February 6th, 2008

PK Icon

Heck, I may want press credentials . . . .

I wonder how to get blogger press credentials for the Democratic Convention? This begins to look like it could be fun.

The same mixed demographic/geographic trends continue now that it is a neck-and-neck race. Obama continues to do better with African Americans, voters under 30, and well educated/professional whites. Clinton continues to do better with women, Latinos, and working class voters. Obama has a narrow lead among pledged delegates, but Clinton more than offsets this with her lead with the Super delegates.

Last night, Obama did very well in states with small Democratic parties where Dems have not traditionally campaigned. Clinton did well in major Democratic states, including more impressive than predicted showing in MA and CA (although Obama pulled his own better than expeced in CN and DE).

The great dream of all political junkies, a brokered convention, seems more possible all the time. Heck, I'm surprised the primary in my state will actually matter this year.

Meanwhile, my endorsement of Obama on my professional site got 5 diggs, which is probably more than any other entry. Damned if I understand how this stuff works.
PK Icon

Clinton Running Out of Money?

I would not have thought it possible, but there are now reports that Clinton has loaned the campaign $5 million of her own money and that senior staffers are going without pay.

That's pretty amazing, given the fact that they have raised humongo bucks already.

People increasingly look to money as a proxy for support, in no small part because it is a publicly reported figure. For some time now, Obama has exceeded Clinton in terms of getting small contributions from millions of supporters, where Clinton has relied on large contributions and "bundlers" who go out and raise money from individuals personally.

I cannot help but wonder if Clinton is finding some of her financial and political support evaporating as her political prospects become less certain. In addition, I wonder how much of this will become self-renforcing. If Clinton is seen as losing money, and thus losing support, will she actually start to lose support from that perception?

As the success of McCain and Huckabee relative to Romney shows, money is not nearly so deciding a factor as folks like to say it is. And indeed, as happened in New Hampshire, Clinton may benefit from a rebound effect if she is perceived as an underdog candidate.

Nor is it clear to me why Obama enjoys such a large advantage in online contributions. My initial reaction is to assume it is shaped by broadband access, particularly in the home. Certainly some segments of Clinton's base have lower broadband penetration in the home (Latinos, working class women), but so do some of Obamas (African Americans). I don't think it's a digital divide thing.

Could it be that the majority of Clinton's rank and file voters, the ones that have given her the edge in places like CA and NH, are undecided until so close to the vote that they do not contribute online?

I'd love to see some real analysis of this somewhere. It baffles me.