How Clinton hit pay dirt

The keys to her Nevada victory: a huge wave of new voters

Leila Navidi

Hillary Clinton poses for a photo with her Nevada staff after a news conference in a parking lot on her way out of town after her Nevada Democratic caucus win Saturday.

By J. Patrick Coolican, Michael Mishak

Sun, Jan 20, 2008 (2 a.m.)

Foresaw a huge wave of new voters unlike in her failed Iowa campaign.
Worked relentlessly to appeal to Hispanics from the ground up rather than the top down.
Sewed up the support of many Culinary workers long before the union endorsed Obama.
Dominated among women and then persuaded them show up to caucus.
Won the final week of publicity with tough political gamesmanship.

2008 Caucus Coverage

See how Hillary won the Silver State

If you want to know how Sen. Hillary Clinton won a convincing victory in Saturday’s Nevada caucus, look back to a meeting Dec. 15 at William E. Orr Middle School in Las Vegas.

There, Robby Mook, Clinton’s state director, told 600 of the campaign’s most committed volunteers that he wanted to enlist many more supporters to caucus for the candidate -- more than twice what he asked for in August.

It was a startling move coming nearly a year into the Nevada campaign -- and just five weeks before the caucus. It also was a strategic risk because it would divert resources.

Mook’s colleagues in Clinton’s Iowa campaign paid no attention to his move. Turns out, they should have.

Clinton’s Iowa team would be blindsided three weeks later by a big turnout that favored Illinois Sen. Barack Obama. The Clinton team there hadn’t thought to consider Obama might draw out many voters who normally don’t participate in elections.

In Nevada, Mook looked at the landscape and found the following: Democrats, despite the predictions of naysayers, had taken a real interest in the presidential caucus. He feared that the campaign would fail if it limited itself to rounding up support only from voters with a history of participation.

So as he spoke to volunteers that cold December Saturday, Mook’s usual confidence was clearly shaken. Clinton needed to mine the electorate for voters the campaign originally thought would not participate.

It was a tall order. Campaigns have an easier time if they can work from lists of “likely voters.”

“We need to work hard now,” Mook told the group. “If the caucus were held today, we’d do OK. We would not be as successful as we want to be.”

The Sun was given access to the Clinton meeting, as well as to other internal discussions by the Clinton campaign, while also conducting background interviews with Obama staff, under the condition the paper not publish any of what it learned about strategy until after the caucus.

Mook said in an interview Saturday that his staff groaned at the suggestion of expanding the universe of voters, especially to such a radical new goal: Find 60,000 more. Some analysts estimated that was as much as the entire expected turnout statewide. (In August, the Clinton goal was 24,752 supporters.)

Now, not only was Mook pushing for an unheard-of total, he was also brutally honest about the profile of the average Clinton voter at the precinct captain meeting: Clinton supporters “are less likely to turn out,” he said. “They don’t understand the caucus.”

Reaching the new number required immense amounts of motivation, both of the voters and the volunteers trying to reach them.

The motivation came from the campaign and its best surrogates.

The endorsement of Clark County Commission Chairman Rory Reid was always seen as a good early “get,” but the campaign never expected him to go to the lengths he did.

At precinct captain meetings in August and December, Reid, not known as much of an orator, fired up the troops. His work and commitment made the sale authentic.

“I want you to feel the urgency of what’s going on here,” he said in December before closing with a “Field of Dreams” cliche: “If you do it, she will win.”

Mook played bad cop at the December meeting. He laid out what he expected from volunteers: hard-core supporters about whom the campaign would have no doubts, one volunteer for every 10 supporters, and a pledge to canvass the neighborhood twice a week, work the phones and host parties. No wavering supporters.

Five weeks later -- on Saturday -- Mook’s team hit the number, and the staff members were thanking Mook left and right for giving them the bigger goal, he said.

The Nevada caucus turned Iowa on its head. There, Clinton hit her original goal but was deluged by the Obama turnout. Here, the turnout was nearly double the 60,000 forecast -- standing at 115,800 late Saturday with 2 percent of precincts yet to report.

One precinct in a middle-class Las Vegas neighborhood showed the success of Clinton’s effort.

State Sen. Steven Horsford, a supporter of Obama, said the vote goal in his precinct was 29. Obama surpassed it easily with 45.

