Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Iraq, Media, Polls, Progressives | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Elections, George W. Bush, Iraq, John McCain, Media
Cross-posted at Daily Kos
The war in Iraq seems to have dropped off the national radar, replaced by the economy, the horserace, and the ominpresent celebrity scandal. It seems that–since violence is down in Iraq–the traditional media has decided that the war is no longer worth covering.
Well, if current trends continue, Iraq may end up on the front page again pretty soon:
“There are growing signs of backsliding in Iraq,” writes Spencer Ackerman today. According to “Iraq security statistics over the past 13 weeks,” roadside bomb explosions in Baghdad “have ticked up slightly to 131 in January from 129 in December — and the last week of January is not included in these latest figures.” Additionally, “the week ending on January 25 saw seven suicide explosions Iraq-wide, the most since the week ending Dec. 21, 2007.”
While American casualties are occurring at half the rate they were a year ago, they’ve started to go up: there were 24 casualties in December and 37 in January. Not only that, but if history is any indication, it’s more than likely that violence will increase in the spring–last year, American casualties climbed throughout the spring, peaking in May at 131, making that the deadliest month in Iraq since 2004. It’s clear that, while casualties might not climb that high this year, they’re already climbing.
Despite the modest gains we’ve made in Iraq, poll after polls shows that the war is as unpopular as ever–the most recent survey from Polling Report shows approval for the war at it’s lowest ever–32%–while disapproval is at it’s highest–59%.
Why is approval so low? Well, two reasons–first, the surge hasn’t succeeded, and second, Iraq is still a failed state. Remember, the goal of the surge was to give the Iraqi government enough room to come to a political solution. Right now, there is no political solution, nor is there one on the horizon–Iraq’s government is as divided as ever. Meanwhile, violence–both against Americans and Iraqis–remains extremely high; it’s not as high as it was, but it’s still up there. Iraq’s government, infrastructure and economy are all in shambles, and will require untold years to rebuild back to prewar levels.
So while Republicans like John McCain may be doing a victory dance over the surge, American soldiers are still dying at a rate of one a day. They pretend that Iraq’s problems are solved or that the war is over, forgetting–or ignoring–the 130,000 soldiers who will remain in Iraq until the end of the Bush Presidency.
There’s a war going on, but you wouldn’t know that by reading the news–the media’s silence on Iraq is deafening. For hundreds of American soldiers, that silence will be the last thing they ever hear.
UPDATE: With forgotten wars come forgotten soldiers:
Suicides among active-duty soldiers in 2007 reached their highest level since the Army began keeping such records in 1980, according to a draft internal study obtained by The Washington Post. Last year, 121 soldiers took their own lives, nearly 20 percent more than in 2006.
At the same time, the number of attempted suicides or self-inflicted injuries in the Army has jumped sixfold since the Iraq war began. Last year, about 2,100 soldiers injured themselves or attempted suicide, compared with about 350 in 2002, according to the U.S. Army Medical Command Suicide Prevention Action Plan. […]
The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have placed severe stress on the Army, caused in part by repeated and lengthened deployments. Historically, suicide rates tend to decrease when soldiers are in conflicts overseas, but that trend has reversed in recent years. From a suicide rate of 9.8 per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2001 — the lowest rate on record — the Army reached an all-time high of 17.5 suicides per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2006.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, House | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Democrats, Elections, Jim Gilmore, John Warner, Mark Warner, Republicans, Retirements, Tom Davis, Virginia
Surprising news out of Virginia:
U.S. Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) said today he will retire from Congress at the end of the year, bringing to a close a 14-year stint in the House of Representatives during which he rose rapidly through the ranks of Republican leadership and championed such issues as D.C. voting rights and a vibrant defense-contracting industry.
“It’s time for me to take a sabbatical,” Davis said. “I would say I’m not ruling out future public service, but it’s time to be refreshed, to see what it’s like in the private sector. That doesn’t mean I will or won’t come back.”
Davis, 59, a self-described political wonk and former Fairfax County Board of Supervisors chairman who has wanted to serve in Congress since childhood, said the decision was remarkably difficult. He said that even as some media outlets were reporting this week that he would retire, he had not made up his mind.
“Jeannemarie and I were still chewing on this last night,” he said. He noted that he has had multiple conversations with employers and expects the opportunities for private work to be rich and rewarding. Davis said he plans to fill out his term and to stay in the area after stepping down.
Davis’s career in Congress has come to a close with great swiftness, underscoring how uncertain political life can be. Just a few months ago, he was viewed as a natural contender to replace U.S. Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), who also retires at the end of this year. But a series of events pushed Davis to withdraw from consideration and then, this week, to leave elective office altogether.
There’s one reason Tom Davis is retiring: The Virginia Republican Party.
Davis has been positioning himself to run for the Senate for a long time–he built a strong and mostly-moderate record, not a hard task for a Republican Congressman representing liberal Northern Virginia. In addition, he has been raising tons of money–Davis has more than $1 million in his war chest, despite the fact that he’s popular and would likely have been re-elected handily. Davis’ Senatorial aspirations were pretty clear.
After waiting patiently for years, Davis finally had a crack at the senate when longtime Republican Senator John Warner announced his retirement in 2007. Davis was fully prepared for the primary, ready to duke it out with former Virginia Governor and failed GOP Presidential candidate Jim Gilmore (who was also running).
Unfortunately for Davis, the VA GOP stepped in and decided to choose the nominee themselves instead of holding a primary–they picked Gilmore, leaving Davis with no way to become the GOP nominee. Thus, his longtime dream of running for Senate was killed before it even began, snubbed by the party he served for so long.
Being in Northern Virginia, Davis’ district is pretty liberal–Kerry won 49% and Bush won 50% in 2004, and Davis’ was re-elected by only 55% in 2006. There’s a chance that the Democratic candidate will have a good shot at winning this one. The Politico has a list of the candidates currently running for this seat:
Former Rep. Leslie Byrne and retired Naval officer Doug Denneny have also announced their candidacies on the Democratic side.
Businessman Keith Fimian is a leading candidate on the Republican side; he has already raised over $350,000 in individual donation over the past six months.
Davis’ retirement is a testament to Republican ineptitude and the conservative disdain for democracy. And now that we have an opening, we’re going to have to work hard to win this newly-open Congressional seat.
Filed under: Conservatives, Government, Progressives, Scandal, Senate, Terrorism | Tags: Chuck Schumer, Michael Mukasey, Senate, Torture, Waterboarding
Schumer to Mukasey: “I’m disappointed.”
America to Schumer: “So are we.”
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Economics, Media, Polls, Progressives | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Democrats, Elections, John Edwards
Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards is dropping out of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, CNN has learned.
The former senator has told top advisors about his decision. It is expected he will announce it at a speech in New Orleans, Louisiana, at 1p.m. Wednesday.
Edwards’ campaign Web site said he was to deliver an address on poverty and work on a Habitat for Humanity project in New Orleans on Wednesday.
Edwards has trailed former first lady Hillary Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in the early primaries.
This was surprising–I figured that Edwards would stay in as long as he could, hoping to be a Kingmaker at the convention. It was a plausible scenario–if Clinton and Obama split the delegates while Edwards won just enough, he could have held both of them below the 50% mark and thus had a huge amount of influence in deciding who the nominee would be.
Edwards has no political office to return to, and it’s unlikely he’ll run for anything in his native North Carolina. With nothing else but his poverty center, I thought he would make the most of the Presidential race. Still, it’s hard to deny the harsh reality–Edwards only ever beat either of the two front-runners once, beating Hillary Clinton in Iowa to take second place. Ever since, he has finished third in every primary; his campaign was hoping to capture the silver in Florida, but they just couldn’t pull it off.
How will this affect the race? Good question–Edwards consistently pulls in a pretty big vote share, meaning that his support could give a big boost to either Clinton or Obama. On one hand, I always believed that Edwards and Obama both portrayed more progressive, idealistic visions than Hillary Clinton, thus appealing to the same demographic. On the other hand, I think Edwards has significant appeal among the Democratic rank-and-file, who would be more likely to back Clinton–the establishment candidate–than Obama–the underdog.
To some extent, it may depend on who Edwards endorses, if he endorses anyone–it seems likely that he would support Obama, though I wouldn’t bet on it just yet. If Edwards’ supporters were to go to Obama, they would easily put him on par with Clinton in a lot of states, turning this into a real two-way race. If his supporters were to go to Clinton, they would give her an even bigger lead, making her nearly unbeatable. Thus, Edwards’ decision could end up deciding this campaign.
