LISTINGS |  EDITOR'S PICKS | NEWS | MUSIC | MOVIES | DINING | LIFE | ARTS | REC ROOM | CLASSIFIEDS | VIDEO

Can Obama lasso the Bay State?

January 23, 2008 3:05:50 PM

pages: 1 | 2 | 3

Clinton has not exactly been quick out of the box herself. Her eight paid field staffers — some with Massachusetts experience, like Tsongas campaign manager Roger Lau — just arrived in the state this past week. They have done no internal polling to determine where to focus their resources. The first official office opened this past week, in Service Employees International Union (SEIU) space in South Boston.

At this juncture, both campaigns are in heavy organizational mode in Massachusetts. And now that staff is getting into place, several organizing meetings a night are taking place for both candidates, in various parts of the state. Turnout at some of these meetings has been more than 100 eager volunteers, staffers say.

Obama staff point to the tremendous attendance at and excitement for the candidate’s previous appearances in the state, including a 2500-person fundraiser in Boston, as a sign that the grassroots are there for Obama. Although the focus has been elsewhere until now, it will soon turn to the Bay State. “Trust me, we haven’t forgotten about Massachusetts,” says Solomont, “and neither has Barack Obama.”

Clinton supporters say that their wide base of support — particularly among women — is mobilized, particularly after Obama’s early success in Iowa seemed to threaten their candidate’s chances.

What are the odds?
As noted before, the polls seem to show Clinton with a substantial lead here. But there’s plenty of time for that to change — even Clinton supporters expect the numbers to tighten.

“These early polls are worthless,” says Dukakis, who is not endorsing in the primary.

“Although we think we are the underdogs, we think we can wrestle Massachusetts away,” says Solomont. “And it would be a significant victory.”

“It’s all about momentum,” says Thomas O’Neill III, who is voting for Obama. “It depends on the other caucuses and primaries.”

O’Neill believes that Obama will bring young voters and Independents to the polls in Massachusetts, and will also get the votes of many “establishment” Democrats who really do want a fresh face to change the culture in Washington. “I find myself surprised by who is voting for Obama,” says O’Neill.

Even if Obama doesn’t win Massachusetts, it may be crucial for him to keep the loss close.

The allocation of delegates in the state is not winner-take-all, but proportional — partly on a state-wide level and partly within each congressional district.

The state-wide vote determines 32 of the delegates; each of the 10 congressional districts has between five and seven to allot.

A blow-out could give Clinton a net gain of 30 or 40 delegates, while a close loss could give Obama a near-even split. (Or even, as just happened in Nevada, a delegate gain despite a smaller vote tally: Obama could win a few districts 4-2, while losing the rest, in a majority of districts, by small margins.) That 30- or 40-delegate swing is equal to the entire delegate total of Arizona or Colorado.

That should be plenty of incentive for both candidates to put Massachusetts in their sights — and should make for an interesting couple of weeks until February 5.

On the Web
David S. Bernstein's Talking Politics: //www.thephoenix.com/talkingpolitics


pages: 1 | 2 | 3
COMMENTS

We will choose 61 delegates at congressional district caucuses on April 5 not 32: M assachusetts 2008 Delegate Selection Plan Page 7 SECTION III SELECTION OF DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES A. DISTRICT-LEVEL DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES 1. Massachusetts is allocated 61 district-level delegates and 10 district-level alternates.

POSTED BY Hilltowner AT 01/24/08 11:05 AM
I suspect that David Bernstein, like most 21st century journalists (I use the term very loosely), will consisder it naive to observe that the word "Edwards" was used only once in the entire article. You'd think that those who think would have been impressed by the stark contrast between Edwards and his opponents in the MLK Day debate. Both in terms of style and substance we saw the difference of a Presisdential Edwards and two adolescents, behaving as though they were appearing on Jerry Springer. The press has annointed the two Democrats least likely to beat McCain. Someone did a study of press coverage last week and reported that Edwards received 7% of the coverage. How that was calculated wasn't explained, but does anyone doubt that the press has been tilting the playing field week after week? If Democrats want to win the Whitehouse, they need to nominate Edwards or beg Al Gore at the Convention, because the two Democratic candidates the press has already nominated probably can't pull it off.

POSTED BY Phil Dunkelbarger AT 01/24/08 2:49 PM
According to your writer: "Clinton campaign staff won’t say that they’ll use disappointment in Patrick as an argument against Obama — not exactly, anyway. They do point out that Clinton’s central campaign theme is the importance of experience — that “we know that she’s ready from day one.” I think Clinton has proven that she & Bill will imply, say or do anything to win, even if it devastates, divides and destroys Democrats' chances in November. A sad state of affairs where, once again, the voters lose. The only reason she would be ready from "day one" is because voters aren't electing her, we're re-electing "Team Clinton." That's why she relies on Bill's record regarding the economy; she certainly doesn't have one. What she will accomplish is to bring out the Republican vote in the Heartland -- Rush Limbaugh listeners are chomping at the bit to vote against her. Unlike the real potential that Obama has to unite, she will divide the country both during the election and -- if she actually manages to eke out a polarizing win -- during her 4 years in office. I shudder at the prospect of Bill having to come to her defense as he has done repeatedly in this election. So much for "breaking the glass ceiling."

POSTED BY Joan V. AT 01/25/08 11:52 AM
Here is one more reason to vote for or against Obama. //rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_commentary/commentary_by_robert_d_novak/attorney_general_edwards Attorney General Edwards? An Inside Report by Robert Novak Friday, January 25, 2008

POSTED BY Krogy AT 01/25/08 8:05 PM

Login to add comments to this article
Email

Password




Register Now  |   Lost password

MOST POPULAR

 VIEWED   EMAILED 

ADVERTISEMENT

BY THIS AUTHOR
  • NO SIDE BETS:   The governor’s gaming legislation crapped out, but are casinos still alive in a compromise? Plus, a school-budget crisis could start a political firestorm.
  • WHITHER THE GOP?:   With Democrats in total control of state government, the Massachusetts GOP should be a rising voice of dissent. Instead, it seems more impotent than ever.
  • MORE THAN A FEW LOOSE ENDS:   BPD to review Cowans evidence
  • OBAMA OUTSIDE THE BOOM:   The first political leader of my generation acts nothing like the rest of us — which might be how he’s gotten where he is
  • IG REPORT ON STATE SENATE PREZ TAKES A CONVENIENT DIVE:   Fails to deal with tourism controversy
  • FRAMED?:   The Boston Police investigation of Stephan Cowans led to a wrongful conviction. Was it incompetent — or corrupt?
  • CASH CAROUSEL:   Many things changed this year on Beacon Hill, but not the power of the almighty dollar
  • EXCLUSIVE: CALIFORNIA GLEAMING:   Romney gains on McCain in crucial Golden State contest; Clinton's lead holds steady
  • MADAM MAYOR MAUREEN?:   While everyone was distracted by the New Hampshire primary, did City Council President Maureen Feeney step into the race for mayor?

PHOENIX MEDIA GROUP
CLASSIFIEDS







TODAY'S FEATURED ADVERTISERS
   
Copyright © 2008 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group