by Joel Wendland
While Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) managed to stake a claim for staying in the race for the Democratic nomination with a split victory on "crucial Tuesday," Mar. 4, she failed to overcome numerical odds against her capturing the nomination of that party.
Barack Obama held on to a roughly 100 delegate lead, by most media estimates. But with a mere 600 pledged delegates remaining and both candidates more than 700 away from clinching the majority needed to win, it is increasingly likely that the Democratic nomination will be decided late into the spring and quite possibly by the much maligned superdelegate voting process.
The night began with Obama's 12th straight victory in Vermont, but quickly unraveled from there. Clinton opened an early commanding lead in Ohio that narrowed to a 10-point victory after the votes had been counted.
A ballot shortage in Cleveland-area precincts, an Obama stronghold, sparked some controversy. Though Obama campaign lawyers convinced a judge to keep the polls open an extra hour and a half, no outside estimates exist on how many votes may have been lost in the process.
Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, who oversees Ohio's controversial elections process and who has endorsed Hillary Clinton, denied that ballot shortages in Cleveland caused lost votes.
Obama's campaign efforts in Ohio included a massive virtual phonebanking effort that claimed to reach more than 1 million voters in Ohio and Texas. Activists from Michigan, West Virginia, and Illinois poured across the border to canvass and turn out the vote.
Hundreds of Obama supporters in Columbus, Ohio staged a march to the polls to participate in the early voting process last weekend.
In the end, however, these efforts may not have been enough to overcome sharply negative campaigning from the Clinton camp. According to exit polling, a majority of Ohioans thought that Clinton had lobbed unfair attack ads, but in the end, a majority of them sided with her at the polls.
Notably, the Clinton campaign circulated a TV ad known as the "3 am" ad, copied from a 1984 Walter Mondale commercial, which claimed that Obama would not be ready in an international crisis. Obama responded by stating that the 3 am crisis had already come in Iraq in 2003, and both Hillary Clinton and John McCain made the wrong choice to go to war.
Voters from union households in Ohio numbered approximately 34 percent and backed Clinton by margins roughly proportional to the statewide totals. Union voters played a huge role in bringing economic issues to the foreground in that state's primary.
Voters who cited the Iraq war as their top concern backed Obama.
One major issue was the role of NAFTA and other free trade deals in decimating Ohio's manufacturing economy. While both candidates pledged to revisit the unpopular trade deal and find ways to prevent it from causing job losses, Obama could not overcome Clinton's claim that members of his campaign told Canadian officials that Obama's views on NAFTA were mere campaign rhetoric.
A report in the Washington Post, Mar. 4, showed that the Feb. 8 meeting between Obama campaign representative Austan Goolsbee and the Canadian consul-general for Chicago actually included a discussion of Obama's goal to revamp NAFTA in favor of the labor and environmental concerns of US workers.
According to the memo released by the Canadian government Goolsbee told the Canadians that they sought to remake the trade deal "in favour of strengthening/clarifying language on labour mobility and environment and trying to establish these as more 'core' principles of the agreement."
Labor and environmental advocates accuse the Clinton administration of sidelining workers' rights and environmental concerns in the original NAFTA negotiations back in the 1990s in order to win Republican backing for the agreement in Congress.
Obama's point that Clinton had long been a supporter of NAFTA until her recent campaigning in Ohio failed to overcome Clinton's spin on the affair as one in which Obama had two views on the subject.
The day before the primaries, Sen. Clinton delivered what many commentators saw as her most controversial argument. On Monday, critics of the Clinton campaign argued that Clinton appeared to endorse John McCain over Obama when she stated, "I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Sen. John McCain has a lifetime of experience that he’d bring to the White House."
Media reports also suggest that when pointedly asked, Clinton failed to denounce strongly false rumors about Obama's religious views, hinting that he might be a closet Muslim.
Negative campaigning in Ohio and Texas helped sway last minute, undecided voters in Clinton's favor, polls showed.
In Texas, Clinton and Obama appeared to split the state's "prima-caucus" system, with a razor-thin victory for Clinton in the primary and a similar advantage for Obama in the caucus, though final tallies in the caucus were not turned in at the time of writing. Vermont fell to Obama by large margins, while in Rhode Island, Clinton held off a last-minute Obama rally.
In her victory speech, Mar. 4, Clinton made an argument for staying in the race despite failing to win by large enough margins to overcome Obama's lead. "We're going on, we're going strong and we're going all the way. Millions of Americans haven't spoken yet and they want their turn," she told a small but exuberant crowd in Columbus, Ohio.
The Obama campaign downplayed the results. According to it, March 4th saw Clinton's huge February leads in the polls in those four states crumble. Obama supporters claimed a continuing lead in the popular vote for all 41 primaries and caucuses to date, a more than 100-point delegate lead, and victories in 28 states to Clinton's 13.
"Time is running out," said Obama campaign spokesperson David Axelrod. "And at some point, the party is going to coalesce around the nominee, and the nominee is going to be Barack Obama."
[Subscribe to the People's Weekly World]
The opinions, views, thoughts, and ramblings of editors of PoliticalAffairs.net – and other stuff worth reading or viewing.
Showing posts with label primaries. Show all posts
Showing posts with label primaries. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Texans do ‘two-step’ on March 4
HOUSTON — Early voting started in Texas last week for the March 4 primary, and votes in the Democratic primaries here in Harris County have already surpassed the total during the early voting period in 2004, according to Beverly Kaufman, Harris County clerk.
Harris County is the third largest county in the country. Houston is the adopted home of former President George H.W. Bush and has been considered a Republican stronghold.
Yet, by Feb. 23, some 38,200 people had voted in the Democratic primary, topping the total 35,381 who voted early in 2004, including Democrats and Republicans. Meanwhile, fewer than 13,000 Republicans have voted early so far this year.
Texas two-step
Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are pushing early voting. Texas has both a primary and a caucus. In the primary, voters elect two-thirds of the state’s 228 delegates to the Democratic National Convention. The caucus, held after the primary polls close, selects the remaining one-third. It’s called the Texas Two-Step. Campaigns are hoping voters will go to the primary polls early, cast their ballots — and then focus on going to the caucus.
Obama has closed Clinton’s lead in the polls here. All polls now show them virtually tied. Despite Clinton’s relationships with the Latino communities in Texas, Obama has made significant inroads among Mexican American and Latino voters, who make up close to 40 percent of the state’s population.
In addition, Obama’s campaign has proved skilled at turning out its voters for caucuses, something the Clinton camp reportedly worries about.
Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont all go to the polls on March 4. Clinton has to win both Texas and Ohio to remain viable, commentators say.
But that may prove to be too great a feat. Obama came into Texas from a huge victory in Wisconsin, part of a streak of 11 primary/caucus wins in a row. (Americans abroad gave him his eleventh victory.)
Workers issues
Economic issues, immigration, health care and foreign policy, including the Iraq war, are dominating the debate in Texas.
Voters here may have corporate greed on their minds as they consider their primary choices. Last week the Houston Chronicle ran a story on the British Petroleum refinery in Texas City, which has killed more workers than any other in the nation.
Following the catastrophic disaster that killed 15 workers in March 2005 at the Texas City refinery, five more have been killed in BP refineries around the country. Three of those were at the Texas City facility.
Brent Coon, a Beaumont attorney who has represented dozens of families of killed and injured refinery workers, told the Chronicle, “None of these plants are re-investing like they should — production is at an all-time high. They’re pushing the operating envelope at all of these plants, and that makes all of them to some degree time bombs.”
While oil companies put profits before people’s lives, working people and their families are outraged by these unnecessary deaths. That feeling may be spurring the huge voter turnout, analysts say.
Struggle continues on voting rights
Also last week some 2,000 people marched more than seven miles from historically Black Prairie View A&M University to the Waller County Courthouse to demand the right to vote.
Members of the university community were outraged that officials planned for only one polling place in Waller County for early voting. Originally the county planned to have six polling places. Protesters saw it as a blatant attempt to suppress the vote of students who make up a significant portion of the eligible voters in the county. They complained that students at Prairie View A&M have had their voting rights suppressed for decades by Waller County.
Waller County officials were forced under pressure from the U.S. Department of Justice to add three polling places.
Prairie View Mayor Frank Johnson said, “These are wonderful kids. They are making a statement. Until they spoke up there was only one early voting place in the entire county. They spoke up but everyone is benefiting from what they are doing.”
