Having spent the past couple of days watching the various campaigns in action, I’ll venture a couple of cautious predictions for tomorrow.
Obama’s supporters are young and really enthusiastic. His crowds are bigger than Clinton’s, and if passion could take the day, he’d do it. At Clinton’s rally today in Cedar Rapids (above), her followers are older and have the air of being civic leaders. Obama’s crowds do have older people as well, but listening to them talk, they seem like they are to a great degree people who aren’t ordinarily that engaged in the political process. Obama has drawn them in with the hope that the nasty politics of the Bush era can be overcome.
Caucus voting in Iowa isn’t a matter of punching a card in secret, it’s done in the open and everybody in the room knows how you’re voting. Add to that the fact that if your candidate doesn’t reach a 15% threshold, you get to cast a second vote — and people get to speak on behalf of their candidate. It’s actually a very anti-democratic process. There’s a lot of small community social pressure you have to factor in when trying to predict an outcome.
It’s hard to know where things actually stand, the polls indicate that on the Democratic side it’s a tight race. I haven’t had a chance to observe the Edwards operation in action (will do so tonight at the Mellencamp show) but all things being equal, I’d have to say that if it were strictly a matter of Clinton supporters in a room with Obama supporters, the gravitas of the Clinton supporters would probably carry the day.
Clinton’s also running a very effective radio ad right now of an older woman saying "I was born before women had the right to vote, and before I die I want to see a woman in the White House." It’s very emotional and a direct plea to the kinds of people who are going to show up and carry a lot of weight in an open, community decision making process.
Candidates need people who can show up and argue persuasively for them in a community situation. If the person who grants you your bank loan, who sits on the city council, who employs your kid at the local hardware store is saying one thing and a bunch of impassioned teenagers are arguing another, after eyeballing their respective crowds I’d have to give the advantage to Clinton.
Edwards, however, is polling the strongest on the 2nd choice vote. And CW has it that low turnout favors Edwards (he’s got solid union support), mid turnout favors Clinton, and high turnout favors Obama. And it’s cold as shit here right now, even by Iowa standards.
Consider this your official Iowa Democratic Prediction thread.
Related posts:
- Obama Meeting with Progressives and Caucus Leaders Focused on Triggers, Opt-Out
- Progressive Caucus Requests Meeting with President Obama to Rethink Afghanistan
- Progressive Caucus, Please Clarify Your Position on “Triggers”
- Bill Clinton: “I Was Wrong About Gay Marriage”
- What We Learned from the Supplemental: If Obama Wants a Public Plan, the Blue Dogs Will Do It





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Zed!! Edwards is the only choice fro the thinking man/woman
EDWARDS
i like how you think
Glad to hear Edwards has Union support. I think he deserves it far more than any other in the top three.
John Edwards!!!!
Hill looks like a ghost in that TV add
maybe its my teebee,Obama looks ghostly too lol
I don’t think anyone really knows how everything is going to shake out tomorrow, there’s just too many variables to consider. It should be interesting to watch-will you be attending a cacus as an observer, Jane, or is that allowed?
BTW-were you able to score some cozy longjohns?
Edwards/Sibelius
thanks for freezing your tush off for us, Jane…
good report.
Glad I read this before posting my own Iowa prognostication. :)
Great post, Jane. I’m looking forward to the
MellencampEdwards report tonight.I don’t think Finnish composers who died 50 years ago are eligible to run for the vice presidency.
Kucinich’s desire to send his votes Obama’s way may not turn out to mean a whole heck of a lot, considering all of those other intangibles mentioned here. Thanks Jane.
Jane, I love your reporting.
Anyone else from Iowa want to chime in?
So Jonathan Alter on KO complains that only a couple of thousand votes in Iowa could determine who the next prez is. To which I retort: that’s better than just one vote on SCOTUS.
Weather forecast really warms up tomorrow.. Should help the turnout.
Detailed text forecast: Des Moines, Iowa
Tonight: Mostly clear, with a low around 4. Wind chill values as low as -5. Southwest wind between 3 and 8 mph.
Thursday Night: Partly cloudy, with a low around 19. Wind chill values as low as 10. South wind between 11 and 14 mph.
I’ve always wondered if the caucuses are like juries where each particular caucus venue has to unanimously agree on a candidate and then send their results as a unit into a central location for tabulating.
Given the closeness of the campaigns and the passion all around, getting everyone to agree would be a daunting task.
I plead ignorance of the procedure, so I’ll have to just sit back, watch, and root for Edwards.
I’m gonna take the ride with Obama.
Thanks for the update Jane. Stay warm!
In 1972, I was a county level McGovern delegate in Kentucky when KY was still a caucus state. The way it was done there, each county Dem group got together for the caucus and the names of the individual delegate slates were presented and voted upon. The then governor was very much against McGovern so all the local pols and power people were running as “uncommitted.” Those of us on the McGovern slate were college students. We got 25% of the vote (10 out of 40) and were declared as all having lost. This was the first year of proportional representation and a couple of folks appealed and wound up being seated at the Congressional District convention a couple of weeks later.
My father was a state employee and I had not told him I was a delegate. He was quite unhappy to discover that I was there and wound up leaving without voting in order to not be blamed for my actions.
And FWIW, pretty much the nature of having a caucus like this (or Iowa) is that the voting is open and not secret so everyone knows how everyone else is voting.
The other Sibelius.
Hear, hear!
and the DUMBASS CORPORATE MEDIA pushing Chimpy down our throat,and covering for him for 8years!!!
Very funny! but of course we know better we the people elect our officials, there is never any hanky panky in politics!!
It makes me wonder why he chose Obama over Edwards (whom Ralph Nader calls most progressive).
