2008 United States presidential election: Difference between revisions
imported>Richard Jensen (map) |
imported>Richard Jensen m ($) |
||
Line 382: | Line 382: | ||
==Money== | ==Money== | ||
Money became much more important in 2008 than previous elections. The candidates spent $915 million before June 1, 2008, double the spending in 2004, and the spending rate continues to escalate. Obama has demonstrated much better fund raising skills than Clinton or McCain; he raised twice as much as Clinton, who borrowed most of her funds in February to May, 2008. McCain has announced that he will accept federal funding, which provides a $ | Money became much more important in 2008 than previous elections. The candidates spent $915 million before June 1, 2008, double the spending in 2004, and the spending rate continues to escalate. Obama has demonstrated much better fund raising skills than Clinton or McCain; he raised twice as much as Clinton, who borrowed most of her funds in February to May, 2008. McCain has announced that he will accept federal funding, which provides a $84.1 million subsidy from the Treasury but a prohition on additional spending. (That is, McCain cannot spend a penny over the $84.1 million, but the Republican National Committee can do so on his behalf, and is expected to have about $110 million.) McCain attacked Obama for reversing himself and deciding to reject federal subsidies and limits, in the expectation that he can raise $300 million on his own. The Republican and Democratic National Committees and groups that are created specifically to influence elections, (called "527’s" after the federal tax code that allows them), will spend many millions of dollars in the fall election. Thus far Obama's biggest expense was $85 million paid to GMMB, a media consulting firm; $69 million of that was used to buy advertising time, especially on television during primary contests. Counting all the candidates, the bulk of the spending has gone for media and consulting (37%), staff (16%), travel (11%), mailings (11%), events (5%) and telemarketing (5%).<ref> Hannah Fairfield and Griff Palmer, "Cashing in on Obama and McCain,'' [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/business/06metrics.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin ''New York Times'' July 6, 2008]</ref> | ||
==Mechanics== | ==Mechanics== |
Revision as of 10:36, 11 July 2008
Template:TOC-right The United States will hold its 55th quadrennial presidential election on November 4, 2008. The rules are very complicated, and the race is long and expensive; the contenders by the end of May had already spent some $900 million seeking the party nomination, with Republican (GOP) contenders spending far less than the Democrats, whose nomination battle lasted into June 2008.
The Democratic nominee will be Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the first African American candidate, who defeated the first strong woman contender, Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, and a host of contenders who dropped out earlier. Obama won fewer delegates in 37 contested primaries (1362 to 1374), ran behind in the controversial states of Florida and Michigan (63 to 87) but scored big leads in the caucus states (332 to 179), and clinched his win by carrying the superdelegates.[1]
The Democratic primary campaign was by far the longest, most expensive, nastiest, and closest in American history. In terms of the popular vote--depending on how it's counted--it was a virtual draw. One tabulation had Obama at 18,107,710 (48.1%) and Clinton at 18,046,007 (47.9%).[2] Clinton started with wide leads in the polls, but Obama caught up, and ended by a lead of about 9 points in polls of Democrats, 51% to 42%. At all times Obama had a large and growing financial advantage, as he raised over million dollars a day, every day, double Clinton's rate. In May and June primaries, Obama won big in the North Carolina, Oregon and Montana primaries, lost heavily in West Virginia, Kentucky, Puerto Rico and South Dakota; Indiana was a virtual tie with a small Clinton lead.[3] They faced off in the inconclusive "Tsunami Tuesday" primaries in 21 states on Feb. 5, and the popular vote was almost exactly 50%-50%. However Obama won the next eleven contests in a row and gained the "momentum" that finally proved too much for Clinton to overcome.
Repeatedly the Clinton campaign was on the verge of collapse, but she came back with stunning wins in New Hampshire in January, California and Massachusetts in February, Texas and Ohio in March, and Pennsylvania in April. She was unable to keep up the pace in May and June, as she was heavily outspent and her treasury was empty; indeed Clinton has been loaning herself over $1 million a week, while Obama's fundraising took in unprecedented sums from over 1.5 million of contributors, many of them using the internet.
Despite his financial advantage Obama grew weaker every weak after March 1, winning fewer popular votes than Clinton in closing weeks He did poorly in large states, and among Clinton's core supporters of women, the poor, the less educated, the elderly, Catholics and Hispanics. Obama's coalition comprised blacks, upscale voters, youth, and secular voters, and it held solid, but he slipped steadily among independents who will probably be decisive in November. Especially in the close states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, working class white Democrats rejected Obama by increasingly large margins. Upwards of a third of Clinton supporters said they would not vote for Obama in the fall; thus in Kentucky, a majority of Democratic primary voters indicated they would not vote for Obama in November.
The final decisive ingredient was the decision by the unelected "superdelegates" who comprise 18% of the convention delegates to support Obama. They are 796 lawmakers, governors and state and local party officials who, since a rules change in 1982, automatically become delegates and can vote any way they wish. By May 29, Clinton had support from 283 superdelegates and Obama had 321; On June 4, Clinton had 282 and Obama had 415 and a clear majority of delegates. [4]
Serious confusion surrounded the delegations from Michigan and Florida, which deliberately moved up their primaries and thus broke the National Committee rules. Neither candidate campaigned in either state, but primaries were held and Clinton won them and demanded those delegates. Democrats in Florida, especially, were embittered by being shut out of the convention. A compromise was finally reached on May 31, that cut the delegations in half but gave the advantage to Clinton; Clinton was given 87 delegates and Obama 63. It was too little, too late to help Clinton.
ABC News concluded in mid February that by all objective measures, Obama had become the Democratic frontrunner: he has more money, momentum, enthusiasm, and delegates. "Obama had his most impressive night of the competition, not just in the size of his victory margins but in the breadth of support he attracted from men and women, young voters and old, African Americans and whites," concluded Dan Balz and Tim Craig in The Washington Post. "The results left Clinton, the one-time front-runner for the Democratic nomination, in a deep hole....Obama's winning streak, his large margins and the prospect of more victories next week put Clinton in a tenuous position, despite the close delegate competition."[5]
The Republicans gave victory to Arizona Senator John McCain in most of the primaries, and national leaders have rallied to his cause. He gained a majority of delegates on March 4, and his opponents have dropped out and endorsed him. The right wing of the party, led by radio talk show hosts, was angry with McCain, who has been a maverick and appeals especially to moderates and independents, and even to many Democrats as well, but seemed in April to be more accepting oh its candidacy. On Tsunami Tuesday McCain polled 41% to 31% for Mitt Romney and 21% for Mike Huckabee. Romney sought the support of the most conservative Republicans, but shared that base with Huckabee, who was strongest among evangelicals. Romney won 273 delegates but dropped out of the race on Feb. 7 and later endorsed McCain.[6]
Each party will officially name its ticket at its national convention in late August in Denver for the Democrats and early September in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, for the GOP. Both conventions will be a nominal affair controlled by McCain and Obama.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg had been making preparations for the possibility of becoming an independent candidate. As a multi-billionaire he has the capacity to finance his own campaign without outside contributions or federal matching funds. In March he announced he would not run.
This election will select the 44th President of the United States and the 47th Vice President.[7] Their terms will begin Jan. 20, 2009. President George W. Bush, who has served two terms, is ineligible to run. Vice President Dick Cheney has long said he would not run. No one close to the Bush administration is in the race, and it has not favored any candidate.
Polls in early July 2008 (see map) show a competitive November election with Obama about 5 points ahead of McCain, as both soldified support among partisans and Obama outpolled McCain among independents.[8] State-by-state results suggest a very close contest in the fall, with the key battleground states likely to be Iowa (7 electoral votes), Michigan (17), New Mexico (5), Pennsylvania (21) and Wisconsin (10), which leaned Democratic in May; the four toss-up states of Colorado (9), Nevada (5), New Hampshire (4), and Ohio (20); and the three states that leaned to McCain in May: Florida (27), Missouri (11), and Virginia (13). Although the presidential race looks close, analysts expect the Democrats to make major gains in Senate and House races.[9] The vice presidential nominees may make a small difference, but they have not been announced.
Obama announced in June he will reject Federal funding of his campaign, and rely on private donations, while McCain has said he will accept federal funding. The National Committees of each party will also raise large sums to help the candidates.
Democrats in 2007
In the Democratic race, throughout 2007 Clinton had a wide lead over Obama and Edwards, but Obama gained rapidly in early 2008, while Edwards faded.
Democratic Contenders
|
|
Republicans in 2007
- See also: U.S. Republican Party
As President Bush is constitutionally ineligible to seek another term and Vice President Dick Cheney has announced that he will not seek the Republican presidential nomination, the Republican field wide was open for the nomination. Various politicians began exploratory committees, fundraising efforts, and other preliminary activities to determine if they had the support they needed to run.
By September 2007, the leaders were former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, and Arizona Senator John McCain, who dropped sharply from his leading position after endorsing immigration reform.
Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee entered as a dark horse but shot to the top rank in December 2007, and won the Iowa caucus. His base is primarily evangelical Christians, who are about 35% of the GOP vote, but he does quite poorly among other segments of the Republican party. By mid-January 2008 Thompson and Giuliani were doing poorly, and both dropped out in late January. Romney dropped out after a poor showing in the February 5th primaries.
