MyDD :: Obama Camp Banking on 200,000 Democratic Caucus-Goers?

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

This strategy could very well be a self-fulfilling prophecy tactic to encourage Iowans to come out and vote, to be part of a record breaking vote. Why not predict your own most favorable circumstance?

by shergald on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:55:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by ColoradoGuy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:01:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I wouldn't. The political graveyard is littered with campaigns who bet on increasing turnout by even a modest 10-20%, and very few who bet on low or normal historic turnout. I've busted my butt on many occasions for candidates who tried to "bring a whole new generation to the polls". Yada yada yada. Never works.

Sixty percent? Fuhgettaboutit. The people who don't turn out do so for a reason ... they don't generally give a shit, although they often do support a particular candidate and sometimes tell pollsters they will be there.

by desmoulins on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 04:23:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Edwards strategy is by no means based on low turnout. Thats simply what reporters are writing because they don't know what else to say.

Turnout is not a factor in that you are not cmopeting for most votes. You are competing for most delegates.

Edwards strategy is to win over as many actual caucus-goers as possible and not to waste resources on those who will not caucus. Thats what every campaign does. Edwards benefits from high turnout if they are his supporters.

Moreover, high turnout could help him by raising the viability threshold and forcing Biden, Richardson and Dodd supporters to go with 2nd choice -- which is more likley to be him than Clinton.

Also From Ambinder: Obama using Drudge (none / 0)

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/

Barack Obama is lining Drudge's pockets by putting up paid advertising on his site.

Must be he wants to russle up some more Republican support.

by dpANDREWS on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:50:38 PM EST

And pigs might fly. (none / 0)

They might but it's not probable. An increase maybe but 200,000? But not long to wait.

by ottovbvs on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:52:20 PM EST

Obama Camp Banking on 200,000 Democratic (none / 0)

Obama has already got Illinois high school students travelling to Iowa where they will caucus using relatives addresses for themselves and friends travelling with them.

by hwc on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:54:51 PM EST

Thats called vote fraud (none / 0)

I have to believe that if Iowens in his corner were to get a sniff of that they'd be moving out of his corner pronto.

by dpANDREWS on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:56:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thats called vote fraud (none / 0)

dpAndrews,

You seem to forget that Obama is from Chicago; the only place in America where dead people can vote.

What's a little fraud here and there among friends?

by andrewalker08 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:00:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp Banking on 200,000 Democratic (none / 0)

Sure, I bet the DMR poll accounted for that effect too!

by Louverture on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:58:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp Banking on 200,000 Democratic (none / 0)

Oh BS, if you believe you can get HIGH SCHOOL (the few that are over 18) students to be involved in the political process AT ALL you are an idiot.

by ArkansasLib on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:59:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp Banking on 200,000 Democratic (none / 0)

There are indeed high schoolers who are politically aware and politically active (I don't know how that percentage would compare to other age groups, but I wouldn't be too surprised if it compares favorably, since, being young, they aren't as apt to be jaded and cynical.) By the way, if I recall correctly, 17-year-olds may participate in the Iowa Caucus if they will turn 18 by the time of the General Election.

Keep it short. DemocraticShortList.com

by Rob in Vermont on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 04:12:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Camp Banking on 200,000 Democratic (none / 0)

This appears to be a completely undocumented smear. I don't know, maybe I'm missing the hyperlink in your comment, but I just don't see it.

Not only would this be illegal, it would be easily detected, making it hard to believe any campaign is doing this in an organized way. It's not a secret ballot, after all, and the people you're caucusing with are your neighbors. If someone asks where you live, you can't just give a relative's address because people will know that Mrs. Jones down the street doesn't have any high-school kids living with her.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 06:55:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Easy (none / 0)

It is totally conceiveable to think that for every one caucus-goer in 2004, 2 or 3 will show-up in 2008.

by Louverture on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 02:57:41 PM EST

by ColoradoGuy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:08:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not if you've ever worked in politics. It would be utterly unprecedented. And unprecedented things rarely happen.

by Piuma on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:11:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

485,000+ donors to a political primary campaign. 765,000+ donations. Unprecedented.

Exactly... (none / 0)

I'd put the turn out floor at 250,000.

I'm betting you have AT LEAST one additional person this time for each person that attended in 2004.

But no, I have no experience in politics.

Then again, looks like "experience" ain't all it's cracked up to be.

by Louverture on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:37:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Exactly... (none / 0)

If Obama is the one chiefly responsible for doubling or tripling the turnout, shouldn't he end up winning by some incredible margin?

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 07:02:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by desmoulins on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 04:25:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Its not unprecedented at all. Its simply unprecedented in the Iowa caucus teh way campaigns ahve been run there the past few cycles.

The #s of field staff and amounts spent are exponentially greater than ever before and the interest level among democrats is higher than ever before, especially among young people.

I'm not for Obama -- I'm for Edwards -- but I don't doubt it could happen.

I do think Hilary's expansion of the universe by bringing in older first-timers is much harder to pull off and unlikely to work. Younger, more self-motivated voters coming for the first time I can definitely see.

by ColoradoGuy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 05:58:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes it is. Name me one race where anything like a 60% increase in turnout has happened. In fact, name me one where a 30% increase has happened. Things like that JUST DON'T HAPPEN.

And no, I'm not a cynic. Just a realist. There is no huge pool of voters out there who were disillusioned or sick or out of town last time who suddenly are interested enough to spend 3 hours in a school gymnasium listening to bad political speeches by their neighbors. The people who didn't vote last time just don't give a shit. They don't care. They might support Obama or someone else. They might tell a pollster or a campaign that they're coming. But come tomorrow night they won't leave their warm sofa for anything.

This is how it always goes.

John McCain: Drill, Drill, Surge!!!!!

What is wrong with the people in our party? Don't we want to expand membership and our party? As a YD it is in our bible (chapter building guide) to recruit, recruit recruit and GOTV what is wrong with that. We should be celebrating even if they are young dems like myself. Good god are we masochistic or what.

by TennesseeGurl on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:02:56 PM EST

by Louverture on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:06:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't you understand the the caucus ought to be dominated by party-insiders.

John McCain: Drill, Drill, Surge!!!!!

What is wrong with bringing new people into the party? I guess it's bad when your candidate doesn't benefit? I think it's great.

by TennesseeGurl on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:30:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by Louverture on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:48:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I was being snarky.

by ColoradoGuy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:10:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nobody's saying it's a bad thing. They're saying it's not going to happen. There's a huge difference between the two. Not understanding that there's a difference is one of the primary weaknesses of the Democratic Party, and one the Repubs exploit all the time. It makes us prone to wishful thinking, which is always a sure path to defeat.

by del on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 07:24:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My understanding is that the increase is independents and a few Republicans. Increase in Dems leans heavily Hillary and Edwards.

@ Jonathan Singer (none / 0)

can anyone tell me how all these Independents fill out cards joining the Democratic party to caucas?

what is the verification system at the caucases.

My understanding is the Indy's or Republicans must join the Democratic party to caucas -- how is this enforced.

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:05:55 PM EST

by Louverture on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:07:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They can register at the caucus!!! It's that simple. No need to verify anything since they can't be in two places at once--the other place being the GOP caucus.

by andrewalker08 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:19:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think the real question should be why are people who were registered as independents or even Republicans being allowed to participate in a Democratic Party process.

It's almost the equivalent of having the Democratic National Committee elect the Chair of the Republican National Committee.

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

but do they even have to fill out a card?

what is the barrier to a republican or Indy caucasing ?

is there any? do they just show up

by TarHeel on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:27:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by andrewalker08 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:33:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

TarHeel,

According to the Iowa Democratic Party, "You may register to vote or change your party registration on caucus night at your local caucus. All you will need to do is show up at your caucus site and fill
out a voter registration form. You will NOT need to show identification." [Source: Iowa Democratic Party document "FAQ: Participating in the Iowa First in The Nation Caucuses

sounds like an easy (none / 0)

way to rig it.

why can't you just bus in college kids from Illinois?

Call it "Medicare Option" not public option

by TarHeel on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:43:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by andrewalker08 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:58:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

TarHeel,

Like I said up-thread...

...You seem to forget that Obama is from Chicago; the only place in America where dead people can vote.

What's a little fraud here and there among friends?

The worst thing is that there's a New York Times article out today that talks about the fact that you can fight and die for your country, but you can't caucus in Iowa if you're based overseas.

Here's a link to the article: "Caucuses Empower Only Some Iowans"

by danIA on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 04:03:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Now we have Edwards people testing the validity of the caucus...

Caucuses are neighborhood meetings, where you meet and DISCUS the nominee and the party platform. It must be done in person, that is the system that Iowa and many other states have always practiced. Now if we are hating on caucuses instead of primaries lets say we think ND and NV (and many more) are horrible backward places.

by danIA on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 03:59:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You have a precinct chair, who is placed by the IDP, and approved or replaced by the caucus who can reject admission if they don't think a person is valid. I think a charter bus showing up at the door with 50 students might tip a few people off.

by del on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 07:29:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, if they are bused in, they probably would go to larger towns. The delegates are heavily weighted towards the rural areas. I think I read that 25 in a rural area counts like 2,500 in city. Anybody from Iowa really know??