New Mexico Primary Results Demonstrate Why Obama Won The Night
So far, there’s 92% of the vote calculated in the caucus, and Obama is leading by 500 votes. But that really doesn’t matter. What matters is this.
New Mexico has far more Hispanics than just about any other state proportionately. There are actually more Latinos in New Mexico than there are white people. That is a demographic that Hillary has not only been courting, she has been counting on it for support. They also have an African-American population of 2.5%. It is also a state governed by Bill Richardson, a man who stopped just short of endorsing Hillary only last week and was actually in the lead prior to dropping out.
So we’re talking about a state that has almost none of Barack Obama’s strongest base and a full majority of Hillary’s strongest base. He should have been crushed here. Particularly when you also remember that just like in almost every other state, the exit polls indicated that 56% of the voters were women, who form an even stronger part of Hillary’s base.
And he has a slim majority of the vote. If Hillary’s campaign isn’t regrouping and spinning their little hearts out, they should be. No amount of spin can change that.
Edit: My favorite comment from that last link:
This sounds so much like the red-blue maps, those showing red and blue nationwide by county, that made it appear that Bush had beaten Gore 98-2.
Several of those monstrosities were emailed to me by gloating Republican Schmucks. My response was that tumble weed and prairie dogs don’t count.
And THAT sums up Hillary’s supporters better than I ever could.
Willie is alreadt entertaining the “dream Ticket” idea and you can bet who will be the presidential candidate in his scenario.
Hillary will be “given” the nomination in a brokered deal. Mark my words.
McCain or Hillary?
I think I’m going to be sick now.
Jeff
February 6, 2008 at 9:36 am
Minor point Wes, Richardson is still the governor. I just mentioned that because his political organization will be still in place when November rolls around for the Democrat nominee.
pgwarner
February 6, 2008 at 9:56 am
OK, I don’t know why I thought he wasn’t still the governor. I’ll make that correction, thanks very much.
Wes
February 6, 2008 at 10:03 am
I’ve got my fingers crossed for Obama as I don’t think I could live with myself after voting for McCain or Billary. OK perhsps I just gravitate toward a certain crowd but both in this blog and amongst my personal freinds there seems to be a universal opinion that no one wants McCain or Hillary as President yet they are both ahead in their respective races. Quite an interesting anomoly.
Apologies to PG as he is a McCain supporter as I recall.
thompaine
February 6, 2008 at 11:16 am
I think DFV is also. Is that correct?
Dave the Infidel Sage
February 6, 2008 at 12:20 pm
The Scribe has always been behind McCain, Jeff. I believe E and Dave will both vote for McCain.
In my view want should not enter into it. Principle-Party-Candidate, if you look first for the person that moves you, then I submit that you will be always disappointed. The only non-Republican I have ever voted for is Federico Pena, and that was in a “non-partisan” mayoral election.
It is extremely funny, but just a few weeks ago people were not torqued off like they are now. It is interesting how people get invested in a contest.
If I had the time I would go back and find the comment where a certain Mike O. said McCain would be okay if he were the nominee. I believe he said a younger running mate would be good to pair with him. Fred then tanks and it was off to the races. My-Oh-My!
pgwarner
February 6, 2008 at 12:27 pm
It is interesting how people get invested in a contest.
I suppose that is only natural as it is coming down to the wire now.
As for Dave and E pardon me for making assumptions gentlemen but I believe McCain is more of a “settle for” candidate for them.
thompaine
February 6, 2008 at 2:21 pm
We will see, we will see.
pgwarner
February 6, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Those of you who want Barack to win can you answer one question? What experience does he have to be commander and chief? His speeches are more about rhetoric, hope, etc. No specifics as to how or what he plans to do once he gets in office. Yeah, he gives a good speech, but there’s no there there! If he becomes president, he will destroy the Democratic party just the same as Bush has destroyed the Republican party. Obama is Bush with a brain. No difference!!! His arrogance and smugness is too much for me to accept. John McCain will rip his tongue out. He has no idea what the Republican machine will do to him.
JCClark
February 10, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Have you actually tried to find out what his positions are, or are you just going on gut instinct? I recommend the former.
I hope they do. I really, really hope they do. Exactly how well do you think dirty politics will work this time around? That’s what killed the Republican party. The Republican machine you’re speaking of has been trying desperately to avoid nominating John McCain. They are failing miserably.
Obama is succeeding because people are desperate to get someone in office that will bring the country together instead of pulling it apart. It’s unfortunate that for the last eight years, the Republican party has made divisive politics its specialty, because it’s the worst possible tactic that could be used right now.
Wes
February 10, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Wes, I respectfully suggest that your view of Obama is unrealistic; the world does not work that way. Being for hope and change is meaningless, except as a slogan, everyone is for that. So is being a uniter, not a divider. Obama is only uniting people who tend to agree with some of your views. I find the idea of Obama being president, despite his rhetoric, frightening.
The ONLY president in my life time that made the country feel better about itself was Ronald Wilson Reagan. He did that by succeeding someone who was less eloquent than Barak, but just as unrealistic. I do think Carter was more genuine. At least he did not give 2 hour speeches and say nothing of substance.
