MO: Bellwether State Hopes for High Turnout
By Rob Stein
Missouri, where 58 delegates are at stake on the Republican side and 88 Democratic delegates are up for grabs, is one of the most competitive states for both parties.
State election officials projected that 28 percent of eligible voters would come to the polls for the state's primaries, a sharp increase from the 15 percent turnout four years ago.
In the days leading up to the voting, the state was the focus of last-minute appearances by Sen. John McCain, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.
"We do not usually play a big role in the primaries," said Jack Cardetti of the Missouri Democratic Party. "But besides the number of delegates, there's a lot symbolism in winning Missouri. We're a bellwether of American politics. We've voted for the winner every year except for 1956."
Polls showed McCain leading, with Huckabee and Romney fighting for second. On the Democratic side, Clinton and Obama are locked in a virtual tie. Obama leads in St. Louis, and among independents, young voters and African Americans. Clinton appeared to be doing better in Kansas City, and among women and older voters.
Clinton is hoping to benefit from the state being next door to Arkansas, where she has deep roots. Obama is hoping to attract more independent voters and even some Republicans. On the Republican side, McCain is also going after independent voters, while Huckabee is popular in the southwestern part of the state -- home to many evangelical Christians.
While the winner of the Republican primary will take all 58 of the state's delegates, the Democrats allocate their delegates on a proportional basis. Forty-seven of the delegates will be awarded according to how well the candidates do in each of nine congressional districts while 25 will be awarded based on the statewide vote.
Sixteen will be unpledged.
Obama picked up endorsements from three members of the state's congressional delegation and Clinton picked up one. Gov. Matt Blunt and House Speaker Rodd Jetton endorsed Romney. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch endorsed Obama and McCain while the Kansas City Star endorsed Clinton.
Posted at 6:09 PM ET on Feb 4, 2008
Share This:
Technorati
| Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This

