Last night, Barack Obama accomplished what no insurgent presidential candidate has ever done: survive Super Tuesday. The Illinois Senator did so by amassing a broad coalition of blacks, liberals and red-state Democrats - paying off dividends across the country except in California. Hillary Clinton's ten-point win here exceeded expectations, and such baffling returns will keep progressives guessing for days what went wrong in the Golden State. Clinton won in part because she got a large share of support from white women and Latinos - her traditional base - as well as from Asian-Americans. But Obama also got slaughtered in the Central Valley and other conservative parts of the state - defying the national trend, and confining his base to San Francisco and other liberal coastal counties. The state's electorate was also very conservative when it came to Propositions: voters approved 4 anti-labor Indian gaming compacts, sinked a measure to fund community colleges, and (while it's good news for progressives that Prop 93 failed) kept the status quo for term limits.
We just had an exciting last-minute addition to our Brave New Films/The Young Turks Super Tuesday live online video election coverage: Senator Boxer will join us at 6:30pm PT as a call-in guest.
That completes an outstanding guest list of progressive thinkers and doers for tonight. You're guaranteed better election coverage with us than on cable or network news, so turn off your TV and check in online -- starting in just a few minutes. (List over the flip)
I just finished my stint standing in front of the Powell Street BART station in San Francisco holding up an Obama sign. This post is really just some stray observations about that experience.
1) Obama supporters were more frequent and more vocal than Clinton supporters. Even the guy with the Clinton sign admitted it. Other than youth being for Obama, the only demographic trend I could discern was that just about every little old Chinese lady that went by (and voiced an opinion) was a big Clinton supporter.
2) Obama also seemed to have the edge among crazy homeless veterans, one of whom cited Obama's "clean spirit" as the deciding factor in his vote.
3) But back to the guy with the Hillary sign...he was really committed to the idea that either candidate would be fine, we're all on the same team, etc. I know San Franciscans are supposed to just relax and love everybody, but I sure don't feel that ambivalently.
4) One of the signs they gave me at Obama HQ (all of which seemed home-made, btw) said "Obama 4 Change" on it. I have to admit, I never thought I would be the one standing around on street corners in Union Square asking for change.
5) European tourists apparently see a dude standing around with an Obama sign as a great opportunity to get a free lecture on American civics.
With the February 5th primary election approaching rapidly, in which voters in California and 21 other states will pick which presidential candidates represent each party, we have a rare opportunity to make a monumental decision.
For the first time in years, we have an opportunity to elect a president who will give the global climate crisis the level of attention that is required to tackle it.
But how are we to know where the candidates stand on global warming, if reporters simply refuse to ask the right questions? Of the 2,938 questions asked of the presidential candidates since January 2007, just 6 mentioned global warming (source: League of Conservation Voters).
As the Democratic Presidential race moves to California on February 5th, Senator Hillary Clinton holds the advantage in part because she leads Barack Obama among two crucial demographics: gays and Latinos. But if these groups were more "results-oriented" about which candidate would bring about substantive change for their community, Obama could have an edge. Clinton's husband signed the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act when he was President, and she has only promised to scrap part 3 of DOMA - whereas Obama would repeal it entirely. While both have waffled on giving drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants, when pressed to take a position Clinton said "no" and Obama said "yes." Gays and Latinos either don't know such policy differences -- or else have put them aside in favor of symbolic gestures, high name recognition or top-down endorsements. Before it's too late, LGBT and Latino voters must look at the issues, and decide which candidate would better pursue their interests.
