Thursday’s campaign round-up

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn’t generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:

* A new WSJ/NBC poll found that registered voters, by a 13-point margin (50% to 37%) say they would prefer a Democrat to be elected president in November. That’s the good news. The less good news is that when actual names are added to the mix, Obama leads McCain by three (47% to 44%), while Clinton leads McCain by two (47% to 45%).

* Presumably in response to Clinton challenging him on his credentials to be commander in chief, Obama hosted an event in Chicago yesterday at which he was flanked by 10 former generals and admirals who are supporting his campaign. Asked about Clinton’s questions about his readiness, Obama said, “Here’s the one good thing about it: This issue would have come up in the general election anyway. So, we might as well surface it now. I didn’t expect Democrats to be making these arguments against fellow Democrats. They typically come from Republicans against Democrats.”

* The AFL-CIO will apparently make every effort to dog John McCain for the next several months: “The AFL-CIO said Wednesday it will have union protesters follow GOP presidential nominee-in-waiting John McCain around the country to demand explanations on his positions on economic and labor issues…. In addition to the protests, the nation’s largest labor federation also plans to devote part of its record-setting $53.4 million grass-roots mobilization campaign funds to criticizing McCain through workplace leafletting, volunteer door-knocking, telephone calls, e-mail, direct mailings and an anti-McCain Web site.”

* The latest from Florida: “Florida’s Democratic Party has proposed a combination mail-in vote and in-person election on June 3. ‘The plan would be inclusive of all Democratic voters,’ according to a memo of the draft plan obtained by CNN that was sent to party leaders…. The estimated cost of the proposal would be between $10 million and $12 million, according to the memo which was sent to party leaders Wednesday night.”

* Obama talked to Al Gore last week. This seems to have excited campaign reporters, but we probably shouldn’t read too much into it.

* The latest from Michigan: “A proposal now being considered for the Michigan primary is that the mulligan primary would be an otherwise normal, state-run contest, but with the state Democratic Party reimbursing the state for roughly $10 million needed to run it. This idea had previously been viewed as unfeasible, but the Detroit Free Press says it was given new life when Govs. Jon Corzine (D-NJ) and Ed Rendell (D-PA), both Hillary Clinton supporters, offered to help raise the money for new contests in Florida and Michigan.”

* The McCain campaign seems a little worried about what its supporters might say and do next: “After being forced to respond to three separate incidents in recent weeks of conservatives alluding to Barack Obama’s middle name, John McCain’s campaign manager today sent a memo to top supporters urging them to stick to the campaign’s preferred message — and to avoid taking gratuitous shots at their Democratic rivals.”

* In case there were any doubts about who enters Pennsylvania as the favorite, a new poll from Strategic Vision, a Republican firm, shows Clinton leading Obama by 18 points, 56% to 38%. In a general-election match-up, Strategic Vision shows McCain beating both Dems, though Obama fares slightly better than Clinton.

* TNR has an interesting item showing that Republican voters were very helpful to Clinton in Ohio. She almost certainly would have won the state without GOP voters, but by a smaller margin.

* And Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), who’s uncommitted, wrote a letter to Clinton and Obama yesterday: “While you trade barbs, McCain is uniting the Republican Party around his thinly disguised right wing agenda. In the next six weeks, McCain can sit back, amass his war chest, concentrate his base and delight as you deconstruct each other.”

Republican voters were very helpful to Clinton in Ohio. She almost certainly would have won the state without GOP voters, but by a smaller margin.

OK, you forgot to mention that they were also instrumental in her narrow “win” in Texas, which was billed as a do-or-die contest. So there is no doubt that the Repuiblicans saved her campaign. If they hadn’t, and if the Clinton’s words about a Texas win being essential were held to (cough) this race would be over.

Time for the superdelegates to pull the plug on Hillary’s Republican-powered surge.

  • FWIW, Hillary Clinton got a significant number of votes in Mississippi from professed Republicans there, according to the exit polls anyway.

  • TNR has an interesting item showing that Republican voters were very helpful to Clinton in Ohio. She almost certainly would have won the state without GOP voters, but by a smaller margin.

    Of course Clinton supporters could argue that if Obama pulls Repubs its because of his inclusive message, if Clinton does it its because Rush Limbaugh wants her so they can win, and that’s unfair.

    However if you look deeper into it, that’s not true – Obama has pulled self-described independents but very little self-described Republicans, in the states that he won. Ohio Republicans vioting for Hillary was a real shift.

