For the political geeks, Nevada

Here's a handy wiki guide to who's supporting who in Congress on the presidential race (this factors into delegate count.) As you can see, there's not that many names left blank.

Also, Hillary plays hardball with Obama and the Culinary Workers Union by outflanking them and stealing supporters from within, all on live TV. Hillary never had a chance of winning Culinary's endorsement, so she apparently feels free to kneecap. Pretty deft move on her part, but even ballsier for the State Rep who escorted her around to his supporters' homes. Because once Hillary leaves, the guy is in for a world of hurt back home.

A day after the 60,000-member Culinary Union endorsed Illinois Sen. Barack Obama for president, Clinton walked a northeast Las Vegas neighborhood heavy with Culinary workers and won the support of several.

Her campaign’s message: the endorsement means nothing and Culinary members should follow their conscience and not the order of union Secretary-Treasurer D. Taylor.

It was a political kick in the shins to Obama and the union, all delivered with the New York senator’s trademark wide grin.

. . . Clinton’s walk through the neighborhood wasn’t exactly a spontaneous stroll. The homes Clinton visited were the same ones that Kihuen canvassed with a Sun reporter last month, which seemed to undercut any claim to authenticity.

Many of the neighborhood residents either weren’t citizens or weren’t registered.

Clinton must have been a bit baffled, for instance, when Kihuen took her to visit Esperanza Solorio, who’s not a citizen. Kihuen explained her importance: She is a community activist who can move voters.

I'm assuming he's placed himself under Hill's protection and is betting big that she wins, because you do not want Culinary after you. This is Vegas folks, and odds are high, but the punishments can be even more severe. If Hillary wins, it means he has good chances of going up the ranks, and if now, well, I'm pretty sure Culinary will take him out in the next election. Hell, he still stands a chance of being defeated.

Besides, she spoke with a few voters, so this is mostly a symbolic gesture, a giant "F-you" to Obama and the union. At the end of the day, Culinary produces results and has immense loyalty form its membership of 60,000. It was definitely a shrewd move, but very ballsy. Expect the national union to come out hard against Hillary, real soon.

New Hampshire iconoclasts

The culture of New Hampshire is that they are iconoclasts, they swerve rights when Iowa goes left. There's a reason why the libertarians want to move en masse to New Hampshire and make it a truly "free" state.

So what happened? How did the Obama bump from Iowa disappear in a 39-36 win for Hillary? In a word, Hillary showed some emotion. As I stated in an earlier post, it's what people have been wanting to see from her. And it was a game changer - the women's vote made the race.

Here's TNR's take on the demographics:

Here are the groups in which Obama enjoyed a significant margin over Clinton: men, young voters (18-24), voters making more than $50,000, voters with post-graduate education (a good indication of professionals), independents, first time voters, voters without religious affiliation, men without children and single men, voters who said they were getting ahead financially, voters who thought the war in Iraq was the most important issue, who wanted change, and who wanted someone who could unite the country.

Here are Clinton's groups: women, particularly married women, voters over 40, voters making less than $50,000, voters without a college degree, union voters, Democrats, Catholics (an important constituency for the Democrats), people very worried about the economy, voters who thought the economy was most important, voters who valued experience, and voters who evaluated candidates on whether they "care about people like me."

And politicalwire (Taeggan goddard) writes that "Two key factors for Clinton making this a close race: Unlike Iowa, she's beating Obama among women and there are more older voters."

As we know from Iowa, Obama's support by age group groups off about 20 per 20 year bracket. So that he only wound up with 18% of the senior vote. This is I think emblematic of how much or how little our elders are willing to change, and perhaps of how some views are deeply entrenched. On the other hand votes for Hillary are a vote for change on the most basic level, since she would be the first female president. But she is staunchly an establishmentarian to the core.

But let's analyze deeper - New Hampshire is a state that's favorable to female candidates - the former Governor Jeanne Shaheen now running for Senate (in Clinton's camp), Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter (in Obama's camp). Sadly, these are the only two women who have been elected to major federal or executive offices in NH but it's better than Iowa.

Iowa, not so much. Iowa has never elected a female senator, never elected a female Congressmember, nor a female Governor.

Let's also consider that Karen Hicks, who built Dean's political campaign in New Hampshire in 2004, has strong ties to Shaheen and to the state. And she knows how to work magic. Plus there is definitely an ex-New Yorker factor in New Hampshire, as well as New Yorkers who own a vacation home up there. (This is undoubtedly a tiny percentage and not something that would account for a 3 percent win.)

Also, I really don't think Edwards bashing Clinton for being too emotional helped. I also didn't like when Hillary said after one debate that all the guys were beating up on her - it's what you do when there's a frontrunner. But I think the reason why I was more willing to accept that there was some genuine emotion in Hillary's display this time is because well, just because she deftly incorporated some talking points into her emotion doesn't mean that the emotion's not there, or that it's not valid. I argue in talking points sometimes, especially on immigration, but I feel it full force.

For my analysis of the upcoming race, go here.

PS: Heads up on the new anti-Obama 527.

PPS: Hello to the folks from Burston-Marsteller (aka, Mark Penn's crappy corporate PR umbrella shill firm which represents Big Tobacco amongst other killers.) I'm mightily amused. I can say I've gotten hits from other nations that haven't amused me as much as this one.

Wow, game on!

So the New Hampshire results are back in, and it turns out that Hillary's tearing up in a public setting did get her the female vote, overwhelmingly. And it means that this is really game on, as we move to Nevada, where a large number of voters are union members and the Culinary Workers Union's endorsement has the impact of a 16 wheeler.

Nevada is a conservative culture, more so than New Hampshire, and in the gambling towns, it's a 24-7 culture, a mix of greed, necessity, survival and personal destruction. It has a large Latino and Asian American population, two ethnic votes that are definitely the swing votes. It's mostly desert and basically, politically combustible. If I had to predict who Nevadans would go for, I would say Clinton. But if the culinary workers go for Obama, then all bets are off.

Also, I cannot strongly emphasize enough how important the APIA vote in Nevada is - if the race there is decided by a few percentage points, we will have surely made the difference. Also don't forget that the APIA leaders in Nevada are mostly in Clinton's camp, but that many of the Asian Americans who are in Nevada work in the casinos, and moved from California. I would even venture that Nevada, not South Carolina, is Clinton's next firewall. That being said, I know that Clinton's campaign considered New Hampshire her firewall, and they managed to stay afloat in it. (Read my analysis of how they won.)

---> BREAKING: Nevada SEIU endorses Obama. This is a pretty clear indicator of where the Culinary workers' union will go, and where the national unions will go.
This means that progressive labor is going hard for Obama as the anti-Hillary, driven by a distrust of her time as a Wal-Mart board member, and her chief advisor (other than Bill), Mark Penn.

South Carolina is a values state, where religion is held dearly, and where the large African American population (expected to form half the voting population) might be expected to vote for Obama, but for the historic Clinton love. Right after Iowa, Obama was polling at 50 to Clinton's 30, but that may even out a bit more. However, having someone who was frequently referred to as "the first black president" dissing the potential REAL first black president, isn't going to play well. And Donna Brazile, who is as insider as they come, fires back at Bill for calling Obama a "fairy-tale." Brazile compares his words to that of Bill Bennett (!!!!)

I could understand his frustration at this moment. But, look, he shouldn't take out all his pain on Barack Obama. It's time that they regroup. Figure out what Hillary needs to do to get her campaign back on track. It sounds like sour grapes coming from the former commander in chief. Someone that many Democrats hold in high esteem. For him to go after Obama, using a fairy tale, calling him as he did last week. It's an insult. And I will tell you, as an African-American, I find his tone and his words to be very depressing.

Pretty harsh, but justifiably. Bill Clinton was the attack dog, and he looks dog-tired, and he's kinda talking down to what looks like a college student. It's kinda catty, but not uglier than what the GOP is going to throw. I agree with Brazile's judgement though - it's pretty depressing to watch the former president taint his glory in this fashion.

I think that Edwards has fought valiently, and pushed issues that other people would never have brought up otherwise, injecting a healthy dose of economic populism into the mix, and standing up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. I also wonder if it might not be time for him (and definitely Richardson) to reconsider remaining in the race. I am sure that they will both hang on until Feb 5th, just to see where the chips fall, but this is up to the campaigns themselves.

For my analysis of what happened in New Hampshire, click here.

No Woman, No Cry?

(Okay, that was a cheap shot.)

Here's what I think about the Hillary crying video.



1) She didn't really cry, she just got kinda teary and emotional.

2) Contrary to the stupid statement that Edwards made, it's [not]<-typo - PS: how to do strikethrough? bad for a president to only be macho and full of testosterone and unfeeling (the first would lead to President Ar-nuld, the second to . . . Veep Cheney.)

3) It's really hard to only get a few hours of sleep every night, and be constantly flying everywhere, all the time, and always on the go, never in the same city for a week. Been there, done that. Ain't pretty. Takes a toll on staff, on candidates. Hence candidates tripping over their signature lines, and saying somewhat ungrammatical things.

4) Hillary is human, despite all thoughts (and sometimes evidence) to the contrary. Somewhere deep inside of her is the college student who wrote her thesis on Alinsky. (Nestled inside of that is the former College Republican.) All this goes to show is that Hillary is like a Russian grandma doll, and not super easily unpacked, but rather very complex.) <--Yes I did just use mathematical notation and defied grammar. So sue me. 5) Did it look slightly rehearsed? Possibly. She got some really good attacks on Obama in there ("some of us are wrong, and some of us are right. Some of us are ready, and some of us are not.") But I don't doubt that she feels real frustration at the state of our country, the same frustration that I feel. Granted, that frustration is partially borne out of her seemingly endless sense of entitlement to the position of the presidency, but it's real. 6) Do I think Hillary did it to appeal to women voters? I don't know. I think she is also genuinely disappointed in herself and I think there is a real person, somewhere in there - we catch faint and stirring glimpses of her real feelings like that of a fleeting deer in the woods. Or perhaps its the proverbial unicorn. 7) Also I think she's really disappointed by how she did with the women's vote - her campaign is supposed to be (no, IS) historic. It's the first time we've had a female frontrunner for president. someone who could really win. Losing the female vote in Iowa 30-35 to Obama must have been a huge blow, especially since Hillaryland is made up entirely of women. And she has the blessings of Emily's List and other women's groups. 8) What must suck for her advisors is that a scumbag like Mark Penn, aka "chief Hack of the White Boys," is THE trusted advisor who gets to vet everything, when there are lots of really talented and smart women on her staff, Karen Hicks (aka "the turnout queen") being one.

9) If this is manufactured emotion, it's a whole lot better than trying to sell Hillary as the "agent of change," which is an entirely laughable concept. I'd buy Hillary being real and vulnerable underneath all her armor any day over her being the change agent.

10) Change. This word must sting because it's not that Hillary hasn't tried to create change, it's just that she's really used to the top down model. And that when she has stuck her neck out on a limb for things she cares deeply about like health care reform, or when she said that (gasp!) she does believe in drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, she gets flak. Blowback. And she shies away from it, from what she really believes.

I think that if Hillary had said, "This is what I believe and I'm going to stick to it," there would have been less impact. But instead she flipped and she flopped. It took a courage that I hadn't seen a lot of in her to make those statements during the debate, and she knew it was politically risky. But for a few seconds, I could see what she really believed, and that she was genuinely concerned for their plight, as some of the most vulnerable people. Then she switched her tune, and got bashed for it, rightfully.


Read this dkos post for a good explanation of what might be going on inside her head.