Author Topic: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins  (Read 4378 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« on: February 11, 2008, 11:38:40 PM »

more about the ridiculousness of the caucus system.

Quote
Strategy plays big role in caucus wins

WASHINGTON — The score on Democratic presidential caucuses this nomination season could hardly be more lopsided: Barack Obama 11, Hillary Rodham Clinton 2, New Mexico pending. And a lot of those Obama wins were landslides.

Obama's big win Sunday in Maine, a state where demographics and other indicators suggested Clinton would do well, begs an answer to the question: Why doesn't Clinton win caucuses?

Clinton and her allies point to the nature of a caucus. Blue-collar and shift workers, they say, don't have the time or flexibility to show up at a certain time and stay for a couple of hours. If you're out of town, you're out of luck. Ditto if you can't get a babysitter.

Political analysts say passion and organization are key to caucus wins and Obama has them in greater measure. "He's got both an army of campaign workers and an operatic presentation" that excites people, says Lawrence Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. "It's a very potent, very unusual combination."

Clinton has targeted early and large states. On Super Tuesday, she focused on — and won — New York, New Jersey, California and Massachusetts.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, said Obama has tried to compete in every contest "in pursuit of delegates." He said that has meant TV ads in New York and California, two states Obama never expected to win, and taking caucus states "very seriously."

Clinton strategist Mark Penn said the campaign invested where returns would be greatest. "Our funds at the time were limited. We put them into the Super Tuesday states that were successful," he said, and that in turn has sparked new contributions.

Caucuses still to come this year are Hawaii on Feb. 19, Wyoming on March 8 and Puerto Rico on June 7. Texas holds a primary March 4, then awards one-third of its delegates at evening caucuses open to people who voted.

So far, Clinton has won American Samoa and Nevada. Obama has won Iowa, Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Washington state, the Virgin Islands and Maine. Six contests on Super Tuesday helped keep up with Clinton on delegates.

A closer look at three caucus states:

•Idaho. John Foster, executive director of the state Democratic Party, said the largest factor in Obama's 80%-17% win was a self-starting group of "very passionate volunteers" who became active last spring and later were augmented by a part-time paid campaign staffer.

The Clinton effort came together a month before the Feb. 5 caucus, Foster said. "They were certainly aware of what was happening here. But strategically they didn't invest a lot here."

The upshot, he said, was a team of "establishment party folks" up against "a lot of young new people who were extremely motivated and just worked themselves ragged for six months."

•Washington state. Kelly Steele, a spokesman for the state Democratic Party, described a similar scenario of Obama fans organizing "organically" and later supplemented by paid staff. Clinton was backed by both U.S. senators from Washington and featured them in TV ads. She did three events in the state while Obama did only one.

Whether it was a primary or caucus, Steele said, "Obama simply had more support." A SurveyUSA poll of Washington released Friday, the day before the caucus, showed Obama at 50%, Clinton at 45%. Obama won easily, 68%-31%.

•Minnesota. Jacobs said Clinton made a "triage" decision not to spend much. "She wasn't running ads. She didn't have much of a paid staff," he said.

A poll by Jacobs' center and Minnesota Public Radio, released five days before Super Tuesday, showed Clinton leading Obama 40%-33%, within the poll's margin of error. Two days later, Obama drew 20,000 people to a rally in Minneapolis.

Jacobs said they emerged "supercharged, talked up the caucuses to their friends, and Obama's ground troops made sure everyone got to the right place." The result: 66% for Obama, 32% for Clinton. She is running, Jacobs said, against a "phenomenon."

story

The BarackStar! is sweeping to victory in the basis of caucus wins in places like Iowa, Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Washington state, the Virgin Islands and Maine.


Offline Lord Undies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11388
  • Reputation: +639/-250
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2008, 11:48:29 PM »
That Clinton lesbian woman didn't "win" California.  She won a percentage greater than her opponent, a man who still benefitted from the state's day in the sun.  Why is that so hard for the MSM to admit?  Why lie, even if it is technically true?  Why fool people who do not live in California?

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2008, 11:53:18 PM »
That Clinton lesbian woman didn't "win" California.  She won a percentage greater than her opponent, a man who still benefitted from the state's day in the sun.  Why is that so hard for the MSM to admit?  Why lie, even if it is technically true?  Why fool people who do not live in California?

she won an actual primary election of democrat voters.  that's infinitely closer to "winning" a state's party nomination than the mayhem, arm twisting, and used car salesmen that you find at a caucus.

I am more or less neutral on The BarackStar vs. hillary, but caucuses get on my nerves.

 

Offline Lord Undies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11388
  • Reputation: +639/-250
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2008, 12:06:40 AM »
That Clinton lesbian woman didn't "win" California.  She won a percentage greater than her opponent, a man who still benefitted from the state's day in the sun.  Why is that so hard for the MSM to admit?  Why lie, even if it is technically true?  Why fool people who do not live in California?

she won an actual primary election of democrat voters.  that's infinitely closer to "winning" a state's party nomination than the mayhem, arm twisting, and used car salesmen that you find at a caucus.

I am more or less neutral on The BarackStar vs. hillary, but caucuses get on my nerves.

California is not a winner-takes-all state.  The Tragic Lesbo won her districts and the Magic Negro won his.  The Lesbo happened to win more.     

It wasn't a California Dreamin' thing.  The Lesbo did ok, but not great.

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2008, 12:14:00 AM »
That Clinton lesbian woman didn't "win" California.  She won a percentage greater than her opponent, a man who still benefitted from the state's day in the sun.  Why is that so hard for the MSM to admit?  Why lie, even if it is technically true?  Why fool people who do not live in California?

she won an actual primary election of democrat voters.  that's infinitely closer to "winning" a state's party nomination than the mayhem, arm twisting, and used car salesmen that you find at a caucus.

I am more or less neutral on The BarackStar vs. hillary, but caucuses get on my nerves.

California is not a winner-takes-all state.  The Tragic Lesbo won her districts and the Magic Negro won his.  The Lesbo happened to win more.     

It wasn't a California Dreamin' thing.  The Lesbo did ok, but not great.

none of the dem contests are "winner take all", it seems.  but she won the largest state by a healthy margin;  over 10%, which netted her something close to 50 delegates more than The BarackStar!  that's a huge deal with the razor thin margin that the dems are headed for.  and back to my original point, a primary win is more meaningful than a caucus win in that it is more honest, and more accurately reflects the actual intent of the electorate.




Offline Lord Undies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11388
  • Reputation: +639/-250
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2008, 12:33:31 AM »

none of the dem contests are "winner take all", it seems.  but she won the largest state by a healthy margin;  over 10%, which netted her something close to 50 delegates more than The BarackStar!  that's a huge deal with the razor thin margin that the dems are headed for.  and back to my original point, a primary win is more meaningful than a caucus win in that it is more honest, and more accurately reflects the actual intent of the electorate.

Wow!  Somebody loves them some Hillary! 

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2008, 12:39:08 AM »

none of the dem contests are "winner take all", it seems.  but she won the largest state by a healthy margin;  over 10%, which netted her something close to 50 delegates more than The BarackStar!  that's a huge deal with the razor thin margin that the dems are headed for.  and back to my original point, a primary win is more meaningful than a caucus win in that it is more honest, and more accurately reflects the actual intent of the electorate.

Wow!  Somebody loves them some Hillary! 

yeah, that's it :-)

I would certainly rather run against her than the alternative.  I have no idea how to run against "hope" or "unity".  but the vast majority of my ire here is actually directed at the caucus system;  it is just personified these days by The BarackStar!





Offline Lord Undies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11388
  • Reputation: +639/-250
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2008, 12:51:03 AM »

none of the dem contests are "winner take all", it seems.  but she won the largest state by a healthy margin;  over 10%, which netted her something close to 50 delegates more than The BarackStar!  that's a huge deal with the razor thin margin that the dems are headed for.  and back to my original point, a primary win is more meaningful than a caucus win in that it is more honest, and more accurately reflects the actual intent of the electorate.

Wow!  Somebody loves them some Hillary! 

yeah, that's it :-)

I would certainly rather run against her than the alternative.  I have no idea how to run against "hope" or "unity".  but the vast majority of my ire here is actually directed at the caucus system;  it is just personified these days by The BarackStar!

Me thinks you wanna work for "change".  You go, girl! lol.

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Re: Strategy plays big role in caucus wins
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2008, 12:55:22 AM »

none of the dem contests are "winner take all", it seems.  but she won the largest state by a healthy margin;  over 10%, which netted her something close to 50 delegates more than The BarackStar!  that's a huge deal with the razor thin margin that the dems are headed for.  and back to my original point, a primary win is more meaningful than a caucus win in that it is more honest, and more accurately reflects the actual intent of the electorate.

Wow!  Somebody loves them some Hillary! 

yeah, that's it :-)

I would certainly rather run against her than the alternative.  I have no idea how to run against "hope" or "unity".  but the vast majority of my ire here is actually directed at the caucus system;  it is just personified these days by The BarackStar!

Me thinks you wanna work for "change".  You go, girl! lol.

 :rotf: I am extremely interested in the dem race this time around, no doubt.  ours is already over, and wasn't that exciting in the first place.  but most of all, I am interested in the social/electoral dynamic of female and/or african american presidential candidates because we will definitely be running against one of them in the general.  in golf parlance, this is where we "go to school" on the person that putts before us.  it's critical that we come out of their primary smarter than we are right now.