Obama sweeps world stakes

As someone who voted for the experienced Hillary Clinton at the Democrats Abroad Global Primary, yesterday's official results, make for rather depressing reading...

Recap: this year the Democratic Party held their first 'global' primary for ex-pats and U.S. citizens serving overseas. Although U.S. citizens can vote in the primary of the state they were last registered as resident in, some states have an electoral process, like the Iowa caucus, which requires the voter to be physically present. The global primary re-enfranchises those who couldn't get back to their old home state.

Pinch of salt on these result as the demographic of the US citizen abroad will favour Obama, who scores well with wealthier, euro-style, white voters.

I do fear Obama will be taken apart by the well-oiled Repulican machine.

However, in what reads like a report of a game of Risk, I received a rather breathless email from Karen Robinson of the Obama camp, declaring global domination:

The result? Barack Obama won with 65.6% of the votes, compared with 32.7% for Senator Clinton, making it the 11th consecutive primary contest win for Barack Obama since Super Tuesday.

Obama won all of the big countries: taking majorities in countries with the highest number of voters:

62.5% in Canada
56.6% in Mexico
79.3% in Japan
71.8% in France
69.1% in Italy
65.1% in the Netherlands
68.9% here in the UK

Obama also won in every region:

54.6% in the Americas,
72.6% in Asia and the Pacific, and
68% in Europe, the Middle East and Africa

Other noteworthy, although not statistically signifcant, votes mentioned by Karen were ins in Afghanistan (77.7%, only 9 ballots cast) Congo, 75% of the 4 votes cast and nudging Clinton in Iraq (57.1% or 8 of the 14 ballots cast).

Other results:

Antartica: Obama 100%, Clinton 0% (turnout: 1)
Kyrgystan: Clinton 50%, Obama 50% (2)

Hillary Clinton had to satsify herself with wins in:

Philippines 55.2% (79)
New Caledonia 100% (1)
Turkmenistan 100% (2)
Israel 53.7% (184)

See full results of the Democrat's Abroad Global Presidential Primary here.

Unfortunately for Obama after all that - the way that the voting was allocated throughout the regions means that in real terms Obama has only gained a .5 delegate lead over Senator Clinton through our Primary. Obama has won 2.5 delegate votes (representing 5 delegates with .5 votes each) and Clinton has won 2 delegate votes (representing 4 delegates with .5 votes each).

With still some Democrat's Abroad Superdelegates undecided, Obama's camp are urging Democrat voters Abroad to lobby their Superdelegates - this one is going down to the wire folks.


http://regentsparklabour.blogspot.com/2008/02/results-from-global-democratic-primary.html



Display: Sort:

Re: Obama sweeps Democrats Abroad Primary (#1)

If I was you I would get on the Obama bandwagon now; he's going to be the nominee, and with a good Campaign Manager (better than the one Clinton's been using, and better than the buffoons who ran Gore in 2000 and, particularly Kerry in 2004) he can beat McCain easily.

This is a five or six State election: Clinton or Obama need to change two or three of the following from Red to Blue: Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia and West Virginia (Florida would be a nice, but unlikely bonus), whilst holding on to everything Kerry won in 04.

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#2)

As for fear of him being picked apart by the Republicans, don't think for a minute that he isn't prepared for that and don't think for a minute that the Republicans are not in trouble because of the Bush administration. Consider the mid-term elections in 2006!

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#3)

Obama has put his few skeletons out to air via his books, if there were any more Clinton would have dragged them out of the cupboard after Super Tuesday.
McCain is starting to feel the heat over ties with lobbyists and previous support for an Arizona congressman who now faces indictments for corruption. I can't see how the generational gap between McCain (already older than Reagan was when elected) and Obama isn't going to be an issue.

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#4)

Never mind about Obama being picked apart by the Republicans; two can play at that game. McCain is already running into a spot of bother over his links with lobbyists.  I have no doubt we will learn more about how clean he has been in other areas his life and politics. Its going to be close. Remember, Kennedy only won by a whisker.

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#5)

Obama is the inexperienced candidate just like Blair was the inexperienced candidate for Prime Minister in 1997?

Once Obama wins the Democratic nomination I'm sure that all the Democrats' top brains will unite around him (hopefully) to provide the support and advice needed to see off Republican attacks and (hopefully) win the White House.

If Clinton fails in Texas she should admit defeat so that the Democrats can concentrate their resources on the presidential campaign...

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#7)

Same goes if Clinton loses in Ohio......

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#8)

Inexperience will not be a factor in the November election; Obama is no more or less experienced than Bill Clinton was in 1992 or George W. Bush was in 2000 (and if you want to go a little further back, you could throw in Jimmy Carter in 1976), but they all successfully overcame that, and in Clinton and Bush's case used it to their advantage - i.e. it plays right into Obama's "change" theme.

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#9)

That's not really true - Clinton, Bush Jnr. and Carter were all Governors before they were President - they all had experience of running an executive.

Not one of the current contenders - Obama, Clinton and McCain have any experience like this.

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#10)

Sorry NorthernMonkey - being a State Governor counts for nothing in Presidential politics (except you can play the "anti-Washington-insider" card) which won't be a factor this year as both candidates will be sitting Senators, making the winner the first Senator elected to the White House since JFK in 1960.

Clinton was Governor of the Nation's poorest State, and Bush had only once travelled outside American borders before their election.  Both Bush Snr and Gore tried to use their inexperience against them, unsuccessfully.

If Obama is the Democratic nominee, this will be a contest between "more of the same" (McCain) and - obviously - "change" (Obama).  McCain will (and already is) trying to portray Obama is too inexperienced, while whoever is the Democratic nominee will portray McCain as being part of the problem not part of the solution.

One last point on experience: what difference does two years make?  I ask because Hillary only has two years more experience in the US Senate than Barack, and being First Lady of both Arkansas and the US is not, in anybody's book, experience.

Re: Obama sweeps world stakes (#6)

That Turkmenistan result cracks me up.