Wow.
The Obama campaign released the details of the Illinois Senator’s trip to Minnesota 24 hours ago and as of right now, the Target Center - as in where the Timberwolves play - is completely sold out! Not just that, there is already a waiting list in excess of 2,000 people and that list is growing by the minute.
To put that in perspective, in 2004, 56,000 people caucused in Minnesota. This year, the DFL projects that between 70,000 and 75,000 will show up.
And just to be clear, the Obama campaign is using the whole arena - there will not be any Metrodome-style curtain covering up some seats.
Matt adds: Wikipedia puts the capacity for the Target Center for a Basketball game at 20,500 and 19,500 for a center stage concert. We’re hearing that the ticket count matches those capacity counts coming in to the tune of around 20,000. Not to mention the waiting list of over 2,000 people. Honestly, “staggering” doesn’t even described how absurdly large this showing is; much less a sell-out in under 24 hours.
UPDATE: A loyal reader of MN Publius reminds us that John Kerry held a rally in Minnesota 10 days before the general election and, in what was the biggest political rally in state history, attracted 35,000 people. Obama has 20,000 in 24 hours and this is a contested primary. Simply stunning.
Loading ...
I found your site on technorati and read a few of your other posts. Keep up the good work. I just added your RSS feed to my Google News Reader. Looking forward to reading more from you.
Chris Moran
So if we have a ticket, we are good right? Or does this mean we will have to camp out like its a rock concert?
Geez, could you gush any harder? I feel like I have to wipe the slobber off the computer screen. I believe young Bill Clinton packed ‘em in the Target Center at a campaign event way back in ‘96, my memory is a little fuzzy, but I think that it “Sold Out” very quickly as well.
I have another topic for you that should be discussed. When will the Legislature change the Primary date from Mid-freakin-September to something more realistic. With the moving up of caucus dates and SD/county unit conventions to earlier dates doesn’t it make it easier to move the Primary Election date to August or before?
The late date of the Primary gives a strong advantage to a party that does not have a contest.
Discussion item 2: Why do we have open primaries? Why should anyone but registered Democrats or Republicans get to decide who is on their Parties’ ticket?
Closing the primaries may even strengthen 3rd parties, independents would have to go somewhere else to vote in a primary, like a 3rd party for instance. Independents like to whine about how the DFL is too left and the Republicans are too right, that is only because they quit showing up and left the parties to those who do. Moderates who lean left and moderates who lean right have simply been out-organized by the issue groups. If you show up to caucus and get to the next level you can influence decisions, can’t do that sitting on the couch.
discuss away
Rick: I’m with you 100% on the first issue of moving the primary in this state up. There have been several proposals in the legislature but none of them have gotten very far. Everyone, however, should be sending a letter to his or her state legislator.
On the 2nd issue, I see where you’re coming from but I have to disagree. People should be encouraged to vote for whatever candidate excites them no matter if they’re a Democrat, Republican, or Independent. Especially in the case of independents, closing the primaries risks shutting people out of the process. And I would contend that allowing independents and non-registered voters in serves as an important check upon the too-left representation of the usual delegates (or the similarly too-right on the other side). Finally, there is little evidence that there’s much strategic voting; that is, Republicans going to DFL caucuses to vote for the weaker DFLer — especially in caucus environments where the reality of being caught by those you’re interacting with face-to-face is highly intimidating. Although it does look like you’re advocating closed primaries and not caucuses, which I do find more palatable.
BFD, Hannah Montana sold out in less time.
I believe the Backstreet Boys did as well.
How long did take to convince your mom to take you to that show chris?
So it means…no entries without tickets?
It doesn’t matter how quickly he sold out, what matters is that he did. And as a white woman I am delighted in the fact that peolpe are willing to support him in this history making endevor, and are doing so in such number.
When Barack Obama came to Rochester in Oct. of 2006, I felt the electricity when he came to the podium. There were over 3,000 people at the older section of the Mayo Civic. It was standing room only. I took some good photos of him.
Those who saw him today are fortunate in knowing that he could very well be the next President of the United States. That would be history in the making. Either way, history will be made in November. The Democrats are going to retake the White House.
Senator Obama is an exciting attraction, no one can deny that. Despite being a Hillary supporter, I would attend the Obama event at the Target Center if I were still in MN. Just this past Monday, I nearly went down to AU for Obama’s endorsement rally (I had to work at the time). Simply because 20,000 people attend doesn’t mean 20,000 people will caucus.
I know I’m probably only talking about 5% of the attendees, but I thought the point should be made.
My wider concern about Obama is related, however. It seems to me his supporters most often cite this magnetic ability to draw crowds as a principle reason if not the principle reason to vote for him. Inspiration? On a scale of 1-10 of what I need from my President, inspiration is -12. I want to feel safe at night, knowing that my President can make wise foreign policy decisions in a time of crisis. I want to know that the President representing my party, the Democratic party, knows how to battle in Washington. Conversations of tone and unity are non-starters for me. DC works a certain way, and it ain’t gonna change. And I want someone competent enough to achieve the political objectives we want and need. If people think Obama will somehow earn republican loyalty while spouting off liberal talking points on the war and otherwise, they are sadly mistaken. And perhaps most importantly, I’m just not as liberal as I used to be, and Hilary more closely represents my view on the economy and foreign policy (though not on Health Care). Anyway, cheers!
Obama is the man. I am excited for saturday, it should be a great day for Minnesota Obama supporters!
Well, Paul B from DC if you are most concerned with feeling safe with a Presidents ability to make foreign policy decisions Hillary in my book gets a -12 out of ten. She has, despite her rhetoric, been almost as good a Democrat for Bush as Lieberman. She is a Hawk and would be a disaster in the White House for the reasons you would like to see her there.
Sadly we are at the point where many would rather have a candidate with no track record than a negative one like Hillary’s. Well maybe that isn’t so sad. And as far as how the world views the U.S. I think Barack Hussein Obama, a young African American that is not tied to the myriad of our past foreign policy mistakes would be a much bigger step forward than the wife of an ex-president.
So where are you caucusing next tuesday? Here? http://www.mnip.org/
Haven’t decided yet. I could go to with the Democrats and caucus for Obama in order to do what I can to keep Hillary out or I can make a statement and go Republican and caucus for Ron Paul. I obviously don’t agree with either completely. The precinct where I live in Minneapolis will most likely be already strong for Obama and be packed with people while there may only be 5 or 6 at the Republican gathering so 1 vote could make the difference for the precinct.
KH -
I will go into greater detail on this later today or over the weekend, but…
The 5th Congressional District has 8 delegates to the national convention. That means that for Obama to get more delegates than hillary clinton out of the 5th, he needs 58% of the vote (otherwise, each will get 4 delegates). So he needs a landslide in the 5th for it to do any good in the delegate count. You’re vote matters far more on the DFL side than a symbolic vote on the GOP side.
Zack,
Thank you for the info. I think it would be a great service for you guys to do a post that gives everyone a better understanding of how our caucus system really works.
To be honest, part of my reason for still considering caucusing for Paul, other than I agree with him a bit more than any other candidate, is the chance of being able to become a delegate at the National convention. As selfish as I know it is it would be an experience that would be almost impossible for me to get another chance at. My significant other will be caucusing for Obama and I am racing back into town for Tuesday’s events and have a 5 hour drive to make up my mind.
KH, I don’t think you’d be selfish at all to try to get to be a delegate; you actually seem to be a principled man (and, I’d bet you’d share your experiences!)
Plus, if Paul is more in tune with your beliefs, you SHOULD caucus for him. Way too often, folk vote “against” rather than “for”.
That said, I’d rather see you caucus DFL, and help keep Obama viable.
I suspect that you’ll end up caucusing for Paul. Principles do count, yes?
All you people who like Ron Paul must not be women. He’s a neanderthal on women’s rights and equality rights for gays, lesbians and transgenders. I’ll support ANY Dem before I’ll ever vote Republican. I’m not willing to give up my rights as a woman which is where the GOP is heading….
The point, WMD, is that with Paul, what you see is what you get.
I happen to agree with your assessment of Paul’s view of womanhood; it’s not as if he actually “hides” it.
But you have to give credit to Paul - he is who he is and he doesn’t apologize for it.
OK, I’m going to soundlike a broken record here, but:
Obama is an incredible speaker. He will give unbelievable state of the union addresses if elected. And yes, he can energize people.
But when it comes to the other 95% of a President’s job — that part that will affect my and my families’ life every day — how can I be assured that he has sound policy skills and good judgement? Track Record?
DTM, you can’t be.
As dismayed as I was when Boy Blunder “won” in Y2K (the push-polling of McCain especially DISGUSTED me), the solace was that at least Bush The Lesser had the “appearance” of surrounding himself with competent people.
Tragically, those that were “competent” had an extremist agenda few - at the time - recognized (Rumsfeld with his transformation of military doctrine, for example), or were marginalized (Powell, for example).
Add to that the clearly incompetent (“Brownie, you’re doin’ a heck of a job”) appointed solely on ideological grounds (Rachel Paulose ring a bell, anyone?).
So, we ARE placing a LOT of hope and trust in those we back.
Because we just don’t know….
This discussion is about 2008.
It strikes me that in some cases, not only is lack of a track record not a disadvantage, but it is an actual advantage because there are fewer screw-ups for opponents to point to.
Does that mean the candidate doesn’t srew up? No. It just means we have no basis of knowing how he will respond when he does screw up.
To add to that, we don’t even have a basis of knowing how many of the candidates’ decisions will be good vs. bad. We know nothing. There is just nothing to go on.
In my personal life, I generally have more respect for someone after I’ve seen them in good and bad, witnessed their weakness and seen how they have overcome. My relationship with Obama, at this point, feel’s like I’ve met him at a cocktail party, had a couple drinks with him, and laughed at his jokes.
We hardly know him.
Yes, DTM, this discussion IS about 2008; however, “those who forget the lessons of history, tend to vote republiCon (tm=TPT)”.
While the past is no guarantee of future performance, it is an indicator of what probably will happen.
I used the last misAdministration as an example of how it’s really those the elected surround themselveswith that dictate where they’re going to go.
The one thing that I take with me from last night’s debate was Obama’s discussion how he does NOT want to be a victim of “GroupThink” (although he didn’t use that term).
Past performance indicates I can live with another Clinton Administration; current performance tells me I really, Really, REALLY like what I see and hear in Obama.
But - again - we just don’t “know”….
DTM,
While I agree with everything you are saying I still think Obama is the better choice between him and Clinton. Clinton has a track record but it is primarily an awful one, especially on foreign policy. She still won’t take responsibility for her failure on the Iraq vote and keeps using the fact that she didn’t think that if she voted to give the President the power to go invade that he would actually do it. She is either incredibly stupid, which I doubt, or incredibly dishonest, which I am quite certain of. Obama had it right when he said Hillary will say or do anything to get elected which means none of her policy positions or promises mean anything no matter how good they sound. She also handles screw-ups the same way Bush does, pretends they weren’t mistakes or claims that the mistakes were somebody else’s fault.
As I stated earlier, at a bare minimum Obama being president will help restore our credibility around the world in a way that the hawkish,hegemonic wife of an ex-president will never be able to do. That assured positive is worth the risk of having little track record. Especially considering the obviously corrupt alternative.
KH -
I agree with you. The one case that I’d be willing to take on an unproven public servant (Obama) is when the competition’s track record is not compelling (Clinton).
As I was writing, I realize that with my “track record” comment probably had McCain in the back of my mind (as someone who we’ve seen and both good and bad of over several years, and if anything the respect level for him has increased through it all).
She still won’t take responsibility for her failure on the Iraq vote …
KH, were your eyes glazing over while she droned on and On and ON, or were you puking, like I was?
It is not rational to believe anything Hillary says. I doubt she even realizes when she is lying anymore.
Well, my point was that it wasn’t even convincing.
She had some good zingers; that one wasn’t one of ‘em. They gave her an out, and she couldn’t even take it.
The only way you don’t know Obama’s track record is if you haven’t looked at it. He’s spent four years in the U.S. Senate, cast 4,000 votes in the Illinois Senate, and written two dense, reflective books. That’s an enormous public record anyone can examine.
And that’s to say nothing of his years as a civil rights lawyer fighting for equal ballot access and affordable housing, among other progressive causes, and as a community organizer before that - all of it well documented in the media over the last year (or four).
Democrats are going to retake the White House. How is this big news? Seems like an every 8 year cycle to me, except that the next one will likely be a 4 year trip to nowhere…
tom a.
I agree 100%. Everyone knows a DemocRat president with a DemocRat House and Senate will get absolutely nothing done.
Great Job!
Typical Frightened Right Wing Guy -
Here is my bet: With a Dem President, House, and Senate, Washington will discover a way to raise the income tax rate on entrepreneurs to above 100%. Just imagine. Being able to collect every penny someone makes plus a little more!!!!!
I bet they are giddy just thinking about it!
DantheMan,
I agree 100%!
They are giddy, absolutely. Everybody knows DummocRats hate entrepreneurs. I also agree that Dummocrats are so greedy that they want ALL the money, and then ask for more than people can afford. They’ll just expect people to go out and get more credit cards!
Like that will ever work!
Next thing you know trial lawyers set a record for the largest profits in the history of the United States!
Great Job!
TFRW Guy -
Thank you so much for the kudos. It is nice to know that there are other people out there who have no other purpose but to make as much money as they could but have to pay for none of the services. Right wingers like you and I are trying to get everything shifted to the poor man, right? It will be our little secret.
It is hard to live in a world where everyone thinks I should have to support others. I should have “tax immunity” because I am so successful. I feel that way, as do all of my Republican friends who I smoke cigars and eat steak with. I’m sure you do too!
I finally found a friend here. Great job right back at you!!! We should do lunch sometime!
Thank God, Reaganism is finally dead.
DanTheMan,
I agree 100%! Thank GOD people like you post here at MN Publius! Our children and grandchildren will be thanking people like you for your efforts.
Great Job!