Sweep

That's the headline already, but it's more than Obama won every contest today--caucuses in Washington and Nebraska, primary in Louisiana, and I don't know what that was in the Virgin Islands. Once again it's the geographical sweep. Heavily African American vote in Louisiana, not so much in Nebraska and Washington. Obama won Washington despite both (women) Senators endorsing Hillary, though he was endorsed a few days ago by the (woman) Governor Gregoire.

And the size of each victory: more than 2 to 1 in Nebraska and Washington, by more than 20 points in Louisiana--and 90% in the V.I.s. Or as this report put it: Obama's winning margins ranged from substantial to crushing.

On Saturday Obama spoke in Maine to an audience of 6 to 7,000 (plus another 2,000 who couldn't fit), while Hillary spoke to about 1500, with 3 to 500 turned away. The Maine caucus is Sunday, an all-day affair.

Hillary and Obama also spoke to the big Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner in Virginia. Rachel Maddow on MSNBC thought it was her best speech of the campaign, but the crowd was heavily with Obama. Obama was introduced by Virgina Governor Tim Kaine who endorsed him. Virginia Senator Mark Warner was there, and I believe he's also endorsed Obama. Obama complimented Virginia Senator Jim Webb twice in his speech, though he has yet to endorse anyone and is considered to be more likely to support Hillary. (He's also considered an attractive v.p. for Obama.) The Virginia primary is on Tuesday, and the Survey USA poll (the most reliable for Super Tuesday) shows Obama with a big lead; also in Maryland which votes the same day, as does DC.

Saturday's result already puts Obama clearly in the lead in delegates won in contests, and even with the AP's projections that included super-delegates (who can change their mind anytime), he's very close, despite Hillary's nearly 2 to 1 margin from her inevitability phase.

Maine is Hillary's February firewall, though Obama supporters insist he'll win there. Her next prospect is Wisconsin, but that's doubtful. Her big state strategy puts it all on the line in Texas and Ohio. In fact, this report in a British newspaper suggests that if she wins those primaries, she would ask party elders to persuade Obama to step aside. The Obama campaign is saying they will stay in it through to the convention.

Polls say Hillary is ahead in Ohio and Texas, but Obama is poised to win 9 of the 10 contests between Super Tuesday and March 4, with tomorrow's caucus in Maine as the only one in which Hillary is given much of a chance. That gives him tremendous momentum, especially if his margins of victory continue to be so overwhelming. All of this sets up Ohio and Texas as the most intensely fought contests of the campaign.

And Sunday, the Cleveland Plain Dealer endorses Obama:

" Obama's frequent talk of hope strikes some people as naive. It leads others to question his toughness. But Obama understands something his critics do not: Change requires vision and optimism, shared sacrifice and mutual trust. Hope can sustain those elements; a presidency defined by political tactics cannot.

Hillary Clinton is an exceptionally bright and accomplished woman. Only a fool could dispute that...But in a campaign where history matters, she carries an inordinate amount of baggage. Who wants to relive the soap operas of the 1990s? "

Brain Science for Super-Delegates

The Conventional Wisdom narrative now is that Clinton and Obama are deadlocked, and the nomination may not be decided until the convention, which will put the party and the nominee in peril because the GOPer nominee--almost certainly John McCain--will have several months head start campaigning.

There is some substance to this analysis, and some problems with it. The substance is this: If Paul Kane of the Washington Post is right about the math, neither candidate can win enough delegates to secure the nomination in the primaries and caucuses to come. In that sense, it is a mathematical deadlock, assuming that both candidates get their usual share of the delegates in the contests between now and June.

If neither mathematically eliminates the other, and neither withdraws, then it's up to super-delegates and probably the convention, since the delegates belonging to Michigan and Florida may make the difference to a majority, and so the decision to seat them or not will determine the nominee.

Even as Super Tuesday votes were being counted, party chair Howard Dean was warning of this possibility. He is right to say it would be a disaster for the Democratic Party, and not just because the nominee would be playing catch-up against McCain. Some Democrats feel strongly that the time has passed that party insiders--the super-delegates--should name the nominee. Donna Brazile said if that happens she would quit the Democratic Party.

I am probably not alone in feeling just as strongly that seating Michigan and Florida delegates that reflect the outcome of their bogus primaries would be such a travesty that I would quit the Democratic Party. (I might still vote for the Democratic candidate in November, but not as a Democrat.) We had eight years of calamitous consequences thanks to the debacle of the 2000 election, and this is just as serious a travesty.

