Exit Polls: Why Clinton won Texas primary March 6, 2008
Posted by koreanpower999 in 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Texas.1 comment so far
POLITICO.COM – by David Paul Kuhn – March 5, 2008
Hillary Rodham Clinton won back her base in Texas, and with it a narrow victory in the state.
Clinton split white men and won six in ten white women. Barack Obama’s strength among blacks was neutralized by Clinton’s continued strength among Hispanics, according to the exit polls conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for television networks and the Associated Press.
In important respects, Clinton’s Texas victory mimicked the coast-to-coast contests of Super Tuesday.
Clinton won six in ten Hispanics, as she had a month ago. Obama won nine in ten blacks, as he had in early February. In Texas, Hispanics constituted a larger portion of voters than blacks, by 10 percentage points.
White men, as they were a month ago, were divided between Obama and Clinton.
Obama narrowly won the large cities, half of Texan Democratic voters. But Clinton ran away with the support of those in small cities and rural areas.
Obama did win six in ten voters age 29 and under, including Hispanics. But more seniors voted than youth. And elderly voters backed Clinton by a two-to-one ratio.
Obama won a majority of college graduates. But Clinton won a majority of those without college degrees — a larger share of Texas Democratic voters.
Obama won a slim majority of independents and Republicans. But about 65 percent of voters identified as Democrats; Clinton won a majority of them.
Point by point, Clinton’s strength overwhelmed Obama’s.
As it had been early on in the race, Clinton’s bloc of Hispanics and white women was simply too unified in Texas. Obama’s inability to win white men, as he recently had until Tuesday’s large contests, meant he could not overcome Clinton’s base.
Obama won seven in ten voters who said the capacity to bring about “change” was the candidate quality that mattered most. Half of Texas Democrats also said that was the most important quality.
In comparison, Clinton won nine in ten voters who said experience matters most. They were a quarter of the electorate.
Half of Democrats said economics mattered most, about ten percentage points fewer than in Ohio. This bloc split between Obama and Clinton.
Eight in ten Ohio Democrats believed that U.S. trade with other nations cost jobs. Less than six in ten Texas Democrats said the same.
Obama won only a slight majority of those voters who said the war in Iraq was the most important issue, often a greater advantage for him. A fifth of voters said health care matters most, and Clinton won six in ten of these Democrats.
Texas and Ohio both showed that Clinton’s central criticism of Obama is also beginning to make headway. In both states more than 65 percent of Democratic voters said it was Clinton who “offered clear and detailed plans to solve the country’s problems,” and Clinton won an equal share of their support.
In Texas, like Ohio, more Democrats thought Obama “inspires” and more Democrats thought Clinton would prove a better “commander in chief.”
Voters worried about their “financial situations” leaned toward Clinton. Those not worried backed Obama. But by a two-to-one ratio, Texas Democrats were concerned about their family’s economic stability next year.
In 2 Battlegrounds, Voters Say, Not Yet March 5, 2008
Posted by koreanpower999 in 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Ohio, Texas.add a comment
The New York Times – by Patrick Nealy – March 5, 2008
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s victories in Ohio and Texas on Tuesday night not only shook off the vapors of impending defeat, but also showed that — in spite of his delegate lead — Senator Barack Obama was still losing to her in the big states.
Those two states were the battlegrounds where Mr. Obama was going to bury the last opponent to his history-making nomination, finally delivering on his message of hope while dashing the hopes of a Clinton presidential dynasty.
Yet then the excited, divided American electorate weighed in once more, throwing Mrs. Clinton the sort of political lifeline that New Hampshire did in early January after her third-place finish in the Iowa caucuses.
For Mrs. Clinton, the battle ahead is not so much against Mr. Obama as it is against a Democratic Party establishment that had once been ready to coalesce behind her but has been drifting toward Mr. Obama. The party wants a standard-bearer now to wage the war against the newly minted leader of the Republicans, Senator John McCain, who enjoys a head start with every day that the Democrats lack a nominee of their own.
Clinton advisers said her decisive victory in Ohio and her narrow one in Texas — where exit polls showed her winning the votes of women, whites and Hispanics in an extremely close race — were more than enough to argue that she should go forward to the April 22 primary in the Ohio-esque Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, even if Mr. Obama has more delegates after Tuesday night.
