Caucus 2008:

Now we’re the epicenter

Culinary gives Obama big advantage, but Clinton also has ammunition

Wed, Jan 9, 2008 (10:55 p.m.)

Chris Morris

The presidential campaign moved to Nevada on Wednesday, as Democratic operatives rushed to the state, money flowed to TV stations for advertising, and staff and volunteers fanned out in search of votes for the Jan. 19 caucus.

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton arrives in Nevada today to rally supporters; details of the visit weren’t immediately available.

U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley endorsed Clinton on Wednesday. But the day offered a bigger lift to the campaign of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who received the endorsement of the Culinary Workers Local 226, a 60,000-strong union of Strip casino workers who could well decide the winner of the Nevada caucus. With the endorsement came voters, organizational muscle and new strength among Latinos, who make up a large portion of the union’s membership.

Obama arrives Friday to accept the endorsement.

The infusion of good news for Obama follows his surprising defeat by Clinton in Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary. Her victory left her resurgent heading into the Nevada caucus.

Clinton is now the protagonist in a new national narrative. Although it’s not clear why so many New Hampshire voters turned to Clinton, obliterating Obama’s double-digit lead in the polls, what is known is that in the final 48 hours, she revealed new emotion and fire and openness to the press and public. She also created a contrast, accurate or not, with Obama: He’s a talker, I’m a doer.

That story, of Clinton peeling off her mask, and landing jabs on the Obama resume, will be told and told again in the coming days. Observers also will also dissect Obama’s failure to win votes in New Hampshire with the working-class corps of the Democratic Party.

Still, the Culinary endorsement could be decisive for Obama.

Here’s why:

Although the union is coy about how many of its members are registered to vote, the endorsement is expected to give Obama at least 10,000 supporters in the caucus, in a contest whose turnout estimates have ranged from 28,000 to 100,000.

In a caucus, supporters of a candidate literally stand together on one side of the room, demonstrating to everyone who is supporting whom. Many Strip shift workers, Culinary workers, will be voting at so-called “at-large” caucus sites on the Strip. This means Culinary members, for whom unity is a creed, will be able to enforce discipline. Clinton can no longer expect to win many delegates at those at-large sites.

The infusion of locked-down voters is only the most obvious benefit, however.

The caucus process requires participants to show up at 11:30 on the appointed morning and at the correct precinct location, which means organizations must identify supporters and ensure they show up. The Culinary is known as the most politically active and organized union in the state and one of the most active in the country. Political observers in Nevada have long assumed the union would provide the kind of organization that could deliver victory.

The Obama campaign, which has been working to win Latino voters with a sophisticated effort to woo them in their workplaces, can now do so with Culinary support and encouragement. A significant though ultimately unknown portion of Culinary membership is Latino, and the endorsement could have a prairie fire effect, spreading from workplaces to Latino homes and communities.

Finally, Culinary leadership, including Secretary-Treasurer D. Taylor and political director Pilar Weiss, are two of the most politically savvy and feared players in Nevada Democratic politics. State legislators and others are wary of crossing them.

In 2006, for example, the Culinary placed Lynette Boggs, then a Clark County commissioner the union opposed, under surveillance to prove she was not living in her district. Her opponent, with the help of Culinary volunteers walking the district, beat Boggs in a landslide.

Taylor is revered by his membership for negotiating impressive wage and benefit gains in 2002 and again last year. His mild manner disappears when he takes the stage in front of the members, when he becomes a passionate, red-faced advocate for labor and progressive values.

Clinton has advantages of her own, including a massive organization, a slew of political endorsements and momentum. Also, President Clinton won Nevada twice, and the couple is beloved by rank-and-file Democrats here.

This sudden parity between Obama and Clinton in Nevada comes after nearly a year of Clinton appearing to be the dominant force in Nevada, leading in polls and racking up political endorsements.

The early Clinton dominance was always somewhat misleading, however.

The polling has never been considered reliable because Nevada has never conducted an early presidential caucus, and so it’s largely unknown who will show up. And, it has always been assumed that the numbers would shift considerably with a victory by Obama in Iowa or New Hampshire.

Moreover, although Clinton’s political endorsements can’t be discounted, they include many from backbench state legislators whose support has never been particularly meaningful.

So now Nevada comes down to this: Who can identify supporters and get them to the caucus? Which supporters have wavered in the face of an Iowa defeat for Clinton, and a New Hampshire defeat for Obama? Will Obama capture the imagination of voters here as he did in Iowa, and, to a lesser extent, New Hampshire? Or will voters choose the longer resume of Clinton and her eight years of White House partnership? Will the presidency of Bill Clinton be a benefit, a pleasant reminder of a more prosperous and peaceful time, or a distraction from Sen. Clinton’s promise of a better future and a reminder of her status as a veteran of the Washington establishment?

One wild card in the coming week will be a debate among Democratic candidates Tuesday in Las Vegas. A debate three days before the New Hampshire vote may have helped change the dynamic there in Clinton’s favor.

Although Clinton and Obama are largely in agreement on most important issues, including universal health care, energy independence and finding a way out of Iraq, Clinton is considered both more centrist and more partisan.

A final question is what role John Edwards will play. The former senator from North Carolina placed a distant third in New Hampshire, but he’s an effective campaigner and has a sizable group of supporters, a big Nevada staff and the endorsement of the 12,500-member carpenters union. He has hammered Clinton in recent months as the candidate of the status quo, but his message of change could take votes from Obama, who is driving the same theme.

All of this is unfolding as a race that appeared a week ago to be a mixed martial arts brawl fast, furious and decisive has turned instead into a lengthy chess match of state-by-state contests.