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the media’s shameful coverage of John Edwards–they decided a long time ago that this was a two-way race between Clinton and Obama, and Edwards often got pushed to the side. The media has a lot of power–they’re the prism through which Americans see their world–and they can influence a race like this through who they cover (or don’t cover). Edwards had a significant amount of support, but he rarely got the spotlight in proportion to his support; the media did not cover the candidates fairly, and that hurt the Edwards campaign.
Personally, I’m sad to see Edwards go. I think he had a great message, and he focused on some extremely important issues that were typically neglected. John Edwards spoke for a lot of people who typically had no voice, and his presence in this campaign will be sorely missed. He injected a healthy amount of populism and progressivism into the Presidential race–both elements that Clinton and Obama have picked up on and since used. He ditched his sunny-but-empty approach from 2004 and took a grittier, more determined, more effective style of campaigning, which made him a stronger and more compelling candidate.
So go with God, John Edwards. You told us some inconvenient truths and you gave hope to millions of people. Keep fighting the good fight–our country and our party needs good people like you.
UPDATE: Here’s Obama on Edwards’ departure:
John Edwards has spent a lifetime fighting to give voice to the voiceless and hope to the struggling, even when it wasn’t popular to do or covered in the news. At a time when our politics is too focused on who’s up and who’s down, he made a nation focus again on who matters – the New Orleans child without a home, the West Virginia miner without a job, the families who live in that other America that is not seen or heard or talked about by our leaders in Washington.
John and Elizabeth Edwards have always believed deeply that we can change this – that two Americans can become one, and that our country can rally around this common purpose. So while his campaign may end today, the cause of their lives endures for all of us who still believe that we can achieve that dream of one America.
And here’s Clinton:
Well, Sen. Edwards is a friend of mine, he was a colleague in the Senate, and I have the highest regard for him, and I’m really admiring of what he has done to make sure that poverty was on the agenda here in America. He encouraged all of us in his passion and advocacy, and I hope he will continue that work because it is really important that we stay focused on what we’re going to do to help people.
You know, I’m out here talking about making the economy work for everybody. And it needs to work for the middle class, working people, it needs to give a life line to poor people like we did in the 1990s, so in any way that I can be part of this effort to try to target poverty I am going to be.
They’re both pulling hard for Edwards’ endorsement–and with the economy as bad as it is, both of them will have ample opportunities to prove their mettle on economics and poverty.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Faith, Governors, House, Media, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Democrats, Elections, Florida, Primaries, Republicans
Here are Florida’s results, via TPM:
| Republicans (94% reporting) | Democrats (94% reporting) |
| candidate |
votes |
percentage
|
candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 274,244 |
15% |
Clinton | 832,107 | 50% |
| Huckabee | 252,098 | 14% | Edwards |
242,057 | 14% |
| McCain | 673,414 | 36% | Obama | 552,004 | 33% |
| Paul | 60,201 | 3% | |||
| Romney | 579,437 | 31% |
Keep in mind that the Democratic results are, since Florida’s delegation was stripped by the DNC and none of the candidates were allowed to campaign in that state.
On the Republican side, where there were some delegates in play, John McCain emerged as tonight’s big winner. He vindicated his successes in New Hampshire and South Carolina with a victory in Florida, which will award him 57 delegates, enough to make him the new GOP front-runner.
The exit polls give us some interesting information about how people voted– conservatives supported Romney, while moderates (who knew there were any moderate Republicans left) went for McCain.
I thought that the GOP primary would become a three-way race, each candidate supported by one Republican faction–Huckabee would get social conservatives, McCain would get foreign policy hawks and Romney would get corporate conservatives.
Now, though, Huck is fading fast, which leaves Romney and McCain to split the GOP between moderates and conservatives. Huckabee needed a win tonight, and now he’s going to have a difficult time moving forward–his unexpected win in Iowa set some high expectations which he hasn’t been able to meet since.
It was widely known that New Hampshire, Nevada and Michigan weren’t fertile ground for him, but South Carolina and Florida were both firmly within his reach, and his losses there are huge setbacks. Huck says he’s staying until the end, but that may not be in his control–with nothing standing between now and Super Tuesday, Huck doesn’t have the support or the momentum to become the Republican nominee.
A bigger loser than Huck, though, is Rudy Giuliani. After his chest-thumping going into Florida, there is nothing left for him to do now but drop out. Early on, he benefitted from McCain’s collapse to become the national front-runner. Later, Rudy began bleeding support for a variety of reasons–non-conservative positions on various social issues, exploitation of 9/11, foreign policy uberhawkishness, and scandal after scandal after scandal. The more people got to know Giuliani, the less they liked him–as the campaign progressed, his support dropped lower and lower.
Rudy invested heavily in the early states–particularly South Carolina–without a single decent showing anywhere; Florida was his firewall, and all he could manage to was a distant third place.
Currently, CNN is reporting that Giuliani will drop out and endorse McCain, ostensibly with the hope of getting a position with his campaign and holding on to the national spotlight for a little longer. With him out of the picture, the GOP race is down to four candidates–Romney, McCain, Huckabee and Ron Paul.
Up next is Super Tuesday on February 5th. A week from today, a huge number of delegates will be awarded on both sides–not enough to decide the nominees, but enough to put some candidates well on their way to the nomination.
On the GOP side, McCain will be riding high off of his recent victories, while Romney will be touting his conservative credentials and trying to recover from tonight’s defeat.
On the Democratic side, Barack Obama will have his resounding win in South Carolina and his impressive lineup of endorsers on his side, while Clinton still maintains a sizable lead in the most influential February 5th states.
And, as always, I’ll bring you the results as they become known. For now, we have a week to get ready–it’ll be interesting to see how things go.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Governors, House, Media, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Democrats, Elections, Florida, Primaries, Republicans
Voting is underway in Florida for both the Republican and Democratic primaries. Today in Miami, it’s going to be partly cloudy with a high temperature of 73 degrees; in Tallahassee, it’s going to be mostly cloudy with a high of 68 degrees.
On the Republican side, Pollster shows Florida to be a mess, with Romney maintaining a slight lead over McCain and Giuliani placing a very distant third. The latest poll from SurveyUSA shows the race in a virtual tie, with McCain getting 32% and Romney getting 31%; Zogby’s final poll out of Florida shows a slightly different race, with McCain getting 35% and Romney getting 31%. It’s clear that this is a close race, with perhaps a slight edge for McCain.
Florida has a winner-take-all system, so their 57 delegates–half of their normal delegation, since they were penalized by the RNC for moving their primary up–will go to whoever wins tonight. That would give the victor a serious boost in what has been a pretty close race–CNN shows Mitt Romney with 73 delegates, John McCain with 38 delegates and Mike Huckabee with 29; RealClearPolitics shows Romney with 59, McCain with 36 and Huckabee with 40. If Romney wins, his margin of victory will be solidified even more; if either McCain or Huckabee pull it out tonight, they will automatically end up in first place.
Both Romney and McCain are showing strong in FL–Romney is coming off of wins in Mighican and Nevada, while McCain has New Hampshire and South Carolina under his belt. Both of them are putting up a strong fight in Florida, which has lead (inevitably) to mudslinging:
Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, began attacking at dawn, accusing McCain of allying himself with liberal Democrats in the Senate and betraying conservative principles on legislation involving immigration, the environment and campaign finance.
“If you want that kind of a liberal Democratic course as president, then you can vote for him,” Romney said at a Texaco gas station in West Palm Beach at 6:30 a.m. “But those three pieces of legislation, those aren’t conservative. Those aren’t Republican.”
McCain volleyed back by describing Romney as a serial flip-flopper who had taken multiple positions on a variety of issues, including gay rights, global warming and immigration. “People, just look at his record as governor,” McCain said at a shipyard in Jacksonville. “He has been entirely consistent. He has consistently taken two sides of every major issue, sometimes more than two.”
No matter who wins tonight, expect this level of nastiness to continue.
There are two candidates who stand to lose a lot tonight–Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani. Huckabee hasn’t won since Iowa, and his path to the nomination is disappearing fast–his Iowa victory is starting to look like a fluke, and two successive losses in South Carolina and Florida would seriously hurt his campaign. Without any momentum going into February 5th, it’s likely that the GOP primary will become a two-man race between Romney and McCain, leaving bad luck Huck out in the cold.
Rudy Giuliani also needs Florida, but he won’t win it. He hasn’t lead in the polls in FL for months, and after today his delegate count will remain at a pathetic “0.” Giuliani’s original strategy was to become the chosen candidate of the conservative Republican base, winning South Carolina and Florida and going strongly into Super Tuesday. Unfortunately for him, other candidates won the hearts and minds of the GOP faithful, leaving Rudy without very little support. After his loss today, there’s a good chance he might pack it in and drop out:
The mayor’s own rhetoric in recent days has suggested that he considers second place to be a worthless prize in Florida, where the winner will collect all 57 delegates and a hefty dose of momentum going into Feb. 5.
