Obviously this is the Clinton dream scenario but I think its unlikely (5%).
Now there are some other variations on these scenarios: an Obama win in Rhode Island, big (>8%) wins for Obama in Texas and Ohio, big (>8%) wins for Clinton in Texas and Ohio, but each is very unlikely (1-2% chance).
So how does this nomination play out given these scenarios?
Scenario #1: If Obama wins Ohio & Texas, no matter what the margin, Clinton is done. She will be forced to suspend her campaign within days, if she does not do it Tuesday night. The Super Delegates will break for Obama in droves, headlined by Edwards, Richardson and possibly even Gore. Obama will then be free to begin the campaign for the general election as he wraps up the nomination in WV, NC, PA et. al.
Now, I have seen several comments about how it would be better for Obama if Clinton were to stay in so that Obama can have the chance to build up his organization in these post-March 4 states. I say hogwash. The sooner this ends, the better for the nominee. I would argue that the reason Obama seems to be slipping in Texas the past couple of days is because he has had to wage a two front campaign the past 10 days: one against Clinton and one against McCain. If Obama has to do this from now until Puerto Rico, he will be wounded for the general election. The sooner he can take over the reigns of the party, the better.
Scenario #2: This is the tough one. Clearly Obama has broken the Clinton firewall. But, the Clinton campaign has been laying the ground work to continue on if this is the scenario that comes to pass. It seems clear that they are going to argue that the Texas rules (primary & caucus) are unfair, and possibly file a (BS) lawsuit to try and put the Texas results into question. Clinton will argue that the goalposts have to moved again - to Pennsylvania on April 22, and we will be right back where we are now - Obama ahead in states, popular vote & delegates and Clinton somehow still hanging on waiting for something to turn the race her way. Between March 4 and April 22, Obama should be expected to win Wyoming (12 delegates) on March 8 and Mississippi (33 delegates) on March 11 so there is the possibility that Obama blow-outs in those states could put the pressure on Clinton to drop out on March 12, but, given the Clinton campaign's penchant for dismissing caucuses and red-state wins, this is unlikely.
With this in mind, if scenario #2 is what we end up with on Tuesday, there will need to be a game-changer to put the pressure on Clinton : Edwards or Gore endorsement, party leaders sitting her down and telling her to suspend etc, or we are waiting until PA. If the race goes to PA, Obama has to win PA or keep it close the argue that he's won the most delegates.
Scenario #3: If this happens, its off to PA. I don't think Obama would have the moral authority to argue that Clinton should suspend, even though there is still no realistic way she can catch him in delegates. We'll have to see what the PA results show - PA becomes a must win for Obama. Under this scenario I suspect the nomination goes all the way to the convention.
Scenario #4: Again, off to PA. I suspect this is the game changer scenario for Clinton. All of her arguments concerning Michigan and Florida will have to be addressed and PA will probably be the deciding contest, with the winner being the nominee.
So, here's where I think we are at:
10% chance the race ends Tuesday night.
50% chance the race ends sometime between March 4 and March 12
30% chance the race goes all the way to the convention
10% chance the race ends April 22.
So here's the scenarios:
1. Rhode Island: Clinton Win, Vermont: Obama Win, Ohio: narrow Obama win, Texas: Obama win: I put this as the least likely scenario (10% chance) simply because I don't see an Obama win in Ohio.
The most recent polls put Ohio in Clinton's column:
ARG: Clinton 51, Obama 44, Undecided: 4
Zogby (for what it's worth): Clinton:45, Obama: 45, Undecided: 6
Rasmussen: Clinton: 47, Obama:45
Fox/Opinion Dynamics: Clinton: 46, Obama: 38, Undecided: 14
SUSA: Clinton: 50, Obama: 44, Undecided: 3
Now, polls have been all over the place this year, none of them have been very reliable but, it seems apparent that Clinton has solidified her position in Ohio. We'll see how the late breakers are going when polls come out tomorrow and monday, but the Obama camp can't be hopeful. I suspect the Obama campaign saw this in their internals earlier this week when they left Ohio and went back to Texas and Rhode Island (most likely just to try and keep Clinton's Ohio numbers down) before returning to Ohio tonight.
Clinton's base - folks over 65 and folks who make less than 50K/year are clearly in her camp, and there may be a tinge of racism to overcome in Ohio (see also Ed Rendell's comments on Ohio's neighboring state, PA):
If Hillary doesn't get the nomination, this man said, he'd not only vote for but work for McCain, "and I hate McCain."
"Why not Obama?"
"He's too inexperienced."
"And why else?" a woman down the bar asked.
"Because he's black."
The only hope for an Obama win in Ohio is for the Obama GOTV to outperform and, for these <50K Hillary supporters to stay home.
Which brings us to scenario #2....
2. Rhode Island: Clinton Win, Vermont: Obama win, Ohio: Narrow Clinton win (6 pts or less), Texas: Obama win: I put this as the most likely scenario (50%).
But, there does seem to be some concern here too. Obama appeared to be pulling ahead in Texas the middle of this past week, but the most recent polls seem to show a Clinton come-back:
ARG: Obama:47, Clinton: 47, Undecided: 4
Zogby (again, for what its worth): Obama: 45, Clinton: 43, Undecided: 8
Rasmussen: Obama: 48, Clinton: 44, Undecided: 8
SUSA: Obama: 49, Clinton: 45, Undecided: 3
it looks like Obama has the upper hand in Texas, but as this comment at myDD states, it looks like, over the past couple of days, Clinton's base (<50K/year, >65, Hispanic) is coming home to her at the end.
Which brings us to scenario #3...
3. Rhode Island: Clinton Win, Vermont: Obama win, Ohio: Narrow Clinton win (6 pts or less), Texas: Clinton popular vote win, delegate loss. I rank this as a possible outcome Tuesday (30%) and it is clear that this is what the Clinton camp is hoping for.
I'll address this scenario in more detail below, but lets get on with the remaining possibilities for now...
4: Rhode Island: Clinton win, Vermont: Obama win, Ohio: Narrow Clinton win (6 pts or less), Texas: Clinton win (popular vote and delegates). Obviously this is the Clinton dream scenario but I think its unlikely (5%).
Now there are some other variations on these scenarios: an Obama win in Rhode Island, big (>8%) wins for Obama in Texas and Ohio, big (>8%) wins for Clinton in Texas and Ohio, but each is very unlikely (1-2% chance).
So how does this nomination play out given these scenarios?
Scenario #1: If Obama wins Ohio & Texas, no matter what the margin, Clinton is done. She will be forced to suspend her campaign within days, if she does not do it Tuesday night. The Super Delegates will break for Obama in droves, headlined by Edwards, Richardson and possibly even Gore. Obama will then be free to begin the campaign for the general election as he wraps up the nomination in WV, NC, PA et. al.
Now, I have seen several comments about how it would be better for Obama if Clinton were to stay in so that Obama can have the chance to build up his organization in these post-March 4 states. I say hogwash. The sooner this ends, the better for the nominee. I would argue that the reason Obama seems to be slipping in Texas the past couple of days is because he has had to wage a two front campaign the past 10 days: one against Clinton and one against McCain. If Obama has to do this from now until Puerto Rico, he will be wounded for the general election. The sooner he can take over the reigns of the party, the better.
Scenario #2: This is the tough one. Clearly Obama has broken the Clinton firewall. But, the Clinton campaign has been laying the ground work to continue on if this is the scenario that comes to pass. It seems clear that they are going to argue that the Texas rules (primary & caucus) are unfair, and possibly file a (BS) lawsuit to try and put the Texas results into question. Clinton will argue that the goalposts have to moved again - to Pennsylvania on April 22, and we will be right back where we are now - Obama ahead in states, popular vote & delegates and Clinton somehow still hanging on waiting for something to turn the race her way. Between March 4 and April 22, Obama should be expected to win Wyoming (12 delegates) on March 8 and Mississippi (33 delegates) on March 11 so there is the possibility that Obama blow-outs in those states could put the pressure on Clinton to drop out on March 12, but, given the Clinton campaign's penchant for dismissing caucuses and red-state wins, this is unlikely.
With this in mind, if scenario #2 is what we end up with on Tuesday, there will need to be a game-changer to put the pressure on Clinton : Edwards or Gore endorsement, party leaders sitting her down and telling her to suspend etc, or we are waiting until PA. If the race goes to PA, Obama has to win PA or keep it close the argue that he's won the most delegates.
Scenario #3: If this happens, its off to PA. I don't think Obama would have the moral authority to argue that Clinton should suspend, even though there is still no realistic way she can catch him in delegates. We'll have to see what the PA results show - PA becomes a must win for Obama. Under this scenario I suspect the nomination goes all the way to the convention.
Scenario #4: Again, off to PA. I suspect this is the game changer scenario for Clinton. All of her arguments concerning Michigan and Florida will have to be addressed and PA will probably be the deciding contest, with the winner being the nominee.
So, here's where I think we are at:
10% chance the race ends Tuesday night.
50% chance the race ends sometime between March 4 and March 12
30% chance the race goes all the way to the convention
10% chance the race ends April 22.
Labels:
Politics
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

