« Poll: Obama, Hillary Locked In National Dead Heat | Home | Huckabee Wins Kansas Caucuses In A Blowout »
Results For Today's Contests
Note to readers: We'll be blogging the results of today's contests right here at TPM Election Central, beginning later today.
On the Dem side: Louisiana (56 delegates), Washington State (78 delegates), Louisiana (56 delegates), Virgin Islands (3 delegates).
On the GOP side: Kansas (36 delegates), Washington State (18 delegates), Louisiana (20 delegates).
Join us.
Advertisement















Not that I'm averse to hanging out at Election Central, but does anyone know when the results will start trickling in?
February 9, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Results will start at 8pm edt on CNN
7pm edt on MSNBC
yahoo!election at 7:30pm edt
February 9, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You left out Nebraska, and have Louisiana down twice.
February 9, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am a hillary supporter but i think she will not win Louisiana or Nebraska today but she will win Washington State and Maine.
I thought she might would win Maryland but looks like that is going to obama
Obama is going to win Virginia, Washington DC and Hawaii
Hillary will win Wisconsin.
US Virgin Islands.... not sure who will pick up the win.
March States i think will depend on how clinton and obama do the rest of this month.
I think when its all over... it will be a clinton/obama ticket.
February 9, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's some live-blogging of the caucuses in Omaha from the Omaha World Herald.
The latest update:
11:42 a.m.
It doesn't look good for Clinton at Monroe Middle School.
The line to the Clinton box is empty. The line to vote for Obama is about a half block long.
February 9, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read the Omaha World Herald site and no where does it say that clinton box is empty and that all the lines were obama supporters.... however it did say that the lines are very long and huge turn out is taking place in the state.
February 9, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the link. Look for post at 11:42. This is just at one precinct.
February 9, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry; apparently I don't know how to make a working link here. As someone pointed out in reply, it was on the page I was trying to link to. Thought I knew how to make links with HTML, but I guess you have to do something else here?
February 9, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
If its a combined ticket, it would only serve to have it be Obama/Clinton. He is much more of a leader than she.
Being a woman, I looked forward to having a female president throughout my life. I'm 39, now, and I still believe we will have a female president in my lifetime. I have seen great women leaders, and although Hillary is very bright, and a skilled and tireless worker, and I see she cares, I don't see her as a true leader. A leader is someone who can not only 'get the job done', but someone who inspires many to get many jobs done. A leader inspires a movement that goes beyond party lines. I am so enthusiastic to have a president who can convey progressive values across party lines. Obama is the one who is already doing that, and, when in office, will do that in spades.
Putting Obama in VP would be a waste. Putting Hillary in V.P. could be a valuable partnership - one that would fully allow the expression of each of their best abilities, while at the same time be a potent force for realigning all that has been disintegrated over the past eight years.
February 9, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with your comments on leadership, and the conclusions you draw in re Obama.
But I don't think either of them would be willing to take second spot to the other. Just reality.
I do think however, that Senator Clinton is the best person to assume the job of the Lion(ess) of the Senate from Ted Kennedy.
February 9, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
couldn't have said it better myself. thank you.
February 9, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
The issue as I see it is that there isn't a compelling reason for either Hillary or Obama to offer the VP spot to the loser, quite apart from whether the loser would be inclined to take it if it were offered.
The strategic calculation in selecting a VP has to look to the broader electorate in the general election, not to unifying the Dems, who are unlikely this year to stay home no matter who gets the nomination. And I say this as one who has been strong for one of the remaining candidates from the very start.
I'm not sure who the best strategic choice for VP would be -- there seem to be few obvious ones beside the oft-mentioned Webb (and I'm not convinced that's such a great choice, as Ezra Klein blogged about yesterday) -- but I think it's clear that choice is NOT Clinton or Obama.
February 9, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're right, that a combined ticket is neither likely nor preferable. As long as the goofy idea of it is going to continue to circulate, though, I want to invite people to try on Obama/Clinton, and stop assuming and asserting the other way around.
My hunch is that Clinton has Richardson in her sights. Don't know who Obama would pick, but hope its not Webb. Needs to be someone that the whole country can like, someone who's distinguished, experienced with the military, and who we can envision as working with/for Obama.
February 9, 2008 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I was just rethinking this Obama/Clinton ticket thing and realizing that this election is such a different scenario and thus a different set of priorities as to how to choose a VP. Obama is someone that, like it or not, people are going look at his choice of veep and think ... will they want that VP in there in the event that anything happens to Obama? I personally don't think that anything is going to happen to him - a strange feeling I can't explain that this is not to be his fate - but once Obama has the nomination, I do imagine that it will be in the back of peoples' minds that the choice of veep needs to be someone they feel they could trust to run the country.