I think I’m a little more comfortable with the folks in Iowa and NH having a big say than I am having the back room pols/beltway VSP mandating the candidates through back room deals at a brokered convention.
Can you imagine the candidate we’d get if it was mandated to us by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin, Steny Hoyer, and Rahm Emmanuel? With the blessings of Broderella, Punkinhaid, and Tweety?
No thanks.
A caucus sounds like the nearly extinct, legendary New England town meeting, which has at times been held up as the be-all-and-end-all of Democracy.
But 2+ hours in the dead of winter? A person could get going on the mulled wine and find their political allegiances wandering all over the map.
Looking forward to your take on the process.
Keith is sooooooooo succinct,no?
me too – first thing I’ve disagreed with Kucinich about. (politically that is – didn’t he claim something about UFO’s?)
OT
If economics data gets headlined here on FDL, I’ll try to leave an interpretive comment. That used to be part of my job. *g* Did it with the ISM report today.
Huck not so much
Gladlyyes.
thanks in advance
Keith for president!! Oh yeah he’s not running! I guess I will stick with Edwards.
he has lost me forever,first the SHCIP thing now this….BYE DENNIS
he is so flipping natural,NORMAL just lke tweety/
Love your McGovern report. I worked for his campaign out of Chicago and you’ve brought back many wonderful memories. My Daddy was cranky about my commitment to McGovern and mercifully ended up volunteering for the great Senator.
had to google that – Dennis the K voted against because he didn’t think it was strong enough…
“I cannot support legislation which extends health coverage to some children while openly denying it to other children,” Kucinich said. “This legislation is woefully inadequate: and I will not support it.”
So – I guess there are worse ways to be wrong(?)
Too funny. KO does honky tonk version of “Roll Out the Barrel” to mark $100/bbl oil.
I wonder about the low turnout favoring Edwards. For one thing, I’m hearing that many of the people deciding at the last minute are going his way.
What does a big turnout imply? Lots of college kids turning out their first time? Much as I like the idea of that, I hope they are informed, and not being swayed by a handsome facade and articulate presentation.
Though, discussing Obama with my 13 year old, I said many liked Obama because he did present well, was articulate etc. – my son said “no he’s not. During the debate, when asked about the war, he said- then he goes into a riff parodying doublespeak and empty rhetoric pretty darn well. “And he changed the subject and didn’t even answer the question!” my kid says. I hadn’t realized he was paying that much attention.
Beware Obama.
He is no progressive, and is no friend to progressives.
Just wait and see.
That’s what would concern me. The stronger personalities always holding sway and it would become consensus by attrition.
I’m sure there are ground rules and all, but this is a human endeavor with neighbors’ intellects and emotions probably colliding. Now that I think of it, this is very exciting.
A 2008 Iowa Caucus Eve classic from fiore
(via AZ Matt)
grandstanding! imo
I don’t care so much about his belief that he saw something he couldn’t identify (the Fundies do it all the time! LOL! And then there was Nancy Reagan who had her spiritual advisors!), but it makes me wonder what it is about Edwards that Kucinich wouldn’t support.
It was definitely a curious move on his part, but maybe he sees Hillary & Edwards as the same? Could be. I don’t know.
Obama will never win the general election imo
My dad came around as well.
It was especially fun in November (not really) when we were campaigning outside the polling place in the college town I was in (Bowling Green, KY). We knew we were on a tough road so had to ask folks to “vote straight Democratic.”
One girl campaigning with me said she and her family were all voting for McGovern because Nixon “had gone soft on Communism by going to China.” I just smiled and thanked ‘em all for their votes.
I suspect Kucinich didn’t like it when Clinton and Edwards spoke together at the end of one of the debates about limiting how many people were up on the podium. Remember that?
He actually vote “with” the republicans in the House a couple of times. Why? Because a penny went to the funding of the war (the republicans shot the bill down for other reasons) and because no where in the bill did it hold George Bush & Dick Cheney accountable. See? ;-)
Well, what’s wrong with getting some children insured and then working to get the rest insured? Seems a better plan than voting against insuring any of them.
he does not want to give Edwards momentum imo….he throws his support ,ONLY if he doesnt get the 15 % required
Great story.
Oh yeah! That’s right. Maybe that is it…but then again….why come out and say “Obama” even if that is the reason? I just find it fascinating that Kucinich would do that…that’s all.
George McGovern is one of THE FINEST AMERICANS ever to live!
Yep – haven’t been able to discern an iota of progressive bent in Obama. My dough is on Edwards prevailing tomorrow evening & only concern I have is he may lose his voice from this artic marathon.
Pssst…..GO MOUNTAINEERS.
And now back to your regularly scheduled politics… (Sorry OKK…)
Yep. That could be it too. ;-)
Joe Lieberman has just announced that he “has no ambitions” to be McCain’s Veep should McCain end up as the Republican nominee.
Given the Lieberputz’s previous pronouncements, this means he will gladly accept any position that gets him some attention.
Remember: he’s rested, willing, and lacking any core principles that might get in the way.
Hi Jane,
Welcome to the icebox. I grew up in NW Illinois and got some edyacashion in Madison so I know a thing or two about the icy isometrics of skating Iowa’s sidewalks. My sympathies. This is, I’ll argue, a good reason to compress the primary season to the months of August and September. No patriotic blogger should have to face such hardship for the sake of a John Mellancamp concert!
That said, I have a minor quibble: You said:
I’m thinking that there is possibly a long laundry & waterboarding list of things that are more anti-democratic. I’d prefer to suggest the term “coercive” with a strong flavor of “groupthink” added in for good measure.
I had a good friend who was an avid Howard Deaniac who spent a month in Iowa prior to “the scream” event horizon. Ann was a retired chair of our County Democratic Party and a retired Army Lt. Col. So she was no rube just falling off the #2 field corn truck.
