Wisconsin Is A Must Win… For Obama

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 11:49


Barack Obama has had a fantastic week, sweeping the six states and two territories to hold contests since Super Tuesday. Further, he has done so by large amounts, with a 19% victory in Maine actually being the closest contest this week. He has soared to a triple digit lead in pledged delegates, maintains an advantage in fundraising, and has an advantage on the ground in most states left to vote. The momentum is clearly moving his way as he has pulled narrowly ahead in national polling (see Rasmussen and Gallup), and he is even starting to win super delegate endorsements at a much faster rate than Hillary Clinton. And yet, despite all of this, a look at the campaign over the next three weeks indicates that the pressure is squarely, if not overwhelmingly, on Obama to win Wisconsin this coming Tuesday.

Check out the polling situation between now and March 4th, keeping in mind that all polls were taken after Edwards dropped out of the campaign:

Democratic Nomination At A Glance
State Date Polls Obama Clinton P. Delegates
P. Delegates Jun 7 35 1,137 1,002 3,253 / 3,566
Democrats Abroad Feb 12 0 -- -- 7
Hawaii Feb 19 0 -- -- 20
Wisconsin Feb 19 4 45.8% 43.3% 74
Ohio Mar 04 3 36.7% 53.0% 141
Rhode Island Mar 04 1 28.0% 36.0% 21
Texas Mar 04 1 38.0% 48.0% 193
Vermont Mar 04 0 -- -- 15

Take a particularly close look at Wisconsin and Ohio polling. All of the polling included in those averages was conducted after Super Tuesday, and most of it was conducted after Obama's weekend victories. In other words, despite his momentum, Obama still faces a significant deficit in Ohio, and is only narrowly ahead in Wisconsin. Perhaps the Potomac primary results have shifted the situation somewhat, but today Rasmussen conducted post-Potomac polls of both states. Obama only led by four in Wisconsin, and trailed by fourteen in Ohio.

It is pretty safe to say that Obama is still well behind in Ohio, and that he probably has no way to make up the ground there unless he wins Wisconsin. With Obama only holding a narrow lead in Wisconsin, it is entirely conceivable that Clinton pulls out a victory there. If Clinton were to win Wisconsin, momentum could reverse on a dime, or at least stop altogether. At that point, it is hard to see how Obama catches up in Ohio. Hawaii probably won't impact the narrative very much, since it will not have results until well after Wisconsin. Democrats Abroad probably won't impact the narrative at all when they finally announce results on February 21st. Debates, of which there will be two between Wisconsin and March 4th, have never been particularly helpful to Obama. Further, Clinton is still going all-out in advertisements, and drawing crowds of 10,000 plus in March 4th states.

Clinton also leads in Rhode Island and Texas, at least according to what little polling information we have from the two states. A victory in Wisconsin would also solidify her position in those two states. If Clinton wins Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Wisconsin, then Obama's pledged delegate lead probably drops to double-digits heading into the six-week interval, with Pennsylvania, super delegates, and fights over Michigan and Florida looming. The campaign would remain a dead heat, but Obama's momentum would be stopped and Clinton would start with a large advantage in the closed primary state of Pennsylvania.

Wisconsin is really a huge, huge primary. Without a victory in Wisconsin, there might not be anyway for Obama to seal the campaign before Pennsylvania, and possibly even June or ever. Wisconsin also remains close, with Obama only holding a 2.5% advantage across four polls. Clinton can absolutely make up that ground over the next five days. If she does, the advantage in the campaign could swing back in her direction. Wisconsin is a must-win for Obama.  

Chris Bowers :: Wisconsin Is A Must Win… For Obama

Tags: , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Makes sense (2.00 / 2)
I guess there's a good reason why Obama is camped out in Wisconsin and spending so much money there on ads. The Obama camp must be thinking along the same lines as you.

I'm confident that Obama can close the gap in Ohio and Texas before March 4th, but only if he wins Wisconsin first. Otherwise, yeah, this could get messy.


Throw out the ARG poll (0.00 / 0)
(which have been terrible all primary season), and the average is something like 6 or 7% for Obama.