Both of these situations would be disastrous. The only other possibility I can think of--and perhaps Howard Dean was contemplating--is that one of the candidates would withdraw for the good of the party. Presumably it would be the candidate with the lesser number of pledged delegates.

As I said, the idea that Obama and Clinton are deadlocked itself has some problems. While it's true that at the moment they appear to be tied, there are more contests to come. It may be that what Super Tuesday showed is that Obama is moving up while Hillary is slipping down, and they happened to be even on that day. We'll get some evidence about that soon.

It's possible that the delegate count will wind up being very close between them by mid-March or the end of April. But it's also possible that it won't be--that there will be a clear leader.

So let's think this through now--especially you super-delegates. If there is a clear leader, isn't it likely to be Barack Obama? He is more likely to win the lion's share of delegates in the February caucuses and primaries, and he is likely to win close to half the delegates in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, even if Clinton wins a few more in each state than he does. It is less likely that Clinton will have a substantial lead in delegates at that point.

While you are contemplating that, think about which candidate is more likely to win in November, and which candidate is likely to be better for the Democratic Party then and for the long term.

The answer is the same: Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton is divisive. The Republicans are praying that she is the nominee. They raise money on the very idea that she will be. They can't wait to run against her. The Republican Party is in disarray now. But there is one thing that can unite it: Hillary as the Democratic nominee.

Clinton and others criticized Obama for suggesting that in recent elections, the Democrats had 46% and the Republicans had 46%, and everybody fought for the remainder, and the winner can't govern. Now look at the polls--most specifically the latest Time survey: Clinton 46%, McCain 46%. (Obama got 48% to McCain's 41%.) Various polls over at least a year have shown Clinton's favorables and unfavorables have been about even.

Clinton is divisive within the party. Many commentators have said openly that her campaign has used race against Obama. They've also said openly that she uses the woman as victim image for electoral advantage. Right now her campaign is whipping up a frenzy over a tasteless analogy used by a newsperson to galvanize and solidify white feminist support that has been peeling off.

Obama on the other hand has appealed to black voters and young voters with his message of unity. His campaign is not divisive. It has brought together established and insurgent elements of the Democratic Party, and it has brought thousands of new participants and millions of new voters.

When Obama says that he will keep the votes of people who are voting for Hillary, but she won't get all the votes of people voting for him--who can really dispute this?

And what will happen to the voters Obama has energized and galvanized in what he calls a movement as well as a candidacy? If he is not the nominee, much of that energy and many of those voters will be lost, perhaps for a long time. It's not that African American voters and young voters will go to the polls to vote for McCain. It's more likely that those who haven't been going to the polls before this year, won't go in November.

And if the perception is that Hillary has won the nomination through arm-twisting deals and bogus delegates from Michigan and Florida--then many of those young voters in particular will be lost to the party and the process for years to come, perhaps forever.

Obama had demonstrated a profound ability to get support from Independents and Republicans. He is attracting rural voters in Red States. He is attracting young professionals who may be Republicans. He is even capable of being strongly pro-choice and attracting pro-life voters who agree with him in other important ways. No other Democrats had demonstrated the breadth and depth of the voting groups and voters he can attract.

The Bangor Daily News expresses this well in an editorial that echoes many others throughout the country:

"Though Sen. Clinton has worked with Republicans, she would be a polarizing president. Whether deserved or not, the Clintons -- the senator and former president -- incite many Republicans to savage opposition, a response that could impede her ability to govern. Sen. Obama, a fresh face who must present more details of his proposals for addressing health care, the economy, climate change and other issues, stands a much better chance of working for a new agenda to tackle new problems, and finding common ground with Republicans. These are important considerations for Democrats this weekend."

So if you're a super-delegate who cares about the Democratic Party and its future, who wants to win the presidency in November and a lot of congressional seats besides, as well as state and local offices, and if you really want the new Democratic President to be effective in governing-- I don't think it's brain science to see that you're much better off with Barack Obama as the party's nominee.

So what's a nervous super-delegate to do? I'm not suggesting that you subvert the democratic process. But you can participate in it. Clearly super-delegates who have endorsed a candidate plan to vote for him or her. More of them should find the right time to endorse Obama. More of them should make these arguments in their states, because these are persuasive arguments for those who care about this election and the future.