  • “I didn’t expect Democrats to be making these arguments against fellow Democrats. They typically come from Republicans against Democrats.”

    Now he knows he’s running against a Goldwater Girl.

    The AFL-CIO will apparently make every effort to dog John McCain for the next several months: “The AFL-CIO said Wednesday it will have union protesters follow GOP presidential nominee-in-waiting John McCain around the country to demand explanations on his positions on economic and labor issues…. In addition to the protests, the nation’s largest labor federation also plans to devote part of its record-setting $53.4 million grass-roots mobilization campaign funds to criticizing McCain through workplace leafletting, volunteer door-knocking, telephone calls, e-mail, direct mailings and an anti-McCain Web site.”

    Given the number of older white guys with union cards who could be (and have been) snowed by McCain, this is good news.

    TNR has an interesting item showing that Republican voters were very helpful to Clinton in Ohio. She almost certainly would have won the state without GOP voters, but by a smaller margin.

    Of course they’re doing that. A Clinton candidacy is their only hope to avoid the wholesale destruction of the Republican Party and the consequent end of the right wing. Goldwater Girls are always good Republican candidates.

  • When Republicans vote for Obama, it shows the strength of his candidacy. When Republicans vote for Clinton, it shows the weakness of her candidacy.

  • * Obama talked to Al Gore last week. This seems to have excited campaign reporters, but we probably shouldn’t read too much into it.

    Settle down. Obama was just getting a few charisma lessons.

    I can’t wait for the general election caucuses to begin so Obama can kick McCaints ass. Oh wait, they don’t do caucuses in the presidential election. How brilliant is it that Democrats still do that in the primaries.

  • When Republicans vote for Obama, it shows the strength of his candidacy. When Republicans vote for Clinton, it shows the weakness of her candidacy. — Dennis_D

    Seeing as how Rush Limbaugh has been encouraging republicans to vote for her in the belief that she’s the weaker candidate, and how the republican nomination is over, that does sound about right.

  • When Republicans vote for Obama, it shows the strength of his candidacy. When Republicans vote for Clinton, it shows the weakness of her candidacy.

    The difference is that Republican voters for Obama plan to vote for him in the GE, while a large portion of Clinton’s have no such plans. I’m at work and can’t get to the link, unfortunately, but the results from an exit poll (SUSA, I think) were up on Kos the other day that showed something like 70% of Clinton’s Republican voters planned to vote for McCain in the general, while only 5% or so of Obama’s Republicans planned to vote for McCain. My numbers may be a little off, but hopefully someone else can dig up the poll.

  • I guess its time for Jimmie Carter to sit these two children down and scold them. Maybe then and only then will both sides be a little less sensitive and talk about the issues that matter. Its the economy stupid. The real funny thing is that each time a Bush has been president the economy has gone in the shithouse.

    Its time that supporters of both candidates started to pull together and quit pissing each other off. This is our election to lose and it is we that will suffer. As far as I am concerned we have two great canidates running and whichever one gets the nomination WE need to stand together. It doesn’t matter who said or did what in 2002 about Iraq its their position now (both say they will end it).

    I myself am proud of both of our candidates and I know that things are often said in campaigns that seem insensitive but thats why its called politics. If we had choir men or women running we wouldn’t be interested at all.

  • Sorry. Just to clarify, the above was an exit poll of MIssissippi Republicans voting for Clinton, and these numbers were similar to those of Texas Republicans voting for Clinton.

  • The TNR article shows that if you cherry pick your data right, you can reach any conclusion you want. From the CNN exit polls:
    Dems (69% of vote): Clinton 56%, Obama 42%
    Indys (22% of vote): Obama 50%, Clinton 48%
    Repubs (9% of vote): Clinton 49%, Obama 49%

    Looks like those Repubs really threw it for Clinton! The TNR piece assumes all the Repubs voted for Clinton, when exit polls show otherwise.

  • When Republicans vote for Obama, it shows the strength of his candidacy. When Republicans vote for Clinton, it shows the weakness of her candidacy.

    Yes, because when we hear about Republicans supporting Obama, there are stories like these which suggest they’re really moving to support him and will vote for him in the general election.

    When we hear about Republicans supporting Clinton, there are nothing but stories suggesting they want to damage our eventual nominee and weaken our party and thereby help the Republicans win.

    Is the difference really that hard to understand?

