The Obama Tide

Senator Barack Obama continued his winning ways yesterday, producing big wins in the Hawaii caucus as well as the Wisconsin primary. Obama has now won ten consecutive contests and has built a real head of steam heading into the Ohio and Texas primaries. Obama’s victories continue to be by impressive margins, and he also continues to make major inroads into constituencies that have been perceived as strengths of Hillary Clinton. In Wisconsin:

Obama 58%
Clinton 41%

In Hawaii:

Obama 76%
Clinton 24%

The story here is Obama’s rise amongst those groups that have been perceived as solid Clinton supporters. From the Washington Post:

“He’s making a real assault on the Clinton coalition for the first time,” said Mark Mellman, an independent Democratic pollster whose Wisconsin clients date to the 1980s.

In a state in which nearly 9 in 10 Democratic voters are white, Obama won more than 6 in 10 of the votes of white men, while Clinton held only a narrow edge among white women. And he defeated her by double-digit margins among those voters with family incomes less than $50,000 and among those without college degrees, exit polling shows.

Further observations simply do not bode well for Hillary as she fights for her political life.

Obama blunted Clinton’s margins among some of her most reliable voters. Clinton held only a narrow edge among white women in Wisconsin — of the 24 previous contests with Democratic exit polls (not counting Michigan), Clinton beat Obama by double-digit margins 19 times and lost by that wide a margin in only one, Obama’s home state of Illinois.

Obama also beat Clinton among those voters concerned about the nation’s economy, and divided the vote of union members evenly. “If those things hold true, then this could be a significant turning point,” Cieslewicz said.

These gains for Obama follow the movement he showed last week in primaries in Virginia, Maryland and the District among groups that have been firmly in Clinton’s camp throughout the campaign and during the first two months of balloting. But more important, Mellman said, upcoming primaries favor Obama because in both Texas and Ohio, non-Democrats are allowed to vote.

Those voters continue to skew dramatically toward Obama.

In Wisconsin, where nearly 4 in 10 who identified as either independents or Republicans, Obama won each by about 2 to 1. He held a slimmer, seven-percentage-point edge among Democrats.

Can Hillary turn around ten straight losses? Can she survive a split of the Ohio and Texas primaries? Obama is now perched to deliver the knockout blow, in my opinion, by winning one of the two primaries on March 4. If he wins both I would say we do not have to worry about seating the Florida and Michigan delegations at the convention.

Read the Post story here.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/23245948#23245948

This entry was posted in National News. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to The Obama Tide

  1. Jules Gordon says:

    Your Honor,
    I expect the Clinton machine is readying its own form of WMD’s. (No lie this time).

    I was kind of surprised to find no Democrat delegate is committed to vote for the winner of the local primaries. Hillary will probably try to acquire those votes. Then there are the Super Delegates.

    THE VOTES OF MILLIONS OF DEMOCRATIC PARTY MEMEBERS CAN BE BRUSHED AWAY AT WILL.

    What happens if Hillary captures the nominations with back room shinanigans. The rules are in place to alllow this to happen.

    Billary is not going to roll over.

    Conservatives are unhappy with the GOP and McCain based on policy differences.

    The Liberals could be disinfranchised ala Boss Tweed.

    Hang on, your honor, it’s going to be an interesting finish.

    Jules

    Like

  2. D.J. says:

    Not to sound like a defeatist, but if Hillary ends up winning this nomination it would be the most unbelievable come-from-behind win in the history of this country.

    Like

  3. Jules Gordon says:

    DJ,

    What do you think will happen if Hillary wins with Super Delegate help?

    Like

  4. D.J. says:

    Hey Jules,

    I don’t think her superdelegates will come close to making up the difference. Obama already has a 150+ delegate lead even if you add both pledged and elected delegates, so unless Hillary pulls off astonishing landslide wins in Ohio and Texas, it’s over. However, the Clintons NEVER go down without a fight…

    Like

  5. D.J. says:

    Sorry…there was a typo in my last post. I meant to say “pledged and superdelegates.” No idea why I typed “elected.”

    Like

  6. Jules Gordon says:

    D.J.

    As I understand it, the Democratic delegates are completely uncommitted and Hillary can ask any of them, even if they are from a Obama winning state, to vote for her.

    Is this correct?

    If it is correct and they sell out to Hillary, (assuming Obama’s on a roll) will there be trouble?

    Jules

    Like

  7. D.J. says:

    I highly doubt that would happen, as both candidates have pledged not to attempt to poach each other’s delegates.

    Like

  8. D.J. says:

    Also, the pledged delegates that a candidate wins in a particular primary or caucus are committed to their candidate. The superdelegates are the ones who don’t have to make a decision until the convention. We’ve already seen quite a few of Hillary’s superdelegates flip from her to Obama. If Obama were to lose his momentum, perhaps some of his superdelegates may flip as well. Anything can happen.

    Like

  9. Jules Gordon says:

    D.J.

    I did some research and found out that you are correct, the regular delegates are in fact committed to the candidates as apportioned by the votes.

    It’s the Super Delegates that are uncommitted.

    Let me ask you, D.J. if Hillary seems to win (perception is reality) the nomination by taking Super Delegate votes away from Obama, will there be anger among the Democratic voters?

    Like

  10. D.J. says:

    There would certainly be a great deal of resentment and anger among Obama’s voters if the nomination was handed to someone who didn’t exactly win it. Especially after the debacle in 2000, our party would be presented as extremely hypocritical should the powers that be award the nomination to the candidate who clearly lost the popular vote. However, momentum plays a major role at this point in the race. Senator Obama clearly has an incredible amount of momentum. Plus, the two candidates are within a point of each other in Texas and Obama is closing in on Clinton in Ohio fast. Unless something totally unexpected happens that throws Obama out of contention, I don’t see his superdelegates going anywhere. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if even more of Clinton’s superdelegates continue to switch sides before the 3/4 primaries. I voted and worked for Hillary, but for the sake of party unity I think she should reconsider her chances should she lose Ohio and Texas.

    Like

  11. D.J. says:

    Here are the latest statistics from RCP…

    PLEDGED DELEGATES:
    Obama — 1,190
    Clinton — 1,033

    TOTAL DELEGATES (pledged + super):
    Obama — 1,368
    Clinton — 1,271

    POPULAR VOTE (not including the non-binding contests in Michigan and Florida):
    Obama — 10,300,410
    Clinton — 9,375,213

    LATEST OHIO POLL AVERAGE:
    Clinton — 50.0%
    Obama — 42.0%

    LATEST TEXAS POLL AVERAGE:
    Clinton — 48.8%
    Obama — 46.0%

    Just for the fun of it, here are the delegate totals for the GOP side:

    McCain — 975
    Huckabee — 245

    Like

  12. Jules Gordon says:

    Thanks, D.J.

    Nice summary.

    I hope it does not end in contention.

    Now after more than a year of B.S., I hope we can get down to discussing substantive issues.

    I liken the primary season to a job interview with the citizenry as the interviewer. What would you ask the candidates if you were interviewing them for a job?

    You would want to know how much experience the candidate had; skill at the tasks necessary to do that job; examples of achievements, etc.

    Now we get demagoguery, insult, accusation (often baseless); hyperbole; pandering (chicken in every pot) none of which would give enough information to make a judgment as to the qualification of the candidate

    We, therefore, vote based on political partisanship.

    Your thoughts.

    Jules

    Like

  13. D.J. says:

    You summarized the concept of a political campaign perfectly. When candidates for public office uses lies and dishonest actions as ways to attract votes, it usually backfires. I learned an excellent lesson in this aspect of the game when I said and did some very stupid things to friends in the most recent municipal campaign. Sadly, this campaign has become a battle between charisma and experience — experience is losing. I haven’t heard anything about the issues from any of the presidential candidates. Hillary is making ridiculous accusations of plagiarism against Obama, and every sentence Obama utters contains nothing more than “change” and “hope.” At this point in the game, I am sorely missing the presence of Joe Biden and Bill Richardson. They were running on issues. There were no slogans, no crazy accusations being made by either candidate. If you were to ask me to name an ideal presidential candidate or party nominee, those two would be at the very top of my list.

    Like

  14. Jules Gordon says:

    D.J.
    Biden was protrayed as loose tongue and Richardson ran a very low key campaign. I thought the man as a competent and experienced public figure. However, in an age of Obama’s charisma and Hillary’s “invitability” they faded from the picture.

    From my standpoint, I watched the GOP sell itself out during the Bush presidency and now we conservatives have no real representitive in the race. Thompson came in as a later day Messiah but never woke up. After researching his background, I am not sure of his qualifications anyway.

    Seems both of us are going to hold our noses and vote the nominees.

    Jules

    Like

  15. D.J. says:

    I am a staunch Democrat (I actually used to be a supporter of Republican candidates during my misguided youth), and I do think the world of both Clinton and Obama. I was simply commenting on the sad fact that the nominating contest has become a popularity contest.

    Like

  16. Jules Gordon says:

    I did guess you were a Democrat by your writings. I, on the other hand, am not a Republican but, instead a Conservative.

    I have been voting Republican for obvious reasons. Now the GOP has gone astray essentially leaving me a man without a party.

    Are you equally comfortable with either Hillary or Obama as the nominee?

    Jules

    Like

  17. D.J. says:

    I would obviously prefer Clinton over Obama, but I will enthusiastically support the Democratic nominee. I think that the rest of the Democrats will too. This may be the first election in quite some time where the Democratic Party is far more united than the Republican Party — even though our contest has gone on far longer than the GOP contest.

    Like

  18. Jules Gordon says:

    D.J.

    The Republicans are in fact disheartened with their candidate. I wish there was some else. That some else never materialized.

    Jules

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s