Comment, news and views from the US Elections.
Susbscribe to an XML feed of this blog at:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/rss.xml
 The rampantly-used media construction has come a long way since its origins in the Watergate Scandal of the Nixon Administration. Derived from the name of the building in which that genuinely scandalous affair first came to light, these days it is unsparingly applied to every minor gaffe and scrape with the potential to be spun into a furore of earth-shattering scale. In the 36 years since its coinage, the phrase has brought us such sensations as “Pizzagate” – an incident involving a wayward slice of hot ‘n’spicy and the freshly-pressed shirt of dour Manchester United manager Alex Ferguson – and more recently Fiascogate – when the flubbing of lines by rapper Lupe Fiasco at a VH1 awards ceremony rocked the hip-hop world.
Over the course of the current US election campaign, however, the American media seems to have fallen victim to some kind of mass gating contagion.
Here are my favourites:
1. Passport-gate. The revelation that three snooping State Department contractors had accessed Barack Obama’s passport file without authorisation. It later emerged that John McCain and Hillary Clinton had also been targeted.
2. NAFTA-gate. A gating boomerang. First it was reported that an Obama adviser had assured Canadian officials that his hardline rhetoric on NAFTA was for political show. Clinton immediately seized upon it as evidence that her rival was all style and no substance. Then it emerged that her advisers had done exactly the same thing.
3. Monster-gate. Samantha Power’s time as a foreign policy advisor to the Obama campaign came to an abrupt end after she let slip her frustrations with the campaign tactics of Hillary Clinton – and the word “Monster” was duly splashed across front pages the world over.
4. Pastor-gate, aka Jeremiah-gate. Obama’s former preacher, Jeremiah Wright, was vilified for controversial comments during sermons, raising questions about his own views. But the candidate managed to slam it shut with a stirring speech on race in America.
5. Sniper-gate, aka Bosnia-gate. Hillary Clinton employed the political euphemism of the year when she attempted to explain why she had told of running from sniper fire at a Bosnian airfield when in fact she had ambled across the tarmac chatting with a schoolgirl. She “misspoke,” apparently.
6. Bowling-gate. The shocking disclosure that Barack Obama isn’t too good with a bowling ball, as discovered at a recent campaign stop. How can a man who scores an appalling 37 out of 300 hope to make a decent 3am judgment call, we wonder?
7. Bitter-gate, alternatively the snappily-named small-town-gate. Obama’s latest troubles began when he spoke of impoverished small-town Americans expressing their frustrations through “guns and religion.” Known to some as pretty-close-to-the-truth-gate.
8. Farfalle-gate. A personal favourite of mine, this one erupted after John McCain posted recipes on his campaign website supposedly from the kitchen of Cindy McCain. Then it turned out they were from the kitchen of the cable channel The Food Network.
 Reactions to the testimony of Gen Petraeus, the commander of US forces in Iraq, in the Senate yesterday were predictable in their split along party  lines. Republican-leaning commentators by and large fell in behind John McCain's upbeat assessment of a successful surge and the swelling prospect of victory. Liberals, meanwhile, offered scathing critiques of what they described as propagandistic testimony, picking up on a number of points of interest:
1. That under pressure from Senator Joe Biden, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker admitted that Afghanistan and Pakistan, not Iraq, was the central front in the battle against al-Qaeda.
2. That Gen Petraeus stated that the US had not "turned any corners" nor "seen any lights at the end of the tunnel," in contrast to statements last summer in which he claimed corners had been turned.
3. That the Iraqi government is failing to take the necessary steps to ensure sufficient progress in the areas of politics and security responsibility.
4. That the United States, while accusing Iran of destructive and destabilising machinations in the country, is yet favouring with its support the Shiite faction most closely linked to Iran (The Islamic Supreme Council in Iraq, the largest party in government, and its militia, the Badr Corps).
For the verdict on how the presidential candidates performed at the hearings, click here.
Here's a selection of comment from the web:
Robert Scheer on the Huffington Post:
"His faithful testimony, at least to the president if not the truth, on Tuesday was a particularly painful performance. Civilian deaths in March were 50 percent higher than in February, and there were a score of recent American deaths, and there is no evidence of political progress to support Petraeus' stab at optimism over the "fragile" situation in Iraq. Most absurd was the suggestion that the problem would all go away if Iran would only behave, when in fact American troops are being sacrificed on the pro-Iranian side of an internal Shiite power dispute. The Shiites in charge of "our" government in Iraq are exiles trained for decades in Iran."
Hullabaloo:
"(Senator) Joe Biden asked Amb. Crocker whether it would be better for American national security interests to eliminate Al Qaeda in Iraq or Al Qaeda along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Crocker had nowhere to hide with that question.
"Crocker, in an impossible political position -- give the correct answer and humiliate the Bush administration; give the administration's answer and look like a fool -- dodged as much as he could. Then Biden forced him down. Crocker: "I would therefore pick Al Qaeda on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
"Game over. Every single argument that the Administration and their lapdogs like John McCain have made or are making break down after that answer. The Ambassdor to Iraq just admitted that Iraq is not the central front in the war on terror... He admitted that the global fight against terror is currently misdirected."
Andrew Sullivan on the Daily Dish, Atlantic.com:
"Petraeus and Crocker strike me as making every effort to be intellectually honest, and their credibility is all the greater for it. They certainly appear more circumspect about Iraq than some of their Republican interlocutors... He's candid about turning Baghdad into a warren of sectarian mini-ghettoes guarded by massive internal walls, about Iran's large gains in influence whatever happens, about a recent spike in violence. ...
"It's all he can do at this point, isn't it, to keep this "fragile and reversible" security progress from unraveling. Petraeus cannot be held responsible for the political will to commit to Iraq for a generation, the only time-line that makes much sense if this is to achieve anything faintly resembling a decent outcome in line with the original war-goals. So he hangs in there; along with the troops; while the kind of Iraqi political progress that alone can get us out of there with minimal damage occurs at a glacial and always reversible pace."
Crooks and Liars:
"Same as the last time…Everything is better, but very fragile...Sure sounds like they want the 100 year—McCain Plan to me.
Crocker: …almost everything in Iraq is hard, but hard does not mean hopeless
He sounds like a basketball coach telling his team during a time out—-that even though they are losing by thirty five points with 6 minutes left to go, they still have a chance to win,…Win, exactly?"
Cenk Ugyur on the Huffington Post:
"I hear him bemoaning Iranian influence in Iraq all the time. Yet, no one has helped Iran more inside Iraq than he has. We have lent the full force of our military might to the political faction and Shiite militia most closely associated with Iran. ...
"The Badr Corps is linked with the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), which is the largest party inside Iraq. The Badr Corps also happens to be the militia with closest ties to Iran. They also happen to be the militia that ran those feared death squads during the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad. And get this - they are also the ones that want to split up Iraq instead of keeping it unified.
"All of these objectives seem to be diametrically opposed to what we want in Iraq. So why have we thrown all our military muscle behind them? ... I would love it if we actually used Congressional hearings to ask a real question for once and if General Petraeus, for once, gave us a real answer."
National Review:
"If Gen. David Petraeus wasn’t denounced as a traitor upon his arrival on Capitol Hill Tuesday, his testimony was the occasion for the same dreary willful obtuseness on the part of congressional Democrats as in September. ... Petraeus and Crocker always counsel patience when talking of Iraq. They displayed it themselves during hours of interrogation on Capitol Hill. They are impressive public servants with no agenda other than trying to help the United States win a crucial war. Would that their antagonists learned from their example."
 As Hillary Clinton wades into the Rev. Wright controversy, a couple of interesting items have made their way onto the web.
First is a statement from the Clinton family's pastor during their White House years, Dean J. Snyder of the Foundry United Methodist Church. He writes in support of the Reverend Wright, who he suggests has been the victim of a smear campaign using selective soundbites to distort his true position.
"To evaluate his dynamic ministry on the basis of two or three sound bites does a grave injustice to Dr. Wright, the members of his congregation, and the African-American church which has been the spiritual refuge of a people that has suffered from discrimination, disadvantage, and violence. Dr. Wright, a member of an integrated denomination, has been an agent of racial reconciliation while proclaiming perceptions and truths uncomfortable for some white people to hear.
"Those of us who are white Americans would do well to listen carefully to Dr. Wright rather than to use a few of his quotes to polarize. This is a critical time in America's history as we seek to repent of our racism. No matter which candidates prevail, let us use this time to listen again to one another and not to distort one another's truth."
Next up is an article on the Huffington Post which links Hillary Clinton to a very conservative, fundamentalist religious group called The Family (or sometimes The Fellowship). A secretive organisation started in 1935 with shadowy links to fascist dictators, The Family is the subject of a book to be published in May called The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power written by Jeff Sharlett, who wrote about his experience with the group in Harpers' in 2003.
The book describes how the group was started by Abraham Vereide:
"... an immigrant preacher who in 1935 organized a small group of businessmen sympathetic to European fascism, fusing the Far Right with his own polite but authoritarian faith. From that core, Vereide built an international network of fundamentalists who spoke the language of establishment power, a "family" that thrives to this day. In public, they host prayer breakfasts; in private they preach a gospel of "biblical capitalism," military might, and American empire. Citing Hitler, Lenin, and Mao, Doug Coe, the Family's current leader, declares, "We work with power where we can, build new power where we can't.""
The Nation and the Atlantic Monthly are among a number of reputable publications that have noted Clinton's membership of the controversial group. In the wake of her insistence that Barack Obama should have selected his religious associations more carefully, perhaps some questions should be raised about her own choice...
 Was Hillary Clinton's declaration of victory in Texas last week a tad premature? With the caucus results finally trickling in, it appears it might have been.
 According to the latest figures, Barack Obama is on course to win the caucus - which decides one-third of the state's delegates - by 56 to 45 per cent, a large enough margin to tip the overall contest in his favour after a narrow 51 to 47 per cent win for Clinton in the primary. Now roughly half the caucus results have still to come in, but, if the current trend continues, Obama is set to take 38 delegates to Clinton's 30, putting the final delegate count for the state at Obama 99 - Clinton 96.
This has got little attention in the mainstream media - NPR is the only major news outlet to have reported it so far - but it hasn't gone unnoticed by the Obama campaign, which has put a little blue Obama logo in the Texas spot on its frontpage map of primary contests. It is a little more optimistic in its delegate projections, totting up 99 for Obama against 94 for Clinton. Meanwhile on Clinton's site, the Texas delegate split is notably absent.
Following the NPR report the figures were picked up by a number of reputable blogs, including the Daily Kos and Daily Dish, yet the Obama campaign has so far made little attempt to correct the impression of a stunning Clinton victory in the state. This may be because the Clinton camp is threatening to take legal action over the caucus results, or because the delegate counts will not be officially confirmed until June due to the very convoluted caucusing process (the delegates chosen last week go to county conventions where they pick delegates to the state convention, where the delegates to the national convention are finally selected. Phew.) Or perhaps because Clinton can still lay claim to the popular vote in the primary - but then Al Gore can still claim the popular vote in the 2000 presidential election.
You would think, with Clinton touting her Texas "victory" as evidence that only she can win key battleground states, Obama might want to make just a little bit more noise about this one. The real prize for Clinton in Texas was momentum, and correcting the record at some distant point in the future won't take that away from her.
 Just days after Hillary Clinton seized upon reports that the Obama camp privately told Canadian officials their hardline on the North American Free Trade Agreement was only for political show, a report has emerged suggesting Clinton herself might have been playing a similar game.
 Both candidates worried officials in Canada with their protectionist rhetoric during the primary campaign in Ohio, where the agreement is blamed by blue-collar workers for the decline in manufacturing jobs. Clinton and Obama both told Ohio voters that they would renegotiate the agreement and pull out of it entirely if sufficent protections for American workers weren't forthcoming.