  • “Republican voters were very helpful to Clinton in Ohio” (ditto TX, MS….)

    What about this potential effect in PA?

  • RacerX wrote:

    OK, you forgot to mention that they were also instrumental in her narrow “win” in Texas, which was billed as a do-or-die contest. So there is no doubt that the Repuiblicans saved her campaign. If they hadn’t, and if the Clinton’s words about a Texas win being essential were held to (cough) this race would be over.

    And this is based upon? CNN exit polls show Republicans broke for Obama, 53%-46%.

  • Some keep claiming that Hillary won TX because of Rep crossovers however the facts are just the opposite Obama won 52% of republicans in TX according to exit polls.

  • TR wrote:

    Yes, because when we hear about Republicans supporting Obama, there are stories like these which suggest they’re really moving to support him and will vote for him in the general election.

    When we hear about Republicans supporting Clinton, there are nothing but stories suggesting they want to damage our eventual nominee and weaken our party and thereby help the Republicans win.

    Is the difference really that hard to understand?

    If there really is a significant number of Repubs that will support Obama over McCain but not Clinton over McCain, then why doesn’t it show up in the poll numbers? The top of the post shows a tiny difference (well within margin of error) difference in support nationally between Clinton and Obama over McCain. Unless you think that there a bunch of Repubs lying to pollsters to bolster Clinton’s candidacy.

  • Dennis_D @14

    Thats what I was looking for thanks.

    However the same ones will keep making the same statements because it fits their argument that Hillary should drop out. I wonder how many caucus attendees in TX were Republicans for Obama.

    Republicans believe that they can beat Obama. Not that I do but most hardcore republicans do.

  • Hey Dennis_D:

    Answer TR’s question in #12 if you want anyone here to think you’re anything more than a Hillary Troll.

    http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14882.html#comment-392012

    The Republicans are being very clear about why they’re supporting each of the candidates. Some of them are genuinely sick of Bush, so they fear his buddy McCain, and they also don’t want the Clintons back in power, so their choice is made accordingly. But you know all that, I’m pretty sure.

  • Republicans believe that they can beat Obama. Not that I do but most hardcore republicans do.

    I’m sure that some of them do believe that, but the polls seem to indicate that the majority feel Obama will be harder to beat. I’ve met a lot of them, they like Obama even if they hate his politics, and they will have a hard time swallowing the Republican smearing that will begin in earnest once Hillary finally crashes and burns.

  • Clinton will pull in the so called Reagan Democrats where as Obama does very poorly with them.

  • It really isn’t very helpful to speculate on which candidate will draw the most republican vote in March as the election is in November. I we as dems don’t carry the states we generally carry plus one then we lose again. Having said that it looks like OH, FL and ARK may be those states this year.

  • Clinton will pull in the so called Reagan Democrats…

    ROTFLOL. Thanks for the humor this early in the morning.

  • I we as dems don’t carry the states we generally carry plus one then we lose again.

    Ah, the old Plus One plan. Also known as the Let’s Shoot Ourselves In The Ass (Again) Plan.

    That’s been a really great strategy for the Democrats, huh?

    Sigh.

  • Before anyone takes the time to point out to Comeback Bill that his assumptions about the general election are directly contradicted by the SUSA state polls, remember he’s had them shown to him four or five times now and is still ignoring them. Don’t bother.

  • * In case there were any doubts about who enters Pennsylvania as the favorite, a new poll from Strategic Vision, a Republican firm, shows Clinton leading Obama by 18 points, 56% to 38%. In a general-election match-up, Strategic Vision shows McCain beating both Dems, though Obama fares slightly better than Clinton.– CB

    Are there similar match-ups available for other states? That is, is there a correlation between who wins the primary and how the state is supposed to “go” in the general? Because, if Clinton keeps winning in states which are predicted to fall to the Repubs anyway (PA, FLA), then it’s NFG to us. Ditto Obama, of course.

  • RacerX, I answered his question. Obama supporters rave about he is a superior General Election candidate, but the evidence we have in terms of polls show that the difference between Clinton and Obama in the General Election are very small.

  • While you trade barbs, McCain is uniting the Republican Party around his thinly disguised right wing agenda. In the next six weeks, McCain can sit back, amass his war chest, concentrate his base and delight as you deconstruct each other.

    Exactly. So why don’t the supers end it by coming out now to express their support whichever candidate gets to the convention with the most pledged delegates?

