A Nevada judge says Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich must be included in Tuesday's candidates' debate in Nevada.
Senior Clark County District Court Judge Charles Thompson says if Kucinich is excluded, he'll issue an injunction stopping the televised debate.
I think this is the right decision, even if I'll be watching the Michigan returns more than the debate. If nothing else, Kucinich does offer a different perspective. Further, a four-person debate won't be that crowded.
Also, I was looking at the polling history of Nevada, and I think the results of the Research 2000 poll (O 32%, C 30%, E 27%) that came out today is even more significant than first thought. While Mason-Dixon showed a close campaign in Nevada well before Iowa (Clinton only led 34%--26% in their most recent poll), the previous Research 2000 poll from mid-November has shown Clinton ahead 45%-20%-12%. While there is good reason to doubt all primary polling after New Hampshire, and good reason to doubt a new frontier like the Nevada caucus in particular, it now seems likely to me that Obama is ahead in Nevada.
Also, I wonder if this is a pattern we will see in more upcoming states: Clinton does worse in causes than she does in primaries. In 2004, John Kerry took 50.2% of the caucus vote, but 61.0% of the primary vote. Dean, by contrast, took 13.9% of the caucus vote, and only 5.5% of the primary vote. In fact, four of Dean's five second place finishes all took place in caucus states: Michigan, Washington, Maine and Nevada. Now, as analysis from poblano suggests, Clinton seems to have many of Kerry's voters, while Obama has many of Dean's voters. I think campaigns that are heavy on activist volunteers, like Dean and Obama, have something of a built-in advantage in caucus states. Activists are more likely to attend low turnout caucuses, while primaries have a larger rank and file population. If this is the case, it should bode well for Obama in the following February 5th states, all of which are caucuses: Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, New Mexico and North Dakota. Edwards should also do better in caucuses than he does in primaries. Still, both of them will need to start winning primaries in order to take the nomination.
Bill Clinton today defended a state NEA-backed lawsuit over caucus sites, saying that all Democrats should play by the same rules.
Clinton was asked about the suit this morning by a student at Green Valley High School, located in the Las Vegas suburb of Henderson. He said that, in essence, state Democrats made "a special rule only for" members of the Culinary union, the most powerful in the state, to be able to caucus at their work sites rather than at their home precincts. "I think the rules oughta be the same for everybody," he said. "I question why you would ever have a temporary caucus site and say only the people that work there -- i.e. the people that we know are going to vote in a certain way or we think they will -- should be able to caucus here. I think that we oughta make it more possible for everybody to vote."
(Of course, we'll ask again: If the Culinary Workers had endorsed Hillary, would there even be a lawsuit? And if so, would Bill be defending it?)
Ugh. Once again, I'll just wonder why there is such a big hub-ub about these at-large precincts now, several months after they were first instituted. I'll also wonder what defending this lawsuit will do to Democratic attempts to prevent Republicans from suppressing voters in the general election. Doesn't anyone remember that this is why Bush is in the White House at all? Gross.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment. blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