But the Canadian Globe and Mail reported today that it was in fact a remark about Clinton's campaign, not Obama's, that triggered the furore.
It claims that the basis for the story was an offhand comment made by Ian Brodie, chief of staff to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, to CTV journalists during the media lock-up for the country's February 26 budget.
Apparently attempting to play down the impact of the candidates' campaign promises, Brodie told reporters that the threat was not a serious one, adding that someone from Clinton's campaign had even contacted Canadian diplomats to tell them not to worry because the NAFTA rhetoric was mostly political posturing.
It quoted an unnamed source as saying that several people overheard the remark.
The source was quoted as saying that Mr. Brodie said that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign called and was "telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt."
It is not clear how, if that was indeed the basis for the report, the Clinton campaign metamorphosed into the Obama campaign. The president of CTV, which broke the story, declined to comment tonight.
But should we really be surprised if either candidate, or both, privately gave such assurances? They are politicians after all, and only the most naive voter would believe that everything promised on the campaign trail would automatically translate into policy once safely ensconced in office.
As detailed here, officials at the British Embassy in Washington have told The Times that they are not overly concerned about the trade policies of either Democrat. One said: “There is a difference between what they say to get elected and what they do afterwards.”
A sad but universal truth.
Hattie Garlick writes: To twist the lyrics of his latest supporter: Barak Obama may have 99 problems, but annexing the talents of celebrities to prove he's down with the kids ain't one of them. Swift on the heels of pop band Arcade Fire's endorsement, comes an informational 'robocall' recorded by rapper Jay-Z as part of Obama's campaign to appeal to younger voters. In a recorded message, Jay-Z greets Ohian householders and then, seemingly not au fait with the voting process himself, haltingly lists the identification requirements and poll opening times. Yet another rebel has clearly found a cause.
Hattie Garlick writes: Since the hurricane and floodwaters drove them from their homes in 2005, leaving them reliant on goodwill and government handouts, powerlessness has become a grim theme in the lives of the Hurricane Katrina evacuees. But unbeknownst to many of them, the 1/4 million who have settled in the state of Texas could currently be yielding a pivotal influence in today's primary and caucus.
It is anyone's guess how many within this displaced community have registered to vote in Texas, or for that matter how many will be showing up today, but as this Washington Post article notes, their numbers are such that they could account for as much as 10 per cent of the Democratic electorate.
Continue reading "The Katrina effect" »
 The Clinton campaign's alleged circulation of a photo showing Barack Obama in Somali dress may have backfired rather spectacularly but it  seems an unintended blow may have landed more effectively. The Democratic frontrunner has struggled to repair the damage to his campaign not from an attack, but from an expression of support - from the controversial head of the Nation of Islam and oft-alleged anti-semite, Louis Farrakhan.
Obama had already been forced to decry Farrakhan's views once, after the Washington Post reported in January that a magazine published by the Trinity United Church of Christ - of which the Democratic candidate is a member - had named him in its annual awards.
But after Farrakhan lauded Obama as the "hope for the entire world" on Sunday, the Illinois senator was cornered at Tuesday night's Ohio debate by Hillary Clinton, who demanded he again "denounce" the black leader's views. He did so, and, after Clinton continued to criticise him for not explicitly "rejecting" Farrakhan's support, said he both "denounced and rejected" him. (It is interesting to note that despite Clinton's apparent dedication to semantics she later chose to neither reject or denounce a Hispanic backer in Texas who said that “Obama’s problem is he happens to be black.")
In fairness, Clinton should not have to reject the support of every individual whose views she does not espouse. Neither should any other presidential candidate. Amongst the millions of voters lining up behind each prospective president are bound to be some whose opinions are abhorrent to many. Many South Carolina Republican voters, for example, support the display of the Confederate flag - viewed by many as a symbol of racism and oppression - at the state's capitol building. To my knowledge, John McCain has not been asked to denounce this yet. And he shouldn't be.
A better question might be why McCain has yet to comment on a statement from the Tennessee Republican Party released Monday entitled "Anti-semites for Obama." Prominently displaying the "dressed" photo and spelling out Obama's middle name Hussein, it claimed Obama would be a menace to Israel. “On the contrary, supporters of Israel should view a possible Obama administration with extreme caution, as America’s ally is being put in the cross-hairs by the anti-Jewish left,” Bill Hobbs, the party's communications director was quoted as saying.
McCain did however on Tuesday castigate a right-wing radio presenter who, when introducing him at a Ohio rally, repeatedly used the "Hussein" moniker and insinuated that Obama had a secret past which would soon be exposed. After the "dressed" photo debacle, he is keenly aware that such attacks, smacking of xenophobia-fuelled paranoia, could well prove a devastating own goal.
 Barack Obama's lofty oratory landed him in trouble yesterday when a particularly memorable speech in Wisconsin turned out to be just a little too memorable - some observers recalled it all too well from the 2006 campaign of Massachussetts Governor Deval Patrick.
After an 'anonymous' rival campaign highlighted the similarities, the section concerned was promptly dissected on YouTube, with the videos leaving little room for doubt. Watch both speeches below.
So how serious a misdemeanour is this? It's not the first time that a presidential candidate has ripped off another politician's words - politics is full of recycled soundbites and it has already been noted that Obama's slogan "Yes, we can" is a translation of "Si, se puede" - the 1972 chant of the United Farm Workers. Joe Biden during his 1988 White House bid got caught plagiarising a speech by Neil Kinnock, then leader of the British Labour Party. The bad news for Obama is that it destroyed Biden's campaign.
The Obama campaign immediately moved to stave off accusations of plagiarism by asking Governor Patrick, a close ally of the Illinois senator, to put in a call to the New York Times, which he duly did. Patrick explained that he had given Obama permission to use his phrases, which he considered a "transcendent argument", and had also assured him it was not necessary to credit him. "Who knows who I am? The point is more important than whose argument it is," he said.