We have had enough crazy hateful people in this country regardless of politics (ref. John Hinckley Jr. for example), and people know that, and will be thinking about how they'd feel if that veep had to take over. It could in fact be best if that veep is Hillary, or some other option with a high national profile whom people can feel immediately comfortable with them in the white house. Like Al Gore.... or Stephen Colbert.
:)
February 9, 2008 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hardly seems fair that Nebraska gets no delegates and Louisiana gets to award theirs twice.
February 9, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
February 9, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why is everyone so convinced that Obama is going to get Louisiana? I think it could actually be a lot closer, given the diaspora brought on by Katrina...Does everyone else think I'm crazy?
February 9, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I think LA will be close - but I've also heard that people in LA were receptive to Obama coming down and speaking to them, whereas Hillary sent Bill on her behalf. Also, a lot of people seem to think Obama will win Maine, which I think will be very close if not a win for Clinton. Obama doesn't seem to be playing the expectations game as well as the Clintons. Oh well. Obama is going to absolutely crush in NE and WA today, I think. My brother lives in Seattle and he says that everywhere you go you see Obama signs and stickers, with maybe one or two Hillary stickers on the back of a Beamer.
February 9, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ctvoter. Nope. Anything can happen.
February 9, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The real news today would be if Clinton pulls a win in Washington--especially after MSM suggesting only uneducated people vote for her and thinking that the Seattle area will go for Obama. Second, if she can win Louisiana, that'd be news considering the racial make-up of the state (BTW, does anyone know if Jefferson endorsed anyone? I can't imagine anyone asking for his endorsement. What about Nagin?). I don't think Maine, Virginia, or Maryland later mean much. Though, I'll be curious in the latter two if Clinton can garner enough soccer-mom votes to beat Obama's Black vote. Should be interesting in any case.
February 9, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Virginia and Maryland are pretty big. Lots of delegates. If you check out the polls that are posted on the front page of TPMElectionCentral, you'll see that Obama is leading by nearly 20% in both states. Beating Clinton or tied with her in the white vote and crushing her in the African American vote. And personally, from what I've heard and read about WA, I don't think she wins there. LA is the only toss-up today, and then Maine tomorrow.
February 9, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are things about Democrats i just don't get. Obama/Clinton would not work in a general. He would need a pro defense Red Stater like Jim Webb or Sam Nunn to balance out a McCain/whoever ticket. During a time of war, Obama needs someone who's worn the uniform or who has way more foreign policy experience than himself. Clinton/Obama would seem more likely. (if they can get beyond ego). And let me take this moment to apologize for my Republican leadership betraying the party principles and leaving us in this dungheap. We can do better.
February 9, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama/Webb will be the ticket, I think. Will be interesting to see if Webb endorses on Monday.
February 9, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto. I have been pitching this since the fall. Obama/Webb. They are together on virtually all issues and he has the military gravitas to lend heft to the ticket. That ticket would be a landslide in november.
February 9, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt Obama would choose Hillary or vice versa. I think they'd both go for someone with military experience to offset McCain's. Someone like Jim Webb.
But either way I'd like to see whoever gets in nominate John Edwards to be AG. If he wants to fight Republicans he'll have at least 6 years to prosecute them for politicizing all branches of our government before and if he decides to run again. If Edward's determination to right these wrongs is half as serious as his fire and brimstone rhetoric on the trail there won't be much of a Republican party left in 2016.
February 9, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The voting in Nebraska is overwhelming the system out there.
http://ap.theindependent.com/pstories/state/ne/20080209/245449799.shtml
OMAHA, Neb. — Thousands of people statewide overflowed school gyms, sat in traffic and stood in groups to be counted as part of Nebraska's first Democratic presidential caucus.
In Douglas County, the state's most populous county, an average of 1,000 people turned out at each of 15 caucus sites, said Eric Fought, spokesman for the state party.
Thousands of people waited outside Sarpy County's lone caucus site and there were reports that traffic to the site was backed up as much as four miles.
Law enforcement shut down the Highway 370 and the intersection leading into the site because the area was packed with cars.
The turnout was so high that Democratic officials in Douglas and Sarpy counties announced that they would delay the announcement of their results at least one-and-a-half hours.
February 9, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you very, very much. Anybody else in states going today with info. I can't find out anything going on as usual. Total news black out. You'd think that we were living in a banana republic. Oh that's right, we are. What's the turnout in La. and Washington? Anyone?
February 9, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary hasn't been attracting much of the "soccer mom" vote. The soccer grandmother vote, perhaps. The women voting for her tend to be older (she does best among 65 years and up) and more urban than suburban, or at least more working class. Obama does better against those people you'd consider the "soccer" demographic -- higher income, more educated, etc.
