Open Left - West Virginia

After 2008 Election, Some States Want to Make Voting Easier; Others Determined to Make it Harder

project vote — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:32:40 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

Following an historic turnout in the 2008 election comes a flurry of election reform agendas from both sides of the battle over voting rights. Since November 4, some state lawmakers have seized on the success of early voting and Election Day Registration (EDR) as models for facilitating voter registration, while others appear to have been threatened by the heightened turnout and inspired to introduce restrictive voter ID and proof-of-citizenship bills for the 2009 legislative session.

Following what appears to be significant progress this year in closing participation gaps among historically underrepresented young and minority voters, we review Election Day stories in states with voter ID and EDR laws, and preview next year's legislative battle for election reform.
Election Day Registration

In North Carolina, lawmakers report being "proud" of the implementation of the state's 2007 Same Day Registration law, which permits early voters to register and vote at established "One-Stop" voting sites, according to the Raleigh News and Observer. In the 2008 primary and presidential elections, the law seemed to boost voter registration while cutting the use of provisional ballots by more than half, compared to figures from the 2004 election. On average, EDR states tend to outperform non-EDR states in election outcome by a minimum of 10 percentage points, according to public policy group, Demos.

"State Rep. Paul Luebke said he expects other states to model North Carolina's early voting system," according to the report. "The only change he would suggest for the next elections would be to standardize the hours, encouraging local boards of elections to stay open longer in early voting."

Despite the smooth success of Same Day Registration at early voting sites in North Carolina and other states,Republican lawmakers in Ohio are pushing to end the state's new mandate to allow voters to register during the early voting period.

State Republicans recently announced that they would file legislation to move the voter registration deadline to 65 days before Election Day, according to an Associated Press report. They hope to pass the bill before the 2008 session ends "and a new, Democratic-controlled House takes over in January."

However, election law expert Dan Tokaji said the bill will likely run into opposition as "federal law clearly prohibits states from having registration deadlines earlier than 30 days before an election."

Before the Nov. 4 election, the "Republican Party sued Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to stop the same-day window...but state and federal courts upheld it."

Brunner has planned an election summit in December to review the elections process and will likely not adhere to any changes before the new legislature takes over, according to the AP report.

Meanwhile, states like West Virginia are considering implementing Election Day Registration, which currently exists in about eight other states in its traditional form whereby eligible citizens may show up at their polling place on Election Day, register to vote and cast a ballot. First implemented in Maine in 1973, EDR is also practiced in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire and Wyoming. Other states, like North Carolina, Ohio and Connecticut permit variations of the option to register and vote at the same time, either during an early voting period, or-in the case of Connecticut-on a special ballot that only allows them to vote for the president.

"I lost my card, and I didn't think I could do it too close to the time," said one West Virginia voter and supporter of an EDR law, according to Parksburg, W. Va. News station, WTAP. "So, if it was that way, I could have voted."

However, Woods County clerk, Jamie Six, who "studied the idea for the state clerk's association" is against the implementation of EDR.

"The poll workers have a long and very busy day already," Six said. "And to add this to their plate to take care of on election day, we don't feel it would be fair."

While EDR in the state is unlikely, Six says it is possible to allow voters to register during the early voting period. "A committee of the West Virginia Legislature is to hear from Six on Monday," according to WTAP.

In the 2008 session, about 19 states introduced EDR legislation. Bills are pending in four states: Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Ohio. None of these bills have moved since this summer.

At least two states, Texas and Montana, which currently practices EDR, have pre-filed several bills relating to EDR for the 2009 session.

Voter ID

While some states were facilitating voter registration and voting this year, Indiana - home of the country's strictest voter ID law - reportedly turned some of its young voters away without casting a regular ballot, and even encouraged poll workers in other states to mandate voter ID when no such law existed in the first place.

Despite being properly registered and equipped with out-of-state and student ID, the young voters were only allowed to vote provisionally on Nov. 4, leaving some discouraged and others in tears, according to a letter to the Indianapolis Star by Leon Riley, an election official at Butler University's Hinkle Fieldhouse precinct.

"The Indiana voter ID law amounted to disenfranchisement for a number of young, well-informed voters, as well as some voters who have various limitations of resources, transportation and problem-solving ingenuity. Is this what we want for some of our brightest and best, or for some who need help along the way? In fairness, this unnecessary barrier must be abolished," wrote Riley.

The day before the election, an emergency motion was filed to stop enforcement of the voter ID law based on constitutional violations. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago denied the motion a week later without citing any reasons why, according to the Indiana Lawyer.

With the controversy over the U.S. Supreme Court's upholding of Indiana's voter ID law, and a flurry of voter registration fraud allegations in the weeks before the election, poll workers in some states appeared confused over their own states' laws. Voters in Mecklenburg County, Virgina, for example, complained that poll workers illegally asked them to provide proof of identification, including photo ID, according to the Smith Hill Enterprise. There were also reports of misleading signs outside of polling places that indicated photo ID was required.

The misinformation amounted to a misinterpretation of the Help America Vote Act, which required voters who registered by mail after 2003 to provide proof of ID.

"The voter being asked to present a photo ID is not the preferred language to use," said Jessica Lane of the State Board of Elections. The preferred language, she said, is to ask for "a form of ID."

Whatever the intention, voters were set back after waiting hours in long lines, leaving to get their IDs, or possibly, not return at all, according to the Enterprise.

"I am registered with neither party. I am a devout independent with libertarian leanings, but I believe in the constitution and the fact that everyone needs to get out and vote," wrote one concerned voter. "Was anyone denied the right to vote? If they did not have a photo ID and saw the sign, did they say 'Oops. I guess I can't vote' and leave?".

For voter ID advocates, preventing the extremely rare crime of individual voter fraud is worth the risk of compromising a voter's right to cast a ballot. However, preventing many eligible voters from casting a ballot just to prevent a rare crime hardly seems on par with democracy. A four year investigation by the federal government found only 24 instances of voter fraud out of more than 214 million votes cast. Several studies have found that a number of already under-represented Americans - primarily young, elderly, minority and poor - would have a difficult time meeting the requirements. These studies include a Brennan Center survey that found 21 million Americans were without the required identification; a University of Washington study that found about a quarter of Indiana's young, African-American and low income voting-age populations lack the necessary ID; and a University of Georgia study found the state's Latino and Black voters were twice as likely not to posses required ID compared to White voters.

Yet despite the lack of evidence of voter fraud, and a well known, recent history of young and elderly voters missing out on the democratic process in Indiana (including Indiana nuns and Notre Dame University students who were turned away in the 2008 primaries) lawmakers in states like Oklahoma and Texas are hoping to make voter ID a reality in 2009.

While acknowledging that Oklahoma Speaker of the House Chris Benge "and the others pushing for a voter ID system have a certain level of common sense on their side (one idea is to offer free ID with their plan), Wayne Greene of the Tulsa World dismisses the argument that if people are required to show photo ID to cash a check, they should be required to show ID when they vote. Greene points out that there is plenty of evidence of people attempting to cash fraudulent checks, but no evidence of people attempting to cast fraudulent votes in Oklahoma.

"Benge told me he didn't have any examples of fraudulent voting to justify what sounds like a pretty expensive free ID system," Greene says. The state, which introduced and failed seven voter ID bills this year, will convene for the 2009-2010 session next February.

Immediately after Election Day, lawmakers in Texas - where there was a serious voter ID battle during the 2007 session - pre-filed a few bills requiring voter ID as well as proof-of-citizenship at registration.
Supporters of voter ID hope to have it in effect by the next gubernatorial election, according to local publication, Athens Daily Review.

In total this year, 25 states introduced voter ID bills, and bills are still pending in four states: Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

Track these and other election-related bills by visiting www.ElectionLegislation.org.

After this presidential election's phenomenal turnout that showed the American electorate is finally closer to representing all of its citizens, lawmakers should recognize that voters take this fundamental right seriously. The passage of laws that help facilitate that right are far more conducive to a fair and healthy democracy than the passage of those that prevent some citizens from voting at all.

Quick Links:
www.ElectionLegislation.org

In Other News:

More minorities voted this year, but white turnout dropped - McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's 8.5 million-vote margin over John McCain was fueled by a more than 20 percent surge in minority voting, a new analysis of exit polling data suggests.

Minnesota group asks feds to investigate problems with state's voter rolls - Associated Press
ST. PAUL (AP) - A group opposed to Minnesota's same-day voter registration law has asked the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate problems it suspects with the state's voter rolls.

Woman seeks limits on mentally disabled voters - Associated Press
GRINNELL - A Deep River woman wants to change a[n Iowa] state law to require that mentally disabled voters be supervised when they cast a ballot.