Mr. Obama, meanwhile, appeared likely to accumulate enough delegates from Texas and Ohio (as well as from his victory in Vermont) to strengthen his mathematical edge for the nomination and portray Mrs. Clinton as a spoiler to a unified party. Yet the results on Tuesday also bring fresh questions about his electability in crucial swing states like Ohio that Democrats are eager to carry in the November election.
“Hillary is very much in the game,” Patti Solis Doyle, Mrs. Clinton’s former campaign manager, said on Tuesday night.
Bill Burton, an Obama spokesman, brimmed with equal brio. “This was her last, best chance to significantly close the gap in pledged delegates,” Mr. Burton said of Mrs. Clinton, who began the night with about 50 fewer pledged delegates and 100 fewer over all. “They have failed.”
Mrs. Clinton spent much of 2007 running as the candidate of the Democratic establishment — racking up endorsements from party leaders, enlisting major party donors from past presidential campaigns and setting up bases of operations in populous states like California and Florida.
But after losing momentum to Mr. Obama in February, she is now viewed by many party leaders as an obstacle to the fight ahead — even as she continues to argue that she is the best candidate, by dint of her experience, to carry the party’s flag into the “wartime election” fight against a Vietnam hero and national security pro like Mr. McCain.
Mrs. Clinton’s advisers say there is no party elder who has the stature or power to pressure her to bow out, aside from her husband, former President Bill Clinton. And he more than anyone wants her to keep running.
The nomination is not determined by the number of states won, but Mr. Obama’s inability to win major battleground states beyond Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and his home state, Illinois, is a concern of some Democrats — especially since Ohio and Florida have become must-wins in presidential elections.
Mrs. Clinton has been enjoying her first real burst of momentum lately, thanks to her new advertisements and speeches questioning Mr. Obama’s abilities in a crisis, raising the fact that he has not convened his Senate subcommittee to hold hearings on the Afghanistan war. A potentially embarrassing trial of a former Obama friend and contributor has begun. And major Clinton fund-raisers said that one big victory on Tuesday night would be enough to energize donors and keep $1 million or more flowing in daily.
“Each time people think we’re down, like after Iowa, or South Carolina, or the February primaries, Hillary has found ways to come back up,” said Jonathan Mantz, the national finance director of the Clinton campaign.
The results will also embolden her campaign’s efforts to persuade the Democratic Party to factor in the delegates from Florida and Michigan, her advisers say. The party counted out those states after they moved up their primaries; Mrs. Clinton stayed on the ballot in both and “won” them in January — despite having no real competition in Michigan and no real campaign in Florida. In a sign of her thinking, She shouted out to them in her Ohio victory speech Tuesday night.
“If we want a Democratic president, we need a Democratic nominee who can win the battleground states, just like Ohio,” she said. “We’ve won Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Michigan, New Hampshire, Arkansas, California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oklahoma and Tennessee!”
But for all the millions of votes Mrs. Clinton has now won, simple math is still her enemy. She needs to use Tuesday night to persuade superdelegates — the hundreds of party leaders who have a vote on the nomination — to stop abandoning her. Or, at least, stop long enough for Mrs. Clinton to damage him with a line of attack, goad him into a colossal gaffe (or watch him make one on his own) or rely on the media to unearth a campaign-altering scandal about him.
But it is not clear if Ohio and Texas were enough to give Mrs. Clinton — a politician who has been a known quantity for 16 years— a real chance for a fresh assessment by the many superdelegates who know her well.
“The great irony is, she is now the ‘hope’ candidate,” said Dan Gerstein, a Democratic strategist who backs Mr. Obama. “She can only hope to catch some breaks and catch Obama stumbling.”
Exit Poll: Critical Clinton Wins – Latinos, Lunch Bucket Voters, Late Deciders Put Clinton on Top March 5, 2008
Posted by koreanpower999 in 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, gender gap, Hillary Clinton, Latino vote, Ohio, Texas.3 comments
ABC News – by Gary Langer – March 4, 2008
Latinos, working-class voters, women and late deciders helped Hillary Clinton push back against Barack Obama’s recent winning streak, while some Texas and Ohio Republicans fired a warning shot at John McCain even as he clinched his party’s presidential nomination.
