Obama takes Maine by wide margin

February 10, 2008

February was poised to be a rough month for the Clinton campaign, but the Maine caucuses looked like a lone bright spot. In the post-Super Tuesday landscape, this was expected to be Clinton’s best chance of a February victory, and several recent polls showed her in the lead.

It didn’t work out the way the campaign had planned.

Democrats overlooked the snowy weather and turned out in heavy numbers for municipal caucuses Sunday, giving Barack Obama a slight lead over Hillary Rodham Clinton in early tallies for the party’s party presidential nominee.

Democrats in 420 Maine towns and cities were deciding how the state’s 24 delegates will be allotted at the party’s national convention in August. Despite the weather, turnout was “incredible,” party executive director Arden Manning said.

With 11 percent of the participating precincts reporting, Obama had a narrow lead over Clinton, 175 to 168, with four uncommitted.

In terms of percentages, with 70% of precincts reporting, Obama led the tally of state delegates, 58% to 41%.

After yesterday’s setbacks in Louisiana, Nebraska, and Washington state, the Clinton campaign responded by highlighting how little effort it made in these contests. It’s much tougher to make the same argument in Maine, where the senator spent considerable time and resources leading up to the caucuses.

It’s a good weekend for the Obama campaign (five for five, if one includes the Virgin Islands), and further evidence of a Clinton campaign that hoped to be in a far better position right now, no doubt contributing to the change in campaign managers.

Congratulations Senator Obama!

  • This means nothing for the Obama campaign. Maine is such a small state, and caucuses are undemocratic anyway…

    /snark

  • I just heard Bill Clinton say that Jesse Jackson won the Maine Caucuses in 84 and 88 — is this true?

  • This can’t be attributed to the large African-American vote in Maine! 🙂

    If I heard correctly, there was a lot of snow in Maine today. If it’s true that Hillary’s best demographic is older white women, the weather may have kept a lot of that demographic at home.

    This was a caucus, so that “enthusiasm gap” may be at work again. It’s a lot easier to drop by the polls and vote at your convenience than it is to show up at a specified time and endure the caucus process. The Obamaites seem to be the more committed of the two constituencies.

    There was a discussion on this blog today about momentum. Is it real or meaningless? We will find out soon enough. Will a string of Obama wins in February carry over to the big primaries on March 5?

  • If I heard correctly, there was a lot of snow in Maine today. If it’s true that Hillary’s best demographic is older white women, the weather may have kept a lot of that demographic at home.

    That’s certainly a possibility, but from the article linked to in the post it says:

    Despite the weather, turnout was “incredible,” party executive director Arden Manning said.

    So turnout was huge — except for the older white woman demographic? Is that what you are arguing?

  • Hey, does anyone have exit poll numbers for any of these caucuses? We had them for Clinton’s wins but not for her defeats.

    Mostly I want to know if she won or lost due to less older/women/donut hole kids getting to participate.

  • # more kinda easy ones for Barack and then he will have to go to work. No more free rides.

    According to the article on Yahoo. he’ll only get 13 delegates and 11 for clinton

  • Crissa,

    Clinton is only in the lead because of superdelegates. Obama leads with pledged i.e. democratic delegates.

    If the remaining superdelegates have any sense, and want to avoid a huge Democratic scandal, they’ll line up behind whoever gets more pledged delegates.

  • I heard today that Clinton went to NC today and had a private meeting with John Edwards has anyone heard anything else about it? If so whats the scoop. I think probally a cabinet position in HHS where he would be a perfect fit. Candy Crowley was speculating today of that possibilty.

  • I’m under the impression that Maine is one of those Northeastern states that pride themselves on their independence, hence their Republican Senators that are more willing the breaks ranks with the party than others. If Obama is capturing the independent vote, it will either be tug of war since that’s McCain’s demographic or maybe Obama will steal them away permanently from John. It would be good see national polls of which candidate, Obama or McCain, is taking the heart of true independents.

  • #16 – pretty sure I read that Edwards met with Clinton in NC on Friday and Obama is scheduled to do so Monday (sounds like Edwards may have initiated the meetings); exploring possible but not certain endorsement.

  • I beleive Maine is the only state in the US that has proportional representive electoral vote or it might be 3 for the winner and 1 at large does anyone know.