February 9, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm curious why ElectionCentral hasn't made more posts about the final Super Tuesday delegate count. It's certain the Obama won at this point, with only a few delegates that could possibly shift in either direction (1 in New Mexico, maybe 2 or 3 in Colorado depending on turnout at different precincts). Obama has what I pretty objectively find to be conservative estimates (http://origin.barackobama.com/resultscenter/) on his campaign site. Conservative, that is, with the exception of New Mexico where Hillary currently has a 14/12 lead pending counting of provisional ballots, although it's rather likely that Obama will make up the difference after counting those ballots if a majority of them count (if all were counted, he'd need 53%, and the lions share of provisional ballots cast are in counties he carried handily).
It's not like the calculus is all that difficult here. Obama's count shows him winning Super Tuesday delegates 847-834, with exactly 0% of a chance that he's off by 7 delegates.
February 9, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Until the Dems realize and respect how essential it is to have a set of guiding principles, that some of us choose to call God, and realize and respect that Abortions are abhorrent and selfish, realize and respect we have a Constitutional right to bear arms, respect that for some of us marriage means something, realize that there's nothing wrong with smaller government, realize that the world you see through the filter of the MSM is not the world that is...This country needs a Republican Party. Otherwise y'all would just get drunk with power and end up blowing it like we have the last seven years.
BTW. Obama and Ron Paul are Right about Iraq.
February 9, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
God has no business in government or politics. God is not real, it is an imaginary thing created by people who feel the need to have the unexplainable explained to them in terminology that a 6 year old can understand.
The right to bear arms in the second amendment is for a militia, not the everyday citizen. If you want to play with handguns, join the police force or the military.
Marriage no longer means what it did. 55% end in divorce, over half of those in the first 5 years. Get over yourself BlueStateRepugnican.
This country needs a republican party about as much as it needs a War in Iran or N. Korea.
The GOP is a dying breed. Too Grand, too Old, and no longer a party but a division of cynical groups of hate-mongers.
GTFOOMC. Bravo6 out.
February 9, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well there is not much to follow on the GOP side and I will not hang out for the DEM results streaming in.
My bet is that Obama does very welll tonight as his campaign has a reason to get out and the shuffling of Edwards dropping has sunk in.
Dee Illuminati predicts Obama tonight as the winner with surge.
February 9, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mattie, soccermom vote? That's so 90's. We're in 2008.
February 9, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
DC-MD-VA have total population and delegate count approx equal to Texas.
February 9, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN is prepared to call the Kansas caucus for Huckabee by a very large margin.
February 9, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry for the off topic rave. I'm getting sick of the god stuff. My early projections:
NE: Obama 67%, Clinton 32%
LA: Obama 65%, Clinton 34%
WA: Obama 58%, Clinton 41%
ME: Obama 52%, Clinton 47%
VA: Obama 60%, Clinton 39%
MD: Obama 62%, Clinton 37%
DC: Obama 74%, Clinton 25%
Delegate projections:
Obama 233
Clinton 127
This is blowout city. After 7 in a row, it will be time for Hillary to stop borrowing money from Chelsea's inheritance and drop out.
I like the sounds of Obama/Webb...just not sure if Jim really wants to leave the Senate so quickly. Is anyone else as excited as I am that VA is about to have 2 dem Sen's and a dem gov? they haven't voted for a dem prez since LBJ in '68.
February 9, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
""The GOP is a dying breed. Too Grand, too Old, and no longer a party but a division of cynical groups of hate-mongers.
GTFOOMC. Bravo6 out.""
Talk about hate-mongering. I bet you don't shout your God loathing venom too loudly at OSU games do ya?
""If you want to play with handguns, join the police force or the military."
Guns aren't to be played with. I'm a Veteran. I know better. I've seen what bullets do. Still doesn't mean I won't protect myself or my family.
An just because marriages fail, doesn't mean they aren't special. Any time two people want to profess their love for one another, i see that as a good thing. And if they have the respect and perseverance to stay true to it, marriage becomes a better thing.
And just because I give Love a Divine source ie. God, don't poop on me. It reflects badly on you, and it's this type of intolerance I thought Dems were against. (Big Tent=Small Minds?)
We can do better.
February 9, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
And just because marriages fail, doesn't mean they aren't special. Any time two people want to profess their love for one another, i see that as a good thing. And if they have the respect and perseverance to stay true to it, marriage becomes a better thing.
Great! Another supporter of gay marriage. Two consenting adults getting married, that's what I call progress. See everybody, Republicans and Democrats can agree more than they disagree.
February 9, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sure hope it's Obama/Webb 2008. I like Webb. And his military background and anti-Iraq stance would be a huge plus.
February 9, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
bravo6. I am as well. VA will go dem in 08 if its obama/webb or obama/good vp. If its the clintons it will be ruby red.
February 9, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. And I don't even live there.