Latinos, Lunch Bucket Voters Put Clinton on Top
The Democratic races in these states were more closely fought, with demographics — more Latinos in Texas, more lunch bucket voters in Ohio — assisting Clinton after her string of losses since Feb. 9.
She also did well with late deciders, winning those who made up their minds in the final few days by 20 points in Ohio and 23 in Texas.
Latinos in Texas accounted for a record 30 percent of voters, up from 24 percent in 2004 — second only this cycle to New Mexico, and matching California — and they backed Clinton by 63-35 percent, crucial to her fortunes.
Obama hit back with 85 percent support from African-Americans, two in 10 Texas voters. And while Clinton won white women in Texas by 19 points, the two candidates split white men evenly.
Ohio was different; there Clinton won white men, a swing group in many Democratic primaries this year, by 59-38 percent.
That partly reflected the working-class nature of the state: Obama won white men who’ve been graduated from college, albeit by narrower-than-usual 51-47 percent; as elsewhere, Clinton won white men who don’t have a college degree, here by a wide 66-31 percent.
And those lacking a college education made up a greater share of white men in Ohio, 61 percent, than in Texas, 49 percent, or all primaries to date, 48 percent.
Familiar Change vs. Experience Theme
While the theme of change continued to resonate in Ohio and Texas, it wasn’t by as wide a margin as in most previous primaries.
The ability to “bring needed change” beat “experience” as the most important quality in a candidate by a 16-point margin in Ohio and by 17 points in Texas, 44-27 percent. Both had among the fewest to pick change as the top attribute in any primary this year.
It mattered, given the correlation of these views and vote preferences.
Obama won “change” voters by more than 2-1 margins in Texas and Ohio alike, while those more concerned with experience went for Clinton almost unanimously in both states.
If a contrast were needed, the two smaller states voting Tuesday, Vermont and Rhode Island, provided it.
Obama won across demographic groups in Vermont, beating Clinton among senior citizens as well as among white women, two of her mainstays.
There his change theme prevailed over experience by more than a 30-point margin, at the high end in primaries to date. In Rhode Island, though, Clinton won easily; there change beat experience by just 10 points, less than anywhere but Arkansas, and late deciders again went heavily to Clinton, by 62-37 percent.
Warning Signs for McCain
McCain lost few groups in Texas, but they were telling ones in terms of his challenges in the Republican base: the most religious and most conservative voters, and those looking mainly for a candidate who shares their values, all backed Mike Huckabee, and the two roughly split evangelicals.
McCain was comparatively weak among those same groups in Ohio. But Texas was tougher to him. There he lost values voters — the top candidate attribute in both states — by a wide 57-32 percent. And in Texas a substantial 45 percent in preliminary exit poll results classified him as “not conservative enough.”
As noted, there were challenges within McCain’s broader victory.
In Texas, Huckabee won those who attend church more than once a week, 29 percent of GOP voters, by 20 points, 56-36 percent. Evangelicals, a hefty 62 percent of Texas Republican voters, split 47-43 percent between Huckabee and McCain. And Huckabee won “very” conservative voters, a third of the electorate, by 8 points.
But McCain came back with broad leads among “somewhat” conservative and moderate Republicans. He won non-evangelicals by a huge margin, 63-21 percent.
He prevailed among less-frequent churchgoers, and won 81 percent of voters focused on the No. 2 attribute, experience. He also beat Huckabee by more than 2-1, 64-27 percent, among senior citizens, compared to an 11-point win among GOP voters younger than 65.
In Ohio McCain did better; he won “very” conservative voters, 51-41 percent.
And McCain came closer to Huckabee than usual among Ohio evangelicals, Huckabee’s mainstay, while winning non-evangelicals by nearly 50 points. But as in Texas, a candidate who “shares my values” was the most important attribute in Ohio, and Huckabee won them there, too, albeit by a closer 48-40 percent.
Democratic Turnout
At 19 percent, African-Americans didn’t increase their turnout in Texas, and it was well down from their 34 percent share in 1984, when Jesse Jackson ran. In Ohio, though, blacks’ 18 percent share was up from 14 percent in 2004; that aided Obama, albeit not enough.
Women increased their turnout in both states — to 59 percent in Ohio and 57 percent in Texas, up from 52 and 53 percent, respectively, in 2004. And Clinton won white women by more than 2-1 in Ohio, as well as by 59-40 percent in Texas.