Erin Ferns is a Research and Policy Analyst with Project Vote's Strategic Writing and Research Department (SWORD

Early Voting - There's a trend starting

btchakir — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 14:32:10 GMT

This morning I'm driving my wife over to the Charles Town (WV) Courthouse so she can cast her early vote for Obama. My son and I have been over there to vote already, but this is the first opportunity Elly has had outside of her teaching schedule. The fact that West Virginia has early voting is something we are very happy about... it gives us a chance to put in some campaign time on election day supporting others in getting out the Obama vote.
You may know, however, that WV is one of the states which has had some polling place problems with computerized voting machines switching votes from Obama to McCain. We are in Jefferson County which uses a printed ballot that is then scanned, but in Martinsburg, right next door to us and part of Berkeley County, they have already reported machines that are switching votes. It is interesting that ALL of the vote switches using the ES&S machines are from Democrat to Republican... and it is great that due to early voting these problems are being documented and broadcast through the National media, making the voters even more aware of possible voter fraud happening.

If one looks at newspaper coverage across the country, it looks like the 33 or so states with early voting are trending toward Obama. This from the LA Times, for instance:

A surprise is the makeup of the early voters, election experts said. In past campaign seasons, Republicans have used early voting to their advantage, mobilizing a slice of the electorate that typically skews their way.
Yet a look at voters in a handful of crucial states suggests that Obama is turning out his base in numbers that surpass those of Republican John McCain.
"Historically, we've seen that early voters are older, they tend to be white, have higher incomes and are better educated," said Paul Gronke, director of the Early Voting Information Center at Reed College in Portland, Ore.
"And that group of people tends to trend Republican. Now we have a mirror image in this campaign."

On the day I voted, over a week ago, the line of people was distinctly older... and were mostly Democrats from what I could determine. But I voted while most young people were either working or in school (we are in a heavy college area), so I will be interested to see what the Saturday turnout is.

I realize that West Virginia looks like it is in McCain's pocket (although our Democratic Governor and Senator Jay Rockefeller lead in their respective polls) when it comes to the election. I am afraid that is because of a 90%+ white voter registration (with a predominantly older perspective) and some unfortunate racial tinges which have been identified in the press. Given a poll-defying push in early voting, and a minor miracle somewhere, it is possible that Obama could win here... but it is doubtful. There is still reason for hope.

I am counting, however, on the trends in the rest of the country. If you can get out and vote early, I would encourage you to do so.

Under The LobsterScope

A miracle brewing in West By-God Virginia

stormbear — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 18:14:55 GMT

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing

click to enlarge

Voting for a Black Man (tm) in West Virginia is a new concept which is strangely being embraced by the people of the Mountain State.

Having lived my early years and having most of my family come from West Virginia, I am shocked beyond belief that West Virginians are supporting Obama. When I was in 5th Grade in Athens, WV, there was on African American in our school. The horrific verbal and racist abuse she took was unimaginable. That was 32 years ago and maybe things have changed dramatically over that period.

Maybe I am shocked because I still see WV through the lens of my family that still lives there. My wife and I wonder if one of my uncles (hard right-wing nut) will vote for McCain because he hates Blacks so much or will he vote for Obama because the Republicans have wiped out his retirement?

I think he will vote for Obama because money tends to win out over hate. Remember the Montgomery Bus Boycott? The Whites of Montgomery, Alabama refused to let Blacks ride in the front of the bus - but once Dr. King organized a boycott of the bus lines, funds for the bus lines dried up and they city capitulated.

Money won out.

Maybe money will win out in West Virginia in November. The state has never been awash in cash, the state has mostly been looted of natural resources and the cash ended up in the private bank accounts of the coal barons. But West Virginians certainly notice when what few dollars they have disappear. Most live so close to the bone, a slight increase in gas prices can have tremendous impacts on household budgets, so when gas hits 4 bucks, it is a disaster. A total, economic disaster. Now, add on top of that the job losses, shrinking college grants, a panicked stock market and vanishing retirement savings you then see the ugly picture that is the West Virginia economy.

Miracles can happen... they can happen in West Virginia.

Why hasn't EMILY's List gotten behind Becky Greenwald in IA-04?

desmoinesdem — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:00:00 GMT

Maybe someone out there who knows the inner workings of EMILY's List can explain to me why this group has not put money behind Becky Greenwald, the Democrat challenging loyal Republican foot-soldier Tom Latham in Iowa's fourth Congressional district.

I have been going over the list of Democratic women running for Congress whom EMILY's List is supporting, with a particular focus on the six challengers most recently added to this group in early August. I do not mean to knock any of those candidates, and I recognize that every race has its own dynamic.

However, after comparing Greenwald's race to those of other candidates, I remain puzzled that EMILY's list is not more involved in IA-04.

Follow me after the jump for more.
First things first: IA-04 has a Cook Partisan Voting Index of D+0.5. Since 2004, every Congressional district in Iowa has seen big gains in Democratic voter registration, which surged in connection with this year's presidential caucuses. For the first time since Iowa's districts were last redrawn, IA-04 now has more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Democrats have an advantage in the generic Congressional ballot nationwide, but what may be more relevant for this district is Barack Obama's big lead over John McCain in Iowa (double-digits according to the two most recent polls). The Obama campaign's enormous ground game in Iowa will be working in Greenwald's favor too. Her staffers and volunteers seem pleased with the level of coordination between the campaigns' turnout efforts.

Turning to Greenwald as a candidate, you can see from her bio that she has strong roots in the district as well as experience in the business world and a history of volunteering for causes including the Iowa Democratic Party. She dominated the four-way Demomcratic primary on June 3, winning over 50 percent of the vote. As of June 30, she had raised about $143,000 for her campaign but had only about $82,000 cash on hand because of her competitive primary.

Several Iowa political analysts observed this summer that Greenwald can beat Tom Latham if she can raise enough money to compete. Latham serves on the House Appropriations Committee and was sitting on more than $800,000 cash on hand as of June 30. Then again, plenty of well-funded incumbents have lost seats in Congress when facing a big wave toward the other party. Cook has this race as likely R, but I would consider it lean R. There have been no public polls on the race yet.

The current reporting period ends September 30. I don't have inside information about Greenwald's cash on hand now, but I know she has been aggressively fundraising all summer long. I assume things have gone fairly well on that front, because the DCCC just put IA-04 on its "Emerging Races" list. One thing working in Greenwald's favor is that the Des Moines and Mason City markets, which cover most of the 28 counties in the district, are not too expensive for advertising. So, she can be up on the air for several weeks, even though she clearly won't be able to match Latham dollar for dollar.

Side note: Shortly after the Democratic primary in IA-04, the sore loser who finished third vowed to run for Congress as an independent. However, he quickly turned his attention to the fight against Iowa's new smoking ban. He then failed to submit petitions to qualify for the ballot, took down his Congressional campaign website and reportedly moved to Florida. In other words, he won't be a factor in November.

Why should EMILY's list get involved in this race? Not only is Greenwald a good fit for the district, she is pro-choice whereas Latham has a perfect zero rating on votes related to abortion rights.

As a bonus, Greenwald has the potential to end Iowa's disgrace as one of only two states that have never sent a woman to Congress or elected a woman governor.

Now, I will briefly examine the six candidates for U.S. House whom EMILY's list most recently endorsed. As I said earlier, I don't mean to knock any of these candidates, but I do question why these districts would be considered more winnable than IA-04.

1. Anne Barth. She is running against incumbent Shelley Moore Capito in West Virginia's second district (R+5, somewhat more Republican than IA-04). Cook has this race as lean R, Swing State Project sees it as likely R. As of June 30, Barth had about $353,000 cash on hand, compared to more than $1.2 million for Capito. My understanding is that this district is quite expensive for advertising because of its proximity to Washington, DC.

2. Sam Bennett. She is running against incumbent Charlie Dent in Pennsylvania's 15th Congressional District (D+2, slightly more Democratic than IA-04). Cook and Swing State Project both rate this race as likely R, although Chris Bowers is optimistic given the partisan lean of the district. As of June 30, Bennett had just under $354,000 cash on hand, compared to about $687,000 for Dent.

3. Jill Derby. She is running against incumbent Dean Heller, who beat her in the 2006 election to represent Nevada's second district (R+8, markedly more Republican than IA-04). It's not too uncommon for Congressional candidates to win on their second attempt, but Cook and Swing State Project both view this district as likely R. As of June 30, Derby had about $314,000 cash on hand, while Heller had just over $1 million in the bank.

4. Judy Feder. This is another rematch campaign, as incumbent Frank Wolf beat Feder by a comfortable margin in 2006 in Virginia's 10th Congressional District (R+5). Again, Cook and Swing State Project agree that this is a likely R district. As of June 30, Feder was doing quite well in the money race with about $812,000 cash on hand, not too far behind Wolf's $849,000.