Clinton had 58.

Mook credited the Clinton precinct captains: “I give a lot of credit to our precinct captains. We came out of Iowa, and we never felt like we were losing them. People had a personal relationship with the campaign.”

Those precinct captains had to adjust midstream to an influx of voters no one expected. But because the campaign found them and nailed down their commitment, they were ready to take on the new goal.

Mook had set the much higher target because he was picking up signs of increased interest in the caucus.

The signs were clear to anyone watching: Democrats eager, even desperate to take back the White House, running a strong roster of candidates with talented field organizers. And December polling in Iowa and New Hampshire showed close races.

But not everyone was so savvy. The campaign of former Sen. John Edwards, for instance, was using a turnout model of 45,000 total voters, according to a campaign official.

Aside from heavy turnout, the Clinton camp made another smart strategic move that was aided and abetted by a strategic blunder: Although the Clinton team won’t admit it publicly, the campaign had been working Culinary Union members hard and organizing them for the past year. The effort recognized that because the union was waiting so long to make an endorsement decision (it didn’t come until 10 days ago), the campaign could peel off members and get them committed and working while the union dithered. The result was a surprising victory at seven of the nine special Strip caucus sites.

Most remarkable about this organizational drive is that it required secrecy -- if the Culinary found out, the union would have worked to shut it down.

And even though Clinton fared well at the Strip sites, she also benefited from the lawsuit filed to have the sites closed, according to interviews with voters, who expressed anger that Culinary workers -- and by extension, Obama -- were given disproportionate influence in the total delegate count because of the at-large sites.

The claim about delegate allocation wasn’t true, but many voters believed it to be so, which is all that mattered.

The Culinary is 49 percent Hispanic, and Clinton dominated among Hispanics statewide, according to exit polling.

Although the Clinton victory was decisive, especially with women, her victory among Hispanics was especially striking, beating Obama 2-1 with a demographic that comprised 15 percent of the voters, according to exit polls.

This was evident in Clinton’s campaigning the past 10 days, when she aggressively courted Hispanics and hit the issues they cared about. Lately, that means the economy and the mortgage foreclosure crisis, which is hurting working-class Hispanics especially.

“We refused to take it for granted and worked very, very hard knocking on doors multiple times,” Mook said. “We focused on the doors.”

To be sure, the Clinton organization wasn’t always a well-oiled machine. At a December meeting called to create a caucus-training guide for volunteers, the staff wrangled over verb choices and what color marker they should use.

For Clinton’s team, no doubt Obama’s Iowa victory drew the challenge into clear relief.

For their part, Obama’s supporters said the loss was a moral victory, given that they started from nothing a year ago and were going against much of the party establishment, save the Culinary.

“We made up 25 or 30 points in two months; things are going our way,” said Billy Vassiliadis, an Obama adviser and the chief executive of R&R Partners, an advertising and public affairs firm.

Vassiliadis acknowledged Obama and his campaign must do better with Hispanics to succeed in states such as California.

The Obama team points out that he could actually walk away with more delegates to the national convention than Clinton because he won in some rural counties that are given more weight than Clark County, where Clinton won handily.

But that won’t cloud the fact that this was a hard-fought victory for Clinton, one that seemed certain six months ago but extremely uncertain a week ago.

It’s not clear whether there was any impact from late advertising and media attacks on Obama’s record on abortion, the nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain or his alleged lack of support for gaming.

And though it’s easy to slice and dice and analyze strategy, there’s this: Nevadan Democrats put their faith in Clinton and her experience.

At dozens of precinct locations voters interviewed by the Sun cited Clinton’s experience as the overriding factor in their decision.

As Mook said, “Sen. Clinton spent a lot of time here, and her presence here was more substantive and focused more on issues. (The voters) decided it was not a popularity contest.”

Discussion: 40 comments so far…

By SeedofChange

1/20/08 at 3:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

"Dogs" is the only words to describe the Clintons.

They work their butt off like snow dogs to get what they want. Love them or hate them, know one thing for sure, they will "work", not just talk.

President Clinton walking the strip to win common peoples vote. That apparently did not please some elites. Elites just forget, before he was president, he was a trashy white boy from Arkansas brought up by a single mom. He knows the realities of this world.

