Today's Order Of Events

by: Chris Bowers

Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 04:45


On deck for today:

  • Washington caucuses, 78 pledged delegates. Starts at 4 p.m. eastern.
  • Nebraska caucuses. 24 pledged delegates. Starts at 11:00 a.m. eastern, ends at 9:30 p.m eastern. Results will trickle in throughout the day.
  • Louisiana primary, 56 pledged delegates. Polls close at 9 p.m. eastern.
  • Virgin Islands party convention, 3 pledged delegates. Not sure when we will have results

I'll be on the road for a bit, but I will also be around to post occasional updates on results later tonight. Personally, I am hoping for decisive results in all of today's events. More information on these contests can be found here.  

Chris Bowers :: Today's Order Of Events

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Today's Order Of Events | 50 comments
"I am hoping for decisive results." Chris B. (0.00 / 0)
Decisive is the only way to save America heal the wounds move forward. Clinton cannot win the nomination without breaking the rules, no matter how well you can explain why it was necessary to break the rules.

If Democratic Party members vote overwhelmingly for Obama over the next weeks, the 'problem' will go away. There is no 'problem avoiding' way for HRC to win. A Clinton win must go through allowing the 'Michigan and Florida created mess' to destroy the party. There is no other way for her to win. I am willing to listen to other opinions on this but my low expectations for Obama today and near February term mean that without M/Fl Clinton can't win.  Post numbers for me if I'm wrong.

That means the only way out is for Obama's numbers to be so high that Florida and Michigan don't matter and the convention will confirm his primary win. The only way for that to happen is for you to come forward now and endorse him.

Tim Kaine the governor of Virginia. The leaders of the Democratic party in Maine, Governor John Baldacci et al.

Governor Gregoire of Washington State has already stepped forward, this is a big help.

Edwards must step forward, Richardson should step forward, Feingold - etc. etc.

Please it isnt just the Party that needs you, or even your country. The world needs this. Dont let this destroy the democratic party, and therefor the country.

. I leave you with this about the two campign rallies in Washington

Speaking at a rally attended by 6,000 people, Mrs. Clinton stood onstage with . . .
Above from the New York Times as is this
"In nearby Seattle, at the Key Arena, where the N.B.A.'s SuperSonics play, about 17,000 people gathered to see Mr. Obama, filling the building and leaving nearly 3,000 people waiting outside." and "When he walked onto the arena floor, the audience thundered with applause. It was one of the largest - and, it seemed, most adoring - crowds to greet Mr. Obama in recent weeks.

"If you guys want to sit down, feel free," he said.

"No!" shouted the crowd, which proceeded to stand for nearly all of his 50-minute speech."

 

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
I'm flattered, but (4.00 / 1)
"The only way for that to happen is for you to come forward now and endorse him."

I actually did endorse Obama last month. I don't think I'm making the difference here.  

[ Parent ]
Ha ha !! (0.00 / 0)
Actually Chris, I meant the reader in abstract form. "you" is intended to be all the many readers and their friends and the opinion makers. I'm hoping someone will discuss this with people that can help.

BTW:
I love your passionate but clear headed writing. I am grateful for your knowledge and your willingness to do your best to be 'above the fray', even while you are deeply  deeply involved. Thank you for being even-handed.

I argued tirelessly for Edwards, I hope he remains a huge influence on the party, but it is time to rally round the candidate who has captured the imagination of the nation.

His viral video has now 2.7 million views and other copies have been seen hundreds of thousands of times.

This is my friends, is a phenomenon.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Have you considered how likely the 50-100 delegate (0.00 / 0)
threshold actually is?  It seems to me that given the results so far, the national polling numbers, and the proportionate apportionment system, and the relatively few remaining delegates, along with the FL/MI problem, it would seem like the probability of a very tight finish would be reletively high.  If I had more statistical expertise, it would be interesting to run a probability model based on the above conditions.  Nevertheless, I think it is at least as likely as it is not that we end up with a deadlock and no clear winner.  

The Politics of Bruno S.

[ Parent ]
I think it might be likely. (0.00 / 0)
That is why I'm urging people who can make a difference now, or very soon, to come forward to make Obama inevitable, make the crisis of legitimacy melt in the sun of popular acclaim.

More Ted Kennedy's more Shrivers.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
.......... (0.00 / 0)
Al Gore! Paging Al Gore!
[ Parent ]
Likelihood of Obama breaking that is not extraordinary (0.00 / 0)
I can see Obama easily having a 60+ lead in pledged delegates after Tuesday.  

Currently the AP has Obama up by 16 pledged delegates.  This is with several Super Tuesday delegates still not allocated.  Most agree that the remaining unallocated Super Tuesday delegates are likely to add more to the spread for Obama.  

The seven elections that are scheduled for the coming days are heavily weighted towards Obama.  I have delegate allocation predictions below which I feel are reasonable (not far from mainstream predictions).
State       Clinton    Obama
Louisiana 25 31
Nebraska 9 15
Washington 33 45
Maine        14 10
Virgin Islands 1 2
Maryland 32 38
DC 6 9
Virginia 40 43

This would have him adding 32 to his delegate lead. Leaving us at a total 48 pledged delegate lead without the extra Super Tuesday delegates allocated.  (The extra delegates will be mostly balanced except for Georgia and Colorado which should add 11 to his count.)  

The trick is for him to hold on to it and/or make it grow.  And this will be done by keeping Texas and Ohio at least even.  He can not tolerate another 10+ point loss in a large state like he has seen in NY, CA & FL.  If he does than the narrative shifts back to "It's a tie" from "Obama is pulling away with it".

[ Parent ]
No, it would shift to Hillary surging (0.00 / 0)
and winning all the big states, whilst locking up the super-delegates....then there'd be a huge call for Obama to accept the Dean Deal and get on the ticket as veep...
[ Parent ]
An HRC surge that made M/FL irrelevant is good (0.00 / 0)
But unlikely.

wait till tomorrow, but the crisis of legitimacy is real, and and it can only be avoided if M/FL don't matter.

Superdelegates must vote to confirm, and M/FL must not matter.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Ohhh sarcasm. (0.00 / 0)


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
I left this comment in another thread, but I (0.00 / 0)
I think it works as well here. The problem is that momentum based predictions are not bearing a lot of fruit at this point.  I see things like this:
Both campaigns have been almost flawlessly professional.  There are no damning missteps likely to occur on either side.  In such a scenario, undecided democratic primary voters increasingly sort into one or the other of the two coalitions, which appear to be at rough parity--at least for delegate purposes.  When campaigns build strong coalitions, they can relatively easily whether momentum bounces on the part of their opponents.  This is a classic incumbancy strategy.  At this point, however, it increasingly appears that we have the equivilent of a two incumbant race.  Perhaps the only equivilent to this would be when redistricting puts two incumbants from the same party against each other in a primary.

To me, this speaks enormously to the credit of Obama.  The Clintons have leveraged much of what is left of the 80's and 90's democratic presidential minority coalition, while Obama has take parts of it, along with the Dean coalition and one based on his own appeal to forge a competing and virtually equivilent coalition.  
 

The Politics of Bruno S.

[ Parent ]
Two incumbants? How so? (0.00 / 0)
I agree that Obama's momentum from Iowa did not win him New Hampshire, but what other momentum have we seen from either candidate? I don't think Clinton's wins in New Hampshire and Nevada were considered to generate momentum, she won NH by 2.5 points and lost the delegate count in Nevada. Because of the polls, the media did portray it, specially the NH part of it, as a huge upset but it wasn't enough to be a real momentum.

The other thing that happened in my opinion, which some of you may not agree with, is the panic after Iowa by the Clinton campaign and the decision to polarize the electorate based on race. Till that point, they had been leading in the African American community but Obama was catching up as he became more viable. I personally think they felt he would have an edge anyway, when considered a viable black candidate, so they decided to conceded the African American vote and South Carolina with it, with the understanding that they would get several times the vote back from whites and other races. I don't know how and if they benefited from this at all, but I think it was a miscalculation because South Carolina became Obama's firewall and broke Clinton's perceived momentum from Nevada and New Hampshire.

My point is, aside from the little moment generated from NV and NH which was broken by SC for the reasons mentioned above, Clinton has never had momentum on her side. If she did, I believe she would swept the field and easily won the nomination.

[ Parent ]
What I'm arguing is that both campaigns have the kind of (0.00 / 0)
campaign infrustructures, fundraising bases, core activists, and solidified coalitions that one usually only sees incumbants possessing.  As a result, neither side has seriously generated enough momentum to win.  Obama gained enough from IA to consolidate the anti-Clinton vote, while bringing out new voters in order to reach rough coalitioal parity with Clinton, but her initial coalition was wide enough originally to hold off Obama's emerging coalition.  Going forward, someone has to find a way to expand into the other's base.  I don't know how that happens since both bases seem fairly consolidated, and momentum-proof.

So it comes down to a judgment call on the part of the party est.--i.e. superdelegates--as to who will best serve their's and the party's interests, and who can win in Nov.  At this point, it is not at all clear how this plays out.  

The Politics of Bruno S.

[ Parent ]
At this point, I agree with you (0.00 / 0)
My only point is that things would have been different if Clinton has won Iowa and New Hampshire... that is, things would have been over!

So I agree that momentum won't carry a candidate to the nomination now and the party must decide. As it's been mentioned here numerous times, I believe a solid lead in pledged delegates by either candidate will make things clear and superdelegates will support that candidate en-masse. To an extent, I think that's what they're there for, to make the nomination clear and conclusive and translate a 1% margin to a 20% margin and leave no doubt as to who the nominee is.

[ Parent ]
6 in DC for Clinton? (0.00 / 0)
Really?  Obama should crush her.
[ Parent ]
Not settled (0.00 / 0)
I still think either candidate could win the pledged delegate count outright, by more than the Michigan/Florida difference. Polls are not elections, and there a plenty of big states left. Let's see what the actual voters do.
[ Parent ]
I dont see the numbers. (0.00 / 0)
Sorry its just not true. But after today hopefully more will understand. Letting the rules be broken to "select" Clinton in Star Chamber will ruin the party and loose the election.

And if enough become disaffected because of it, it will ruin the Democratic Party for a generation.

If I'm wrong please someone put up some numbers to show how Hillary could do it. Which states by how much etc. If you say she might be able to win Ohio and Texas, to pull her even with Obama, then you have to use m/fl to push her over, or use super delegates to deny. This is not good folks.

And if you want to wait until those delegates are necessary, when is it time to endorse?

If you wait too long then Obama might not be able to win with M/FL counting. Obama winning overall avoids the problem, the party is united. This is a make or break moment for the party, and it reallies on clear thinking and smart action.

This needs to start now.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
It 'relies' on clear thinking (0.00 / 0)
and as luck will have it, not on clear writing. Sorry folks I'll proof twice from now on.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Your claim (0.00 / 0)
You are the one making a claim about pledged delegate numbers, not me. Primaries continue on after today for almost four months! That's a long time.

I don't vote until April. And although I plan to vote for Obama, I don't like people claiming at this point that the pledged delegate count is decided. It isn't decided. Plenty of people yet left to vote, and the race is very close.

[ Parent ]
These are not MY numbers. (0.00 / 0)
I'm sorry I am not making a claim. I am using numbers available in the press. Mydd for example has a graphic up showing HRC ahead, but only because they have decided now to stop separating out the M/FL delegates. Obama is actually ahead now in delegates states and popular vote, read any news article. But.

And its a big but.

If Obama doesn't get enough delegates to overcome the extra "votes"  M/FL unfairly represent, then HRC must use them to win. That will hurt the party. So I'm not asking for the party to end the primary, nor asking people to stop participating, what I am hoping for is smart people realizing it is time to step forward, to help heal the party.

If you are not one them, thats OK. Rep. David Obey did just step forward, as did Rep. John Yarmuth (KY) today. Obey is a huge progressive, formally for Edwards, Yarmuth is head of the newly elected democrats in congress.

This is what Im hoping for. A discussion about how to stop the onrushing crisis of validity.

If you dont think there is a crisis coming then OK.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Could be a crisis (4.00 / 1)
There could very well be a crisis. But one possible outcome is that Clinton ends up with more pledged delegates, even without counting Michigan/Florida. You seem to be claiming that is impossible.
[ Parent ]
Thank you so much. (0.00 / 0)
I am not asking for anything else. Just people looking at the numbers. I don't think its possible. HRC supporters mydd.com have predicted Obama will win another 30 or so extra delegates next, after winning in almost all states in the near term. Obama will get:
From mydd.com, Jerome Armstrong 
             Obama (delegates)   Clinton (delegates)

Louisiana    54% (31)           44% (25)
Nebraska     60% (15)           40% (9)
Virgin Isl.  60% (2)            40% (1)
Washington   60% (49)           40% (29)
Maine        49% (10)           51% (14)

Delegate total:   107           78
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/9/14926/38364

Thats the prediction from mydd. Wait till after those races, then consider if you want the crisis, wait till after the next set. If you wait, and I dont mean you personally Semblance, until Ohio and Texas, it is a crisis of validity.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
don't get carried away (0.00 / 0)
Even if Obama has a ~60 delegate lead after this weekend, it is really still quite possible for Clinton to take the lead after March 4th. At 10 point win in both Texas and Ohio would net her something like 45 delegates, which means that Clinton just needs to do somewhat better than expected on Tuesday, and win Wisconsin.
[ Parent ]
yeah, jerome had hillary winning something like 15 states (4.00 / 1)
on Super Tuesday and Obama winning 6.  don't rely on his numbers.  He has lost his objectivity in shilling for the Clinton people.  that site and talk left are all Clinton all day.  which is a shame because both used to be favorite blogs.  ..
[ Parent ]
Re-Post: Obama only needs to keep 20 point lead? (0.00 / 0)
(I posted this in the previous article thread)

So, assuming for the moment that Obama and Clinton break even in all the remaining contests and MI and FL are seated, and the Edwards and Uncommitted delegates all vote for Obama - here's where the numbers would be:

As of now:
Obama: 910
Clinton: 882

(There are 1328 left to be won.  Give each one 689.)

Obama: 1599
Clinton: 1571

(Add Michigan: C-73, O-55)

Obama: 1654
Clinton: 1644

(Add Florida: C-111, O-69, E-13)

Obama: 1736
Clinton: 1755

Difference: Clinton has 19 more delegates.

Now of course, they won't be splitting the delegates evenly in all the remaining contests.  But, am I crazy or does this mean that Obama needs to keep about a 20 delegate advantage overall in order to win the most delegates?  

[ Parent ]
Can't assume the 55 Uncommitted delegates will go to Obama (4.00 / 1)
Those delegates could actually still split towards Clinton in the convention.  Seeing as she is the one that is fighting to get them included, it wouldn't be suprising to see it go that way.  

We will have to wait and see.

[ Parent ]
delegate count source? (0.00 / 0)
What is you source for the 910 to 882 delegate count? (there are so many counts out there)
[ Parent ]
No... (0.00 / 0)
That's the prediction from the Obama campaign.  Jerome's prediction is less optimistic for Obama - he has Clinton winning Washington.
[ Parent ]
Im going to guess Washington Obama with 58 to 42 for Clinton (0.00 / 0)


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Clinton scenario (0.00 / 0)
It is ridiculous to suggest that Clinton has no way to get a lead in pledged delegates without MI and FL. And I say this as an Obama supporter.

Here is one scenario: Clinton wins Maine, and then either gets a surprise victory in one of VA/MD or loses narrowly in both, and then wins WI. This is not impossible: the Maine demographics favor Clinton, and the latest polls suggest a narrow lead for her in WI (posted on TPM, I think). I admit a VA or MD upset might be difficult, but remember NH. She could very well keep it much closer than expected, which would help considerably with the delegate math. Big wins in TX and OH could then give Clinton at least parity, if not a small lead, in pledged delegates, which would likely grow in PA.

Now, since I'm supporting Obama, I hope this doesn't happen. I hope Obama sweeps the weekend contests and racks up big wins in MD/VA/DC on Tuesday. But let's not get carried away: even without the MI/FL delegates, Clinton still has a clear path to the nomination.

[ Parent ]
OK (0.00 / 0)
Those are the numbers, well descriptions.
There is a possibility if Virginia or Maryland fall to Clinton big enough to matter, and then the others. BUT not without Virginia or Maryland.

Others, most specifically the ones that need to step forward, have much much better analytical tools and staff than I do. But you say Virginia might be the firewall.

OK

After an Obama win in Virginia then: its time to rally round the candidate to avoid the ugly crisis of legitimacy.

I wouldn't wait that long if anybody at all cared about my opinion, I'd step forward now. I hope opinion setters are doing the math now.

In fact now that I say it, I'm sure these calculations ARE going on, but will it be enough and soon enough?

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
MD and VA (0.00 / 0)
If Obama wins all four contests this weekend, wins VA/MD/DC by huge margins (SC-like), and gets glowing headlines on Wednesday about massive momentum, clear frontrunner, etc -- then I will start to feel like Obama is really pulling ahead.

Look, I hope that Obama can do it, and I hope that he can get enough momentum out of the next 4 days to win WI, OH, and TX. But I am trying to argue against the triumphalism of Obama supporters that has usually been far too optimistic. Clinton is a polished politician running a strong, professional campaign. I think it is far to early to be making the argument that Obama is inevitable and that everybody should rally around him. He isn't inevitable at this point. I wish he were. But he's not. And momentum has been kind of funny in this race.

I agree with you that we will likely reach a point where it will be better for the party for one candidate to admit defeat than to push on to the bitter end. But we clearly aren't at that point yet, and I see no reason why that point should be before March 4th.

Personally, I think that if Obama wins Ohio and Texas, this thing is clearly over. So rather than pushing for a premature rallying around Obama to avoid a crisis, us Obama supporters should work to make sure that Obama wins Texas and Ohio. If he does win those states, then is the time to start calling for rallying around a nominee to avoid a crisis in legitimacy.

[ Parent ]
Maryland (0.00 / 0)
I don't see that a Clinton upset in Maryland is really possible.  Given the polls in Virginia, I think it's pretty unlikely there, as well.  And New Hampshire, I think, is pretty sui generis, and beyond that, the demographics there were always favorable to Clinton.  We have enough data now to have a better sense, polls aside, of where Obama should do well, and it doesn't seem like he should lose those states.

I'm more worried about Washington.  Wisconsin and Hawaii could also prove Clinton victories.

[ Parent ]
Nebraska caucuses (0.00 / 0)
Will any of the results be posted online during the day?  The Nebraska Democratic Party's webpage is saying that they won't upload any results until 7:15 CST.  Will any other sites have unofficial results?
My guess is that (0.00 / 0)
if they are not uploading results until 7:15 CST, no one will have results until then.  
[ Parent ]
A diarist at Dkos just said that... (0.00 / 0)
at his/her caucus location, Obama had a 2/1 margin.  He/She also said that their friends at other caucuses said the margin might actually have been even bigger.  

Keep in mind, though, that some of the later caucus sites favor Clinton (based on demographics).  

 

[ Parent ]
Rural Nebraska: Burt County Results (0.00 / 0)
I just put this up as a diary too. The short of it in my rural Nebraska county though is Obama 59%, Clinton 41%. Read more.
[ Parent ]
The Clinton's Swiftboat Obama (4.00 / 1)
This is great -- just great. Phoenix Woman at FDL --

http://firedoglake.com/2008/02...

During the 1990s, the GOP/Media Complex did such a thorough job of promoting the notion of a "Whitewater scandal" that to this day, it's largely forgotten that the nub of the case was probed to a fare-thee-well by several different official bodies, from the Resolution Trust Corporation to the Pillsbury Commission to even Ken Starr's Office of (Not At All) Independent Counsel, and each of these bodies found that neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton had done the slightest thing wrong.

Now it's 2008, and another politician is starting to feel the lash of another alleged scandal involving a land deal. Ironically, while the Whitewater hoo-ha was first pushed by an increasingly desperate Bush the Elder during the 1992 election, the new scandal is being pushed by the Clintons themselves. Barack Obama, come on down! It's your turn in the barrel.

Let's see -- Team Hillary pushed the story for at least two weeks that Obama was a crack smokin' ghetto you-know-what, and now they attack him in the same way the GOP smeared the Clintons.

Fine example of leadership, Hillary . . .

YOU guys are the ones acting like slimey republicans (0.00 / 1)
"team" hillary did no such thing. stop with the fake victim righteous indignation. look all over the obama blogs and you'll read endless disgusting rants about Hillary. enough already. grow up. we're all on the same team in the end.
[ Parent ]
Good (4.00 / 1)
One of the values of our adversarial system is to vett the candidates to determine if they'll be able to stand up to the republican adversary in the general.

I say that as an Obama voter.

OT--There has been much comment on caucuses as being undemocratic. Caucuses reward the candidate with the best organization and who is better at motivating supporters into activism. Part of our process to select a candidate ought to be weighted toward such a candidate.  

[ Parent ]
Caucuses reward the leisure class and students (4.00 / 1)
Shift-workers, blue collar types who have to work to feed their families are left out. It's un-Democratic with a historic, capital D.
[ Parent ]
Lets not forget seniors, my friend. (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Hillary Clinton is a progressive Democrat (0.00 / 0)
And I want her to be the "Senator for Universal Healthcare," working the floor vote with President of the Senate, VP John Edwards, extending and broadening President Obama's call for the extension of benefits to all Americans

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Obama might get a big bump out of this weekend (0.00 / 0)
I'm looking at the news stories for the upcoming primaries, and they all seem to be something like:

Dems face off in 3 states

Clinton, Obama vie for 161 delegates in their nail biter

The notion that 2/5 was a "tie" is still prevalent. However, that will really begin to hurt Clinton if Obama starts racking up victories. If it was a tie yesterday, and Obama wins three primaries today, what does that make the state of the race tomorrow?

I keep thinking about what it will mean.... (0.00 / 0)

....if Clinton wins the nomination primarily because of large delegates awarded from a smaller number of states and the addition of MI and FL.

I'm  not saying that isn't within the rules, but I do sense (from comments and articles here and elsewhere) that would also prompt a crisis of legitimacy for the candidate with the supermajorities in heartland states who are voting Obama.

It is worth noting that Obama and Clinton could end up with a close number of delegates from MI, depending on how the delegates turn out.  FL on the other hand, I think is a different story as a majority of the democrats who vote there are over 60, and that's been Clinton's key demographic.

You mean by actual Democrats? (0.00 / 0)
from Big Blue states? Yeah, illegit in the extreme...
[ Parent ]
The Big Blues (0.00 / 0)
No, I mean by an elite group of democrats - the one's who ALWAYS vote democrat in the general election anyway.

Remember, remember, to WIN in November...

[ Parent ]
Some dispatches from Omaha (0.00 / 0)
"11:42 a.m.

It doesn't look good for Clinton at Monroe Middle School.

The line to the Clinton box is empty. The line to vote for Obama is about a half block long."

"9:51 a.m.

It was wall to wall people at the Elkhorn campus of Metro Community College.

"I didn't know there were this many Democrats in Nebraska," said Chris Colen, 40."

"10:21 a.m.

Its time for "Plan B" at Monroe Middle School.

The school has been overun with too many people and too little room in the school's auditorium.

The plan now is to cuacus in the parking lot. "Once all the people are registered, the caucus will be held in the lot," said state Sen. Tom White.

"This is democracy. Everyone is going to get to vote," White said as he appeared to be paddling hard to keep his head above water."

"11:17 a.m.

At Metro in Elkhorn, "Plan B" was scrapped.

An overflow room also became overran. Caucus leaders in Elkhorn are now allowing people to vote by a blue slip.

At Monroe Middle School, people are now being asked to go into the parking lot."


WOW (0.00 / 0)
"I didn't know there were this many Democrats in Nebraska," said Chris Colen, 40."


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Nebraska (0.00 / 0)
7 of 49 districts reporting

District : 2 all to Obama (number not specified)
5 Obama 6  Clinton 3
8 Obama 11 Clinton 2
9 Obama 7  Clinton 3
10 Obama 9  Clinton 3
12 Obama 8  Clinton 2
31 Obama 6  Clinton 3

That is 47 to 16 or 75% to 25%

Today's Order Of Events | 50 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox