This is for the regular readers

I need to do this post for the regular readers of this blog. Such was the frequency of posting this afternoon (4 posts!), that the post I wrote specifically in reference to the requests that St. Ives Correspondent and Jim Belshaw left has been buried in a sense. Thus, my post all about superdelegates can be found here:

Superdelegates

I thought I would leave this here in case you two didn’t make it that far down the page and left thinking that I just ignored your requests. That’s not to discourage you from reading the other three. They are all about the U.S. primary race. Mainly Democratic, but quite a bit more Republican in there than I usually have.

Thomas.

Some of these polls matter more than the others

And to make it a fourth post today about U.S. politics: Polling data.

Yes, more polls were released. There’s always polls being released, you should know that by now. South Carolina, Florida and Michigan were the states being reported on for both the Democrats and the Republicans (well, mostly).

South Carolina first, and the most important (in my opinion). InsiderAdvantge released a poll that had Barack Obama up with a 7 point lead. Rasmussen released a poll that had Obama up with a 12 point lead (42 to 30) – a new trend (double figure lead for Obama) for South Carolina polls. This gives Obama an average lead of 13 points on the polls. I think that this average is inflated – some of the feed polls had data gained from the Iowa fallout. A fallout that seems to have inflate the polls somewhat if the New Hampshire results are anything to go by. However, the InsideAdvantage and Rasmussen polls have come out after the New Hampshire results, which is encouraging for Obama’s campaign.

For the Republicans, immediately after the Iowa results, Mike Huckabee was between 7 points and 17 points ahead in the polls. When New Hampshire came along, and John McCain won, new polls from South Carolina indicate that indeed the Mac is back. The first poll, from Fox News (accurate because of the Republican viewers), has a 7 point lead on the polls (25 to 18). Rasmussen has McCain leading by just 3 points (27 to 24). Both of these leads are against Huckabee. Mitt Romney ranks in third, and has figures in the teens.

Michigan, and there is only data for the Republicans. Rossman Group let out a poll that has Huckabee with a 1 point lead against Romney (23 to 22). McCain is third with 18 points. Strategic Vision has a poll out that gives McCain a 9 point lead, ahead of Romney, in Michigan (29 to 20). What’s important to note is that both the Rossman Group and the Strategic Vision polls came out after the New Hampshire vote. This state is too hard to pick a winner in by the past few polls, and the Iowa and New Hampshire results.

Florida, and both parties have polling data to report on. For the Republicans, thanks to InsiderAdvantage, finally we see the name Rudy Giuliani pop up. And first – a 5 point lead against Huckabee and McCain (24 to 19 to 19). Romney comes in fourth on 13 points. Nothing overly interesting here – except for the fact that Huckabee and McCain are are second and not Romney. Giuliani has been running a ‘big state’ strategy from the start, ignoring the early ones which don’t have that many delegates. The only problem is that he hasn’t been on the news at all, and people, pundits, and television stations alike have written him off already. A bad strategy in my books. But who knows how this will work out. Not just Giuliani but the whole Republican primary race.

For Democrats in Florida, and another InsiderAdvantage poll has Clinton with an 8 point lead over Obama (40 to 32). If the state doesn’t count, it will hurt Obama more than it hurts Clinton. The Iowa momentum has put him within striking distance – and he will run really close with Clinton if he wins South Carolina. If he ran close, or won, in Nevada too, then Florida could be a surprise victory for Obama. This is why Florida not counting hurts Obama more than Clinton. Clinton has New York locked up (in all likelihood), so Obama needed to win a couple of ‘big states’ to counter that.

Anyway, interesting times ahead. Very interesting.

Oh, and something that wasn’t reported on at all: On January 5 (along with Iowa), Wyoming held its Republican primary vote. Mitt Romney won the popular vote with 67%, beating out Fred Thompson (25%), and *shudder* Duncan Hunter (8%). 8, 3, and 1 were the delegate handouts. For reference, the delegate count is as follows:

• Mitt Romney: 30
• Mike Huckabee: 21
• John McCain: 10
• Fred Thompson: 6
• Ron Paul: 2
• Rudy Giuliani: 1
• Duncan Hunter: 1

This is after some of the unpledged delegates have promised their votes. Not nearly as many as the Democrats, but still, it’s created a very interesting race.

Thomas.

Bill Richardson is out

Yes, you read it correctly. Bill Richardson, the Governor of New Mexico, and candidate for the Democratic nomination, has ended his race for the ticket spot. After receiving 2% in Iowa and 5% in New Hampshire, I guess he realised what everyone else knew – that he had no chance of winning. While being the most qualified and ‘best dressed’ of the Democrats running, for some reason he never managed to burst into the polls and attract the attention of the voters (the opposite of what Mike Huckabee has managed to do).

Facing facts, he never had enough money or enough ‘fingers in pies’ (like Clinton) or that certain impressive and charismatic personality (like Obama).

Being Hispanic (and the only Hispanic running in either race), it’s somewhat surprising that he dropped out before states voted which have a high Hispanic population. The first one that springs to mind is Nevada – only 9 days away. Maybe back-room deals?

Anyway, it will be extremely interesting to wee who his supporters (and his 19 delegates – all superdelegates) flock around. I said in a previous post that I expect them to go Obama’s way. I also expect Richardson to go Obama’s way. Not only in endorsement, but in terms of running mate position too. Yes, some of us (the Pope and myself) have speculated that of all the candidates from this primary season, Obama would most likely pick Richardson. I think this is true – but it doesn’t mean I think he is the best choice. Al Gore is the best choice for Obama, though that certainly isn’t the most likely selection to happen.

It would benefit Obama is he could sweep up the 19 delegates, and all the supporters of Richardson, himself. If the spread evenly between Obama/Clinton/Edwards, then Clinton doesn’t get hurt and Edwards benefits at the expense of Obama. So Obama loses. I will be watching what happens closely.

Anyway, I’d like to say a final word about Richardson’s candidacy. It’s important, for the early stages of the primary race (before voting begins) that the ‘fringe’ candidates are there. They keep the ‘real’ candidates honest, in question, and sweating. Also, the ‘fringe’ candidates are free to say what they want. They can make the outlandish claims and the crazy remarks without fear of losing – because they will no matter what. It’s important to have the ‘fringe’ because without them, the ‘real’ candidates get a free pass.

However, they should all drop out before voting begins. They take away votes from people when they were never going to finish in a competitive position anyway. That 5% vote in New Hampshire could have boosted Obama into a tie, or better, a 1% lead had they all gone Obama’s way. The ‘fringe’, while helpful before the voting starts, only hinder the ‘real’ candidates’ chances after the process really begins.

Thomas.

Endorsements all round

While Barack Obama may have lost the New Hampshire primary (vote!), he has seem to benefited some more from winning Iowa. Everyone will remember John Kerry, Democratic nominee from 2004. Sure, maybe he wasn’t the best candidate ever, maybe even a little bland, but he sure a heck ran a good-ish race. And he’s quite a popular Democrat if he can win the nomination. Anyway, that was random rambling. What I need to say is said in this picture:

Yes, Senator, and former Democratic nominee, John Kerry has come out and endorsed Barack Obama. He said that he is the candidate who can create a “better image” for America around the world, and is the guy who can unite America again. Where did it happen? No where else other than battleground state South Carolina.

Ok, I’ll drop the facade. A Kerry endorsement isn’t death for a campaign, but it’s not as though heads will turn so fas they pop off neck. Was it expected? Maybe slightly. I personally would have thought Kerry would have stayed out of this race. Does it help at all? Yes, and in more subtle ways.

Firstly, Kerry is going to have a massive email list that he used during his last primary race and the presidential race. This list is now in the Obama camp’s hands. Rumours have it that the list is very extensive, especially when the presidential list is added in. Much larger than anything Hillary Clinton has.

Second, Kerry is a strong fundraiser. Look at his numbers from his go at the White House. By June 30, 2004, the Kerry campaign had raised $186.2 million. He went on to raise the most ever by a Democrat (more than 5 times more than anyone previous in fact).

Third, and as a counter to the people who still cite Obama’s lacking experience, Kerry is a boost for Barack’s foreign policy credentials. Kerry is respected on this front, having served in Vietnam, been chairman on the Kerry Committee report, had meetings with the former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami, among other committee sessions, senate bills, and what have you.

Fourth, Kerry is respected by war veterans and the military. He was the spokesman for the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (V.V.A.W.) when he returned from his tour. He is a decorated soldier – recipient of the Silver and Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts.

Fifth, he is probably the biggest endorser of Obama’s. And it adds backing to the Obama camp’s claim to being a legitimate candidate. A big-whig, senior Democrat is now on his side, and will be in the camera’s view, and behind the microphone, and door-knocking with Obama all the way. There is probably only two people bigger than Kerry that Obama could have hoped for in terms of endorsement – Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Clinton is gone, Gore is holding out a little longer. So Kerry is a big score. People can’t say that the ‘big’ Democrats don’t believe in Obama any more.

On the side, I think that Gore will come out and endorse Obama soon. Hopefully before Super Tuesday. Of Obama got that plug, his numbers would skyrocket.

The Democratic party’s ‘establishment’ jumped onto the Clinton bandwagon in 2007 for no real reason other than the name Clinton. Kerry, an near president and high ranking Democrat, helps the Obama campaign to counter the party machine that has just followed Clinton thus far. This might be a bit of a wake-up call for some of the party members. Which leads me into …

Sixth, and finally, Kerry ran the primaries and won. My previous post detailed certain people who make that possible – superdelegates. Kerry, no doubt, has connection, has favours, and has people’s ears. People in D.C.. People who are superdelegates. He may be able to pull a few more pledges to the Obama camp because of his endorsement. Look out for that from here.

The second (and third) endorsements that came out today are just as important, if not more-so. In Nevada, the next state in the primary process, the two biggest unions the state has, the Service Employees International Union (S.E.I.U.) and the Culinary Workers’ Union, both endorsed Obama. They both have a large membership, and seem to be (especially the C.W.U.) extremely popular among the citizenry, generating thousands of votes for its endorsee .

What’s important is that there hasn’t been a new poll out about Nevada for months now. With this endorsement, and Nevada’s Democratic machine firmly behind Clinton since the beginning, the state has the makings to become as tight as New Hampshire (a 4 point difference). Of course, with no polling data yet, it means that no one really has a clue what’s happening, and any candidate could have jumped up to take the lead.

With that said, expect polls to come out about Nevada in the next few days.

Thomas.

Superdelegates

What is a superdelegate? Who is a superdelegate? How do I get one? Well, here is a post attempting to explain the Democratic phenomenon (those two words cancel each other out, as you will see soon) that are the superdelegates.

To begin with, only the Democratic party has superdelegates. They first came into the fold in the 1970s when the caucus and voting in the primary elections became most important to electing a party representative. To ensure that some control still remained in party official hands, the Democratic party created the ’superdelegates’ titles, thus ensuring that 14% (though now as high as 20%) of all caucus votes could be controlled without a people’s vote.

Note from Thomas: That seems like a somewhat undemocratic process to me. But it also looks like an essential one too. It helps to save face with the party, and to even ensure that a certain person gets nominated. But it’s not a decision left to ‘the people’. Sort of like keeping a trump card to yourself and only yourself. A tough call to make on this front.

The Republican party, while they don’t have ‘official’ superdelegates, have 135 unpledged delegated (in the same way the superdelegates aren’t pledged). They play the same role as the superdelegates, though are obviously less in number. I suspect that they are there to ensure that a tie, or at least post-third round voting, doesn’t make the party look like a joke.

So what do these superdelegates do? Well, it’s rather simple. There are a certain number attached to each state, but not attached to the state’s voting. For example, take New Hampshire just gone. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote (40%), and will take 3 state and 6 district delegates from that. Barrack Obama came second (36%) and still wins 3 and 6 delegates from that too. However, the superdelegates are not bound to follow what the voters decide, and can freely choose who they want. So while Clinton may have own the 9 delegates from the New Hampshire vote, she only won 2 superdelegates over during the process. Obama won 3 superdelegates. At the end of the day, Obama wins more delegates from the state, 12 to 11.

The superdelegates are not bound to pledge their intentions on who they will vote for on the day of the vote. No, they are free to pledge much earlier or later. Thus, before the primary process even began, Clinton had a lead already because she had won over more superdelegates. During the 2004 cycle, and before the primary race began, Howard Dean was favourite to win the race. Why? Because he had won over more superdelegates. This is why schmoozing and charming in D.C. helps. Why you ask?

Simple: The superdelegates are elected party members who already hold an office or are party officials. For example, Senator Barack Obama is a superdelegate from Illinois. He was before he put his name in. Senator Hillary Clinton is a superdelegate from New York, and was before the race. Representative Dennis Kucinich is a superdelegate too. Howard Dean, now the Democratic National Committee chairman, is also a superdelegate. Former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and former Vice President Al Gore, are all superdelegates. As you can see, all types of Democratic officeholders (Senators, Representatives, Governors, Mayors, D.N.C. persons, Presidents, and V.P.’s) are all in the running to be a superdelegate. And, given the amount of superdelegates, you have a good chance of being one if you make it to D.C..

Before the race gets to the voting, a lot of superdelegates have already officially pledged. For a list of who has officially spoken about who they will support, see 2008 Democratic Convention Watch – Announced Superdelegate List. All the people on that list have said that they intend to pledge to a certain candidate come the Convention. Similarly, they would have said that a long time ago – before the voting started, before everyone was announced, while the candidates were asking for advice. It might now be clear to you why some people run and why others don’t. It’s quite simple – a person runs if they think they can get ample support from superdelegates and win states in the primary race. Thus we see that the superdelegates have significant control in the process.

Thankfully though, there are always superdelegates who wait until their state has voted (and then pledge), or wait until the convention, or wait until a candidate already has a clear majority, and then pledges. People like Al Gore and Jimmy Carter are free to do this. For a list of unpledged superdelegates see 2008 Democratic Convention Watch – Unpledged Superdelegate List. You will see that Senator Chris Dodd and Senator Joe Biden are on that list – two former Democratic candidates from this race. The two lists change, and have the potential to change a lot. Howard Dean lost all his momentum and chance of winning in 2004 with the yell not just because of the ‘Screamin’ Dean’ incident, but because superdelagtes jumped off the Dean wagon. That symbolised more that the yell. As people drop out of the race, the superdelegates will shift around. Expect to see anyone pledged for Bill Richardson to support Obama. That’s one of my predictions.

It’s important to explain something else here too. For a while I’ve said that Florida and Michigan won’t count for the Democrats. What won’t count? The states will still vote for their candidate, but their superdelegates and delegates won’t count at the convention. Thus, while winning those states would be good for the electability debate, the delegates won’t help the candidate. It’s a win-lose situation, but the states lose on the whole. Their delegates don’t count, their voting isn’t really important, and the candidates stop campaigning there.

And finally we get to the glaringly obvious question: How do the superdelegates decide who they will pledge? How do these people decide when they don’t have to follow any voters? They chose on their own. And how do they come to a conclusion? By whoever has won them over in D.C.. Yes, it becomes a wine-and-dine procedure for the superdelegates as the candidates try to win over as many superdelegates as they can. This might include future funding for projects should the candidate be elected president, cabinet and senior positions, or help with campaigning come the election. Whatever it is, there are promises made. And a lot of them.

For Clinton, I suspect that Bill might have called in a few favours or made a few promises as well. What with being a former president and all. Political favours, I guess, is what the whole process of woo-ing superdelegates is based around. And political maneuvering. You will see that the Illinois superdelegates have pledges Obama, while the New York superdelegates have pledge Clinton. No surprises there.

Those delegates unpledged are either morally superior or fence-sitters, in that they probably haven’t taken any ‘deals’ from the candidates. Some of them don’t need to (Gore, Carter, etc.) while others might actually take their role seriously, or think that the process is undemocratic (and will eventually follow their state’s vote).

So there you have it. What a superdelegate is, what they do, how they do it, and how to get one. I hope that this post answers all your questions about superdelegates. If there are any more, please comment this post and I’ll be happy to answer them. Thanks for the post idea.

Thomas.