Clintons don't forget who they are, unlike others who are confused if they are white like Regan, or black like "Regan's hated Caddilac driving single black mom from project".

Congratulation to the trashy white boy and his middle class wife :-)
By Jeffko

1/20/08 at 4:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hey -- Harry Reid !

I have spent a year of my life and oodles of my time trying to get people to get involved and pay attention to us.

You guys screwed up.

My Caucus was the worst organized debacle I have ever been involved in.

I first have to give up my candidate, John Edwards, because he did not stay viable. OK. My guy lost. My party rules said if you do not get enough votes you move to another candidate or you choose uncommited or you leave.

I joined Hillary Clinton's caucus.

Then I come home and see that Barack Obama, despite getting a substantially fewer amount of votes, has more delegates than my new choice, Hillary Clinton.

I lost three times today, and you wasted my time.

You guys have now joined the US Supreme Court in the annals of US Political History in stealing the election from the person who won it. Hillary Clinton won, but Barack Obama becomes our Presidential nominee if we are the last criteria used to choose the Democratic nominee.

Shame, shame, shame on all of you.

God Bless all of you.
By ezboy03

1/20/08 at 4:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

American is not a monarchy system. We shall end the Bush/Clinton era in November, even if the Democrats nominate Hillary. The Clintons are power-obsessed. and they represent everything wrong about our politics. Turning Brown against Black, back-room political manouvering, Democrats may fall for that, we Independents have not forgotten the Clinton White House of the 90s - Lewinsky scandal, Money for Pardon scandal - Marc Rich, Hugh Rodham etc..
By ezboy03

1/20/08 at 4:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

We do not run a monarchy system of government in the United States. We shall end the the Clinton/Bush era in November.
By SeedofChange

1/20/08 at 5:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clintons did not win Iowa, and they has to work their butt off everywhere else to win it for the commoners. We can not take away rights from hard working people just because they are related.

Republicans elect people based of "heredity" as they support burden free inheritance as well. Democrats don't support burden free inherence and Clinton knows that.

Clinton left presidency with higher popularity than Ronald Regan. People care about those who make difference in their life. They don't care if Jefferson slept with his slave, FDR spend time with his girl friend, or Bush Senior spent time with his prosititues in Watergate Hotel.

Get real. Look at real problem for real people.
By mm

1/20/08 at 6:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

if you guys are thinking, then you should be thinking about the following:
remember clinton's argument that the location of the caucuses on the las vegas was unfair, and that votes cast there would be counted for more than those cast elsewhere. remember the-one-vote-per-person line advocated so angrily by bill clinton. now, since the majority of the voters on that strip voted for the clintons, does bill still believe that those votes were unfair? does he still believe that they counted for more than others? of course not; after all, the clintons thanked the voters for voting their conscience.
those voters moved from having unfair voting advantage to having great conscience!!!!
what a bunch of hypocrits!!!
By weacguy

1/20/08 at 7:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

But Clinton and Obama are the political twins:
both favor:
1. nuclear power
2. free trade
3. HMO dominated health insurance
4. muscular foreign policy
5. lobbyist dominated WH and Congress
etc., etc.

Same old, same old, status quo.

Style differences, but no substance that would meaningfully affect working Americans in a
positive way.

So we're electing a personality now?
By Socrates

1/20/08 at 8:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

The media determined the outcome of this caucus as they do for all elections in this country now. They marginalized some candidates while putting Obama and Clinton front and center.

The media should refrain from reporting on polls and allow all candidates equal time. Campaign financing should be public and equal to all candidates as well. Corporations and big money must be disconnected from the process.

Only then will the people truly be able to choose fairly.
By converse

1/20/08 at 8:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

I'm confused.

This is a primary race, where the winner is the candidate with the most national delegates.

Obama's totals position him to win more pledged national delegates in Nevada.

There was no "popular vote" since it was a caucus.

What did Clinton win? The contest to dupe the press?
By aw

1/20/08 at 8:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

people longing for Bill Clinton to be president again need to think twice --

Bill Clinton presided over a terrific economy not the least of which was because of the advent of the internet and that impact on the US ecomony

That's not going to happen again -

Also: if will never be before 9/11 again -- the world is different.

You can say this is a generational divide, you can say it is a racial divide - I submit it is an intellectual divide

Team Clinton thinks they can twist and change the argument to suit them wherever they are an who ever the audience is - and sad to say there is some evidence that is working

I am over 50 and a woman and I support Barack Obama. Partially because I want my children to grow in a less divisive world where truth matters. Where ideas matter. Where we can travel abroad and be proud to be American again. Where we have a president who has sound judgement and gets it right the first time.

Where we know our country can do better than having presidents from only two families for decades.

That's my dream
By GOD

1/20/08 at 8:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

How Clinton hit pay dirt
The keys to her Nevada victory: a huge wave of new voters.... IT SHOULD READ: A HUGE WAVE OF ILLEGAL VOTERS.

Now Hitlary is beholding to the illegals she pandered to in Las Vegas. Licenses, handouts, and more welfare in the form of healthcare.
By VOTER

1/20/08 at 8:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

This country is in a world of hurt, and Hillary Clinton has the work-hard attitude and skills to get it fixed. Period.

The voters know that we are not electing the Prom King here, no matter how much to stupid media tries to tell us we are. These are the people who gave us Bush because they thought he was such a great, uniting guy. Yeah, right. The public does not trust the media anymore, and we are deciding for ourselves.
By Taelyn

1/20/08 at 9:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Neither Obama or Hillary won any "National Delegates" from The nevada caucus. Those wont be given until the State Party meets and assigns them. (atleast that is my understanding of the statement they (NDP) gave about Obama's claim of having more National Delegates)
They both won precint delegates who will go and represent them at the State Party. Then National delgates will be assigned.

But .. That in no way takes away from Hillary's win in Nevada. Anymore then it made her be second in Iowa with her extra delegate over Edwards.

Congratulations Hillary..
By mango

1/20/08 at 9:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

The delegate count is irrelevant at this point, and the chair of the Nevada party has pointed out as much. And, by that argument, Clinton placed second in Iowa, not third, as the media too eagerly jumped over. The people have spoken, move on and do better in the next state. The vitriol of the Obama supporters is shocking.
By NickD

1/20/08 at 9:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

THE RIGHT CHOICE NEVADA....WE DID IT!!! We are sending this wonderful woman off to the Whitehouse.
By gsirod

1/20/08 at 9:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

It is nice to see that the people of Nevada picked the person who has a proven record of RESULTS and has the best WORK ETHIC of all the candidates. It is great to see that hard work and experience does count in this nation. Not just talk... Congrats goes to Hillary.
By 1971guy

1/20/08 at 11:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Look at national Delegates pledged: Clinton is far ahead...Obama is a fairy-tale and race obsessed soon to be loser...look at his atl speech today (trying to sound all preacher and southern black...) Give me a break...
By krispyjoe

1/20/08 at 1 p.m.

Suggest removal

Yep, Obama is leading in delegates going into South Carolina. Hillary is working all the angles (crying, playing on gender, promising licenses, jobs, payouts etc. to people who aren't here legally, etc.) while Bubba takes the swipes at Obama. This thing will probably be settled at the Convention. Well, we can all stay home or vote for Romney/Huckabee or McCain if the Convention delegates try to push the Clintons in for a third term.
By hal0bender

1/20/08 at 3:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

"How Clinton hit pay dirt
The keys to her Nevada victory: a huge wave of new voters.... IT SHOULD READ: A HUGE WAVE OF ILLEGAL VOTERS.

Now Hitlary is beholding to the illegals she pandered to in Las Vegas. Licenses, handouts, and more welfare in the form of healthcare."

Thats exactly what Hitlery is about. More state welfare for people who have acted irresponsibly at the sake of those who haven't(i.e. the housing market). More rewarding and cajoling of illegal immigrants at the sake of legal citizens.

As a life long Democrat my tide has shifted this year. My vote would is for Ron Paul but beyond that I cannot say. I can say I will not support Hillary and her welfare state.
By seven

1/20/08 at 4 p.m.

Suggest removal

You know, I guess you think the name "Hitlery" is cute, but your candidate George W. Bush lied us into a war that has cost billions of dollars and nearly 4,000 American lives. He ignored the "Bin Ladin Ready to Strike in the U.S." memo one month before September 11. He has vetoed health care, he has opened a torture chamber at Guantanamo Bay, he has violated the right to privacy, shredded the Constitution. And lest we not forget, he took office after a stolen election.

I have had it up to HERE with you sick, rabid, Hillary hating wing nuts. You have turned this beautiful country into an unrecognizable police state. You have run the economy into the ditch with your worship for corporations and greed. And now you have the NERVE to criticize and name call Hillary Clinton. I think the name HITLER belongs to YOUR party of sick haters. May God forgive you for what you have done to this country.

HILLARY CLINTON WILL BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
By litlady

1/20/08 at 4:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hillary is the strongest democratic candidate and that is why she won. Obama is the future of the party but I do not have the confidence in him that I have in her in changing America the day GWB leaves. I hope they stop attacking each other and join unified coalition (Clinton-Obama)to beat the Republicans.
By kreyol509

1/20/08 at 4:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Obama is the best candidate for this country. He represents change since he is not controlled by businesses and other politicians as Clinton is.
By Kathryn

1/20/08 at 6:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Our country is so ready for a candidate with a powerful message and strong character. We have endured almost two decades of scandals,deception and corruption. For once I want my children to know an honorable leader. If you listen carefully, beyond the insults, race baiting and accusations of the opposing candidate, you can hear and feel greatness with Obama. I would be proud to call him my president.
By aw

1/20/08 at 6:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/arch...

and maybe some confusion and disorganization
see above link
By 12roses

1/20/08 at 7:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hillary's victory in Nevada is just one of many stepping stones to the nomination, as it is for Obama and Edwards. At this point, the most important thing to keep in mind is what the people want and need of a leader (actually leaders) as the president and vice president must function as a team for truly effective leadership; leadership that can erradicate the reversals suffered by the economy, human rights, humanitarianism and diplomacy under the GWB administration. Americans must vote to regain the right to be heard, the right to work, the right to privacy, and the right to due process of law -- all which we have lost under the current Republican administration. To me, the messages of Clinton, Obama and Edwards are similar in that they are all concerned about righting the many human rights and civil rights wrongs imposed since 9/11 in the name of security. Liberty remains the key to true democracy, and that is clearly something Americans must once again struggle for. What are we so afraid of losing that we are willing to give up the basic rights listed above? What is important is that we all vote on all levels (primararies, causcuses, the national election) to make sure that our voices are heard. Whether Edwards, Obama or Clinton wins the presidential nomination is really not that important as long as a viable presidential-vice presidential team is arrived at that represents the widest spectrum of American voices as possible, and that can help toward eliminating the stranglehold that America's greedy, bigoted, abusive and war-mongering elite has held on all levels of American society for far too long. I would vote for either a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket in a flash, or any combination with Edwards. I do believe that they all want the best for America, and that it is time to put people into office who actually represent what the middle and lower classes need, rather than what the entrenched interests want.
By pepem

1/20/08 at 7:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

It is not fair to claim that Ms. Clinton peddled to ILLEGAL ALIENS. Do not asume that everyone who is of hispanic ancestry is an Ilegal Alien. Many of us foreign born are naturalized American Citizens with the rights, benefits and obligations as anyone born here. There is no way a Hotel or Casino is going to hire anybody unless he or she provides the proper documentation that is check, re-check and super check before that person is hired. We all want to stay here and must follow the law and only an idiot will register to vote and vote without being a US Citizen either by birth or naturalization. Foreign born workers are tax payers also and have all the right to participate, show their enthusiasm, file their complains and make public officials accountable for their actions. Bigotry only divides. Just accept the fact tat 25% of the residents of Clark County are of hispanic ancestry plus all the people coming from the rest of the world. Just learn to live with us and accept the fact that Mexicans or Hispanics, were here before the white people came to the West, will be here while white people are here and will still be here when all you are gone. In United States the latins birth rate is higher that any other etnic group.
By HH123

1/20/08 at 8:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Obama's Campaign is not looking good after Nevada. Hispanics are not voting for him. Clintons are extremely popular among Asians too. How is he going to win California without the support from them? He will win South Carolina and some southern states. But he will not win the states with most delegates, such as California and New York. I guess the attempt to please the Republicans didn't help him in Nevada. Many Liberals are not happy with his comments about Ronald Reagan. He should forget about the Republicans. They will not vote for him. If you think the Clintons played dirt tricks on Obama, you haven't seen nothing yet. Wait for the Republicans if he is nominated. Obama should focus on Change, more important, what to change, and how to change. His Campaign really needs some real substances.
By Goody

1/20/08 at 9:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

To say Obama is not controlled by businesses or politicians (kreyol 509) is such nonsense. If that was the case, he wouldn't be in the race.

