Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Super Tuesday

The dust has settled from Super Tuesday and just now are we beginning to get a look at the full scope of what has happened. On the Democratic side, only one thing is certain: this thing will continue, for a very, very long time.  On the Republican side, McCain had appeared to have the nomination all but locked up going into Super Tuesday, but with a late southern surge from Huckabee and Romney's dominance of the mountain west states, this thing might not be as over as we once thought.

The Surprises

1) Massachusetts: As a Clinton supporter, Massachusetts had me worried.  Clinton has held a 15-20 point lead early on, but with the late endorsements of the Kennedys, I figured Obama had a real shot of winning.  In fact, the latest poll from Suffolk actually had Obama ahead with other polls showing an extremely tight contest.  But in the end, Clinton won Massachusetts strong, 56-41.  As Chris Matthews put it, in round one, the Clintons beat the Kennedys.  

2) California: Talk about  a state that had me, and the Clinton campaign, very worried.  All the latest polls showed Obama with anywhere from a 2-13 point lead.  In the end though, Hillary Clinton won California, and won it convincingly, 52-42.  

3) The South and Huckabee: Just before I sat down to watch the results start trickling in, I was over at Daily Kos and voted in a poll that asked how many states Huckabee would win tonight.  I, as many, voted for one (Arkansas).  But I was wrong, way wrong.  It seems the Huckaboom is not over just yet.  Sure, he can't win anywhere else but the South, but Louisiana, Mississippi, Virginia, and North Carolina are all yet to come and I expect he could win some, if not all, of those states.  Indeed, last night Huckabee stole Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, and West Virginia from McCain and Romney, who were the ones expected to be competing for first place.  And, also to note, Huckabee did come within 1% of winning Missouri.  With this kind of strength in the South, and McCain's weakness among evangelicals, expect to see Huckabee as VP on a McCain ticket.   

The "Not-So" Surprises

1) The Caucus States: Not Surprisingly, the caucus states went convincingly to Obama and Romney.  Simply put, they were always favored to win those states and they did.  The caucus states have very little delegates, but they do exemplify Obama and Romney's grassroots' strength.

2) The North East: The North East went overwhelmingly, with the exception of Massachusetts, to John McCain.  The benefit for McCain is that most of the NE states are winner-take-all and hence allowed him to grow his delegate lead significantly over Romney and Huckabee.  The downside is that McCain won last night in all the places that will be almost impossible for him to win next fall.  He won mostly blue states, with the exception of Arizona and Missouri. What good is a Republican nominee if he can't win in the South and mountain west?  That is why a McCain/Huckabee ticket makes so much sense----McCain needs the South.

Where do we go from here?

-The Republicans: McCain does appear to have this nomination locked up, but Huckabee could win the remaining Southern states.There has been talk from the Romney campaign of "frank discussions" concerning withdrawing from the race.  If Romney stayed in, he could potentially pick up a few more victories in places like Nebraska, Washington, and Wisconsin.  If he dropped out, McCain is likely to win those states.  

-The Democrats: Where do they go from here? Honestly I do not know, but this thing could end up at the convention.  The next few weeks heavily favor Obama with Louisiana, Washington, Nebraska, Maryland, Virginia, DC, Hawaii, and Wisconsin.  With that said, if Hillary can survive those states and stay competitive, the following weeks favor her: Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania.  In the end though, with the delegates split almost even, how can one candidate reach 2025 with the proportional system?  I just don't see it happening.  

Photo Credit: AP

6 comments :

Anonymous said...

Isn't it amazing? Hillary won the "far left" states of New York, California and Massachusetts, while Obama is winning the more conservative states. Go figure!!

Joseph Patrick said...

Hey, lol, there's nothing wrong with being "far-left". But if anything, it shows Obama has strength in caucus states(which tend to be more rural), while Hillary is stronger in more urban states.

Anonymous said...

If Obama is the candidate that can bring the nation together, Super Tuesday did not confirm that. California and New York have the most diverse population, yet Senator Clinton won there big. California's governor's wife, backed Obama and said he was California,a reference to his ethnic background but the people did not buy it. You can bet John McCain was glad to win the far left states of California and New York.

Anonymous said...

Joseph Patrick said...

Hey, lol, there's nothing wrong with being "far-left". But if anything, it shows Obama has strength in caucus states(which tend to be more rural), while Hillary is stronger in more urban states.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In other words, Obama did better in states that are typically won by republicans while Hillary did better in states that typically vote democratic. SO, if Hillary wins, we can count on carrying the same states that we carried in 2000 and 2004. MmmmmKay!!

Anonymous said...

Hey lighten up. Regardless who is the democratic nominee, they will carry the same states as 2004, plus Florida, Ohio and one or two others carried by the republicans in 2004.

Anonymous said...

Hey lighten up. Regardless who is the democratic nominee, they will carry the same states as 2004, plus Florida, Ohio and one or two others carried by the republicans in 2004.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You're following the same fatal reasoning as in 2004. remember? After 4 years of Bush, there's no way the democrats can't win in 2004? FWIW, if the election were today and the candidates were Hillary Clinton and John McCain, I'd vote republican. As Ann Coulter put it, Hillary's much more conservative than McCain. If I wanted to vote for a corporate-friendly conservative, I'd be a republican. Hillary Clinton does not represent the values that the democratic party is principled upon, supporting the little man against corporate America. what Joseph quoted from Chris Matthews rings oh so true. It's basically the Kennedys vs. the Clintons. It's a matter of democratic ideology. If the Kennedys lose the nomination, our once proud party loses out to the "blue dog democrats", the same democrats who vote in tow with the republicans today.