  • #19 thats what I was thinking he might be going to endorse soon as tomorrow. It will be interesting because he will more than likely go to who ever he endorses. That could mean alot in deciding this nomination he has 26 delegates I beleive pledged if not they are free agents at the convention.

  • First, a note regarding Crissa’s shout out at 12:

    Also, Clinton is still in the lead: CNN.com

    Yes she is. That’s because the media is lumping super-delegates in with “the voice of the people delegates.” This is sad sick shit. At the very least they ought to give two totals: Earned delegates versus the insider-party-machine-you-owe-me-a-favor crap. Conclusion: Like it or not… the Clinton machine is a big think snake and will not go easily into the good night. It is going to take nothing less than a multitude of $25 donations from wee folks to kill it. It will fight to the very end and then some. If there is any chance for a victory via a lawsuit… it will take it. I expect the worse. I am damn sure I won’t be disappointed.

    Now for second point. Yesterday this appeared on one of the threads [parenthetical comment added]:

    I know that a win is a win is a win, and of this small vote total, Obama did get a 2-1 win over Clinton, but let’s not call what’s happening a landslide [See because it depends on what your definition of a “landside is” is.] … Obama was always expected to win these caucuses – that seems to be the venue where he shines – so let’s not get carried away. If that’s possible.

    And that profound reasoning settled on last night’s thread like a wet blanket on a cold night in Maine. Way later someone else said in response to that: you are spinning like a republican. Amen. If we get too timid to call ‘spin’ spin in here… out of a desire to be nice, we serve no one but the forces of unreason.

    Lastly: Today the people in Maine, where he wasn’t supposed to win, kicked the cold damp futureless Clinton blanket to the ground. And they said very clearly: We want something warm.

    We want something warm!
    Maybe that should be the new Barack Obama chant… eh?

    Well done young fella!

    quoted comment: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14531.html#comment-378621:

  • Jim-

    Maine and Nebraska are the two states that split up their electoral votes. You were pretty close on #21. The way it works is they award 2 electoral votes based on the statewide winner and 1 electoral vote for the winner in each of Congressional districts.

    I happen to think that is the most democratic way to apply the electoral college, but unlike those asshat Republicans in CA, if they are going to do something like that it should be done across the board.

    Of course, that would require elections to be federalized, and we know how likely that is to happen.

  • According to CNN’s figures, Clinton leads by a whopping 27. I’m looking forward to what that looks like—about 50 hours from now.

    Six months ago, this wasn’t supposed to be possible. The same with five months—and four months—and even three months ago. The Clinton campaign spin two months ago was that Obama would be crippled by 2/5, and it was pretty much the same thing just three weeks ago.

    Honestly, I think the problem here is that Clinton surrounded herself with a gaggle of sycophantic geese—and the eggs they’re laying are anything but golden. Bringing in “a friend from her first-lady days” isn’t going to do much for the campaign at this point. In fact, it could be portrayed as “a wee bit of cronyism.”

    The Maine polling numbers held steady for Clinton right through to today, and she spent some serious cash there—only to get blitzed from just about every direction. The only explanation for such an upset—and frankly, getting waxed by 18 percentage points when you’re supposed to win easily can be called nothing else but an upset—is that the opposing force has attained “momentum superiority.”

    If that momentum holds—and there’s really no solid reason, after the fiasco of Maine, to doubt that it will, indeed, hold—then February might well be Clinton’s “Appomattox Moment.” The war might last for a few more months, but there will be no more meaningful victories.

    Just a continuing string of “advancing to the rear….”

  • ROTFLMLiberalAO: I like reading your comments and find many of your points valid. Personally, I think your arguments would be stronger with out the demeaning language.

  • Obama has more total votes, has won nearly twice as many states, and is up about 80 pledged delegates. And his margins will only increase in the coming days.

    You can pretend like this isn’t true, but refusing to believe it doesn’t make it not so.