February 9, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that Obama/Webb would be a fabulous ticket, while McCain says "I've been to war, so trust me when I say that we must stay in Iraq" - Webb can say "I've also been in war, and Iraq is a debacle that we should have never pursued!" As a Virginia resident, I was glad to be a part of Webb mercilessly taking down George "Maccaca" Allen - in one of my blog posts recently I named Webb 2008's "Man of the Year", because Allen would have been a republican candidate for president the right-wingers would have rallied around. God bless Jim Webb..lol
February 9, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm intrigued by this Obama/Webb talk. Those of you in VA (and familiar with Webb), tell me: what's his influence down there? How's he perceived and what's he all about? I know of, and respect, his military background, and he seems highly intelligent and already engaged in the top-levels of Senate work. Other than that, though, I know little of him.
February 9, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I worked on Sen. Webbs campaign in 2006. He did well state-wide, but it was the ever changing demographics in the NoVA suburbs that propelled him, like Gov. Kaine the year before, to victory. He did better at the top of the ticket than we expected in places like Danville, Martinsville, Lynchburg, Blacksburg..the Piedmont region as it is called. This may be the hidden story behind his ability to win the independents and moderate Repub's fed up with Sen. Allen.
Jim Webb is also a USNA grad, class of 1968. He won the Navy Cross in Vietnam. For more info on his background, check out his bio here: http://www.jameswebb.com/about.htm
Honestly, he is a bit monotone when he speaks but is has a quick wit and is a tremendous listener. Fields of Fire was(/is?) required reading for incoming plebes at USNA.
February 9, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
One other fitting image from the Webb v. Allen race in VA in '06 came from a debate (i think meet the press) that showed their footwear under the table: Jim Webb in his son's combat boots (who has been in Iraq for two tours), and George Allen in his cowboy boots. Here's Webb holding up his son's boots after winning http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/09/AR2006110900775.html.
I kid you not, he wore them EVERY day on the campaign trail as a reminder to himself and to the voters.
Not sure if www.recruitjimwebb.com is still up. I know the blogosphere likes to take some credit for his win...not sure it's all warranted, but what is is that they had a serious influence on getting him into the race.
February 9, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, bravo6. I checked out Webb's resume and was impressed. Re: the link to the boots photo was not so successful because the Washington Post wanted sign-up info (sigh!), but your description of the photo was affecting.
People like Senator Webb, and our progressive, cross-the-party-lines Democratic governors in the midwest and such, make me feel so very hopeful about our country's future. There's talent everywhere in our party, which over the years I had started to think was old and tired and full of unimaginative, argumentative bunk. Thank God...
February 9, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
From that article in rhe Lincoln (Neb.) Journal Star Kutz frontpaged:
"“Desperation,’’ Sarpy County Democratic Party Chairman Burke Summers said when asked why officials changed procedures at the last minute. School officials wanted the school cleared of caucus-goers by midafternoon to make way for a pair of youth basketball games.
Fought, the state party spokesman, said it was up to each county’s party leaders to adjust plans in the best way possible without drastically deviating from the procedures.
An early count showed that 6,000 people showed up at the school to caucus, including 2,000 people who registered Saturday. About 1,500 of the new registrants had switched from other parties.
“There’s a hell of a lot fewer Republicans in Sarpy County than there were yesterday,’’ Summers said."
Be my guess they're coming out for Obama. Yes we can.
February 9, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Webb wrote a editorial in the WSJ or the NYT after the election last year that Billmon highlighted as one of his last posts. Blew Bill's mind that this guy who was in Reagan's administration had turned into a fullblown populist policy wonk.
February 9, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
To the Democrats, a question. We've all heard the reports about the more education one has in your party, the more likely you will be an Obama supporter. Clinton seems to appeal to folks with immediate financial needs and those with only a high school education.
So is it to say that Obama appeals to the more socio-politically/globally alert, those who understand the workings of government (60 votes in the senate=working majority).
And Clinton primarily appeals to the working class, folks who are barely getting by and simply want something done. They are less concerned about indies and republicans, and more interested in getting a Democrat in the White House.
baseline: the less you know=Clinton vs. the more you know=Obama.
Granted i know these aren't absolutes but what does it say about the candidates?
February 9, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the break between working class and educated class candidate preferences is only temporary, and has to do with the different access to and involvement with political news at this stage in the primaries, and will change (as it has been changing) when the working class segment is more tuned in as the campaigns and candidates come to their states.
February 9, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Douglas and Sarpy County Nebraska (Omaha metro area) results just in. Douglas County: Obama 77% Clinton 23%; Sarpy County: Obama 75% Clinton 25%.
February 9, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the link for those results I just posted.
February 9, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just got back from my Seattle caucus. My precinct, which is a wealthy white enclave amidst a more African-American one, voted for Obama 83% to Hillary's 15%. Other precincts in our building had similar percentages.
My mother-in-law voted across town. The tally there was also Obama at 80%.
Not a significant statistical sampling, I know, but there it is.
February 9, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink