Comment, news and views from the US Elections.
Susbscribe to an XML feed of this blog at:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/rss.xml
 If John McCain triumphs in the coming US election, he will become, at the age of 72, the oldest president in the country’s history. It is a sore point for the Republican nominee, who has accordingly dragged his sprightly nonagenarian mother Roberta around the campaign trail to impress voters with his family’s longevity and good health.
Now, despite the recent pledge of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean not to use his advanced years as ammunition, a senior Democratic operative has gone on the offensive over the issue.
Steve Rosenthal, who has been involved in every Democratic presidential effort since 1972 and was an advisor to Bill Clinton’s campaign, has created the website Younger Than McCain, a somewhat tongue-in-cheek look at old things that are nevertheless - you've guessed it - younger than McCain.
Says Rosenthal: “John McCain comes from another time, an old war-horse stuck in the past with an old-world view of things. Just for fun and to put into some perspective just how old McCain is, we started compiling lists of things that to most Americans seem really old, but they're still younger than good 'ole John McCain."
Here's the video, then scroll down for our short quiz:
Younger than McCain?
Decide whether following things are younger than McCain, then click "continue reading" to see the answers.
1) The state of Alaska
2) The jet engine
3) The contact lens
4) Daffy Duck
5) The tape recorder
6) Polystyrene
7) Thailand
8) The vacuum cleaner
9) The bikini
10) Mickey Mouse
Continue reading "Younger than McCain" »
 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."
 A struggling small time boxer takes on the heavyweight champ in a once-in-a-lifetime fight in which he strives to go the distance, not for the glory or the spoils of victory, but for his self-respect. Not exactly the most striking parallel with Hillary Clinton, one half of America's most formidable political power couple. Perhaps the former first lady was envisioning her defeat on points at the end of a fight which leaves both opponents forever scarred...
 But let's say we suspend our disbelief for a moment, and accept that Mrs Clinton is Rocky Balboa, that underdog fighter battling the establishment heavyweights. Who would Barack Obama be? And John McCain? In the Clinton-as-Rocky scenario Apollo Creed seems the obvious choice for Obama, but his status as reigning champion doesn't fit. Ivan Drago, the evil Soviet droid? Too inarticulate. Clubber Lang, aka Mr T? His infectious catchphrases and years spent on the mean streets of Chicago make him a more likely candidate, but his gratuitously sadistic nature rules him out too.
In fact, after Mrs Clinton's bagged the best role, the remaining field of cartoon baddies seems a little scant, so I've widened my search to all Sylvester Stallone films to give McCain and Obama an equal shot at action hero status. And after several hours of rumination and intense discussion with my newsroom colleagues, the results are in.
 First up, John McCain. An Vietnam veteran who can no longer raise his arms above his head due to the torture he suffered at the hands of the Vietcong, a bit of a maverick, a tinderbox temperament, relentlessly patriotic and ideological - he can only be John Rambo.
 Barack Obama is a little tougher. There are few great orators among Stallone's heroes, so I've chosen a man whose physical agility can perhaps match the Illinois senator's rhetorical dexterity - Gabe Walker, aka Cliffhanger.
Now that would be a fight I'd like to see.
Embarking on a "Service to America" tour to position himself as the candidate of choice for American patriots, John McCain has unveiled his first presidential election TV ad, in which he paints himself as a true American hero with a dedication to the American military pumping through every American vein and capillary (and if you think I've overused the word "American", just wait till you hear the ad).
Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, immediately slammed McCain as a "blatant" opportunist for seeking to capitalise on his record as a naval aviator and later Vietnamese prisoner of war. The Republican National Committee then hit back, demanding Dean apologise for what they called a "disgraceful" character smear.
Watch the ad below, then scroll down for another web ad released today (on a similar theme - you'd better get used to it) and a selection of reaction from the web.
My DD:
"As many of his web ads over the course of the primary did, this one creepily exploits his status as a POW to hit us over the head with his war hero credentials.
"... I know it's pretty much all McCain has but is he really prepared to just entirely cede the change mantle to Obama, or even Clinton for that matter? The McCain campaign probably thinks there's plenty of time to make that case but when the Democrats are already hammering the message that McCain is nothing but 4 more years of Bush, you'd think he'd try to use the first ad of the campaign to counter that. Instead, what they're doing here is spending thousands of dollars to reinforces what people already think of McCain."
Salon.com:
"The ad concludes with a curious new slogan: "John McCain: The American president Americans have been waiting for."
"One guesses this was a second choice; the obvious first choice -- "John 'America' McCain: The American president Americans have been waiting for, in America" -- was likely judged too long."
The Stump at The New Republic:
"John McCain's new ad refers to him as "the American president Americans have been waiting for."
"... That's an awfully conspicuous formulation when your opponent has been accused of being unpatriotic and of murky foreign origin. All the more so given that it echoes Obama's line, "we're the ones we've been waiting for." Am I reading too much into it?"
Reality Principles:
"The Republicans have destroyed their brand. They hope the electorate will not notice. That's why McCain is campaigning as an American's American in America for Americans who are proud of being Americans. McCain, the Republican, isn't campaigning as a Republican."
Steve Benen on The Carpetbagger Report:
"It did remind me, though, of what McCain had to say about these kinds of tactics. In 2004, for example, he criticized John Kerry for reminding voters of his own heroic service. McCain said he was “sick and tired of re-fighting the Vietnam War,” and disparaged Kerry, saying his emphasis on his military record is “clearly a tactical or strategic move.” McCain said he intentionally avoided talking about his service during his 2000 campaign.
"And yet, eight years later, he’s building a campaign ad around interrogation footage taken from a Vietnamese prison. It’s quite a departure from McCain’s previous strategy."
Red State:
"You can tell the ad hit home by Howard Dean's reaction. ... Dean is so worried by the contrast of the Republican nominee to be, looking very presidential, while the Democratic presidential wannabees are engaging in nothing but senseless negativity."
 Fresh from the row (or should I say, minor rucus) over televangelist supporter John Hagee's anti-Catholic rants, John McCain has once again  landed himself in difficulty by describing as his "spiritual guide" the Reverend Rod Parsley, an evangelical minister who urged a Christian war to destroy the "false religion" of Islam.
Read the story here before scrolling down for a selection of comment from the web:
Mother Jones:
"McCain's relationship with Parsley is politically significant. In 2004, Parsley's church was credited with driving Christian fundamentalist voters to the polls for George W. Bush. With Ohio expected to again be a decisive state in the presidential contest, Parsley's World Harvest Church and an affiliated entity called Reformation Ohio, which registers voters, could be important players within this battleground state. Considering that the Ohio Republican Party has been decimated by various political scandals and that a popular Democrat, Ted Strickland, is now the state's governor, McCain and the Republicans will need all the help they can get in the Buckeye State this fall. It's a real question: Can McCain win the presidency without Parsley?"
Jeffrey Feldman on The Huffington Post:
"By cozying up to Parsley, McCain has given his disturbing speeches a new national legitimacy. The alliance will no doubt help McCain rebuild the so-called Evangelical coalition that he needs to have a chance in the general election. ... To read Parsley's violent language as he encourages his readers to join the so-called 'war' is to come face-to-face with the violent rhetoric John McCain will tolerate - even encourage - to win votes in November."
Steve Benen on Crooks and Liars:
"If McCain is going to tout Parsley as a “spiritual guide,” it’s certainly worth learning more about where Parsley might “guide” the Republican nominee. ...
"And lest there be any confusion, Parsley isn’t a one-trick pony — sure, he hates Muslims, but his bread and butter includes attacks on gays, abortion, the federal judiciary, and civil libertarians. Best of all, his rhetoric frequently includes what sounds like appeals to violence, telling his followers, “I came to incite a riot! Man your battle stations. Ready your weapons.” (One wants to assume he’s speaking metaphorically, but it’s not entirely clear.)
"This is the man John McCain has embraced as a politically ally. Remind me again how he developed a reputation as a moderate?"
Wonkette:
"It creates a quandary for McCain, who needs to rely on this dude to get votes out in Ohio during the general election. But... Joooooohn, look what he says!"
 The blogosphere is busily dissecting a New York Times story which claims that a questionable, perhaps romantic relationship with female  lobbyist Vicki Iseman (left) led John McCain to improperly wield his influence to gain favours for her clients. Liberal commentators are pondering why the New York Times chose to publish when it did, after apparently sitting on the story for several months, while incredibly, McCain seems to be reaping the benefits on the right - being attacked by the New York Times seems to have boosted his appeal among the conservative wing of the GOP in a way that his personal overtures never could. Meanwhile, The New Republic has responded to claims that investigation by one of its journalists forced the hand of the New York Times. Read the full story from our US correspondent here.
Update: As of 1800 GMT today, the New York Times article concerned had 1577 comments, most of which were attacking the story as tenuous and a product of liberal bias. This comment was highlighted in the editor's selection:
L.O., Ohio: "I read the entire McCain article and I have to say this is all unsubstantiated. Shabby journalism, to be sure.
"I also have to reflect on the timing of this. Michelle Obama was taking pretty good heat for her anti-American comments and suddenly, this story, which the Times sat for quite some time, hits the news and the coverage shifts. Liberal news media at its finest! From print media to television, you've all done a bang-up job in not only protecting the Obamas at all cost, but making it seem un-American to challenge them at all. When will the bias end?"
Here's a selection of comment from the web:
Huffington Post:
"News that the Times had an article on McCain's relationship with Iseman was known months ago, albeit with only slight hints of the romantic angle.
"So why would the Times hesitate to act? A number of theories, beyond threats of legal action, have been batted around by analysts. They range from the generous -- the paper could simply have thought it unfair to publish the story on the eve of a slew or presidential primaries -- to the nefarious -- the Times was waiting to unload on McCain only after he secured the nomination."
Booman Tribune:
"What is significant is that the sources for this article are former McCain staffers that contacted the Times in December, before the primaries started. They clearly intended to derail his nomination not destroy the candidacy of the Republican nominee, which is what this article threatens to do now.
"... I think it's a thin story. I wouldn't have published it. Frankly, I don't care about infidelity, and that is not even proven here. To show preferential or unethical behavior, more reporting needs to be done. The Times will take a well deserved hit for publishing this piece."
Powerline:
"What is most striking, though, if you actually read the story, is how thin it is. It's mostly about the Keating Five scandal, which dates to the late 1980s. The "news" that gives the story a hook has to do with McCain's friendship with a pretty blonde lobbyist that apparently ended in 2000. As for the purported affair, the Times offers zero evidence....The Times is a mouthpiece for the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, nothing more. Its smear of McCain--not the last, to be sure--is entirely consistent with the editorial policies it has maintained for many years. Tomorrow's story is just one more reminder of why no sophisticated person takes the Times seriously as a news source."
Ankle Biting Pundits:
"This is a smear of the worst kind and reeks of a reporter, or a paper, with an agenda.
"Hell, maybe in a sick sort of way this will win him some sympathy with conservatives who will sympathize with McCain for getting a hatchet job done on him by this liberal rag, and I’m sure there will be many people snickering that McCain is getting slapped by this garbage even after spending so much of his career trying to please the editorial page of the NYT."
Truthdig:
Did unwanted attention from a New Republic scribe prod The New York Times into printing its long-awaited story about certain alleged snags in Sen. John McCain’s moral fabric? McCain’s camp apparently thinks so, but regardless, the Arizona senator’s team is switching into battle mode to counter the paper’s “smear campaign.”
The Plank (The New Republic):
"One interesting question about the piece is just how it will be received by the considerable segment of the conservative movement that already views McCain with deep suspicion (the Ann Coulters, the Glenn Becks, and other assorted anti-McCainiacs). On the one hand, as Noam notes, being "attacked" by the New York Times is seen as a feather in the cap by many Republicans and, as printed, the story is hardly dispositive. On the other hand, the story does feed into the feeling on the part of some conservatives that McCain is a sanctimonious phony who's really no purer than the fellow politicians he occasionally castigates. I suspect the first sentiment will predominate in the initial response, but keep an eye out for signs of the latter as the story develops."
The Stump (The New Republic):
"The McCain campaign is apparently blaming TNR for forcing the Times' hand on this story. We can't yet confirm that. But we can say this: TNR correspondent Gabe Sherman is working on a piece about the Times' foot-dragging on the McCain story, and the back-and-forth within the paper about whether to publish it. Gabe's story will be online tomorrow."
Finally, a statement from Jill Hazelbaker, McCain's Communications Director:
“It is a shame that the New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit and run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.
“Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.”
 With neither Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton able to carve out a clear lead in the Democratic race, talk is increasingly turning to the possibility that superdelegates might, for the first time since their inception in the 1980s, decide the presidential nominee.
 So what is a superdelegate, and why do they matter?
This stratum of turbo-charged voters constitute around 20 per cent of Democratic delegates who decide the nominee (Republicans have far fewer, just 123, who I'll come back to later.)
They are made up primarily of Democratic National Committee officials, members of Congress, governors and Democratic notables such as former presidents and congressional leaders. Some, meanwhile, are elected at state conventions.
Sometimes referred to as unpledged delegates, superdelegates are not bound to support any particular nominee. So far, around half have declared their voting intentions, with Hillary Clinton commanding a sizeable lead, but as these could change their mind right up to the last the former first lady can't bank them yet.
With the two rivals neck-and-neck when it comes to your average, common or garden delegate, it is these souped-up versions which may tip the nomination one way or the other.
The Republican party has no superdelegates per se, but it does have 123 unpledged delegates which function the same way.
For further information on superdelegates, CNN has a useful guide here.
What is the current state of play?
Continue reading "Superdelegates, and how they could change the fate of a nation" »
 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.
 With Super Tuesday promising to whittle down both races (and perhaps, on the Republican side, produce a winner) thoughts are turning to possible pairings for the presidential head-to-head. Unsurprisingly, it is a subject fascinating the pollsters, who have probed every possible permutation to determine the likely outcome. We all know that polls can be wrong (especially after the New Hampshire debacle) but nevertheless this breakdown of national surveys on RealClearPolitics makes interesting reading.
It confirms what Democrats have feared all along- that a McCain candidacy would be tough to beat. Considered a liberal Republican (despite his plan to keep the US in Iraq for 100 years,) McCain has significant crossover appeal and could easily leach votes from the Democratic candidate, particularly if that happens to be Hillary Clinton, a divisive figure even among her own party.
When all the national poll results are averaged, McCain beats Clinton by a slim margin. But he is the only Republican who does - both Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee lose by double digits. Barack Obama, on the other hand, not only routs Romney and Huckabee but also comes out on top against McCain (by a rather paltry one point, admittedly, but then, as George W Bush well knows, he could make do with even less.)
This is a message that has not been lost on Republicans, who have responded to Obama's surge by rallying behind McCain as the most electable candidate. It is a bitter pill for right-wingers, who dislike McCain almost as much as Mrs Clinton.
But, as Andrew Sullivan argues in this Times article, the prospect of another Clinton in the Oval Office might be the one thing to make them swallow.
He writes: "She (Hillary) has extraordinary negatives. She galvanises the conservative movement in ways no other Democrat can. Against McCain, she and she alone enables the Republicans to forget their deep internal divisions and unite. Nothing – nothing – unites them as she does."
Sullivan closes his argument with this salient question: "Will Democratic voters realise that he is now their best bet against McCain or will inertia and fear keep Clinton alive? One thing I’ve learnt in American politics: never underestimate the capacity of the Democratic party to screw it up."
 McCain:
Romney:
Giuliani:
 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.
10pm To sum up. Undoubtedly the biggest primary on the Republican side so far. In ascending order of significance, here are the consequences.
Duncan Hunter gets nothing and calls it quits. For this relief, much thanks. Fred Thompson comes in a poor third and gives a strong hint that he's about to call it quits. Mike Huckabee fails to win a state dominated by his natural suporters - evangelical Christians. This is a body blow to Huckabee and he will eventually have to call it quits. He may well prove to be a one-state (Iowa) wonder. He wouldn't be the first.
John McCain pulls off his second primary win. Unlike his first in New Hampshire, this was not natural McCain territory. It was his graveyard eight years ago when he got trounced by George W Bush. This time, winning in a far from friendly state, he has demonstrated some serious strength. The doubt about McCain all along has been: can he win in places where he can't rely on independents to vote for him? Well, only about 15 per cent of the SC voters were independents. McCain lost narrowly but very respectably among conservatives to Huckabee.
Next up: Florida. McCain will surely get a bounce which will arm him for a struggle there with Rudy Giuliani. There's a battle on now to be the anti-McCain candidate. Giuliani has a chance to make the case in Florida that he is that man but his near invisibility in the last few weeks, and McCain's demonstrated capacity to win elections will surely give the Arizona senator the edge.
So sooner perhaps rather than later, the Republican race is going to come down to Romney v McCain. Expect Romney to go really hard and negative now. There is real antipathy to McCain among what might be called a conservative establishment and Romney is going to play that hard across the country. McCain's trump card is that he seems to be the more electable candidate in November. In a year that otherwise looks bleak for Republicans, that should to be a winner.
9.18 McCain wins. Fox and AP call it. This is huge. For all the talk about confusion and a complex, multi-sided Republican race, this is probably the most clarifying so far. For McCain a sweet triumph where his campaign faltered eight years ago. He shows his ability to win conservatives and southerners in enough numbers to make him a true frontrunner.
For Huckabee this is a very big defeat. According to the exit polls more than two thirds of voters were evangelical Christians. If Huck can't win here, how can he possibly stack up enough delegates in California, New York, Illinois and elsewhere? Unless Giuliani pulls off a win in Florida on the 29th Jan, the Republican race is going to come down quickly to McCain v Romney.
8.32 Eastern Still waiting for real news on who won, though all signs (exits plus 30 per cent of precincts reporting so far) point to McCain. The only event of the evening has been Fred Thompson's lengthy, if technically imperfect (the mikes seemed to fail) and very early concession. Sounds like he's out. No mention of fighting on; no mention of the states to come. Lots of emotional thanks and valedictory-type encomiums. Does he formally withdraw in the next few days and endorse McCain?
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.
Those who did play along stressed that they had far more gripping issues to worry about than American politics, such as security and a lack of basic services – common complaints in Iraq since the US-led invasion almost five years ago.
In addition the only two candidates whose names people recognised were Democratic hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
“I don’t really care about the elections,” said Mohammed Salaam, whose only taste of the campaign comes when he accidentally flicks his television on to a satellite news channel.
“Our life has become far more complicated than to be concerned about them, such as stressing about finding a job,” said the 39-year-old engineer from Baghdad.
Mr Salaam lost his job when the company he worked for closed down because of the violence.
“Also worrying about how to return to my house safely every day makes it ridiculous to add more things to worry about like the elections,” he said yesterday, speaking after Mrs Clinton clinched an unexpected victory over Mr Obama in the New Hampshire Democratic Primary.
On the Republican side, John McCain won the battle.
Mr Salaam said that Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama were the only two candidates he had heard of, but he knew nothing about their respective policies so was unable to choose between them.
“However, the good thing is that they are both against Mr Bush, which is the most important thing for the entire world that is suffering under the Bush policy,” he said.
Asked for his thoughts on the incumbent President, the married father-of-three said: “Hasty and wrongheaded. I think there is something wrong in the genes of his family because his father was even worse then him. They are a family of psychopaths.”
Anas al-Azzawi, aged 36, was similarly scathing about Mr Bush, who is currently on a swan-song tour of the Middle East.
“Everything is bad about him. Please don’t ask me what I think of this man because such a question drives me crazy,” she said.
Unusually, Ms Azzawi said that she was following the American primaries “because I can’t wait until I see Bush being replaced”.
She continued: “I really hope that the new President will have a positive role in our life because Bush has been supporting our corrupt and sectarian Government. We hope that the Government will lose this support when a wise person takes over.”
As for who should get the most powerful job in the world, Ms Azzawi opted for Mrs Clinton.
“With all the violence and awful killing caused by men in the United States, we might need a woman’s touch to help put an end to it,” she said. “But, I see very little chance of the new President making any change because the damage done by Mr Bush is very difficult to repair.”
Arcelan Sadiq, a computer programmer in Baghdad, said the only thing that interested him about the American primaries was Mr Obama because he had heard on the television that the Democratic contender was Muslim.
“I’m waiting to see if the most anti-Islam country in the world these days can still elect a Muslim President,” the 34-year-old, married father-of-two said.
Mr Obama, whose middle name is Hussein, has denied any suggestion that he is Muslim.
"If I were a Muslim, I would let you know," he was quoted by CNN.com as saying in Dubuque, Iowa, last November. "But I'm a member of Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street on the South Side of Chicago. We've got the best choir in town, and if you want to come and worship with us, you are more than welcome."
 South Carolina is known for its peaches, palmettos, barbecue, and down-and-dirty politics.
A Charleston, SC voter videotaped a call purporting to be an impartial opinion poll, but was actually a "push poll" attacking Fred Thompson. There are also reports from Sen. McCain's campaign that Huckabee supporters are using push polls in South Carolina to distort McCain's record on abortion issues. He has formed a "Truth Squad" to combat such attacks, as explored in Hannah's earlier post.
It appears that these South Carolina push polls are conducted by, Common Sense Issues, the same Mike Huckabee supporters responsible for the anti-Romney push polls in Iowa.
Here's the push poll attacking Thompson: (hat tip: Wizbang)
 John McCain is not taking any chances in South Carolina this time around. Haunted by the memory of the vicious smear campaign that lost him the 2000 Republican primary here to George W. Bush and effectively ended his presidential bid, the Vietnam vet has formed the "Truth Squad", a band of tough political operatives tasked with tackling negative attacks. It has already taken on a number of foes, in one instance wheeling out fellow POW Orson Swindle to combat slurs on McCain's Vietnam record.
Here's what the blogs had to say:
The Plank (The New Republic):
Seems pretty clever. Even if the name "Truth Squad" strikes some voters as cheesy, McCain is shrewd to remind the fine folks of South Carolina just what kind of nasty rumor-mongering their friends and neighbors fell for last time around. Plus, when the '08 version of the illegitimate-black-baby smear does indeed surface, McCain will already have a designated team in place to strike back."
The Palmetto Scoop
"So far they’ve proven to be incredibly adept at snuffing out false rumors and bogus attacks against their candidate."
The State
"Can that group really stave off a sneak attack, if it happens again? Will it happen again? I hope not. Last time was enough of a dark stain on the honor of South Carolina."
Politico
"This is the problem with claiming the high ground and attacking others for running negative campaigns: when you indulge in attacks of your own, you're bound to get less attention for the issues you're trying to spotlight than the fact that you're doing that which you criticized your rival(s) for doing.
Such is what is now happening to John McCain."
Townhall.com
"It should be noted that McCain, Huckabee, and Romney are all reporting these sorts of nasty attacks in the state... Right now, McCain and Huckabee are running neck-and-neck in the Palmetto state. This will likely continue to be a nasty race ..."
Top of the Ticket (LA Times):
"Here's the member who impresses us: Adjutant Gen. Stan Spears. In his post -- an elected one -- Spears directs the 10,500-member South Carolina Army and Air National Guard.
"Sounds like a good guy to have on your side."
Okay, it doesn't look much like the Palmetto state, but I've just driven back to Columbia from the Bob Jones University (ordinary name, craa-zzzy students) and it seemed, somehow, appropriate.
Where else but a Christian fundamentalist university can you meet an normal-looking 18-year old girl who says she would not vote for Hillary Clinton because the God teaches us that men should rule over women?
Now, don't get smart, I'm sure there are other places. Iran is one that springs to mind. But where else can you meet LOTS of normal-looking teenagers who, in my secular eyes, have the most extraordinary views (yes, Iran again, I suppose).
The Bob Jones students were really nice, laughing at my slightly deranged, certainly inappropriate, jokes about the quantities of booze, fags (that's English for "cigarettes") or other sinful behaviour I indulged in at university. And they were hugely articulate in the way that all Americans are (is that to do with the "sharing" they do in elementary school?)
But then one of them says: "I'm backing Huckabee because he stands for 'No Gays'." What - none at all? "No, they're only doing it for attention."
These presumbably heterosexual students are not allowed to hold hands, let alone kiss each other, at Bob Jones university - unless they are engaged. And with the best and most open minded will in the world, as someone who had a three-year-old daughter when I got married, this is jaw-droppingly strange. America sometimes seems a very foreign place.
I'm sure BJU is an extreme example of the Christian conservative voters who will comprise 50%-plus of the Republican primary turnout on January 19.
But I've been here in South Carolina long enough to know that Mike Huckabee is not the only one pandering to them. Bob Jones III himself has endorsed Mitt Romney, while Fred Thompson - remember him? - has been pandering away here for most of the past fortnight.
He has justified ignoring New Hampshire and Michigan by pointing out how he has kept his limbs warms in the South while "they're up there fighting blizzards", adding: "Now, who's the most qualified to be president, with judgment like that?"
Thompson thinks he is going to pull off a little miracle by winning here, not least because it is his turn after Huckabee in Iowa, John McCain in New Hampshire and Romney in Michigan.
I was pondering the nature of mircales in a post Bob Jones visit sort-of-way over a large drink when the barman pointed out that it was snowing here, for the first time in five years (or "ten years", as he said later).
Maybe Thompson should have kept his mouth shut about the blizzards. South Carolina's miracle quota may just have been used up.
 Mitt Romney's win in his native state of Michigan has only further frustrated attempts to identify a frontrunner in a Republican race that, three contests in, remains about as clear-cut as Fred Thompson's campaign strategy.
Watch Gerard Baker, US Editor of the Times, discuss its impact on the Republican race in this commentary from the Michigan primary.
|