Minor candidates who entered but dropped out are Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo, former Kansas Senator Sam Brownback, former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore and former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, and California Representative Duncan Hunter. Other candidates who considered running who did not enter include former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, and former New York Governor George Pataki.
GOP Contenders
|
|
Withdrawn Candidates
The Republican primaries shows a contest in turmoil, which may indicate the splintering of the Reagan coalition of social conservatives, the religious right, national-defense hawks, and advocates of low taxes. McCain started with a large lead but collapsed in the spring, because of grass roots opposition to his liberal stance on immigration, and bad financial strategy that left the campaign broke. But McCain soldiered on, making a comeback in early January, 2008, and winning the New Hampshire primary by 37%-32% for Romney. Rudy Giuliani, the former Mayor of New York, used his heroic image from the 9-11 Attack, and promise of a strong counter-terrorism policy, to vault to the lead in mid-2007, despite moderate social policies that the large conservative wing disliked. In early December, however, his negatives were catching up and he fell from the 30% to the 20% level nationally, and ran a weak fourth in New Hampshire at 9%. His strategy involves a comeback in the Florida primary.[36] Hollywood actor and former senator Fred Thompson entered the race late, but appealed to many conservatives looking for another Ronald Reagan. His ineffective campaign style led to a steady erosion of support; he polled 1% in New Hampshire and dropped out after a weak third-place in South Carolina. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, by reversing previous moderate positions, suddenly became a hard-line conservative spokesman. His Mormon religion, however, caused distrust among the religious conservatives who bulk large in some primaries. Romney's strategy was to pour millions of dollars (much of it his personal money) into Iowa and New Hampshire, hoping that victories there on January 3 and 8, 2008, would generate massive favorable publicity. That publicity supposedly would propel him into a dominant position in the Super Tuesday primaries on Feb. 5, 2008, when 45% of the delegates will be chosen.
Every prediction and game plan was shattered in November, when Mike Huckabee, a little known former governor of Arkansas, shot to the top of the polls and won in Iowa. His base comprises evangelical Christians, who comprise 35% of national GOP voters. Evangelicals comprise 48%-68% of Republicans in the South and border states, 47% in Iowa, and only 11% in New Hampshire. They are 33% in Michigan, 29% in Florida, 27% in California and 14% in New York.[37]
|
|
The candidates in primaries and caucuses
For daily updates on the polls see [11]
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
Later primaries
The proportional representation rule for Democratic primaries meant that Tsunami Tuesday did not end the race, as Clinton and Obama are close in delegate count. On Feb. 9 Obama won easily in Nebraska, Louisiana and Washington state, and picked up delegates in the U.S. Virgin Islands. With 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination, the Associated Press on Feb. 10 estimated 1,095 for Clinton and 1,070 for Obama.[55]
The vote in Louisiana split along racial and age lines. Obama won the African-American vote 82% to 18%, while Clinton won among whites 70% to 26%. Obama won those under age 65 while Clinton won voter over 65.
Six states plus the District of Columbia hold Democratic contests in mid-February, with some 400 delegates. Washington held caucuses on February 9th and will hold a primary on February 19th. The Democrats select all their delegates at the caucuses, with the primary being non-binding; the Republicans will select some delegates at the caucuses and some in the primary. Maine held its Democratic caucus Feb 10; Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia held primaries on Feb. 12.
Obama won the Democratic caucuses in Washington and Maine, and the "Potomac Primaries" in Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. Obama received 161 delegates to Clinton's 106, leaving Obama with a small edge in delegate count.
In his 9th and 10th straight victories against a fading Clinton, Obama scored landslides in icy Wisconsin, 58%-41%, and in sunny Hawaii on February 19. Obama's win raised new doubts about the Clinton campaign's strategy of casting the Illinois senator as a candidate whose soaring rhetoric masks a lack of preparation for the presidency. Analysts noted that Obama was now winning large majorities of white men, reducing Clinton to her core of white women and Hispanic voters. In Wisconsin white women voted for her by a slim 52%-47%, while Obama amassed a fat margin among white men, 63%-34%. Voters under 30 showed unusually high turnout rates as they rallied to Obama, 70%-26%.[56] Clinton did carry the dairy state's white Democrats by 51%-48%, but they comprised barely half the voters in the primary, which was open to Republicans and Independents.