With the Culinary endorsement, the Obama team surely sees victory in its grasp here. It would then have momentum going into South Carolina on Jan. 26, where half the voters are black and in the past week have moved quickly into the Obama column. If Obama racked up two victories, he would have momentum going into Feb. 5, when 22 states, including California, Illinois, New Jersey and New York, will hold primaries. He’d also have money and political support.

The Clinton team, before Tuesday’s surprise, had been urging reporters to look ahead to Feb. 5, which it thought would deliver national victory to Clinton.

Now, with a New Hampshire victory, Clinton will no doubt want to continue her momentum here and in South Carolina to finish off Obama before then.

Nevada, welcome to presidential politics.

Discussion: 13 comments so far…

By JackKennedy

1/10/08 at 6:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hillary Clinton is the best candidate to be the next President. Nevada voters could help the nation by giving Hillary a solid vote of confidence in the caucus.

Mrs. Clinton has a global view and is right with the many inmportant issues of the day. She has a vast amount of unique experience. She is battle-tested and an agent of change.

Nevada can help make important history with the first female president with the right credentials to do an outstanding job at the White House.

This Kennedy endorses Hillary Clinton for President.
By stanjz

1/10/08 at 8:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

The 22nd amendment isn’t there to prevent power to an individual as much as that individual working in concert with established government connections. Having political connections in Florida and the Supreme Court certainly didn’t hurt our current President in his 2000 victory over Al Gore. In practicality, George Bush’s second term was a third term for his immediate family and a violation of the purpose of the 22nd amendment. Hillary Clinton’s election would violate the same principle. Power does accrue from husband to wife. This lust for power is against what this nation stands for.
By Maite

1/11/08 at 7:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clinton has taken $567,950 from lobbyists. Obama has taken $76,859. Who do you think will stand with the unions, Clinton, beholden to corporations, or Obama, who has walked picket lines with union members?
By efranklin

1/11/08 at 7:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

To echo stanjz, America will not support a continuation of the Bush/Clinton dynasty. Can anyone recall the last time an ex-President went on a tirade against a candidate during a primary election!? How ironic for that to come from President Bill Clinton, who has been labeled the first African-American President. The message here is, the Clintons have a passion to help minorities and those in need as long as they are not threatening their strangle hold on power and influence.
By bwilliam46

1/11/08 at 7:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

That's very well-put, efranklin. I really like these excerpts from Camille Paglia on Hillary's nasty nature:
"Their [the Clintons] actual political accomplishments are fairly slight. The obsessive need to keep campaigning may mean a president Hillary would go right on spewing the bitterly partisan rhetoric that has already paralyzed Washington. "

and the answer to the 'experience' issue:
"Obama has served longer as an elected official than Hillary. He has had experience as a grass-roots activist, and he is also a highly educated lawyer ..."
By plastictree

1/11/08 at 10:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

It's really disheartening to see nothing but Hillary and Obama covered as if they were the only two democratic candidates. Maybe I'm just old fashioned but I always thought journalists were supposed to try and cover things equally and let the public decide who they want. It seems that we always hear political pundits saying "the race isn't over yet" and "voters haven't made up their minds", yet the vast majority of coverage from the very beginning has been on these two candidates, and which of them has the best strategy to win. I realize that reporters get wrapped up in the horse race of it all, but that particular part of this whole process is probably the least helpful to those of us who haven't figured out who we want to vote for yet. As a longtime reader of the Sun, it would be nice to see some more coverage with depth-- involving the issues if possible.
By kindacurious

1/11/08 at 12:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

The culinary union is wise to endorse Obama. Hillary would further divide our country and sell us out to the highest bidder. We don't need to continue the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton corruption.
By NewYorker

1/11/08 at 12:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

Obama is the man for the job. Hilary has been bought out by Insurance Companies, The Coal Lobby, and Health Care Companies. Do you think they gave her millions and didn’t expect anything in return? Nevada needs to send a message to this country and the media which have tried to write Obama off. He is still leading in the polls, and he can win the election. Vote Obama.
By lvdream

1/11/08 at 2:01 p.m.

(Removed by the site staff)
By texex

1/11/08 at 2:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

It's as simple as ABC: Anybody But Clinton.

And as far as registered voters goes, Desert Beacon has the latest figures: http://desertbeacon.blogspot.com/2008/01.... Also at the NVSOS site: http://www.nvsos.gov/elections/voter-reg....

Despite the lies Chair Derby has been putting out, Nevada remains a purple state, neither blue or red. The greatest gain in registered voters %-wise belongs to the Non-Partisans which increased 22.6% since '06. Dems outnumber repugs by a mere 0.4% but Non-p's represent 15.2%.

If HRC doesn't win here by double digits, she will be toast going into SC. As usual it's going to be the nonpartisans that determine Nevada. I'm betting she turns off more than she turns on and it comes out either a dead heat or a small BO win.
By rose

1/11/08 at 8:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

If Hillary and those other cowardly Democrats hadn't voted for the war,4000 families would not have lost their son,daughter,brother,sister,wife husband,and thousands of soldiers would not be in the hospital,some without their limbs!!

Those billions of dollars that are spent on the war each month,could have been to fix schools,help people with their insurance,help kids with their college education and to help people hold on to their home.
By ADR

1/11/08 at 11:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

One thing-I'm shocked that no one is talking about Hillary's weakness in a general election. 60% of Democrats don't like her-Republicans are begging to run against her-can you imagine a bigger Republican turn out, and the weakest Democratic turnout in modern times? Visit politico.com, read up, she is alienating every Democratic Party base- just to squeak out a narrow victory in the primaries.