“I think the winner in Florida will win the nomination, and we’re going to win in Florida,” he told reporters.
Giuliani staggered through a listless, final day of campaigning by hopscotching across the state in a private jet and greeting small groups of supporters on airport tarmacs.
Reporters covering his campaign returned to their plane seats after one leg to find a going-away present of sorts: a signed baseball from Giuliani (worth $11.99 on eBay).
In Fort Myers, there were no more than 75 supporters waiting for Giuliani, whose speech sounded more like an appreciation than a call to arms.
“We are really thankful for all of the work you’ve done,” a subdued Giuliani told the crowd before turning to his wife, Judith, and thanking her for “all of her help and her assistance and her partnership.”
Giuliani’s super-hawkishness, pandering, revisionist history and 9/11 exploitation have both added to the unpleasantness in the Republican race and left a bad taste in my mouth. I’ll be glad to see him drop out of the race and step out of the national spotlight once and for all.
On the Democratic side, there isn’t much to talk about. Much like Michigan, Florida has no delegates and the candidates are forbidden to campaign there. The outcome of today’s primary won’t affect the delegate count, and it won’t even reflect the accurate will of the voters.
Unfortunately, that won’t stop the media from obsessing over which Democrat wins Florida, which could impact the media narrative going into Super Tuesday. Personally, I wish the media would focus more on the delegate count–which actually decides the nominee–and less on the incidental horserace; perhaps they’ll surprise us tonight.
I’ll bring you more as it happens.
UPDATE: AMERICAblog brings us some early exit polls (which are hardly reliable, but I figured I’d put them out there):
The National Review, which as a right wing publication really, really cares about the GOP nomination, posted early exit polls from Florida:
The first wave of exit poll numbers, including absentees: McCain 34.3 percent, Romney 32.6 percent, Giuliani 15.3 percent, Huckabee 12 percent.
Given these are exit polls, caveat emptor. That’s all I’m saying.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Media, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Democrats, Elections, Florida, Primaries, South Carolina, Super Tuesday
The South Carolina Democratic Primary has come and gone, and it’s added even more complexity to the Democratic race.
After two successive losses in New Hampshire and Nevada, Barack Obama picked up his first win since Iowa, adding to both his delegate count and his momentum going into Super Tuesday. The final vote count was 55.4% (26 delegates) for Barack Obama, 26.5% (14 delegates) for Hillary Clinton and 17.6% (8 delegates) for John Edwards.
Right now, the delegate count from the primaries is (according to CNN) Barack Obama with 70, Hillary Clinton with 57 and John Edwards with 29. If you include superdelegates–elected officials and party officials who can vote for whoever they want–Clinton has 230, Obama has 152 and Edwards has 61. RealClearPolitics has slightly different numbers, but they reflect the same dynamic–they have Clinton with 249 delegates, Obama with 179 and Edwards with 58.
We have yet to see how Obama’s victory will affect the polls, but it’s clear that he has to make a lot of movement in the week until Super Tuesday. In New York and California–two of the largest states voting on February 5th–Obama is trailing Clinton by double digits. Unless he can use his victory in SC–as well as recent good news, such as endorsements from Ted Kennedy and Kathleen Sebelius–into serious momentum, he might just well leave Super Tuesday with a significant delegate deficit compared with Senator Clinton.
SC was an expected–yet crushing–defeat for Clinton. Her campaign was hoping for a small loss here, yet trailed Obama by nearly 30%. South Carolina’s Democratic population–particularly it’s African-American and young populations–turned out in droves for Obama, and they contributed significantly to his victory What can we take away from this? That some of Clinton’s attacks on Obama–particularly racially-tinged attacks–have been hurting her among Democratic voters. While I would like more Democrats to learn a lesson or two from the Republican’s take-no-prisoners style of campaigning, I would rather see those tactics used against Republicans, not other Democrats.
For Edwards, South Carolina was a huge disappointment–his home state, whose primary he won in 2004, gave him a third place showing and only a handful of delegates. Edwards’ role as the perpetual third-place finisher appears to be solidifying–he gets enough support to make an impact, but not enough to get within striking distance of the nomination. I think he’ll stay in as long as he can, perhaps with the hope of being a kingmaker (extracting a significant promise from whoever he crowns) but this isn’t likely.
Between now and February 5th, there is one more contest–Florida. Since Florida moved their primary up without consent from the party, they–like Michigan–have had their delegation removed by the DNC. That means that, despite the results there, Florida won’t affect the Democratic primary.
In regards to Florida, though the Clinton camp wants to have their cake and eat it too–they want Florida to get their delegation back, but they also want all of the candidates to adhere to their pledge not to campaign there. It’s easy to figure out why–Clinton is currently leading in Florida (a huge state that would normally have 210 delegates) so she’ll probably win there without campaigning. Her position is a bit hypocritical–she wants all of the candidates to adhere to their pledge not to campaign in FL, but she wants FL’s delegates to count toward the nomination. If the delegates count, why shouldn’t candidates campaign there? And if candidates shouldn’t campaign there, why should their delegates count?
Still, as it stands now, Florida has no impact–they have no delegates and, like in Michigan, the candidates aren’t campaigning there. Florida won’t make any difference in the primary and it shouldn’t impact the media narrative at all.
After that, we go on to Super Tuesday. Both Clinton and Obama will pick up a lot of delegates, and Edwards should put up a good show; it’s just a matter of how many delegates each candidate wins and what the final delegate count ends up being.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Interesting | Tags: Mike Huckabee, New York, South Carolina
I’m sorry about the light posting this weekend—I went up to New York and didn’t have access to a computer.
On Saturday night, I ended up calling a few friends of mine to get the results of the South Carolina Primary and to hear what the media was saying about the contest. Tomorrow I’ll have my usual post reviewing that race and looking at the races ahead.
An interesting note, though—there were Huckabee supporters collecting email addresses and handing out stuff in Manhattan today. I saw at least three tables set up near Times Square, with two or three people manning each table. I’m surprised the Huckabee camp is putting much effort into New York—I severely doubt it’s going to be fertile territory for the former Arkansas Governor.
All in all, I had a good weekend—and I hope you did too. I’ll be back with my usual posts on politics sometime tomorrow—make sure to check back.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, House, Polls | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Elections, Republicans, Ron Paul
Cross-posted at Daily Kos
As I predicted, Ron Paul’s campaign is all but finished:
With the focus on the presidential horse race, one story that has been neglected is the surprising underperformance of Rep. Ron Paul in New Hampshire. This is not to diminish Paul’s very real accomplishments in his run for the Republican presidential nomination — he has raised more than $20 million and went from a barely noticed candidate on the fringe to a key player in early polling, and he won a considerable amount of media attention. But that makes it all the more surprising that he did not run stronger in New Hampshire.
Paul took 10 percent of the GOP vote in Iowa, better than most anticipated. That should have provided him with even more momentum going into New Hampshire, where many supporters and independent observers thought he would do significantly better than he was doing in polls, given his grassroots support and popularity among some independents and Democrats. Talk of Paul taking 15 or even 20 percent of the New Hampshire vote was not uncommon in the weeks leading up to the primary, and pundits began to assume he would finish third behind Sen. John McCain and Mitt Romney.
In the end, however, Paul ran fifth in the state, taking just eight percent of the vote — about what he was polling — despite his assumed strength and New Hampshire’s libertarian leanings. He did nearly as well in Michigan, a very different state where he did not put in nearly as much effort. Paul got a victory of sorts last weekend in Nevada, where he ran second to Romney. But it was a very distant second, some 37 points behind Romney, and Paul beat out third-place McCain by less than 450 votes.
Even Paul never really thought he would be the Republican presidential nominee, and now that the focus of both the party and the media have shifted away from him, his role in the GOP race may be at an end.
[Emphasis Added]
Paul’s campaign was centered around a small–but devoted–core of followers organized primarily through the internet. They did everything they could online to promote their candidate–spamming internet polls, flooding various social sites like Digg and holding massive online fundraisers (where Paul’s small base of support donated huge amounts of money).
The purpose of this strategy was twofold–first, they wanted to build buzz about Ron Paul, getting him press attention and getting his message out there. Second, they wanted to make Paul’s support seem bigger than it really was–to make Paul seem like the leader of a movement, thus attracting even more support and attention. To some extent, it worked–Paul did get more media attention than he would have if he ran a more conventional campaign.
Unfortunately for Paul and his supporters, their strategy had one key flaw–you can’t spam real-life polls. Paul languished at the bottom of the polls, trailing front-runners and second-tier candidates alike. Even in the primaries, Paul had low support compared to other candidates, particularly if you consider his massive fundraising. In fact, Paul never got more than 14% in any contest; if you take idiosyncratic Nevada out of the mix, Paul never garnered even 10% of the vote in any other caucus or primary.
It seems that Paul’s brand of radical conservatism and quirky libertarianism–dressed up in platitudes about the Constitution and “saving our republic”–just didn’t play very well with Republican voters.
I give Paul credit for moving from bring a fringe candidate to being a long shot, but anyone who entertained the idea that Ron Paul would be the Republican nominee was deluding themselves. With the media and the voters now focused on the McCain-Romney-Huckabee slugfest, there is little oxygen left for the Congressman from Texas.
Where does he go from here? Well–like Dennis Kucinich–Paul may have to drop out in order to defend his Congressional seat–Chris Peden is challenging Paul in the GOP primary, running as a conservative Republican loyal to the GOP:
I am a proven conservative Republican; the incumbent is a self-described Libertarian. I support winning the Global War on Terror and the War on Drugs; the incumbent does not. I think Islamo-Fascist terrorists were responsible for the 9/11 attacks; the incumbent thinks America’s Middle East policy’s were responsible for the attacks. I support fully funding NASA’s budget and the Vision for Space Exploration; the incumbent does not. I will support and vote for the Republican nominee for U.S. President in 2008, the incumbent will not (unless it’s him.)
The Texas primary is March 4th, so if Paul’s seat is threatened he would have to drop out well before then in order to focus his efforts on that. If Paul were to lose the primary, it could free him up to run for President either as an independent or a Libertarian; if he were to win, though, Paul could stay in the GOP race until the convention. While it’s doubtful he’ll pick up enough support to be a kingmaker or a spoiler, the GOP race is close enough for this to still be a distinct possibility.
For now, it’s clear that Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign is finished. He won’t pick up enough support between now and the convention to become the GOP nominee, which means he will either have to run as an independent (where he will inevitably lose) or drop out and defend his Congressional seat (which me might also lose).
Some people call Ron Paul a netroots candidate, but I don’t necessarily agree with that–true netroots candidates parlay the influx of attention, talent and money that come from online support into a strong grassroots campaign; Paul failed to do that, relying too much on the netroots and focusing too little on building a strong campaign apparatus of their own. In addition, Paul’s extremist ideology didn’t help him much, either.
If we can learn anything from Paul’s campaign, it’s that the internet can only do so much for a candidate; if you can’t build an effective ground game and voters can’t stomach your ideology, all the netroots support in the world won’t get you elected.
UPDATE: How can I declare that Ron Paul is finished? Well, as I said before, it doesn’t matter who comes in what place in what state–what matters is the delegate count.
According to CNN, Mitt Romney has 76 delegates, while John McCain has 38 and Mike Huckabee has 29; Ron Paul has only 6 delegates in his corner.
Real Clear Politics shows Romney with 59 delegates, McCain with 40, Huckabee with 36 and Paul with only 4 delegates.
Paul is severely lagging when it comes to winning delegates, coming well behind all three Republican frontrunners. To ad insult to injury, if you take a look at some polls of upcoming primary states–such as Florida, Alabama, California, New York, Massachusetts and Georgia, just to name a few–Paul is trailing all three leading candidates in every single one.
In fact, if you look at some of those charts, Paul trails Fred Thompson–who dropped out of the race because he had no chance of becoming the GOP nominee.
Paul is nowhere near striking distance of first place, nor is he winning any state at this point. I’m not sure exactly how a series of second–and third and fourth and fifth–place finishes will rocket Paul to the nomination. In fact, it’s pretty clear that Paul’s hopes of being the GOP nominee are long, long gone.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, House, Progressives | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Congress, Democrats, Dennis Kucinich, Elections, House, Ohio
Earlier than I expected, Dennis Kucinich is dropping his bid for the White House:
Dennis Kucinich has announced that he is dropping out of the race for the Democratic nomination for president, and will focus on his own re-election bid to the House.
Two factors likely pushed him out of the race: a) The public calendar forced him to choose between continuing his candidacy versus running for re-election, and b) The cable news networks stopped inviting him to debates, due to his very poor showings in the caucuses and primaries so far, thus depriving him of a high-profile venue for promoting his platform.
Dennis Kucinich was always a long-shot candidate, but he was running in order to push his platform of progressive ideas, intending to weave those ideas into the Presidential campaign (in the short run) and the Democratic Party (in the long run).
Kucinich was missing a key component of his strategy, though–he lacked a significant following, which would have shown that his platform had widespread support and could have influenced the major candidates to adopt some of his ideas. Unfortunately for him, this year we have a slate full of talented, charismatic, experienced and overall fantastic candidates from which to choose, which severely reduced the pool of dissatisfied voters willing to back a long-shot candidate with some good ideas.
Besides enjoying an extremely low base of support, Kucinich is facing four primary challengers to his Ohio Congressional seat, all of whom could very well give him a run for his money. Kucinich’s challengers are bringing up the perception that Kucinich is more focused on pushing his ideas on the national stage than representing the district–a criticism that’s somewhat warranted, considering the amount time and effort invested in both of Kucinich’s Presidential campaigns.
His exit won’t influence the Democratic race much–his support was minimal and he hasn’t been invited to a debate in a long time. Still, his two national campaigns have raised his profile significantly, giving him national prominence–if he gets re-elected, he should enjoy some newfound influence in the House.
Filed under: Conservatives, Economics, Government, House, International, Iraq, Polls, Progressives, Scandal | Tags: Democrats, Failure, George W. Bush, Incompetence, Republicans, Roadblock Republicans
This graphic from the House Democratic Caucus shows what just 7 years of Republican governance has done to this country. It just goes to show you that Republicans can’t govern, a sad but true fact that has been proven time and time again in recent years.
So the next time some GOP politician is asking you for your vote, keep in mind that he might be a future Roadblock Republican; he might be the next George W. Bush; he might be another Tom DeLay; he might take American from boom to bust in a just a few years.
And then make sure to vote for his opponent.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, House, Progressives | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Dan Maffei, Democrats, Elections, Jim Walsh, New York, Republicans, Retirements
So says The Politico:
Republican Rep. Jim Walsh of New York is expected to announce his retirement soon, according to a GOP aide familiar with the decision, giving Democrats another pick-up opportunity following a wave of Republican retirements this cycle.
The veteran appropriator had a tough reelection fight in 2006 and was expected to face another challenge in the fall.
It marks another surprise retirement for the GOP. Moderates Republicans have been particularly depleted in recent years, both through retirements and losses in the 2006 midterm. As a result, House Republicans have adopted a more conservative thrust during the 110th Congress.
[Emphasis added]
Walsh is from a pretty liberal district in upstate New York–in 2006, he beat Democratic challenger Dan Maffei by only 1.6%. Maffei is running again in 2008, so now this seat is even closer to ending up in the Democratic column.
Republicans have been retiring in droves, anticipating another Democratic victory this fall. Moderate Republicans have been particularly disadvantaged, and now the GOP is in a self-defeating, self-perpetuating cycle: moderates lose because they get tagged with the extremism of the national party; since there are fewer moderates left, the GOP becomes more conservative, which disadvantages the remaining moderates even more.
GOP members of Congress have been like rats deserting a sinking ship, so don’t expect Walsh to be the last retirement. James at Swing State Project says it best:
Will there be any Republicans left in Congress to turn the lights off at the end of the day?
At this rate…
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Elections, Fred Thompson, Republicans
Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson quit the Republican presidential race on Tuesday, after a string of poor finishes in early primary and caucus states.
“I hope that my country and my party have benefited from our having made this effort,” Thompson said. “Jeri and I will always be grateful for the encouragement and friendship of so many wonderful people.”
[...]
In the statement, Thompson did not say whether he would endorse any of his former rivals. He was one of a handful of members of Congress who supported Arizona Sen. John McCain in 2000 in his unsuccessful race against George W. Bush for the party nomination.
[...]
Expectations rose higher — and his standing in polls started to fall as he failed to meet them.
Thompson played coy about his intentions all the while taking steps to prepare for a formal entrance into the race with a flourish. He cut ties with NBC, visited early voting states and delivered high-profile speeches. And, he started raising money and set up a preliminary campaign organization.
He delayed his expected summertime entrance in the race until fall, perhaps missing an opening created by McCain’s near campaign implosion.
As he prepared to officially join the race, Thompson was plagued by lackluster fundraising; high-profile staff departures, including some prompted by the deep involvement in the campaign of his wife, Jeri, and less-than-stellar performances on the stump. Thompson also endured repeated questions about his career as a lobbyist and his thin Senate record.
Thompson formally announced his bid in early September but hit a rocky patch from the get-go.
His easygoing style and reputation for laziness translated into a light campaign schedule that raised questions about whether he wanted to be president badly enough to fight for it. A spate of inartful answers to campaign-trail questions — on everything from the Terri Schiavo case to Osama bin Laden — didn’t help matters.
Thompson was the victim of an all-too-successful draft campaign–those who wanted Thompson to enter the race saw more in him than there really was. Like with Ronald Reagan, they confused the man they saw on stage with the man as he exists in real life.
Thompson went to the Senate after a lucrative career as a lobbyist (where he backed some questionable causes). He left the Senate after just a few years to pursue an even more lucrative acting career. Though he was certainly a conservative, that was basically all he had going for him–Fred Thompson ended up as a cookie-cutter Republican in a race full of cookie-cutter Republicans.
His acting skills didn’t help him the slightest–he was neither passionate or engaging as a speaker, while his speeches were clumsy and boring. In the end, Thompson was only as good as the lines he was forced to memorize.
In addition, his trademark laziness–an open secret ever since his Senate campaigns–translated into a light campaign based on an increasingly-thin schedule. If a man can’t devote himself wholeheartedly to running for President, why should we believe he will devote himself wholeheartedly to being president?
That laziness was what did him. Had Thompson entered the race several months earlier than he did–right after McCain collapsed and his followers were looking for another candidate to back–the Thompson boomlet could have turned into an all-out Thompson boom. Unfortunately, Fred waited too long–long enough that the GOP field settled while supporters and money were locked into place, leaving very little oxygen in an already-overcrowded room. Thompson peaked too early and entered too late, eventually losing the limelight to more interesting and accomplished candidates.
So goodbye, Fred Thompson. You were a textbook example of how not to run a campaign–hopefully, the next person finding himself on the other end of a draft campaign will take heed, lest they pull a Thompson and flame out.
Filed under: Interesting | Tags: George W. Bush, Interesting, Josh Brolin, Oliver Stone
Daily Variety writes that film director Oliver Stone “has set his sights on his next directing project, ‘Bush,’ a film focusing on the life and presidency of George W. Bush.” He has chosen actor Josh Brolin to play the leading part. Stone told Variety that he wants this movie to be a deep introspective:
Here, I’m the referee, and I want a fair, true portrait of the man. How did Bush go from an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world? It’s like Frank Capra territory on one hand, but I’ll also cover the demons in his private life, his bouts with his dad and his conversion to Christianity, which explains a lot of where he is coming from. It includes his belief that God personally chose him to be president of the United States, and his coming into his own with the stunning, preemptive attack on Iraq. It will contain surprises for Bush supporters and his detractors.
I thought Josh Brolin was excellent in No Country For Old Men.
I’m interested to see how this turns out, and I wonder how easy it will be for Stone to find information on one of the most secretive administrations in American history.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Governors, House, Media, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Caucuses, Delegates, Democrats, Elections, Primaries, Republicans, The Media
I think the above chart from CNN shows the problem with the coverage of these races Apparently Obama won New Hampshire and tied in Nevada (not sure if anyone’s definitively figured out that last part)! Although Clinton gets the little red check signaling victory.
I agree completely. The media is focusing on who wins the popular vote in each state, even though that doesn’t determine the nominee; it’s actually the number of delegates each candidate has that matters. Often–either because of complex primary rules or slim margins of victory–the candidate who wins the popular vote may get as many or fewer delegates than the second-place candidate.
Right now, it’s hard to find an accurate delegate count anywhere–Political Wire shows three different news outlets with completely different delegate counts for all the major candidates.
Clearly, determining the delegate count is confusing. Still, though, why isn’t the media paying more attention to the delegates?
In past elections, one candidate would do well in a number of early primaries, building momentum and eventually capturing the nomination. This year, since there are so many good candidates running, that hasn’t happened–instead, we’ve had a prolonged primary that has turned into a multi-candidate race on both sides.
In light of this, the media’s focus on victory and momentum makes little sense–this race has defied all the conventional wisdom on how primaries are won. A popular vote victory doesn’t translate into momentum and it doesn’t guarantee any future victory.
It would make more sense for news outlets to move away from obsessing over the popular vote totals and toward focusing on the delegates. This will be long-fought battle for delegates on both sides, and knowing where each candidate stands in that regard will give a more complete and accurate picture of how the primaries are playing out.
Personally, I just want to see all of the beauty-contest horserace-obsessed media stories stop once and for all. It doesn’t matter who won what percentage in what state–what matters is how many delegates each candidate walks away with. And until we start focusing on those numbers instead of the popular vote, we won’t have an accurate idea of who is winning which contest and by how much.
Just some of my thoughts.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Governors, House, Polls, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Elections, Primaries, Republicans, South Carolina
South Carolina–one of the biggest primaries on the Republican side–is said and done, and John McCain has walked away with a narrow margin of victory over Mike Huckabee.
Did McCain capture the hearts and minds of conservative Republicans enough to do what he couldn’t do in 2000? Well, not really:
Indeed McCain didn’t do much better in core Republican groups this year than in 2000. The difference was that last time these groups coalesced around his only opponent, George W. Bush, while this year they divided among a greater choice of candidates – Huckabee, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Sen. Fred Thompson.
McCain won 30 percent of party regulars voting in the state, similar to his 26 percent in 2000; and he won 26 percent of conservatives, compared with his 29 percent in 2000. That was good enough to open the door; McCain closed it by easily winning moderates, with 47 percent to Mike Huckabee’s 18 percent; and independents, 39-22 percent.
If all the conservatives and mainline Republicans who didn’t support McCain had lined up behind a single alternative, he’d have had trouble – as happened in 2000, when Bush won six in 10 voters in both those core GOP groups. Their fragmentation this time made the difference.
[Emphasis Added]
In other words, McCain didn’t win South Carolina–the other candidates just lost it. His victory doesn’t speak to his strength as a candidate–it speaks to the fractured nature of the Republican Presidential field and Republican voters. For example, McCain lost both conservatives and evangelicals to Mike Huckabee, but still managed to pull out a win in a state that’s largely conservative and evangelical.
How did he do it? Well, McCain appealed to more moderate/liberal voters, including independents. This is probably going to be a trend for McCain–he will do better in states with open primaries (where voting isn’t restricted to members of the party) and will do worse in states with closed primaries. Unfortunately for him, a number of influential Super Tuesday contests–including massive states like California and New York–are closed, which could severely hurt his campaign.
Still, with McCain in the race, the GOP primary is guaranteed to remain fractured and divisive. Remember that, even though McCain has become the establishment candidate, he is not particularly liked by the Republican establishment. Just take a look at the GOP rogues’ gallery that tried to derail his campaign in SC:
[Rush] Limbaugh led the way with a verbal blitz, not just against McCain but against his closest rival in South Carolina, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.
“I’m here to tell you, if either of these two guys get the nomination, it’s going to destroy the Republican Party. It’s going to change it forever, be the end of it,” Limbaugh fumed on his radio show Tuesday. It was a line of argument that he kept up all week long.
[Tom] DeLay resurfaced on Fox News Friday to excoriate McCain for working with “the most liberal Democrats in the Senate,” for passing an overhaul of campaign finance laws that “completely neutered the Republican Party,” and single-handedly thwarted oil drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
“McCain has done more to hurt the Republican Party than any elected official I know of,” said DeLay, the former House majority leader, who was personally damaged by McCain’s Senate probe of lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a probe that implicated numerous DeLay associates.
Conservative blogger Patrick Ruffini, on the Web site of popular radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, implored South Carolina Republicans on Friday to vote for Huckabee, simply to extend the nomination fight in hopes that another candidate could derail McCain.
And Jim DeMint, South Carolina’s ardently conservative senator who is backing Mitt Romney, issued a message Friday to “fellow conservatives,” warning that “Washington experience is the problem, not the solution. We cannot afford to have a President who has fought for amnesty for illegal immigrants, voted against the Bush Tax Cuts, and curtailed our First Amendment rights in the ill-conceived campaign finance legislation.” He never mentioned McCain’s name, but his meaning was clear.
So even if McCain gets the nomination, he’s going to have an extraordinarily difficult time putting the fractured GOP coalitions back together and winning enough support from the various players in the Republican Party.
Most of all, McCain’s victory hurts Huckabee–both Romney and McCain have two major primary victories under their belt, while Huck only has one. Even worse, Huck just lost in a southern state with a significant Christian conservative contingent–in other words, a state that he should have been able to win pretty easily. This makes Florida–the GOP’s next primary, held on January 29th–critical for him. If he can’t win here, Huckabee will have no momentum going into Super Tuesday, which could mean his swift exit from the race.
For now, though, the fractured Republican Party lives to fight (itself) another day.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Polls, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Elections, Fred Thompson, Primaries, Republicans, South Carolina
Nothing official, but it certainly sounds like it:
After a weak showing in the South Carolina primary, Fred Thompson gave a wistful speech to supporters, telling them “we’ll always stand strong together.”
Thompson had staked his campaign on a strong finish in the Republican primary here.
While he remains in the race, two sources told CNN that “it was abundantly evident to all of us” that the bar was a win or a very competitive second place in South Carolina to continue to be viable in the GOP presidential race.
Thompson has no public schedule Sunday, and is planning to consult with campaign manager Bill Lacy and other top advisers about the next move.
“We are not blind to the obvious,” said one senior campaign adviser.
The Thompson campaign has had the highest expectation to performance ratio of any campaign in recent memory. He was hailed as the second coming of Ronald Reagan but turned out to be an unambitious, passionateless, directionless candidate with an ineffective, inattentive campaign.
At this point, it’s clear that Thompson is looking to be the Vice Presidential nominee. Still, considering his poor performance, I’m not sure why any candidate would want him on their ticket–what does he bring to the table? If he drops, though, expect him to endorse McCain in the hopes that McCain will be the eventual nominee.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Governors, House, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Elections, Primaries, Republicans, South Carolina
From TPM, 8:01 PM EST:
Republicans (5% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 663 | 3% |
| Huckabee |
6,251 | 28% |
| Hunter |
47 | 0% |
| McCain | 7,902 | 36% |
| Paul |
930 | 4% |
| Romney | 3,550 |
16% |
| Thompson | 2,860 | 13% |
______________________________________________
UPDATE: From TPM, 8:09 PM EST:
Republicans (9% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 951 | 3% |
| Huckabee |
10,635 | 29% |
| Hunter |
72 | 0% |
| McCain | 12,914 | 35% |
| Paul |
1,480 | 4% |
| Romney | 5,591 |
15% |
| Thompson | 5,195 | 14% |
____________________________________________
UPDATE II: From TPM, 8:22 PM EST:
Republicans (22% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 1,892 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
23,796 | 28% |
| Hunter |
203 | 0% |
| McCain | 30,453 | 36% |
| Paul |
3,387 | 4% |
| Romney | 12,230 |
15% |
| Thompson | 12,794 | 15% |
_____________________________________________
UPDATE III: From TPM, 8:27 PM EST:
Republicans (28% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 2,351 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
28,589 | 28% |
| Hunter |
237 | 0% |
| McCain | 35,854 | 36% |
| Paul |
4,008 | 4% |
| Romney | 14,840 |
15% |
| Thompson | 15,337 | 15% |
____________________________________________
UPDATE IV: From TPM, 8:36 PM EST:
Republicans (39% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 3,152 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
44,969 | 30% |
| Hunter |
351 | 0% |
| McCain | 52,472 | 35% |
| Paul |
5,630 | 4% |
| Romney | 21,579 |
14% |
| Thompson | 23,013 | 15% |
____________________________________________
UPDATE V: From TPM, 8:52 PM EST:
Republicans (55% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 4,854 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
71,574 | 29% |
| Hunter |
566 | 0% |
| McCain | 82,396 | 34% |
| Paul |
8,899 | 4% |
| Romney | 36,458 |
15% |
| Thompson | 39,538 | 16% |
___________________________________________
UPDATE VI: From TPM, 9:04 PM EST:
Republicans (68% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 6,408 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
88,102 | 29% |
| Hunter |
690 | 0% |
| McCain | 100,373 | 34% |
| Paul |
10,718 | 4% |
| Romney | 45,543 |
15% |
| Thompson | 47,114 | 16% |
__________________________________________
UPDATE VII: From TPM, 9:13 PM EST:
Republicans (75% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 6,895 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
93,734 | 29% |
| Hunter |
718 | 0% |
| McCain | 109,109 | 34% |
| Paul |
11,372 | 4% |
| Romney | 48,480 |
15% |
| Thompson | 49,657 | 16% |
________________________________________
UPDATE VIII: From TPM, 9:17 PM EST:
Republicans (82% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 7,515 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
107,344 | 30% |
| Hunter |
883 | 0% |
| McCain | 120,963 | 33% |
| Paul |
13,215 | 4% |
| Romney | 55,036 |
15% |
| Thompson | 58,103 | 16% |
_____________________________________________
FINAL UPDATE: From TPM, 11:59 PM EST:
Republicans (93% reporting)
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Giuliani | 8,522 | 2% |
| Huckabee |
123,467 | 30% |
| Hunter |
994 | 0% |
| McCain | 137,467 | 33% |
| Paul |
15,275 | 4% |
| Romney | 62,652 |
15% |
| Thompson | 65,223 | 16% |
_____________________________________
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, House, Polls | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Caucuses, Duncan Hunter, Elections, Primaries, Republicans
Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) has just announced that he is dropping out of the GOP presidential race.
Yes, the man who routinely gets fewer votes than “uncommitted” is finally out of the race.
Considering that Hunter basically ran for President because his re-election prospects in California were dismal, this is hardly surprising. Hunter contributed very little to the race, and his exit will change pretty much nothing.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Governors, House, Media, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Caucuses, Democrats, Elections, Nevada, Primaries, Republicans, South Carolina
The Nevada caucuses have ended and the results are pretty unsurprising.
There was always a wild-card quality to NV, since it never played a significant role in the early nominating processes before. But, on both sides, the candidates who the polls said would win did win, so Nevada gave us with few surprises today.
On the Republican side, Mitt Romney went into NV leading all other candidates in the polls, as he has ever since Giuliani lost his lead there months ago. Romney’s margin of victory was impressive–over 50%–and it shows that the his campaign has come back from the brink of destruction. With a second major primary win under his belt, Romney has turned the GOP primary into a three-way race.
Unfortunately for him, tody’s other primary–South Carolina–isn’t within his reach. News of Romney’s win will inevitably be buried in the news coming out of SC as John McCain and Mike Huckabee strive for another win there. And even more unfortunately for Mitt, it’s doubtful he’ll win Florida, meaning that he may not have another chance at victory until Super Tuesday. With February 5th being more than two weeks away, it’s possible that Romney’s momentum may languish or even reverse before then.
Still, today’s win corroborated Romney’s victory in Michigan, and it guarantees that he’ll be in the race for another few weeks at the very least.
On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton went into Nevada leading all other candidates in the polls and she emerged with a sizable margin of victory. In fact, at no point during the entire Democratic primary has Clinton trailed anyone in Nevada, making news of her success even less surprising.
While the Culinary Workers’ Union endorsement made waves in the media, it had less of an impact on the ground. Keep in mind that unions are nowhere near as powerful as they were years ago–furthermore, while a union as a whole may endorse a candidate, that doesn’t mean that the rank-and-file will all turn out and vote for that candidate. Despite the Culinary Workers’ Union endorsement of Barack Obama, Clinton won 6 out of the 9 at-large caucus sites where culinary workers made up the majority of caucusgoers. This just goes to show you that endorsements don’t necessarily mean much, and that candidates who rely too heavily on endorsements will find themselves falling short come election day.
Despite her victory, though, Clinton has a major problem to worry about:
African Americans overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama in the Nevada caucuses, just as they did in the Michigan Democratic primary last week — a trend that could hurt Hillary Clinton in next Saturday’s South Carolina primary, where black voters are expected to make up half the electorate.
Black voters made up 16 percent of Democratic Nevada caucus-goers — and roughly 80 percent of them voted for Obama, according to entrance polls. Clinton won support from 16 percent of black voters.
In Michigan’s Democratic primary Tuesday — a contest that was rendered meaningless after party sanctions — roughly 70 percent of African-American voters did not cast their votes for Clinton, choosing the “uncommitted” option instead. According to CNN exit polls, those voters overwhelmingly favored Barack Obama, whose name did not appear on the ballot.
[...]
African-Americans have long been firm supporters of both former President Bill Clinton — dubbed the first ‘black president’ by author Toni Morrison — and Hillary Clinton. But a high profile spat earlier this month between the New York senator and Obama over the issue of Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy may have done some damage to Clinton’s favorability numbers among some in the African-American community.
I mentioned this after Michigan, and it seems to have gotten worse. Between Clinton’s poorly-worded statement about Lyndon Johnson and Martin Luther King and the not-so-subtle racial statements by Clinton campaign surrogates, Hillary is bleeding African-American support. Come South Carolina–which has a significant African-American Democratic voting community–Clinton may very well lose for the first time since Iowa.
On a more positive note, Nevada’s turnout is definitely heartening:
With 84 percent of the precincts reporting across the state, state party officials said more than 107,000 Nevada voters attended the caucuses. It is the third state in the row to achieve record-setting turnout in the Democratic presidential nominating fight, which party strategists believe is a referendum on the Bush administration and a strong call for a new direction in Washington.
What’s next? Well, tonight the polls will close for the South Carolina Republican Primary, while the South Carolina Democratic Primary will occur in one week, on January 26th. I’ll bring you coverage of both primaries’ results as they occur.
UPDATE: Some thoughts on Obama from Kos:
Obama’s path to the nomination at this point runs through Democratic voters. And ultimately, while my absentee ballot will be mailed out Monday with his name checked off, I’m pessimistic that he can win. He has shown no proclivity for speaking in unambiguous progressive tones, and it could cost him the election.
[...]
But I never dismissed his theories that Obama’s fundamental weakness — his refusal to run as a Democrat in a Democratic primary — would ultimately prove his undoing. Of course it’s not too late, and much can and will happen. Jerome may yet be wrong. But his core argument was never wrong, and subsequent contests have proven that.
Obama’s strong support in the African-American community should give him a boost in South Carolina, but it won’t be enough to put him over the top on Super Tuesday. Clinton’s lead in large states such as New York and California means that she could very well walk away from Super Tuesday the big winner (though not necessarily the nominee).
Obama has been doing well, but if he wants to win the nomination he has to start making waves, and fast. Otherwise, Clinton’s national strength will translate into a major victory on February 5th and beyond, possibly dooming the Obama campaign.
Will he learn a lesson from New Hampshire and Nevada? Will Clinton? We’ll have to wait and see.
UPDATE II: Did Obama actually win Nevada? For all intents and purposes, it seems like he did:
So check it out, Obama literally won more delegates in Nevada than Clinton:
A source with knowledge of the Nevada Democratic Party’s projections told The Nation that under the arcane weighting system, Obama would win 13 national convention delegates and Clinton would win 12 delegates. The state party has not released an official count yet.
Barack Obama released an official statement celebrating a delegate victory. “We came from over twenty-five points behind to win more national convention delegates than Hillary Clinton because we performed well all across the state, including rural areas where Democrats have traditionally struggled,” he said.
And the Obama campaign is milking it, throwing the Hillary campaign’s own words against it:
Senator Obama was awarded 13 delegates to Senator Clinton’s 12. As Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson said, “This is a race for delegates…It is not a battle for individual states. As David knows, we are well past the time when any state will have a disproportionate influence on the nominating process.”
UPDATE III: The Obama campaign is alleging widespread voter fraud across Nevada:
David Plouffe, in a succinct statement appended to a released quotation from his boss, Barack Obama, said the Obama campaign was investigating more than 200 reporters of irregularities in Nevada.
“We currently have reports of over 200 separate incidents of trouble at caucus sites, including doors being closed up to thirty minutes early, registration forms running out so people were turned away, and ID being requested and checked in a non-uniform fashion. This is in addition to the Clinton campaign’s efforts to confuse voters and call into question the at-large caucus sites which clearly had an affect on turnout at these locations. These kinds of Clinton campaign tactics were part of an entire week’s worth of false, divisive, attacks designed to mislead caucus-goers and discredit the caucus itself.”
Plouffe asks Nevadans to call a toll-free number, (866) 675-2008, and report any other problems.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Governors, House, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Caucuses, Democrats, Elections, Nevada, Primaries, Republicans, South Carolina, Voting Irregularities
From TPM, 3:36 PM EST:
| Democrats (13% reporting) | Republicans (36% reporting) |
| candidate |
state del. |
percentage
|
candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Clinton | 338 | 48% | Giuliani | 696 | 4% |
| Edwards | 45 | 6% | Huckabee |
1,437 | 8% |
| Kucinich | 3 | 0% | Hunter |
203 | 1% |
| Obama | 310 | 44% | McCain | 2,175 | 13% |
| Paul |
2,078 | 12% | |||
| Romney | 9,367 |
55% |
|||
| Thompson | 1,205 | 7% |
_________________________________________________________
UPDATE: From TPM, 5:13 PM EST:
| Democrats (89% reporting) | Republicans (78% reporting) |
| candidate |
state del. |
percentage
|
candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Clinton | 5,224 | 51% | Giuliani | 1,540 | 5% |
| Edwards | 385 | 4% | Huckabee |
2,568 | 8% |
| Kucinich | 4 | 0% | Hunter |
596 | 2% |
| Obama | 4,647 | 45% | McCain | 4,374 | 13% |
| Paul |
4,401 | 13% | |||
| Romney | 17,860 |
53% |
|||
| Thompson | 2,622 | 8% |
__________________________________________________
Major news networks are projecting that Hillary Clinton will win the Nevada Democratic Caucus.
UPDATE II: From TPM, 5:25 PM EST:
| Democrats (89% reporting) | Republicans (85% reporting) |
| candidate |
state del. |
percentage
|
candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Clinton | 5,260 | 51% | Giuliani | 1,629 | 5% |
| Edwards | 388 | 4% | Huckabee |
2,853 | 8% |
| Kucinich | 4 | 0% | Hunter |
652 | 2% |
| Obama | 4,676 | 45% | McCain | 4,730 | 13% |
| Paul |
4,813 | 13% | |||
| Romney | 19,930 |
53% |
|||
| Thompson | 2,856 | 8% |
_______________________________________________________
FINAL UPDATE: From TPM, 5:40 PM EST:
| Democrats (90% reporting) | Republicans (95% reporting) |
| candidate |
state del. |
percentage
|
candidate |
votes | percentage |
| Clinton | 5,287 | 51% | Giuliani | 1,766 | 4% |
| Edwards | 390 | 4% | Huckabee |
3,183 | 8% |
| Kucinich | 4 | 0% | Hunter |
807 | 2% |
| Obama | 4,696 | 45% | McCain | 5,203 | 13% |
| Paul |
5,314 | 13% | |||
| Romney | 21,395 |
52% |
|||
| Thompson | 3,239 | 8% |
______________________________________________
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Governors, House, Polls, Progressives, Rights, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Caucuses, Democrats, Elections, Nevada, Primaries, Republicans, South Carolina, Voting Irregularities
It’s a busy day today, so let’s get into it.
In Reno, it’s going to be mostly sunny with a high temperature of 43 degrees; in Las Vegas, it’s supposed to be sunny with a high temperature of 52.
The press has already declared one winner–they have projected that Mitt Romney will win the Nevada Republican caucus. Here are the current results, via TPM, 3:30 PM EST:
| Republicans (20% reporting) |
| candidate |
votes | percentage |
|||
| Giuliani | 692 | 4% | |||
| Huckabee |
1290 | 8% | |||
| Hunter |
182 | 1% | |||
| McCain | 2,084 | 12% | |||
| Paul |
2,011 | 12% | |||
| Romney | 9,555 | 56% |
|||
| Thompson | 1,246 | 7% |
Pollster showed Romney with a significant lead going into the caucus. He went on to win with an even more commanding victory than predicted, confirming that his success in Michigan wasn’t a fluke and cementing his position as a Republican front-runner.
Of course, that isn’t to say that the Nevada Republican caucus hasn’t had problems:
At least 40 Republicans got off on the wrong foot Saturday in their effort to attend the presidential caucus and some were pretty upset. “That’s it,’’ says Lois Kelly. “I’m getting ready to go for Obama I’m so fed up.”
The Republicans scheduled 12 of their precincts to cast their votes at the governor’s mansion. But two days before Saturday, they changed the location. And apparently the party was unsuccessful in notifying everybody of the switch.
More than 40 Republicans showed up at the mansion Saturday morning. There was a small sign outlining the switch but it didn’t give any directions to the new site of the Senior Center. And the sign could not be read from the street.
There was no one stationed at the mansion to re-direct the voter.
Debra Rodich, when informed by reporters of the switch, said, “We’re supposed to be the organized party.” She said she did not receive any notification of the change and she called the party “very arrogant.”
“This is very discouraging,” she said.
On the Democratic side, the caucuses has finished–we should have results soon.
Pollster shows Hillary Clinton with a lead over Barack Obama, though her momentum is downward-trending while his is upward-trending. The last Democratic poll out of NV was a Zogby survey showing Clinton with 45% and Obama with 39%, nearly within the margin of error. Nevada has never played a significant role in the early primaries before, so it’s hard to predict how this will play out.
In addition, the legal battle between the Nevada Culinary Workers’ Union and the Nevada Teachers’ Union has added an extra degree of complexity to the race. Shortly after the Nevada Culinary Workers’ Union–which encompasses most of the workers at Las Vegas casinos–endorsed Barack Obama, the Nevada Teachers’ Union–which hasn’t endorsed anyone, but whose leadership has individually endorsed Clinton–filed a lawsuit. The purpose of their lawsuit was to shut down 9 at-large caucus locations along the Las Vegas strip, which were set up to allow casino workers to caucus without having to return to their home districts. If someone proved they worked within 2.5 miles of the strip, they could caucus at the at-large sites. Yet, the caucus rules were set and made public months ago, so it didn’t make sense for them to wait so long to file a lawsuit, which was why their case was thrown out of court.
Obama used the attempt to keep Las Vegas workers from caucusing as a way to rally his supporters, particularly those in the Culinary Workers’ Union. Could this fight have soured some Las Vegas voters on Clinton? Could it have galvinized union support for Obama? We won’t know until the results are in, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this ends up playing a significant result in the Las Vegas caucuses.
Today is also the day of the South Carolina Republican primary. In Charleston it’s rainy with a high temperature of 40 degrees, while in Greenville it’s snowy with a high of 33 degrees.
Pollster shows McCain recently pulling ahead of Huckabee–corroborating this, SurveyUSA shows McCain with 31% and Hucbakee with 27%. On the other hand, ARG shows Huckabee with 33% and McCain with 26%, which could either be an outlier or an indication of recent momentum. No matter what, it’s clear that this one will be a nail-biter.
There has been a significant amount of dirty campaigning going on in the Palmetto State, a replay of the types of tricks that killed McCain’s first run for President. On on hand, though, SC’s large veteran and military population could help McCain, while their Christian conservative and Republican evangelical population could help Hucbakee–the results here may simply be a matter of turnout.
Both McCain and Huckabee need a victory here–Huckabee hasn’t won since Iowa, while McCain’s victory in New Hampshire was dampened by Romney’s win in Michigan. A loss in SC could seriously hurt either candidate, and only Florida stands between today and Super Tuesday for the Republicans.
So far, the SC GOP primary has been dogged with problems: voting machine malfunctions, voters being turned away from the polls and unusually low turnout. In response to some of these issues, McCain’s South Carolina State Director has released this statement:
“We have received reports from Horry County that voters are being turned away from the polls, because electronic voting machines are not working and paper ballots are not available. Some voters say they are being instructed to return at a later time. We are disturbed by these reports and hope that this issue is resolved immediately. We encourage any voters who were turned away from the polls to return again to their polling place this afternoon to exercise their constitutional right to vote.”
Today is going to be a big day for both parties, and I’ll bring you more as it comes out.
UPDATE: The results for the Nevada Caucuses are above, but CNN brings us this from South Carolina:
A top backer for John McCain’s presidential bid tells CNN the Arizona senator’s campaign is seeking a court order to extend voting in Horry County by one hour, after learning voting machines in this eastern part of the state were malfunctioning on primary day.
State Rep. Tracey Edge, R-Myrtle Beach, said the campaign was trying to find a circuit court judge to issue the ruling.
“We are seeking an order to extend the voting time, because of reported and publicized information that people were turned away from the polls,” Edge said.
All polls in the South Carolina Republican primary are scheduled to close at 7 p.m. ET. Complicating matters for McCain, the county has just one resident circuit court judge, who they have not yet been able to reach. McCain won Horry County when he ran for president in 2000.
It looks like McCain is trying to do two things at once–on one hand, it looks like he’s trying to pick up late voters by supporting electoral integrity; on the other hand, it also looks like he’s preparing for a loss by playing up allegations of voting problems.
These voting problems might raise significant issues going into the last hour and a half of voting time. We’ll have to see how this plays out, and if the McCain camp can find a judge to issue their order.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Governors, House, Media, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Campaigns, Candidates, Democrats, DNC, Elections, Primaries, Republicans, RNC, Super Tuesday
With three Republican front-runners–each with a major primary victory–there is now significant discussion of a brokered GOP convention convention–the first in 60 years:
The Republican presidential race is so unsettled that some party officials are openly talking of a scenario that seemed almost unthinkable until now: the first contested GOP convention in 60 years.
Even if Republicans choose a nominee before they convene in Minneapolis-St. Paul on Sept. 1, there’s a good possibility he will emerge weeks or even months after the Democratic nominee is chosen, giving Democrats an advantage in fundraising, organizing and campaigning. Congressional Republicans particularly wanted an early nominee to draw voters’ attention from President Bush, whose low approval ratings could hurt the entire party in the fall.
[...]
“The way it looks now, it could end up in the convention,” Ron Schmidt, South Dakota’s Republican National Committeeman, said of the party’s nominating process. “It’s fascinating if you’re a political junkie.”
[...]
But a deadlocked convention could be a nightmare for the party. The Republicans’ last multi-ballot convention was in 1948, when New York Gov. Thomas Dewey prevailed on the third ballot. He lost the general election to Democrat Harry S. Truman.
The last contested Democratic convention was in 1952, when Illinois Gov. Adlai Stevenson won on the third ballot. He later lost two elections to Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Contested conventions have never been kind to their eventual nominees, said G. Terry Madonna, who has studied them as a public affairs professor and pollster at Franklin and Marshall College in Pennsylvania. A deadlocked convention in either party remains unlikely, he said in an interview Wednesday, but it is more possible for Republicans.
How possible is this?
On the Democratic side, there are 4,049 delegates and a simple majority is needed to become the nominee–thus, a candidate would need to win 2,025 delegates. Right now the primary is between Clinton and Obama, with Edwards placing decently enough to pick up some delegates. For us to have a brokered convention, Clinton and Obama would have to go tit-for-tat throughout the primary, splitting the delegates almost evenly while Edwards picked up just enough to keep both of them below the 2,025 mark.
Even in this scenario, though, a brokered convention is extremely unlikely–it’s more likely that Edwards would make a deal with either Obama or Clinton, promising them his delegates in exchange for something (since it’s doubtful he’ll end up with enough delegates to be within striking distance of the nomination himself).
The Republican side is more divided–there are 2,380 delegates and a simple majority is needed to become the nominee–thus, a candidate would need to win 1,191 delegates. Yet, while the Democrats have two candidates who have won major contests, the Republicans have three–Romney, McCain and Huckabee.
If all three of them manage to go tit-for-tat throughout the primaries and splitting the delegates between them, each candidate would end up with roughly 793 delegates–putting all of them well out of reach for the nomination. Even if it’s not split exactly three ways, if each candidate remains competitive enough and receives a large enough share of the delegates, all of them may be reluctant to cut a deal and step aside, hoping instead that they will be able to lock up enough support by–or at–the convention to win the nominaton.
Of course, it’s still early and all of this could change. Edwards could become more competitive, making the Democratic primary a three-way race. One or more of the current GOP frontrunners may flame out, turning the Republican primary into a two-way race. Really, the only way there would be a brokered Republican convention is if there were three or more candidates who remain competitive throughout the contest–an unlikely, but possible, scenario.
What’s clear is that a brokered convention would damage the GOP, possibly irrevocably. While the Democratic candidate would be setting up his/her campaign, reallying support, outlining policies and and picking a Vice Presidential candidate, the Republicans would still be duking it out across the country. The media would talk endlessly about Democratic unity versus Republican infighting. The GOP convention would be a mess, with delegates trying to understand archaic procedures, with shady backroom deals being cut, and with round after round of voting before a nominee is finally settled upon.
If the nominee were chosen that late (the GOP convention is September 1st), he would have to work miracles to build a sufficient campaign infrastructure in time. Remember that, in 2004, a lot happened before the summer conventions–with a brokered GOP convention, that time would be the united Democratic Party versus the fractured Republican candidates, followed by a Johnny-come-lately GOP candidate struggling to put the pieces of his party back together in time.
Is it unlikely? Yes. But it’s possible, and it has become more possible since Michigan. We’ll just have to wait and see…
UPDATE: As a commenter points out, both party’s contests have superdelegates–delegates that are not bound by the outcomes of primaries or caucuses. Typically, they’re elected officials and party members who candidates have to win over individually, which adds another layer of complexity and uncertainty to the contest.
The DNC has 792 superdelegates, meaning that they comprise nearly one-fifth of the total amount of delegates. The RNC doesn’t officially have superdelegates, but they do have 463 unpledged delegates who will basically function in the same manner as superdelegates.
Thus, a close contest may result in someone losing the primaries but winning the nomination–ostensibly through back-room dealing with the superdelegates. In fact, this could be even more damaging to the eventual nominee–having lost the popular vote and been rejected by the party rank-and-file, only to be given the nomination because of party elites