It remains to be seen whether Patrick's intercession will be enough to defuse the row, particularly given that the contentious speech was itself intended to rebutt Hillary Clinton's claim that Obama offers little more than shallow rhetoric. I however would like to suggest to Obama's speechwriters that a meaty policy speech is not only appropriate but a necessity right about now. A really nerdy, technical one packed full of somnolent detail that might bore a rally but will give the policy wonks something to chew over ahead of Texas and Ohio. He is at risk of tipping into inspiration overload and must address Mrs Clinton's attacks once and for all - if he can, that is.
That's my thought on the matter - now, readers, over to you...
 Thousands of Pacific miles might separate residents of an isolated fishing town on Japan's snowy west coast from the buzz of the US election campaign but that hasn't prevented them from taking an avid interest in the fortunes of one candidate - the young Illinois senator with whom the ancient community shares its name.
Obama, Japan has been thoroughly infected by the mania surrounding its accidental namesake and is mounting an astonishing display of support for the man who hopes to become America's first black president.
 The main hotel is splattered with posters hailing Obama, while his image will grace headbands and T-shirts currently in production. Sweet bean "manju" cakes bearing Obama’s portrait are being prepared by local confectioners, and the town of 32,000 has even held special primary night parties to celebrate his victories.
Mayor Toshio Murakami plans to send the candidate a good luck "daruma" doll in the lacquerware for which the town is famous nationally, with the word "victory" emblazoned across its chest in Japanese calligraphy.
Murakami sent a gift - a set of lacquer chopsticks - to Obama last year but is not sure whether it arrived as he used an address he found on the internet.
"I will present you the chopsticks of Wakasa paint and I am glad if you use it habitually," Mr Murakami said in the letter, written in English. "I wish you the best of health and success."
He pointed out that Obama's birthday, August 4, happens to be "Chopsticks Day" in the city.
"At first we were more low-key as Hillary Clinton looked to be ahead, but now we see he is getting more popular," Murakami said.
"I give him an 80 per cent chance of becoming president," the 75-year-old said, beaming with pride.
But policy doesn’t seem to be a major concern for the candidate's Japanese supporters - the main draw is his name.
"Obama gives good speeches and has a good voice, so I want him to do well. And, of course, we
share the same name," Seiji Fujiwara, a hotel executive and leader of a local support group established
earlier this month for the candidate, said.
Residents in Obama - which means "small shore" in Japanese - want nothing in return for their support, but hope that if their man becomes president, he might grace them with a visit or perhaps even an international summit to put their little-known home on the tourist map.
 Barack Obama might have routed Hillary Clinton in the weekend's primaries but it was her husband that he beat to a Grammy for the best spoken word album of the year at last night's ceremony. While the young Illinois senator was wrapping up Sunday's caucus in the east coast state of Maine, over on the west coast the audio version of his book, The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream, triumphed over Bill Clinton's Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World.
 Herbie Hancock, buoyant after his surprise win in the Album of the Year category, gave a tacit nod towards the Democratic presidential candidate when he borrowed Obama's campaign phrase to describe the significance of a jazz artist winning the award this year.
“I’d like to thank the academy for courageously breaking the mold this time,” he said. “This is a new day, that proves that the impossible can be made possible. Yes we can, to coin a phrase.”
Of course it's just a Grammy. And the Clintons already have a clutch of their own - Bill has won the category twice while Hillary took the award home in 1996 for her audio version of the book "It Takes a Village." But as the one time presumptive nominee struggles to rein in her rival's growing momentum, the fact that it was the words of B-Rock, rather than Billary, that ignited the popular culture this year won't be lost on her newly reshuffled campaign staff.
Obama couldn't make it to LA to accept his award. But then, he did have quite a busy weekend.
 Here's the latest list of notable endorsements for the remaining Republican candidates. Please note that this is not conclusive and if you think there's anyone else that should really be on there, email us at acrossthepond@thetimes.co.uk
John McCain
Senators and governor
| <><>
- Senator Sam Brownback, Kansas
- Senator Joe Lieberman, Connecticut (Democrat)
- Senator Saxby Chambliss, Georgia
- Senator Richard Burr, North Carolina
- Senator Mel Martinez, Florida
- Senator Gordon Smith, Oregon
- Senator Olympia Snowe, Maine
- Senator John Thune, South Dakota
- Senator John Warner, Virginia
- Senator Tom Coburn, Oklahoma
- Senator Susan Collins, Maine
- Senator Norm Coleman, Minnesota
- Senator Pete Dominici, New Mexico
- Senator Lindsay Graham, South Carolina
- Senator Johnny Isakson, Georgia
- Senator Jon Kyl, Arizona
- Governor Charlie Crist, Florida
- Governor Mitch Daniels, Indiana
- Governor Jim Douglas, Vermont
- Governor Jon Huntsman, Utah
- Governor Tim Pawlenty, Minnesota
- Governor Rick Perry, Texas
- Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, California
- Governor Tommy Thompson, Wisconsin
|
Celebrities
- Curt Schilling, pitcher, Boston Redsox
- Sylvester Stallone
|
|
Others
- Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York City
- Phil Gramm, former senator from Texas
- Martin Feldstein, chief economic policy adviser for President Reagan
- Tom Ridge, former secretary for homeland security
- Tom Kean, former chairman, 9/11 Commission
- Robert "Bud" McFarlane, national security adviser for Ronald Reagan
- Steve Forbes, president and CEO, Forbes Inc, former Republican presidential candidate
- John Thain, CEO of Merrill Lynch
- Trent Lott, former senator from Mississippi and majority leader
- Henry Kissinger, secretary of state under Presidents Nixon and Ford
- George P. Shultz, secretary of state under President Reagan
- R. James Woolsey Jr., former CIA director under President Clinton
|
|
07.30am - The votes are in
Ten hours later and Super Tuesday might not have produced any definitive answers but it hasn't been lacking in drama: a see-sawing Democratic battle and Huckabee's comeback in particular have set the stage for a thrilling finish to the primary races.