The county has been notorious for African American voter suppression and has faced numerous lawsuits over the past decades.
A Supreme Court decision as a result of a Prairie View protest more than 30 years ago allows college students to register and vote in communities where they attend school.
November
Texans are looking forward to the November battle as well, where the country will have a chance to deliver a final blow to the far-right Bush administration and clones.
At a recent Obama speech, Texans in the crowd erupted with cheers and laughter when he said, “No matter what, the name George W. Bush will not be on the ballot. I love Texas, but I want y’all to take him back.”
[Subscribe to the People's Weekly World]
Harris County is the third largest county in the country. Houston is the adopted home of former President George H.W. Bush and has been considered a Republican stronghold.
Yet, by Feb. 23, some 38,200 people had voted in the Democratic primary, topping the total 35,381 who voted early in 2004, including Democrats and Republicans. Meanwhile, fewer than 13,000 Republicans have voted early so far this year.
Texas two-step
Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are pushing early voting. Texas has both a primary and a caucus. In the primary, voters elect two-thirds of the state’s 228 delegates to the Democratic National Convention. The caucus, held after the primary polls close, selects the remaining one-third. It’s called the Texas Two-Step. Campaigns are hoping voters will go to the primary polls early, cast their ballots — and then focus on going to the caucus.
Obama has closed Clinton’s lead in the polls here. All polls now show them virtually tied. Despite Clinton’s relationships with the Latino communities in Texas, Obama has made significant inroads among Mexican American and Latino voters, who make up close to 40 percent of the state’s population.
In addition, Obama’s campaign has proved skilled at turning out its voters for caucuses, something the Clinton camp reportedly worries about.
Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont all go to the polls on March 4. Clinton has to win both Texas and Ohio to remain viable, commentators say.
But that may prove to be too great a feat. Obama came into Texas from a huge victory in Wisconsin, part of a streak of 11 primary/caucus wins in a row. (Americans abroad gave him his eleventh victory.)
Workers issues
Economic issues, immigration, health care and foreign policy, including the Iraq war, are dominating the debate in Texas.
Voters here may have corporate greed on their minds as they consider their primary choices. Last week the Houston Chronicle ran a story on the British Petroleum refinery in Texas City, which has killed more workers than any other in the nation.
Following the catastrophic disaster that killed 15 workers in March 2005 at the Texas City refinery, five more have been killed in BP refineries around the country. Three of those were at the Texas City facility.
Brent Coon, a Beaumont attorney who has represented dozens of families of killed and injured refinery workers, told the Chronicle, “None of these plants are re-investing like they should — production is at an all-time high. They’re pushing the operating envelope at all of these plants, and that makes all of them to some degree time bombs.”
While oil companies put profits before people’s lives, working people and their families are outraged by these unnecessary deaths. That feeling may be spurring the huge voter turnout, analysts say.
Struggle continues on voting rights
Also last week some 2,000 people marched more than seven miles from historically Black Prairie View A&M University to the Waller County Courthouse to demand the right to vote.
Members of the university community were outraged that officials planned for only one polling place in Waller County for early voting. Originally the county planned to have six polling places. Protesters saw it as a blatant attempt to suppress the vote of students who make up a significant portion of the eligible voters in the county. They complained that students at Prairie View A&M have had their voting rights suppressed for decades by Waller County.
Waller County officials were forced under pressure from the U.S. Department of Justice to add three polling places.
Prairie View Mayor Frank Johnson said, “These are wonderful kids. They are making a statement. Until they spoke up there was only one early voting place in the entire county. They spoke up but everyone is benefiting from what they are doing.”
The county has been notorious for African American voter suppression and has faced numerous lawsuits over the past decades.
A Supreme Court decision as a result of a Prairie View protest more than 30 years ago allows college students to register and vote in communities where they attend school.
November
Texans are looking forward to the November battle as well, where the country will have a chance to deliver a final blow to the far-right Bush administration and clones.
At a recent Obama speech, Texans in the crowd erupted with cheers and laughter when he said, “No matter what, the name George W. Bush will not be on the ballot. I love Texas, but I want y’all to take him back.”
[Subscribe to the People's Weekly World]
Monday, December 17, 2007
Sen. Hillary Clinton, a New Gay Icon?
She's got fabulous hair and (sometimes) fabulous outfits, but there may be more to why lesbian, gay, and bisexual people are lining up with Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries, according to a recent survey conducted at Hunter College in New York.
The survey shows that 63% of LGB voters (this survey, funded by the Human Rights Campaign, did not include transgender individuals) support Sen. Clinton, while 22% back Sen. Barack Obama, and 7% support John Edwards. LGB voters also have higher rates of political interest and awareness than the general population and place "gay rights" high on their list of priorities, the survey results indicate.
Only about 4 in 10 LGB voters see John Edwards as "gay friendly" (only slightly better than Rudy Giuliani), while 7 in 10 view Sen. Clinton as such. This may very well have to do with Edwards' cultivation of a Christian evangelical image (appearing recently on Pat Robertson's 700 Club, yuck!) that obscures his record of supporting most current issues of import to the LGBT community, such as expanded funding for health care needs, support for domestic partnerships and civil unions and the like.
Overall, to expose the Democratic Party's "gay agenda," 9 in 10 LGB voters say they will vote in the Democratic primaries.
In sum, though, candidate analysis conducted by the Human Rights Campaign as well as public statements on key issues show that all of the Democratic candidates share similar positions on gay rights. Two candidates stand out: Rep. Dennis Kucinich is alone in supporting full marriage equality. Gov. Bill Richardson has been caught making offensive statements about LGBT people, but contradictorily has a policy and legislative record of supporting equality.
Because all of the Democratic candidates share strong pro-equality values, why do LGB voters support Sen. Clinton in such numbers? I suspect that her husband's record of being the only president in US history to be open to talking about the LGBT community and its needs puts Sen. Clinton by association into a class of her own.
Sen. Clinton has also refused to shy away from speaking for equality (up to full marriage equality), despite the nastiest and most hateful invectives from the ultra right.
To be sure, a concerted effort by Sen. Obama and Mr. Edwards (and the others) to reach out to the LGBT community and to specify the kinds of policy changes they would take the lead on could significantly alter these numbers.
After all, as the survey's analysis of the political awareness and activism of LGB voters indicates, Sen. Clinton won't just get by with great hair and outfits. She's got guts, and soon the other candidates are going to have to show they've got guts too or sit down.
The survey shows that 63% of LGB voters (this survey, funded by the Human Rights Campaign, did not include transgender individuals) support Sen. Clinton, while 22% back Sen. Barack Obama, and 7% support John Edwards. LGB voters also have higher rates of political interest and awareness than the general population and place "gay rights" high on their list of priorities, the survey results indicate.
Only about 4 in 10 LGB voters see John Edwards as "gay friendly" (only slightly better than Rudy Giuliani), while 7 in 10 view Sen. Clinton as such. This may very well have to do with Edwards' cultivation of a Christian evangelical image (appearing recently on Pat Robertson's 700 Club, yuck!) that obscures his record of supporting most current issues of import to the LGBT community, such as expanded funding for health care needs, support for domestic partnerships and civil unions and the like.
Overall, to expose the Democratic Party's "gay agenda," 9 in 10 LGB voters say they will vote in the Democratic primaries.
In sum, though, candidate analysis conducted by the Human Rights Campaign as well as public statements on key issues show that all of the Democratic candidates share similar positions on gay rights. Two candidates stand out: Rep. Dennis Kucinich is alone in supporting full marriage equality. Gov. Bill Richardson has been caught making offensive statements about LGBT people, but contradictorily has a policy and legislative record of supporting equality.
Because all of the Democratic candidates share strong pro-equality values, why do LGB voters support Sen. Clinton in such numbers? I suspect that her husband's record of being the only president in US history to be open to talking about the LGBT community and its needs puts Sen. Clinton by association into a class of her own.
Sen. Clinton has also refused to shy away from speaking for equality (up to full marriage equality), despite the nastiest and most hateful invectives from the ultra right.
To be sure, a concerted effort by Sen. Obama and Mr. Edwards (and the others) to reach out to the LGBT community and to specify the kinds of policy changes they would take the lead on could significantly alter these numbers.
After all, as the survey's analysis of the political awareness and activism of LGB voters indicates, Sen. Clinton won't just get by with great hair and outfits. She's got guts, and soon the other candidates are going to have to show they've got guts too or sit down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)