More Politalk

Posted by Seth Kramer on Thursday, January 31st 2008 at 10:14pm


So I had a long post about the Feb. 5th überprimary all about how the Democratic states being proportional representation states and how Edwards fouls all sorts of things up if he meets the necessary 15% cut off and I left it for a day for me to finish doing some editing and polishing, and then the little bastard goes and quits. So imagine I had a thoughtful and well researched blog after a long dry period.

Now instead of that here's a bunch of random thoughts ahead of the Feb. 5th primary. I hope it's not too disjointed.

Clinton's been leading Obama nationally (which is what the 2/5 primary amounts to) for months with the exception of the few days between Iowa and New Hampshire. As it stands she's going to win New York, California, New Jersey, and Connecticut. Edwards dropping out is weird. He wanted to make poverty an issue, and as long as he was running he could shed some light on it, but the press didn't care about him. At some point he realized this and did the only thing he could. Drop out, and bait the candidates into chasing his endorsement by cuddling up to his pet issue. So far that plan has worked perfectly.

Lets be clear, Edwards is NOT going to endorse Hillary Clinton. NAFTA, the Clinton-era trade agreement that began a steady flow of unskilled labor jobs to Mexico, China, India and other nations, is a major cause for the poverty and quality of life issues Edwards kept flogging. I'm not sure if Edwards will endorse Obama or not. I suspect he will not, in fear of what it would do to him politically if Clinton were elected. The Clintons are known for many things, but forgiveness is not one of them.

That said an Edwards endorsement would help Obama, but it is my belief that without the endorsement of both Edwards and Gore I think Obama will trail Clinton significantly in delegates after the Feb. 5 contest. If there's a 20% chance of an Edwards endorsement, there's a 1% chance of a Gore endorsement. Gore is going to have to try to work with whoever is in the White House, and backing Obama would be risky. If Edwards endorses--and I believe he will (UPDATE: oops I forgot a critical NOT, see above)--he does it Friday because it stays in the news all weekend.

Endorsements are only effective if they're done with enough lead time to allow the endorser to campaign for the endorsee. Kennedy's endorsement (though not my cup of tea) is effective for hardcore liberals who think of Obama as squishy on liberal issues because Republicans like him. John McCain (the presumptive Republican nominee) has the same issue, only worse. Republicans apparently believe it's a bad idea to have a candidate who is able to attract the 70 something percent of people who think Bush is incompetant. Obama is in a remarkable place (courting voters on the right and center with his hope meme) and voters on the left with his actual policies.

Matching up McCain against Clinton could be dicey. McCain is the type of Republican even I could vote for. I disagree with the guy, but I don't think he's going to turn the nation over to Pat Robertson. He's a conservative in the vein of Bush 41, rather than Bush 43. Clinton alienates conservatives and many moderates and I think she wins narrowly, or even loses to McCain. On the other hand, Obama and McCain quickly turns into a youth versus experience dynamic in an election year where change is the watchword. Just my opinion, but 72 year old man who's been in Washington since I was 2 years old gets his clock cleaned by Obama.

Regardless, lets look at the candidates' supporters.If Edwards endorses, he does it Friday because it stays in the news all weekend.

Clinton's chief base of support comes mostly from lower to middle class white women, particularly over 60. Fortunately for her, women comprise a major voting block of the Democratic party, and the 60 and up is the age group most likely to vote (what the heck else are they going to do?)

Obama's chief base of support comes from a weird mish-mash of more educated and affluent white people, lower to middle class black people, some white men who don't like Clinton, and of course young people--a group widely believed to show up to rallies, campaign, but frequently don't actually vote.

Lets talk regional politics.

Midwest and Mountain West
Clinton is weak in rural states like these where Obama has significant local support. Think Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NB), Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS), Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO).

South
Any state with a large black population should help Obama. Whether the Clintons felt they were race-baiting or not, most black people did (see also South Carolina).

Northeast
Clinton is the Senator from NY. That's going to bring home a lot of votes in NY, CT, and NJ.

Southwest
Kind of a tossup. There could be a little swing in someone's direction if Bill Richardson (the NM governor who recently dropped out of the race) endorses someone, but a tossup tends to favor the national poll leader (Clinton).

I'm dying to see how this goes. I'll post my predictions the morning of the primaries because there are 5 more days and that's a lot of time.

I'm feeling tired