He is already hugely indebted to Harpo Productions (Oprah), for starters.

If we're going to make comments let's at least have a modicum of credibility to them.

Granny Warrior 4 Hillary
By TomBlase

1/20/08 at 9:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Nevada, you blew it. You got sucked in by Bill Clinton going around and intimidating people to caucus for Hillary. You got sucked into believing the Clintons really care about you. They don't. They ONLY CARE about POWER. They are liars, cheaters, and completely sleezy. God forbid that the Clintons ever get back into the White House. WE NEED TO GET RID OF THE CLINTON AND THE BUSH DYNASTIES ONCE AND FOR ALL. Washington really does need new blood.
By Melindas1

1/20/08 at 11:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

I was shocked and appauled at Bill Clinton's Bullying tactics and lies as he stated that there was pushing and shoving inside the MEC center at The Mirage by the Obama supporters.....I am a culinary shop steward and proud to support Sen. Obama. Inside, The Obama supporters were stopped when they were giving stickers and t shirts out to the OBAMA supporters but it was ok for the Clinton Campaigners to hand out t-shirts and bring Bill Clinton into the caucas room to campaign for her..IF THIS HAD BEEN ANYONE ELSE...he would not have been allowed in that room until his REGISTRATION was verified. PULL THE VIDEOS OUT AND EXPOSE HIM...PLEASE ...and call him on his lying about pushing and shoving. I went to approach him and he purposely turned his head when he saw I had an OBAMA t-shirt on. Im sorry I EVER voted for him. Im So So ashamed of him and his nasty tactics.....My husband wanted to break out in a MONICA chant but refrained. GO OBAMA....WE"VE GOT YOUR BACK...ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE.
By JohnRoberts

1/21/08 at 12:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama is what America needs to regain a place in this world. Enough of the Clinton attack machine. The Clintons are so divisive and they are so fake. The only way they can make themselves look better is by running smear campaigns on others. Why don't they only talk positive about themselves instead of calling Obama a fairy tale, diminishing MLK's actions, and thinking we, the American people, are stupid enough to believe them?

Yes Clinton, Give me a break, all right! Enough attacking others, Clinton! We don't want another Bush - Clinton - Clinton - Bush - Bush - CLINTON?!!!

That is not CHANGE.

If you believe in America, Obama is the best candidate out there.

You have a choice, so please make the right choice. Stop listening to the Clinton Smear Attacks... enough is enough.
By Theo

1/21/08 at 1:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

One of Obama's advisors is Billy Vasiliadis, a registered lobbyist and CEO of R&R Partners. Obama's also accepted money from Vasiliadis.

All of his talk about not accepting money from lobbyists? Well, Obama goes to great length to make a distinction between people who are registered as federal lobbyists and those who are registered as state lobbyists.

Obama isn't the pure soul people make him out to be. He's learned the ways of Washington very, very quickly... which means he's easily corruptable.
By mom4clinton

1/21/08 at 5:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

I was a first time caucus goer, and it was great to be a part of history to give my support to the Clintons.

We got to see up close and personal why they are the right ones to get the job done right now. They fought so much and so passionately for our support, and they will do the same to fix the economy, get us out of this awful war, and keep the Middle Class from sliding down the tubes. I like that they know what we need in Nevada in our housing market and nuclear dumping but that they also know what the country needs.

I look forward to real change, real results, not all those long and phony words. The economy and the war especially need results the minute that we can get this country back on track, out of the current hands in the White House making too many mistakes that hurt real people's lives.
By mm

1/21/08 at 8:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

it may not be that racially polarized if we look deeper.
the majority of blacks in nevada is relatively young. many blacks come here to work in the counstruction and entertainment industry; and because young voters tend to gravitate toward obama, this huge turn-out in favor of obama may have a lot to do with generational differences that appear to be racial polarization only superficially; similarly, the large percentage of the white vote that went for hillary may have more to do with educational level and older age rather than race. for instance, the vegas strip workers are in majority blue-collar democrats, and a significant portion of that percentage is hispanic. since there seems to be pattern of blue-collar democrats gravitating toward clinton, the huge hispanic support for clinton may not be that ethnic-based as suggested by many commentators.
we have to remember that it was not easy to campaign in nevada, and the caucus thing is vey new here; and we also know that hispanics here watch a lot spanish television. neither obama or clinton have had enough media coverage here prior to their speedy campaigns in latin television stations. so, given the fact that obama is a new comer in term of national politics, and has had insufficient time in terms of campaigning, the hispanic support for hillary may reasonably be viewed as a choice for a better known candidate with a popular ex-president as a husband rather than as an ethnic rejection of obama.
for example, in california clinton only has a nine-point lead; in light of that, obama would not be that close to clinton unless he had some significant hispanic support there.
so, it may well be a myth that hispanics do not support obama or blacks do not clinton.
many blacks are very young, so the generational gap be a bigger factor for their support of obama. in fact, when it comes to older blacks particularly women, clinton and obama are quite even.
so, i believe that the media may be tapping into our historical racial obsessions in order to increase ratings. in conclusion, the statistics when viewed in their proper context suggest that race is quite a minor issue in this presidential race.
By TomBlase

1/21/08 at 9:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

"How Clinton hit Pay Dirt"... I think the operative word here is "dirt". Dirt that Hillary and Bill are slinging at Barack Obama. How anybody can believe the Clintons' lies is beyond me. The same couple that called women "bimbos" and "trailer trash" who just wanted some justice after Bill had used and abused them, and in one case RAPED them. The same couple that had more scandels, malfeasances, mysterious deaths surrounding them, sleezy behavior, IMPEACHMENT and god knows what else, while in the White House. I am shocked and dismayed at anyone who can't see through their act. All they want is power, and they don't care how they get it. PERIOD.
By mm

1/22/08 at 8 a.m.

Suggest removal

wow!!! i was proud of obama last night for standing up for his record. he really set the record straight. he made them look like idiots.
the tough bill that they claimed obama voted present for was initially sponsored by obama. somehow, there was some added clauses in the bill that obama had some reservation about; so obama could not either vote for or reject the bill in its modified form.
this is somehow equivalent to not answering yes or no to a non-applicable question on a federal form.

tom, you really got it, the sun-editors must have been under the influence of the unconscious mind when they chose this very operational and descriptive word for the clintons' camp.
obama has been doing something for the democratic party that many democrats could not do. he ventured into the hard and untouchable parts of northern nevada and convinced rural and northern nevadeans to vote democratic. that is revolutionary. his next move is with the evangelicals. he believes that the evangelicals have a lot in common with democrats, and for too long we have let right-wing politicians take advantage of them on the issues of obortion and gay marriage. in fact, he argues that evangelicals have some very important things in common with democrats; things such as poverty concerns, and other social problems such drug rehabilitations centers insteas of prisons for drug-addicts and so on.
obama can win this all the way to the white house!!!
By commonsense

1/22/08 at 7:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

No surprise that the Clintons have found a way to make dirt pay.
By mm

1/22/08 at 9:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

did any of you notice the strange pattern following the narrow wins of mrs clinton?
with two straight wins, her national lead is still dwidling. she is the only candidate in recent presidential primaries whose national polls do not improve overall even after two wins.
there is something else going on here. the party elders want her to stop criticizing obama so harshly. why? because even if she wins more delegates prior to convention, she may not get the nomination. the party leaders are concerned with her lack of appeal to independents, and in contrast very pleased with obama's strong showing in northern nevada, a traditional republican stronghold. so, the superdelegates may swicth their votes to obama even if after clinton manages to win more delegates from the primaries. after all, superdelegates are more loyal to the party than to hillary.
after the showing in northern nevada, many democratic leaders are starting to think that they may be better off with obama in the national elections.
there is now real concern with the electability of hillary in november. the superdelegates were invented exactly for that kind of scenario-- in which one candidate appears to be a strong primary, but consistently fares very weakly in national match-ups.

she does get support beyond the very core and reliable and traditional democratic voters.
this is a real concern!!!