For full coverage from our writers in the US follow the links below:
Clinton and Obama split Super Tuesday
John McCain stakes his claim to the Republican crown
Clinton gets booed at the Obama party
McCain celebrates almost-victory to Rocky tune
Analysis: Super Tuesday not super-decisive - Gerard Baker, US editor of The Times
06.30am - Obama takes Missouri (and equal bragging rights)
Finally, after an agonizingly tight contest, the networks are projecting Missouri for Obama. This gives the Illinois senator a total of 13 victories tonight, against Clinton's 8 (though including primary heavyweights California, New York and New Jersey). The result, which also sees the candidates split the popular vote 49-48 per cent in Clinton's favour, leaves no one able to proclaim themselves the clear winner. The race continues...
05.50am - Romney the Republican loser?
What a difference a night can make. Ten hours ago Mike Huckabee was limping towards a lacklustre Super Tuesday result and a little-noticed withdrawal; now, with a raft of southern states behind him, TV studios are a-buzz with lofty suggestions of vice-presidencies and the like.
Meanwhile Romney, who last week proclaimed the contest a two-man race, is being branded with the L-word...
05.30am - Clinton and McCain to carry California, McCain to take Missouri
Clinton and McCain have pulled off huge victories in this delegate-heavy state, a disappointment for Obama in particular who seemed to have eroded his rival's lead here in recent days. However with many congressional districts still to report it is not yet clear how the delegates will break down, with the process particularly complicated on the Republican side. McCain is also projected to win Missouri, a big winner-takes-all state for Republicans.
05.15am - Arizona for Clinton, Missouri still too close to call
CNN is projecting a Clinton win in Arizona and in the bellwether state of Missouri the race is going down to the wire - with 98 per cent of precincts reporting there's just one point separating the frontrunners on both sides. More news soon.
04.49am - Tornadoes batter Super Tuesday states
 Americans had been expecting a night of electoral thrills but it was drama of an altogether more tragic kind that gripped the south tonight as a series of tornadoes cut a swath through the states of Arkansas, Mississippi, Kentucky and Tennessee, killing at least fifteen people and injuring dozens.
A couple and a child were killed when a tornado tore through the centre of Atkins, a community of 3,000 along the Arkansas River, while another five people lost their lives statewide, including in the towns of Clinton and Gassville.
The storms killed at least five people in Tennessee, while three adults died in westerrn Kentucky, authorities said.
As warning sirens sounded across the states, voting stations were drawn into the chaos with at least one site in Atkins being transformed into a Red Cross shelter after the polls closed.
Meanwhile a Little Rock convention hall hosting a party for Mike Huckabee, the Republican candidate and former Arkansas governor, suffered power outages.
"It's been a wild night," Tommy Jackson, a state emergency management spokesman, said. "A heck of a way to have elections in Arkansas."
Mr Huckabee spoke of his sorrow at the loss of life during his address to supporters. "While we hope tonight is a time for us to celebrate election results, we are reminded that nothing is as important as the lives of these fellow Arkansans, and our hearts go out to their families."
04.45am - Idaho and Colorado called for Obama
CNN has called Idaho and Colorado for the Illinois senator, bringing his total so far for tonight to 11 states.
04.03am - California "too close to call"
With the polls just closed in California, the networks are saying it's too close to call on both sides. With delegates awarded proportionately in both contests, a tight result would temper the impact of this heavyweight state.
03.50am - Huckabee on course for Tennessee victory
Some networks are calling Tennessee for Huckabee, adding it to the raft of southern states that have fallen to him tonight. Given that just a few days ago many were questioning his continued presence in the race, this is a quite astonishing result. Is this a sign of social conservatives in revolt against John McCain?
 03.30am - Huckabee pushes on in the south
AP is calling Georgia for Mike Huckabee, adding to his considerable progress in the southern states. Obama is projected to win the Minnesota caucus and North Dakota, according to CNN, while the latter is also to go to Romney. McCain takes Arizona, the state he represents in the Senate, but nowhere near as decisively as expected with Romney leaching conservative votes. More soon.
03.15am - Huckabee: "I will be president next year"
With Arkansas, Alabama and West Virginia under his belt, Mike Huckabee thumbed his nose at those who said he should drop out ahead of Super Tuesday and insisted that in a little less than a year he would take up residency in the White House.
"Iâve got to say that Mitt Romney was right about one thing - this is a two-man race," he told whooping supporters. "He was just wrong about who the other man in the race was. Itâs me, not him."
You've got to admire his dogged optimism...
03.00am - Utah for Romney, Oklahoma for McCain
Mitt Romney has clawed back some delegates in Utah, an unsurprising win given its large Mormon population and his involvement in the Salt Lake City Olympics, but an important one nevertheless.
Seconds later, however, and McCain has taken Oklahoma, another winner-takes-all state. Things are not looking good for Romney.
 02.45am - A twist in the tale
Gerard Baker writes: Further to that last note, I reckon now also that the exits way overstated Obama support in Georgia and Alabama too. On the Republican side they also seem to have heavily overestimated Romney support (they gave him Delaware which McCain seems to have won quite comfortably. The narrative among the pundits on TV and on the blogs has changed quite dramatically. When we started three hours ago it was - Obama doing well, Clinton in trouble and Romney and Huckabee fighting back against McCain. Now it's - Hillary back in charge and McCain steadily locking down his party's nomination.
02.40am - A bad night for exit polls
Gerard Baker writes: Might be shaping up to be another bad night for the exit polls. Hillary has now just won (presumably quite comfortably, given how early they've been called) both Massachusetts and New Jersey. The exits had New Jersey as an exact tie (49-49) and Massachusetts as a very slight Obama lead (48.5-48). If this pattern plays out as we go west - especially Missouri, where the exits had Obama slightly ahead, and the big one California, where they gave Hillary a small lead, this might turn into a night that gives Hillary a slight edge.
02.30am - More Democratic projections...
Obama looks to have locked up Alabama - where he is currently leading Clinton by some 30 points - and Kansas. These are desperately important wins for the Illinois senator, who elsewhere seems to be losing ground to the former first lady. Fox and MSNBC have just called both New Jersey and Massachusetts for Clinton, a troubling result for the Obama campaign and one that suggests some of the earlier exit polls could have been misleading...
02.20am - McCain scores big in New York
John McCain has sewn up New York's 101 delegates, according to a CNN projection. This is a big prize as it's a winner-takes-all state on the Republican side.
02.00am - New York backs its senator, Obama takes Delaware.
Clinton headquarters has erupted in wild applause following CNN's projection that the New York senator has carried her delegate-rich state. But not all New York's 232 delegates will go to Clinton as, like in many Democratic primary states, these are awarded proportionately. More news on the breakdown later.
Meanwhile CNN has projected that Delaware has gone to Obama.
01.50am - McCain to carry Delaware
John McCain has added Delaware to his victories in the liberal north-east, according to CNN projections, but it's in the south that he really needs to prove himself.
 01.35am - Tennessee called for Clinton
Arkansas' neighbour has also fallen to Clinton, according to projections.
This is a solid win for the former first lady - who spent considerable time and money campaigning in the state - and suggests that the Clintons' links to the region could influence other neighbours, such as the critical Missouri.
01.30am - Arkansas for Clinton, Huckabee
Hillary Clinton and Mike Huckabee have pulled off expected but nevertheless important wins here, according to CNN projections. No surprise, given their links to the state - Clinton was first lady here while Huckabee was governor for some years - but losses here would have been damaging.
01.13am - Eyes to the north-east
Tim Reid writes: Exit polls must be treated with extreme caution. But the area to watch here are the north-east states of Connecticut, Delaware and particularly New Jersey, which in geographical terms, is almost a suburb of Mrs Clinton's home state of New York. Mrs Clinton held formidable, double-digit leads there just two weeks ago. According to the exit polls, Obama is winning all three, and New Jersey by six. If the exit polls are proved right, the north-east surge of Mr Obama points to much wider concerns for the former First Lady and firm evidence that his recent momentum is very real.
01.02am - Projections incoming...
CNN projects that John McCain has ratcheted up three wins in Connecticut, Illinois and New Jersey, while Massachusetts has backed Romney.
On the Democratic side, CNN is projecting the expected win for Obama in his home state of Illinois, and victory for Clinton in Oklahoma. More soon.
01.01am - Huckabee complicates Republican race
 Gerard Baker writes: The exit polls indicate the Republican race looks a lot more complicated than the pre-Super Tuesday polls suggested. Huckabee may do well in the South - Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and of course his home state of Arkansas, with McCain trailing badly there. Romney doing well in a number of states including Missouri, Delaware and his home states of Utah and Massachusetts.
McCain's advantages in winner-take-all states - New York, New Jersey especially - will probably still give him a delegate lead tonight. But for a Republican not to be able to win in the South shows just how much trouble he's got.
1.00am - Leaked exit polls reported in the Times show Obama surge
Exit polls leaked to The Times show that Obama's recent momentum has propelled him to victory in a swath of early reporting states and is locked a tight struggle with Hillary Clinton in other, delegate-rich states.
12.45am - This could be a very big night for Obama
Gerard Baker writes: Doing some simple cross-tabulations from the exit poll, it looks like Obama has won Georgia by a margin of about two to one (66 to 32 per cent to Hillary). Thatâs a very big win. If the exits weâve seen for Alabama are correct he is set to win there (polls close at 8pm eastern) easily. Opinion polls had this race a near-tie.
12.30am - Obama doing well among southern whites
The Illinois senator seems to have reversed the trend that worried his campaign following his South Carolina win and has increased his support among southern whites, according to exit polls emerging from Georgia. Figures cited by CNN indicate that while Obama continued to attract a overwhelming majority of African Americans - 88 per cent - white votes were split 57-39 to Clinton - a significant improvement on the South Carolina result. When the figures were broken down for gender Clinton looked to have even less of a lead, with male voters split 49-46 in her favour and women 62-36. Even in southern states with smaller African-American populations, therefore, Clinton could still face an uphill struggle.
12 midnight - Obama wins in Georgia
The clocks have just struck midnight and already CNN is calling Georgia for Obama, but there's no news yet on how the delegates have been split. On the Republican side, the race is still wide open, suggesting John McCain may not be soaring to the expected landslide.
Meanwhile Drudge is reporting the following exit numbers coming from the campaigns:
OBAMA: Alabama: Obama 60, Clinton 37... Arizona: Obama 51, Clinton 45... Connecticut: Obama 53, Clinton 45... Delaware: Obama 56, Clinton 42... Georgia: Obama 75, Clinton 26... Illinois: Obama 70, Clinton 30... Massachusetts: Obama 50, Clinton 48... Missouri: Obama 50, Clinton 46... New Jersey: Obama 53, Clinton 47...
CLINTON: Arkansas: Clinton 72, Obama 26... California: Clinton 50, Obama 47... New York: Clinton 56, Obama 43... Oklahoma: Clinton 61, Obama 31... Tennessee: Clinton 52, Obama 41...
11.55pm - Exit polls show race, gender faultlines
Barack Obama has a clear lead among African Americans while Hillary Clinton has an edge among women and whites, according to exit polls being quoted by Associated Press. This bodes well for Obama in Georgia and Alabama and could also reflect a swing towards him in New York, where Clinton has always drawn huge support from the African American community.
No indication yet though of where Latino votes are going - crucial in the battle for the mighty California.
11.30 pm - Change v experience argument rumbles on
Exit polls coming in for CNN show that 74 per cent of Obama voters say change is the most important factor to them, with just 3 per cent citing experience. Clinton voters, meanwhile, are less polarised, with 45 per cent putting experience at the top of their wish list and 29 per cent change.
On the Republican side, most McCain voters are looking for experience while those choosing Romney and Huckabee are doing so because of their values.
Meanwhile ABC's early exit polls suggest Obama's change message is reverberating ever louder, with 52 per cent of Democrats citing ability to bring change as the most important attribute, as opposed to experience with 23 per cent.
The majority of Republicans - 44 per cent - opted for values, while experience and straight-talking came in at 25 and 22 percent respectively - not the best news for John McCain.
10.30 pm - Huckabee snatches West Virginia caucus from Romney
It was a state that Mitt Romney seemed certain to win. With just 18 delegates, West Virginia was never going to tip the race but the Massachussetts governor recognised its symbolic importance enough to campaign here personally in the frenzied Super Tuesday run-up. With polls predicting a Romney victory until the last, his defeat in today's caucus does not augur well for his bid to stay in the contest.
Romney won the first ballot but failed to garner the 50 per cent needed to secure a win. In the second round, McCain's supporters fell in line with Huckabee's, propelling the former Baptist preacher to a 52-47 per cent victory. The result left the Romney camp accusing the two other contenders of a "backroom deal" and demonstrated the crucial role Huckabee's continued presence in the race may have on tonight's results. Read The Times article here.
10.15pm - Liveblogging Super Tuesday
With just two hours until the first primary results are due to start trickling in, we're gearing up for what looks like a thrilling night on the Republican side and a nerve-grinding one for the Democrats. John McCain has a clear lead over Mitt Romney across the country according to the latest polls and could, if he lives up to expectations, sew up the nomination tonight. But in the Democratic race it looks tighter than ever, with a surging Barack Obama matching Hillary Clinton stride for stride.
The first primary result is expected to be Georgia at 12 midnight (GMT), followed by a whole tranche of states at 1am, including Mr Obama's home state of Illinois, New Jersey and Tennessee. We'll be liveblogging the results all the way through to tomorrow morning, when the final numbers are due in from Alaska at around 6.30am.
Ah, the Sunshine State—no stranger to Election Day controversy. In the 2000 Presidential election, some Florida voters were confused by “butterfly ballots” and mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan instead of Al Gore.
It seems that in 2008, some Floridians are still confused about how voting works. Florida election officials have been fielding calls all week from eager citizens wanting information about where to vote on Super Tuesday.
The problem? Florida held its primary last Tuesday.
From The Orlando Sentinel:
Millions of Americans in 24 states are turning out vote to in Super Tuesday presidential primaries from Georgia to Alaska today. Meanwhile, some dedicated if confused Florida voters are trying to, as well.
Elections offices across the state are reporting hundreds of calls from voters wanting to know where they can vote today. The answer is that Florida already had its presidential primary -- last week.
"We've had over 100 calls at least over the last two days," said Kathy Adams, a spokesperson for the Palm Beach County Election Supervisor.
Hat Tip: Ace of Spades HQ
New Jersey
Will give the first indication of whether Obama's momentum has genuinely damaged Clinton. She had wide lead here in delegate-rich (127) state neighbouring her home turf of New York just two weeks ago. Polls say Obama has now drawn level. A strong Obama showing here will point to wider problems for former First Lady.
New York
Second only to California in size and delegates (281), will be the first large contest to declare. Clinton must win big in her home state. Look for how well Obama does in black districts, and whether he can pick off more delegates than expected. McCain will also want to win well here.
Georgia
Crucial for Mr Obama to dominate here. Like Alabama, a central part of his Super Tuesday strategy is to capitalise on the large black vote in these Southern states, and replicate his big win in South Carolina. Mitt Romney has to do well in the South, with support from conservatives, if he is to block McCain.
Missouri
Close race in both parties, and all candidates campaigned hard here. The ultimate bellwether in heart of America: Bible Belt, Yankee, rural, industrial, wealthy, big job losses. Picked every US president correctly for past 100 years (except 1956). 88 delegates for Democrats, 58 for Republicans.
Illinois
Obama's home state (and Clinton's birthplace). Polls show Obama with huge lead. Like Clinton in New York, he has to win by a wide margin and take as many of its 185 delegates as possible. McCain expected to win its 70 Republican delegates.
Arizona
McCain should cruise his home state. But polls show the Democratic contest is tight - Clinton's strength in the region has been undermined by Obama securing the key endorsement of Governor Janet Napoletano.
California
The greatest prize for both parties. Obama has surged up to level pegging with Clinton in recent days, pointing to a result where delegates - if not bragging rights - are evenly shared. Watch out for sharp diaparity in voting by racial group with blacks backing Obaman and Latinos voting for Clinton. The Republican contest may yet be closer than you might think.
Massachusetts
Romney was governor here and should win Republican primary. Clinton has led polls for months, but the Obama's endorsement form Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy has helped him get within striking distance. Both Obama and Clnton campaigned in the state yesterday.
Tennessee
Clinton's best chance of winning a Southern state outside Arkansas (where Bill was Governor). The Republican race appears close with Mike Huckabee showing strongly in his native South.
The following times are GMT:
12:00:
Georgia
01.00:
Alabama
Connecticut
Delaware
Illinois
Massachusetts
Missouri
New Jersey
Oklahoma
Tennessee
01:30
Arkansas
02:00
Arizona
New York
03:00
Utah
North Dakota*
Idaho*
04:00
California
New Mexico*
Minnesota*
Colorado*
05:00
Kansas*
Montana*
06:30
Alaska*
*Caucus times are estimated. West Virginia’s morning caucus should produce results before midnight.
 Election time must be tough when you're both the niece of John F. Kennedy and the wife of California's Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. But Maria Shriver left no one in any doubt as to where her political loyalties lie with her surprise endorsement yesterday of Barack Obama for president.
 Just days after her husband delivered a boost to John McCain's campaign, Ms Shriver stunned delighted supporters at Obama's UCLA rally by making an impromptu appearance, make-up free and and casually dressed after a daughter's equestrian show, to voice her support for the Democratic candidate. Apparently wavering up until the very last minute over whether to go public, Obama aides said that even while she was waiting backstage they were uncertain whether the announcement would go ahead. But stride onstage she did, and declared to a enraptured audience that "If Barack was a state, he'd be California!"