    Hillary already lost. If the supers were thinking about the general election, they’d finish it now instead of waiting until August and allowing the media circus to continue to McCain’s benefit and at the country’s expense.

  • I am still trying to understand how Strategic Vision can have the Dems overwhelmingly going for Clinton, but Obama as the better General Election candidate. Per the 2004 PA exit polls, the voter breakdown is 41% Dem, 39% Rep and 20% Indy. Per the poll, Clinton gets only 42% to McCain’s 48% (10% undecided) and Obama only gets 44% to McCain’s 47% (9% undecided). To get 47-48%, McCain has to get all of the Repubs and the majority of the independents against both candidates. I just don’t see it.

  • Would Obama chose to disenfranchise FL and MI voters?

    ‘Obama…said in an interview with CNN that he had reservations about a vote by mail. “I think there’s some concerns in terms of making sure that whatever we do is fair, and that votes are properly counted and the logistics make sense,” he said.’

    “Two co-chairman of Obama’s campaign in Michigan also say they’re wary of redoing the primary by mail. They’d prefer that the DNC evenly split Michigan’s 128 delegates between Clinton and Obama, who was not on the primary ballot because he didn’t want to anger other early voting states.”

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5igrYLRrHG3P6lIbs2E7pSH0bxhvgD8VBJDO00

    “Plouffle again floated the idea of seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan – which were stripped of their delegates because they held their primaries too early – through some sort of negotiated “arrangement.” One idea that has been tossed around is to evenly split the delegates between the two Democratic presidential candidates. If Florida’s Jan. 29 vote were counted, Clinton would get a net of about 38 more pledged delegates than Obama.”
    http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_politics/2008/03/obama-campaises.html

    I’m a Californian who votes by permanent absentee ballot… i.e. by mail.
    Now let’s hear from Obama supporters how disenfranchising two states, one a swing state… is democratic?

  • @ 29 “who was not on the primary ballot because he didn’t want to anger other early voting states”

    Uhh, that’s one way to look at it. You could also say that pledging not to “participate” meant, you know, not participating. Having your name on the ballot sure seems like participating. Sort of the one way to participate.

    Isn’t it ironic that the states so determined to have their say early would have been so much better served by…not changing anything?

  • According to CNN’s exit polls, 53% of republicans which made up 9% of the voters in Texas went for Obama, stop crying about republicans spoiling it for Obama in Texas and Ohio, if you want to get angry about republican interference in the democratic nominating process, you should be angry as hell that they have pushed Obama into the lead with delegates.

    If you tally the delegates from closed primaries, Obama is in fact only winning by 6 delegates, and that doesn’t include Florida.

    Wake up, and realize that republicans who have no loyalty to the democratic party nor any candidate for the party nomination. Hell, a lot of independants have no intention of voting democratic either.

    We need to choose the democratic nominee based on how democrats are voting, forget the outside interference!

  • What the CNN exit polls don’t tell you is what percentage of Republicans who voted for a Democrat did so because they also want to vote for that Democrat in the general, and how many did so just to try and skew the out come of the Democratic Primary. If a significant percentage voted for a Democrat to try and skew the numbers, then yes, we should be concerned. If they voted for a Democrat so they would have a chance to do so again in the general election, then leave it alone. The President of the United States is the President of all of the people, not just those who belong to his/her party.And just how much faith do you put in exit polls?

  • “concentrate his base and delight as you deconstruct each other.”

    It would be nice if some of these guys would quit acting like the deconstruction has been 50/50. One has been a bit more aggressive in and should be noted that it is hurting the party. Hillary should be called out when making statements like the one above.

    Obama and Gore ? Does that mean someone is actually thinking about the environment ? We are nearing the end of the primary season and I have yet to hear one candidate tackle the environment consistently.

    Is is a no brainer, the Pope has made pollution a sin, the EPA is a fricken joke, making corporate friendly decisions. People are interested in all things Green and I bet that is why Gore has not decided who he will support. Neither candidate has earned his nod.

    We have three, if not four states that have had R’s voting for Hillary. If the SuperD’s pull Hillary out, there is going to be hell to pay. I have a sneaky suspicion she is working very hard to pull that off, she has to be, otherwise this is over.

    What happened with the Ohio Super Duper Delegates demanding attention ? Doesn’t seem like anyone jumped when they said jump. Good for them.

  • If you tally the delegates from closed primaries, Obama is in fact only winning by 6 delegates… -Greg

    ‘Still winning’ are the operative words in your exclusive and meaningless metric.

