Wisconsin's Demographics Tilt Both Ways
WaPo's Dan Balz has a useful explainer as to why both the Obama and Clinton campaigns see Tuesday's Wisconsin primary as a potentially close and unpredictable contest with demographics that tilt both ways:
The Clinton campaign sees Wisconsin as a haven of progressive and independent-minded voters, the kind of people who have found Obama appealing in earlier contests. They say Wisconsin is a quirky state, one that over the years has elected iconoclastic senators like Russ Feingold or William Proxmire, not always establishment candidates, like Clinton. They see Madison and the University of Wisconsin, where Obama drew more than 15,000 people last Tuesday night, as trouble -- although Clinton will hold a rally there late Monday in an effort to hold down his margins in Dane County.Obama's campaign sees Wisconsin as a state with a sizable blue-collar population, an economy hit by the loss of manufacturing jobs and families struggling with health care or college costs -- all ingredients that have been helpful to Clinton in the past. They see Wisconsin as a state with a large Catholic population -- which has been one of Clinton's strength in other states -- and a smaller African American population.
Though many commentators have predicted a sizable win for Obama in the state, the Obama campaign worked hard today to depress expectations. Obama campaign manager David Plouffe told reporters on a conference call that the Clinton campaign is contesting the state "ferociously," adding: "I believe they think they can win it and that's what they're trying to do."
Most polls show Obama ahead in the state, albeit not by much.
Wisconsin voters please remain first class and vote for Hillary.
A co-chairman of Hillary's Michigan campaign and has a line that's sure to drive a whole bunch of red state governor's up the wall:
"Superdelegates are not second-class delegates," says Joel Ferguson, who will be a superdelegate if Michigan is seated. "The real second-class delegates are the delegates that are picked in red-state caucuses that are never going to vote Democratic."
February 18, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, this is the second time. I hate this commenting system.
Anybody know of one commentator that is predicting a sizable win for obama? Anybody? Every single one that I have heard and read called for a squeaker one way or the other. I did hear a bunch thinking it was a stupid move for the clintons to initially abandon wisconsin as the demographics are favorable to her. I don't recall hearing one calling for a "sizable win for obama." It's a toss-up.
February 18, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you. Not sure which commenter(s) he is referring to. Or maybe he's talking about a different blog.
February 18, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe "commentator" isn't referring to people who post here but rather the national talking heads?
February 18, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right. I misread it. Thanks.
February 18, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice catch, Rucns:
"Superdelegates are not second-class delegates," Ferguson said. "The real second-class delegates are the delegates that are picked in red-state caucuses that are never going to vote Democratic."
February 18, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
How can something tilt both ways? That's a Tom Friedman level metaphor right there.
February 18, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
This commenter is not predicting a big win. I'll be happy with any win at all, and certainly believe it could be within 5 pts. She got almost all the news coverage in the last day because she was stuck in Wisconsin and Obama was stuck out of it.
February 18, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
something can tilt two ways by swinging back and forth on a fulcrum
February 18, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can you give us some color on the commentators that are predicting a sizeable win for Obama? I don't recall seeing that anywhere over the last few days, but I'd be interested in reading their analysis (given the demographics). Thanks in advance.
February 18, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's going to be very close.
The Clintons must see something in their polling--otherwise, they would have abandoned Wisconsin after this weekend's weather screwed the schedule up--instead, they're staying in until tonight--which I know as in the plans--but why stay after losing yesterday to the weather unless there's a very good reason to--she could have easily gone on to Ohio or Texas. So that tells me that they think they've got a realistic chance.
So unless turnout is really high, and Obama catches a lot of independents and republicans, I'm willing to bet that Clinton just might be able to win this. And my bet is that turnout isn't going to be as high as it has been for other states simply because both campaigns have been muffled in the days leading up to the vote (because of the weather).
February 18, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I only have my own anecdote to go by, but I canvassed in a Dem area of Milwaukee on Saturday -- no canvass list, just knocked on every door in a particular area, talked to voters and dropped lit -- and nearly everyone who answered their door said they were planning to vote (except for a Jehovah's Witness, who is leaving it in God's hands). A number of people had recently moved into their homes, so it was helpful to tell them where their polling location was, but very few people said that they were not going to vote or slammed the door in my face. This is for a primary. I canvassed the same type of regions many weekends in the fall of 2004 and received much more resistance then. Though that could also be because they were sick to death of being contacted in 2004.
February 18, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the view from the ground. How was the weather?
February 18, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can tell you from my experience of the last week in Madison, there has been no "muffling" of the campaigns here. I have spoken to relatives in other parts of the state as well and they report the same thing. Campaign stops from both the Republican and Democratic candidates have been non-stop and well reported, with large event turnout. The weather and its impact on campaigning has itself been a story. I went away overnight Saturday and returned home Sunday (through the storm!) to find 3 new pieces of campaign literature from the Clinton campaign and 2 voice messages from my union to make sure to vote. Clinton is endorsed by Wisconsin Lieutenant Governor Barbara Lawton, Rep. Tammy Baldwin and Dane County Exec. Kathleen Falk, all of whom have been traveling with the campaign. I predict we will see the same very high turnouts tomorrow in Wisconsin as we have seen across the country, but I think the result will be much closer between Obama and Clinton than the most recent contests - both candidates have strong bases in Wisconsin.