When Ann got back home, she told us how it was that Howard Dean had lost the Iowa caucus racket. And the way she described it, it amounted to a decision made well in advance of the caucuses that the Democratic Party “Establishment” felt uncomfortable with Howard Dean’s insurgent style and decided from the top of the party to back the much safer horse, John Kerry.
Considering that the Clintons began establishing their network of cronies in Iowa in the early 1990s and Barack Obama started to try to play catch up nine months ago, I think we can pretty assuredly assert who the Establishment Dems are backing tomorrow night. In other words, I agree with your view that
This is precisely what happened in 2004, substituting Kerry and Dean for Clinton and Obama. I’ll be very, very surprised if there aren’t hundreds of very deflated Obama activists come Friday morning. All or most of whom will have learned the same lesson I learned in 1968 as a wet-behind-the-ears volunteer for Eugene McCarthy.
If I might be so rude as to make a suggestion, I’d say that in addition to the Mellankamp event, you might also use your charming wiles and press pass to secure phone interviews with a handful of the Democratic Party County Chairs to get a sense of the coming order-of-battle. I’ll bet you that not one in ten members of a County Executive Commmittee (Chairman, Vice-Chairs, Sect’y., Treasurer, CD Delagates) are lined up for Obama. At least that’s the lay of the land out here in Oregon (excepting Multnomah Co.), from what I can tell. And it is the Executive Committees who will rule the day. As before.
No, I agree. Bit odd. Kucinich seems such a straight shooter, and Obama – not so much.
Well, what’s wrong with getting some children insured and then working to get the rest insured? Seems a better plan than voting against insuring any of them.
Yeah, I wasn’t buying my own argument either.
Happens sometimes.
True.
George McGovern
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Mcgovern
hahahahahahahahaha
spit up my tea
It was definitely a bit jarring to hear that statement after all the months of listening to the Rs demonize McGovern in so many ways.
Carolyn, that’s how I’m feeling too. If Edwards is truly the progressive, then why is Kucinich offering Obama, who I don’t think “progressive” at all? Very curious.
I’m sure everyone has read this. From Kucinich’s site:
For Immediate Release – Tuesday, January 01, 2008
DES MOINES, IA – Democratic Presidential candidate and Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich opened the New Year by publicly asking his Iowa supporters to vote for him in the caucuses this Thursday, and suggesting that if he did not make the 15% threshold, their second ballot should be for Senator Barack Obama. “This is obviously an ‘Iowa-only’ recommendation, as Sen. Obama and I are competing in the New Hampshire primary next Tuesday where I want to be the first choice of New Hampshire voters.
“I hope Iowans will caucus for me as their first choice this Thursday, because of my singular positions on the war, on health care, and trade. This is an opportunity for people to stand up for themselves. But in those caucus locations where my support doesn’t reach the necessary threshold, I strongly encourage all of my supporters to make Barack Obama their second choice. Sen. Obama and I have one thing in common: Change.”
LOL! Love that story. My mother was born in Bowling Green and I’ve always wanted to visit that part of Kentucky.
#3 Waterboarding-gate on Keith!!
it was mentioned in an earlier thread that Kucinich is mad that Edwards has “his” (Dennis’) votes… something similar happened last time he ran, but I don’t recall the details…
consequently, Dennis is throwing is votes to Obama…
KO labeling the CIA tape destruction as “WaterboardingGate” Too long. How about “TortureGate”?
With Turley!
Jane’s freezing her toes off so digg this post for her
Turley sez Durham appointment does not prevent conflict of interest at all, since Mukasey is his boss.
Jane, two words: neck warmer.
Turtle fur (TM) neck warmer.
to clarify – turtle fur.
this one could be big.
Conventional wisdom is that the cover-up is worse than the crime. On this one, I’m thinking they’d gladly eat the obstruction charges. IOW, on this one, the crime *is* worse than the cover-up.
Great minds, eCahnomics
yea well he is dead to me(NSA figurtively of course)
Nice to see the candidates getting along so well. LOL!
Re:
In the 2004 Iowa caucuses, Kucinich advised his followers to switch to Edwards should he fail to achieve the 15% threshold. Here’s Rep. Kucinich explaining his reasoning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBJzmhaD98k
Extrapolating to 2008, perhaps we can assume that the Kucinich and Obama camps have achieved some sort of a gentleman’s agreement regarding Kucinich’s caucus votes…
Jane is correct. A lot of familial, economic and social pressures are at play in a caucus. The net effect of these pressures normally benefits the
establishment candidate.
It’s not happening tomorrow Jane, and that’s an important difference in Iowa Caucuses. It’s happening specifically tomorrow night at 7PM
It’s an egregious antiquated tradition, and a convoluted inaccurate Byzantine way of influencing an election and it should be changed, and it won’t. One Democratic candidate per election has the balls to say this, and in 2000 it was Dean–he finished third, and is remembered for an exhuberant yell, instead of for the terribly bright articulate doctor he is, and Dennis Kucinich said it two hours ago.
An Inconvenient Truth About Caucusing: What Bloggers Here and Mainstream Media Won’t/Don’t Tell You About Obstructions to Voting in IOWA during Caucuspaloozamania
Excitement and Frenzy’s in the air right? Bloggers have been rushing to Des Moines to maybe eat pasta at Centro in Des Moines, and rub elbows with Dodd and Biden, and the rest of the candidates who have a chance who often eat there.
MSNBC is all Iowa all the time–well, except for Britney, Jamey, and Jail Breaks–gotta have the sex and prison–America’s two really favorite topics and sometimes hey there’s a nexus of the two in middle Suburban America. After all MSNBC on Jan 1 did 24 hour “To Catch a Predator” and then did 24 hours of Crime and Punishment. Sex and Prison–two concepts Americans think they understand or might constructively combine–a nexus for the ages.
But what the bloggers and the media aren’t telling you is how frigging hard it is to vote in Iowa, because you don’t really vote there, you caucus, so some of us thought you should know. I may have missed it, but I haven’t seen Jane or Christy get into it yet.
1)It’s not exactly constitutional, because certainly some people are for all practical purposes discriminated against, and the Constitution does stipulate that specific categories of people shall not be excluded. But many Iowans, and it’s a significant number, sure as hell are exculuded from caucusing in Iowa.
2) Most people think it’s like when they vote: The voter walks up to the Diebold machine that can be hacked in 5 minutes like when you will vote for President in November ‘08 right? No they diunnnnt. No they don’t. No they aren’t. In fact caucusing is nothing at all like wating in line at the local elementary school, and gowing into your hackable Deibold machine and pulling the lever. No way in hell.
3) What’s the difference between voting in a caucus in Iowa and voting in a primary?
Well, first off there’s no such thing as a one person-one vote rule. As the NYT reports today, the Republican voters can leave after a few minutes. But that’s not you firepups. You aren’t Republican Voters are ya? At least I’ve gathered that much from the comments of late. You are Democrats, and if you’re like me, you’d like to tell Bush how you really feel when Bush and Rove talk about the “Democrat party” not “Democratic party” with a snarky chmip smirk.
Democrats come to a meeting, that last for hours; not a voting booth. Votes actually have different weght according to a precinct’s past participation record. Ties can be broken by coin toses. You don’t have those in a voting booth. And a meeting is held where you may have to stay for hours in order to vote for your choice. The meetings do attract better informed voters who really care, but they also exclude many more than they attract.
4)Many voters are disenfranchised completely.
Military and overseas voters don’t get to vote. There are no absentee ballots. Pretty ironic isn’t it? Someone’s son or daughter sent by a chicken hawk who has lied and lied about this war, who could be blown up any minute in a surge that has produced more and bigger bombs, cannot vote back home in Iowa. Sorry no absentee ballots.
How about students? After all there’s Obama Girl and even “bantam rooster Rudy 912 Kill the Firemen by mismanagement of radio frequencies” has girls–hot looking coed aged girls who sing songs written for them. Many students can’t get away from classes and many have jobs at night. They wait on tables in Centro where Dodd, Biden, Edwards, the HRC, or Obama might eat among tables with bloggers. So they have to serve them dinner and want to get to the caucuses but they can’t.
What if you’re blind or confined to a wheelchair or deaf? You say fortunately that’s a small number of people. Yep.But these caucuses are in homes and many people don’t have facilities for them to access the caucuses.
5) My vote is my secret sacred privilege in a democracy right? Wrong. Not in an Iowa caucus. You have to stay at the meeting for at least a couple hours, listen to business discussed and then state your opinion in front of everybody, and most of us would be pretty okay with that, but it takes time.
6) I can vote any time of day. How ’bout in Iowa? No you can’t and no you diunnnnt. Uh Uh. You have to be signed in or in the registration line by 7PM, and no exceptions. If you’re late you don’t vote.
But I work nights. Sorry you’re out of luck. Tough. You can’t vote in the daytime in an Iowa caucus. You gotta be there at 7PM and stay for hours if you’re a Democratic voter.
7) Wow. This seems like the nomminating process in Iowa “the caucuses” that no one defined for you really exclude people–is this going to change? Couldn’t they use a hackable Diebold machine like we do?
Not bloody likely. To change and modernize may give up Iowa’s “first in nation” status. New Hampshire wants to be the first primary. It has the nations focuses on Iowa for months, even if MSNBC and Tweetie Bird Mathews have Pat Buchannan and his merry band of talking heads living at the station parotting the same shtick over and over and over again.
What you’ll here is “they’re voting in Iowa.” Well er um not really. They ain’t “voting” at all. John Dean addressed this eight years ago, and it got barely noticed by the rest of the country, and his opponents attacked him for attacking Iowa’s sacred caucuses.
Some of this info is captured in this article:
Caucuses Empower Only Some Iowans
take off on WATERGATE
It’s a beautiful part of the state. And whenever someone gets Bowling Green, KY confused with the one in Ohio or other states, I just point out that BG, KY is the one the Everly Brothers sang about.
Torture Gate is a thousand percent improvement to share with KO.
Speaking for ourselves, OK, all together now …
Gee I didn’t know turtles had fur. Man you really things here at the lake!
You get all the snow eCAHN?
It’s below zero here. Keep your neck chest and head warm, everything else will follow.
Jane,
I have been looking for something for you to keep warm in. I found it.
It’s called a haramaki, a Japanese tummy warmer.
http://www.squidoo.com/haramaki
Ha, I was just emailing my old pal in Louisa, KY!
Listening to a interview with Thom Hartmann and Kucinich, Dennis was very cranky but kept going on about the 527’s. Im guessing thats why he wont support Edwards.
Na its the feet, cold feet and you are toast oops frozen!
I grew uo in Boston! a good place to be from what with the 909 90’s and the frozen bay!
Great perspective. Thank you for the insight
Is the process that Jane describes in this post used in all the other states? Because I have to say it sounds kinda odd.
Hmm, interesting. I really don’t know enough about this fundraising stuff. Is this a legitimate criticism?
That shyould have been 90 90s 90 degrees and 90% humidity.
Got another 4″ in the mid-Hudson yesterday, 4th of the season. Went for a long walk in it.
Have a 76″ base at Alta, where I’m going on Saturday.
http://www.alta.com/pages/report.php
And here’s a link to those who want to order turle fur neck warmers. Made out of recycled plastic, warm and soft as cashmir, washable, comes in every color under the sun.
http://www.rei.com/product/663041
Hey nahant, I saw a liscence plate with your name on it at Sugarbush (VT)this weekend, I wondered if another FDLer was enjoying the powder.
Except that fingers are important too if you are outside any length of time – mittens not gloves – your fingers need each other’s company to stay warm.
Not in states that have primaries, here in Hawaii, we vote by secret ballot throughout the day…
nope, Fern – only in Iowa… everywhere else has regualr voting…
Absolutely, Fern. Fingers unite! But your body needs to keep your core warm first, so it’ll take heat from your extremities if your chest and head is too cold.
In Watergate, DOJ didn’t investigate DOJ. That’s why we found out most of what is going on.
But today, in Waterboardgate, we have DOJ investigating, well um DOJ. It’s self introspection city in Mukasey-land.
But wait, isn’t Mukasey the sonofabitch on the bench in the Southern District of New York who jailed scores of material witnesses who had done nothing and knew nothing and cut them off from counsel for months? You betyour ass he is. And didn’t Mukasey, whose medical expertise consists of zipping his pants, once do a medical evaluation in his courtroom of a prisoner who was severely beaten and had abdominal injries from the bench with “Look’s Okay to me.” But no one asked Mukasey where the judge did his medical training, because he didn’t. He couldn’t get into a med school or stay in one in NYC.
Isn’t Mukasey the coniving sonofabitch who is dedicated to torture and the Unitary Executive Doctrine refusing to say what waterboarding is or that it’s torture with dumb compliant Senate Judiciary waving him through with Lahey now looking like the complete idiot he is?
You betcha. The most intense, and only meaningful investigation is going to take place on the threads of EW, not at DOJ/FBI.
We’ve had feet upon feet of it eCAHN, piled up to the moon, all powder.
Where are you?
No. At one time a lot more states used caucuses to select delegates to conventions but even then, each state and the individual parties in them had their own rules/laws.
Most states nowadays have the primaries to select delegates to the conventions. Primaries and caucuses are both reactions to the old days when the party bosses selected the candidates in “smoke-filled back rooms.”
The Iowa caucuses came to prominence in 1976 when Jimmy Carter came out of nowhere to win the vote in the caucus that year. He used the system as it was set up and visited Iowa, became known and got votes.
Too words: Cuddle Duds
Certainly wasn’t me. Me and the cold don’t like each other. I have learned to enjoy all that snow running down the gutter. I am in the Bay area and the forcast says snow as low as 2000 feet. Might just get to see some snow on the hill tops! thats as close as I get to that snow stuff!
Edwards in a close one, just to keep ploitics in the thread.
But who ever had Nahant on the plates lives on one of the better pieces of real estate in the Beantown area.
Not quite so. I believe Nevada is also using caucuses although probably not structured the same as Iowa and I think there are two or three other caucus states still as well.
if it’s any help, I wrote this as part of a discussion of an amendment to MCain-Feingold proposed by Mike Pence (R-IN):
The main thrust of the bill is to attempt the repeal of that portion of the Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (also known as “McCain-Feingold”) which regulates “Electioneering Communications”, the definition of which is, basically, advertising within 60 days of a general election, or 30 days of a primary election.
Section 203 of McCain-Feingold (also to be repealed) is entitled “Prohibition of Corporate and Labor Disbursements for Electioneering Communications”. Now I can certainly understand why Pence wants to lift the prohibition on corporate donations for political advertising, but he sticks himself at the same time with the lifting of the prohibition on Organized Labor contributions. I suppose the calculation is that their corporations have more money to throw around than do the Unions. I propose that this portion could be called the “Bring Out the Big Guns” provision.
The exceptions for 501(c)(4) organizations (non-profits) and 527’s (PAC’s), which *are* allowed to advertise within the 60 or 30 day periods would be eliminated as well, but that becomes unimportant, as they would simply then be treated as other corporations, and thus still eligible to engage in last-minute electioneering communication – in fact, there would no longer be, if this is passed, any reason for the existence of PAC’s or those 501(c)(4)’s which were created solely for political reasons.
So, in Kucinich’s case, I would assume that he stands (stood?) to lose out on some advertising by reason, simply, of not *having* any 527 support.
Jane,
It’s actually in the area of convincing others that Obama’s strategy will fall. The fact that he’s actually gone out of his way to recruit out-of-state college students will explode in his face when they are trying to convince established Iowans.
The first thing they’ll be asked is…where are you from?
Then they’ll be asked why someone from elsewhere should understand Iowan issues and perspectives.
Then they’ll be asked whether they will also vote in their own State’s primary election? If so, why should an Iowan give their ONLY vote over to someone who can vote again?
They’ll be questioned about their age and maturity.
They’ll be asked what they know about Iowans needs, and how Obama’s platforms deal with those issues.
Lemme say that if Edward’s comes in under the 15% number it’ll be really hard for an older supporter to make a decision as to where to throw their support amongst the top two. You can simply walk out…and that may be what many will do. If that happens the number two votes may not matter.
Down. Down. Lots of down! Down coat, down hat, down mittens, down socks, down boots… (Memories of Vermont kicking in here!)
Mad River Valley, Vermont. Home of Sugarbush and Mad River Glen. North Central Vermont.
true that.
That’s where I learned to ski. I still own one share of MRG. Do you know Ted Church?
will they balk
at all the raucous talk
and the talking heads’ squawk
or, to the evening caucuses flock?
oh thanks jayt, having some dinner then I’ll come back to read that.
Boston Globe campaign section covers all the various states and how delegates selected. Looks like fourteen straight caucus states (including DC) plus one that has a split caucus/primary set-up. Remainder are primary.
That’s great. The exclusionary caucuses complemented by Diebold-esque voting machines that can be hacked.
eCAHN, no I don’t. But small world, huh? Great start to the season, good time to come up.