March 4 was the the next critical date for Clinton, as she scored victories in Ohio (161 delegates) and Texas (228 delegates). After a long hiatus, in which Obama raised far more money and outspent her heavily in TV ads, Clinton came back with a decisive win in Pennsylvania on April 22. However on May 6 Obama won by landslide margins in North Carolina, and held Clinton to a one-point victory in Indiana. The final six small states with 217 delegates will finish the primary season by June 3.
- Ohio Dem. exit polls
- Texas Dem. exit polls
- Pennsylvania Dem. exit polls
- North Carolina Dem. exit polls
- Indiana Dem. exit polls
- West Virginia Dem. exit polls
- Kentucky Dem. exit polls
- Oregon Dem. exit polls
- Puerto Rico Dem. exit polls
- Montana Dem. exit polls
- South Dakota Dem. exit polls
Democratic divisions
The primary contests showed the Democratic electorate was deeply divided along lines of race, gender, age and class. Although Clinton had strong support among blacks in 2007, her grass roots supported nearly vanished, falling below 10% in April and May primaries. On the other hand she scored large majorities among Latino voters, and led among whites. Looking at the white voters showed strong polarizations. In terms of gender, Clinton had a strong lead among white women. In terms of age, Obama had 70% support among voters under 30, and Clinton had large majorities among whites over age 60. Class (operationalized in terms of schooling) showed well educated whites for Obama, and less educated for Clinton. Whites without a college degree voted 64%-35% for Clinton in Indiana and 71%-26% in North Carolina); she won them by 61$-32% percent in all previous primaries to date.[57]
While Obama does poorly among working class whites--a major part of the old New Deal Coalition, most poorly educated blue collar workers have already moved out of the Democratic party and typically vote Republican. In the 1960s, 48% of white Democrats were manual workers and 29% had professional and managerial jobs. The numbers today are reversed, as only 23% of white Democrats have manual jobs--Clinton's base-- and 51% are professionals and managers--Obama's base. The blue collar remnant still in the party voted heavily for Clinton in the primaries, and indicated they would not support Obama in the fall, thus signalling their further exodus from the party. The issue for Obama is whether his dramatic strength among youth and well-educated voters can offset those losses.[58]
Enthusiasm
Polls show Americans are unusually focused on this year's election, more so than for any recent election at this time in the election-year cycle. The Gallup poll found in early February that 71% said they had given "quite a lot of thought" to the election, a number that Gallup called "extraordinarily high" for this time in the election cycle. The comparable rate in early 2004 was only 58%. Gallup gives four explanations. First, no incumbents are running for re-election, so both nominations are up for grabs. Second, this year's "cast of characters" has unique characteristics and appeal. For the first time in U.S. history major-party front-runners this deep into the process have included a woman, a black, a Mormon, and a Baptist minister. Third, the primary and caucus season occur much earlier. Fourth, the races themselves got underway much earlier than usual, with full-scale announcements and campaigns initiated a year ago or more.[59]
Gallup research has shown that Democrats are in general more enthusiastic about their candidates in 2008 than are Republicans. Democrats have turned out in far larger and more enthusiastic rallies, and numbered far more supporters in the Iowa, New Hampshire and Florida contests, even though the parties were about evenly balanced in those states in 2000 and 2004. On Tsunami Tuesday, twice as many people voted in the Democratic primaries compared to the GOP. McCain noted that turnout among Republican voters has been anemic while Democrats have shown up to primaries and caucuses in record numbers. "I've said many times, we've got a lot of work to do to energize our base".[60]
As 2008 opened the Democratic candidates had thus far raised $223 million, compared with $152 million for Republican candidates. Obama broke all fund-raising records, and in the first four months of 2008 was averaging a million dollars a day, double what Clinton raised and triple that for McCain. Obama counted on 1.475 million total donors, who made 2.93 million contributions, averaging $91 each.
A Rasmussen poll at the end of January found that 47% of Democrats say they are "passionately and deeply committed" to their candidate, compared to only 28% of Republicans. Among Democrats who are passionate about a candidate, 53% favor Clinton and 28% Obama. Among passionate Republicans, 34% support Romney, 23% Huckabee, 10% McCain and 10% Paul. Americans under 30 and those who earn less than $40,000 a year are more likely to be passionate about a candidate than older and higher-income Americans. 27% of all voters believe McCain is too old to be President, while 56%, disagree and say he is not too old for the job.[61]
Throughout the long primary season new records were set for attandance at rallies, fundraising, voter turnout, and registration of new voters, especially on the Democratic side. The downside of the enthusiasm was a reluctance to vote in November for the party nominee on the part of the losers' supporters. In the May primaries, half the Democrats who voted for Clinton indicated they would not vote for Obama in November. Party leaders sought an early end to the contest to allow time for these divisions to heal.[62]
In the primaries alone, the Democrats attracted close to 37 million voters, with 17.3 million for Obama. The Republicans, in contrast, drew just under 21 million primary voters, with 9.8 million for McCain.