The upscale/downscale division among white voters was striking. In both states Obama won college-educated white men, while Clinton won those who don’t have degrees. In both states Clinton won college-educated and non-college-educated white women alike, but won less-educated women by broader margins.
As previously there were huge generation gaps.
Clinton again easily won seniors, by 73-24 percent in Ohio and 64-34 percent in Texas, while voters under 30 went for Obama by 20 points in Texas and 26 points in Ohio.
In both states turnout among young voters was up from 2004, by seniors, down.
Seniors accounted for 13 percent of voters in Texas and 14 percent in Ohio, fewer than in most states this year. Interestingly, in Texas Obama came close to Clinton among Latinos under 30, losing them by 5 points in preliminary data, while she swamped him among older Latinos.
Also in both states, Clinton prevailed among mainline Democrats. Obama tied her among independents and Republicans voting in the open Democratic primary in Ohio, and won those groups in preliminary results in Texas.
It’s the Economy…Again
The economy was the top issue in Texas and Ohio alike, and most strikingly so in Ohio, where 59 percent of Democrats ranked it as the single most important issue, second only to Michigan in the importance of the economy to Democratic voters this year.
Almost eight in 10 in Ohio were worried about their family’s finances, 38 percent were “very” worried about it and voters there almost unanimously said the national economy is in bad shape. Slightly fewer in Texas were “very” worried about their own finances, 33 percent.
The exit poll indicated a smaller-than-previous turnout by union voters in Ohio — 35 percent were from union households, down from 44 percent in 2004.
At the same time it also found broad anti-trade sentiment: About eight in 10 said that trade with other countries takes more jobs from Ohio than it creates. Anti-trade sentiment was lower in Texas, with about six in 10 there saying trade takes jobs.
Whatever their candidate preference, Democratic voters had some greater criticism for Clinton than for Obama on negative campaigning — 54 percent in Ohio and 52 percent in Texas said Clinton attacked unfairly, while fewer than four in 10 both states said Obama did.
By about similar margins, however, more said Clinton, rather than Obama, offered “clear and detailed plans” to address the country’s problems.
Dirty Tricks by the Obama campaign in Texas and Ohio March 5, 2008
Posted by koreanpower999 in 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Ohio, Texas.add a comment
Posted on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 01:27:12 PM EST
Tags: Texas ’08, Ohio ’08 (all tags)
Participants may NOT begin signing in until the precinct convention has been called to order. The call to order may not occur until 7:15 p.m. OR whenever the last voter finishes voting at that polling location whichever is later. If, after the convention has been called to order and participants have signed in, any participant who wishes to leave may do so, and their sign in WILL count toward the delegate allocation for each candidate. Sign-In ends when the last person present waiting to sign in has done so.
If any Texas voter has witnessed this, feel free to let me know. More on the rules and some disturbing reports from Ohio below:
Ohio’s Secretary of State, an office held by a Democrat, has rebuked Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign for trying to staff precincts with poll workers who presented insufficient credentials. Obama’s campaign calls this charge “wrong.”
In a memo sent late this morning to county election directors by David M. Farrell, Ohio’s
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, a letter carried by Obama supporters — signed by Obama state director Paul Tewes — is deemed “not legally sufficient on its own to allow someone to gain access to polling places.” Farrell notes that state law requires that polling observers must be “duly appointed” and have been previously issued a certificate.Ambinder has posted the letter saying the authorization is insufficient and the authorization. The problem this can cause:
The alleged infraction seems minor, but the Clinton campaign has seized on the e-mail from the Secretary of State’s office as evidence that the Obama campaign is trying to game the system in Ohio.
Lynn Utrecht, chief campaign counsel for Sen. Hillary Clinton, said that she’d recieved reports from the field of Obama poll workers being kicked out of precincts for aggressively challenging voters. Adding it up, she said, “and it’s a pattern.”
Back to the Texas caucus rules, here’s more:
2) Attendees sign in on the roll sheets (“Exhibit A”) that are in the packet. ATTENDEES MAY ONLY SIGN IN FOR THEMSELVES. (see TCDP GUIDELINES p. 4 *) Only those persons who voted in the 2008 Democratic Primary may participate in the caucus. A person is verified in one of three ways: 1. The attendee’s voter registration card was stamped as having voted in the 2008 Democratic Primary, or 2. The attendee was given a stamped Party Affiliation Card when they voted, or 3. The attendee is listed in the precinct voter roster as having voted in the 2008 Democratic Primary. This is the roster of registered voters provided by the Democratic presiding judge. The roster will indicate those who voted Democratic in your precinct on March 4th and also includes those who Voted Early, or Voted by Mail.
5) The Chair, Secretary and caucus representatives determine the following and then announce:
a. the threshold for a caucus to be able to elect delegatesb. percent of people attending the precinct convention who support each candidate
c. number of delegates the supporters of each candidate are entitled to elect
There is an “E-Z Math Precinct Delegate Formula” sheet in the packet to help you. Please see mathematical examples at the end of these TCDP GUIDELINES.
Once the threshold and proportional allocation of delegates has been announced by the Chair of the precinct convention, it cannot be changed by any late arrivals to the convention. Late attendees can still sign in with their presidential preference and participate, but their arrival cannot change the threshold or the allocation of delegates.
Hillary Clinton tv ads in Texas: ‘True’, ‘One of a Millions’, & ‘Soldiers’ March 4, 2008
Posted by koreanpower999 in 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Texas.add a comment
These Hillary Clinton tv ads running in Texas emphasizing how she delivers for the American people.
“True”
“One of a Million”
“Soldiers”
For Clinton, they’re crucial – Texas Latinos March 3, 2008
Posted by koreanpower999 in 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Latino vote, Texas.add a comment
San Francisco Chronicle – Carla Marinucci – March 3, 2008
(03-03) 04:00 PST Laredo, Texas — Just steps from a bridge that links the United States with its southern neighbor, 22-year-old Jorge Garcia is ready to tackle international trade: He’s just arrived from Mexico in his truck with a load of shoes, T-shirts and other goods to deliver to merchants on the American side of the Rio Grande.
But first, Garcia attends to politics. He grabs his “Texas for Hillary” sign and yells in Spanish to the shoppers crowding the streets of Laredo: “Hillary! Vote for Hillary!”
“She’ll be better for my friends and the immigrants,” said Garcia, also in Spanish, as he unloaded his truck Sunday across the street from U.S. Customs agents examining incoming cars for drugs and contraband.
“She’s a supporter of us. We want to work here. We are here,” he said, motioning to his Mexican crew.
With just hours remaining until Tuesday’s Texas primary, the efforts by Garcia and others to turn up the political heat – and get out the vote – for New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton underscores the critical role of the Latino vote in must-win Texas, a “minority majority” state where Latinos will help determine Clinton’s fate.
Garcia is just one of the tens of thousands of Texas Latinos who straddle the U.S.-Mexico border – sometimes literally in their day-to-day lives but also culturally – in this border city where an estimated 95 percent of all residents claim to have some Latino roots.
He was born in Laredo – and therefore holds American citizenship – but has ties as strong in Mexico. He lives in Nuevo Laredo, the Mexican town across the Rio Grande where he has family and a lower cost of living.
He says he will vote in the Democratic primary Tuesday because he believes Clinton can make the difference – both for the country where he was born and for the one he calls home.
“They need to make it easier for us to get here and work here,” he said. “It will help business.”
Just blocks away, in the historic Plaza de San Augustine, Zafira Serrato de Leon, 44, and her daughter, also named Zafira, were out in the 85-degree sunny Sunday afternoon, waving “Hillary 4 President” signs and distributing literature for the woman they hope will be the next president.
“She’s for amnesty for the immigrants,” said the elder de Leon, a Laredo health care worker who was born in Mexico and has lived in the United States since she was in her teens. “We’ve known her for a long time, and we know her husband. So that is why we’re supporting her.”
“We love Hillary,” said her 12-year-old daughter, wearing her “America con Hillary” button. She says that although she can’t vote yet, she is sure a woman as president “will make a difference.”
A recent poll by Texas A&M University showed Clinton leading Barack Obama by a 3-1 ratio among Latinos in Texas, but her early lead among the whole population has evaporated as the Illinois senator poured resources into the delegate-rich state.
Emphasis on early vote
Clinton’s state campaign manager, Ace Smith, said last week that the campaign’s efforts to get out Latino supporters – in addition to women and older voters, the senator’s most loyal base – during the 11-day early-voting period that ended Friday could well serve as her margin of victory on Tuesday.
While Obama’s Texas effort has been bolstered by support from young voters, African Americans and the college-educated, his team says it is not ceding Latinos to Clinton. Obama is outspending Clinton 2 to 1 on the air in Texas, with a substantial presence on Spanish-speaking television.
Texas will award 228 delegates of the 444 up for grabs on Tuesday, a day when Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island also hold primaries. Polls show Clinton is tied with Obama in Texas, while she holds a slim lead in Ohio and Rhode Island; Obama leads by a wide margin in Vermont.
The latest Associated Press count shows that Obama leads Clinton by 109 delegates, 1,385 to 1,276, with 2,025 needed for the nomination.
Both candidates were campaigning in Ohio on Sunday, relying on California Latino political leaders to carry their messages in Texas over the weekend.
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has been crisscrossing the state for Clinton, as has Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Dolores Huerta, the iconic co-founder of the United Farm Workers.
State Sen. Gil Cedillo of Los Angeles, who has gained fame as a leading proponent of issuing driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants, was in the Lone Star State this weekend working the grassroots and Spanish media for Obama. The Illinois senator, in a move hailed by Cedillo, announced he supports driver’s licenses for those without immigration documents – a position popular with Latino voters, but not with the electorate as a whole.
“There’s no question that it’s controversial – and not the most popular issue” among some of the past presidential candidates and GOP conservatives, Cedillo acknowledged.
But he noted that Republicans look likely to nominate Arizona Sen. John McCain, a supporter of immigration reform. “So I don’t think that in (the general) election … this is a wedge issue that the Republicans want to make of it,” Cedillo said.
And Cedillo said Clinton’s hold on the Latino vote is weakening as more ethnic voters get to know Obama and understand he shares their values and experiences.
“There’s so many aspects of his life that are uniquely America,” Cedillo said. “As the son of an immigrant, this man has really tried to construct a way in which every American can participate in their democracy.”
Not all agree.
Economic concerns
Jose Martinez, 39, born in the United States and working as a Laredo store clerk, echoes the concerns of many when he says that Tuesday’s vote will be crucial on many fronts: the U.S. economy, immigration policy and the family budget concerns of workers like himself who see themselves as both American and Mexican.
“The economy is bad. The workers don’t earn enough here,” said Martinez, who, like Garcia, lives on the Mexican side of the border. “And President Clinton was better for the economy. So I think for Mexicans, and Mexican Americans, the best will be Hillary. If she’s there, she will raise the economy again.”
Still, Lorenzo Herrera y Lozano, 28, an Austin community activist with ARGO, a statewide organization for gays and lesbians of color, warned that the Latino vote in Texas is far from monolithic.
Herrera y Lozano – a California transplant who is earning his master’s degree at St. Edward’s College in Austin – said he’s found disagreement and dissention among Latinos on the election, even within the tightly knit community of gay and lesbian activists.
“There’s almost this narrative that if you want to vote as LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender), you’re Clinton,” he said. “If you’re a person of color you’re Obama. And if you’re both, what do you do?”
He said he went to a lively dinner last week, only to watch the attendees split right down the middle on their preferences – still arguing over the pros and cons of the candidates with just days to the vote.
“The progressive pro-feminist ideologues want to go the Clinton route. But the anti-racism ideology wants to go Obama,” he said. “As much as people talk about it being not a gender and race-based race, it has come down to that in some ways.”
For Latinos from every background here, he said, “there are no gut wrenching differences between the two – so it makes it hard.”
Clinton Needs Texas Latinos to Rescue Her Embattled Candidacy February 20, 2008
Posted by koreanpower999 in 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Texas.1 comment so far
Indira Lakshmanan
Feb. 20 (Bloomberg) — Next to her gold medallion of the Virgin Mary of Guadalupe, Rosa Rosales of San Antonio wears a button pin for the woman she considers another patron of Mexican- Americans: Hillary Clinton.
The New York senator needs to prevail in the March 4 primary in Texas, the second most-populous and delegate-rich state in the nation, to salvage her dwindling chances of becoming the Democratic presidential nominee. Her victory hinges on winning the support of a substantial majority of Hispanics, who are likely to account for about 35 percent of the Democratic primary electorate, Latino polling experts said.
