UPDATED: FEB 7, 2008
WAYWARD TPJ
Several States are still counting ballots; but Super Tuesday continues to offer surprises. Obama outperformed TPJ’s delegate estimates (see the article below) by about 75 delegates. Party mathematicians are working their calculators overtime to project the final results, but in the end Obama and Hillary essentially split the pledged delegates at stake.
TPJ is still working the demographic data from the exit polls. It appears that the essential demographic patterns that emerged prior to Super Tuesday held; with only a few States deviating. Those deviations are important and TPJ will offer its findings on Sunday.
TPJ’s delegate pre-Super Tuesday analysis was generally accurate in primary states. Our analysis was off primarily in caucus states, which raises an interesting preliminary point. Hillary won 9 of 15 primary states, including the popular vote total in all of these States by a narrow margin. Obama won 6 of 7 caucus states (highlighted in grey below) and may actually have won all 7 as New Mexico as the last precincts are being counted and the margin of Hillary’s lead is quite small. His margin of victory in the caucus States, with the exception of New Mexico was 2 to 1.
While there is no distinction between primary election and caucus delegates in their votes at the National Convention, Hillary is showing continued strength and an advantage when the public votes. Obama has clearly demonstrated the ability to turn out supporters at Party caucuses. Unlike Nevada, Obama’s ground game in the caucus states was far superior to his efforts prior to Super Tuesday/
|
State |
Type |
Vote Percentage |
||
|
|
|
CLINTON |
OBAMA |
|
|
Alabama |
primary |
56% |
42% |
|
|
Arizona |
primary |
51% |
42% |
|
|
Arkansas |
primary |
70% |
27% |
|
|
California |
primary |
52% |
42% |
|
|
Connecticut |
primary |
47% |
51% |
|
|
Delaware |
primary |
43% |
53% |
|
|
Georgia |
primary |
31% |
67% |
|
|
Illinois |
primary |
37% |
72% |
|
|
Massachusetts |
primary |
56% |
41% |
|
|
Missouri |
primary |
48% |
49% |
|
|
New Jersey |
primary |
54% |
44% |
|
|
New York |
primary |
57% |
40% |
|
|
Oklahoma |
primary |
55% |
31% |
|
|
Tennessee |
primary |
54% |
41% |
|
|
Utah |
primary |
39% |
57% |
|
|
Alaska |
caucus |
25% |
75% |
|
|
Colorado |
caucus |
32% |
67% |
|
|
Idaho |
caucus |
17% |
79% |
|
|
Kansas |
caucus |
26% |
74% |
|
|
Minnesota |
caucus |
32% |
67% |
|
|
New Mexico |
caucus |
49% |
48% |
|
|
North Dakota |
caucus |
37% |
61% |
|
CAMELOT
Hillary’s strong 16% victory in Massachusetts in the face of open opposition from Sens. Kennedy and the Kennedy clan and Kerry makes a point. Cape Cod Today noted:
Despite endorsements by Senators Kennedy, Kerry and Governor Patrick, Barack Obama lost the Bay State to Hillary Clinton last night. . . .
The big losers yesterday were Romney and Kennedy, latterday friends in their home state. The big winners here were the younger Democratic pols who mostly backed Clinton and Beacon Hill which did the same. One local Cape pundit said, "it likes like the half century reign of Camelot has ended in Massachusetts."
Americans bestowed “Camelot” on President John Kennedy. Obama is successfully developing his own mantle.
_____________________________________________
UPDATED: FEB 3, 2008SEN. SCHUMER’S AG
Sen. Schumer was instrumental in obtaining the US Senate’s consent of Michael B. Mukasey as Attorney General of the United States.
In recent Senate hearings last week, Attorney General Mukasey refused to state whether waterboarding as an interrogation technique would be torture.
When the subject returned to waterboarding, there was especially tough questioning by Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who had initially championed Mr. Mukasey’s nomination and has sometimes defended his performance when other Democrats have not.
The senator appeared exasperated by Mr. Mukasey’s refusal to say whether waterboarding was torture and should be outlawed, despite the attorney general’s statement during his confirmation hearings that he found the technique “repugnant.”
“I find it hard to understand how you personally, when asked for advice, would not be able to say that something that’s repugnant should be outlawed,” Mr. Schumer said. “You said it’s repugnant. I don’t understand how you can now say, Well, I have to ask a whole lot of other people.”
Sen. Schumer rationalized his decision to support Mukasey’s nomination thusly:
I AM voting today to support Michael B. Mukasey for attorney general for one critical reason: the Department of Justice — once the crown jewel among our government institutions — is a shambles and is in desperate need of a strong leader, committed to depoliticizing the agency’s operations. . . .
There is virtually universal agreement, even from those who oppose Judge Mukasey, that he would do a good job in turning the department around. My colleagues who oppose his confirmation have gone out of their way to praise his character and qualifications. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, for one, commended Judge Mukasey as “a brilliant lawyer, a distinguished jurist and by all accounts a good man.”
Most important, Judge Mukasey has demonstrated his fidelity to the rule of law, saying that if he believed the president were violating the law he would resign.
Should we reject Judge Mukasey, President Bush has said he would install an acting, caretaker attorney general who could serve for the rest of his term without the advice and consent of the Senate. To accept such an unaccountable attorney general, I believe, would be to surrender the department to the extreme ideology of Vice President Dick Cheney and his chief of staff, David Addington. All the work we did to pressure Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resign would be undone in a moment.
I deeply oppose this administration’s opaque policy on the use of torture — its refusal to reveal what forms of interrogation it considers acceptable. In particular, I believe that the cruel and inhumane technique of waterboarding is not only repugnant but also illegal under current laws and conventions. I also support Congress’s efforts to pass additional measures that would explicitly ban this and other forms of torture. I voted for Senator Ted Kennedy’s anti-torture amendment in 2006 and am a co-sponsor of his similar bill in this Congress.
Judge Mukasey’s refusal to state that waterboarding is illegal was unsatisfactory to me and many other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But Congress is now considering — and I hope we will soon pass — a law that would explicitly ban the use of waterboarding and other abusive interrogation techniques. And I am confident that Judge Mukasey would enforce that law.
America now has an Attorney General who continues the “opaque” policy of waterboarding and the unfulfilled promise of a law to specifically ban torture.
PLAY
Super Tuesday is generating is generating excitement in both Parties. Polling firms have issued literally hundreds of polls and consistent with the trends thus far in the primary election cycle, the polls are showing divergent results. For example, these polls from California paint a highly different picture, depending on which poll is most correct:
|
Pollster |
Dates |
N/Pop |
Clinton |
Edwards |
Obama |
Undecided |
|
1/29/2008 |
807 LV |
43 |
9 |
40 |
4 |
|
|
1/27/2008 |
888 LV |
49 |
9 |
38 |
2 |
|
|
1/23-27/08 |
690 LV |
49 |
14 |
32 |
4 |
|
|
1/23-26/08 |
779 LV |
47 |
10 |
35 |
6 |
Which polling firm is “most right?” Your pick is as good as any that TPJ could make.
TPJ goes out on a limb today and predicts the actual delegate count each candidate will win in each State. Our analysis attempts to recognize that delegate selection produces results that can be different than the polling results. First, whether the State uses a primary or Party caucus to allocate delegates is an important factor. A large segment of delegates are apportioned among the various Congressional Districts within a State and some are allocated based on the State-wide vote.
With TPJ’s crystal ball in hand and having consulted the writings of Nostradamus, our predictions follow. (States Obama wins are highlighted in red; States Hillary wins are denoted in blue.)
|
State |
Type |
District-level |
At-large |
PLEO |
Total Pledged |
DLD/ALD |
|
|
Delegates |
Delegates |
Delegates |
Delegates |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CLINTON |
OBAMA |
|
Alabama |
primary |
34 |
11 |
7 |
52 |
23 |
28 |
|
Alaska |
caucus |
8 |
3 |
2 |
13 |
7 |
6 |
|
American Samoa |
primary |
|
3 |
|
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
Arizona |
primary |
37 |
12 |
7 |
56 |
32 |
24 |
|
Arkansas |
primary |
22 |
8 |
5 |
35 |
23 |
12 |
|
California |
primary |
241 |
81 |
48 |
370 |
202 |
168 |
|
Colorado |
caucus |
36 |
12 |
5 |
55 |
27 |
28 |
|
Connecticut |
primary |
33 |
11 |
6 |
48 |
26 |
22 |
|
Delaware |
primary |
10 |
3 |
2 |
15 |
10 |
5 |
|
Democrats Abroad |
primary |
|
6 |
1 |
7 |
2 |
5 |
|
Georgia |
primary |
57 |
19 |
11 |
87 |
27 |
50 |
|
Idaho |
caucus |
12 |
4 |
2 |
18 |
10 |
8 |
|
Illinois |
primary |
100 |
33 |
20 |
153 |
52 |
101 |
|
Kansas |
caucus |
21 |
7 |
4 |
32 |
17 |
15 |
|
Massachusetts |
primary |
61 |
20 |
||||