  • I had some thoughts about ‘momentum’ that time and inclination didn’t permit me to gather for that thread, so I’ll spout it here:
    To have ‘momentum’,you must first achieve a critical mass – a snowball can trigger an avalanch, but only if it convinces enough other snow to follow. It’s not an avalanch if it rolls down the hill by itself.
    For me, the question is whether Obama has achieved this critical mass. A 4 state run where he wins by double digits in each is more than a snowball. (I’m not even counting the whopping 3 delegates from the Virgin Islands)
    As early as a day ago, Clinton had one state she could call ‘safe’ – 2 weeks ago, 2 fell into that catagory. Today? She lost them both by double digits.

    I was an Edwards guy who also liked Dodd. I like Hillary and Obama as well. From where I sit, the ‘Big Mo’ is real and at Obama’s back.

  • Good stuff from Kos:

    Clinton (10)

    Arkansas +43
    Oklahoma +24
    New York +17
    Massachusetts +15
    Tennessee +13
    California +10
    New Jersey +10
    Arizona +9
    Nevada +6
    New Hampshire +3

    Obama (19)

    Idaho +62
    Alaska +50
    Kansas +48
    Washington +37
    Georgia +36
    Nebraska +36
    Colorado +35
    Minnesota +35
    Illinois+32
    South Carolina +32
    North Dakota +24
    Louisiana +21
    Maine +18
    Utah +18
    Alabama +14
    Delaware +10
    Iowa +9
    Connecticut +4
    Missouri +1

    Good stuff from Matt Yglesias:

    Back in October 2007, Clinton was beating Obama in Maine by a hilarious 47 to 10 margin, but it seems he’s carried the state today, once again by a large margin. My understanding, though, is that this doesn’t really count because it’s a small state, much as Utah doesn’t count because there aren’t many Democrats there, DC doesn’t count because there are too many black people, Washington doesn’t count because it’s a caucus, Illinois doesn’t count because Obama represents it in the Senate even though Hillary was born there, Hawaii won’t count because Obama was born there. I’m not sure why Delaware and Connecticut don’t count, but they definitely don’t.
    [snip]
    UPDATE: I forgot about Missouri. Obama’s win in Missouri, of course, doesn’t count because the state was called too late.

  • OBAMA – 986
    CLINTON – 924

    The people are speaking. The people want Obama!!

    It is the responsibility of the DNP to make sure that the people’s voice is heard this August. Clinton must NOT be allowed to steal the nomination by purchasing Super Delegate votes.

  • Just a thought about polls and Intrade.com

    Right now, Clinton is slightly ahead in the polls. Realclearpolitics.com has Clinton up by 3.1. The exact number is not that important.

    Intrade says that Obama has a 70% chance of winning the nomination and Clinton has a 30% chance of winning the nomination

    So, Intrade must be looking at something else besides the national polls..

    Therefore, it seems to me that movements in Intrade are far more significant than movements in the polls. Even if movements in the polls influence Intrade.

  • Neil: the national polls tend to poll registered democrats and dem-leaning independents…as they tighten the screen (to voters, primary voters, likely primary voters, etc), obama does better and better. When you get down to the highest barrier to registering preference, Obama kills. And the trends are clear: the longer he has to campaign in a given area, the better he does.

  • Billary needs to go read “Reville for Radicals” by the late Saul Alinsky. Obama read it 20 years ago when he went to work in the projects of Chicago – as does any community organizer anywhere, since it’s the “bible,” “the little red book” of community organzing. Read it, and all of a sudden, what’s going on becomes transparently obvious.

    The Boss of the Company (Billary) is being out-done down on the level where Famous Entitled People don’t have to go or worry about.

    And if you read the book, you will know why she has had her last “victory” in this campaign.

    Hope all the BillaryBots watched “60 Minutes” tonight to see the difference between Tomorrow (Obama) and Fifteen Years Ago (Billary).

  • Pingback: The Significance of the Last 24 Hours for Obama and McCain | David Ortez

  • OK, I think I’ve got it, Maine doesn’t count because it was snowing so hard that the voters couldn’t tell that Obama wasn’t white. 🙂

    Seriously, notwithstanding CB’s astute observations about momentum not amounting to much so far, I suspect that this will quickly change. I suspect that a lot of Democratic voters have been holding off on Obama because they haven’t been sure if he can go the distance. Hillary may not be as exciting as Obama, but she certainly represents a familiar and safe choice. However, this weekend’s results on top of a draw with Hillary on Super Tuesday certify Obama as a serious contender, fully as capable of winning as Hillary. Independents who lean Republican may even be susceptible to this as they see Obama trounce Hillary, and McCain floundering in Republican primaries (everyone loves a winner).