  • Hahahahaha…

    I don’t type the above very often, but i couldn’t help it. We’ve descended to parsing and analyzing exit polling? It’s a fun game, but is it worth it? Can any sort of definite knowledge really be found in it?

    Sure, the pollsters can try and get a good sample, but will they? When do they conduct the poll? If they concentrate on early morning and after 5 pm, does that skew it terribly because younger people and stay at home parents (and the unemployed) will probably avoid going to the polls at the busiest times?

    And since exit polling only represents X percentage of the people polled, i do not see how it can be translated into X percentage of total voters…unless the polling is so lopsided that it must be indicative. I don’t watch them closely, but i’ve never seen it noted that the pollsters asked X amount of total people, but Y number of people declined to participate. Do the percentages come from all polled (included declined participation) or just those who participated?

    Long story short: i’ll believe it when i see it. And i’ll add that it is somewhat different when a campaign member goes on a Republican radio show to ask for crossover votes…knowing full well that those crossovers will not vote Dem in the general.

  • Super delegates probably have a variety of reasons for not endorsing anyone now.

    If their state’s primary is yet to come, elected officials facing an opponent may not be sure which candidate has longer coattails. Or even if not facing an opponent now they might worry about how their vote could damage them in a future primary challenge. Some might fear that if they pressure Senator Clinton out of the race some issue (maybe the Rev. Wright comments) could damage the nominee even before the convention. Another reason may be that the Clinton campaign has given them pause. I think Senator Clinton’s telephone ad and much-maligned mention of her experience and Sen. Mccain’s was a signal to super delegates that Sen. Obama can be “attacked on his positives”–his claim to superior judgement on foreign policy. Another such signal was Sen. Clinton and former Pres. Clinton’s mentions of the possibility of a joint ticket. They predicted that Obama would reject the idea rather haughtily, not sounding much like a uniter and damaging another positive claim.

  • DeFazio said it best in his letter… I felt this part of it was more telling than the one quoted above by Steve:

    “You both claim to be better suited than the other to take on the so-called Straight-Talk Express, so prove it. Run the next six weeks of your campaign against McCain, not against the other Democrat. Go after McCain for his policy positions, not the other Democrat for theirs. Allow the Democratic voters to believe in a campaign that can provide a new direction for this country and stop McCain from continuing the failed policies of the Bush Administration. In the end, it is the candidate who can take the fight to McCain and win that deserves my support and, most importantly, the support of the Democratic Party.””

    Amen to that…. Regardless whether you’re a Clinton or Obama Supporter, I hope we can agree that we want to see who can beat McCain best, not who can outsmart the other Democrat.

  • DON’T BE DUPED!!!

    Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And because they feel that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket would be unbeatable. And also because with a Clinton and Obama ticket you are almost 100% certain to get quality, affordable universal health care very soon.

    But first, all of you have to make certain that Hillary Clinton takes the democratic nomination and then the Whitehouse. NOW! is the time. THIS! is the moment you have all been working, and waiting for. You can do this America. “Carpe diem” (harvest the day).

    I think Hillary Clinton see’s a beautiful world of plenty, and comfort for all. She is a woman, and a mother. And it’s time America. Do this for your-self, and your children’s future. You will have to work together on this and be aggressive, relentless, and creative. Americans face an even worse catastrophe ahead than the one you are living through now.

    You see, the medical and insurance industry mostly support the republicans with the money they ripped off from you. And they don’t want you to have quality, affordable universal health care. They want to be able to continue to rip you off, and kill you and your children by continuing to deny you life saving medical care that you have already paid for. So they can continue to make more immoral profits for them-self.

    Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama’s. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

    As much as 30% of Obama’s primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help.

    Hillary Clinton has been out manned, out gunned, and out spent 2 and 3 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton.

    If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is. YOUNG PEOPLE. DON’T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose.

    The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. I suggest a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket now! Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.

    I think Barack Obama has a once in a life time chance to make the ultimate historic gesture for unity, and change in America by accepting Hillary Clinton’s offer as running mate. Such an act now would for ever seal Barack Obama’s place at the top of the list of Americas all time great leaders, and unifiers for all of history. But the time to act is soon.

    The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses.

    Fortunately the Clinton’s have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton’s. Only the Clinton’s are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.

    “This is not a game” (Hillary Clinton)

    Sincerely

    jacksmith…

  • Comments are closed.