Define “Win”
Jackie Calmes over at the WSJ points out that barring a knockout blow from the Obama campaign on the Clinton effort, things are going to get murky, fast. The delegate math gets screwy if the primaries today are close. While I have predicted Clinton would get hammered today, that was before Obama suddenly was set upon by the press over the Canadian-NAFTA story and by the building buzz about Tony Rezko's trial.
The latest polls suggest, however, that the outcome is likely to be muddier than either of those scenarios. The surveys show Sen. Clinton with a solid, even expanding, lead in Ohio. In Texas, two polls released yesterday, show Sen. Obama with a slight lead, while a third puts Sen. Clinton somewhat ahead. Texas's results will be complicated by separate caucuses held after the primary polls close. Sen. Obama is favored to win the caucuses even if he loses the primary.
Should the senators split the states' contests — or if Sen. Clinton wins, but only by narrow margins — the debate will turn to how to interpret the results. Two smaller states, Rhode Island and Vermont, also vote today. Clinton aides have started to imply that even just one big win today would allow her to claim she had broken Sen. Obama's momentum, justifying a continuing competition.
Meanwhile, Dana Milbank at the Washington Post describes the howling pack of reporters that set upon Obama:
The day before primaries in Ohio and Texas that could effectively seal the Democratic presidential nomination for him, a smiling Obama strode out to a news conference at a veterans facility here. But the grin was quickly replaced by the surprised look of a man bitten by his own dog.
Reporters from the Associated Press and Reuters went after him for his false denial that a campaign aide had held a secret meeting with Canadian officials over Obama's trade policy. A trio of Chicago reporters pummeled him with questions about the corruption trial this week of a friend and supporter. The New York Post piled on with a question about him losing the Jewish vote.
Obama responded with the classic phrases of a politician in trouble. "That was the information that I had at the time. . . . Those charges are completely unrelated to me. . . . I have said that that was a mistake. . . . The fact pattern remains unchanged."
When those failed, Obama tried another approach. "We're running late," the candidate said, and then he disappeared behind a curtain.
And then there are reports of large numbers of Republicans crossing over in Texas – presumably to vote for Clinton. (Although it might not be quite that simple).
Poll watchers throughout Ohio are noting large numbers of Republican voters crossing over to vote in the Democratic Primary between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
In the Republican roost of Chagrin Falls, veteran poll worker Liz McFadden was amazed at the number of people jumping the party's ship. Democrats accounted for 70 percent of the voters in her precinct, one of seven at the village's high school.
"That's a complete reversal of what it normally is, even more so," she said. "I've never seen a switch like this."
The defectors had motives both pure and sinister.
One woman voted for Clinton in hopes of delivering John McCain a weaker debate opponent. Another picked Obama because her vote could help deny Clinton and her husband a return trip to the White House.
It seems that things are suddenly turning on Obama in a very big way. This is getting interesting. I really don't mind if Clinton and Obama keep savaging one another right up to the convention, so this could be fun.
By curtis, March 4, 2008 @ 5:40 pm
I never thought I’d say this but, I’m pulling for Herself. If she pulls it off, it will mean 16 hour days for the shrinks’ in Telluride,AnnArbor and Berkley. The trustifarians will be sorely tested.
By Neo, March 4, 2008 @ 10:40 pm
Obama begins to take on that comic feel that came out in the old National Lampoon "Lemmings." <blockquote><b>inoperative .. inoperative</b> .. that statement is inoperative</blockquote>