  • “Reville for Radicals”, hmm? As luck would have it, i need to go to the library tomorrow and i’m generally more interested in the forest than the trees. Thanks for the suggestion TC.

    My gut already agrees that her campaign is strategically finished, but it comes from too much time reading military history rather than the community organizer angle.

  • Yesterday, the Clinton camp’s message was that their supporters had to work and couldn’t caucus. Today, it’s the snow. Damn, everything is just conspiring against her!

  • I agree with you take on the situation N.Wells, and every voter from here on out knows that they have the power to put it out of reach. Americans love winners, and we’ve never been afraid of overloading a bandwagon.

    Plus, everyone knows the situation with the super delegates and i don’t think that anyone wants it to go that far or be decided in that way. I don’t want to detract from Sen Obama’s win today, but i can imagine many folks in Maine feeling like they were choosing between the better of two goods and knowing that if they came out hard for him they could well be the push that turned a snowball into an avalanche…and we’re all white in an avalanche, eh?

  • I agree with those posters who gently tweaked Steve’s nose for his earlier disparaging of momentum as a significant factor in elections. I also agree that it looks more and more like the ordinary folk in the street really want to be led by Barack Obama, and not by Hillary Clinton. This will be a bitter pill to swallow for her – bitter as wormwood, if a sense of entitlement led her to believe she couldn’t lose.

    I’d still encourage Democrats to vote for her rather than let a Republican take the White House, if she won it fair and square. But it’s beginning to look like the only way she could take it now would be by some trick or function of patronage: even her fans would have to admit she’s better placed to force her will on the party than Obama is. I hope that won’t happen, because this should be one big long victory mambo for Democrats, not trench warfare.

    Just as an aside that likely means little to Americans; in a recent poll, 15% of Canadians surveyed said they’d give up their next vote in a Canadian election, for an opportunity to use it in this one, in the United States. Who becomes the next U.S. president is that important to Canada, and I daresay the rest of the world feels the same, to varying degrees.

    Well done……Mr. President.

  • And if that book title really is “Reville for Radicals”, the author should go to spelling jail. It’s “Reveille”, from the French verb, “reveiller”, to get up. I’ve never read it myself, although it sounds interesting.

  • Two points:

    1-Tom Cleaver, Hillary did read that an all of Alinsky’s work, and wrote a thesis on him, and then rejected his philosophy as “quaint” (I shit you not). I’ve said a couple times (though I don’t know if I’ve said it here) that you can trace the real, fundamental difference between the two down to that: their thoughts on Alinsky. I think it speaks well of Obama that he’s in favor of Alinsky’s ideas.

    2-N. Wells-I suspect that is why Obama has taken to making the case that he’s the best to go up against McCain so explicitly. It’s a straight up pitch to the rank-and-file who more than anything want Bush out of the White House to get on board his electibility train. It’s just another bloc of voters for him to poach from her coalition

  • I’m not going to lie to you, and as you know I’m already thinking it, I’m going to say it:

    Boo-to-the-Yah, everyone! Score another one for the Bamster!

    There, that wasn’t so bad, was it?

  • So, it seems we have a new understanding of the dynamics of this campaign:

    Hillary can win only in large states where the population has never met Obama, where it never snows, and where the population is made up of working-class Latinas, all of whom have met and hate David Shuster? Hmmm.. I suppose Florida might be almost a possibility…. *grin*

  • Right now, Clinton is slightly ahead in the polls. Realclearpolitics.com has Clinton up by 3.1. The exact number is not that important.

    One pattern to look at in comparing different polls is how rigorously they exclude people based upon likelihood to vote. If you simply poll people in general, Clinton does better than Obama. However the tighter the poll is with regards to limiting to people expected to vote, then the better Obama does.

  • I suspect that is why Obama has taken to making the case that he’s the best to go up against McCain so explicitly.

    Actually, I just read a news article yesterday headlined “Clinton Says She Can Beat McCain,” so it actually looks like she’s the one that can beat him. Even better, she explained her strategy thusly:
    “When I think about running against Senator McCain, if I’m so fortunate to be the Democratic nominee — you’ll never have to worry about being knocked out of the ring,” Clinton said to cheers. “I think I can go toe to toe with John McCain every single day.”

    And I think that just about says it all. And the more I think about it, the more I realize she’s right and that Obama’s plan of getting knocked out of the ring repeatedly and going toe-to-face with McCain might not be the best of strategies. And so I’m switching my vote to Hillary. I’m convinced. Wait a minute! That was just toughguy rhetoric which explained nothing! I’ve been betrayed!!!

    BTW, I’ve never really watched an Obama rally before. Could he be as boring and pointless as this? Could Bill? Toe-to-Toe?? Who writes this junk? I’ve seen boxers with better material than this, and that was after the fight. Boring!

    She apparently also mentioned that people who traditionally vote Democratic support her. Great, because I really thought that poor latino women might be voting for McCain this time around. Good to know we can have a candidate who’s locked their votes up. Sounds like the 50+1 strategy is working like clockwork.

  • The book title is actually “Rules for Radicals” I read it in the early 80’s and we used it when convincing ( through creative protest,)the University of Oklahoma to divest itself of its investments in South Africa. We also utilized it in pushing for a national MLK Day. He had a second book,and I honestly can’t remember the name so it may have been Reveille for Radicals. I read that also, but it didn’t stay with me as well.

    I understand that H. Clinton was also offered a job with Alinsky in Chicago, but turned it down, Pretty much the same job Obama accepted. Though, Hillary did write a paper about Mr Alinsky.

    Anyway, good on Obama and his staff and his supporters, they’ve had a hell of a weekend. And he actually did win a Grammy tonight. I thought who ever posted that earlier was pure snark.(Along the lines of “Gore won an Oscar and an Emmy and the Nobel Prize!”)

    Don’t get me wrong, I think Hillary would be a very good President and I totally dig her wonkishness. I think she’d be an amazing Veep, much better than Cheney, because she’d use her powers for good. And even better than Gore was. That woman has a command of all the issues that is breathtaking. And I think she’d make a better “Lion” of the Senate than Kennedy. And I will proudly vote for her in Nov.

    A very fine week for democracy and America and Obama, all considered.

    And thinking back almost 30 years, yea it was probably Reveille for Radicals, the second Alinsky book.

  • “Just as an aside that likely means little to Americans; in a recent poll, 15% of Canadians surveyed said they’d give up their next vote in a Canadian election, for an opportunity to use it in this one, in the United States. Who becomes the next U.S. president is that important to Canada, and I daresay the rest of the world feels the same, to varying degrees.”

    There’s a reason for this. The current Prime Minister is the most embarrassing suck-up that Canada has ever produced (and there have been several). He needs a patron in the White House to keep his job, and the election result in November will impact the next election here.

    At the moment, Stephen Harper has enough clout to hold a minority government together and may be able to manage a 50%+1 majority if he holds an election soon enough.

    However, I think his window is closing. He needs a powerful status quo President who won’t interfere with the normal process of Bushocratic government too much. His best Republicans, Romney and Giuliani, are out, and his next best, Huckabee, is unlikely to win. McCain might help him, but he supposedly took a pathological dislike to Mitt Romney and Stephen Harper is basically Romney with beady eyes.

    Harper’s best Democratic choice is Clinton, if only because she is seen as the “safer” of the two choices. (Harper’s strength is that he is seen as a “stronger leader” even by people who don’t like what he’s doing.) Obama, by contrast, would be poison for him. A successful populist who can get out the votes for any movement other than Bush-Cheney conservatism means the end of the Conservatives’ relevance in Canada.

  • Boy, I’ll sign that. I never liked Stephen Harper, even way back when he blew the first election by referring to his party – in an unguarded moment – as “the Republican party of Canada”. His opponent, Paul Martin, was kind of a weak and wobbly nice guy who eventually collapsed under the juggernaut of modern bare-knuckle politics. However, if I’m fair to Mr. Harper (and I try to be fair in everything), he’s run a pretty untroubled government thus far. I suppose that’s easier to do if you take over in a sustained period of prosperity and inherit a meaty cash surplus. Mind you, I could name a leader who took over in a nearly identical set of circumstances, and fucked it up until its own mother wouldn’t recognize it.

    Still, I’ll never forgive Harper from back when he wasn’t Prime Minister, shouting angrily that we should be standing shoulder to shoulder with our American friends in their charge to liberate Iraq. If he’d been PM then, that’s what we’d be doing now – trying to unstick ourselves from the tarbaby, just like you are.

    Despite the smooth sailing on this side of the border, the Conservatives’ popularity is down – mostly, I think, because of their inability to impose conservative values on the rest of the country – and they might not win another election if it were called today: would almost certainly not win a majority. I’ve never really thought about who he’d prefer as president, except the impossible goal of another 8 years of Bush rule, but you’re probably right.

  • Dee, Alinsky actually wrote BOTH books. You can still get them on Amazon.

    Tom, I know about the “little red book,” but we used to call it “the little red book WITH A GREAT BIG CLUB. It’s a real “wall-tumbler.”

  • I would have to say that I am from Maine, and Hillary totally has underestimated the demographics…We are a well educated bunch, fiercely independent, have a fierce dislike of governmental mandates (such as her health insurance mandate for adults), very anti-war…need I go on ?…If you could have seen our little one room civic center with lines over flowing and the overwhelming majority going to Obama….The few Hillary supporters were almost booed when they had the audacity to compare Barack Obama to be some sort of flash in the pan, charismatic leader who would let us down….There are those out there that would say that he is weak on real solutions…or that he cannot get the job done …Just go to his website …he is very clear as to how he would accomplish, fixing the economy, ending the Iraq war, providing Healthcare for all without requiring people to pay for healthcare that they may not be able to afford…he has the real solutions not Hillary…

  • Hillary’s strategy of ignoring insignificant states like Maine to focus on the “real” contests like Ohio is pure genius! You Obamacons are just too stupid to realize it. Just ask Rudy…
    LOL

  • Here’s an excerpt from a very funny post from Matthew Yglesias over at The Atlantic, in response to the endless, spine-twisting spinning the Clinton campaign does after every loss (or win). All campaigns do it, but their contradictions are mind numbing.

    Maine for Obama
    Matthew Yglesias, The Atlantic
    10 Feb 2008

    Back in October 2007, Clinton was beating Obama in Maine by a hilarious 47 to 10 margin, but it seems he’s carried the state today, once again by a large margin. My understanding, though, is that this doesn’t really count because it’s a small state, much as Utah doesn’t count because there aren’t many Democrats there, DC doesn’t count because there are too many black people, Washington doesn’t count because it’s a caucus, Illinois doesn’t count because Obama represents it in the Senate even though Hillary was born there, Hawaii won’t count because Obama was born there. I’m not sure why Delaware and Connecticut don’t count, but they definitely don’t…I forgot about Missouri. Obama’s win in Missouri, of course, doesn’t count because the state was called too late.

  • If we are going to talk about Harper, let’s not forget that aside from the wonderful attributes correctly listed by Splitting Image, he is also busy instituting mechanisms of social control and artistic censorship (i.e. including ‘not in the public interest’ as criterion for artistic merit, straight out of the Francisco Franco playbook).

    The good thing is that unless the separatist and largely social democrat Bloc Quebecois collapses, it is mathematically well-nigh impossible for Harper to win a majority government. A number of scandals are beginning to dog his ministers; I won’t get into details, you can look them up yourself: The Chuck Cadman scandal, the conflict between Ontario’s newly re-elected majority premier Dalton McGuinty and federal finance minister Jim Flaherty, the possible involvement of Environment Minister John Baird in the election of Ottawa mayor Larry O’Brien, the fiasco at Bali over the Kyoto Protocol, the Afghan detainee issue, the Atlantic Accord issue (google Bill Casey), and many more ‘Greatest Hits’ are all adding up to a thousand cuts. Some Conservative base support is also slipping, perhaps surprisingly, to the Green party.

    The Liberals, however, have been seemingly lethargic in their opposition, abstaining from votes in parliament, calling it a ‘boycott’, and leaving the New Democratic Party & BQ to provide the only meaningful opposition. If the Liberals are smart, they will time their opposition to bring the minority government down while Democratic Party support in the US is providing them some free media coverage of some of their talking points.

    • Comments are closed.