So, what do you make of last night’s results?
About The Author

BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
39 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 15: You Thought Blowing Up the Debt Ceiling Was Bad?
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
.
You guys counting the votes while I sleep … Zzzzz.
Just woke up to a beautiful sunrise and a Sunday morning in The Netherlands.
Thanks people for a nice clean sweep, not forgetting to mention the Virgin Islands: delegates Obama 3 – Clinton 0.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Hey, hey–no fair bragging about the beautiful sunrises in the Netherlands!!!
:<)
((sigh)) It’ll be a few months before we can enjoy them again.
BTW, we’re still working on the chocolate. It’s delicious.
Everything else is pretty much what we expected on Wednesday.
Obama has better margins than were predicted.
The Huckster’s momentum rolls on. If only that actor fellow hadn’t spoiled South Carolina for him earlier …
On Obama I think he did exactly what he needed to keep him on track in his probably-not-going-to-succeed effort to knock Hillary out of the race on March 4.
Phase 1 – win everything before March 4. So far so good. Helps if he wins by good to great margins – so far so good. Hillary needs to be seen as strongly contesting him in one of these states – that didn’t happen in the states he won last night. She managed to spin WA that she didn’t even try there and besides … it was a caucus and her people can’t caucus because they work (whatever that means). And I don’t think she did try in Neb. or La.
But I don’t think the media will let her spin away her efforts in Virginia. So he needs to win Va.
She can ruin this glorious plan by winning in Maine today although a win there would not ruin his overall chances in the entire process. It would simply ruin the “undefeated” narrative going into Ohio. But he could still have a good narrative if he can wipe out the memory of her Maine win between now and March 4 by the scale of his other victories. And not lose Wisconsin.
It was a fantabulous night for Obama. And it may be again on Tuesday. But will it matter if he loses Ohio and Texas?
If Obama can’t win New York, California, Ohio or Texas in the Democratic primaries, how the hell is going to win the general election?
Are Louisiana, Washington and Nebraska going to put him over the top?
Sen. Clinton is from NY. There was no way she was losing that state. CA seems to always go to the Dem. Anyway. Besides, what we need to see large margins of Dem. voters in those typically GOP states. Are you looking at the number of voters?
Take Kansas, well Obama has favorite son status there, so this may be a bit off, but look at his vote totals:
Obama 27,172 74% 23
Clinton 9,462 26% 9
Now look at the GOP totals:
Huckabee 11,627 60% 36
McCain 4,587 24% 0
If he gets the nomination, he takes Louisiana:
Obama 220,588 57% 0
Clinton 136,959 36% 0
vs.
Huckabee 69,665 43% 0
McCain 67,609 42% 0
Romney 10,232 6% 0
Paul 8,595 5% 0
Even in places where he came in second, he generally outperforms the GOP candidate. So why does he need those typically liberal strongholds to be viable?
you know, the scale of the win (look at Washington – strong across the state) makes it hard for Clinton and their supporters to spin away.
Just taking super Tuesday and yesterday Obama has racked up wins in 16 states plus Virgin Islands to Clintons’ 9.
But I take that back. Clintons will find an excuse:
We’ve been outspent or Obama workers have no jobs.
What I keep going to that in the states they both represent, he beat her by a wider margin in Illinois than she beat him in New York.
Even thought Clinton was raised in Illinois, she did better in her adopted state of Arkansas with 70% of the vote, but Obama did better in Kansas with 74% of the vote.
And yes, in most of his wins, he’s taking 54% – 64% of the vote while she’s been held below 40% more often than not. In most of those places where she’s won, it’s a 1 – 6 point difference.
in Arkansas, she was first lady, high profile for several years.
Today, betcha Clinton wins Maine.
AP photo: Clinton wiping away tears in Lewiston, Maine.(Feb. 09)
Will someone, someone out there, give this lady a kleenex tissue!
Again? Yeah, Maine totally goes to the Clinton’s.
.
