Antoine Clarke's Election Watch

How things stand in the 2008 Democratic primaries

All right, this site doesn't normally do satire. But this is priceless.





Hat-tip: Russell Whitaker.

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 5/13/2008 05:19:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

Welcome fivethirtyeight.com!

Fivethirtyeight.com is a project by a Daily Kos contributor I've mentioned previously, here and here and which has some flaws, despite what I reckon are genuine attempts to avoid overstating Democratic party hopes for November.

I think it's a very good addition to the debate about what will happen, as opposed to what we might like to happen or wish would happen. As such, I have no hesitation in adding fivethirtyeight.com to my blogroll.

Here's what Poblano says about it all, taken from the site FAQ:

What is the significance of the number 538?
538 is the number of electors in the electoral college.

How is this site different from other compilations of polls like Real Clear Politics?
There are a few things we're able to do over here that these other sites haven't done. Firstly, we assign each poll a weighting based on that pollster's historical track record, the poll's sample size, and the recentness of the poll. More reliable polls are weighted more heavily in our averages. Secondly, we include a regression estimate for each state among our 'polls', which helps to account for outlier polls and to stabilize the results. Thirdly, we simulate the election 10,000 times for each site update, in order to provide a probabilistic assessment of electoral outcomes.

I'm not sure that RealClearPolitics doesn't already do the weighting that Poblano is doing, but either way there are likely to be some differences. See here for my praise for the RCP.

And we agree on Zogby:

OK, so just who are the most reliable pollsters? As of 3/13/2008, the weights assigned to the various polling agencies are as follows:

Survey USA 1.91
Selzer & Co (IA) 1.47
Field Poll (CA) 1.33
Rasmussen 1.30
Ohio Poll / U. of Cincinnati 1.24
Chicago Trib. / Market Shares 1.16
Mason-Dixon 1.10
Univ. New Hampshire 1.08
Public Policy Polling (PPP) 1.05
Research 2000 1.01
Mitchell (MI) 0.96
ABC / Washington Post 0.95
Insider Advantage 0.95
Quinnipiac 0.95
Strategic Vision 0.95
LA Times / Bloomberg 0.83
Star Tribune (MN) 0.81
FOX / Opinion Dynamics 0.79
CNN / Opinion Research 0.77
Suffolk (MA) 0.77
EPIC-MRA (MI) 0.75
Franklin Pierce (NH) 0.74
Farleigh-Dickinson (NJ) 0.71
Marist (NY) 0.69
CBS / New York Times 0.66
American Research Group 0.65
Zogby 0.64
Keystone (PA) 0.64
USA Today / Gallup 0.63
Public Opinion Strategies 0.63
Columbus Dispatch (OH) 0.50
Zogby Interactive 0.43

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 4/13/2008 01:15:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

Let the voters decide? No!

Daily Kos contributor DHinMI seems almost frantic to persuade Senator Hillary Clinton to stop her campaign, before the Pennsylvania and other primaries that remain.

See here, here, and here.

For what it's worth, I agree with the analysis and that the only serious chance Mrs Clinton has is to see her rival, Senator Barack Obama, destroyed by a smear or a drip-drip of innuendo, like this.

Anyone who believes there aren't people working full-time on identifying, testing and disseminating dirt on Mr Obama, for the benefit of the Clintons is naive.

So for the sake of Party unity, this slugging match must stop. Barack Obama is the (almost) clear winner.

But what I want to know is, what happened to "count every vote"?

What happened to the disenfranchised voters of Florida and Michigan? If I lived in Florida, it wouldn't MY fault the local state government and political parties move the date of their primary to January. So by what right would I be disenfranchised?

In 2000, the Democrats made a lot of noise about electoral cheating and sharp practice. In 2004, very conveniently (because Ohio was the ONLY state that could change the result), various allegations were made, which should more likely have been directed in the Washington State Governor's election.

So blacks can only vote, when they vote Democrat. And Florida can only vote, when it suits one of the Democratic nominees. And just in case the voters get it wrong, the super-delegates can fix it.

Any guesses as to why Senator John McCain, if he were 10 years younger, would now be my prediction for winner of the November presidential election? I won't make a firm prediction until the vice-presidents have been picked.
McCain's problems are:

1) the stupid, if not outright evil, Feingold-McCain Campaign Finance Act, which allows labor unions to act as Democratic party surrogates but restricts individual donors and businesses; he sponsored it, so I have no sympathy. The legislation was also used to try and shut down political blogs, so shame on you Senator! McCain has less money than his opponents, although they seem to be doing their best to redress that imbalance.

2) age and health. The simple fact is, he has never had a campaign of this kind before. How fit is Senator McCain. He is two years older than Ronald Reagan was in 1980. It didn't harm the Great Communicator in 1984: "I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience."

3) He is a Senator. That means he has a long record of votes than can be mined for evidence of anything an opponent might wish to accuse him of. True, so are his opponents, but unlike a McCain or a John Kerry, there is a lot shorter trail of evidence to follow.

The big advantages McCain has are "the surge" in Iraq, no nonsense about earmarks, the fact he was demolished in 2000 by George W. Bush (hard to make him out to be a crony) and his appeal to moderates.

Here's the sort of opinion poll Democrat strategists wake up in the night screaming about: one in five Democrats will back McCain instead of the primary candidate they didn't want.

If [FILL preferred candidate] does not win the Democratic nomination, who do
you think you will vote for in the November election? Will you vote for [fill other
candidate], John McCain, some other candidate, or will you probably not vote in the
November election?

Hillary Clinton supporters (n = 228)
53% Barack Obama
19% John McCain
5% Other
13% Won’t vote
10% Don’t know

Barack Obama supporters (n = 126)
60% Hillary Clinton
20% John McCain
3% Other
3% Won’t vote
14% Don’t know

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/22/2008 10:41:00 AM 0 comments
links to this post

When narcissists clash

From that bastion of the great "right-wing conspiracy," the New York Times, comes this:

Delegate Battles Embroil 2 States

Remember Florida 2000? You ain't seen nothin' yet!

There's one lot wants their money back.

Reflecting how tense the situation has become, influential fund-raisers for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton have stepped up their behind-the-scenes pressure on national party leaders to resolve the matter, with some even threatening to withhold their donations to the Democratic National Committee unless it seats the delegates from the two states or holds new primaries there.

In the middle of it all the Clinton spin machine is flying into orbit:

Mrs. Clinton won the primaries in both states, but the contests were not sanctioned by the party, neither candidate campaigned in the states and Mr. Obama did not even put his name on the ballot in Michigan.

Actually, Senator Clinton accidentally forgot to have her name taken off the ballot in Michigan, you know, a bit like forgetting to cancel the gym monthly payments...
And the "non-campaign" in Florida included a televised event in the state a couple of days before the vote (obviously a long-standing engagement that couldn't be re-arranged for the following week, you understand). In fact, the bit I really liked was the victory party for the non-campaign.

Pushing to seat the Florida delegates, at least one top Clinton fund-raiser, Paul Cejas, a Miami businessman who has given the Democratic National Committee $63,500 since 2003, has demanded Democratic officials return his 2007 contribution of $28,500, which they have agreed to do.

“If you’re not going to count my vote, I’m not going to give you my money,” said Mr. Cejas, who was the United States ambassador to Belgium from 1998 to 2001.

Hmm. Is it really legal to appoint as U.S. Ambassador to Belgium someone who's main qualification was to give under $30,000 a year? If buying ambassadorships is that cheap, can I have one?

The post is presumably important, given that the E.U., N.A.T.O., and a couple of other international bureaucracies are based there. Its not like Ambassador to St Lucia or Monte Carlo. Also, we can assume that the threat means Mr Cejas doesn't expect to get a big-time job this time. Is he worried the Democrats might lose?

Just in case you think Florida's bad...try Michigan:

The new vote, which would be run by state elections officials but financed with money raised from private sources, is far from a sure thing. It requires approval by the divided state legislature and from the Clinton and Obama campaigns. There is also no assurance that the party can quickly raise the estimated $10 million it would cost to redo the January contest.

Now you might be forgiven for thinking it was the Republicans stirring the pot and making it hard to arrange a re-vote. But no:

The person said that Michigan Republicans, who control the State Senate, said they would not stand in the way. But Democrats, who control the state House of Representatives, are divided between Clinton supporters and Obama supporters. “The Clinton people say they’re not going to block it,” the source said. “The question is what the Obama people are going to do.”

I always thought the Florida 2000 fraud claims were dubious: the Democrats in Florida have a rotten record of organizing elections, and in many of the areas where disputes occurred, the local election boards were, shall we say, not exactly in the hands of Karl Rove.

At stake is a net THIRTY-EIGHT DELEGATE gain for Senator Clinton. According to some counts, this reduces Senator Barack Obama's lead by a third.

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/15/2008 12:33:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

Why the drama of elections is fascinating if you hate politics

Here's my take on the appeal of the current U.S. primaries and caucuses:

It’s like a less rational version of The Apprentice, with guns and lawyers. And right now, we don’t know how one of the finalists is going to get picked.

I think part of the appeal of elections is that, unlike a TV show, we don’t really know what’s going to happen.

I mean, who predicted the California Democratic party primary of June 5th 1968 would end with the front-runner gunned down? Depending on who you believe, even Sirhan Sirhan didn’t see that one coming.

[Thanks Jackie D for triggering that one]

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/06/2008 06:04:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

What now?

After the drama of the other day, it all dribbles away for a bit.

Saturday 8 March - Arkansas Democratic Special State Convention and Wyoming Democratic County Caucuses

Tuesday 11 March - Mississippi Democratic Primary

Saturday 15 March - Democrats Abroad Democratic Regional Caucuses

Thursday 3 April - District of Columbia State Party Committee

There is a multitude of smaller events until the next big state primary: Pennsylvania on April 22. There are 45 days between the Mississippi and Pennsylvania primaries.

For hardcore election nerds, check out this complete listing.

Lots of idle hands to make mischief over the next six weeks!

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/06/2008 12:43:00 AM 0 comments
links to this post

I guess he or she found what they wanted

Glad to be of service.

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/05/2008 10:05:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

Opposite result, same effect: Super Tuesday 2 post mortem

I may not have been very brave in my predictions yesterday, but they have been fairly well vindicated. This Super Tuesday to follow the Super Duper Tuesday of February 4 has failed to produce a knock-out blow for the favorite, this time Senator Barack Obama (Illinois). Instead it is Senator Hillary Clinton (New York) who is relatively better off after last night's efforts.

Here's how it ended up:
1) Vermont called first, giving Obama a 12th win on the trot. Some people in Ohio and texas may still have been voting when the news came out, which is naughty.
Obama: 91,829 votes; 59%; 9 delegates
Clinton: 59,854 votes; 39%; 6 delegates

2) Then came Rhode Island. Clinton's first win in a month.
Clinton: 106,471 votes; 58%; 13 delegates
Obama: 73,609 votes; 40%; 8 delegates

N.B. At this stage Clinton is narrowing the gap: 166,325 to 165,438 or by less than 1,000, but it is a start. Two net delegate gains are handy too.

3) Ohio. Zogby tried to make it look close. For a variety of reasons, it wasn't.
Clinton: 1,212,077 votes; 54%; 75 delegates
Obama: 982,172 votes; 44%; 52 delegates

N.B. At this stage Texas is no longer crucial: as long as it's close and with the strange bias in the caucuses held immediately after the primary, Clinton has broken the losing streak and can narrow the gap.

4) Texas. The primary was a Clinton victory, as in Ohio, Obama spent a lot more. This time, with negative advertising, she spent smarter.
Clinton: 1,453,139 votes; 51%; 65 delegates
Obama: 1,354,672 votes; 47%; 61 delegates

N.B. If it stopped here, all would be sweetness and light for Clinton. But now the caucuses kick in, with the sort of racial gerrymandering that old time Democrats in the Deep South would do. I'm surprised they didn't do "literacy tests" for Latinos at the caucuses. I guess they didn't have to.

Kos, who wishes Clinton would quit gracefully, sums up his version of events here:

Based on the Obama math, Clinton netted a gain of four delegates Tuesday. My own count based on official sources and projections based on the early TX caucus results peg the number at nine delegates. This cycle, Obama's numbers have been solid (and have matched up with the Clinton numbers), so my count is likely to shrink as the official results catch up with the campaign's projections.

A four-delegate gain is far less than what the Clinton campaign needed.

This is a sure recipe for lawyers. That'll be cheap!

Overall, the Green Papers has Clinton ahead in both popular vote (but this includes Florida and Michigan) and in some caluclations of delegates. Real Clear Politics gives Obama a lead of 97 or 136, depending on definition. The latter estimate is close enough to discourage quitting but big enough to make overtaking hard to do, if at all likely.

One of the definitions of a Zugzwang in chess, is that the player who has in fact lost, may not realise it for a while. Each move is making the position inexorably weaker. But the defeated player may persist in the delusion of salvaging something. I still think we're at this stage.

With a stronger Republican candidate (15-20 years younger, better at fundraising, better at motivating conservatives), this election would now be a formality.

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/05/2008 08:31:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

How not to build bridges

O.K. so I said:

On a different note, there is NO WAY Mrs Clinton quits the contest if she narrows the Obama delegate lead, winning three states in the process. A legal argument over who won Texas is as good as a win for these purposes.

Put it this way. I don't think I'm more self-delusional about my own importance to the world than Hillary Clinton is, but speaking as an election candidate myself, in her shoes I wouldn't quit now.

There is no mistaking the fight in the email I reproduce below, but... doesn't John McCain just have to read this out in the televised debates to win in November? I've highlighted some juicy bits. I got this from RealClearPolitics but the highlights are my own. Sorry, but I don't seem to be on Mark Penn's email list these days!

March 5, 2008

To: Interested Parties

From: Harold Ickes

Mark Penn

Re: The Path to the Presidency

With last night's victories in Ohio and Texas, one thing is clear: the momentum has swung back to Hillary Clinton. Voters in both states agreed that Hillary Clinton would be the best Commander-in-Chief and the strongest steward of our economy. In fact, according to last night's polls, those who decided who to vote for in the last three days overwhelmingly favored Hillary [CNN exit polls, 3/4/08]. Its time for a second look.

1. Ohio is the barometer: Hillary was successful in Ohio, the state that for the last quarter century has picked our president. As everyone knows: As Ohio goes, so goes our country. Historically, it's one of the bellwether states and it decided the last election. And the demographics of the upcoming contests in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Indiana and Kentucky closely mirror those in Ohio. Hillary looks strong in all four states.

- In recent years, every President has won two of the three following states: Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. Hillary has already won two of those and, according to all polls, is leading in the third - Pennsylvania.

2. This race is extremely close and more than 5 million Democrats are likely to vote. After 28 million votes have been counted, the popular vote contest in the Democratic primary is within one-tenth of one percent. Applying the same level of turnout to the remaining contests, there are still more than 5 million Democratic voters - 17 percent of the total - who are likely to participate in this contested primary race. After 41 primaries and caucuses, the delegate count is within roughly 2 percent.




3. In the primaries, Hillary has demonstrated that she is the best positioned candidate to carry the core battleground states essential to a general election victory -- particularly the large industrial states of Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and the critical swing contests in Florida, New Mexico, Nevada, and New Jersey.

4. The vetting of Obama has just begun. The press has only begun to scrutinize Senator Obama and his record. The corruption trial of Tony Rezko is getting underway this week, yet many questions about Obama's relationship with him remain unanswered. Hillary, on the other hand, has withstood fifteen years of substantial media and Republican scrutiny, including many months of sharper scrutiny as the front-runner. If the primary contest ends prematurely and Obama is the nominee, Democrats may have a nominee who will be a lightening rod of controversy.

5. Several of Hillary's base constituencies (women, Hispanic, labor, elderly and under $75,000) are key to a Democratic victory in November. Senator Obama has not brought these voters out in the same numbers.

- The two groups that fueled President Bush's victory in '04 were women and Hispanics, and they are among Hillary Clinton's strongest supporters. From 2000 to 2004, Bush's support among Hispanics rose from 35% to 44%. And Bush's support among women rose from 43% to 48%. That five point gain among women and nine point gain among Latinos gave Bush his victory in 2004.

- Women reached an all-time presidential election high of 54% of voters in '04. As a factual matter, an outpouring of women for the first woman president alone can win the election. Hillary leads all candidates among women.

- These political and demographic trends project positively into the general election and strongly favor Hillary.

6. The Red States: The central strategic argument of the Obama campaign is flawed. Senator Obama argues that his success in Democratic primary contests held in long-time Red States means he will carry those states in a general election. In reality, there are no "Red States" in a Democratic primary - there are only Democratic voters who live in Republican states and represent a small percentage of the general election population.

Of the eleven core Republican states that have gone to the polls, Sen. Obama has won ten: Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alabama, Alaska, Kansas, South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana. John Kerry lost each of these states by fifteen points or more.

- The last time a Democratic nominee won Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, and Alaska in the general election was 1964.

- Even if Obama is "transcendent," as his campaign has argued, the historic electoral trends and the current political environment suggest that translating those primary wins into November success will be close to impossible.

- In short: Hillary is better positioned to carry the battle ground states that Democrats need to win in November and Obama's victories in deep red states do not .

7. Hillary is the only Democrat with the strength, leadership, and experience to defeat John McCain. Senator Clinton is seen as the best prepared to be Commander-in-Chief.

- Nationally, 57% say Hillary Clinton is best prepared to be president, 39% Obama [CBS/ NYT, February 24]

- Hillary Clinton is seen as best able to take on the Republicans on their own turf - national security and terrorism. She is seen as a strong and decisive leader (a seven point advantage over Obama nationally).

- Hillary is seen as the one who can get the job done - leading Obama nationally by 13 points [USA Today/ Gallup, 2/24].

- Hillary is seen as the candidate to solve the country's problems, leading Obama by 10 points [USA Today/ Gallup, 2/24].

8. John McCain will diminish any perceived advantage Obama has with independents. As has been widely discussed, one of John McCain's key constituents is independents. And against McCain, Obama will be framed by the Republicans as too liberal (he was ranked by the National Journal as the most liberal Senator); untested on national security; and vulnerable on issues that would make him unelectable in November. These issues may be surmountable in a Democratic primary but will be an Achilles heel with independents in a general election.

9. The McCain Roadmap: McCain has already foreshadowed his campaign's construct against Obama: His vulnerability is experience and judgment on national security.

- McCain: Obama's 'meet, talk and hope approach' is 'dangerously naïve in international diplomacy.' "Meet, talk, and hope may be a sound approach in a state legislature, but it is dangerously naive in international diplomacy where the oppressed look to America for hope and adversaries wish us ill." [McCain, NYT's The Caucus, 2/22/08]

- McCain: Obama is an 'inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists.' "Each event poses a challenge and an opportunity. Will the next president have the experience -- the judgment, experience informs and the strength of purpose to respond to each of these developments in ways that strengthen our security and advance the global progress of our ideals? Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons? I think you know the answer to that question." [Post-Wisconsin Primary Victory Speech, 2/19/08]

10. Steward of the economy. Hillary Clinton leads both John McCain and Barack Obama on the economy and health care. In the latest LA Times/Bloomberg poll (1/22), Hillary leads McCain 52/28 on health care and 43/34 on the economy.

- Hillary leads Barack Obama on health care by 21 points nationally [USA Today/Gallup, 2/24].

11. Florida. There is an additional reality that must be considered - the 1.75 million voters in Florida whose votes will not be represented at the Democratic convention. How we handle this swing state will affect our Party's potential of carrying it in November (Democrats lost Florida in 2004). This is a state where the playing field was level - all of the candidates had their names on the ballot and none campaigned in the state.

12. Michigan. Nearly 600,000 Democrats voted in Michigan, but right now their votes are not being counted. Democrats barely carried Michigan in 2004 (by only 3% -- 51 to 48). If our party refuses to let them participate in the convention, we will provide a political opportunity for the Republicans to win both Florida and Michigan. Recognizing their importance to Democratic success in November, Hillary has called for the delegates of both states to be seated at the convention.

13. Hillary has the money to compete. In February, the Clinton campaign raised approximately $35 million - averaging more than a million dollars a day. This deep level of support gives Hillary the resources she needs to compete between now and the Convention.

On the last two highlighted points, nothing beats a BIG FAT LIE. Hillary Clinton can pretend that attending a public event which is televised in Florida is not campaigning, but that's baloney. And when she somehow didn't manage to get her name removed from the ballot in Michigan (others somehow managed it, is she that incompetent? No) the lie then was that "it won't matter, these votes don't count."

That said, the kernel of truth is that the Michigan and Florida fiascos are good for McCain. It would be very handy for him to have a war between the local Democrats and the their presidential candidate over this. And if the lawyers, to use the expression beloved of Al Gore fans in 2000 "award" the candidacy to Senator Clinton, how can that stand up in the face of public decency?

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/05/2008 08:03:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

Liveblogging OH/RI/TX/VT

03:07
I'm turning in. At this stage it looks survivable for Clinton, which is therefore a moral victory. A bit like Super Duper Tuesday (a month ago!) was the moment when Obama survived the Clinton juggernaught (which ground to a halt until today). This time it's Obama's relentless thrust that has been blocked. A very good night for John McCain.
Latest projection: Texas close, Ohio Clinton, Rhode Island Clinton, Vermont Obama. Apart from the Texas caucus, Clinton closes gap. But that caucus is key. Too good for Obama and the lawyers will be in, I reckon.

02:59
Ohio looks solid for Clinton, especially with the Governor on-side and all the "cleric errors" apparently hitting Obama voters.
Clinton 323,055 votes 58%
Obama 223,666 votes 40%
24% of precincts reported

02:55
As I was saying a couple of minutes ago:
Obama 606,941 51%
Clinton 566,035 48%
7% [same source as below]

02:52
Gap closing in Texas:
Obama 586,586 votes 52%
Clinton 522,565 votes 47%
6% precincts reporting, sez ABC.

02:46
Ron Gunzburger finds less than fraternal love on the Republican side:

P2008 - GOP. In a sign that John McCain still has a way to go to build party unity, check out these comments by US Senator John Cornyn (R-TX). Speaking this past weekend at a GOP dinner, Cornyn said McCain wasn't his "first choice ... or second, third or fourth choice" for the Presidential nomination. "I sort of liken it to a grieving process. You come to acceptance," said Cornyn in his speech, according to the Dallas Morning News. Still, Cornyn said he thought McCain was "head and shoulders above Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton" -- as he said he feared the election of either could lead to a "socialist regime" in the US.

02:43
From the Hill (the publication, not the TV show):

Clinton cries foul in Texas; Obama lawyer hijacks call
By Sam Youngman
Posted: 03/04/08 09:10 PM [ET]
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) campaign charged rival Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) campaign with breaking several rules in the Texas caucuses.

The Clinton campaign called an “emergency” conference call with reporters that was interrupted by Obama’s chief counsel Bob Bauer, who called in and said the Clinton campaign only criticized the caucus process when it was losing.

02:40
Texas looks ridiculously good for Obama, considering the polls, so I'm guessing the distribution of precincts reporting so far is not representative of the whole. But Ohio's looking good for Clinton.
Figures going round on Drudge: OBAMA 530,214 54%, CLINTON 448,702 45%

My view on a prolongation of the civil war presidential primary campaign? From an email I sent earlier:

think of the wasted cash, the insults, the hate, the venom, the lifelong friendships ruined, the stabbings.
I love it!

If I were a Democrat, I'd be praying for a big Obama win in Texas and a decent delegate allocation elsewhere.

02:33
Clinton wins Rhode Island, Obama has Vermont. Huckabee has quit leaving Ron Paul the only challenger to McCain. ;-)

02:22
Bad weather reported in Cleveland in the North and in Cincinnati in the South West of Ohio. Who does it hurt most?

02:20
HEH. Just spotted this:

Bush to endorse McCain
by kos
Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:36:01 PM PST

According to CNN, the McCain campaign is all excited that if they can close the deal tonight, that Bush will endorse him tomorrow.

They're excited about it.

So am I.

I hope there's lots of pictures and video.

02:17
Smintheus at Daily Kos has a useful preview of Rhode Island for those of who only know it as the smallest U.S. state by size.

02:10
John McCain will reach the number of delegates required for nomination as Republican candidate. The same may not be the case for a Democrat for, let me see... six months if the lawyers get involved?

02:03
All polls for primaries closed... BUT! Texas has caucuses starting soon to determine who gets up to 67 delegates in a series of caucus across the Lone Star state.
For comparison, this is more than double the total number of delegates available in Rhode Island, and nearly five times the number from Vermont.

02:00
Polls close in Ohio, Rhode Island, I'm checking Texas. Exit polls in these states published earlier will miss some late deciders, which this time, looks like helping Clinton not Obama. Beware a New Hampshire style snafu!

01:47
Sandusky County is the hold up in Ohio. Court orders polls to stay open until 02:00 GMT, according to The Green Papers, and that's a detail I trust them with.

01:40 GMT
Vermont is so friendly! Here's what the Vermont Secretary of State has to say tonight:

Official Presidential Primary Results from the March 4, 2008 will not be available on this website until Tuesday, March 11th at 11:00 a.m. We do not release unofficial results so please do not call our office.

01:32 GMT
Welcome Samizdatistas!
Voting is still going on in Rhode Island and part of Texas. With the caucus element in Texas, that could create delays, to say nothing of confusion. Any projections in those states must be pretty unreliable if not deliberate attempts to sway the result.

01:06 GMT
Checking in for the night. Early projections show a comfortable Obama win in Vermont, as expected, but Matt Drudge's headline implies a close race everywhere else "EXIT POLLS: DEADLOCK IN TX, OH, RI".
So that would put the balance against Clinton, if true and confirmed by later returns. I'm not commenting on that until I've had a sniff around.
Here's ABC on Vermont (15 delegates to select):
Candidate Votes Vote % Delegates Projected Winner
Obama 3,769 59% 3 Winner
Clinton 2,532 39% 2
[this will probably look bad until I fix a table template later on.]

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/05/2008 01:05:00 AM 1 comments
links to this post

Super Tuesday, Take Number 2!

O.K.

Head on the block time. My gut predictions:

Texas is a popular vote win for Senator Hillary Clinton (New York) over Senator Barack Obama (Illinois), but the delegate count won't reflect it.

Ohio is a Clinton win. But, if it turns out very close, credit should go to the Quinnipiac poll, which is the only one showing Clinton's lead dipping towards the end.

Vermont and Rhode Island are straightforward: Obama gets a win in the former, Clinton the latter. Crucially, if the margins are similar, Clinton should benefit: Rhode Island, though smaller in size, has more people and twice as many delegates (32 to 15), up for grabs.

If I'm right, the winner is Senator John McCain (Arizona), the troubled Republican candidate.

At the moment McCain has A LOT less money than the Democrats and while he probably can beat Clinton, Obama is right now out of his league. Every penny spent by them against each other is not held back for October/November. There is also the chance of such bitterness between the two camps that the Democratic party cannot unite in time. It is the best, and cheapest (in every sense of the word) shot McCain has right now. Who knows, both sides may dig up slime that the Republicans can pretend to hold their noses against, while dangling it in front of the electorate. The NAFTA and the Rezko case, for instance.

On a different note, there is NO WAY Mrs Clinton quits the contest if she narrows the Obama delegate lead, winning three states in the process. A legal argument over who won Texas is as good as a win for these purposes.

Put it this way. I don't think I'm more self-delusional about my own importance to the world than Hillary Clinton is, but speaking as an election candidate myself, in her shoes I wouldn't quit now. She loses Texas and Ohio? Maybe.

I hope to live-blog the voting and results later.

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/04/2008 07:32:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post

ZOGBY says Clinton wins Texas!

So either it was something I said, or Senator Hillary Clinton (New York) is now the left-wing candidate.

Joking aside, the only media ferociously battling for Clinton that I'm aware of was Fox News. The only pundits talking her up were Rush Limbaugh and people who loathe the Republican party candidate (Arizona Senator John McCain), such as Darwin-basher Ann Coulter.

Hilariously, or should that be another word to avoid accusations of rotten puns, newspapers across the U.S.A. are publishing op-eds written a day or two ago before the polls suddenly shifted in Sen Clinton's direction. How daft headlines such as these will look if the Sen Barack Obama (Illinois) delegate lead is cut?

Hillary Should Save Dems - From Herself - Margery Eagan, Boston Herald
Clinton Campaign's Dying Light - Jonathan Chait, Los Angeles Times

For the record, here's the new Zogby bias, against Obama!
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby. Polling dates: from 03/01 to 03/03. Sample size: 855 Likely Voters. Clinton 47% Obama 44%. Lead: Clinton +3.0%.
[Big Hat Tip: RealClearPolitics]

posted by Antoine Clarke @ 3/04/2008 06:50:00 PM 0 comments
links to this post