Obama To Clinch Nomination at 10pm EST

It's now *very* clear that Barack Obama will clinch the Democratic nomination within minutes - and probably within seconds - of the close of the polls tonight in Montana at 10 pm EST.

Many superdelegates have already said they'll be committing to Obama at the close of the polls, including some of the most potentially influential superdelegates such as Jimmy Carter and several US Senators.

Hillary Clinton may not concede the race tonight though I'm guessing she will do so, and immediately announce her unqualified support for Obama. Network TV is reporting that Clinton has said she'll accept an Obama VP spot based on conversations with campaign insiders.

Half a disenfranchisement is better than a whole

The Democratic Party rules committee has decided to give half power to the delegates from Florida and Michigan. Had this decision been made earlier it would have seemed wiser than now,and Clinton is suggesting she may dispute this decision later. The inept process has made the end of the Democratic Primary as much an example of contentiousness and poor planning as party unity, which is still sorely lacking for the Democrats.

The Clinton campaign is now making the (correct) case that more voters cast a vote for her than for Obama, although the process is not about total votes and thus it's not clear how you should allocate, for example, caucus activity since those states did not have a popular vote.

As with the 2000 election we are seeing that our "democracy" is ... seriously flawed. Rather than simply count everybody's vote in both primaries and the general election we have system that are designed to "balance out" the process but have been co-opted by party insiders to make it messy and questionable. The solution is very, very simple. One person, one vote, abolish delegate voting and abolish electoral college.

Democrats Meet on Michigan and Florida's Fate Soon

Saturday will bring discussion and a probably decision by the Democratic National Committee on how to treat the delegates from Florida and Michigan. Although Clinton has more pledged support in the meeting it appears unlikely that the committee, which I understand had voted earlier to NOT seat these delegates, will now reverse itself. Most likely would seem to be a compromise that will seat some of the delegates. Even seating all of them would not put Clinton over the top, and any major departure from the original gameplan is likely to create a backlash from the superdelegates who can put Obama over the top.

Prediction: Bet on Clinton to get some delegates seated and Obama to win the big show, probably as soon as next week when it appears likely a large block of superdelegates will move to his support based on pressure from the party.

Clinton Wins West Virginia

The votes are not yet in but Clinton will certainly win the West Virginia Democratic Primary, throwing somewhat more uncertaintly into the complex and poorly constructed Democratic primary process. Although most pundits are exaggerating the demise of the Clinton dynasty West Virginia to some extent confounds the notion that "it's over", given that Clinton is likely to win by as much as 20% or more. Race appears to be a key factor in this victory, though it's simplistic to see race as a one way factor in an election where Obama consistently can count on some 80 or even 90% of the African American vote in most states.

Surprisingly few have challenged the incomprehensible system that almost all the candidates and parties signed on to over a year ago, but it's making it very hard for the Democrats to define their process clearly in the face of this close election.

If Clinton can leverage this victory into better treatment for the Florida and Michigan delegations which in turn might shift superdelegates to Clinton, the race would become even closer, and Obama's "frontrunner" lead could evaporate overnight. Is that likely? No, but neither was the GW Bush victory over Al Gore in 2000, and the Democratic process is looking more like it could hinge on defects in the process or on elitist insider plays rather than the popular vote.

Battleground: Oregon

Here in Oregon the TV advertising is starting to get very heavy, especially for Obama. It appears he may be trying to set up the campaign to effectively "declare victory" after this primary, arguing that his delegate total is greater and superdelegate total about equal.

However I'm inclined to think that both campaigns are going to settle this at the convention- probably in an amicable fashion and probably with Obama as the victor although skeletons in the closet could still rear their ugly heads and totally derail either campaign. This election is in the hands of the superdelegates now and it is not at all clear how they'll respond to the circumstances.

The Democratic party really should be ashamed to have such an un-Democratic process for choosing candidates. Although there are a handful of justifications for having "elite" voters with much more power than regulary people, the notion flies so flagrantly in the face of true Democracy and good elections practices that it's surprising the party hacks didn't realize this would create problems in a close election.

Clinton Wins Indiana

Although the Indiana race is going to be close the exit polling, which is almost *always* correct, indicates that Hilary Clinton will win Indiana by a narrow margin:

Male (45% of vote ) 51% for Clinton 49% for Obama
Female (55% of vote) 53% for Clinton 47% for Obama

The Male and Female stats cover all the bases, and therefore the likely outcome, assuming the exit polling was done fairly well, is that Clinton will get (.45 x .51 .2295) + (.55 x .53) = 52.1% of the total Indiana vote and Obama will get 47.9%. There is enough error in polling that this outcome is not certain, but it is very probable.

Contrary to what many think the exit polling in Florida was correct to suggest that Al Gore won the state. The key factor in Gore's "loss" in Florida was that the butterfly ballots of Palm Beach County which led to thousands of spoiled votes due to double voting. The exit polls can't measure this spoilage - they have to assume that people's votes actually *counted* where in the case of Florida the cast ballots were destroyed.

An important tangent to that is that the chad situation - even if Gore's Supreme Court challenge had moved ahead with a recount - would still have decided the election for Bush. Only certain unusual treatments of hanging chad counts, or the calculation where the spoiled palm beach ballots were mathematically allocated to Gore would have given him the edge. In a sense most of the analyses there were wrong. Republicans did not steal the election, but Gore did in fact win it. Blame our foolish Democracy and ballot procedures which fail to do a good job in some close elections.

Rev. Wright or Rev. Wrong?

In a speech today, Barack Obama tried to thread the needle between absorbing a lot of damage from Rev. Wright's controversial rants and abandoning his long term pastor and friend. It is extremely ironic that the biggest threat to the Obama campaign is coming - dramatically - from somebody who you would think would be very sympathetic to Obama's quest for the presidency and therefore would.... be quiet rather than loud and shrill.

Of course part of the deal here is that Obama to some extent must remake himself in an image more palatable to the white voters he'll need for a victory. I certainly don't believe Obama thinks the US Government is as dispicable as Wright seems to suggest in many sermons, but it's also reasonable to think that Obama is toning down his own left wing sensibilities to "fit in".

On the other hand I'm guessing that Obama has been for the most part very straightforward about his views in all this. His affection for Wright does not stem from a shared worldview, rather from a respect for the influence that leaders like Wright have had on the African American Community. Obama would probably prefer that people respond to reasoned, quiet reflection about the world. But they do not - many people respond to loud and irrational conspiratorial ranting filled with hyperbole and odd allusion. Wright is a master of this style and one can hardly fault Obama for paying attention.

Voters need to pay attention to what Obama says, not what Wright says. If Obama said "I agree with Wright" that would be news, but simply having an associate make some outrageous claim is not very worthy news.

Obama takes Wyoming

Barack Obama handily took Wyoming's Democratic caucuses, trouncing Clinton with his 60+% of the caucus vote.

It's almost crystal clear now that even with a sweep of the remaining states by either Clinton or Obama, the Democrats are going to take the decision to the Convention. Some commentary is suggesting that the wild unpredictable second ballot could determine this outcome at the Convention.

The Clinton's have begun to speak very openly about a Clinton Obama ticket, and I think cautiously not suggesting that Hillary would necessarily be at the top. This is brilliant strategically because many voters - polls suggest 70% - want both on the ticket and if Hillary can become the candidate offering that desirable option she may be able to pull superdelegates to her side before the convention.

Pundits and Plagiarism: Shut UP!

As the USA enters an era of challenged prosperity, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, global responsibilities that are greater than at any other time in history, and many challenges here at home....

The pundits are talking about whether Barack Obama copied a few words from his friend in a speech.

This is *complete* nonsense and although I don't blame the Clinton campaign for cleverly misdirecting everybody into this absurd issue, I *totally* blame Brian Williams, Tim Russert, Chris Mathews, and more and more for buying into this absurdity. This absurdity simply should not make the news, but like other mildly contentious stupid points it trumps real issues - really the *only* thing these clowns should be reporting.

What is wrong with TV news people? They rarely choose to report anything but items of entertainment value and the horserace details. Wouldn't it be refreshing to hear some intelligent discussion of policies? Is that too much to ask?

On, Wisconsin!

Primary eyes are on Wisconsin this week as that "all American" state votes for the Democratic nominee. While McCain has only the finishing touches to put on his nomination, the Democratic race is very likely to go to convention, and the outcome there is not at all clear.

Obama has run a virtually flawless campaign, rising from near political obscurity to the be new national favorite and arguably the most likely winner of the big prize - the Presidency of the USA.

Presidential heir apparent Hilary Clinton is now locked in the tightest of races with Obama - a race that ultimately could hinge on how she manages issues such as inclusion of Florida and Michigan delegates, states banned by the Democratic national committee for holding early primaries, and superdelegates, most of whom remain uncommitted.

My take on superdelegates is that they will *not* necessarily help Clinton even though she currently has more of them pledged to her, though last week it was reported that she has lost 3 superdelegates during a time where Obama has won 13.

I think the most likely outcome at the convention is that many superdelegates will agree to support the person with the most popular votes and this will give that person a strong lead. Of course there could even be debate about who won the most votes as the Florida and Michigan voting legitimacy is debated.

Campaign Hiatus

It feels odd, but nice, not to hear the overwhelming and excessive coverage of the primaries for these few days between the last set of primaries and Wisconsin coming up in three days. Washington is voting as well but most of the delegates are distributed there via the caucusing which is completed already.



The superdelegate issue now takes front stage as it is extremely unlikely that either Obama or Clinton will go to the convention with enough votes to win. Many superdelegates appears to be holding off on committment, partly because they probably want to go with the winner, and partly because they are concerned about their own political reputations if they pick people that were not in favor in their own district or election territory. Superdelegates are about 20% of the total.



At this stage of the game it appears unlikely that we'll see superdelegates *overturn* the verdict of the popular vote. If Obama continues to perform in future primaries as he has in the last 8 primaries, his vote and delegate totals would be high enough to make if very hard for Clinton to convince superdelegates to vote for her as well as hard to justify a superdelegate win. A more likely scenario however is that Clinton will win in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, making the total delegate count *so close* that the party will need to do some soul searching to determine how to avoid contention at the Democratic convention.

You call that negative?

The term "negative campaigning" should be reserved to mean the nasty, mean spirited, or misleading stuff that has become so common in American politics. Here, CNN calls a Hilary Clinton Wisonsin campaign commercial "negative" when all it does is goad Obama for refusing a debate, which he has done because stratically it is wise for him to do so and for Clinton, generally a better debater, to try to bring on more debates. This is not exactly the type of thing we saw back in the elections of the 1800s where candidates took outrageous shots at their opponents.

We can have a spirited, healthy interactions free from the media-induced nonsense that tends to color everything in the most confrontational light.

Big Mo for Obama?

Does Obama have so much momentum now that Clinton cannot stop him from winning? Bill Kristol suggests today that Obama's recent victory sweeps will propel his campaign to have a clear delegate lead soon.

It is certainly clear that Obama, unlike Clinton, has captured the imaginations of many young voters as well as many mainstream Democrats. Where Clinton offers capability, experience, and the first serious female candidate to run for President, Obama offers the same affirmative action advantages to the democrats but also inspires confidence and enthusiasm. Historically the people that win are not the smartest and most capable - they are those with leadership qualities. Obama's superb speaking style, which combines power and humility, gives him leadership points that simply do not match Hilary Clinton's persona.

With many Obama wins in caucus states where a few can influence many, it's not clear Obama can translate his appeal to the big audiences of Ohio and Pennsylvania. California went to Clinton and this is a strong indication that in populous states Clinton still has the edge. Will this be enough to win? No. The decision is now very likely to be made at the convention, and increasingly it looks like the superdelegates issue could make all the difference.