Mark Penn has been pimping a survey here that says Hillary has an 18 point lead in Ohio.  I have been unable to find any information on this survey other than it supposedly surveyed 800 people and was performed by Opinion Consultants out of Columbus.  So I don't really put much stock in it at this point.

However, outside of the Cleveland and Columbus areas, I think Obama has a definite uphill battle in the rest of the state.  Ohioans, generally speaking, are very conservative, mainstream type people.  They are slow to accept things which are perceived to be out of the ordinary.  There will most definitely be an advantage to Hillary out of the gate, I think,  because there is a comfort factor due to her seemingly "mainstream" Democratic bonafides.  Obama's sudden rocketing to stardom is liable to be a little unsettling to many Ohio Democrats, who are used to working "inside the box".  So Obama is going to have provide a lot of face time on the ground here in Ohio to develop a sense among the electorate that he is not some radical new model of Democrat.  One with which they have no familiarity and who they will wonder if the can trust. He has the charisma to pull this off, but it is going to take a lot of work.

Ohioans like their candidates plain and easy to understand.  If there was a state color here in Ohio, it would definitely be beige.

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

I basically agree with your general assessments of the races but I disagree with some of your Meta and I wouldn't conclude that he's the prohibitive favorite.  At all.  He has big advantages.  He has more cash and a better ability to raise cash.  He has a better on the ground organization and the rest of the schedule will allow that to be useful.  But I still see the advantage to Hillary based on her ability to carry Texas and Ohio.

Here's where I disagree:

1.  February Caucuses/Primaries - through Wisconsin.  

   Hillary will soldier on even if she loses them all.  She has no reason to drop out with Ohio and Texas coming up.  Forget delegate counts at that point - Ohio and Texas have enough delegates to put her right back on the map.

   On the other hand, even with a majority of wins and a majority of delegates it might not be enough for Obama.  He needs to outperform in order to have a shot at Ohio and/or Texas.  No matter how far ahead he is in delegates, it can be wiped out for all practical purposes if he loses Texas and Ohio big.  And in order to have any kind of shot of winning Texas and Ohio he needs to look inevitable coming into those races.  So I think there's much more pressure on Obama to win them all but especially whichever State Hillary decides to take him on in. (Virginia?) He needs a significant victory over her in a contested state  

2.  Ohio and Texas.   He's unlikely to win either of them and if he doesn't win at least one I don't see him winning the nomination. Hillary is going to put her all into these states, she's going for big wins not just in delegates but in popular vote.  A big win in both states puts her right back in the drivers' seat.  And if they end up close in delgates at the end I don't see him convincing the superdelegates to go his way if he hasn't carried at least one big state. Instead, they will push back against him and want him to agree to be VP.

 Now, I have no idea how he wins either Texas or Ohio, but he needs to figure it out.  He needs to cut into her lead in women and he needs to not concede the Texas Latino vote to her.  I don't however know how he will do that.

Winning Vermont and Rhode Island means nothing to him at that point if he loses in both Ohio and TExas.   (And right now it looks like he will lose both - but let's let him run his campaign and see how things change.)  

If, however, he runs the table in the leadup to 3/4 with at least one victory over Clinton in a hotly contested state AND wins either Ohio or Texas , then I think he's got it.  Anything less means at best he's still playing catchup to Hillary or he's done (if he loses big in Texas and Ohio).  Because ...

3.  Pennsylvania -  the last big prize favors Hillary.  If she wins Texas and Ohio she will win Pennsylvania. She may not be able to clinch delegates but she will look the winner and that's what will count with the superdelegates.

He's in a tough position.  Her whole strategy is Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania.  She'll spend time in Wisconsin and Virgina.  He has to spend time everywhere.  

One last thing ... and I think this is potentially a huge advantage to him, her ability to run a nasty campaign against him is limited by the fact that if she wins she's going to need him badly and there will be significant pressure for him to be the VP.  

Also published in orange.

I read some speculation somewhere, wish I could remember where, that Hillary is running out of cash and has started putting Clinton family money into her campaign. Anyone else hear any of this, and does anyone think there's anything to it?

Also, regarding Penn & Ohio, both states have low numbers of Latino's and 10-12% are African-Americans. Obama needs to make inroads with White voters (which he seems to be doing), and if he does, these states are ripe for the picking.

It's happening. Obama has the most delegates by virtue of your votes, our citizens. But Hillary has the lead in total delegates, 783-709. How is that possible? Because of a bunch of Democratic party officials got together and decided that they prefer Hillary, so they gave her the lead in spite of the fact that you, the voters, gave Obama the lead.

Who says Republicans are the only ones who know how to steal elections?

Hillary has got to be fresh out of funds right now.  Got to be.  She didn't deliver the knockout blow to Obama. If not, she's probably wondering whether her money is going to hold out until the end of primary season. Bill cannot raise any more from those with deep pockets--legally.  Look for her to go really desperate, greasing palms with promises if not cash.  The only way that she could stem the onrushing flood is to win big in some of these next contests.

The more super/delegates Obama gets, the less these guys will be able to dictate who the nominee will be, even if Obama is in the lead.  Meanwhile, small donors will continue to stock Obama's larder if he doesn't begin to peak.

An untypical Negro

http://thisblksistaspage.wordpress.com

This all sounds really good, but I'll breathe easier when we start seeing polling data from the various states supporting this roadmap to victory.  Extrapolating - such as from Alabama and Georgia to Louisiana - is a little bit too "hand waving" an argument given everything that can change in the next month.  To me, the strongest evidence that Obama is on the road to victory is the money issue.  Even the Clintons ain't gonna win without it.

Ecological collapse is already happening. Your resentment of the word doesn't change the fact that it is occurring.

BooMeister,

You've been doing some neat analysis lately, and I like your overall take above, with one important caveat.

There is very little reason to expect Clinton to back out regardless of the pressure she'll face after the next couple of weeks or so.  First off, I'm not so sure the pressure really will be all that great given the Traditional Media narrative that favors Clinton staying in as long as possible.  There will be precious little hard truth coming from our big media friends over the next month or so.

Next, you mention her chances in Ohio and Texas. I can't see her even thinking about giving in until these two big states have their say. She can win both states. I hope she doesn't, but based on polling today, she can.

It's like the dude over on the rec list at DKos with his statement of `Obama is only behind 10 points in Texas, so he'll win there for sure!'. I know it's exciting and all, but being 10 points back does not equal an automatic win.

So, no matter what she sticks through to March 4th. And I suspect beyond even if she only has a small chance to win. This is her time at the plate - she won't give up after strike two and several runs down. She'll take it all the way to the bitter end, or much closer to it than you suggest above. She won't bow out until April 23 at the earliest, IMMHO.

All said - go Obama!

If it's about the people, then Obama is right, we are the people we've been waiting for.

How many friends have you called or emailed to make sure Obama gets his fair share of representation?

In WA state, we're the only state that has both the caucus & the primary. Most regular folks, especially the set I've called that are new to the Dem party, don't realize that unlike the Rep party here, the primary votes DON'T count. So they've all be sheepishly mailing in their newly minted Obama votes, thinking they don't have to attend a caucus.

For WA voters, this could add up to a sizeable count.
 

1.Do we know ANYTHING about the racial makeup of Louisiana democrats now, following the Katrina diaspora? Citing the number from 2004 doesn't strike me as terribly reliable.

2. Why are you saying that HRC doesn't have much chance at VA? You didn't give any analysis here -- you just declared it so.

3.I think your analysis very much overplays the value of endorsements. If last night's results showed us anything, it's that even high-profile endorsements (assorted Kennedys, Kerry, Shriver) appear to account for diddly-squat in people's voting patterns.

4.PA (which is where I live) has the 2nd highest percentage of elderly residents in the country (right after FL). I do not know what % of them are eligible to vote in the Democratic primary, but you are talking about Hillary's top demographic here. That alone is going to make PA somewhat difficult for Obama.

Mind you, I'm a fellow Obama supporter, so I'd love to believe your analysis -- as long as we can believe it isn't mixed with Kool-Aid.

Interesting analysis

I have not heard an explanation for why Obama kicks butt in caucuses. Why do you think it is so?

This was an interesting analysis, Booman, enough to draw me out from lurking at DKos to dust off my account here and cross post my own analysis from Docudharma.  You've been doing good work this campaign season, both in your objective and pro-Obama modes.

Now, here's where you're wrong.  ;7)

First, I would like Obama to ratchet down expectations substantially for the Washington caucuses, because Hillary has what machinery exists, it's her only play, and even though it's a caucus and everyone thinks Obama should win, she's going to put her chips there and he's likely to lose.  She should be considered the favorite there, and I say that in both my objective and pro-Obama mode (though in the latter I'm a little louder.)  Obama has to learn to lower expectations better.

Second, all you're going to be hearing from Hillary during these next three weeks of contests is that she just wants to stay competitive in them while she focuses on the big prizes (and they are that) of Ohio and Texas.  There is no plausible way she drops out before then, regardless of what happens in Wisconsin.  "It's a race for delegates and I'm going to clean up on March 4" is what you'll hear.  And she'll argue, convincingly, that the small races after that don't matter, as she looks ahead to Pennsylvania.  If Obama wins 60% of the delgates between now and March 4, that still gives him only a net gain of 120, most of which will be lost in Ohio and Texas.

No one is going to be able to talk Hillary and her husband into dropping out before Pennsylvania.

Third, assuming that she wins Texas and Ohio, which is likely, then even if she wins nowhere else she is likely to win Pennsylvania, which is old, working class, and suspicious.  She'll have the Mayors and Governor working on her behalf.  After that primary, expect the delegate counts to be roughly equal.

Finally, all of the above mean that you absolutely do have to look at the post April 22 primaries, which are a mixed bag.  The critical day is probably May 6, and the critical primary is North Carolina.  If Obama does well there and in Indiana, he may get far enough into a delegate lead where you can hear rumblings of superdelegates going her way.  But I think that Obama will do well in Oregon and Clinton will do very well in Puerto Rico.  The mystery to me is Kentucky.  Like North Carolina, it borders Tennessee, which Clinton won by 13, but this time he'll have time to focus on it.  That's the best thing he has going for him, that he grows on people.

And then, of course, there is the wild card.  Expect nominating conventions (or some other sort of mechanism) in Michigan and Florida -- my guess is June 7 if a caucus or convention and June 10 if a primary -- as the Dems realize that they can neither seat the previously selected delegates nor ignore these states in the runup to November.  That works to Hillary's advantage, possibly decisively.  Obama's best hope is for Edwards and Gore to finally come out and endorse him.  But the prospect that those states will re-enter the mix is another reason that Hillary won't drop out until she's mathematically eliminated or humiliated, neither of which is likely before the convention.

Obama-Gore 2008. Broker that!