February 18, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
actually, let me amend that. some of the demographics tilt in obama's direction; others tilt in hillary's. therefore, wisconsin's demographics tilt both ways.
February 18, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
michelle obama:
"For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country,” she told a Milwaukee crowd today, i know......just words ....wheres the outrage????
February 18, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what I thought he meant talking heads and op ed people. And, like I said I don't know of one calling for a sizable obama win, let alone many. It's a toss up and if he wins by 1% its a huge win. She was up by 9 points only a week ago. Again, who are the many commentators calling for a sizable obama win?
February 18, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops, that's a reply to CT Voter above.
February 18, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg? When you said "commentators" were you referring to people who do this stuff for a living (the bobbleheads on TV, cable, magazines, newspapers) or were your referring to us "commenters" on this site who are, at this point, completely and utterly addicted to this election?
(speaking for myself, of course).
February 18, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I certainly expect that Obama will win in WI. But if he loses instead, I expect that it's going to be the effective end of his campaign. He will have lost the one thing he really has going for him: the perception of momentum, which will pass to Hillary. And he will have lost it just before he enters the huge states of TX and OH, which most definitely don't favor him.
February 18, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the polling is accurate, Wisconsin will be a tight outcome, with little real impact on the pledged delegate count, so I don't think it will change much on that front. From a spin standpoint, if HRC wins, then you are right, she'll gain some headlines.
As for momentum going into Texas, perhaps you should do some more research. I don't think it favors Clinton quite the way you (or her campaign) suspect.
Here's a couple of websites that may give you some insight.
http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/
http://www.burntorangereport.com/
February 18, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of Texas, I can't believe that the Clinton campaign actually didn't know about the delegate rules in Texas. Seriously. Doesn't seem possible to me.
February 18, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not convinced that losing WI would effectively end Obama's chances, but I do agree that WI could significantly impact the rest of the race. If Clinton ekes out a win there, even a small one, it will make for very interesting horse-race coverage and you can expect to see big "Comeback!!!" headlines on all the major newspapers. It would be a bracing dose of restoratives to her campaign and could help her re-open her dwindling margins in OH and TX so that she could actually make the the delegate deficit that she is presently suffering.
By the same token, if Obama pulls of one of his surprise blowouts, turning what was supposed to be a narrow victory into a landslide win, you can expect to see headlines to the effect of "Obama moving from success to success" and this in turn could help to exacerbate the trend we are already seeing of Clinton's once-formidable leads in TX and OH shrinking. This could be the spark that sets fire to the dry tinder at the base of her "firewalls" and deal the death blow that ends the race entirely.
Of course, it could be that neither of these things come to pass. It could be that Obama pulls off a small victory just like the polls have predicted for a week and a half now, in which case I do not see that much of anything chances, and he spends the next two weeks nibbling away at her leads in TX and OH a little at a time. If that is the case, it still seems that the dynamics of the present race favor him. Unless he goes into the debates and calls for baseball to be outlawed or for French to be proclaimed the national language, I do not see how his numbers stop going up or hers start going up.
February 18, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
FranklyO, it isn't clear to me why you feel that underestimating Obama is a useful strategy for either your candidate or her supporters. But if you want to believe that Clinton has Obama on the ropes...well, not for me to stop you, I guess.
February 18, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, I'm not trying to "underestimate" Obama -- I'm perfectly well aware that my comments here are hardly going to determine the spin in this race.
I'm saying what I think is true: if Obama loses in WI, it's going to be very hard for him to claim the nomination. It won't be through my efforts that the media narrative and voter perception will turn against Obama, but through the facts themselves.
February 18, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I seem to recall that you were also convinced that Edwards dropping out of the race would inevitably serve to highlight Clinton's Florida victory, and yet nothing like that ever came to pass in any news account that I heard or read. As such, I am not sure that your sense of the dynamics of "media narratives" or "voter perceptions" is quite altogether trustworthy.
February 18, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Evie, you're a tease! How were things leaning?
February 18, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Michael A said " I did hear a bunch [of commentators] thinking it was a stupid move for the clintons to initially abandon wisconsin as the demographics are favorable to her."
The Clintons never comtemplated abandoning Wisconsin, that was pure spin to give them cover if Hillary loses big, and comeback status if she wins. "We really didn't even compete in Wisconsin, you know."
What did our nation do to deserve the double plague of the Clintons AND the Bushes?
February 18, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know about that one. It really is politically tone deaf to blow off wisconsin until this past weekend if you are planning a "comeback" or for spin purposes. You may be right, but it kinda doesn't make sense. However, alot of things that the clintons have done doesn't make sense.
February 18, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Most polls show Obama ahead in the state, albeit not by much."
Not by much?