The front-runner, Illinois Senator Barack Obama, is campaigning to cut into her base, with some success. To hold him off, Clinton probably needs to replicate her performance in the Feb. 5 primary in California, another state with a large Hispanic population, where she carried 71 percent of those voters, according to exit polls.
Clinton, 60, “has to keep her base and expand her base or she loses,” said Lydia Camarillo, vice president of Southwest Voters Registration Education Project, a San Antonio-based nonprofit group. “Hispanics are finally in the driver’s seat.”
Texas Roots
Backing Clinton will be plenty of older, female and working- class Hispanics. Her roots in the state date to 1972, when she registered voters in the Rio Grande Valley, a history that is remembered by people such as Rosales, 63, president of Lulac, the largest U.S. Hispanic organization, which is neutral in the race.
South Texas — from San Antonio, the state’s largest Hispanic city, to the Mexican border — is Clinton country. Loyalty to her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and appreciation of her commitment to improving education and health care, run deep.
In addition, said Henry Flores, a political scientist at St. Mary’s University in San Antonio, trust in a strong woman is ingrained in the matriarchal Hispanic community.
With almost two weeks to go before Texas votes, Obama, 46, still has time to make his case. He is trying to chip away at Clinton’s popularity among Hispanics, just as he has cut into her support among white men, blue-collar voters and women.
“Obama is going to be attractive to Latinos,” said Representative Charles Gonzalez of San Antonio, an Obama backer. “They’re going to say, `this is a new friend who’s younger and by virtue of being new, he may be able to do it, get elected, get things done.”’
A Gallup poll published yesterday showed that Clinton’s once 2-to-1 lead over Obama among Hispanics has evaporated nationally.
Obama Strategy
The Obama strategy for winning Texas rests on cutting into Clinton’s advantage with Hispanics; winning, as he has all along, most of the black vote, expected to be about a quarter of the turnout, and dividing the white vote.
This makes sweeping the Hispanic vote in Texas even more crucial for Clinton.
“Our target is delivering 70 percent of the Latino vote, and I don’t think I’m going to have any problem,” said Representative Silvestre Reyes of El Paso, who introduced Clinton at a rally last week that drew 12,000 supporters. Still, even a win of that size may not ensure she carries the state.
The central issues for Texas Hispanics are illiteracy and dropout rates, health care, the war in Iraq, where Latinos represent 17.5 percent of front-line forces, and immigration overhaul. The candidates have similar positions, and both voted for a border fence, which is unpopular among Hispanic voters.
Visits
Clinton has made repeated visits to Texas, campaigning for Latino politicians, while Obama stumped here just three times before this week.
One of Clinton’s ads, “Nuestra Amiga” (“Our Friend”), portrays her as a motherly figure hugging a Hispanic child, and stresses health and education. In an Obama radio ad, “Obama Me Esta Hablando a Mi” (“He Speaks to Me”), a young man says Obama cares about college costs and Social Security, and says he is telling his elders to support Obama.
Both campaigns have sent dozens of staff members to open offices from El Paso to Texarkana. Voting rules here allocate three-quarters of Democratic delegates according to the popular vote, and a quarter from precinct caucuses — giving an edge to a well-organized campaign.
Chavez
Clinton has four of the state’s six Hispanic congressmen and many influential citizens raising money and working networks for her, including former San Antonio Mayor Henry Cisneros, who was housing secretary in her husband’s administration. The United Farm Workers and the grandson of its co-founder Cesar Chavez are also organizing for her.
Obama, meanwhile, has won over one Hispanic congressman, many younger state politicians, and the endorsements of Texas’ Mexican-American Democrats and the United Food and Commercial Workers.
His supporters dismiss suggestions Hispanics are reluctant to vote for black candidates, noting that many African-Americans have won office with Latino support.
“I think we’re going to do much, much better” among Latinos, said Gonzalez, 62.
Interest in the race is high. In the first day of early voting yesterday, there were lines in the Rio Grande Valley. In Harris County, which is centered in Houston, 9,233 Democrats turned out, an 11-fold increase from 2004.
To contact the reporter on this story: Indira Lakshmanan in San Antonio, Texas at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net .