Ms Shriver's break with her husband was not so unusual, as the couple have always been political opposites. But, as Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, USC political analyst, said in today's LA Times, "The drama of it all was just delicious."
Embracing Oprah Winfrey, cousin Caroline Kennedy and Michelle Obama onstage, the effortlessly elegant Ms Shriver (hair unbrushed or no) delivered a priceless media image: three of the most influential Democratic women in America united in their support for the Obama campaign. Hillary must have been seething.
In fact, Ms Bebitch Jeffe says, Ms Shriver "probably edged out Bill Clinton" -- who spent Sunday morning visiting Los Angeles-area black churches - "and Oprah Winfrey as the story of the day, at least in California."
 Moments after John Edwards quit the Democratic race today the blogosphere was buzzing with frenzied analyses of the likely impact on the remaining  contenders. By and large the commentary is as inconclusive as polling on the subject, with some suggesting Obama might gain a slight advantage, others leaning towards Mrs Clinton and more still sitting resolutely (and probably wisely) on the fence.
There are two key points to consider here: delegates already won and supporters who have not yet voted.
Edwards has not yet thrown his weight behind a candidate and may well not do so until he has assessed his potential influence. If the race stays as close as it is as present he may decide to hold on to the dozens of delegates he has accrued and direct them nearer the convention to the candidate who offers him the best reward (ie the VP spot on the ticket or a future Cabinet post.) On the other hand he is clearly ideologically closer to Obama and may endorse him sooner if it looks like Hillary is pulling ahead. I've written about this in an earlier blog post.
However with his delegates not bound to obey him, the bigger question is where his supporters in the remaining states will turn.
Here's a selection of the best comment on the web:
Continue reading "Edwards quits - but where will his supporters go?" »
 ABC is reporting an interesting little nugget of information. Tucked away in the last paragraph of this article on Roberta McCain's latest gaffe is the revelation that the pre-trial conference for the prosecution of Bernard Kerik, the former New York City police chief and close associate of Rudy Giuliani indicted on corruption charges, has been postponed from February 4 - the day before Super Tuesday - to Feb 6.
The date was changed at the request of the defence, according to court documents. Make of that what you will...
 John McCain's nonagenarian mother Roberta has suffered a recurrence of the foot-in-mouth disease which got her in such trouble with Mormons a couple of months ago (watch here). This time it was a question regarding her son's conservative credentials that tripped her up.
Here's the relevant extract from the C-Span interview transcript:
Steve Scully: This is a political question in terms of how he gets the nomination, but just from what you have seen, how much support do you think he has among the base of the Republican Party?
Roberta McCain: I don’t think he has any. I don’t know what the base of the Repub– maybe I don’t know enough about it, but I’ve not seen any help whatsoever.
Scully: So can he then go on and become the nominee of this party?
McCain: Yes, I think holding their nose they’re going to have to take him.
Scully: Can you explain?
McCain: Well, everything they’ve done and said. … Now I’m really popping off, but he worked like a dog to get Bush re-elected. …He’s backed Bush in everything except Rumsfeld. Have you heard other senators and congressmen backing Bush over eight years? Find me it – give me a name. I’ve not seen any public recognition of the work that he’s done for the Republican party.
Mama McCain is right of course. Despite having a highly respectable lifetime rating of 82.3 percent from the American Conservative Union, John McCain's deviations from the Republican orthodoxy have left him struggling amongst the party faithful, instead drawing his support from moderate Republicans and independents (a fact which, as Roberta implies, could make him the only candidate able to swing it for the GOP this year). And she's only trying to defend her boy.
But this doesn't make the headlines any better for John McCain, who originally wheeled his elderly mother into the spotlight in order to dispel concerns about his own age. After being forced to defend her comments during the Florida debate, this might be one strategy he has come to regret. Watch his response here at 1 min 38.
 With both the Democratic and Republican races suffering more ups and downs than President Sarkozy's love-life, observers in America and beyond are waiting expectantly for the multiple nominating contests of Super Tuesday to clarify matters.
But according to an analysis by the Associated Press, we can all stop holding our breath, as it is "mathematically impossible" for any candidate to lock up the nomination on February 5. In fact, the day may not even produce clear frontrunners, leaving later primaries in delegate-rich states such as Ohio and Texas to determine the race. Read why here.
 John Edwards has staked his fading presidential hopes on the pivotal South Carolina primary on Saturday, where a win would propel him into the electoral  cash cow that is Super Tuesday. However with the latest polls showing him trailing in third place, a fourth, highly damaging defeat now seems the most likely outcome. Such a loss - in the state of his birth and where he dazzled voters during his 2004 bid for the nomination - would surely spell the end of his campaign. If not immediately, then after a prolonged and painful bleedout.
Accordingly, and with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama still vying for the mantle of frontrunner, all eyes are turning to Edwards as kingmaker. As Ben Smith wrote on Politico.com last week, due to technical features of the Democratic nominating process, Obama could end up with almost as many delegates as Clinton even if he fails to win as many states. This would leave Edwards in an awfully influential position.
But how would he decide to use it?
Continue reading "John Edwards the kingmaker?" »
 The strains of the campaign trial seem to be getting to Hillary's other half. Questioned by a reporter about a lawsuit being brought by Clinton supporters in Nevada unhappy at the creation of casino caucus sites, the former president's normally slick media persona began to crumble. The reporter's follow-up - whether the complaint might be related to the recent endorsement of rival Barack Obama by the Culinary Workers' Union, representing many casino staff - sparked a furious outburst. Someone's in trouble with the missus....
Iraqi people show very little interest in the American primaries, but appear unanimous in their dislike for George Bush whose legacy will always be linked  to their country.
Several men and women questioned about the election fever sweeping the United States refused to answer, saying with a laugh that it meant nothing to them.
|