Beyond that, a protracted, ugly struggle that is all too synonymous with "politics" truly does look like a nightmare that could hand the presidency to John McCain, who at the moment seems to be running to the Rabid Right of G.W. Bush. If he is that kind of President, kiss the country goodbye. And remember, Hillary is at best a 50%+1 candidate. It won't take much to erase the +1.

But of course it may not turn out to be that messy. While I have little confidence anymore in the honor of the Clintons, perhaps some honorable solution will be found. In the meantime, work the hope--get Barack Obama so many delegates that he can't be denied.

Thankless Thursday

Romney is out. The Rabid Right is foaming at the mouth.

As I suspected, the Clinton campaign was playing possum. Their staffers aren't going without pay, the campaign has raised over $6 million in the past few days with new donors (while Obama has raised over 7.5 million) and the idea that all her former donors have maxed out is not likely to be true. Still, this guy thinks her lending that $5 million--which is apparently Bill's money, too--is going to come back to bite her.

Depressing story of the day: Paul Kane at the Washington Post maintains that it is all but impossible for either Hillary or Obama to win enough delegates in the upcoming primaries to secure the nomination. It will be up to the Super Delegates apparently. So everything we'll go through for the next several months is just go keep it close, and take control of the narrative. Maybe by then those Super Delegates will get super smart, and realize that THE REPUBLICANS CAN'T WAIT TO RUN AGAINST HILLARY, and that Obama is the only candidate WHO CAN KEEP THE BASE AND EXPAND THE PARTY.

Wisdom Wednesday, Part 3

Does money talk? It does in campaigns, almost literally (TV and radio ads, robocalls, etc.). The first news today was that Hillary lent her campaign $5 million, and it's gone. Then that her top staff is going without pay (not that they can't afford it--consultants can clear millions on a national campaign; Hillary's guy Mark Penn's firm was recently paid more than $4 million), and they issued a fund-raising appeal.

Today the Obamathoners online took on the challenge, and as of 8:30 p. PT, they've raised nearly $6 million since the polls closed yesterday. [Actually, between the time I wrote this and posted it, they surpassed that figure, and are now approaching $6.4 million.] They expect to raise a total of 30 million in this short month of February.

Obama will campaign in Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington state, which all have contests on Saturday he is expected to do well in (also a caucus in Maine, which apparently Hillary has some hopes for, and a contest in the Virgin Islands.) He's also favored for next Tuesday in the Potomac primary of D.C., Maryland and Virginia, as well as Hawaii and Wisconsin the following week. It's not clear if Hillary will campaign more than symbolically in any of these. She has her sights on Ohio and Texas on March 4 and Pennsylvania on April 22. Today the Obama campaign announced it is officially opening its offices in Texas and Ohio, and has reassigned top staff that helped him win in Iowa and South Carolina to those states.

I quoted Kos last night saying it was on balance a win for Obama. Chris Bowers, who started the myDD site that grandfathered the Kos site, and who is a numbers guy, also sees the states and delegate count propelling Obama: " for the first time since New Hampshire, Obama now has a clear path to the nomination. The Clinton campaign is going to talk a lot of super delegates and a lot of Florida and Michigan, but right now Obama has the edge of pledged delegates, resources, and momentum generating activists. If he can sweep Beltway Tuesday, avoid a surprise in Wisconsin on February 19th, and then win both Ohio and Texas, he will be the nominee. "

As Bowers said, those are big "ifs." Texas and Ohio look like they're going to be tough, especially if Billary sees them as their last stand.


A few more loose ends from yesterday...Will anybody ever believe a Zogby poll again? They seem to have been the least accurate. The most accurate, according to Kos and the numbers he showed, was SUSA.

Television coverage: I watched MSNBC early, not only for Keith (who actually doesn't say much, compared to Matthews) but because they seemed to have fewer commercials than CNN. Every time I switched to CNN, they were in commercial. But by later in the night, I was staying with CNN, despite my aversion to Wolf Blitzer and his voice. They were just more substantive in their reporting and analysis of the numbers. Their political panel was no better, so I often zapped them but when I wanted hard info, I stayed with CNN.

My district in CA, where Bill Clinton made a quick visit that was front page news and the buzz for a week, went for Obama, 53.7% to 38.4% for Clinton.

I hope I can break my addiction to talking to myself about all this here. It's been fun, but I've got to get something else done!

Wisdom Wednesday, Part 2

The media narrative seems to be that the results of Tsunami Tuesday mean the Democratic race is even. Obama won more states but Clinton won bigger states--but Obama won more delegates. That's not final yet, but consider two days ago a media maven was saying that if Hillary won by fewer than 200 delegates it would be a loss for her, and the Obama campaign said their goal was to win within 100 delegates of Clinton.

As California votes were counted, Obama lost by about 9 points. There is a lot of controversy within the state about independent (no preference) voters not getting to vote, because of various screwups at the polls. Our Secretary of State (Debra Bowen) got elected on her strong record for voting rights, so we'll see how this plays out.

But not everybody was buying into this master narrative--the Field blog has a photo of the cover on the Philadephia Daily News: a photo of Obama and headline: Our Next President.

But as Obama warned last night, it's not going to be easy. The revelation today that Hillary lent $5 million to her campaign for Tsunami Tuesday--which means it's already been spent--is a bit shocking. This Times story makes the situation sound dire. I can't believe her campaign won't raise some money on the basis of her big state wins, and I'll be interested to see if the frenetic pace of Obama's incoming contributions continues. But Obama has more potential for raising money, and more time to campaign in the states with upcoming primaries or caucuses or--in Texas--a combination of the two, on the same day.

Hillary has to at least compete in the contests this month to stay viable. If she's forced by funds to adopt an Ohio firewall strategy, and that doesn't work, it could be over for her by Pennsylvania. And PA in April is looming large. With the endorsement of its governor, she looks to have the advantage--but I'll have to check with my expert PA source.

But let's not neglect what Obama accomplished yesterday. He continues to increase his proportion of the vote in all or nearly all groups (the exception may be Asian Americans). He demonstrated beyond doubt that he can win white votes--he actually got more white votes in California than Hillary. In some places, he got 44% of the Latino vote.

But of course, these categories are only after the fact analyzes--they aren't necessarily why people vote for somebody. I suspect a lot of folks in Los Angeles voted the way their employers suggested.

Wisdom Wednesday

Conventional Wisdom, that is. What will it be? (Because it's just after midnight here.) On the GOPer side, it looks like McCain is inevitable, and Huckabee is his v.p. Even if Romney doesn't drop out entirely by day's end, he's not given much of a chance.

For the Dems, the campaign for votes and delegates goes on. Obama won Connecticut, where he was down 14 points two weeks ago. He won Alabama, where Hillary was up 15 points. He won Missouri, where he was behind by 19 points. He came up short in Massachusetts, where he was down 37 points two weeks ago. And by the time you read this it may be more evident that he came pretty close in California, where Hillary was up something like 20 points two weeks ago.

The CW also says that the next few states will probably go to Obama, but Hillary will make her stand in Ohio and Texas in early March. Ohio, like CA, is where she's put in resources and time. Though Obama has more money now, Hillary may get enough to compete, and the question is whether there is enough time for Obama to get himself known well enough in the coming states to start really cleaning up.

You have to give the CW and the political calculus their due. But Obama said something in his eloquent speech from Chicago election night--he referred to his campaign, I think for the first time, as a movement. Oddly, I was thinking about this earlier in the day, whether it was legitimate to start calling it a movement, because that's what it seems to me to be. And the power of a movement is inherently unpredictable. Plus Obama just gets sharper with each stump speech, and more eloquent with each election night speech.

I find myself wondering about endorsements now. Did Tuesday call into question their usefulness? I don't think you can measure the impact of the Kennedy endorsements, or their campaigning. Certainly the endorsements of Governors like Kathleen Sibeleus paid dividends. And above all, the Mayor of Los Angeles, with patronage power to deliver for Hillary (Kos' theory.)

Regardless of how their electoral impact is evaluated now, the question of Super Delegates looms larger in a close race. It will be fascinating now to see if there are new endorsements this coming week. Will potential Super Delegates wait for more outcomes? Or will they do what they did even after Hillary won New Hampshire, and make their move with the future?

What does John Edwards do, when most of his staff and supporters have already gone to Obama, and his voters are trending that way? Does it matter if he endorses, beyond the photo op? Bill Richardson's endorsement may still matter with Latino voters in Texas, but the moment may have passed him by, as it did the other former presidential candidates. It matters only when they are current members of Congress or otherwise are designated Super Delegates.

The one voice who can still make something of a difference is Al Gore. It's been reported that it's only a matter of when and not if he will endorse Obama, but even that is still speculation. There is one more element of a high profile endorsement that perhaps can't be quantified, but we saw it with the Kennedy endorsements (which were in the works before the great South Carolina victory.) And that is their immediate influence on the narrative.

Right now the narrative is unclear. A high profile endorsement creates its own momentum. If Gore or Edwards were to endorse Obama in the next few days, Obama would win the narrative of Tsunami Tuesday.

Tsuami Tuesday, part 6

9 p. Barack Obama just gave another wonderful speech. While he was giving it, CNN called Colorado for Obama. And Obama has pulled ahead in Missouri! Once that happened, I think it's going to be a win.

Well, bummer. NBC calls California for Hillary. Also for McCain, which is an upset according to the polls, but I always thought he'd win it. Apparently they called it for Hillary because of high Latino turnout and only average black turnout.

10:45p. There are still not a lot of hard numbers from California I can find. Winning CA is big for Hillary, though she's been campaigning here hard, spent a lot of money, and had the Los Angeles mayor's machine in a heavily Latino area of the state.

Still, overall, a big night for Obama. He won more contests (13-9) and according to Chuck Todd of Politico is so far leading in delegates. That's huge! Now the question becomes the narrative that emerges. Some will say the Obama wave did not capsize Hillary. Some will say it was a draw. Some will point to CA and New Jersey for Hillary, some to Missouri and Conn. for Obama. And some will say what Kos said. After agreeing that CA is big for Hillary: "But the rest of the night is bleak. She didn't exceed expectations anywhere. She lost states she led big in just a few weeks ago. She's hurting for money. The calendar up ahead is tailor made for Obama. The momentum is there."

Tsunami Tuesday, part 5

8:20 p. CNN exit poll analysis shows that Obama is WINNING the white vote in California. Astonishing! He's also winning the black vote overwhelmingly. (I don't think he's gotten under 80% of the black vote anywhere, and it was like 90% in Delaware.) But what's making this close is that Clinton has 2/3 of the Latino vote. I believe the Obama campaign was hoping to get closer to 40%, so 33% may not be enough--the Latino base comprises about 30% of CA Dems. But I have to say this is hopeful. It may depend on how many of those groups voted today.

David Gergen pointed out that Minnesota has as any delegates as the much vaunted Missouri, which makes me feel better. Clinton still slightly ahead.

NBC called Arizona for Hillary, but CNN is holding off.

CNN analysis of votes still being counted in Missouri suggest Obama could still pull out a victory there. He's winning overwhelmingly in the cities--St. Louis, Kansas City, and there's a decent percentage still to be counted. I'm feeling better.

Nobody is counting delegates yet--except the campaigns. Obama's claims they're ahead by 72 so far. The formulas are so complicated that nobody will really know for days. But except for California, which looks like it's going to be even in delegates, there's not a lot out there left for Clinton (although she's going to get a bunch from Missouri because she's won most of the counties.) If Obama wins more delegates tonight, it's momentum building victory.

Tsunami Tuesday, part 4

Big one: CNN projects Obama to win Connecticut.
Not a small one: CNN projects Obama to win Minnesota.

The TV is getting cluttered with Republican candidates speaking. So far, you'd have to say that both Clinton and Obama have some bragging rights, with the delegate counts to come. Hillary's wins so far will probably mean she can raise some money and compete. I'm nervous about what I'm hearing about Missouri and California. But the Obama campaign said yesterday and today that their goal was to survive Tsunami Tuesday, and make their big move afterwards. It looks like they're going to do that, at least. This analysis weighs towards an Obama advantage coming out of today.

7:45p CNN is talking about exit polls in Arizona that show Obama getting 44% of the Latino vote, much higher than nationally. Bodes well for California, since Obama is expected to do better among younger Latinos and recent immigrants, and Arizona's Latino population is older and more established. Frankly, this is the first good news I've heard about California, and it's not even about California. Polls close here in a few minutes.

8 p. NBC calls Idaho for Obama. Bracing for less than ecstatic news from Missouri and California, though CA will come much later. Missouri will be a blow if it continues to go for Clinton. St. Louis is apparently still coming in, and it depends on Obama's margin there. CA is psychological mostly--it's likely that Hillary and Obama will split the delegates pretty evenly. But it will suggest something about momentum, though we'll see how they all spin it. At this point, with the polls just closed, too close to call. Apparently he's doing well in New Mexico.

Tsunami Tuesday, part 3

6:30 p. It's time to define "disappointment" in an Obama partisan mode: it means he isn't getting states in Hillary's northeastern sphere of influence where she was leading by double digits just a few weeks ago. So one network is calling Mass., New Jersey and New York for Clinton. The delegate question is not settled. The NY Times points out that Clinton outspent Obama in Mass. 2 to 1 for TV ads, and that their organization was strong. Earlier in the year, Mass. was considered Clinton's strongest state outside of New York.

Also, the Times online is being very careful with their projections: they've given only Tenn. and Mass. to Clinton, Georgia and Illinois to Obama.

However, Obama is projected by NBC as victorious in Delaware and Alabama, where Clinton also led in the polls. The Times notes that in Georgia, women went to Obama by 2-1 margin. An 80% black vote has to be factored into that.

The storyline so far is that nobody is getting a landslide, that Hillary is not done yet, but that demographic trend lines all favor Obama--according to exit polls he's getting about 44% of the white vote, and increasing his inroads into votes of women and Latinos, while increasing his lead in black and young voters. There's some bad-mouthing of the Kennedys, Kerry and Governor Patrick for not delivering Mass. to Obama, but all the votes aren't in and it may be closer than projected.

A factor they aren't talking about is today's weather. Tornadoes in Arkansas and Tennessee are just one example of the bad weather in many primary states.

On the Republican side, the TV narrative seems to be that McCain is not getting the landslide across the country--so far-- that was expected. Huckabee is apparently doing better than expected.

7p. Somebody has apparently called Kansas for Obama. NBC called North Dakota and Utah for Obama. Conn. is still out, with Obama reportedly leading. Missouri also, with Clinton reportedly leading.

Tsunami Tuesday Part 2

4 p. PT Obama wins Georgia, receiving not only over 80% of the African American vote, but 43% of the white vote, and his biggest age group: baby boomers. (Well, the younger ones.)

If this was the only election today, and if the exit polls are accurate (which is questionable) it would be historic. Imagine: nearly half the white voters in the South voting for a black man for President in the Democratic primary. For a moment just look at that. And give props to Jesse Jackson, who for so many bleak years led that chant, "Keep hope alive." It was more than a racial message, as his was more than a racial candidacy especially in 1992, when I watched him (live) debate Bill Clinton before the Pennsylvania primary. America could not really imagine a black President then. Obama is more than that--he's the Tiger Woods of politics really, with his mixed parentage, very mixed ancestry (it's just reputedly been discovered that he has Irish forebearers) and international background. But it is an important moment in American history. Maybe the first indication of the day that America might be growing up.

5p. Obama takes his home state, the Land of Lincoln, where I went to college and still have old acquaintances: Illinois.

Super Tuesday (Part 1)

1 a.m.PT The latest and last Zogby tracking poll is out, and it shows Obama leading in California 49% to 36%! As I said, Zogby doesn't get a lot of respect, but..gee whiz!

He also found that Hillary is up a tad over the margin of error in New Jersey, as is Obama in Missouri. Obama is up 20 points in Georgia.

The Washington Post has a story for this morning on the boost that the Kennedys have given the Obama campaign. If Obama does win California by winning Latino votes, this quote from the story may be prophetic:

Added Michael Casaus, 35, an environmental organizer: "Sure, we Hispanics, we remember how good it was during the Clinton years. But we're not voting about the past. We're voting about the future. And Obama's the future. Senator Kennedy realizes that."

Manic Monday (Continued)

The Gallup daily tracking poll shows that Obama and Clinton are tied nationally. A final CNN poll shows the same basic result. At this point, the polls basically reflect momentum for Obama, and with Tsuami Tuesday tomorrow, even that is not much of a guide, as we've seen momentum swings on the final day, unmeasured by polls.

Here's the sense of what I'm getting about tomorrow: According to Kos, if Hillary doesn't get at least 200 more total delegates than Obama, her campaign is in trouble. According to the Obama campaign, their goal is to get within 100 delegates of Clinton's take. In a memo they list how far behind they were--less than two weeks ago Clinton led in CA by 12 pts., Arizona by 21, Conn. by 14, Georgia by 7, Massachusetts by 37 points, etc.

If Obama does win some states and gets between 100-200 fewer delegates (or of course he gets more delegates than Clinton) he is on track for the nomination, because the contests after Tuesday tend to favor him, and because he probably has more money to spend. If Hillary has a big night, and if this sparks new contributions, then it could be a long spring.

States to watch for Tuesday: Georgia should come in early, and it should be a big Obama win. If it's not, could be a long night. In the Northeast Obama has a shot at Conn. and now even Mass. If he takes New Jersey, or even comes close, it's a long night for Clinton. I expect Obama to do pretty well in New York.

Later in the night, and into Wednesday: the media will be watching Missouri and of course California. If Obama wins both, the pundits will say it's just about over.

Skimming the statistical analyzes of polls, patterns etc. is like listening to economists who always have good reasons for their predictions as long as they never revisit how wrong they were last time. Because of Obama's appeal to people who don't normally vote or who have never voted, the numbers are no more than rough guides to direction. The numbers folks said that Obama's fast rise was impossible, and now that it has apparently happened, they've got other statistical limitations. We'll see.

As for endorsements, Al G. at the Field has an interesting explanation for why Al Gore will endorse Obama, but not until after Feb. 12, when Obama is expected to do well in the Potomac primaries. But not waiting that long were Joan Baez and today, Robert DiNiro at a New Jersey rally, who endorsed Obama. It was another in a series of Obama's huge events, as Tsunami Tuesday approaches.

Later--
Also released: a letter signed by "more than 100 feminist leaders" endorsing Barack Obama for his position on the war. Hillary's campaign has made it official--they raised $13.5 million in January. As the Washington Post says, that's normally a lot of money--but it was the month that Obama raised $32 million.

Here's another sense of things I'm gleaning from coverage today. The theory is that Hillary got a late surge in New Hampshire for two reasons: her widely covered show of emotion at a diner, and women who didn't want to see her humiliated by the double-digit spread predicted for Obama. Well, today Hillary got media coverage again for last minute tearing up (in neither case were there actual tears shed.) Will it work again? There's doubt that it will. Once is genuine, twice just before election day looks less sincere, or at least doubtful. And as for the broader sympathy vote, nobody today is predicting an Obama landslide though the buzz is of him drawing even. The question is, will either of these--or the synergy of both of them--cause (primarily) women voters who are otherwise wavering to vote for her? It's possible. But it does seem less likely.

Hillary was counted out just before New Hampshire. Right now she seems to be running out of tricks, running out of money and momentum. She could surprise us again. Or it could be real decline, with fewer and fewer options.

I read somewhere than more than 100 newspapers endorsed Obama. Here's an interesting endorsement of Obama from Native American Times:

Obama has started to aggressively reach out to Native Americans in word and deed. In his words he has put together a policy which truly addresses Native problems. In his deeds he has actually gone to Indian reservations to seek our votes. He is also the co-sponsor of the all important Indian Health Care Improvement Act. And he continues to seek the Native vote. As he explains it, he says he understands to be treated differently and unfairly. Part of the change he proposes is one of justice and equality. He is also proposing sweeping changes in health care for Native Americans that include mental health. While the economy is the driving issue on the national stage its ‘Health Stupid,’ in Indian Country. People are dying too soon, babies are not making it to adulthood, and diabetes is robbing our way of life in ways never imagined. It’s hard to worry about the paycheck when you are too sick to go anyway.

This reminds me that the first national politician I know of to campaign in Indian Country was Robert Kennedy. I also met an Inuit who more than 30 years later recalled RFK's visit to Alaska, and that his brother shook his hand.

Manic Monday

It's barely midnight and it's started already! Zogby tracking polls done Sunday show Obama with the big mo: "enjoying a big Sunday bounce"--increasing his lead in California, going ahead in Missouri, tied in New Jersey. These are the three day tracking averages. The difference for Sunday alone was considerably greater:

Pollster John Zogby: "A very big single day for Obama in California (49%-32% over Clinton) and Missouri (49%-39% single day). In California, Obama has widened his lead in the north and pulled ahead in the south. He leads among Democrats and Independents, liberals and moderates, men (by 21 points),among whites, and African Americans. He holds big leads among voters who say Iraq and immigration are their top concerns. Clinton holds a big lead among Hispanics (though Obama has made some inroads), women, voters over 65, and has pulled ahead among those citing the economy.

"In Missouri, Obama leads two to one in the St. Louis region, and has solid leads with independents, voters under 50, and African Americans. He also leads among Missouri women. Clinton leads among whites and has big leads in the Kansas City and southwestern region.

This is just one poll, and one that some politicos don't necessary trust so much, plus the leads are razor thin. But it does suggest that Obama still has the mo--and in California the Maria Shriver endorsement is going to play all day Monday in newspapers and on TV. It also suggests again that Obama is going to get a pile of delegates. But if he were to win California and Missouri, let alone New Jersey--he'd be near unstoppable.

Speaking of California, I've been a bit puzzled by the insistence of pollsters than John Edwards' voters are splitting equally between Obama and Clinton. I don't see that, and now the SF Chronicle suggests it's because it's not happening--at least here in California, where his big supporters--including three of his state co-chairs--are declaring for Obama. Over at Kos, Clinton picked up very few Edwards supporters. Active supporters are different from voters of course, but when they are mostly all heading in the same direction, you'd think most of their voters would.

One prominent Edwards supporter has provided an important endorsement for Obama--Kate Michelman, former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, and an Edwards campaign "surrogate." Like the people who are "close" to Nancy Pelosi, or the wives of various politicians, Michelman's endorsement is said to indicate the preference of John and Elizabeth Edwards. I wouldn't be surprised if they do favor Obama, just as I wouldn't if it turns out that Richardson, Biden, Dodd and Gore do. But the train is leaving the station for those folks--especially the ones with primaries in their states on Tuesday. After that, who's going to care who Richardson, Biden and Dodd endorse? Edwards may believe he's in a more strategic position afterwards, and maybe he is. But maybe he isn't.

Speaking of Biden's state of Delaware, Obama's rally there in Wilmington Sunday morning was said to be the largest gathering in the state's long history. In any event, the Kos diary that asserts it has some neat photos. Though nobody compares to Al Rodgers over there, and he's outdone himself with this one. A lot of his photos are from New York City as well as the Delaware rally and the Los Angeles event with Oprah, Caroline Kennedy and the surprise appearance (and endorsement) of California First Lady, Maria Shriver. That event was live on C-Span--nicely timed for Super Bowl Widows--and rebroadcast later. I caught most of the replay, including Michelle Obama speaking. Now I know why she's the campaign's closer. The two best speakers on the campaign trail in the same family? And not Billary.

Super Sunday

Holy Mrs. Governator! Maria Shriver, wife of the Republican governor of California, endorsed Barack Obama for President Sunday afternoon at the big L.A. rally with Michelle Obama, Caroline Kennedy and Oprah.


The first Sunday news: the Reuters/C-Span/ Zogby poll shows Obama ahead in California for the first time, 45 to 41%, just above the margin of error. Zogby also polled Georgia (where Obama is way ahead), Missoui and New Jersey, where Obama has virtually tied Clinton. New Jersey in particular is an eye-opener--next to New York, it was Clinton's safest state.

In terms of momentum, there's also the ABC/Washington Post poll that shows nationally "Obama, Clinton are even." Which means that nationally, Obama is still moving up, and has essentially erased Hillary's huge lead. Significantly, her large lead in electability has also dropped to a near tie.

Update: the Gallup daily tracking poll nationally also shows a statistical tie. The USA Today story emphasizes Obama wipes out Clinton's double digit lead from just two weeks ago. "The poll showed Obama had the highest favorable rating of the major candidates still in the race — 59% favorable to 32% unfavorable. Clinton was even at 48% favorable, 48% unfavorable."

Newspaper endorsements for Obama Sunday include the Newark Star Ledger, Alburquerque Journal and Birmingham News.

Guess who else thinks Obama is above average? Garrison Keillor endorsed Obama.

There are a number of stories about Obama's unorthodox choices for appearances late in the campaign, such as his event in Republican Idaho. From a conventional point of view it could look like somebody way behind trying to make it look good by winning small states, or somebody way ahead, or--as these stories indicate--somebody with a different strategy. However, it can't be much comfort to Clinton that Obama will end up in the Northeast for the last days--Delaware this morning, then New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts. He's leaving southern California in the capable hands of Ted Kennedy, Michelle Obama, Oprah Winfrey and Caroline Kennedy.