California, New Mexico Thread

I think the big deal is (5.00 / 1)

that some of the last day polling had Obama ahead and people expected him to do a lot better (the majority of BOR writers picked him to win the state). The victory margin for Clinton in CA is higher than anyone thought.

But you do make a good (and important) point on delegates.

The "big deal" from CA, I think maybe more than anything, is that a month before Ohio and Texas  vote on March 4, Obama has shown an inability to win a big state besides Illinois. He will have to change that to win this race.

---

by: David Mauro @ Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 16:50:13 PM UTC

That's true (0.00 / 0)

And I just got done reading the Calitics blog for the first time this morning (I link to it in the post "Some Final Notes on Super Tuesday.") It seems HRC won 8 congressional districts with heavy Hispanic vote by enough of a margin so they broke 3-1 (instead of getting split). That apparently added 30-40 delegates to her totals out there.

The "how will Obama grow his appeal to Latinos" question may be the biggest one that CA showed us. In that sense, I don't think the size of the state matters so much as who are the people voting.

Both camps are happy -- but neither did much to answer the "challenge" of the other: Can Obama win big states? Can Clinton stop Obama's momentum? I'm not sure how much those will get answered before now and March 4, but as Glenn pointed out, those will be important questions to consider.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 20:54:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Seems they are (0.00 / 0)

canceling each other out in different but important ways.

I have polled various Latino people in my world around Dallas, and they are not disliking Obama, they're just preferring Hillary. If Obama can change some minds before March 4th, maybe they'll switch. If not, then I don't see how he wins Texas.

And that's the very unscientific truth.

---

by: Elsbeth @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 01:31:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Maybe (0.00 / 0)

I agree that he needs to do better with Latinos. But I don't know if he needs to win a majority of them, or just close the gaps some (like he closed the gaps in a lot of states yesterday).

The majority of delegates aren't in South Texas, though.

Now, a very great man once said that some people rob you with a fountain pen.

---

by: Phillip Martin, Progress Texas @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 01:42:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, (0.00 / 0)

I don't know.  I just know the Clintons have deep, long-time, support in Texas. And a lot of people who don't pay as much attention to all of this as the junkies, are excited about getting a Clinton back in power. They're hurting and they can't see how this young man can help them. The Clintons were good for them. And as a long-time Edwards supporter, I haven't had to really think about all of this until the past week. So, I'm in my own quandry.

---

by: Elsbeth @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 01:53:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good point (0.00 / 0)

Little has changed. Though Obama did win an impressive amount of states he did not deliver a knockout in one of the big states (like CA or NJ) that many seemed to be expecting.

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:54:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Do the Clinton's pay you to spin David? (0.00 / 0)

Obama NEVER had the time to win California(or NY,NJ,MA for that matter).  A state that should have gone by 20 points went by 10 and it would have been less without early voing.  Here is what we know.  Obama won more states and he has won more delegates.  He caught up to her and his lines are going up, hers are flat.  He roles up the rest of February and Texas and Ohio are her last stand.  I think she has a shot at stopping him then, but it will be hard, he will have the wind as his back.

---

by: BJazz @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 00:27:20 AM UTC

Wait a minute (3.00 / 1)

I think David makes valid points. And I think Clinton couldn't do much better if she wanted to pay David to "spin." He's doing an excellent job without being obnoxious ~ something that the Obama people on the blogs need to work on.

And, by the way, I totally agree with David about the "big" states. That's something we haven't heard so much today since the Obama spin machine has been drowning out that important fact. And Massachusetts? Even Kerry and Kennedy couldn't do it for him? Seems their endorsements didn't pull it off. That's kind of significant, in my little book.

---

by: Elsbeth @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 01:43:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

haha (0.00 / 0)

No, they don't pay me to spin.

As a Clinton supporter, when I saw the CA results I was extremely relieved and surprised.

I would expect that you as an Obama supporter were disappointed and somewhat surprised (especially after you predicted in a comment that California would be very close).

My point was that, like or not, Clinton did beat expectations in CA.

Thanks for defending me, Elsbeth.

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:58:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

re: (0.00 / 0)

On Friday you said that Clinton would win CA "but not by much and delegates will be a wash."  

You also said that MA, TN, AZ and NM were too close to call (and boy were you right on NM!).

Clinton won MA, TN and AZ -- three of your "too close to call" states -- by double digits.

Now you say that "Obama NEVER had the time to win California(or NY,NJ,MA for that matter)"

I would think an all capitals "NEVER" should probably encompass Friday.

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 07:11:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

still waiting for a response .... (0.00 / 0)

---

by: David Mauro @ Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 00:01:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If, as you say Obama (0.00 / 0)

NEVER had time to win California he is already out of time to win Texas.  It is not going to happen. Never.

---

by: nuts101 @ Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:12:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

re: the majority of delegates are not in South Texas (0.00 / 0)

This is true but there are many other factors.Like the superdelates for one. How many Democratic congressman do we have? Who have they endorsed and pledged to?
South Texas votes as a bloc.All the way from S.A.
to Brownsville. Actually South Texas Hispanics,Latinos,
or the term I prefer Tejanos, vote as a bloc.

---

by: nuts101 @ Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:07:46 AM UTC

Seven Texas Dem congressmen have endorsed (0.00 / 0)

Six for Clinton, one for Obama. I believe each has an equal amount of Texas DNC members pledged but I am not 100% sure.

---

by: David Mauro @ Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:28:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Re:California, New Mexico Thread (0.00 / 0)

The race is too close and one thing evident is  a close race between these two and that is real.
-----
sathyan

new mexico drug rehab

---

by: sathyan @ Tue Mar 31, 2009 at 15:48:23 PM UTC