Former Virginia Gov. L. Douglas Wilder, the nation’s first elected black governor, an Obama backer and Richmond’s mayor, took a swipe at Bill Clinton during a news conference. “Barack Obama is not a fairy tale,” Wilder said. “He is real.”
Of Bill Clinton, Wilder said: “A time comes and a time goes. The president has had his time.”
Clinton Weeps – Obama Sweeps
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Look at the TOTALS of turnout for Dems vs. Republicans. The primary contests aren’t asking people to choose between a Dem and a Republican.
painting Clinton as Republican lite. McCain’s conservative opponents have been painting him as Republican lite.
If Obama is anathema to some Clinton voters they could stay home.
Or worse, they could still vote.
You’re bringing in a whole different line of attack now. How about this: If Clinton wins the nomination there are several voters like myself, who won’t vote the Clinton’s just because of their race-baiting tactics. I know several more voters who are tired of the Clinton’s new “victimhood” and even they won’t vote in Nov.
Independents don’t like Clinton, so where is she going to get the numbers? The GOP really, really wants to run against her (hence the recent donations from GOP circles) and even some Independents would rather vote GOP instead of for Clinton. So again, where does she get the numbers?
I can back you up here. I am an Independent. I would belong to a party to the left of the Democrats, if we had a system that allowed its marginal success. But I honestly prefer McCain to Clinton, in a selection between the two. The reason is obviously not their stated positions on policies for this campaign season. The reason is because I am sick to death of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. She can’t slap a label on her campaign that says “change” and make me stop thinking that. Also, I find McCain to be something less of a lying hypocrite than I do the Clinton machine. If it is McCain-Clinton, I either stay home, vote for Nader, or perhaps vote for McCain if I think it is close and that my state matters. (Fuck, I’ve contributed to him before — in the primaries when he ran against Bush — because any clueless bastard could see what a disaster Bush was going to be — and I wanted it to be a choice between Gore and McCain).
I don’t think I’m alone. Obama has a good shot against McCain because he is expanding the voter pool. Clinton will lose to McCain. I’d “bet on it,” to borrow the patented phrase of AG — if that weren’t illegal.
isn’t involved in all of these fights that are going on online. My state (Missouri) was hard fought. Republican lite wasn’t even part of the two week campaign. People talked about the differences in their healthcare plans and over the war. All democrats agreed that either would be better than McCain.
Don’t mistake all the crap that goes on on blogs as the politics that the general voter is aware of.
The only thing that hurts either of them in the GE among Democratic voters is if the eventual nominee is seen by a significant voting bloc within the Democratic coalition as getting the nomination in an illegitimate way. And the risk there goes imo to Hillary. If she manages to get MI and FLA seated in a way that is meant to put her over the top – I think it might be seen as illegitimate. I truly think that could rip the party apart.
If on the other hand they aren’t seated and she wins simply on Supedelegate vote – partisans will be unhappy but it will be seen as within the rules and she will be seen (grudgingly by some people) as the legitimate nominee.
I would try to be fair and use a counter example for Obama being seen as illegitimate, but right now I don’t see any scenario where he wins in that kind of way. With Hillary – the big risk is MI and FLA.
You think McCain would win those states or something?
It all depends on how you look at things. Cali went for Clinton but will probably go Democrat, no matter who is the candidate. Same with Mass, NY and other Dem states. I suspect that Obama would be better at the top of the ticket in less Democratic states.
He can lose a big state by a fraction (as he has in many states) and still come out ahead.
I am deeply fearful that we are going to awaken from another leftiness dream of the Fitzmas/Gannon-Guckert/Downing Street Papers type to find that all of our good-hearted hopes and wishes and dreams have been invested in a vain rumour of salvation by yet another idea that is too small to make it past the guard dogs of this wretched system.
While we sit and impotently root for yet another “good guy” to come riding in on his magical steed and save us from the evil dragons and trolls of comtemporary reality, the wizards behind the curtain have a steady bead drawn on the remote possibility that he might actually succeed in doing something and will pull their (metaphorical or not, as the case demands) trigger before anything past the outward shape of the ongoing hustle changes.
is it now all Fantasy Island. all the time?
The fucking plane never seems to land.
We shall see.
My last point of resistance is as follows.
If I cannot change things, I will at least refuse to be fooled anymore.
More than that I cannot offer.
Sweet dreams.
AG
.
perhaps could win a governorship on state level, but will NEVER defeat the Washington machinery on national level. So you’re right in your observations, we’ll all perish and be buried cherishing the dream that never quite came true. All that’s LEFT is having some pleasure while being the fools we are doomed to be.
Maybe we should be satisfied Cheney’s plane doesn’t land next door and his black ops start pouring out and occupy your neighborhood, collecting all dissident voices to be stowed away in the prefab working camps already existing.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
It won’t come to that.
They have figured out that media hypnosis is more efficient, cheaper and more effective than work camps, etc.
No Resistance fighters on that level.
Not the kind with guns anyway.
Unless (Until?) the media machine breaks down in a big, BIG way…no need for any physical black ops on a domestic level.
Not on a really large scale, anyway.
Just the occasional disappearance or assassination is all…
Bet on it.
AG
Why does most of MSM still attribute most of the superdelegates automatically to Clinton? It’s my opinion that they can vote as they will, and that any previous statement they may have made indicating their support is not binding. If the majority in their state has voted the other way, there would be some pressure to follow. And if they aren’t bound, why list them at all?
The pro-Clinton bias was all over cable yesterday, from the unscheduled bio on MSNBC to the “Clinton now has fashion sense” bit on Faux. Now that they’ve given up on the Republicans (Murdoch doesn’t trust McCain) they are pushing her way.
I was wondering that too. August is a long time away, and who knows what will happen between now and then.
Of course, I have no doubt that the Clintons are aces at backroom dealing, so maybe the MSM is right. But who really knows?
Everything I’ve heard about the superdelagates says that they can’t go against the will of the people. If Obama has a clear majority of votes, doesn’t that mean that they would have to crown Obama the candidate? Maybe that’s too simple. Or wishful thinking.
It’s been tough being a middle aged boomer female around here. Even though I’m solidly behind Obama, it’s hard not to take the comments about boomers and stupid middle aged women that love Clinton comments personally.
I know Clinton sucks, but man! For people that supposedly are so filled with hope, there is an awful lot of hatred around here lately.
I agree with you that the superdelegates shouldn’t go against the will of the people, but we’ve seen things go the wrong way too many times. And the folks on the Hillary campaign are who they are. But I hope you’re right, and that the tide will be strong enough for them not to go against it.
You know, every time I see comments about Hillary’s ‘base’ I cringe a little too. I know I mentioned something about age groups and single mothers yesterday, but I try not to be derogatory about it…nobody wants to be lumped into some mythical group they don’t belong to.
Well, I try not to make boomer slams. Some of my best friends are boomers. ;P
Look at it this way, now you’re getting a very narrow look into how it feels to be black and read most progressive blogs.
I’ve read some comments over at Salon, where I USED to be a paying subscriber about a couple of years ago, and I’m just aghast. And that’s just one example.
One letter-writer wrote that Obama “had no right” to run against Hillary. WHAT?!?!? The mind positively REELS at the arrogance and entitlement of these people. Also, IIRC, the same person talked about him “taking this away” from her, her daughters and her granddaughters.
I guess my nieces and nephew don’t rate. Hell, I don’t rate. On top of this stupid meme that white women were somehow more oppressed than black men, which is so obviously, ridiculously AHISTORIC (and again, black women just don’t seem to rate), all I can do is SMH and wonder why I ever thought of some of them as progressive allies.
I went to Donna Edwards’ rally yesterday, and Kim Gandy was one of the speakers. I was glad to see her there, but I admit that I don’t look at her the same way anymore. There’s now a wariness that wasn’t present before. I know she is not NY NOW. I know she hasn’t said publicly some really hurtful and stunningly factually inaccurate things. But still. I knew that people’s true feelings would come to the fore, both good and bad. But some of the truly bilious comments have been very bad, indeed.
that most of the superdelegates that have committed right now are high profile politicians who won’t in the least mind coming out and backing someone and then switching their vote later.
But the majority of superdelegates are people you haven’t heard of – like chairmen of the state parties or democratic elected officials in state offices we don’t pay attention to. They aren’t going to say a word until they know which way the wind is blowing. They never do.
imo in the end, if they have two candidates who would be great (this is probably the first time for that!) and one of them is clearly ahead, they will go with the person who is ahead.
The only problem (usually) would be if there wasn’t somebody clearly ahead and the candidates are virtually tied (which would not be pretty but would not be the end of the world).
The glitch this year is Michigan and Florida. And that could throw the whole process into disarray and cause a meltdown.
In my mind it isn’t even a question of whether the delegates from MI and FLA are actually seated or not – it’s a question of the psyche of the superdelegates. They want to pick a candidate that the entire party sees as legitimate.
So does a failure to take into account the will of the Democrats of Michigan and Florida make the candidate illegitimate? It might if it would have made a difference.
But how do they know the will of Michigan and Florida? They have nothing to go on except the primaries – which were not supposed to count, which (in the case of Michigan) didn’t have Obama even on the ballot, and in which the potential voters didn’t have the same type of information they would usually get because the candidates did not campaign and in which the campaigns couldn’t conduct GOTV efforts.
If the superdelegates don’t take into account the Michigan and Florida primary elections does that mean they are picking an illegitimate candidate because they ignored Michigan and Florida? Or by taking into account the Michigan and Florida elections are they picking an illegitimate candidate because those elections were in themselves illegitimate and don’t reflect the true will of the the Democrats of Florida and Michigan?
And will they then try to split the baby by discounting some of FLA and MI’s delegates in a way that gerrymanders the process (at least in their minds) to a way to at least claim they tried their best to come up with a legitimate winner?
So, in the end, it would be best if either Obama wins by enough delegates that he wouldn’t need MI or FLA or if he loses it is by enough delegates that he would have lost even if MI and FLA were left out. I don’t know what those numbers would be or if they are achievable.
I’m becoming more convinced that it will be the super-delegates and Michigan/Florida.
Hillary’s not going to give up without a fight. Unless Obama can get his delegates before the primary season is up, it’ll get ugly.
The second it becomes mathematically impossible for one of the two candidates to win without the super-delegates, we’ll see the Clintons launch into action.
It’ll be interesting to see that happens with Michigan and Florida. I think that has the potential to be really ugly.
.
An oil platform in the North Sea is being evacuated in a security alert, it has been confirmed.
It is understood that a total of 539 people are being taken off the facility in an operation involving 13 helicopters and a fixed wing aircraft. They are being transported to other rigs in the area.
The operation, 130 miles off the Aberdeen coast, began at 0920 GMT on Sunday and is being co-ordinated by Grampian Police.
A spokesman for Aberdeen Coastguard said it was a “large scale” operation and that two platforms were involved, but that just one was being evacuated.
Squadron leader Barry Neilson, from RAF Kinloss, said of the incident: “It’s unusual, that’s probably the best way to describe it. But it falls within our normal operating procedures and we are reacting accordingly. He added that there was a report of a woman on the platform who had sparked the incident, but he could not go into details at this stage.
The Press Association reported sources saying the platform involved was the Safe Scandinavia and that a “device” had been found on board.
Sky News – Oil Rig Bomb Alert
≈ Cross-posted from my diary — Iraq War Divided US & Europe and Now Splits NATO ≈
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
A woman on the platform who had sparked the incident …
wonder what she could have done.
.
In multilingual surroundings of EU employees, such is easily misread … sex bomb.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
.
… a bit of enthusiasme.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Keep in mind one thing folks- every time the huckster embarasses mccain, the dems garner more ammunition for the real campaign. Also, how about those totals!!!!!!
Now, if the dems can’t get their act together with these kinds of numbers, they don’t deserve to win the dog catchers job!
BUT………….!!!!!!!!
Who fucking cares?
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
In a word: Ouch.