Issues
|
|
|
The issues Democrats care about heightened voter turnout, but they have not differentiated the candidates. That is, there is very little correlation between which issues Democrats see as most important and who they have voted for. Thus health care is mentioned by 20-25% of Democrats as a top concern, but they split their votes same way as Democrats who do not rank the issue highly. For the Democrats personal qualities have been far more influential.[64]
Issues have mattered more for Republicans. The Iraq issue hurt McCain in summer 2007, but started to help him in the fall when the public sensed gains in the war there due to the "surge" McCain championed. McCain also gains among Republicans who criticize Bush's handling of the economy, while those who praise Bush support Romney. Immigration has been Romney’s best issue, but the constituency viewing it as a high priority has been too small to carry a primary for him. In Florida, Romney had a 43% to 25% edge over McCain among voters who said immigration is the most important issue; however, they constituted only 16% of the voters.[65]
Money
Money became much more important in 2008 than previous elections. The candidates spent $915 million before June 1, 2008, double the spending in 2004, and the spending rate continues to escalate. Obama has demonstrated much better fund raising skills than Clinton or McCain; he raised twice as much as Clinton, who borrowed most of her funds in February to May, 2008. McCain has announced that he will accept federal funding, which provides a $84.1 million subsidy from the Treasury but a prohition on additional spending. (That is, McCain cannot spend a penny over the $84.1 million, but the Republican National Committee can do so on his behalf, and is expected to have about $110 million.) McCain attacked Obama for reversing himself and deciding to reject federal subsidies and limits, in the expectation that he can raise $300 million on his own. The Republican and Democratic National Committees and groups that are created specifically to influence elections, (called "527’s" after the federal tax code that allows them), will spend many millions of dollars in the fall election. Thus far Obama's biggest expense was $85 million paid to GMMB, a media consulting firm; $69 million of that was used to buy advertising time, especially on television during primary contests. Counting all the candidates, the bulk of the spending has gone for media and consulting (37%), staff (16%), travel (11%), mailings (11%), events (5%) and telemarketing (5%).[66]
Mechanics
The nomination process for the two main parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, is significantly more complex than the process at the general election. For most of the history of the United States, each party nominated its candidate at its national convention in the summer before the election. However, the process for selecting the delegates (the people who vote on the nomination) to the convention has changed over time, and differ for each state and each party.[67]
Most states use primaries, which are ordinary secret-ballot elections. Some primaries are open only to party members; in others like New Hampshire, registered independents can vote in either party's primary. Some states do not record party preference in registration; in those states, voters can choose to vote in either primary.
In the 19th century all states used local caucuses and a state convention. Progressives created the direct primary system in 1900 to break the power of state party organizations. The states that rejected primaries in the 1900s and 1970s continue to use caucuses that elect delegates to a state convention, which in turn selects the delegates to the national convention. The best-known caucus state is Iowa, whose caucuses are traditionally the first in the nominating process.
In Iowa voters to go to a local school or meeting place; Republicans sign in with their vote and leave. Democrats must spend an hour or two in a "caucus" to register their preference. Supporters of candidates with under 15% at that caucus move to another candidate. The Democratic Iowa caucus is a mixture of discussion, debating, a little horse-trading, and some consensus-building between neighbors. Anything can happen, but the media will report on the distribution of support at at the end of the evening. The actual national delegates in Iowa will be chosen months later at the state convention.
The Democratic Party rules require that delegates are awarded to the candidate in proportion to their votes in each congressional district in the primary. In addition the Democrats have "superdelegates" who are party officials who automatically become delegates. The Republicans allow a broader variety of rules among the states. Several states (Florida, with a Jan. 29 primary, and New York and New Jersey with primaries on Feb. 5) have "winner take all" rules that magnify their importance. California awards 11 of 170 delegates to the statewide plurality winner, and the remaining 159 as winner-take-all per congressional district.
Third parties choose their candidates at their own, smaller conventions that receive little coverage.
The nomination campaign will have three stages. In January, come the preliminaries, with attention focused on the Iowa caucus (Jan. 3) and the New Hampshire primary (Jan 8), along with contests in Michigan, South Carolina and Florida. Then comes Super Tuesday Feb 5, with 40% of the delegates chosen. After that a string of primaries will be held, which will become increasingly important if the races become deadlocked on Feb. 5. The nominees could possibly be undecided until the national conventions in August/September.
Interest groups
Labor unions
The labor union movement, which itself is split into two camps, has divided its support between Clinton and Obama. Clinton has 12 endorsements from unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO -- the nation's largest labor federation -- as well as the United Farm Workers from the rival Change To Win labor federation. However Obama in mid-February won three of the largest unions (all from Change to Win), The Teamsters (1.4 million members), the United Food and Commercial Workers (comprising 1.3 million supermarket workers and meatpackers) and the Service Employees International Union (1.9-million members). He also has two AFL-CIO unions, the Transport Workers Union and the United Association of Plumbers and Pipefitters. Unions and other interest groups have spent far more money so far for Clinton. Two AFL-CIO unions, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and the American Federation of Teachers, have spent nearly $4 million for Clinton.[68]
The New Deal Coalition forged by Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s dominated national politics until the mid-1960s. One key reason was the close alliance of the party with labor unions. Since the 1960s, however, union membership has fallen by 2/3. In the 1980s unions came under assault from business and the party was unable to help them. Unions in recent years have increased their activism in the election cycle, especially in terms of funding and get-out-the-vote campaigns.
In 2004 and 2006, unions spent a combined $561 million to help elect their preferred candidates (most of them Democrats). That is nearly a 50% increase over the $381 million spent on the previous two campaigns. However they are still outspent by business; in 2000, companies were responsible for three times as much spending as unions. By the 2006 election, companies and their employees spent $491 million on elections, compared with $264 million for labor unions. Labor spent $32 million on its own mailings and television and radio commercials for the 2004 and 2006 elections, a nearly fivefold jump over the previous four years. Polls show 74% of voters who belong to an AFL-CIO-affiliated union voted for the congressional candidate endorsed by their union in 2006, up from 70% in 2004 and 68% in 2002.[69]
Candidates for the nomination
|
|
Minor parties
Numerous minor parties run candidates, usually getting under 1% of the vote. Perennial candidate Ralph Nader announced in February 2008 he planned to run. He was an on-again, off-again candidate in 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004. Many Democrats blame his 2.7% showing in 2000 for Al Gore's loss that year. In 2004 Nader received 0.4% of the vote.
Current newspaper and magazine reports
External links
- exit polls, from MSNBC
- Delegate counts for major candidates; upcoming schedule
- Campaign journalism, statistical reports on media coverage
notes
- ↑ Justin M. Sizemore, "How Obama Did It: Big states, small states, caucuses and campaign strategy," Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball (June 5, 2008) v 6 #22
- ↑ The many variations are summarized at "2008 Democratic Popular Vote"
- ↑ See the summary, updated daily, at Real Clear Politics
- ↑ See http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html
- ↑ quoted at ABC News, "The Note" Feb. 13. 2008
- ↑ See Real Clear Politics and the MSNBC results, updated daily
- ↑ The presidential candidate tells the convention whom to select as VP. Rarely, as in 1956, the convention is allowed to vote for its own choice of VP.
- ↑ Chris Cillizza, "Obama Leads McCain in Four Key Battleground States," Washington Post June 26, 2008
- ↑ It is much too early to predict the November election, but the national match-ups are used to gauge the electability of candidates. See Real Clear Politics summary of national match-ups and [http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_electoral_college_update Rasmussen Reports, "Election 2008: Electoral College Update Electoral College: Democrats 200 Republicans 189 Leaners 111 Toss-Up 38 " May 22, 2008]; Associated Press, "General election competitive states" June 5, 2008
- ↑ see [1]
- ↑ quoted (London) Telegraph Dec-9-2007
- ↑ Brian Friel, Richard E. Cohen and Kirk Victor, "Obama: Most Liberal Senator In 2007" National Journal, Jan. 31, 2008
- ↑ Kristin Jensen and Julianna Goldman, "Clinton, Obama Battle Makes for Partisan Politics Without Unity," Bloomberg News, Jan. 10, 2008
- ↑ See NBC report at [2], and CNN report at [3]; see for detailed exit polls
- ↑ Ben Smith, "Racial tensions roil Democratic race," Politico Jan 11, 2008
- ↑ Michael Luo, Jo Becker and Patrick Healy, "Spending by Clinton Campaign Worries Supporters." New York Times Feb. 22, 2008
- ↑ Rick Klein and Sarah Amos, "Bill Clinton: Texas Could Be Hillary's Last Stand," ABC News Feb 20, 2008
- ↑ See details at 2008 Democratic Popular Vote
- ↑ Dan Balz, "Decision Time for Clinton," Washington Post May 8, 2009; Adam Nagourney, "Clinton Facing Narrower Path to Nomination," New York Times, Mar. 20, 2008; Robert D. Novak, "Clinton Crosses a Line," Washington Post May 29, 2008
- ↑ "Senator Obama's victory speech [in Iowa] was a concise oratorical gem. No candidate in either party can move an audience like he can.... He's...charismatic." Bob Herbert, "The Obama Phenomenon," The New York Times, Jan. 5, 2008; Obama Dec 27. 2007 speech at Obama official website; Jonathan Greenberger, ABC News, May 17, 2007 report
- ↑ Kristin Jensen and Julianna Goldman, "Clinton, Obama Battle Makes for Partisan Politics Without Unity," Bloomberg News, Jan. 10, 2008
- ↑ Brian Friel, Richard E. Cohen and Kirk Victor, "Obama: Most Liberal Senator In 2007" National Journal, Jan. 31, 2008
- ↑ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3134308.ece
- ↑ See NBC report at [4], and CNN report at [5]
- ↑ Carrie Budoff Brown, "Obama faces off against both Clintons," POLITICO Jan 20, 2008
- ↑ Mark Z. Barabak, "Obama easily wins heated S.C. primary," Los Angeles Times Jan. 27, 2008; Larry Sabato, Sabato's Crystal Ball - Vol. VI#3 Jan 24, 2008.
- ↑ Tim Reid, "Polls show Barack Obama damaged by link to Reverend Jeremiah Wright," (London) Times Online Mar. 21, 2008; Rasmussen reports, "The Impact of Pastor Wright and THE SPEECH on Election 2008," March 20, 2008
- ↑ . Evangelicals comprise 48%-68% of Republicans in the South and border states, 47% in Iowa, and only 11% in New Hampshire. Andrew Kohut, "The G.O.P.’s Unanswered Question," New York Times Jan. 11, 2008
- ↑ See criticism reported by Jennifer Rubin, "Romney and Huckabee: Club for Growth Comparisons," from Human Events Aug. 24, 2007
- ↑ Dan Balz, "Huckabee's Rise and Rise," Washington Post Dec. 10, 2007; Michael D. Shear and Juliet Eilperin, "Suddenly, Huckabee Is in Romney's Rearview Mirror," Washington Post Nov. 25, 2007; "Shields and Brooks Mull Iowa Election Push, Baseball Scandal" PBS, Dec. 14, 2007
- ↑ Perry Bacon Jr., "The Key in South Carolina: Huckabee Fails to Get Decisive Edge Among Evangelicals," Washington Post Jan. 20, 2008
- ↑ David D. Kirkpatrick, "Huckabee’s Money Woes Curtail Campaign," New York Times Jan. 22. 2008
- ↑ Roger Cohen, "McCain's comeback," International Herald Tribune Jan. 16, 2008
- ↑ Roger Cohen, "McCain's comeback," International Herald Tribune Jan. 16, 2008; For voting details see CNN at [6]
- ↑ John M. Broder, "McCain, Long a G.O.P. Maverick, Is Gaining Mainstream Support," New York Times Jan. 28, 2008; Adam Nagourney, "McCain’s Victory in a Party-Only Primary Raises the Hurdles for Romney," New York Times Jan. 30, 2008
- ↑ For current polls see [7]
- ↑ Andrew Kohut, "The G.O.P.’s Unanswered Question," New York Times Jan. 11, 2008
- ↑ Matthew Continetti, "The Giuliani Implosion: From frontrunner to also-ran in eight short weeks," The Weekly Standard Jan. 21, 2008; Justin Wolfers, "How Rudy's Bet Went Wrong," Wall Street Journal Jan. 23, 2008; Michael Powell and Michael Cooper, "For Giuliani, a Dizzying Free-Fall", New York Times Jan. 30, 2008
- ↑ Giuliani Exits Race, Endorses McCain, Associated Press, 30 January 2008.
- ↑ Adam Nagourney, "McCain’s Victory in a Party-Only Primary Raises the Hurdles for Romney," New York Times Jan. 30, 2008
- ↑ In California Romney did much worse than polls predicted (the polls had him tied with McCain but he lost by 8 points). In the closing days he banked heavily on the anti-immigrant argument with intense TV commercials. Romney did well among the 28% who saw illegal immigration as the top issue, beating McCain by 50%-26%. However he lost heavily among the 60% who were more tolerant of immigrants (McCain won them by 50%-28%). Asians and Latinos comprised 19% of the GOP vote in California; most are immigrants or children of immigrants and they voted for McCain over Romney by 48%-21%.
- ↑ Michael Scherer, "Romney's Big Push Nets Little," Time Feb. 06, 2008
- ↑ Zogby data based on 867 likely caucus–goers; see press release 12-30-07 at [8]
- ↑ See NBC report at [9], and CNN report at [10]
- ↑ Michael Luo and Michael Cooper, "Focus Shifts to South Carolina for Romney and Rivals." New York Times Jan 17, 2008
- ↑ Rasmussen Reports, "Michigan Exit Polls Show Challenges for McCain," Jan 16, 2008 online
- ↑ Cathleen Decker and Seema Mehta, "Clinton, Obama reach new level of rancor," Los Angeles Times Jan 22. 2008
- ↑ Christopher Cooper, Valerie Bauerlein and Corey Dade, "New Machine: In South, Democrats' Tactics May Change Political Game," Wall Street Journal Jan. 23 2008
- ↑ See summary results; Alan Fram and Mike Mokrzycki, "McCain won over moderates in S.C." AP Report, Jan. 20, 2008
- ↑ Mark Z. Barabak, "Obama easily wins heated S.C. primary," Los Angeles Times Jan. 27, 2008; Gary Langer and Brian Hartman, "Black Voters Lift Obama to S.C. Victory; Obama Showing Among White Voters in S.C. Indicates Uphill Battle Ahead," ABC News Jan. 26, 2008
- ↑ Nielsen Co. Press Release, "Romney Leads in Florida Primary Advertising, Nielsen Reports" Jan, 28, 2008
- ↑ Adam Nagourney, "No Quick Knockouts as Races Move to New Terrain," New York Times Jan, 20, 2008; Doyle McManus, "Florida becomes showdown state for GOP," Los Angeles Times Jan. 20, 2008; Elizabeth Holmes, "With a Crowded Republican Field, Candidates Set Sights on Florida," Wall Street Journal Jan. 20, 2008
- ↑ Bob Moser, "Fumbling Florida: Have Democrats already blown their biggest swing state," The Nation Dec. 17, 2007, pp 20-24
- ↑ for explanation, maps and statistics, see Rhodes Cook, "Super Tuesday," in Sabato's CrystalBall '08 Jan. 31, 2008
- ↑ The different news media use different estimation techniques. Some do not count the caucus states, which have heavily favored Obama, until the delegates are finally selected sometime in the spring. AP estimates the way the caucus states will finally vote. Mike McIntyre, "Media and Candidate Methods of Counting Delegates Vary and So Do Totals," New York Times Feb. 9, 2008
- ↑ see Wisconsin Dem exit poll
- ↑ ABC News Polling Unit, "Exit Poll: White Working-Class vs. Change in Indiana; Blacks Lift Obama to N.C. Victory Obama Wins Nearly Unanimous Support Among African-Americans in N.C." online at ABC News May 7, 2008
- ↑ Alan I. Abramowitz, "This Is Not Your Father's (Or Mother's) Democratic Party: the White Working Class, Democrats and the 2008 Election," in Larry J. Sabato’s CrystalBall'08 May 15, 2008, online
- ↑ Frank Newport, "Americans Display Record Level of Interest in the Election." Gallup Feb 5, 2008
- ↑ Alex Frangos and Amy Chozick, "Obama Defeats Clinton in Contests Huckabee Wins Kansas, Louisiana; McCain Grabs Washington State in Close Race," Wall Street Journal Feb. 10, 2008
- ↑ See Rasmussen Report, "Passion Gap: Democrats More Committed to Candidates Than Republicans," Jan. 29, 2008
- ↑ "Clinton's Indiana win keeps Democratic race alive" [http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/06/primaries.change/ CNN ElectionCenter2008 May 7, 2008
- ↑ CNN report on exit poll
- ↑ Andrew Kohut, "A Look at the Numbers," New York Times Jan. 31, 2008
- ↑ Andrew Kohut, "A Look at the Numbers," New York Times Jan. 31, 2008
- ↑ Hannah Fairfield and Griff Palmer, "Cashing in on Obama and McCain, New York Times July 6, 2008
- ↑ For details see the unofficial site "Election 2008: Primary, Caucus, and Convention Phase"
- ↑ Jesse J. Holland, "Powerful 1.9M-Member Union Backs Obama," AP Feb. 15, 2008; and Jesse Holland, "Teamsters Union Endorses Obama," AP Feb. 20, 2008; Brody Mullins, T.W. Farnam and John Emshwiller, "Clinton Backers Launch Ads as Obama Gets Union Support," [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120353609734380611.html?mod=rss_Politics_And_Policy Wall Street Journal Feb. 21, 2008
- ↑ Brody Mullins, "Labor Makes Big Comeback In '08 Races; Ramping Up Spending, Unions Get Voters to Polls; The Battle in Nevada; Wall Street Journal Jan. 18, 2008