We’ve got our fingers crossed for Edwards!
Go John, Go!
Thats called Reynard’s when your body over does it! No blood in hands or feet, very painful! You can quickly freeze fingers and toes. Thats why I am in Cali.
I haven’t skiied in the East for years, but Ted has a house on Bragg Hill that I can stay at whenever I want. If you’ve got lots of snow this year, I might just come up.
If you are on a mission to do away witht eh caucus method of selecting delegates to national political party conventions, it appears you’re going to have to clone yourself in order to get all the states to follow your way of thinking.
No! The Iowa Caucuses are truly unique. It’s all right out in the open. Usually in a cold gym or a theater. People gather underneath signs for the candidates and then are counted (after their right to “vote” is established).
The candidates that have less than 15% are then excluded, but their supporters are then “wooed” by speakers from the other camps. This can take awhile, and can involve in friends or neighbors coming over to convince someone they know. That’s really where oratory and deal making are involved.
People can walk out at that stage as well. Individuals who are so firmly set on “their candidate” actually may have little influence at this stage. But some folks may also work within a group to try to convince their fellow “Dodd supporters” to swing to another non-eliminated candidate (say Edwards). People within a camp can be highly influential, and some experienced campaigns may even have “moles” planted within a caucus to ensure such switches.
Did you not hear?
Obama’s promised the VP spot to Joe!
That way if there has to be a transition, plane crash whatever, policy will remain constant.
Screw the bottom 4/5ths so the Uber-Rich can wallow in luxury. Yup….
‘S all worked out.
Obama/Lieberman Unity 08!
My attire here in Maine for over a month:
A hooded sweatshirt with a parka w/hood over that, boots with wool blend socks, a fleece neck warmer, and Norwegian mitties my Mother knitted me a bazillion years ago.
Pretty, huh? LOL Okay, not so much.
Leiberman will stay in the obscure hole he’s in now when Obama gets to the general.
Stop the Delusional Leiberman Linkers to Obama making something out of nothing in ‘08.
Focus on the rest of the stupid Senate in a position to do real damamge or the DOJ that claimed this morning they’re investigating themselves.
I should say that some of those other state caucuses differ a bit from Iowas. Some of the others have something like a “secret poll”. In some, you do have to show up to vote, and in some they form into apparent caucus groups…but the votes are secret as they are tabulated. Because these caucuses are later the number of candidates involved are fewer.
There are different cut off points and votes are tallied differently. Most of the caucuses are in smaller States. They have less influence than the larger States that hold primaries. Iowa is so important mainly because it’s always so early.
Do we know Larry Craigs position on caucausing.
-G
That’s why I think it’s a shame that it has so many restrictive rules.
The other side of the argument or the devil’s advocate to the Iowa caucuses (I guess), is that they focus so much attention on the election and put real pressure on the candidates to hone their messages, or I should say bring the best game that their handlers can package.
I’m sure it’s the same as Escort Service Vitter’s position or Haley Barber “I can appoint him Senator for as long as I want to make up. I’m the Unitary Executive of Mississsipi.”
It’s called retail politics and why Iowa and NH have assumed such an importance. They force the candidates to deal with people one on one and treat voters as humans rather than just a demographic group which is all they would be if large states moved to the front.
If the voting process begins with large states, it is pretty much conceding the winner to be the best funded/best advertising candidate rather than the most well vetted who had to face the voters.
Let me know if you come up this way. We can hook up for a drink or a couple runs or something.
This seems to go with your Hillery v. Obama but look what happens with 2nd choice http://www.southernpoliticalre…..1_103.aspx
also for those that did not see this today
from Michael Moore
http://www.commondreams.org/ar…..1/02/6108/
Stay warm ya’all
LOL. Add some LL Bean boots and that’s my outfit too.
Take Hawaii and the points. You heard it here yesterday, from Beerfart.
Here’s my prediction:
A LOT more people turn out for Dems than turn out for Republicans. A LOT.
I can’t pretend to know who they’ll vote for, but I think they’ll come out in big numbers. And I suspect the press will doze through that.
I saw something today about the totals for the caucus votes being tallied out of state, the various chairs call in their numbers by phone to a hired contractor. Usual suspects, the out-of-state contractors having questionable bonafides, so who knows how it comes out?
I hope Edwards has his own personal bean=counters at each event.
I sure agree with you there. It’s not the choice of Iowa or New Hampshire that I object to, although the jokying that almost through them into December got ridiculous. It’s the byzantine way some of these caucus rules like Iowa keep people from voting.
As you know the night hours, the no absentee ballots (and I understand the definition of caucus is for these people to participate in a unique way) keep a lot of people from participating in these important early contests, including those in Iraq whose issues are an important part of the election.
I sure hope the turnout breaks records in spades. I heard Nora O’Donnell make the comment that last election, there were about 50% new voters to the caucuses, and there are projections there could be as many as 60% tomorrow night. I figure, and I could be wrong the more new faces impacts my man Obama the most favorably.
Jane, I’ve been totally mesmerized with Obamas speeches, so I watch each one aired on C-span and have paid close attention to the audiences of all the candidates.
And I’ll tell you right now, Obama audiences have not just young people standing up cheering. He’s grabbed the attention and souls of every age group possible -I’ve seen big good ol boy trucker types, ZZ Top look alikes and every age group not just applauding politely, but smiling enthusiastically. But when Senator Kent Conrad and Dennis Kucinich support him you know he’s crossed lines not open to Edwards or Clinton.
Obama is going to win, because I haven’t seen so many smiling faces at a political rally in a long long time.
Andhe Iowa new repot just said
Just skied Catamount in Mass if you have ever been there.
My home state of Kentucky used to be a caucus state. There it was in an open meeting, in each county on a Saturday late morning so you had many of the same problems. That is the nature of the caucus.
The political parties are selecting their candidates based on the rules of the political parties in order to select the national candidate that we all get to vote on next November. In some of the states the Dems are caucusing and the Reps are using primary or vice versa. And not every state has open primary or caucus allowing folks to declare on the pertinent day a party affiliation. Closed states require voters or caucus goers to be declared members of the party on a certain date prior to the primary or caucus.
The bottom line is, we do not have a parliamentary system that allows all voters to vote in all the run-up ways to the general election. As bad as the caucuses and primaries may be, they still are better than having the Nancy Pelosis and Harry Reids and Rahm Emmanuels and all the other party power folks and consultants to select nominees behind closed doors without ANY input from the voters.
Really. I grew up there, but haven’t lived there for a long time. I probably was at a caucus and didn’t realize it.
I sure agree with you there.
I think we have a big problem on another voting front, and it’s hardly an insight or revelation, and that’s the propitiary companies, big contributors to Bush, who make the voting machines in so many states.
A third is the effort to revamp the assignment of electoral votes via petition in California which could steal the elections from the Democratic candidate.
I’ll rely on my own caucus experience to make a prediction. In 1972, we carried several Virginia counties for George McGovern (!) because the civic-minded party leaders, who wanted to go Uncommitted and thus be courted by all the candidates at the State and National Conventions, were swamped by a ragtag bunch of high-school students who’d pestered their Government Class teachers to give them credit for participating in the Democratic Party candidate selection process.
So: while the caucus night pitch from your banker or your kid’s little league coach or the head of the Ladies’ Circle at your church might make a big difference to folks when the numbers are close and the non-viables need convincing, if the Obama and Edwards campaigns get out their enthusiastic, disenfranchised, young voters — they will take this process by storm.
It’s all about turnout. Lots and lots of people, happy and enthused about their candidate, will trump the boring civics lessons from establishment folks who think experience is important because it’s what they bring to the table.
And if Hillary Clinton comes in third, after her sizable investment in staff, money, advertising, and use of a hugely popular former President to close the deal — then I think she’s badly wounded.
Anther thing you made me think of is the confusing aspect that some precincts have votes that count more than others depending on their seniority or longevity. That is hard for me to get a handle on from a distance.
What I have found interesting is that the liberl, populist rhetoric of John Edwards far exceeds his record as a legislator.
As for Sen. Obama, his record is much more liberal and yet he’s been very centrist in his appeal.
-G
Well so far as I’m aware, I believe Florida, California, and Colorado have all de-certified their e-voting machines (or at least most of them). And I believe some other states have done so as well or are intending to require an audit trail at a minimum.
And I also believe I have read that the move to change the electoral vote calculation for California has died but it may just be on life-support.
Yessir. That is for certain.
What do you wear when you go outside?
I saw Obama’s speech, covered by C-SPAN today. The audience got very excited and applauded the most when he recited lines out of John Edwards speech.
Go John go!
Turley calls for independent prosecutor or bushco investigates themselves?
” You betcha. The most intense, and only meaningful investigation is going to take place on the threads of EW, not at DOJ/FBI.”
Sad but that ws somehow hilarious Ted Kennedy is happy about it?
Boo to John Edwards.
He’s on c-span right now with new lines taken right from Obamas mouth….change is hard… hurdles in our way …no one has to tell me …
In 2004 he plagiarized the entire works of Stan Greenberg’s book ‘The Two Americas’. Most people thought that was his idea.
He’s just another attorney, after all.
Today Kucinich asked his supporters to vote for Obama as their second choice.
Huzzah “sadlyyes” at 45 …
No need to be humble about that assessment.
1. Economist Paul Krugman – not exactly partisan firebrand – questions why Obama has already thrown in towel, doing the Weak Democrat Bend Over, on health care PRE-EMPTIVELY, before winning a single primary.
2. Michael Moore’s letter today (no outright endorsement, just the facts, m’am)noted the same Obama squishiness. Barack thinks he’s going to good will smile policy into being; governance by kumbaya.
3. ‘Course everyone knows by now that Barack Obama chose Joe LIEberman as his Congressional mentor and – allegedly – was fronted by the fence-sitting, DLC, Centrist Weak-Knees for this race specifically to bleed off progressive support from Edwards. (Hillary’s entitlement.)
Go to MichaelMoore.com and read about Hillary’s refusal to be interviewed by Moore in Rolling Stone … to which both Obama and Edwards agreed, but HRC’s refusal sunk the whole tripartite interview. If you’ve seen “sicko” and have any idea how much $$$ the health insurer/Big Pharma lobbyists have coughed into Hillary’s coffers as Shut Up Money on Universal Health Care, you already KNOW why Hillary is afraid of a sit down with Mike Moore.
Don’t be humble about fearing Obama’s unprogressive, unelectability cuz he’s both. Double Ditto for my senator, H.R. Clinton, she of the astronomical negatives right out of the gate.
Thus, hazmaq in 156 seems to twist everything out of shape. Edwards has been a populist — The Two Americas is not the only label for it — for nearly 40 years as a trial attorney for citizen plaintiffs. (What hazmaq dismisses as “just another attorney” … which Edwards could fairly be called if he was a Corporate Clone. He isn’t.) One could say John Edwards has been aware of The Two Americas for his entire life; he comes from the working class. And never forgot it.
Check out Center for Media and Democracy’s PR Spin report today: V. reasonable analysis of how ALL corporations — but mass media conglomerates in particular — are scared crapless of Edwards. The example was from USA Today totally ignoring Edwards’ existence. John Edwards didn’t have to copy anybody’s ideas on his populist, fight-the-machine life’s work. Why do you think he’s being ignored by our P.U.-litzer Prize winning (stinko journalism awards) mass media? (h/t on the P.U. Prize to Jeff Greenwald at AlterNet)
Should we all chip in and FedEx Jane some of those thermal shoe inserts they sell on the impulse shelf in hardware stores?
“Warm toes for Jane: if not now, when?”
Edwards/Sebelius
That is my dream ticket!
However, I’m preparing my tender progressive heart to be thrashed tomorrow when it comes that Obama will pull out ahead (I fear Edwards might even come in third!). This election is our chance to not only realign the country towards progressivism and we’re about to squander it. Simply having a “Democratic” president and majority just won’t do.
My guess for an Obama VP: a woman. I am all but certain. Likely a moderate (i.e. “post-partisan”).
Sorry, but you and I have a different definition of “democracy”.
You say:
As I see it, the caucuses in Iowa are EXACTLY what democracy should be. A face to face communal activity. There major flaw seems to be that they only come around every four years (or do they have them more often?) By contrast, mass democracy as practiced today in most places, with anonymity and solitude, is in my view a step down from the town meeting and the local caucus. Life and politics should be local and communal. Anonymous elections of state senators and Presidents are barely democratic at all… it’s just a short step from anonymity and the loss of face to face culture to influence pedaling and our current fascistic system.
I am going to scream if another interviewed Democrat says that he/she will not vote for Hillary “because she will be polarizing with the Republicans”. Truth is, fellow Democrats, that all lot of us a dumb as shit.
Obama actually has a more progressive record than Hillary. (see below for his voting record)
The past 16 years Obama worked as a community organizer, a civil rights attorney, Constitutional rights professor, Illinois state Senator and a US Senator. He has been aggressive in trying to bring about social changes. Given lots of opportunities to work in lucrative jobs instead Obama remained a public servant advancing progressive ideas. Furthermore he is the least wealthy in the top tier and probably second tier candidates, too including most republicans. He and his wife are worth a little over $1 million. Individually Edwards and Clinton are worth much, much more.
Organizing poor neighbourhoods, taking on genocide in Darfur and opposing the war in Iraq demonstrate Obama is a man who acts on his convictions, who cares about people and who thinks deeply about the issues.
Disclosure: iam in no way affiliated with his campaign, but I support his bid for the presidency because his record shows he can accomplish what the others may not be able to.
I like Edwards a lot too. I just feel that Obama is representative of the change we need. He has shown he is a man who act on his convictions . He is forthcoming about his desire to move America forward in some semblance of Unity. America has been fractured for far too long under the Bush administration.
Obama says we need to change the mind-set that got us into war and the mess we’re in, in the first place (vital for success). He is very aware that is what we need to deal with before the nation can move forward. Change the thinking: we have options other than military, which is what Cheney & Bush have worked so hard at cementing into the public’s mind-set.
I think it finally dawned on the public that military aggression creates more problems with the ongoing increasing expansion of anti_americanism. America’s wake of death and destruction is the problem not the solution.
The public tired of the war, tired of the politics of fear, has an open window of opportunity and the timing is auspicious for putting the genie back in the bottle. It is the first step to correct the nightmare Bush and Cheney created when they opened Pandora’s box.
The nation’s choice: the politics of fear or the politics of hope — choose a different path or stay the course sure to last at the very least a generation.
For those willing to set aside your negative impressions and do some research, watch his body language, you will find he is consistent. (rare in politicians today). He walks his talk.
Perpetuating false narratives and false impressions are not what progressives stand for.
This is not about changing who you support or plan to vote for.
Iam suggesting there is much more to this man than he is given credit for IMHO. Obama has more on the ball than most. Obama has the desire and yearning to lead given the chance.
Vote for the candidate who moves you.
Evidence of Obama’s progressive votes:
for transparency and good government:
He created a web site to show what the government spends and the recipients of government contracts.
http://www.usaspending.gov
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..ues…
“He supports ethics and lobbying reform and is the only front-runner to walk the walk in not accepting lobbyist money and soft money.
http://obama.senate.gov/issues…
Obama stood up to the media in opposition to media consolidation
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…
An article from DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND a year ago:
“37 Bills That Barack Obama wrote and/or Co-Sponsored in 2 Years in the US Senate!”
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364×3132998)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So those posting Obama is not progressive now know differently. I really wish people would not take other’s comments at face value without doing research.
There is something special about Obama. He has a special quality and a phenomenal mind which make Obama uniquely qualified to be President.
Perhaps you will take another look. maybe you will see what I do… maybe, maybe not?
Vote for the candidate who moves you.
[Mod Note; In the interest of keeping the servers running smoothly, please limit the number of links in your comments and keep comment length to a minimum. Furthermore, discussions on candidates are appropriate — in fact, encouraged — so long as they are back and forth discussions. But cut and paste ads, repetitive comments, campaign literature spam and such are not.. Thanks.]
re: 163, and voting for the candidate who moves you.
Vote Richardson.
He has the guts, the experience, and a track record that isn’t bogged down in Senate procedural BS. Whereas Senator Obama said he opposed Mukasey’s confirmation he did not bother to go and Vote No to his confirmation. Neither did Senator’s Biden, Clinton, or Dodd.
I simply can not vote for someone who had the opportunity to vote in the U.S. Senate against the confirmation of an Attorney General who cannot utter the obvious truth that waterboarding is torture.
Sometimes one must act on the courage of one’s convictions regardless of the consequences to ones’s own ambitions. Biden, Clinton, Dodd, and Obama all took the path that minimized the consequences to themselves rather than the right one for their country. I can not vote for any of these. I don’t think anyone else should either. They all blew it.
Vote Richardson.
Or vote Edwards.
But don’t vote for opportunistic political-cowards.