What would you do Wes if Edwards endorses Hillary? I am not saying he will, but he did meet with her at his mansion on Monday.
pg - your humble messenger
February 10, 2008 at 4:03 pm
I’d still be for Obama. Then if she got the nomination, I’d just have to see how she went through the campaign.
I do think Obama would bring people together. Or at least would moreso than the remaining candidates. McCain might do the next best job, though. Again, I’d have to see how he carried the campaign. But I think we just disagree on this subject. I said early on that I thought it was too early for Obama to be running, and even though I support him, I still think that’s true. But I also don’t think that he isn’t up to the task. And I like his ideas. I’m thinking he’ll wind up picking up Richardson as VP, and that would be beneficial to him. Lord knows Cheney proved to be valuable to GWB.
Wes
February 10, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Called it!!! Hillary was supposed to win or place in Maine, not get walloped. She’s waiting for TX and OH, but she may not make it intact. Obama will almost assuredly win VA now, and it’s going to be hard to stop a runaway train.
Wes
February 10, 2008 at 6:20 pm
“Cheney proved to be valuable to GWB.”
That’s an understatement, Wes.
Jeff
February 10, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Wes you are more than welcome to “believe” in a candidate. My views regarding Clinton and Obama are known, and they have to do with which one I think we hurt this country less.
Obama has been winning, or more properly stated has been getting the plurality of the vote, in caucus states, with relatively small turnouts. TX and OH will be the tests as they are large state primaries. It may come down to PA, and maybe even not then. But you are right; Obama is a movement right now, that is such a pity, a shame really.
Conspiracy theories and emotionalism, the American people always get the government they deserve. The guy is for hope and change, my dog is for hope and change. He is not alone, Huckabee’s speech a CPAC said absolutely nothing either except he is for Faith, Family and Freedom. Oh yeah, and Jesus, forgot that.
My only “hope” is that America has yet to elect anybody as liberal as Clinton and Obama since WWII, at least nobody who was this up front about it. They will need to move to the center, my hope is when thy do their/your party fractures
pg - your humble messenger
February 10, 2008 at 9:39 pm
PG, buddy, our party isn’t the one fracturing. Ask around, and you’ll find that we’re in the majority these days. Not only are independents not voting Republican, Republicans aren’t voting. Guess that BDS is an epidemic, huh?
Wes
February 10, 2008 at 10:39 pm
You missed my point Wes, yet again. I will leave the discussion to you now. Elections, politics as a whole in this country is so emotional it is pathetic.
Read what I say, comment on that please. That is if you want a response from me in the future “buddy”.
As far as BDS being an epidemic you are right. You are the one who thinks the majority is always right. We shall see. I could care less who predicts what Wes. I care about surviving. I shudder at the idea of voting for a man who delivers his speeches with the cadence of a preacher. I don’t have a conspiracy theory on that yet, but I am working on it. Good luck “buddy”.
I made a promise and I intend to keep it. Ideas I will talk about, feelings, not so much.
pg - your humble messenger
February 11, 2008 at 11:24 am
I’m not talking emotionally, really, just being practical. The Democrats are far more stable this election in almost every way. And it wouldn’t make sense to move back to the center when the Republican nominee is likely to already occupy that spot. And if he doesn’t, then he’d lose anyway. By all accounts, nobody is in the mood for a conservative right now. BDS will prove to be more than just a product of the left, because in the end, it would require a tremendous leap in logic to blame anyone else if either Democrat is elected.
Wes
February 11, 2008 at 2:57 pm
It remains to be seen how stable the Democratic Party will remain Wes. For instance the right wing of the Republican Party did not go to extremes until it was clear McCain was going to be the choice.
Here are some hurdles:
1. Super Delegates: How will they behave? Will their choices be accepted? Lawsuits?
2. John Edwards’ Delegates: Their use is a huge source of potential conflict.
3. Michigan and Florida Delegates: Lawsuit? Howard Dean?
4. A brokered Conviction
5. Hillary nomination: Will African Americans sit out?
6. How will the far left (of which you are a part Wes) react when the nominee strives to move towards the center? They have to, or the nominee will lose.
These are just the most obvious ones at this time. A united Democratic Party has not existed in my life time. Even the mid seventies were a reaction to Watergate, not due to Democratic unity. I see no reason that the Democrats will united.
This just the primaries, the fracturing I was talking about involves the more conservative leaning voters who gave the Demorcates their ’06 majority. Faced with avowed tax rising and nationalized health caring advocating liberals they may bolt to a McCain.
If you think either Democrat can win running to the left Wes, I think you need to again get educated on this subject. I would not equate any dissatisfaction regarding Bush as the American public supporting a socialist agenda. If they do then they deserve what they get. What “all accounts” are you talking about BTW?
You are setting yourself up for disappointment like after ‘06 as to how small a part of the Democratic Party a socialist like you represents. This is somewhat similar to what conservatives are feeling now. We shall see. There is always “hope”
See, I made it through all that without either a conspiracy theory or unreasonable hatred towards an individual.
Finally, you don’t need to tell me the Republican Party is fracturing. What do you think I have been writing about for the last few weeks? Calling me “buddy”, and using BDS like you did, was emotional.
pg - your humble messenger
February 11, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Why I dont know, but this post is getting more views than any post on the site right now. Well any non-Eva Longoria posts.
pg - your humble messenger
February 11, 2008 at 4:02 pm
A Democrat cannot win by trenching in on the left. There has to be Clintonian promises of “I will not raise taxes” and promises of creating the New Democrat. If Wes believes that neither Obama nor Hillary will make a push for the center, he hasn’t been well versed in politics. By saying that the Republican will already be there ignores the point. Dems will concede nothing during the election and then say sorry for it after they win. Why ask for permission when it is so much easier to ask for forgiveness after victory?
E the Wise
February 11, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I could well be wrong, but I really don’t think I am. Universal healthcare is a huge issue. The economy is a huge issue. On the former, McCain doesn’t really have any answers, and his solutions for competition and lowering prices are pretty toothless. And on the economy, what is he going to say, more tax cuts? Everyone knows Bush cut taxes, and they can see now that it didn’t really fix anything. Why would they listen to more of the same? Besides that, either Democrat will be running on tax cuts for the middle class. Bet on it.
Look, all I’m saying is that I think the country has been run on core Republican principles for 8 years. And if people are extremely dissatisfied, it’s with those policies. I think trying to adopt a more conservative campaign at this point in time is at best useless, at worst suicidal. Look where it got Mitt.
Wes
February 11, 2008 at 6:02 pm
PG – One can only assume that there must not be very many other ‘New Mexico Primary Results” threads on the web.
Dave the Infidel Sage
February 11, 2008 at 9:45 pm
If the democrats stay as divided as they are, they WILL lose in November. I think Obama instead of uniting the party has done much to polarize the party. While there are many democrats who will vote either way in November, an increasing number are saing they will sit out in November if their candidate is not selected!!
MM
February 12, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Let’s not forget who the polarizing figure is here. Hillary Clinton has had a target on her back for over a decade now. Her carefully plotted political strategy has turned off not only Republicans, but Democrats looking for honesty in government as well. Her association with the Republican-lites at the DLC are a giant obstacle that some of us just can’t stomach. If she were not running, no matter who else was, there would not be this level of division. If Obama were not running, there would be. If you think that people who won’t vote for Hillary got this way after the campaign started, you’re fooling yourself.
Hillary knew how she was perceived. Her supporters knew how she was perceived. Both decided to proceed regardless. Why is anyone surprised now that exactly what was predicted would happen is happening?
Wes
February 12, 2008 at 2:20 pm
These are facts. When Hillary was fighting for working families for 35 years, did she fight her husband Bill not to sign NAFTA ( HR 3450) into law 1993. Arguably one of the most destructive pieces of legislation to destroy American and Mexican working families. When she was standing up for civil rights, why didn’t she stand up for gays when in 1996 Bill signed the Defense of Marriage Act (HR 3396) *see bottom for details. What kind of policy is Don’t Ask Don’t Tell? Anti-gay? How does the family medical leave act financially help families that are seriously ill? It doesn’t!. Clinton initiated the 2nd Guld War with HR 6544, which was a policy of “Regime Change.” Sound familiar? Clinton kills innocent Iraqis in one of many cruise missile strikes into Bagdad. What about all the innocent men, women, and children at WACO? Is this part of Hillary’s experience? She consistently refers back to her Whitehouse days as experience. These all sound like GW Bush policies don’t they?
HR 3396: 1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need recognize a marriage between persons of the same sex, even if the marriage was concluded or recognized in another state.
2. The Federal Government may not recognize same-sex or polygamous marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states
Repost and repost. Facts are facts, and they don’t lie. -adam
Adam C
February 12, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Just heard on the News HILLARY WON NEW MEXICO.
Good……..
Obama may still win the Nomination, but the guy is nothing but a bunch of Talk and Speeches, he hasn’t done much of anything except,write a book and run for office. He is also divisive, to call the Clinton’s racist was the most underhanded, ludicrious campaign smear, he did it to wake up the sleeping dems, throw racists mud on the Clintons and because they are white, the masses immediately believe it. Obama’s campaign played the racist-card. He also hides his white mother when he campaigns in a state with a large black population. Once he gets the nomination, he’ll suddenly be mixed race again, no longer African American.
jan
February 14, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Yep, those good old united big tent dems!
pg - your humble messenger
February 14, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Obama has the support of the people. If “Billary” is ‘given’ the Democratic nomitation we might see two things that seem impossible. (1) black president (2) who won as an independent. If Obama doesn’t get the Democratic nomination I know a lot of people, including myself who would vote for him even if he’s not tied to a party. Actually, I think there would be a lot of people that would do this, maybe in spite of not being duely provided what he earned…the democratic nomination.
Best regards to those that preach non change and discontent.
Amber
February 18, 2008 at 11:48 am
[...] on New Mexico Primary Results Demonstrate Why Obama Won … tapblog2 wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptHillary Clinton has had a target on [...]
test » Blog Archive » Comment on New Mexico Primary Results Demonstrate Why Obama Won …
May 3, 2008 at 9:06 pm