5. Annette Taddeo. She is running against incumbent Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in Florida's 18th Congressional District (R+4). Cook and Swing State Project both rank this district as likely R. Taddeo made a great impression on people at Netroots Nation and had just under $444,000 in the bank on June 30, while the incumbent reported nearly $1.9 million.

6. Victoria Wulsin. In 2006, she fell just short against incumbent "Mean Jean" Schmidt in Ohio's second district (R+13). Granted, Schmidt is ineffective as an incumbent, which is probably why Swing State Project has this in the lean R category (it's likely R according to Cook). Wulsin also had about $378,000 in the bank on June 30, compared to about $390,000 for Schmidt. Still, this is a markedly more Republican district than IA-04.

I understand that EMILY's List does not have unlimited resources, but I still find it surprising that they have not jumped in to support Greenwald. A little money goes a long way in the Mason City and Des Moines media markets.

If you want to help send her to Congress, go here and give what you can. September 15 is her birthday, by the way.

I look forward to reading your comments about EMILY's list or any of these Congressional races.

One Down, Three To Go, or, Do You Have Any Friends in Hawaii, North Dakota or Oklahoma?

Living Liberally — Fri, 23 May 2008 22:00:00 GMT

Drinking Liberally Shot of Truth

A few weeks ago, we asked some of our favorite activist friends if they had any friends in West Virginia, and man, did they deliver. Now we just need one more favor from you - to let us know if you have any leftie buddies in Hawaii, North Dakota or Oklahoma who'd like to help liberals organize over a few drinks.

In late April, as we moved closer to Drinking Liberally's 5th anniversary this Thursday, May 29th, we noticed just how close we were to hitting all 50 states, with, until recently, only 4 states left: the Aloha State (HI), the Peace Garden State (ND), the Sooner State (OK) and the Mountain State (WV). With that in mind, we made it our May goal to create Living Liberally chapters in all 50 states by May 29th, and simultaneously celebrate our 5th anniversary and a truly 50-bar strategy. We started by asking you to help us out with West Virginia.

Today, we have not just one, but two new West Virginia chapters soon to officially enter into the network, that will both hold their first meetings in the next few weeks - one in the state capital of Charleston, and one in Martinsburg.

That only leaves three states left - and we're going to have to ask again - know any liberals in Hawaii, North Dakota or Oklahoma?

Please don't make Howard Dean take back his words:

Maps: Where are the Superdelegates?

dreaminonempty — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:36:07 GMT

My curiosity got the better of me today and I went over to DemConWatch and counted up how many superdelegates have endorsed from each state or territory. A moving target, of course; the map already needs an update!

Here's the map:

Click to enlarge.

The color of the state shows the margin among declared superdelegates only. The size of the circles is proportional to the superdelegate lead in a given state.

Below, a comparison to the pledged delegate map, some trivia and an update to the county-by-county results map.
The most striking feature is the shut-out in the north-central part of the country. Obama's superdelegate lead would not be possible without the strong support of superdelegates in states that Don't Count because they're small, red states, many with caucuses.

In the Intermountain West: MT, UT, ID, WY Obama 13, Clinton 1.
In the Plains: ND, SD, NE, KS, OK Obama 27, Clinton 2.

For both regions together, that's 95% of superdelegates for Obama.

Goodness, maybe folks don't like being told they Don't Count!

There is one state where Obama has no superdelegates, and that's Arkansas. The top five states for Obama are Illinois, California, Wisconsin, DC, and Massachusetts, accounting for 27% of his superdelegates.

There are eight states where Clinton has no superdelegates. The top five states for Clinton are New York, California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Texas, accounting for 41% of her superdelegates.

The bravest superdelegate, in my opinion, is Marianne Spraggins of New York, the only one of 46 declared New York superdelegates to support Obama.

Here's the map showing primary and caucus results and pledged delegate leads:

Click to enlarge.

Comparing the two maps, the superdelegates seem to swing more to extremes, although part of that is home state effects. Also, it's clear how much better Clinton did in West Virginia than nearly every other state.

County Maps

While I'm at it, here's the updated maps following the West Virginia election:

Click to enlarge.

No surprises from West Virginia, except perhaps a little more support for Edwards than neighboring states. See my previous diary for maps of education, population, race and ethnicity in the region. The cartogram on the right, where the size of each county is proportional to its population, shows how even within the Appalachians, cities show moderate to strong support for Obama. The region of very strong Clinton support, while extensive in geography, is more limited in population.

Notes: Michigan county results are estimated from county results for Clinton and Uncommitted and exit polls, Texas county results are from the primary, and Kansas results are shown by State Senate district.

Cross posted at DailyKos.

Media Hand Washing: "Objectivity" and Race

GlennWSmith — Wed, 14 May 2008 17:29:45 GMT

Corporate media coverage of the 2008 presidential election has been rightly criticized for its inept analyses, frequent miss-readings of public sentiment, deep bias toward the status quo, and lazy habit of exploiting at-hand narratives that, in the end, are more like tales from another planet.

The progressive movement is all about the restoration of popular democracy, but the corporate media's acceptance of elite quasi-democracy remains a powerful obstacle. This is nowhere as apparent as in its discussion, or lack of a discussion, about racism, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

It is, maybe, the elite media's worst habit. They create or reinforce a public opinion environment and then step out of that environment and pretend they are covering something they themselves have not helped create. If politics is theatrical melodrama, it is as though they write the script, shape the action on stage, and then retreat to the audience and cover events as though they had no role in the production.

The West Virginia vote and the ongoing euphemism "white working class voters" is another telling episode from 2008, Act I.
Take Adam Nagourney's analysis of West Virginia in today's NYT. The Clinton victory is presented as something that happened "out there" as a consequence of a voter consciousness which the media has absolutely no responsibility for creating in the first place.

..some of the resistance that he [Obama] continues to face is almost certainly racial. In West Virginia, 20 percent of respondents said that race was a factor in their decision and those voters, by overwhelming number, backed Mrs. Clinton.

But accepting the obvious racist element in this vote -- and in measuring Obama's possibilities in the fall -- without acknowledging that racial attitudes are shaped and reinforced by the media environment in which citizens swim, is irresponsible. It's deluded, even.

The elite media's hand-washing and retreat to the balcony leaves unsaid certain obvious facts, like, "Clinton received many votes because she is not black."

But, more importantly, a phrase like Nagourney's "almost certainly racial," serves to legitimize a dramatic turn in the play that should be scrutinized as illegitimate in a democracy of equal citizens. While acknowledging media perceptiveness about race, such phrases back away and distance the media from any responsibility for racism's persistence in American political life.

The media dutifully and obediently showcased Jeremiah Wright for weeks, and then stepped away and pretended Wright somehow entered the consciousness of Americans with no help from the media at all.

It's time the elite media understood that their "in it but not of it" fantasy is not responsible neutrality but deluded destructiveness. They help set up West Virginia by reporting, "Hey, West Virginia voters, we don't want you to forget that Obama is black, Clinton is white, and Obama had a black preacher we're sure you'll be alarmed about."

Then, safely tucked in the audience once again, the media smugly publish their reviews. "See," they say to themselves. "We were right all along."

Of course they could accurately predict the script. They wrote it.

Hillary is the Real McCain… er McCoy

stormbear — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:14:55 GMT

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing

click to enlarge

The outcome of the West Virginia Primary shows something I have suspected all along - Hillary Clinton has more in common with neo-con beliefs than she does with progressive ideas.

Exit polls showed that 67% of those who voted for Hillary will vote for McCain if Obama wins the nomination. Some people say that is because racism is rife in West Virginia. When I lived there, it sure as hell was. But now? Every time I am back in the Mountain State to visit family, the same old racism still exists. You know, the kind of racism Hillary has been playing to since she started her campaign.

But I think the root cause of the willingness of Hillary supporters to vote for McCain is because Hillary is more closely aligned philosophically with McCain than she is with Obama and when she enters a contest like West Virginia, the effect is amplified.

If West Virginia's main concern is the economy, why are they choosing a neo-con? I wish I knew. West Virginia has, on occasion before, defied logic and common sense.

SPECIAL REQUEST FOR TCD FANS: The San Francisco Chronicle is pondering the addition of new cartoons for their paper - a process that seems to be initiated by Darren Bell, creator of Candorville (one of my daily reads - highly recommended). You can read the Chronicle article here and please add your thoughts to the comments if you wish. If anything, put in a good word for Darren and Candorville.

I am submitting Town Called Dobson to the paper for their consideration. They seem to have given great weight to receiving 200 messages considering Candorville. I am asking TCD fans to try to surpass that amount. (I get more than that many hate mails a day, surely fans can do better?)

This is not a race between Darren and I, it is a hope that more progressive strips can be represented in the printed press of America.

So if you read the San Francisco Chronicle or live in the Bay Area (Google Analytics tell me there are a lot of you), please send your kind comments (or naked, straining outrage) to David Wiegand at his published addresses below. If you are a subscriber, cut out your mailing label and staple it to a TCD strip and include it in your letter.

candorcomment@sfchronicle.com

David Wiegand
Executive Datebook Editor
The San Francisco Chronicle
901 Mission St.
San Francisco, CA 94103

May 13th Election Results Thread

Chris Bowers — Tue, 13 May 2008 22:29:37 GMT

West Virginia: 47% reporting, 28 delegates at stake
Clinton: 65% (16 delegates)
Obama: 28% (6 delegates)
Clinton +63,300 votes

Mississippi-01: 80% reporting
Childers (D): 51%
Davis (R): 49%
Childers +1,104 votes

Update 9--Childers Wins MS-01: The AP and MSNBC just called MS-01 for Childers. That's pretty cool. We are going to win everywhere in November. Landslide city.

Update 8--Very close in Mississippi: Republican Davis closes to only 700 votes, but most of the remaining counties are Democratic, especially the 85%+ Dem county of Prentiss.

Update 7--~~Narrow~~ Growing Democratic lead in MS-01: Comparing the primary and general election results in the ~~four~~ ~~six~~ ten multi-precinct counties where 90% or more precincts have returns, Democrat Childers is doing better in ~~three of the four~~ ~~four of the six~~ ~~seven of the nine~~ seven of ten. That is a pretty good sign, though not enough to call the race yet. Almost, however.

Update 6--Kleebn wins Nebraska Senate primary: Even though only 5% is reporting, Scott Kleeb is ahead by an absurd amount in the Nebraska Senate primary. Pretty easy to call an election when someone is ahead by 50%. I won't update this one anymore.

Update 5--McCain still only at 76%: McCain is only at 76% in West Virginia, which is pretty much what he did in Indiana. Kind of funny that about one-quarter of the Republican electorate is still voting against McCain, more than three months after Super Tuesday. Pretty funny.

Update 4--Deceptive margin in MS-01: Childers is well ahead in MS-01 right now, but SSP reports that he is running about even with his results from the primary. So, it still looks like it will be a very close result in MS-01.

Update 3--Tee vee watching is painful: Election nights are the only nights I watch tee vee news. Its pretty painful, as TPM shows, but I did learn that Obama is wearing a flag pin now. I guess the key is just to attack him from the right.

Update 2--Other Dems Still on Ballot: The reason the numbers don't add up to 100% in West Virginia is because the other Democrats are still on the ballot. In particular, Edwards is probably getting a decent percent, and would have been strong here if he was still in the campaign.

Update--Clinton Wins West Virginia: Everyone calls West Virginia for Clinton. No surprise. Let's see what the various final margins will be. Exit poll can be found here. Quick extrapolation from the gender numbers indicates 65%--32%.

No Drama Left In Remaining Nomination Contests

Chris Bowers — Tue, 13 May 2008 16:02:29 GMT

As Matt noted below, Obama is going to get crushed in West Virginia tonight. In fact, crushing victories look par for the course the rest of the way out:

Democratic Nomination Primary Schedule

State	Date	O %	C %	P. Del	Obama Del	Clinton Del
West Virginia	May 13	24.3%	61.3%	28	9	19
Kentucky	May 20	30.7%	58.7%	51	18	33
Oregon	May 20	53.3%	39.0%	52	30	22
Puerto Rico	Jun 01	37.0%	50.0%	55	24	31
Montana	Jun 03	--	--	16	8	8
South Dakota	Jun 03	46.0%	34.0%	15	8	7
Sub-Total	June 03	--	--	217	97	120
Pelosi Club	Jun 04	NA	NA	6	7	-1
Total	June 21	--	--	223	104	119

Which leads us once again to the competing campaign delegate counts:

Projected Obama Campaign Delegate Count

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Pledged	1,594	1,423	19	217	1,627
Super	284	276.5	0	233.5	--
MI + FL	184	184	0	0	NA
Projected	104	119	0	-223	NA
Total	2,166	2,002.5	19	227.5	2,208.5

Current polling projects that Obama only needs 42.5 superdelegate endorsements between now and June 3rd in order to clinch the nomination on June 4th, at least according to his campaign's count.

Projected Clinton Campaign Delegate Count

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Pledged	1,591.5	1,425.5	19	217	1,627
Super	289	285.5	0	275.5	--
Florida	67	105	13	0	NA
Michigan	31	47	5	45	NA
Projected	104	119	0	-223	NA
Total	2,082.5	1,982.5	37	314.5	2,208.5

'
The Clinton campaign count doesn't help her that much, as Obama only needs 35.8% of the remaining superdelegates, Edwards delegates, and Michigan delegates in order to secure the nomination. It buys her time, but really only until June 15th, and does not change the outcome. Don't expect superdelegates to accept what will be a clearly bogus argument on the popular vote, either. And, as a final problem, one of her pledged delegates switched to Obama today.

Ah, I'll miss the nomination at a glance series. What are your predictions for tonight?

Black History: Secession of West Virginia

stormbear — Fri, 09 May 2008 13:27:18 GMT

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing

click to enlarge

West Virginia was formed and added to the Union as a direct result of the American Civil War. In the early days of the war, Union troops under George McClellan drove off Confederate defenders, essentially freeing Unionists in the northwestern counties of Virginia to form their own government as a result of the Wheeling Convention.

Despite its central location and disputed territory, West Virginia suffered comparatively little. Early in the war, Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson led the Great Train Raid of 1861, which resulted in the capture of several locomotives and rolling stock of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. Jackson later led his men in what became known as the Romney Expedition, an unsuccessful attempt to firmly establish Confederate control over western Virginia. In a series of relatively small battles, McClellan's forces gained possession of the greater part of the territory in the summer of 1861, and Union control was never seriously threatened, in spite of Robert E. Lee's attempt later same year to retake parts of western Virginia. A key part of the Union strategy in West Virginia for the rest of the war was to keep the vital Baltimore and Ohio Railroad open as a major supply and troop transportation route.

Another important mission was to protect the vast supply warehouses and munitions factories at Harpers Ferry. However, the town fell to Stonewall Jackson during early days of the Maryland Campaign, and the surrender of its Federal garrison was the largest capture of U.S. Army troops until World War II nearly eighty years later. With Lee's withdrawal to Virginia following the Battle of Antietam, Harpers Ferry reverted to Union control for the rest of the war. The Maryland Campaign concluded in what became West Virginia with the Battle of Shepherdstown.

In 1863 Brig. Gen. John D. Imboden, with 5,000 Confederates, overran a considerable portion of the state and tore up sections of the B&O. Bands of guerrillas burned and plundered in some sections, and were not entirely suppressed until after the war was ended.

A Confederate brigade of cavalry under antebellum U.S. Congressman Albert G. Jenkins saw considerable action during the Gettysburg Campaign, as well as other major campaigns. The low number of voters in the elections sponsored by Wheeling was a result of voter suppression by Wheeling and in the fact that Wheeling actually controlled only a small part of West Virginia, mostly the Northern panhandle and associated counties near Wheeling. Vote numbers from the interior counties were actually cast in Wheeling by refugees from those counties. A number of West Virginia regiments were distinguished for their war records, including the 7th West Virginia Infantry (which assaulted the Sunken Road at Antietam and rushed onto Cemetery Hill in the twilight at the Battle of Gettysburg to help push back the famed Louisiana Tigers. The 3rd West Virginia Cavalry also fought well at Gettysburg as a part of John Buford's veteran cavalry division that defended McPherson's Ridge on the first day of the battle.

President Lincoln was in a close campaign when he won reelection in 1864. However, the act that allowed the state to be created was signed in 1862, two years before Lincoln's re-election would have been an issue in any real way.

Slavery was officially abolished February 3, 1865.

On May 30, 1861, Gen. George B. McClellan in Cincinnati wrote to President Lincoln- "I am confidently assured that very considerable numbers of volunteers can be raised in Western Virginia...". After nearly two months in the field in West Virginia he was less optimistic. He wrote to Gov. Francis Harrison Pierpoint of the Restored Government of Virginia in Wheeling that he and his army were anxious to assist the new government, but that eventually they would be needed elsewhere, and that he urged that troops be raised "among the population". "Before I left Grafton I made requisitions for arms clothing etc for 10,000 Virginia troops--I fear that my estimate was much too large." On August 3, 1861 the Wellsburg "Herald" editorialized "A pretty condition Northwestern Virginia is in to establish herself as a separate state...after all the drumming and all the gas about a separate state she has actually organized in the field four not entire regiments of soldiers and one of these hails almost entirely from the Panhandle."

Similar difficulties were experienced by Confederate authorities at the beginning of the war. On May 14, 1861 Col. George A. Porterfield arrived in Grafton to secure volunteers, and reported slow enlistment. Col. Porterfield's difficulty ultimately, however, was lack of support by the Richmond government, which did not send enough guns, tents and other supplies. He eventually turned away hundreds of volunteers due to lack of equipment. General Henry A. Wise also complained of recruitment in the Kanawha valley, though he eventually assembled 2500 infantry, 700 cavalry, 3 battalions of artillery for a total of 4,000 men which became known as "Wise's Legion". These men were later sent to defend South Carolina.

A curious anomaly occurred in the recruitment of Union soldiers in West Virginia, the presence of Secessionist or Secessionist sympathizers within the ranks. A series of letters to Gen. Samuels and Gov. Pierpoint in the Dept. of Archives and History in Charleston, most dated 1862, reveal the concern of Union officers. Col. Harris, 10th Company, March 27, 1862, to Gov. Pierpoint-"The election of officers in the Gilmer County Company was a farce. The men elected were rebels and bushwhackers. The election of these men was intended, no doubt, as a burlesque on the reorganization of the militia."

It is difficult to determine accurately the number of men from West Virginia who volunteered for service in the Union or Confederate armies. The Union numbers are inaccurate because of the large number of Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, and others who enlisted as "Virginians". An analysis of the 1st West Virginia Cavalry by the Moore Center in Shepherdstown revealed that only 32% were Virginians. An estimate of Union numbers for 1862 was 12-15,000 though this would include non-resident soldiers. The range of estimates were a high of 32,000 for Union soldiers to a low of 3-5,000 for Confederate soldiers in 1862. The Confederate Dept. of Western Virginia gives the number of soldiers for 1863-4 at 18,642.

Recent studies have concluded that the numbers of Union and Confederate soldiers from West Virginia were about equal, in the range of 22,-25,000 each.

Birth Of A Notion Disclaimer

This is not a race between Darren and I, it is a hope that more progressive strips can be represented in the printed press of America.

candorcomment@sfchronicle.com

David Wiegand
Executive Datebook Editor
The San Francisco Chronicle
901 Mission St.
San Francisco, CA 94103

BIRTH OF A NOTION WALLPAPER is now available for your computer. Click here.

Campaigning Under Mountain Momma

stormbear — Wed, 07 May 2008 15:17:38 GMT

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing

click to enlarge

I did part of my growing up in West Virginia where my father mined coal out of the hills - so did my uncles and my grandfather. It is where many of them died due to mining, sometimes by black lung and sometimes by accident. My uncle Dewey died when a kettle bottom fell on him and crushed him below the ribcage. During the autopsy, they also learned his lungs were filled with coal dust from long exposure to mining. My grandfather's lungs were also full of coal dust when he died and my father died of black lung and complications due to that condition.

I talked with my mom yesterday and we chatted about the upcoming election. She lives in Princeton and lives off of Social Security and the pension that has been well protected by the United Mine Workers. I asked who she was going to vote for and she said she didn't know. The commercials on television have not been helpful to her. Yes gas prices are high in West Virginia, but she is concerned with who is going to protect the unions and the pensions related to them.

Over the past 150 years, immense amounts of money has been drained out of West Virginia in the form of coal and none of it has been funneled back in terms of monetary wealth. Unlike Alaska, where the citizens get a yearly check from the oil companies for the oil that has been pumped out, West Virginia has been left to corporate wolves.

It is a pity, some of the most beautiful wilderness in America is blighted by crushing poverty caused by an uncaring federal government.

I think the people, at least my family that still lives in West Virginia, have one question on their minds.

"Which candidate will screw me the least?"

This is not a race between Darren and I, it is a hope that more progressive strips can be represented in the printed press of America.

candorcomment@sfchronicle.com

David Wiegand
Executive Datebook Editor
The San Francisco Chronicle
901 Mission St.
San Francisco, CA 94103

West Virginia, Where Art Thou?

Living Liberally — Tue, 06 May 2008 17:50:54 GMT

Drinking Liberally Shot of Truth
by Justin Krebs

I need a friend in West Virginia...somebody I could have a beer with.

It's been nearly five years since we started drinking liberally in a backyard in Hell's Kitchen. In May, 2003, a few weeks after Mission Accomplished, progressives weren't very hopeful...and we regularly heard the joke: "Guess liberals need a few beers to dull the pain."

Our response: "No, we need a few beers while we organize." From the start, our social club wasn't about sharing depression -- it was about sharing ideas, energy and commitment.

People are now Drinking Liberally all over the country, and it spreads because local liberals grab hold and make it happen....sometimes in the unlikeliest of areas.

Our fifth chapter, beating out such liberal hotbeds as Boston and Austin, was Boise, Idaho, leading Atrios to demand of his readership why Idaho had a chapter and Philadelphia didn't. (A Philadelphia group launched within 24 hours of that blog post; the Boise chapter still meets, and has been visited by their Mayor.)

Salt Lake City -- in a deep red state not known for liberals or drinks -- has a booming chapter. There are two clubs in South Dakota, and three in Mississippi. The Idaho Falls chapter (it always comes back to Idaho) has been involved in local anti-war activism, as have our Wyoming groups.

So...what's the matter with West Virginia?

Actually: West Virginia, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Hawaii. Those are the four hold-out states left as we reach our five-year mark, with no spots for liberals to congregate and organize over a few drinks. But not for long.

Drinking Liberally turns 5 on May 29th. We're kicking off our anniversary month with a Living Liberally fundraiser this Saturday, May 10th, in New York City, honoring CREDO / Working Assets and their political director Becky Bond (with Open Lefters Matt Stoller and Mike Lux on the host committee). During the course of the month, we'll be launching a new website and new tools.

And we're going to hit all 50 states for the first time. If I have to raise a pint in North Dakota myself, we're going to do it.

But I'm hoping I won't have to travel to North Dakota (at least not this month). The 240+ chapters that exist weren't started by me -- they were started by you -- liberals that wanted to gather, build community, share stories and a few pitchers. And now we need you to help realize the social parallel to Dean's 50-State Strategy: our own 50-Bar Strategy, promoting democracy one pint at a time.

Know anybody in West Virginia?

West Virginia Secretary of State Disenfranchising Thousands of Obama Voters?

Matt Stoller — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:06:53 GMT

I got a call today from Mark Levine, the election protection attorney for Donna Edwards and one in whom I have a good amount of trust, and he told me about a brewing problem in West Virginia which will probably end up disenfranchising thousands of Obama voters. Here's the nub of the issue. West Virginia has an open primary, which means you can vote even if you are an independent. However, if you are a Democrat or a Republican, you are automatically given a normal ballot in a primary. If you are an independent, you are pointed to a touch screen device which does not list a Presidential choice.

If you are an independent, you have the option of requesting a Democratic or Republican ballot so you can vote in the Presidential primary, but you have to request it. And unless you know to request it, you will end up with no vote in the Presidential primary. The Secretary of State has decided not to inform people of this fact, which will leave potentially thousands of voters in West Virginia who came to vote for Obama without a choice.

Independents, in other words, are being disenfranchised. There's a full press release on the flip.

Jeff Kisseloff is an author and journalist. His most recent book is "Generation on Fire: Voices of Protest from the 1960s" (University Press of Kentucky, 2007).
The West Virginia Secretary of State's office and county election offices in the state are refusing to tell independent ("no party choice") voters arriving to early vote at the state's 55 voting locations that they are entitled to vote in the Democratic primary, stating that they are forbidden to do so by law.
"The Obama campaign will lose thousands of votes during early voting if this situation isn't corrected quickly," Victoria Baker, a former Republican who is an Obama supporter in Huntington, WV, said Sunday. "The Secretary of State's position is not supported by the law," according to Roy D. (Don) Baker, a West Virginia lawyer familiar with the situation. "It is wrong," he said. Mr. Baker, a Democrat, is also an Obama supporter and Ms. Baker's husband
156,199 West Virginians are registered as independents eligible to vote in West Virginia's May 13 primary according to figures released over the weekend by the Secretary of State's office. That represents 13.2% of all registered voters in the state. These figures include voters who registered before last week's April 22nd registration deadline in the state. Early voting began April 23 and ends May 10.
Gregory L. Howard, Jr., the lawyer for the Secretary of State's office, said two sections of West Virginia law, Sections 3-1-35 and 3-2-31,1 mandate the office's position. The crucial provision, he said, is a sentence which says "Political parties, through the official action of their state executive committees, shall be permitted to determine whether unaffiliated voters or voters of other parties shall be allowed to vote that party's primary election ballot upon request." Howard, a Republican, is a former member of West Virginia's House of Delegates.
"If those sections are all they have to support their 'Don't tell, don't ask' policy, it's scandalous," Mark L. Levine, a voter protection lawyer from New York investigating the matter, said.
Howard's citation of the department's legal underpinning for the policy was made following the voter protection lawyer's request that the Secretary of State's office require election workers to deliver a slip of paper to each independent coming to vote which says, "If you want to vote in the Presidential Primary and are registered as an Independent ("No Party Choice"), you must ask for either a Republican or Democratic ballot. "No Party Choice" (Independent) ballots do not include a choice for President."
Levine also asked that signs with the same message be placed in the area where people come to early vote. Both requests were denied by Jason Williams, manager of the Elections Division of the Secretary of State's office, and by Howard. Williams said that this policy had long been in effect and could not be changed. He referred Levine to Howard for the policy's legal basis.
Levine made the requests late last week after learning that two West Virginians who wanted to early vote in the Democratic presidential primary voted on touch screens that listed no candidates for president since the two had registered as independents. West Virginia law permits voters who made no party choice when they registered to vote in the primary of either the Republican or Democratic party.
Howard said Friday that the two sections from the West Virginia code are the only legal basis for the Secretary of State's office's position and all that is necessary. Pressed to say what in those two sections supported the office's policy, he said that it was "two words"- the "upon request" at the end of Section 3-2-31(a) (the sentence quoted above). Howard rejected Levine's contention that nothing in either section supported the office's policy and denied his request that Ireland review the issue and change the office's position. It is not known whether Howard or Williams have apprised Ireland of that request. Ireland's 94-year-old mother died on Thursday and was buried Saturday.2
Williams said that the state's election offices had sent mailings to independent voters telling them they must ask for a party ballot if they want to vote in the presidential primary and that they also encouraged reporters to write articles to inform independent voters. He said those activities are not prohibited by the law but that giving the same information to independent voters at early voting and the polls is prohibited.
Two students at Marshall University (Huntington, WV), Matthew Smith and Tamara Chavies, voted with independent ballots at the Cabell County Courthouse in Huntington before noon Wednesday morning, the first day of early voting. Both were surprised when they learned that there was no choice for President on the ballot and that their votes had already been recorded. Voters in WV vote on touch screens and cannot tell from looking at the screen when they start voting that the presidential candidates are not listed on a subsequent screen.
"I don't understand how they can penalize you for not knowing how to vote when they don't tell you that you have to ask for a specific ballot," Smith said. "I'd hate to see my vote not counted because of a technicality."
The only race on the independent ballot was to elect two members of the Cabell County Board of Education.
Both Smith and Chavies were permitted to cast provisional ballots after they discovered their error. Each said they voted for Obama on the provisional ballot and were told that their vote might be counted. Under West Virginia law, provisional ballots are not opened on election night but can be opened and counted during a canvass of votes after May 13 if a county canvassing board determines, based on the circumstances surrounding each provisional ballot, that they should be.3 A provisional ballot cast after a voter has already cast a valid independent ballot will not be counted, voter protection lawyers say. A senior WV election official, speaking not for attribution, confirmed this.
Betty Ireland, a Republican, is West Virginia's secretary of state. She was elected in 2004 and is the first woman ever to be elected to the state's executive branch.4 She announced last July that she was not seeking re-election or running for another office in 2008 because attending to the needs of her aged parents and fulfilling her duties as Secretary of State would not allow her time to plan and run a political campaign in 2008.5 Both her parents are now deceased. Ireland pulled a major upset in 2004 election when she defeated former Secretary of State Ken Hechler and is a likely candidate for higher office.6
Levine said he had initially been told by a county elections officer on Thursday that the purpose of the policy was to prevent the SOS's office and election workers from "influencing elections." "Letting a voter know that if he wants to vote for a presidential candidate - of whatever party - is not influencing an election," Levine said. "It's the duty of the Secretary of State's office to educate voters and encourage voting, not to help disenfranchise people."
There is no Independent party as such in West Virginia. Voters are considered independents if they do not register for any of the parties listed on the state's registration form (Republican, Democrat, Mountain and "other") or if they check "No Party Choice."7 West Virginia Republicans have long permitted Independents to vote in their primaries. This is the first year that the Democratic Party has permitted it.

Foucault's Delegate Counter

Chris Bowers — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:25:41 GMT

Back on Friday evening, I argued, in a fashion that would have made Michel Foucault proud, that there is no objective, "true," delegate count, but instead only the power each campaign possessed to make its delegate count a reality. In other words, the truth of delegate counts and the power over the selection and credentialing of, not to mention rule making for, delegates are interchangeable concepts. As such, my new goal in delegate counting is not to determine the "true" delegate count, but instead to accurately determine the delegate count being argued for, and kept by, both the Obama and Clinton campaigns. From that point, we will see who has enough power over the process in order to make their delegate count a reality.

Our first indication of where the power resides will come in about five weeks, since that is when the rules and bylaws committee meets to discuss Florida and Michigan. For now, here are the dueling delegate counts from each campaign, as best as I can determine them:

Obama Campaign Delegate Count

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Pledged	1,494	1,333	18	408	1,627
Super	236	257	0	304	--
MI + FL	184	184	0	0	NA
Total	1,914	1,774	18	710	2,208

Clinton Campaign Delegate Count

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Pledged	1,490	1,336	19	408	1,627
Super	236	257	0	304	--
MI + FL	103	167	18	80	NA
Total	1,829	1,760	37	790	2,208

And here are my projections for future delegate acquisitions:

Democratic Nomination Primary Schedule

State	Date	O %	C %	P. Del	Obama Del	Clinton Del
Guam	May 03	--	--	4	2	2
Indiana	May 06	44.3%	46.8%	72	35	37
North Carolina	May 06	51.0%	40.7%	115	63	52
West Virginia	May 13	27.0%	55.0%	28	9	19
Kentucky	May 20	26.0%	62.0%	51	16	35
Oregon	May 20	52.0%	42.0%	52	29	23
Puerto Rico	Jun 01	37.0%	50.0%	55	24	31
Montana	Jun 03	--	--	16	8	8
South Dakota	Jun 03	46.0%	34.0%	15	8	7
Pelosi Club	Jun 04	NA	NA	5	6	-1
Future add-ons	Jun 21	NA	NA	64	38	26
Vacant	Jun 21	NA	NA	7	3	0
Total	June 21	--	--	484	241	239

Which leads to the following, dueling projections:

Democratic Nomination Delegate Projection

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Obama Count	2,155	2,013	18	230	2,208
Clinton Count	2,070	1,999	37	310	2,208

The disparity in the "remaining" column in the two counts comes from the argument over Florida and Michigan. The Clinton campaign count currently leaves 45 Michigan pledged delegates (all PLEO and at-large), 21 Michigan superdelegates, and 14 Florida superdelegates in the undetermined column. The 45 Michigan pledged delegates will be determined at the state party convention on May 17th, and will allow Clinton to gain some ground in her count. The rest of the "remaining" column in both counts are non-add-on superdelegates from outside Florida and Michigan.

Since it is one of the few times I have been able to apply Michel Foucault to something outside of academia, I am enjoying this new post-modern delegate counting that eschews a belief in an objective delegate reality. Even so, I do actually have a personal preference on how Michigan and Florida should be decided. If I were in charge, I would seat Florida's pledged delegates as is, and seat the pledged delegates from Michigan Clinton 73-55 Obama. From that point, I would strip both states of their superdelegates. This way, the voters of the two states are not punished, but the superdelegates who are responsible putting both states in this mess are. I actually think that this should become the standard punishment for states that flout the primary calendar: keep the pledged delegates, but strip the superdelegates with no possibility of reinstatement. I also really like the idea of superdelegates whining that they should be seated at the convention. That would be an hilarious press conference.

Nomination At A Glance, April 24th

Chris Bowers — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:38:25 GMT

Here is the latest delegate count. I have removed the add-on projections, because the add-on delegate from Oklahoma endorsed Obama instead of Clinton, thus showing that these delegates are not hte same as pledged delegates. Also, I lowered Obama's Michigan total to 27, because 19 are still to be selected at the state committee, and because I can't verify that 9 of the 36 uncommitted delegates at the district conventions last weekend support him.

Democratic Nomination Delegate Count

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Pledged	1,490	1,336	18	408	1,627
MI + FL	94	178	13	28	NA
Super	239	271	0	339	--
Total	1,824	1,785	31	775	2,208

According to current polling, here are projections for the remaining pledged delegates:

Democratic Nomination Primary Schedule

State	Date	O %	C %	P. Del	Obama Del	Clinton Del
Guam	May 03	--	--	4	2	2
Indiana	May 06	43.0%	45.0%	72	35	37
North Carolina	May 06	51.7%	36.8%	115	66	49
West Virginia	May 13	27.0%	55.0%	28	9	19
Kentucky	May 20	26.0%	62.0%	51	16	35
Oregon	May 20	52.0%	42.0%	52	29	23
Puerto Rico	Jun 01	37.0%	50.0%	55	24	31
Montana	Jun 03	--	--	16	8	8
South Dakota	Jun 03	46.0%	34.0%	15	8	7
Total	June 10	--	--	408	197	211

This leads to the following June 4th projection:

Democratic nomination campaign delegate projection

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Total 1	1,824	1,785	31	775	2,208
Projected	197	211	0	-408	--
Pelosi Club	6	-1	0	-5	--
Vacant	3	0	0	-3	--
Total 2	2,030	1,995	31	359	2,208

With Clinton + Edwards coming within four delegates of Obama, the possibility of a convention fight looms. In order to avoid fights at the credentials committee, rules committee, or floor of the convention, it is important for Obama to secure the as many of the 28 remaining uncommitted delegates from Michigan as possible, and to improve on the delegate projections for states and territories yet to hold nominating contests. It is also important that the remaining superdelegates commit to a candidate, just as almost every primary voter or caucus goer has already had to commit to a candidate. I still don't see a way for Clinton to pass Obama, short of Edwards moving his delegates to her in a block. Remarkable that Edwards still has an important role to play in the campaign, even at this late date.

Nomination At A Glance, April 9th

Chris Bowers — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:30:00 GMT

Is it April 9th where you are? I think it might be April 10th where I am, but I'm not sure. Anyway, here are the latest polling averages are delegate projections:

Democratic Nomination Primary Schedule

State	Date	O %	C %	P. Del	Obama Del	Clinton Del
Pennsylvania	Apr 22	42.3%	48.5%	158	74	84
Guam	May 03	--	--	4	2	2
Indiana	May 06	44.3%	51.3%	72	33	39
North Carolina	May 06	53.0%	36.0%	115	67	48
West Virginia	May 13	27.0%	55.0%	28	9	19
Kentucky	May 20	29.0%	58.0%	51	17	34
Oregon	May 20	52.0%	42.0%	52	29	23
Puerto Rico	Jun 01	--	--	55	23	32
Montana	Jun 03	--	--	16	8	8
South Dakota	Jun 03	--	--	15	8	7
Total	June 10	--	--	566	270	296

This translates to the following delegate count:

Democratic Nomination Delegate Count

Type	Obama	Clinton	Edwards	Remaining	50% + 1
Pledged	1,415	1,254	18	566	1,627
Super	221	245	0	328	--
Total 1	1,636	1,499	18	894	2,024
Projected	270	296	0	0	--
Pelosi Club	6	-1	0	-4	--
Vacant	3	0	0	-3	--
MI + FL	5	15	0	348	0
Total 2	1,920	1,809	18	676	2,208

The "vacant" column indicates three superdelegates-to-be who have endorsed Obama, but whom are not technically superdelegates yet (vacant Illinois DNC spot, vacant SEIU DNC spot, vacant MD-04 congressional spot). The Michigan and Florida columns add in the superdelegates who have declared, but leave the rest undecided (or, more accurately, "undetermined.") Since we know that Michigan and Florida will be seated, but we just don't know who those delegates will be, that seems like a reasonable way to include those delegations in the count for now.

It may seem strange to be posting a delegate count update from Israel, but people are even talking about it over here. This is a truly global primary.

Nomination At A Glance, February 28th

Chris Bowers — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:01:59 GMT

The majority of interviews for all polls were conducted since the Wisconsin primary on February 19th:

Democratic Nomination At A Glance

State	Date	Polls	Obama	Clinton	P. Delegates
P. Delegates	Jun 7	38	1,193.5	1,033.5	3,253 / 3,566
Ohio	Mar 04	6	42.2%	49.2%	141
Rhode Island	Mar 04	2	39.0%	52.5%	21
Texas	Mar 04	8	47.5%	45.9%	193
Vermont	Mar 04	3	56.7%	35.3%	15
Wyoming	Mar 08	0	--	--	12
Mississippi	Mar 11	0	--	--	33
Iowa*	Mar 15	0	--	--	14
Pennsylvania	April 22	2	42.5%	47.5%	158
Guam	May 03	0	--	--	4
Indiana	May 06	1	40.0%	25.0%	72
North Carolina	May 06	2	41.5%	27.5%	115
West Virginia	May 13	1	22.0%	43.0%	28

* = The 14 Iowa delegates for Edwards might switch at the March 15 county caucuses.

The polling that led me to conclude Clinton faces an insurmountable pledged delegate deficit has swung even further in favor of Obama. On March 4th, Obama has pulled slightly closer in Ohio (7.0% down from 7.3%), and slightly further ahead in Texas (1.6% up from 1.0%). Rhode Island is unchanged, while Clinton has pulled closer in Vermont (21.4% down from 25.0%). Obama has pulled nine points closer in Pennsylvania, and seven points further ahead in North Carolina. While West Virginia off-sets most of these gains for Obama, even favorable delegate projections for Clinton show losing eight net pledged delegates between now and May 13th.

Pro-Clinton Delegate Projections, Based On Current Polling

State	Date	Obama	Clinton	P. Delegates	Clinton Poll Margin
P. Delegates	Jun 7	1,193.5	1,033.5	3,253	--
Ohio	Mar 04	65	76	141	+7.0%
Rhode Island	Mar 04	8	13	21	+13.5%
Texas P	Mar 04	63	63	126	-1.0%
Texas C	Mar 04	38	29	67	--
Vermont	Mar 04	9	6	15	-21.4%
Wyoming	Mar 08	7	5	12	--
Mississippi	Mar 11	18	15	33	--
Iowa*	Mar 15	7	7	14	--
Pennsylvania	April 22	75	83	158	+5.0%
Guam	May 03	1	3	4	--
Indiana	May 06	41	31	72	-15.0%
North Carolina	May 06	65	50	115	-14.0%
West Virginia	May 13	9	19	28	+21.0%
Total	NA	407	399	778	--

A deficit of 168 pledged delegates after West Virginia is untenable. Obviously, Clinton needs to change the direction of the campaign, because current delegate math indicates virtually no way for her to win.

Resources: Pledged Delegate Count, Popular Vote Counts, Democratic Convention Watch, Democratic Nomination Wiki, The Green Papers, Pollster.com

Update: New Rasmussen polling in Pennsylvania and Texas caused some change in these numbers.

Adopt Our District

WVaBlue — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 23:02:33 GMT

Do you live in a safely Democratic Congressional district? Are you eager to add to the Democratic Congressional majority? Want to tie down incumbent Republican resources in a top Democratic House pick-up opportunity?

Adopt our district!

It doesn't matter if you've ever stepped foot in the district before or not, we welcome you here in West Virginia's Second Congressional District.

West Virginia State Senator John Unger is a progressive Democrat who needs our support to successfully challenge vulnerable Republican Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (WV-02). Your help today can make a major difference in this race.

The Curse of Capito

In early 2006, I moved to WV-02 and became an active volunteer for the Democratic challenger. There I met Carnacki, a long-time district activist and well-known member of dailyKos. One major contribution WV-02 Dems made in '06 was forcing Rep. Capito to buy an easy win (57% of vote). She panicked, stopped funding other candidates and even held two fund-raisers in DC the last week of the election.

Still, it was a disappointing outcome here in the district. The challenger never had money to get his message out, the voters were once again duped and we're stuck with two more years of mis-leadership for WV-02.

The curse of Capito fell over our district in 2000 with the ill winds of Pres. George Bush's installation to office. Vulnerable Republican Rep. Shelley Moore Capito is the daughter of the former Rep., W.Va. Gov., and ex-con Arch A. Moore. Her path from college career counselor to W.Va. legislator to U.S. House was paved with her middle name. Like George Bush, it's long past time her public dis-service ended.

A moderate-in-name-only, Capito has shown her true colors by supporting Bush in his greatest time of need. She has a nasty penchant to talk out of both sides of her mouth. She said she was against the surge, but refused to vote against it. She said she supports worker's rights, but refused to vote for the Employee Free Choice Act. She said she believes in oversight and accountability in Iraq, but votes against it.

As a four-term incumbent, Capito has accumulated remarkable little power or prestige. Her greatest legislative accomplishments are founding the Civility Caucus and, just last month, passing a law making something already illegal, well, still illegal. Scratch behind the ear of any Republican Rep. under indictment, investigation, or incarceration and you'll find she's gladly received money from them (she was the single largest recipient of Tom Delay PAC funds) and her good friend Bob Ney is now sitting in a W.Va. prison.

Who is John Unger?

Unger has a compelling personal biography. He was the first in his family to attend college yet he took time off from school to work with Mother Teresa in the slums of Calcutta. He's a Rhodes Scholar. In his 9 years as a State Senator he has passed hundreds of pieces of legislation. He's provided aid to refugees in Hong Kong and Turkey. In 2003, he spent 3 months in Iraq working with Save the Children. He's a person of compassion and competence. He has strong moral and intellectual integrity.

These experiences shape his political beliefs. Unger help deliver aid to the Kurds after the Gulf War in 1995 and aid to the Iraqis during our occupation in 2003. He advocates we turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and bring our troops home from Iraq immediately. Unger would be one of the few Reps. with on-the-ground experience in Iraq. [Perhaps the only one with NGO experience?] He knows there needs to be a political solution in Iraq, instead of a military solution.

West Virginia Netroots Support

Unger is a rare combination of someone who was both the Netroots activists' and the DCCC's first choice. After West Virginia native Christy Hardin Smith spurned our efforts to draft her for the WV-02 race, we turned to recruiting W.Va. State Sen. John Unger. Carnacki lives in his district and has known him for several years.

The day after Election '06, Carnacki and I started actively laying the groundwork to knock her off this cycle. One thing missing in W.Va. was an online progressive voice--we redoubled our efforts to grow West Virginia Blue to help fill that void and sustain progressive candidates at all levels in W.Va. We strongly endorse John Unger as a progressive voice for WV-02.

Unger is newly introduced to the Netroots. He just recently read "Crashing the Gate" and has welcomed our support for his campaign. Since he announced, Carnacki and I have met with for extended dinner conversations lasting late into the night. He's comfortable meeting on our turf--the same Waffle House Carnacki and I meet at every few weeks to plot Capito's downfall!

Unger has already been a fast learner of one key Netroots lesson: fight back hard at baseless right-wing attacks. In an optimistic sign for 2008, when John Unger fired back at a smear attempt by the W.Va. GOP last month, the largest paper in the district called out the Republicans for their "hateful tactic".

John Unger embraces the label of progressive Democrat. His life experiences demonstrate his commitment to social and economic justice. He is strongly against any form of discrimination against anyone, including discrimination based on race, religion, gender, and sexual orientation. In a recent meeting, he spoke with passionate about hate crimes being not just crimes, but crimes against humanity.

Unger is an accomplished legislator. Elected to the W.Va. Senate at age 28, he's been an independent, effective, results-oriented state senator. He's passed over 230 bills including the West Virginia Water Resources Protection Act, the Voluntary Farmland Protection Program and legislation that created the West Virginia Division of Energy. Unger is running on a platform of getting out of Iraq, energy independence, and universal healthcare.

These qualifications are in sharp contrast with vulnerable Republican Rep. Shelley Moore Capito. The path to her mis-leadership was paved by her middle name. The path to John Unger's leadership was been paved with hard work, a strong moral core and exemplary competence.

Capito consistently prioritizes the needs of Pres. George Bush and the GOP "team" first. John Unger lives a life of public service, prioritizing the needs of constituents first. Crapito demagogues. Unger gets results.

Adopt Our District

In summary, John Unger is Democrat who can win WV-02 this cycle. The field is clear from him in the Democratic primary. He needs financial support to get his progressive message out past the conservative-dominated state media. We're working hard every day to turn WV-02 from Red to Blue.

As strong as our candidate is, we face an uphill battle. The power of incumbency and a conservative-dominated state media is strong. Entrenched interests in West Virginia cross party lines. Still, we've got a real chance this cycle. We've got a smart hard-working candidate--we just needs the resources to get the job done. This is our best shot. Unfortunately, if we don't unseat her now, Capito could remain a fixture of West Virginia politics for life.

Please help us end the Bush-Capito reign of WV-02. Help us send progressive Democrat John Unger to Washington in 2008. Your contribution of any size will make a difference.

Clem Guttata
WV-02 Volunteer Netroots Activist
West Virginia Blue
http://www.wvablue.com

Similar diary appeared as a guest-post at Down With Tyranny.

Republican Rep. Capito (WV-02) takes credit for bolting a locked door

WVaBlue — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 20:04:49 GMT

I know we often make fun of lawyers in this country ("What do you call a smiling, sober, courteous person at a bar association convention? The caterer."). On the other hand, there's a lot to be said for the value of training in law for political leadership. The Clintons (Bill, Yale; Hillary, Yale), Barack Obama (Harvard), John Edwards (UNC), and Harry Reid (George Washington U.) all have law degrees.

Then we have our Republican mis-leadership. There's George Bush with an Master's in Business Administration. That's the same degree that Duke Cunningham and Jeff Skilling have. There's Rep. Shelley Moore Capito with a Master's in Career Counseling. That's the same degree as... well, actually, no one comes to mind. Bush and Capito share a mis-understanding of the law, too. Whereas Bush missed the week in high school civics class about constitutional checks and balances, after six years in Congress Rep. Capito still hasn't figured out the basic mechanics of when a law is needed.

Case in point: Rep. Capito is crowing about her success in using an obscure legislative maneuver to outlaw something that is already illegal!

West Virginia Democrats had no problem getting it right (emphasis mine):

West Virginia’s other two congressmen—Alan Mollohan and Nick Rahall—voted against the measure. Rahall says he opposed the amendment because the program already includes ID requirements and toughening up the standard would be burdensome to many rural and elderly citizens and raise privacy concerns. Mollohan’s office said the amendment was "nothing but political chicanery."

You know, it's hard to counter the negative stereotypes the rest of the country has of West Virginia. Rep. Capito isn't helping any. They noticed up in New York, too: Rep. Joe Crowley (D-Queens) said "It's all demagoguery." As Albor Ruiz of the New York Daily News put it:

While the fate of 12 million people, thousands of families and the future of the nation's economy wait for Congress to do its job on immigration reform, some of its members would rather play games.
[snip]
"Loopholes in current law, like this housing assistance loophole for illegal immigrants, act as a magnet and invite people to enter our country illegally," Capito is quoted as saying. "We should not be rewarding those who have come here illegally by awarding them taxpayer-funded services intended for law-abiding citizens."
Wow! Is she tough! She's cracking down and closing loopholes! No "illegal" will take advantage of taxpayers on her watch!
Not to rain on her party, but there is one small problem: What loophole is she talking about? Undocumented immigrants already are ineligible for housing vouchers. Under current law, all recipients of assistance are required to be citizens or to prove their lawful immigration status.
Capito can do all the chest-thumping she wants, but there is nothing to crack down on.

Here in West Virginia, the coverage is a mixed bag. Tom Searls article reads like a Capito press release. Yet, he did prominently mention his inability to get a quote from Rahall or Mollohan. Loopy Kercheval's opinion piece does include quotes from Rahall and Mollohan but it distorts the issue even worse than Capito did.

Capito should be called out for immigration race-baiting and class warfare. Her arguments are full of lies and distortion. Here's a just a few ways her actions are deceitful:

1. The HUD reform is benign at best and an assault on poor people at worst. It is already illegal for illegal residents to get section-8 benefits. As Rahall noted, her additional ID requirements create an additional burden on those who can least afford it.

If this legislative action has any effect it will be to make it harder for those who are entitled to the benefits to get them. This is an assault on poor people. Republicans like Bush and Capito believe that government cannot help people--this is an example of a self-fulfilling prophecy as they make it more difficult for the government to help those who most need help.

2. She provides no evidence whatsoever that there is a problem with Section-8 housing that needs "reform". The one statistic she quotes in support of this bill has nothing to do with Section-8 housing.

You can be sure if she had any examples of illegal residents receiving Section 8 housing she would have mentioned them. As Mollohan said, this is "nothing but political chicanery." It is a waste of time, money, and resources.

3. In her floor statement she repeatedly says the tax dollars paying for Section 8 housing come from hard-working Americans. That's a misleading statement. Tax dollars are paid by not only by hard-working Americans but also by legal immigrants and illegal immigrants who reside and pay taxes in this country.

She knows this. She's using misleading inflammatory rhetoric to score cheap political points. Rep. Joe Crowley is absolutely right, "It's all demagoguery."

This is yet another example of Bush-Capito style mis-leadership. There's a reason why 75% of West Virginians feel that the country is headed on the wrong-track. Passing do-nothing legislation doesn't help.

West Virginia need leaders who put their energy into solving the many difficult, significant problems that we face--ending the occupation of Iraq, providing universal health care, and providing social and economic justice for all of us, not just the wealthy few.

It's time for Bush and Capito to leave office. We can do better.

Cross-posted at West Virginia Blue