Check Out Today's Rass (4.00 / 2)
tracking Obama 49 Clinton 37... we know a bounce usually comes two days after a victory, the famous "Where's the bounce?" memo...Rass also has Obama leading amongst women nat'l.  Your right that he needs to win, and it would probably be uphill if it weren't for the Beltway Primaries - but is he starting to pull away?

Hillary has to perform better than 53% in OH, to have a shot.  If Obama wins Wisc.  She needs 60% in OH and TX...or will have to count on super delegates.

BOR has a new diary with a great breakdown of TX.  http://burntorangereport.com/s...


One thing Chris (0.00 / 0)
you fail to note is how Obama has been doing alot better on voting day than he has in polls especially in open primaries. The reason the Clinton team is not really competing in Wisconson is they don't believe it's that close. Those turnout models are severely undercounting indies and new voters.  Survey Usa's polls over the last week have been as bad as the rest. Obama up 5 in Washington, and no one had Virgina over 20.  He won by 38 and 29.

[ Parent ]
Expectations (4.00 / 7)
You guys are really bad at lowering expectations. I don't doubt that you believe what you are writing, just as I believe what I am writing. Still, talking about Obama holding an insurmountable lead does little more than hold the potential for him to start come crashing down should Clinton pull a surprise. Just sayin'.  

[ Parent ]
In 2004 (4.00 / 3)
I did a diary that reviewed the instances where a primary race changed direction.  

I am updating it, but what is really critical is to understand that nomination fights most frequently turn on surprise wins.  Note the last two words in the previous surprise: "surprise" - an anticipated win doesn't help and "win" - getting close doesn't matter.  Another point, if you go back and read the accounts of these races you will see a recurring phrase: "buyer's remorse".  In each of the examples below the front runner had a significant lead, but there were still lingering doubts about him.   These doubts led voters in the state to vote for the challenger in part to make sure the race continued.

BTW, I believe buyer's remorse is what turned New Hampshire around for Clinton in the last 36 hours.  I am very worried that Wisconsin may turn into another case of buyer's remorse.  

An abbreviated list:
1976: Reagan surprises Ford in North Carolina, and goes on to win a string of primaries that bring him just short of the nomination.

1980: Kennedy, down 20 in polling, wins New York, and goes on to win most of the remaining contests.

1984: Ohio and Indiana: Hart surprises Mondale in both states, and goes on to win  almost all of the remaining contests with the disastrous, and ultimately fatal exception of New Jersey.

In 1992 there was a very big surprise in NY: Tsongas and Brown very nearly beat Clinton in CT and in NY, but didn't.  In order to change the race, you need to win.  


[ Parent ]
I agree with Chris, and... (0.00 / 0)
I'd never just expect a new voting bloc to appear for an election.  People thought this would happen in 2004 with younger voters, and in a way, it did, since more young people voted... but in the same percentage as they had before (if I'm not mistaken).  That is, while the youth vote increased, so did the voting from every other segment of the population.

As for the expectations, particularly after NH, I think it's best to assume that it's going to be close and work from there.  As for the national numbers, while they're helpful, they are clearly different than the state-by-state numbers.  Rasmussen's numbers today show a 4 point lead for Obama... not exactly insurmountable.  And the national numbers, I believe, include states that already voted, many of which probably already voted for Obama, or maybe even from some people who already voted for Hillary, but just want to see a nominee at this point.


[ Parent ]
Surely... (0.00 / 0)
saying that if Obama doesn't win Wisconsin, he probably can't win the nomination is also not very good for the Obama expectations game.

[ Parent ]
Obama will win WI (0.00 / 0)
 
It's as if people didn't watch what happened in VA. Obama won white males.  

If Clinton wins close in WI, Obama will be plenty alive. So it's not a must-win. And this isn't about "expectations", it's about who wins. And Clinton won't win WI.  


[ Parent ]
I remember lotsa polls... (4.00 / 1)
...in MA and CA showing Obama very close or even ahead before 2/5, and he went on to lose by double digits in each.  

[ Parent ]
I remember (0.00 / 0)
Lots more showing Clinton with HUGE margins of victory in both states. I believe pollster.com does too.

[ Parent ]
Also... (0.00 / 0)
Calling a 10% margin of victory in California as "double digits", is equivalent to saying I have a full head of hair.  Yes, there are no noticeable bald spots on my head, but if you were to call what's up there "full" you'd be stretching the boundaries of truth.

[ Parent ]
Not Sure I Buy It (0.00 / 0)
Obama has a significant pledged delegate lead now. If he loses Wisconsin narrowly, Clinton maybe picks up one delegate on him? Ohio has the potential, if she wins by 15-20 points, to net her more, but Rhode Island probably wouldn't give her a huge delegate boom (I don't know if the Chafee endorsement will help or hurt).

But...

We have pretty good reason to think that even if Clinton wins Texas by 5-10, she might still lose the delegate count. The district math just seems to favor Obama.

So she would be relying on Ohio and Rhode Island to make up a significant delegate deficit.


It's about momentum... (4.00 / 1)
A loss in WI would probably kill his momentum and, at the very least, make it harder for him to keep it close in OH and TX.  It's not necessarily that he'd lose the pledged delegate count, but he'd open up the door for Clinton to claim the nomination from Super Delegates and counting FL and MI.

[ Parent ]
Momentum (4.00 / 1)
Momentum is such a tricky thing. Slate has had a series this year about the conflict between what they deem 'momentumcrats' and (I am going by memory here) 'arithmatocrats' (who count delegates) and has concluded that in this particular election the aritmatocrats are winning.

For Clinton and for Obama this seems to be a momentum proof election. If momentum had mattered more, Obama would have won New Hampshire, California and Massachussetts. If momentum mattered for Clinton, her win in California or New Hampshire would have translated into victories afterwards.

Now, certainly momentum does matter to a degree - it helps set a favorable media context.

If Obama does lose, I suspect the media will jump on it and start asking about his viability again.

But I'm not sure that hurts him. In the strange dynamics of this race, whenever one of the candidates take a blow, their supporters seem to redouble efforts, raise more money, and vote in bigger numbers.

Long ramble to the underlying point - I suspect momentum cancels itself out and this year delegate counting really is the winner.


[ Parent ]
Some slight differences... (0.00 / 0)
I agree it's not ALL about momentum, but the difference with NH is that Obama was polling 8 points ahead nearly the whole time.  And there are probably a lot of reasons why Obama's "momentum" didn't carry him there, which, of course, the media spent hours of coverage on.

The fact that Hillary ended up winning it was a huge blow to him and probably cost him in NV and even Super Tuesday, where, in many ways, he actually exceeded expectations (except in CA, although I was personally always skeptical that he'd win it, but didn't expect him to lose by 10 points either).

In any case, if not for momentum, Obama probably would've lost Maine, CT, and several other states that he was really trailing in before.  Hillary was way up in the national polls too before "momentum" kicked in, and right now she's way up in OH and TX.  If he doesn't have "momentum" going into those, he's likely going to lose those by significant margins, which would not necessarily derail his campaign, but would at least prolong it and perhaps lead to some of our worst-case scenarios... for instance, if FL and MI delegates made a difference, or if just a handful of super-delegates make the call.


[ Parent ]
My mistake... (0.00 / 0)
Sorry, Obama wasn't polling ahead "the whole time", but post Iowa, he was.

[ Parent ]
There appears (4.00 / 1)
to have been substantial movement nationally in the last two days.  This suggests that the Quin polling (taken 2/6 - 2/12) is obsolete.  However, the Rassmussen poll still shows Obama down 14 in Ohio (51-37) and Hillary above 50.

I agree - Obama has to win Wisconsin.  If he does, he can still claim the nomination despite losing Texas, Ohio and Pa.  

Wisconsin is, as it has been in past primary seasons, absolutely critical for both Clinton and Obama.  


Good points (0.00 / 0)
I agree it is critical for both, and my guess is that the winner of Wisconsin goes on to win the nomination.

[ Parent ]
Don't assume Obama wins Hawaii (4.00 / 1)
Yes, it's one of his (many) home states, and it is a caucus. But it's also true that the Democratic electorate is overwhelmingly Asian-American, which has been Clinton's best ethnic demographic (better even than Latinos). And neither candidate is going to campaign there, for obvious reasons (takes too long to get there ... taking time away from Wisconsin). Clearly the Clinton campaign hasn't conceded it, as Chelsea appears to be campaigning there now.

The general sense (4.00 / 1)
I get from people familiar with Hawaii is that the Asian-American community in Hawaii is very different from that back here on the continent.  I wouldn't put any particular stock in Asian votes in California as a measure of how Obama will perform in Hawaii.

[ Parent ]
The Asian population in Hawaii (0.00 / 0)
I don't know if this makes any sense, but the Asian population in Hawaii seems more Asian, than Asian-American.  They seem to retain asian culture and customs to a higher degree than their mainland counterparts.

It's not just growing up in Hawaii, he also grew up partially in Indonesia.  His Asian heritage is clear in Hawaii, and for whatever reason it didn't translate to California.


[ Parent ]
NJ SuperDelegate Switches from the Clintons to Obama (4.00 / 1)
Completely agree that WI is a must win and that he is not running away with anything. The campaign was successful in getting the media to adopt their narrative that she cannot catch up no matter what. I have to believe that they wouldn't have pursued that strategy if they thought WI was iffy. He will have three rallies there tomorrow and turn out should generate more press and more enthusiasm. Plus she is getting slammed for ignoring the state. I have consistently followed the lead of the campaign and this time I have to believe that they think HI and WI to be in the bag. Nevertheless it is important to remind people how close this race really is because she has come back from the brink before and could do it again. Arrogance and cockiness is not becoming a campaign or a candidate or a supporter(s).

But this is good news and I hope to see more of the same between now and March 4th:

WEST ORANGE, NJ -Christine "Roz" Samuels, a superdelegate from Montclair, New Jersey, who was supporting Hillary Clinton announced she was now supporting Senator Barack Obama for President today, citing his ability to unite the country:

"I now support Barack Obama because he has brought about a new wave of hope and energy to this country, especially among our young people, who represent our future. People want to see change. Barack can help unite this country and help us embrace our diverse nation.

"I am also proud to support Senator Obama because he spoke clearly and forcefully against the war in Iraq from the start. I know he has the leadership to make sure we bring our young men and women home as quickly and carefully as possible, and ensure all Americans have access to affordable health care."

Samuels served as Secretary-Treasurer of the Newark Teachers' Union, Local 481 from 1995 until 2007. Samuels is a former Commissioner of the Essex County Board of Elections, a member of the Montclair Democratic Committee, and active in the Montclair and state-wide NAACP. from the page



as a new Obama supporter i say great (0.00 / 0)
but really the superdelegates should shut up and say they're waiting for the primaries to be over and are looking to the will of the people. if they personally want to endorse a candidate fine, but saying who they are pledged too is premature.  

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
I am guessing... (0.00 / 0)
she is now on the EOH & EOB lists.

I agree with the sentiment above, Supers should keep a low profile for now.  I know I would.


[ Parent ]
OH, RI, TX & WI (0.00 / 0)
I'm hard pressed to see how HRC wins Rhode Island. The polls have seen Hillary's lead undercut severely. She's only picked up a point while Obama's support has surged and there's still 40% undecideds. I would think things look bleak for her, especially if the RISD and Brown crowd vote en masse.

OH: blacks seem to have been undercounted in most polls I've seen. the Q poll has Obama winning 67% of the black vote. It should be much higher then that. If he gets 80% of the black vote, that translates to an extra 3% points.

WI: I really don't see this being close. Not with its proximity to Illinois (media seeping across borders, Obama's Illinois ground game moving into Wisconsin and open primary). Obama by 12%.

TX: Don't have a clue about TX but I'm a bit surprised that Obama is only down 10 there. Would not be surprised if Clinton overperformed in Texas.


TX definitely (0.00 / 0)
Should be a big day for Clinton if her operation and message are working hard down there. When she's used her time to campaign somewhere where Obama has not, like she was able to in California, she makes it really competitive if not blows him away.

I see Wisconsin as trending Obama and Clinton only seems to have one days' worth of campaigning scheduled from what I know, but she put up some attack ads on the television machine in WI, so she'll still have a presence and that'll make the job tougher on Obama to make a huge landslide victory. It'll stay close and Brother Barack will have to really hunker down and get out to places like LaCrosse and Green Bay if he wants to capture some Clinton voters and more delegates and a big win.


[ Parent ]
She won CA by 10% (0.00 / 0)
If she does that in the TX primary (and ties in the caucus third), she gains in the neighborhood of 13 delegates. This would be a blowout?

I'd add that this would be a real good showing for her. In CA Asian plus Hispanic voters were like 42% of the electorate. In TX it will be about 25% (and over 20% African-American).

I just don't see how she gets the kind of delegate haul she needs in Texas.


[ Parent ]
TX is in play... (0.00 / 0)
Speaking as an Austinite, I'm not convinced that Hillary is going to take Texas.  Houston Dallas and Austin should turn out big for Obama.  Dallas has grown up fast, and Houston is so urban/diverse.... San Antonio, El Paso, and north TX for Hillary?  That doesn't seem to be enough....  Austin is Obama land, no doubt about that.   Looking forward to the debate...

[ Parent ]
25 percent? Not (0.00 / 0)
Census figures show latinos at 36 percent of the TX population, and Asians at about 4 percent.

[ Parent ]
census is fine (0.00 / 0)
but what are the percentages of likely voters?  

[ Parent ]
Probably considerably higher (0.00 / 0)
Because most Latinos are Democrats, their share of the Democratic electorate is much higher than in the population as a whole.

[ Parent ]
Maybe not a "Must-Win" for Nomination... (4.00 / 2)
But perhaps a must-win if he wants any chance of ending this nomination fight in March.  I agree with the analysis that losing WI would probably stall his momentum and decrease the chances of him at least keeping it close in OH and TX, which would mean his pledged delegate lead would decrease and the "cluster" that Hillary's campaign is sort of hoping for right now would be attainable (the "cluster" being, fights over FL and MI and super delegates because the pledged delegate count is close).

But it'd still be a fight, and one that Obama could still win.  So, in that sense, WI isn't a "must win" for him, it's just that it'd allow him to maintain his momentum and potentially wrap-things up in March, instead of a long slog to the convention.

In a way, WI is a "must-win" to Obama in the same way that NH was... had he won NH, it's possible he would've wrapped up the nomination in February.  In losing NH he's now had this slow climb in Feb, hoping to put an end to the nomination fight in March now.


Yes (0.00 / 0)
This seems like the right way to look at it.  It'll be hard for Obama to win Ohio and Texas if he loses Wisconsin, and that it might lead to substantial delegate gains in Ohio for Clinton (although probably not in Texas).  But he certainly won't be out of it.  He'll still get big wins in Wyoming and Mississippi to temper the bad taste, he'll still have a substantial pledged delegate lead, and then we'll be off to Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania will be tough, but there's a lot of time, and anything can happen, especially if superdelegates start really looking at those pledged numbers and seeing a very difficult situation if Clinton wins Pennsylvania and this goes on down to the convention...

But, yeah, it'd be good if Obama wins Wisconsin.


[ Parent ]
Chris (0.00 / 0)
I agree completely.  I don't know why Clinton hasn't put a lot more into Wisconsin.  Sometimes you can't wait for the other states.  Rudy tried that and things just kept getting worse for him. Maybe it's the water in New York.  I really think a Clinton Wisconsin win would help her in all sorts of ways down the road, including demonstrating that she can win a swing state.  So far in swing states like Missouri, Minnesota, Virginia, and Iowa she hasn't showed that.  If  Obama wins Wisconsin it will be incumbent on Clinton supporters to indicate how Obama will lose California, New York, New Jersey, and Mass. in the general and how Clinton will win Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin,  Missouri, and Minnesota.  Thats an argument they may have a hard time making.

It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners -- Albert Camus


Why Clinton isn't contesting Wisc more strongly (0.00 / 0)
poblano over on DailyKos explains this quite well...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

Basically, if she contests Wisconsin hard, and loses, then she dilutes her message with the media and super delegates that "only big states matter".

Her best bet in WI is a middle strategy.  Commit some resources there, cross her fingers, and tell the media that she's not counting on Wisconsin.


[ Parent ]
Something I keep wondering (0.00 / 0)
Is it possible that Wisconsin will notice Clinton's tantamount Wisconsin-doesn't-matter messaging, and there will be kind of backlash among Wisconsin voters?

[ Parent ]
She is definitely putting some resources into WI (0.00 / 0)
Though it seems that many of them are more of a under-the-radar type perhaps so she can maintain plausible deniability of expending resources only to lose.

My parents live in Racine and have received several calls from the Clinton campaign over the past few days. My dad was asked whether he was interested in taking part in a conference call "town hall" with Hillary (he's a Hillary supporter). My mom is getting annoyed with them for calling so frequently (she's undecided and she feels like they are bullying her into voting for Hillary). Despite the phone calls, she's disappointed that Hillary hasn't bothered showing up here when Obama has been all over the place (in Madison Tuesday and Racine yesterday).

But I haven't seen or heard much from her here in Madison though Obama has been running TV and radio ads for at least a week. Perhaps she thinks Madison is a lost cause for her. Or maybe she's waiting until the weekend and Monday.


[ Parent ]
WI big mo (0.00 / 0)
A WI win for Clinton could be huge and would staunch the bleeding at least for the moment. I'm not certain how it would reflect on the other races like RI and Texas, but I will tell you Ohio is going to be incredibly difficult for Obama under any circumstances. With the exception of the Columbus metro area I don't see anything adding up to a majority for him. While cities like Cleveland, Dayton and Youngstown have large African-American populations  these are also classic blue collar towns. And believe me when I tell Obama will get little support in southern  or western Ohio. As always though fingers crossed for November whoever wins the nomination.    

Surely Obama should be able to win Cuyahoga County? (0.00 / 0)
It's 28% Black.  He won big in Baltimore County, Maryland, which is only 20% Black and also has some big white blue collar areas (e.g. Dundalk, Essex), and is entirely suburban.

He won St. Louis+St. Louis County in Missouri, he won Jackson County, Missouri, etc.  Cleveland should be pretty solid territory for Obama, I think.  I agree that the state as a whole look dicey, though, at the moment.

Clinton winning Wisconsin really would be a big momentum changer, though.  Fingers crossed.


[ Parent ]
maybe (0.00 / 0)
Everything you said jlkenny is possible and it would not surprise me to see Obama win several metro areas by varying margins, but I just don't see it making up Clinton's margins in the southern part of the state and most rural areas. I also think Ohio is a rust belt state unlike Maryland or Missouri. Watch Ted Strickland's old district that night for an indication of how the night will go. If Obama is ahead or even close there it's over for Clinton.

[ Parent ]
Oh (0.00 / 0)
I wasn't making a comment about the state as a whole, just about the issue of whether Columbus was the only part of the state that was good for Obama.  I can't imagine Obama will do that well in Strickland's district - look how poorly he did in Western Maryland, Eastern Tennessee, and Southwestern Virginia - but Southeastern Ohio isn't very representative of the state as a whole - it's at least imaginable that he can do well enough in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton, and so forth, to keep it close.

[ Parent ]
Clinton needs bigger margins than 10 points (0.00 / 0)
this isnt enough for her. Obama should work hard to go for the jugular in Texas or Ohio. but Clinton isnt even making up ground with these spreads.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

She doesn't need much (0.00 / 0)
Obama's only up a few delegates (with superdelegates, it's only about 25-50 depending on which count you use). And those counts don't include the 18 or so delegate margin from Michigan (assuming all the undeclared go to Obama) and slightly more than that from Florida.

Florida and Michigan are really the "reason" Obama has a lead at all right now. While it's true that if those primaries had been normal ones Obama might have done better (almost certainly the case in Michigan, although I think not in Florida), the Dem leaders and legislatures in both states have made it very clear that there will be no second tries in either state. So unless those delegates are going to be excluded altogether, there has to be a deal. And if there's a deal, it HAS to favor Clinton. This race is MUCH closer than you all think.


[ Parent ]
Q-poll done before Potomac Primaries (0.00 / 0)
Chris,

Au contraire on the timing of the Ohio and Penn Q-polls:

This from TPM

The new Quinnipiac poll shows that Hillary is hanging onto big leads in Ohio and Pennsylvania, two of the three firewall states that are now key to her hopes of stopping Obama's momentum and turning the race around.

Key point: These polls were taken from Feb. 6th-12th -- before Obama's resounding wins in the Potomac Primary. So whatever momentum he gained then is not reflected in these numbers.


I agree (0.00 / 0)
Obama must win WI, Clinton doesn't really have to but it would help.

USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox