|
|
Much attention, understandably, is being paid to the notes Barack Obama sounds in his first general election television ad, which starts running Friday and can be viewed here.
Its emphasis on family values, self reliance and patriotism would have made Ronald Reagan's media shop proud. And in case anyone misses the point, the spot's title -- "Country I Love" -- says it all.
What really grabs us, however, is where the ad will appear (and, in one case, where it won't).
For the most part, the 18-state list is predictable. It includes the battlegrounds, large and small, that political analysts expect to watch through election day: Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, New Hampshire and New Mexico among them.
But the list also includes a handful of reliably Republican places where Obama aides have been saying they believe he can compete, based on strength he showed among certain voting blocs during the primary season.
The states in this category are Georgia, Indiana, Montana, North Carolina and Virginia.
And then there are two states -- Alaska and North Dakota -- where the airing of the Obama ad demonstrates that:
A) His campaign knows something about these GOP redoubts that the rest of us doesn't;
B) When you're riding herd over an organization that raises massive amounts of cash seemingly without breaking a sweat -- and just today announced it was breaking free of the restraints imposed by the campaign finance system, as our friends at The Swamp write about here -- you can afford to take a flier on a couple of longshots, especially when the media markets are inexpensive;
C) It's always fun, when the November election still seems a long way off, to play in a few of your rival's backyards, if for no other reason than to cause some headaches on the other side.
Probably some combination of A, B and C explains the decision to advertise in Alaska (which President Bush carried with 61% of the vote in 2004) and North Dakota (which Bush won with 63% of the vote four years ago).
Looking at all seven states where the Obama ad buy raises eyebrows, here are some of the daunting historical facts ...
Read more Barack Obama ad targets include some shockers »
Mike Huckabee presumably remains a running mate contender for John McCain's presidential ticket, but he apparently has achieved what some thought was an ulterior goal of his own White House bid: a regular spot on national television.
The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz reported today that Huckabee has inked a one-year deal to provide political commentary on Fox News. That network, of course, is the logical venue for the former Arkansas governor, who rode his strongly conservative convictions on social issues -- and his ability to glibly communicate those views -- to a first-place finish in the Iowa caucuses.
As we mentioned, some saw this coming a long time ago.
In late November, veteran Arkansas political journalist John Brummett ended a column on the politician he had followed for years this way: "From time to time I've written an unoriginal but incisive line, which is that Huckabee is really running for his own show on Fox or MSNBC. I'm sticking with that.
"But I'll admit there are moments lately when I wonder if he'll have to go through the motions of being the Republican presidential or vice presidential nominee first."
Brummett's piece obviously was prescient, but he may have gotten the sequence wrong -- as well as underestimated Huckabee's ultimate ambition.
Take note of the former candidate's schedule of late. Monday found him in Bedford, N.H., speaking to the state's Federation of Republican Women's Lilac Luncheon. Such a lovely sounding affair would be high on anyone's list to attend, but especially so ...
Read more Mike Huckabee to have his own soapbox on Fox News »
On this, the first anniversary of our Top of the Ticket blog, we are reminded of the mercurial, unpredictable nature of U.S. politics -- part of what makes what we do so fascinating.
Our goal -- one of us on the East Coast and the other on the far more important or at least less humid West Coast -- was to write about Campaign '08 virtually around the clock.
Our second-ever posting, 12 months ago today, previewed an upcoming L.A. Times/Bloomberg Poll; later in the day, we detailed the results of the nationwide survey. The findings were in line with other polls of the time.
In the Republican presidential race, which then seemed the most likely to last deep into the primary season, Rudy Giuliani was perched in first place. His lead wasn't overwhelming, but it was strong enough that he appeared certain to remain a major contender.
His liberal record on social issues loomed as an obvious liability within his party, but his tough-on-terrorism message was attracting substantial support from moderates and GOP-leaning independents.
His major headache among rivals last June was an as-yet-undeclared candidate who was riding a wave as the great conservative hope -- Fred Thompson. He ran a strong second in the poll.
Lagging far behind were John McCain and Mitt Romney, each barely with double-digit support. In our preview posting, we were especially scornful of McCain, noting sarcastically (and foolishly, as it turned out) that in the poll, he found himself "in heated competition with the 'Don't Know' category."
Meriting no mention from us was Mike Huckabee, one of several back-of-the-pack candidates barely earning any support across the country.
The Democratic race, at that point, seemed so much more cut-and-dried.
Hillary Clinton was the clear front-runner; Barack Obama was just as clearly ...
Read more Top of the Ticket, the start of Year Two »
One special interest -- television stations -- profited mightily from the prolonged nature of the Democratic presidential battle.
A study released today found that close to $200 million has been spent so far on televised ads by White  House candidates in both parties -- with more than two-thirds of that figure accounted for by Democrats.
Indeed, the almost $75 million disbursed by Barack Obama's campaign on TV ads easily surpassed the roughly $58 million in total spending by all Republican contenders. (The leading spender in the GOP race -- by a sizable margin -- remains Mitt Romney, who folded his campaign in early February.)
A spending chart -- so comprehensive it includes the handful of spots aired by obscure Republican aspirant Hugh Cort, plus the four ads that plugged the little noticed candidacy of Democrat Dal LaMagna -- can be studied here.
Deep in the report, Ken Goldstein, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin, offers some noteworthy observations ...
Read more Television stations are big winners in the '08 campaign »
Yes, there are still states -- and a territory -- to vote, Democratic delegates to select, superdelegates to decide and conventions to be held, but it's hard not to peek ahead to the fall matchup. You can make your own presumptions about whether the Dems will go with Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, but for the sake of argument, we'll presume it's Obama.
And polls, fickle though they may be, show that the general election could be just as tight as the Democratic primaries in crucial swing states where Obama's race and perceived class work against him (witness Kentucky). The tallies maintained at Real Clear Politics give a broader sense of the challenge for Obama and for John McCain.
You can go over there and play, but the overview is the latest state poll aggregates give the current advantage (some of these are within the margin of error) to McCain in Ohio, Florida and Missouri and the advantage to Obama in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin (though McCain led in the most recent poll) and Iowa with Michigan essentially a dead heat.
Now take those poll numbers over to an interactive electoral college map and the advantage is: Nobody. Under that scenario, with Michigan a virtual tie and polls too erratic in New Mexico to count, Obama and McCain would be separated by four electoral votes and both would need Michigan to put them over the 270 threshold.
Let the fun begin. Oh, wait -- it already has.
-- Scott Martelle
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama got mangled in Kentucky tonight by Sen. Hillary Clinton (see her video at bottom) by a better than two-to-one margin. But he basically ignored that setback and returned to an enthusiastic crowd at the scene of his initial primary season victory tonight and talked to Iowans over and over and over about change.
In fact, even before learning of his Oregon victory, standing before the state capitol in Des Moines, the freshman senator said the word change 14 times. That provides a pretty obvious clue to the major theme he envisions in the already building general election campaign against presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona.
Obama congratulated Clinton on her overwhelming Kentucky victory and praised her as a pioneer, perhaps an early indication of reaching out to Clinton supporters, many of whom still cling to hopes of a mathematical miracle in her struggle for convention delegates. Obama said, "Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has changed the America my daughters and your daughters will come of age."
The crowd gave a half-hearted cheer.
He made the obligatory attack on McCain, saying, "The lobbyists who rule George Bush's Washington are now running Sen. McCain's campaign."
"McCain," Obama added, "is not change."
"Our journey may be long," Obama said, his voice rising. "Our work may be great. But we know in our hearts we're ready for change."
"Iowa," he added to growing cheers, "change is coming to America. Change is coming."
In case, you didn't get it, Obama thinks change is coming. And he is it.
--Andrew Malcolm
Barack Obama ultimately disrespected Kentucky even more than he did West Virginia; he at least made an 11th-hour stop (albeit a brief one) in the latter state the day before its presidential primary last Tuesday.
In the walk-up to Kentucky's nomination contest this Tuesday, the closest he's come to its borders was when he was at home in Chicago on Thursday.**
Since then, he's gone off to South Dakota, Oregon (which also has a primary Tuesday, and where he was greeted by a massive crowd, at left, on Sunday) and Montana (June 3). Tuesday night will find him in Iowa -- not only the site of the caucus win that first fueled his candidacy, but a likely key swing state come November.
Obama's hands-off approach to West Virginia and Kentucky is striking to us on two counts.
One, public protestations notwithstanding, his willingness to concede them to Hillary Clinton in the Democratic race is an unmistakable signal that as he and his aides look toward the general election, neither state figures in its Electoral College calculations. (They are not alone in this assumption -- an astute overlook of the electoral map posted on Salon.com late last week by Democratic pollster Paul Maslin did not include either on the list of 17 states he views as competitive, to varying degrees, in an Obama-John McCain match-up.)
Secondly, it caused us to hark back to the very early stages of the campaign and wonder: What if Clinton had followed the controversial advice of her then-deputy campaign manager, Mike Henry, and taken a pass on a full-fledged effort to win the Jan. 3 caucuses in Iowa?
It was almost exactly a year ago -- May 21 -- that Henry (who left the campaign shortly after Campaign Manager Patti Solis Doyle was replaced early this year) wrote an in-house memo ...
Read more What if Hillary Clinton had treated Iowa like Barack Obama has Ky. and W. Va.? »
Just look at his face!
Doesn't William Jefferson Clinton look absolutely delighted with his wife's Democratic presidential primary victory in Indiana?
Sure the Clinton campaign (Hillary's) had hoped to do much better in North Carolina. It is difficult to put a happy face on a 14-point thumping down there by Sen. Barack Obama. But at least she tried -- "Thank you, Indiana!" -- even though Hillary didn't know when she gave her victory speech how close her opponent would come by night's end (1%) to pulling out a win in the Hoosier State as well.
Bill Clinton has arguably been helpful to his wife's now 15-month White House effort. The crowds are supposed to love him. And many do. But he's often stepped on her message, creating unwanted news of his own to detract from hers. In South Carolina, his controversial racial comments may well have cost her badly in that state's primary, and they might have hurt her again Tuesday in next-door North Carolina, where 9 out of 10 blacks voted against the wife of the man so popular with African Americans that he was once called the first black president. Instead, they voted for the man who may well be the first black president.
Professional political packagers often mute the sound on TV to just watch the real message seeping out from the moving pictures on screen. President Ronald Reagan's communications crew once sincerely thanked CBS correspondent Leslie Stahl for a devastatingly critical news report she'd done on his senior citizen programs because the pictures showed Reagan talking amiably with numerous fellow seniors.
Last night, as the Clinton campaign did after her disappointing third-place finish in the Iowa caucuses, the senator's political packagers let her down by allowing her husband (and daughter) onstage with her.
To be sure, by this point in virtually any presidential campaign, it is difficult for all but the most intimate staff to tell a candidate what he/she should do, so sold on themselves have the candidates become by hundreds of adoring crowds and the automatic subservience of virtually everyone around them. It is particularly hard to say "No!" to an ex-president and an ex-first lady who both think she should be president.
But Bill's glum puss, standing there right behind her, competing for the eyes of every television viewer everywhere, throughout the candidate's remarks visibly contradicted virtually every hopeful, positive word she said. As a veteran and successful campaigner for himself, he could know better.
It was the same after her Iowa defeat. (See photo below) There she was onstage before an immense banner -- "READY for Change!" -- and an enthusiastic crowd of fans who, however, went largely unseen on TV in the darkness in front of the stage.
And as millions of Americans at home watched the one-time frontrunner valiantly argue her case, what did everyone actually see? About two dozen glum faces of disappointed campaign workers surrounding her, no doubt invited there to share the spotlight and offer moral support.
But they looked more like an oversized grieving family at a memorial service (in fact, look how many are wearing black), including a whole pack of faces familiar from the 1990s -- Bill and Chelsea and, directly by Clinton's right elbow, Madeline Albright!
This is READY for change? Living reminders of the turbulent Clinton past. While running against the fresh face and rhetoric of the triumphant Obama?
By the next week in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton or her communications advisors had learned their lesson. Click on Read More below to see that photo.
Read more Hillary and Bill Clinton in defeat and victory: When pictures tell the story »
Last summer while campaigning in Iowa, Barack Obama told voters in the farm state: "Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula? I mean, they're charging a lot of money for this stuff."
The comment was one of those that the Democratic presidential candidate probably wishes he had kept to himself -- it got ridiculed at the time, and periodically gets recycled by critics as a sign that Obama is an out-of-touch elitist (an image he perpetuated with his remarks about bitter attitudes in small-town America). 
Maybe, though, when it comes to his greens, Obama's just not a savvy shopper.
Times copy editor Jim Buzinski reports that at the 99 Cents Only store in the Silver Lake section of Los Angeles, he recently bought an 11-ounce tub of pre-washed, organic baby arugula for ... 99 cents.
It's hard to get any less elitist than shopping at 99 Cents Only stores, so perhaps Obama should stock up the next time he's in Southern California.
The next task for our colleague Buzinski: find some cheap gasoline.
-- Don Frederick
Photo credit: Ricardo DeAratanha/L.A. Times
Most Democrats remain squarely focused on the matters at hand: Who will win their presidential nomination and when will that be determined?
A cadre of party leaders, however, are looking down the road, mulling another conundrum: How can a repeat be avoided of the free-for-all atmosphere that surrounded the setting of this year's caucus and primary schedule?
Elaine Kamarck, a longtime party pro, is one of those whose attention already is turned toward 2012 (only partially, to be sure -- as a Democratic National Committee member, she's a superdelegate backing Hillary Clinton).
On Wednesday, Kamarck traveled to Washington from her current perch at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government and, at a gathering with a small group of journalists, discussed ways that a nomination calendar for the next presidential campaign might come together more easily.
Starting from the assumption that the immovable object and irresistible force in the process -- Iowa and New Hampshire -- will retain their starting-line roles, Kamarck said she would like to see definite dates decreed for these contests far earlier than they were in this cycle.
At the least, she said, there is strong motivation from many quarters to prevent the votes in Iowa and New Hampshire from again abutting so closely the holiday season (that, in and of itself, would be a gift for all concerned).
On the matter of "front-loading" -- the ever-growing and increasingly chaotic ...
Read more A few Democrats already have 2012 on their mind »
Well, Ticket readers gave each other an earful -- or eyeful -- in the last 24 hours over Oprah Winfrey, her endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, her perceived declining popularity, religious views and what many called the increasing irrelevance of her widely-viewed daily TV show.
"Oprah has been sliding not only because of her suport of Obama but her show has became a religion," Keith wrote. "She has let everyone know how new  age she is and that turns a lot of Christians off. She is not as entertaining."
"I think she felt compelled to come out and support someone just so she could get her name out in the media for more than what the latest book club joke was," Bruzilla added. "She's been on her way out for several years now."
Wednesday morning, The Ticket published a detailed item, since read by hundreds of thousands, that told of a study compiling Winfrey's declining popularity after she announced her backing of Obama last year, her first entry into politics after more than two decades of national TV popularity that created a personal fortune of about $2.5 billion.
The conclusion was that Winfrey, who's not exactly in danger of unemployment, may be paying a higher price for her political involvement than the benefit she provided Obama by drawing large rally crowds for him in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
"I never watch daytime TV," Sam admitted, "but if the women in my family are any measure, this drop in popularity is correct. They are a mix politically, mostly moderate but they were all big Oprah fans. They felt she was above the politics of the day.
"Now they all, every one of them, feel she sold out and they no longer watch her, at least so they say. I know my wife now watches 'Ellen' when she is home at that time. I also know that my sister-in-law posted her anger on the Oprah website. Don't make light of this, I think it is true."
Many, even most critics, defended her right to ....
Read more Oprah's ex-fans trash her support for Obama over a woman »
(UPDATE: This Ticket item has aroused so much interest, traffic and hundreds of comments that a new one has been published this morning. After you've read this item and are ready to go to the new one, just click here to read the reactions of hundreds of Oprah fans and former fans. Thanks for reading.)
Most of the attention on the O2 effect -- Obama and Oprah -- has been focused on how much the daytime TV cult leader helped her home state senator by endorsing him and appearing at all those rallies in Iowa and South Carolina with Barack and Michelle.
The 54-year-old Chicago TV hostess certainly helped raise a hefty chunk of change by loaning out her estate for that Obama fundraiser last summer.
Oprah Winfrey has long enjoyed an immense popularity tied to her long-running daytime TV show, which started in 1986, and helped give her favorable ratings around 78% by 1996. So well known is she that one name will suffice, as in our headline.
In one 1999 survey of the most admired and respected 20th-century women, Oprah (26%) came in only second to Mother Teresa (33%), who didn't have her own TV show. And in 2003 a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll found that 60% thought Oprah was a more powerful woman than someone named Hillary Clinton, a former first lady and senator, who drew only 28%.
Fourteen months ago, a Gallup/USA Today poll found 74% of Americans had a favorable view of the TV personality.
Then on May 1 last year, Oprah announced during....
Read more A surprise: Oprah pays a real cost for supporting Barack Obama »
While part of the increasingly hard-edged, mean-spirited chatter between the warring Democratic presidential campaigns centered on the "Judas" analogy directed at Bill Richardson for having -- in James Carville's eyes -- the audacity to back Barack Obama, another portion focused on the Bill Clinton-Joe McCarthy comparison.
Hillary Clinton aides already were in a lather over Obama advisor Merrill "Tony" McPeak raising the McCarthyite charge against Bill Clinton. That accusation arose out of what McPeak saw as a sin of omission by the ex-president: he did not mention Obama when, late last week, he said a presidential race between his wife and Republican John McCain would feature "two people who love their country."
Many -- including an unlikely Clinton defender, Kathleen Parker, in a blog posting for National Review magazine -- took McPeak to task for overreacting. But then another Obama supporter went even further overboard.
Gordon Fischer -- an obscure figure nationally but known within party circles because he formerly chaired the Iowa Democratic Party -- wrote this on his personal blog: “Bill Clinton cannot possibly seriously believe Obama is not a patriot, and cannot possibly be said to be helping — instead he is hurting — his own party. B. Clinton should never be forgiven. Period. This is a stain on his legacy, much worse, much deeper, than the one on Monica's blue dress."
That would be Monica Lewinsky, of course, and that was enough ...
Read more And then there's the Bill Clinton-Joe McCarthy remark »
For sports junkies, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar saved the best for last in his L.A. Times blog posting earlier today featuring an e-mail exchange between the basketball great and a longtime hoop-aholic, Barack Obama.
The Democratic presidential contender answered a few serious questions that Abdul-Jabbar pitched him, which you can read here. But the end of the post contained this revelation: If Obama ends up moving into the White House early next year, some sort of b-ball setup will be added to the grounds (actually, given D.C.'s often wretched weather, we'd recommend an indoor court).
Obama's passion for the sport evolved into a bit of a superstition back in January.
He relaxed the day of the Iowa caucuses by playing some hoops and, of course, ended the night by celebrating his win in that contest. But he skipped a shoot-around on the days of the New Hampshire primary and the Nevada caucuses, both of which he lost to Hillary Clinton. So when the South Carolina primary -- an obvious must-win for him -- rolled around on Jan. 26, he made a point of playing (and later basked in an overwhelming victory in the Palmetto State).
-- Don Frederick
Here in the wonderful world of blogging, time is truly relative -- as in the past fades fast, the future is amorphous and the present is all-consuming. But for the rest of you, well, we know you're studiously staring at the computer screen trying to show the boss in the corner office how hard at work you are.
So waste some time with this: Slate's candidate tracker, which graphically shows where the candidates have been busy with appearances. It took forever to load on our workhorse of a laptop but once it does fire up it's fun to see how far this campaign has come. Especially when you look at the lists of the fallen on the right hand side, running alphabetically for the Democrats from Joe Biden to Bill Richardson, and for the Republicans from Sam Brownback to Fred Thompson. And note that the tracker still shows Ron Paul slogging away, even if he seems to have sent the horse back to the barn.
Ah, the memories.
-- Scott Martelle
Will this be another day that adds to the Clinton legend, another chapter in a book teeming with examples that their political apparatus -- whether headed by him or her -- often may be down, but it is never out?
It was just two months ago that Hillary Clinton, seemingly on the ropes following her third-place finish in the Iowa caucuses, added to the family legend by confounding the pollsters and narrowly winning the New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary.
Going into today's spotlighted contests, a late surge has put the polls on her side -- substantially in Ohio, by a small margin in Texas. At this point last week, Barack Obama seemed to have the momentum, especially in Texas, and story after story delineated discontent with the Clinton camp.
If the polls prove right, it will underscore why it's not a smart bet to write off the Clintons. As do these reminders about her husband:
Read more The Clinton comeback chronicles »
A new L.A. Times/Bloomberg survey of Democratic voters nationwide underscores Barack Obama's spectacular rise from spirited underdog to commanding figure in the party's presidential race.
We won't reveal the precise numbers here; for that, check for the detailed story on our home page about 4 p.m. PST and in Wednesday's print editions. Suffice to say that among a national sample of those who have voted or plan to cast ballots in Democratic nominating contests, Obama has erased the once-daunting lead held by Hillary Clinton and now appears to enjoy a slight advantage over her.
The results roughly parallel the figures of other national polls conducted in February, most of which have found Obama ahead or locked in a virtual tie with Clinton.
The race could still turn again, with both candidates keying on the March 4 primaries in Texas and Ohio (and squaring off tonight on MSNBC in another debate, starting at 6 p.m. PST). But here's a reminder of the ground Obama has made up:
* Just four months ago, a Times/Bloomberg poll found Obama barely holding onto second place against John Edwards, with both far behind Clinton. Her lead in that mid-October nationwide survey: 31 percentage points.
* In mid-January, after the pair had traded wins in the race's initial skirmishes in Iowa and New Hampshire, Clinton clung to a nine-point lead in a Times/Bloomberg national poll.
The full results...
Read more L.A. Times/Bloomberg Poll posts this evening »
In what can only be a signal that the Barack Obama campaign is ceding nothing to Hillary Rodham Clinton, it has sent Paul Tewes -- he led Obama's successful Iowa fight -- to Ohio to try to play catch up. And why not? Obama's been on a winning streak that could continue tonight when the results are in from the Potomac Primaries (you know, if you type "Potomac" real fast, sometimes it comes out "ptomaine").
The thinking -- and the polls -- suggest that Obama will do well today, and next week in Hawaii, where he is something of a native son, and possibly in Wisconsin with its long tradition of populist politics. Then, on March 4, it will be Clinton's turn in Ohio, heavy on older and lunch-bucket Democrats, and in Texas, with a large Latino population, among whom she draws extremely well.
But if Obama steals a win in either or both of those big-delegate states, we could see a reordering of the nomination fight, with Obama moving beyond his base of young, upper-income and African American voters and into Clinton-land. If she wins them both, as expected, then the marathon continues unchanged.
But the chance to upset the apple cart is plenty of incentive for Obama to put some hitters on the ground in Ohio.
-- Scott Martelle
Ages ago, way back before this year's Iowa caucuses, The Times' Dan Morain wrote an article in this newspaper noting that a woman in her 90s called Rachel L. "Bunny" Mellon had made a $495,000 donation to an independent campaign group that was supporting Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.
Now that the official Jan. 31 fundraising report deadline has passed, the conscientious Morain went back to check the required campaign statements filed with the Internal Revenue Service. And, wow, the full scope of Bunny Mellon's generous support for Edwards pops out at you.
She gave fully $3.48 million to the Alliance for a New America, which....
Read more Bunny Mellon gave John Edwards' cause some chunk of change »
At last, the news we've all been waiting for. A new University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll just out has discovered that fully 86% of Iowans "had fun" during their recent caucuses.
Really. Isn't that wonderful?
According to a university news release, "Despite the chaos of a record turnout, long lines and crowded rooms, Iowans had fun at their caucuses on Jan. 3."
It's just so heartwarming to know that what the rest of us thought for so many months had something to do with choosing party nominees for president of the United States was, for a very large majority of the quarter-million Iowans who caucused, actually a whole lot of fun. Kind of like those summer fairs with the hog contests and that cow butter-carving that we heard so much about when politicians were working the sticky-handed crowds eating everything conceivable fried.
The random telephone poll of 306 Democratic and 223 Republican caucus-goers between Jan. 5-10 found, according to David Redlawsk, poll director: "Iowans didn't caucus just for the fun of it, but most seem to have discovered the fun factor in caucusing."
It was the first caucus for 46% of those surveyed, many of whom said they caucused to oppose one candidate rather than support one. Across parties, an overwhelming number (95%) said they attended because it was the "right thing to do," 89% came to support a candidate, 69% to support their party, 40% to support a particular issue, 27% to oppose a candidate and 19% because someone asked them to go.
While 86% reported having fun, only 26% listed fun as their reason for going.
Oh, and despite their more complex, often chaotic voting procedures, more Democrats (88%) reported "having fun" than Republicans (83%). Come to think of it, the Iowa caucuses, which seem like only a year ago, were just a whole lot of fun too for the rest of us to read about. And without the ice and snow.
-- Andrew Malcolm
There's still an awful lot of space between John Edwards and Barack Obama in the South Carolina polls ahead of Saturday's primary, but as the Zogby folks have found, Edwards is moving to within striking distance of Hillary Clinton for the No. 2 spot.
Caveat: Shifts demarked in a single poll often don't mean anything, and polls in general are NOT predictors. Being savvy political watchers, you knew that, of course.
But the Real Clear Politics aggregate tracker shows a similar shift amid some serious volatility in South Carolina. Most interesting is that two weeks ago Clinton and Obama were running neck-and-neck, even without the margin of error. Since then -- as the Clinton tag-team lined up against Obama -- the Illinois senator has gained support while the New York senator has lost support (Obama has seen some erosion lately, too).
At the same time, Edwards has been picking up traction. Again, there's a lot of ground between him and Obama. But not so much between him and Clinton. And if Edwards edges out Clinton again, you have to wonder what that will do to her support in the Feb. 5 states.
-- Scott Martelle
Rudy Giuliani's risky strategy of ignoring the opening acts in the presidential race to concentrate on Florida may still pay off (although the recent polling in the Sunshine State indicates otherwise). But the trend in a series of L.A.Times/Bloomberg national polls underscores the price he's paid for his unorthodox maneuver.
Giuliani led in all four similar surveys conducted last year when Republican-leaning voters were asked their preferences among the party's White House candidates. In April, he was backed by 29% of those polled; in June, 27%; in October, 32%.
By early December, though, his decision to focus on Florida -- which reduced his visibility at a time when the main political playing fields were in Iowa and New Hampshire -- began to erode his standing. He still led in a Times/Bloomberg poll, but just barely, with 23%.
Now, in a new survey, he runs fourth, with 15%.
At one time, Giuliani touted himself as the Republican who would have the widest appeal in the most places in the general election. But running a primary campaign so dependent on one state hardly bolstered that argument.
-- Don Frederick
Republican Fred Thompson dragged his feet getting into the presidential race, much to his detriment. He moved more expeditiously getting out of it, issuing a simple, three-sentence statement today announcing -- to no one's surprise -- that he was ending his candidacy.
Thompson bowed to what became inevitable after his third-place showing in Saturday's South Carolina primary. Less than an hour after the polls closed that night, when it was already evident he would be an also-ran, Thompson addressed his supporters in the state -- remarks that walked right up to a withdrawal but stopped just short of it. Since then, he has been absent from the campaign trail.
Some of his higher-profile backers had jumped ship before Thompson officially abandoned it. Earlier today, ex-New York Sen. Al D'Amato -- who like many Republican leaders had not so many months ago viewed Thompson as the candidate who could magically cure what ailed the GOP presidential field -- switched allegiance to John McCain. (D'Amato seems mainly motivated this campaign season to sidetrack fellow New Yorker Rudy Giuliani, long a political foe.)
Thompson entered the White House race with a semi-splash, you'll recall, using the couch on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno" to proclaim his candidacy in early September. But by that time, the bloom was already off his rose. His clear interest in running -- and efforts to generate support for such a bid by his longtime political mentor, Howard Baker, and other respected Republicans -- had been a hot topic ...
Read more BREAKING NEWS: Fred Thompson ambles back to the sidelines »
LAS VEGAS -- Amid all the confusion of the Nevada Democratic caucuses, from people leaving in frustration to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama each claiming separate victories, an interesting pattern emerged. And building on what happened in the "non-primary" that Democrats conducted in Michigan, it is going to make next weekend's South Carolina primary "verrrrry interesting," as Arte Johnson used to say.
Nevada's caucus was the first full Democratic presidential nominating contest to include a significant number of black voters, and Obama won overwhelmingly here in predominately black Precincts 4028 and 4461, reflecting what national polls show has been a significant shift in support by black voters from Clinton to Obama.
Obama was similarly strong in in last week’s Michigan primary. "Uncommitted" –- seen largely as votes for Obama and John Edwards, whose names were not on the ballot –- took 68% of the African American vote, with Clinton getting 30%, according to exit polls. But those results came in a race in which only half the candidates were on the ballot and no one was awarded any delegates, dampening turnout.
On Saturday, the votes mattered. Obama’s success among black voters wasn’t enough to give him the win. About 8% of Nevada residents are African American, compared with nearly 13% nationally. But Obama’s growing support among African Americans could shape ...
Read more It doesn't necessarily stay in Vegas »
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina could be excused for irrational exuberance tonight as he basked in the glow of the hard-fought victory by his friend and ally, John McCain, in the Palmetto State's GOP presidential primary. Still, Graham's attempt at political analysis left something to be desired.
The Times' Maeve Reston was on the scene at McCain's victory party in Charleston when Graham, the campaign's co-chair in South Carolina, predicted his favored candidate now would have "unstoppable momentum" leading up to Florida's Jan. 29 primary.
If so, McCain would be the first -- in either the Republican or Democratic races -- to truly capture the "Big Mo" this year. His fortunes in Florida now should be improved, but it's hard to imagine GOP voters in the Sunshine State will now be swept off their feet by McCain-a-mania -- especially given that he won in South Carolina by all of three percentage points and garnered just a third of the total vote.
As we noted recently in print, this has been a surge-less campaign so far.
In the Republican race ...
Read more McCain set to go on a roll? »
LAS VEGAS -- Oh, irony of ironies.
As we all know by now, Michigan and Florida got themselves in a boatload of trouble with the national Democratic and Republican parties by trying to jump to near the head of the line of states that get to vote first for the presidential nominees.
It cost the Democrats in Michigan and Florida their convention delegates -- and, maybe more importantly, the presence of candidates campaigning. The Republicans in those states lost half their delegates. In both party's cases, they lost a lot of face.
But now, especially on the Republican side, it's beginning to look as though those two states may have done themselves even more of a disservice. Nobody could have foreseen this, but if there is no clear winner coming out of the massive -- and de facto -- national primary on Feb. 5, when more than 20 states vote, the states that hold their nominating contest after that could be in play as kingmakers.
See you in Montana, New Mexico (Republicans only) and South Dakota on June 3.
-- Scott Martelle
LAS VEGAS -- When the Nevada Democratic Party, with the national party's blessing, decided to move its caucuses to Jan. 19, voters in places like Elko were all atwitter. The reasoning was that as the main population center in northeastern Nevada, with 16,700 people (the security line at LAX might have more people in it), the major candidates would have to visit.
Someone, finally, would pay attention to the "rurals," as they're called here, which is pretty much everywhere across the deserts and mountains outside Las Vegas and Reno-Carson City. And a few politicians did come. But it wasn't the political lovefest they had anticipated.
Until now.
Beginning with a John Edwards rally at 8:30 tonight, four of the major presidential contenders will be holding rallies in Elko over a span of about 18 hours. On Friday, residents might as well take the whole day off work and watch the spectacle. Mitt Romney -- the only Republican spending any time in Nevada -- starts the day with a 7:40 a.m. rally at Adobe Middle School. (Will they need a hall pass?) Hillary Rodham Clinton has a rally at 1 p.m. at the Elko Indian Colony Gymnasium, and 90 minutes later Barack and Michelle Obama rally supporters and the curious at Elko High School.
And in a mark of how upside the whole process has become, Elko County Republicans outnumber Democrats 8,668 to 3,878, or more than 2 to 1. But Elkonans, if that's what they're called, will see three Dems and one Republican.
Which makes you wonder how the turnout will skew come Saturday.
-- Scott Martelle
Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd gave up his hopeless campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination earlier this month.
But he'd still like some more of your money.
In an e-mail sent to supporters headlined "Retiring" to get their attention, Dodd revealed that after some time off with his family from a grueling campaign that, he says, "changed the debate at home and abroad," he really isn't contemplating retiring from the Senate. LOL
It seems he needs to "retire" his campaign debt. He doesn't reveal how big the leftover campaign financial burden is, but the attached form is equipped to take anything from $25 to $2,300. Dodd said he's very busy right now restoring the Constitution, fighting "that terrible FISA bill" and working to put another Democrat in the White House.
But he sure would appreciate some donations here.
Who wouldn't actually?
--Andrew Malcolm
Well, he's hanging in there. Not only that, but Rep. Ron Paul thumped two reputed Republican heavyweights in the Michigan primary -- former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
Who'd have predicted that a couple of months ago?
Giuliani, you may recall if you can remember anything as distant as last summer, was the longtime GOP national front-runner in polls. He ran strongly against everybody in his party, even former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who won one last night, taking his home state from Sen. John McCain, who won there in 2000. Everybody wondered if anyone had a chance against the hero of 9/11, who defied standard Republican theocracy with his liberal social views.
But guess what? Ron Paul, the 72-year-old Texas congressman and ob-gyn who delivers babies and a strict view of the Constitution, beat Giuliani in Michigan. And beat him good. Not only that ...
Read more Ron Paul, Dr. No-body, beats Rudy and Fred -- again »
There's an axiom within NFL circles (first related to us years ago by an ace sportswriter-turned-Hollywood type who said he heard it from Oakland Raiders' boss Al Davis): in choosing winners in the latter part of the season, go with the teams that have the most riding on the games.
So far, that would have been the best guide for betting on the Republican presidential race.
Mike Huckabee had to win the Iowa caucuses to prove he truly could play with the big boys.
John McCain had to win the New Hampshire primary to confirm that he still is a contender.
Mitt Romney had to win Tuesday's primary in Michigan to shake his also-ran label (and avoid the embarrassment of losing in his native state).
So with Saturday's South Carolina primary looming as the next big GOP showdown, who has to win?
Fred Thompson, who has been campaigning nowhere else of late.
Oh well, this is where the phrase "an exception to every rule" probably comes into play.
-- Don Frederick
Fresh polls aplenty on the presidential races today, including one gauging voter attitudes in crucial California. (It's been a long, long time since that adjective was attached to the state during primary season.) And if there's one candidate for whom the surveys are a downer, it's got to be Rudy Giuliani.
In line with Giuliani's collapsing poll numbers nationwide and in other states of late, the new L.A. Times/CNN/Politico.com survey finds him lagging behind a resurgent John McCain among Republicans in California -- and fighting for second place with Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. By contrast, a statewide Field Institute poll a month ago showed Giuliani in the lead -- the position he enjoyed in virtually every California poll for more than a year. (See the trend line here.)
The new poll, conducted between Friday and Sunday, testifies to McCain's comeback in the GOP presidential contest. In the December Field poll, he was in fourth place among those Republicans likely to vote in California's Feb. 5 primary, with 12%. In the new survey, his 20% support among likely voters puts him in first place. Romney is next, at 16%, followed by Giuliani (14%), Huckabee (13%) and Fred Thompson (6%).
The poll reports little such upheaval in the Democratic race. Hillary Clinton leads Barack Obama ...
Read more New California poll bad news for Giuliani »
Bloomfield Hills, Mich. -- As if there weren't enough real-world primaries going on, the folks at MySpace and Facebook have been holding their own online primaries, as our colleague David Sarno writes in today's Calendar section. And while the online primaries are as meaningless as the Michigan Democratic primary, the results are interesting.
Any online poll -- and that's what these "virtual primaries" are -- relies on self-selected, and self-activated, participants. So the 150,000 people who took part in the MySpace primary reflect no meaningful political base. Near as we can figure, voters didn't even have to prove they were old enough, or a U.S. citizen. The results, though, indicate where the loyalties lie among that self-selected group of Internet users.
And there were no surprises. On the Democratic side, Barack Obama -- whose support is heavy among left-leaning upper-middle-class Democrats -- took 46% compared to 31% for Hillary Rodham Clinton and 8% for John Edwards. Among the Republicans, Ron Paul's net-revolutionaries clicked mightily, giving him 36% to Rudy Giuliani's 18% and Mike Huckabee's 16%.
In the real primaries and caucuses, Obama won Iowa and Clinton won New Hampshire. On the Republican side, Paul has barely figured in the final outcomes: Huckabee won Iowa and McCain -- who didn't place well at all in the online primary -- won New Hampshire. The MySpace results also contradict national preference polls. As indicators, the virtual primaries just aren't there.
So what lessons do such polls offer? First, sites like MySpace are keen to tie into political activism, and these polls have more to do with marketing and branding than with elections. But look beyond the vote breakdown and you get a glimpse of social and political networking. Political strategists have learned that the Internet is a great organizing and fundraising tool, able to move information to people quickly, and to provide an easily-accessed base of information on everything from events to how to get lawn signs.
But in the end, it's just a place to do a little research and have a detached conversation. Sure, you can rally the faithful there, but campaign strategists know that person-to-person contact is the best way to build a movement. Otherwise, why have all these offices?
-- Scott Martelle
BOSTON -- In Iowa, Mitt Romney bashed Mike Huckabee. In New Hampshire, he took on John McCain. Both targets withstood the damage and romped past Romney to victory.
So now, with a three-way battle shaping up in Michigan's Republican primary on Tuesday, will Romney lash out at both? Will he get personal?
Yes and yes, if remarks by a top Romney fundraiser on Wednesday offer any gauge of things to come.
Mark Chapin Johnson, a California co-chair of Romney's Republican presidential campaign, asserted that McCain's temperament and Huckabee's background as a minister made each unsuitable for the Oval Office.
[UPDATE: A Romney spokesman later said Johnson was expressing purely personal views that had not been sanctioned by the campaign.]
Johnson made his comments a few minutes after greeting Romney in Boston at a fundraising event, Johnson called McCain "extremely volatile."
"I like him, but he's got a short fuse," Johnson said in an interview. "He's got a short temper."
As for Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister ...
Read more Californian carries some water for Mitt Romney »
There's been much ink spilled this campaign about how leading Democrats are trying to "level the praying field" (as Time magazine put it) by talking up their personal faith and reaching out to religious voters, especially evangelical Christians.
So how are evangelical voters responding to those pitches from the left?
We haven't the foggiest.
In Iowa, surveys asked Republican caucus-goers about their faith and found a groundswell of evangelical support for Mike Huckabee. But the pollsters didn't talk faith with Democratic voters.
In New Hampshire, an extensive exit poll of voters did ask Democrats what religion they practice and how often they attend services. But Democrats were not asked, as their GOP counterparts were, "Would you describe yourself as a born-again or evangelical Christian?"
So no one really knows how many evangelicals might have been attracted to Barack Obama's personal testimony about accepting Christ as his savior, or Hillary Clinton's talk ...
Read more Democrats and faith: Still unfathomable »
For months now the growing thousands of Ron Paul supporters across the country have been saying virtually everywhere they could, including the comments section of this blog by the hundreds, that the media, the polls and the prognosticators were all wrong. There was a conspiracy.
Those Paul supporters were actually correct. The media, the polls and the prognosticators were, indeed, all wrong -- about Barack Obama handily beating Hillary Clinton in the New Hampshire primary. The media that the Paul camp loves to hate was actually dead-on right about Ron Paul. He was a long shot. He misfired again. And he got pretty much the same share of New Hampshire GOP votes as the progressive polls, that Paulunteers also despise as frauds and fixed, unrepresentative statistical snapshots, had indicated he had all along.
As he did in Iowa, Paul, despite raising the most money of any Republican presidential ....
Read more Ron Paul, loser again »
On the night that he came in second in the New Hampshire primary, Barack Obama came in first with the Nevada chapter of the large Service Employees International Union. He won that important union's official endorsement a few minutes ago.
The influential union's 17,500 health care and county worker members will come in very handy for Nevada's Jan. 19 caucuses. The union's choice will come as a serious disappointment for both Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, who both coveted it too. And the timing late tonight is likely no accident.
Union president Vicky Hedderman said just before midnight that the union's decision came during a late-night conference call of the executive board Tuesday, the Associated Press reported. But the timing of such a rapid news release without elaborate media attendance comes as a convenient public relations counterpunch to Clinton's narrow New Hampshire election win Tuesday night.
It also gets the SEIU endorsement in ahead of another anticipated Obama endorsement Wednesday by Nevada's Culinary Workers Union, Local 226, which has 60,000 members.
Hedderman said Obama is a candidate "who could take the campaign all the way to November."
Obama has previously received the endorsement of SEIU state councils and locals in five states, including Illinois. Edwards has won the endorsement of SEIU's California State Council, which could make its 600,000 members available to help him.
Under SEIU union rules, the Nevada endorsement allows SEIU locals in other states to lend volunteers and resources to its Nevada counterpart on behalf of Obama.
Ten days left.
-- Andrew Malcolm
| |