Get This Widget >>

Posted by: Chicago1 | February 6, 2008 1:14 AM
My letter to earth-loving Democrats:
Well it's almost time now. Here's my quivering argument for whatever it counts.
Let's first perspectify the Clinton legacy. Obama supporters are very tearful about Clinton's affair with Lewinsky and his hurtful lying. There are politicians, you know, who are both, pristine in private life and make competent presidents. Let's take a historical shot at this Audacity of Hope. JFK was a serial philanderer, poking every hole in sight. He gave us Bay of Piglets and near Apocalypto. Then, LBJ fatally perpetuated Vietnam. Nixon - criminal. Carter - exquisitely incompetent. Reagan of soaring national debt/Iran Contra/S&L crises. George Recession Sr - no, he was in bed only with the Saudis. Then, Bill Clinton. Wipe away the scum thrown at your faces by the republican propaganda, and if you attained puberty a bit before 90s, you will see quite easily, Bill Clinton's were the best presidential years in recent history. Who compares?
Let's get to near history and Hillary's vote for the Iraq war resolution. Our country had just been devastatingly attacked. Such was the patriotism that a Democratic Senator who left most of his body parts in the fields of Vietnam was knocked out of the senate for not being patriotic enough! 29 Democratic senators voted for the resolution. Many of them, like Kerry, were finally persuaded that the vote will be used primarily for getting Saddam Hussein to come clean. They might not have trusted him. Bush was going to war anyway. Only, we might have given Republicans a 60 vote senate. Friends, Hillary Haters, Monday Morning Quarterbacks, Backseat Drivers, what would have happened then?
Meanwhile, on a hilltop, far away from the battlefield, there was a Senator in the safe confines of a very blue state. His state not devastated like New York. Sears Tower still towering. He made a fine anti-war speech. Simultaneously, he was lustily voting Present in his state legislature instead of taking a stand on radioactive issues to avoid providing propaganda material to the Republicans. Political expediency, it's called. Clinton haters are very intimate with this phrase. If Obama had to be politically expedient in the Bluest of Blue states, what, you must think, he would have done in the jingoistic pressure cooker of the 2002/03 senate? When we did not know where and when again we might be hit again. One anti-war commentary given from the distant, safe, liberal confines of IL should not a president make!
Predictably, once Obama was in Senate, his voting was identical to democrats like Clinton. He raised no hell, showed no leadership. Why should he? You see, voting against war funding is a somewhat unpopular thing. You can't do that and hope to become President. And you can't just say Present, you know. You have to vote.
So now we have a tight race. Hillary might very well lose. No doubt, Hillary supporters will have to show up.
Obama supporters also feel about his electability. Good night, good luck and sweet dreams. We wouldn't let Hillary lay a hand on Obama. No, we must be all tea/coffee only. If you criticize - you are racist. Dearest, I am going to go out on a very dangerous limb here. I have a feeling, Republicans won't be so sensitive. No, I think they will have a thing or two to say about that. *Despite* all the hype, Obama is not doing dramatically better than Hillary against McCain. How will it look after Republicans have worked him over? To those who insist that our gem, Obama is still unknown - he has spent aver $120 million dollar introducing himself. Media has been all ga-ga about him. Can it really get better for him? You know, Fox, i.e., conservative media won't keep giving him a pass. They won't mind asking him about his drug use. Pox on them but they will - and much more. Though, in my personal opinion they ought not to bother with that. McCain's strong, maverick character and years of experience will be quite enough. To a left of center and right of MoveOn org type of a person like me, when I put Obama next to McCain, I see a shrub next to a Titan. Obama's experience? He has organized in Chicago - shame on me if I deny him that. In a general election, Comrades, that only works if the public has a seizure while rolling on the floor in laughter. Bird flu, global warming have nothing on the effect Obama's record-setting lack of experience might have on the general population.
No, wrong, I am not a purple Democrat. I thought Howard Dean was a better candidate than Al Gore/John Kerry. I was devastated when he was knocked out because he dared to be emotional/spontaneous. He had such a strong executive experience but the media didn't like his laughter. He had no style. In America we must have Style.
I doubt if an undecided voter comes all the way here. And I don't have the Audacity of Hope to believe I can make any impression on those who love Obama. But try I must.
Posted by: vishalg_99 | February 4, 2008 8:31 PM
Wow johnycheng1:
I see you are another HIGHLY ingnorant person that thinks people only vote based on race. If I had a dime for every ignorant comment I respond to, Bill Gates would be doing my dishes.
Posted by: mev47 | February 4, 2008 7:34 PM
Clinton, obama, and mccain are the most evil politician ever. THe country is brainwashed by the media's choice for a president that align the media corporation agenda of global genocide. These candidates will wage worldwar against all civilizations. Their proven record of voting for an illegal invasion and genocide of the iraq people proves them guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. American civilians will be the ones who will pay for the charges of war in the long run. Vote for CHANGE CYNTHIA MCKINNEY
and visit her growing supporter base http://mckinney2008.com, she represents social justice and will not tolerate illegal abuses of political power and war profiteering corporations. The obama, clinton and mccain are the same people getting donations from the same war machine. They will stop at nothing in destroying the american way. Our constitution is set aside for proceucution of politician for treason for less crimes. These evil politicians have destroyed are american way and made the world hate our country forever. We must NOT ELECT the same war mongers but instead display justice and imprison the evildoers who voted for an illegal war and genocide and murder of over one million innocent iraq civilians. We must stop their campaign and demand real change and NEW GOVERNMENT! NOW!
Posted by: impeachment | February 4, 2008 7:03 PM
Campaign Diaries has a round-up of all the latest polls from the race, and they are many. In particular, the latest poll from Missouri has good news for Clinton. Full roundup: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/02/poll-roller-coaster-continues-with-susa.html
Posted by: campaigndiaries | February 4, 2008 7:02 PM
Here's the current National Weather Service prediction for St. Louis on Tuesday:
"Tuesday: Occasional showers and thunderstorms. Some of the storms could produce heavy rain. Temperature rising to near 54 by 9am, then falling to around 46 during the remainder of the day. North wind between 6 and 10 mph. Chance of precipitation is 90%.
"Tuesday Night: Rain likely, mixing with snow after midnight. Cloudy, with a low around 29. North wind between 11 and 15 mph. Chance of precipitation is 70%. New snow accumulation of less than a half inch possible."
Not what you would call likely to inspire a high turn out overall.
Posted by: fmichaels | February 4, 2008 7:01 PM
When chips are down,it is the dependable old folks we can count on. I think Hillary can win the whold thing by tomorrow night, with most of the women,whites, latinos, and asians.Obama can still get 100% votes of the African-American votes and lose the election/
Posted by: johnycheng1 | February 4, 2008 6:56 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.

Is it racist that 95% of Illinois Africa-American voters voted for Obama? Yes, that's what I thought.
Missouri: not the bellwether anymore. Not enough Latinos.