Did you even see the post right below yours, Greg?
Obama has 13 point lead now (up from 11 last week) from a reputable polling firm (as opposed to the ARG).
Remove ARG from the list you linked to your "not by much" doesn't fly.
February 18, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, I did find one "commentator" who said something about Wisconsin:
FWIW. Which isn't much. As someone who has listened to Cokie Roberts over the years, I increasingly think that term limits should be applied, not to politicians, but to the "journalists" covering politics these days.
February 18, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
FranklyO -- fair enough, I guess. I think your interpretation is a stretch though. Obama has more delegates than her now; he will continue to have more delegates than her even if she blows him out in Wisconsin. It seems extremely unlikely (to put it as mildly as possible) that he will (or should) concede until, at the very least, she passes him in earned delegates and in popular vote totals. If HRC wins Wisconsin, she'll get a much-needed boost, will slow the bleed of superdelegates, and will probably help her chances in OH and TX. But it'll hardly be a game-ender, especially after Obama has beaten her badly eight in a row. She needs a string of victories -- and while Wisconsin could be the first of that string, she'll need to follow through if she wants to be the nominee.
I actually think Hawaii will be pretty important tomorrow too. If they essentially tie in Wisconsin, Hawaii (which nobody's polled, right?) could end up being the big story, and the big balance of delegates. (I think RI and VT could be very important on the 4th, for similar reasons.)
February 18, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm from Wisconsin and I'm predicting a victory for Obama in the 4% to 10% range.
Traveling the state with the Dane County (Madison) administrator and the Madison Congresswoman is not exactly the way to gain wide appeal in a state where Madison is considered to be "surrounded by reality".
Some of typical Hillary voters (older women) aren't as enamored with her in Wisconsin. She isn't "one of them". She'll appeal to some older liberal women in Dane and Milwaukee counties but not so much "up north".
And since McCain has locked up the Republican nomination, many independants and Republicans will vote for Obama just to vote against Hillary. Wisconsin's primary is open AND people can register to vote the at the polls tomorrow! Look for a lot of new voters who are pulled into the process by the Obama bandwagon.
Bill isn't much of a help either. He got the support of the insiders in 1992 but many of them are gone now and Obama is doing pretty well with the rest of them.
This is a state where Dems have had to fight very hard over the past two presidential cycles to pull off a slim victory. They aren't too excited about the idea of trying to win one for Hillary over a fairly moderate Republican McCain. Tommy Thompson was a popular governor there for many terms - they'll vote for McCain over Hillary.
February 18, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
"A co-chairman of Hillary's Michigan campaign and has a line that's sure to drive a whole bunch of red state governor's up the wall:"
And which perfectly illustrates why Hillary is too divisive and wouldn't get a thing accomplished if she was elected.
I've long suspected that many of Hillary's supporters are angry people who think she's going to go in and kick some Republican ass. It's a vengeance thing. I hope I'm wrong because that would be incredibly stupid. But it sure looks that way sometimes...
February 18, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
michelle obama:
"For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country,” she told a Milwaukee crowd today, i know......just words ....wheres the outrage????
February 18, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did she really say that?
I suppose that Obama rules will remain in full force throughout the Democratic primaries, but that is absolutely going to be seized on by the right wing attack machine, if she really said that.
February 18, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, got done with my 2 hour commute and jumped back in to see a list of "many commentators predicting a sizable win for obama." Who are they Gregg? I haven't seen one make such a prediction. How about one? If its one say one, if its "many" say many, if its none, then please amend the original post. I don't know of one, but I could be wrong. Let's not demean an obama win or make it sound like a huge clinton comeback in a state that she was leading by 9 a week ago and is a toss-up. Many commentators, my butt.
February 18, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
And . . . . . many commentators, who are they? Thanks.
February 18, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Both camps are right, WI is a tricky state.
Very diverse populations - Green Bay & Madison couldn't be more different. GB is very very blue collar (have you SEEN the crowds at a Packer game?? ;) ) & of course Madison is about as left as they come. There is a decent sized African Amer population in Milwaukee but it isn't huge and other than a smattering between Milw & Chi, that is mostly it for the state.
The state is almost 50/50 Dem & Republican. They usually vote Dem in the General Election but it is usually really close.
This is the state that had Russ Feingold & Tommy Thompson in office at the same time. (best thing Bush ever did for WI was to 'promote' TT to Health & Human services - opened the way for Dem Gov Jim Doyle -- who is still cleaning up the TT budget mess)
I have posted this elsewhere but I would expect the Dems to split between the 2. The tie breaker will be the very generous voting rules. You can register the same day and both parties will be on the same ballot so indies and cross-over republicans will likely give Obama the edge.
I am from WI (although now an IL resident) so I knows
February 18, 2008 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wisconsin may go the way of Missouri (my home state), and be VERY close. I suspect the delegate split will be close to even. And who actually wins the raw vote-total may be a toss up.
Obama by 2 points, maybe 3 at best. That's my prediction -- though I think Hillary could win by up to a single point (at most).
February 18, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink