In case you haven’t noticed, we’re pretty big Obama fans around here. I’m working on a post that will more fully try to explain why I feel so strongly about the necessity of an Obama presidency, but for now I’ll just refer to three quotes I just read and agree with. The first comes from Sean’s post right below this one: “That’s why I’m so excited about Obama, not because of what he does for me, but what he inspires in people who haven’t ever been involved.” I agree 100%. The next quote comes from a comment left on Zack’s post by Wes from Andover, MN: “I read a great deal on generational theory - especially the work of Bill Strauss and Neil Howe (see the www.fourthturning.com site) and it feels like at this watershed time in history, with a potential sea-change election that Obama’s inspirational voice can provide the direction we need in what has become a most troubling time in American history, both economically and internationally.” I agree 100%. And the last quote comes from an article published in the Sunday London Times by Andrew Sullivan titled “Don’t screw up, Democrats, Barack Obama is your man”: “if you are someone in the middle – on the purple edge of the red-blue divide – then the polarising nature of Clinton might mean that if she were the candidate you might vote Republican. Obama is the salve for this syndrome.” Sullivan is stating that in purple to red states Obama is the best bet for down-ticket Democrats, and I agree 100%.
Now, despite all this, I also think Sullivan is right in the above referenced article when he admits that Obama is still, to the objective observer, the underdog — he’s gaining, but Hillary is still out front. So, as rabidly pro-Obama as I am, I’ve been having my doubts lately. That is, until I opened up RealClearPolitics.com today and looked at the polls:
This might not look like such a revelation if you haven’t been watching these regularly, but Clinton is down to single digit leads in many states; this simply was not the case a week ago. But wait, it gets better. The RCP average is flawed in too many ways to count (different polls are different, timing is everything, etc…) so we have to look at the individual polls to see the exciting truth.
First of all, Obama is gaining dramatically everywhere, but he’s also actually leading in some places the RCP average doesn’t reveal. Check out the results of the most recent polls in various states:
- California: Reuters/CSpan/Zogby polled from 01/31 - 02/02 with the largest sample size of any poll yet has Obama +4.0 (41 to 45)! CA is the biggest delegate pool on super Tuesday.
- Missouri: The same poll for MO puts Clinton up by only a single point in a state that had been consistently led by Clinton by double digits.
- New Jersey: The same poll puts Clinton up by only a single point in NJ as well. Although here a bigger grain of salt may be necessary as other polls show Clinton around +6 more consistently. Still, a single digit loss in Clinton’s backyard would be a big win for Obama.
- Arizona: The most recent poll here (Mason-Dixon) has Clinton only +2.
- Alabama: SurveyUSA has the most recent poll here and puts the two at a tie.
- Connecticut: SurveyUSA has the most recent poll here as well and puts Obama +4! Again, a narrow defeat or a win in the states surrounding NYC would be a big symbolic victory for Obama.
And that’s without mentioning the big win states Obama has like Illinois and Georgia, which should (hopefully) make up for Hillary’s lead in New York. Also, I’m putting big money on Obama coming out on top in the most important state of all: Minnesota.
All this means that Obama might actually come out of Super Tuesday behind Hillary in delegates by only a small bit or (please God, please God, please God) ahead. In either scenario the post 2/5 landscape is favorable for the Obama camp given the number of Southern, Midwest, and Northeast states (where Obama has a bit more bite) and his general gaining of momentum as time goes on.
I’m still not holding my breathe, but wow, taking on the Clinton machine and winning would be one hell of a story to tell…
Also, check this out:
How can you not get exited about a candidate that inspires this sort of stuff!? Okay, I’m done with my daily pro-Obama rant now.
Loading ...
Matt or Zach I am curious what your response is to this piece over at mydd.com
MyDD :: Obama’s Krugman Problem http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/3/43521/21244#commenttop
Personally, I believe the lies and deceit go deeper than any of us realize; however, for the sake of argument, let us say that everything is transparent. We, as a country, elect our officials based on ignorance and apathy. I agree fully that Obama, himself, is secondary to the effect that his campaign is having across our country. People are becoming hopeful - the apathy is diminishing. The lack of apathy is naturally leading to people becoming more informed, thusly the ignorance is also diminishing. The effects of this will influence future elections across our country way into to future. This needs to be nurtured. More important than one man or one’s politics, this hope that has arisen from so many hearts across this land will lead to real change. I will fully admit, logically, I have little hope, I truly believe there is great evil in this world, and I expect things to get much worse. Heck, in principle, Obama wouldn’t even be my first choice in this field. I would vote Ron Paul if there was even a chance of him winning, but, again it is Obama’s campaign that has stirred hearts, and thusly minds. The ramifications of this in future politics, and beyond, leads me to truly believe there is hope in Obama winning this election. I, myself, have been apathetic towards politics, believing there was no hope, but now I find myself writing posts online, checking the news and polls, discussing the election with others, and deeply hoping to see Obama become our next president.
How in the world do folks think Obama will be a uniter? Obama is terrific and if he was the nominee I’d do everything I could to get him elected. But just wait till the swiftboaters get started on him. They turned a war hero into a villain for a big chunk of voters. Imagine what they can do to a black man named Barack Hussein Obama who did cocaine in high school and college? (And that’s just what we DO know…and what the swiftboaters don’t have to make up.) Doesn’t bother me, but ask independents and Republicans in the suburbs or outstate how they feel about that. People want change, but not THAT much change!
Bill Clinton’s getting a lot of criticism for the “Fairy Tale” comment, but he hit is right on the head. The campaign is going to be nasty no matter who the nominee is. And when did the “Clinton Machine” become a bad thing?!? I want them in the game. Oh, and Hillary is the more qualified candidate.
I’m hardly a Clinton evangelist or anything, but I think you’re right that the race is tightening, and I also think you’re seeing what you want to see in the numbers. Looking at individual polls actually decreases your “predictability”, if you want to call it that. They sum up the polls and take the mean for a reason. By taking the mean you are effectively increasing the sample size of the poll numbers, and thus getting *more* reliability, not less. It’s still not perfect by any means, but it still better than cherrypicking through individual polls.
What’s way more important is that we get a Democrat in the White House, I don’t particularly care who it is. Obama talks a good game, but I want someone who I think can do the job, not just *get* the job and make people feel good about him. If he wins, great, he’ll have my unabashed support. He’s still behind, and he only has one more day to campaign.
So you guys can have your pro-Obama rant, the rest of us who don’t agree can have their whoa-there rant below the fold. I think we can all agree that Huckabee should get the Republican nomination. The evangelicals will vote for him, everyone else will stay home or go
Please God..Please God..Please God??
Oh God…
I think the UCLA event with C. Kennedy, Oprah, and Michelle that ended with M. Shriver endorsement this afternoon will help tip CA to Obama and lead the way to his nomimation. I especially loved the line about if Obama was a state he’d be california.
As I lay awake last night, I thought about who to caucus for now that Edwards has exited the race. I came upon a thought very similar to the one quoted from Sean’s previous post, that Obama energizes and engages those who have never before and likely still wouldn’t be engaged in politics. I think we all realize this is a great thing. While this makes Sean very excited about Obama, it gives me a dislike for the Obama campaign. Not because of the man (although he has a ton of problems when it comes to being a progressive) or what the campaign is doing, but because it feels very undeserved to me. I can’t understand how he is going to make this change he talks about. I just don’t buy it. That being said, I’m now 90% sure I’ll be caucusing for Obama on Tuesday because of what he does for others, even as he does nothing for me personally.
What I would like to ask him and I guess his supporters about this “change” is: from what, to what, and how? As close as I can figure the answer given would be: from partisanship, to getting along, by believing in Obama and his message of hope. As I’ve already said, I really do think such an idea is a fairy tale, and Obama’s candidacy makes me more depressed than it does others hopeful. Compromise has to be a two-way street, and I don’t see Michael Brodkorb and his ilk laying aside partisanship and neither will I. That is because issues matters. People aren’t going to forget about issues just because a guy is likable. There isn’t going to be a change in partisanship in Washington and there shouldn’t be. What should be done is a realignment of Washington towards progressive ends. This doesn’t mean making nice with Republicans, it means electing more and better Democrats so we don’t have to. If Obama can do this, then I’ll buy the talk of “change”.
That being said, I want a Democrat in the White House, and that can only be done by engaging non-traditional voters and not ceding large swaths of independents to John McCain. I feel Obama will do this, whether it is justified or not.
Now, everyone can call me a pessimist and anything else you want to, but until this concept of change can be moved out of rhetoric and into reality, I won’t be embracing change. Because like I said, I want a Democrat in the White House and I want America running on progressive ideals, not some half-assed compromise in the name of hope and change that lets the same people who have worked so hard to ruin our country have a spot at the table.
Clinton/Obama … . it is a forgone conclusion and will be even more obvious come Wednesday Morning.
Hillary has negatives, but they won’t change and there isn’t much more the Right can do to her. Obama is fresh meat and they’ ll chew him up and spit him out. Before he has a chance to fix the record, the damage will be done
If Dems had winner take all, than the California tightening would be more of a story. Time to accept reality and work towards fixing this country starting be re-taking the White House!
We’ll have a presupmtive on Tuesday.
Since the race is tight, I am not sure we’ll have a presumptive Tuesday. It might be a long hard slog for them. Hillary will probably “win” many of the states, at least according to today’s polling, but the apportionment of delegates will not be decisive for her. And it’s not like Obama is going to back away. This could conceivably last to the convention, which would not be good for the party — McCain is going to have months of free time to solidify his base and make nice-nice to the evangelicals who hate him whilst the Dems slug it out for their own nomination. Some of this might depend on how Edwards swings after Super Tuesday, and who he might release his delegates to (if anyone).
Fun times ahead.
The 2008 race for the Democratic endorsement reminds me of the 2006 race for the Fifth District U.S. Representative. Mike Erlandson had the experience, the contacts, the relationships. Elect anyone but him and you’re relegating yourself to a back-bench legislator. Keith Ellison — too little experience, too much baggage.
Keith went out with the goal of increasing voter turnout. He did, and he won, both the primary and general election. Today, he’s anything but a back-bench legislator.
Tuesday’s vote isn’t too close to call, it’s too unpredictable to call. And that’s as it should be, elections being determined by voters, not pundits.
Whoever will turn out first-voters will take Super Tuesday.
Barack Obama brings no obnvious baggage per se to this election. His honesty and integrity are admirable character traits that voters are taking a deeper look at. His passion resonates with each word uttered. People are coming out by the thousands to hear and see him.
His heritage will be under attack, that is for sure by the GOP. Anything like that to win an election. They will also attack his character as well as his “experience” or lack thereof to be President.
If anything, the oppposite will likely happen. The GOP will find voters turned off and see more support for Obama if it is he who will be the Democratic candidate.
Kathy..
I’m not the GOP… and I question Obama’s “experience”.
It’s a vailid concern.
Lets simply “Hope” the GOP doesn’t bring it up??
Curt,
Obama’s been in elected office longer than Hillary has. Unless she can convince people that being First Lady of Arkansas for 12 years and a lawyer for 8 years prior is valid Presidential experience, we’re behind in that category either way.
I welcome that Obama is a relatively fresh face in politics. Community organizing and civil rights law is much more relevant to today’s issues than what Sen. Clinton claims as experience.
And to paraphrase a supporter at a recent rally, Sen. Obama is inexperienced — at being a typical politican. And taking lobbyist money. And being untruthful to the American people.
But as his wife always says, so far, none of the slurs against his campaign are things they didn’t hear in their tough race to the Senate.
I wish him luck. He’s going to be a great President. :)