Help !!! - Anybody Have A Legitimate\Current Poll For Maine ???

[WillyT]

The few places I've looked, the last poll was taken in October, and has Clinton 46%, and Obama 10%.

That is reflected here (move cursor over map of Maine): http://www.electoral-vote.com/

That was also, like a century ago, LOL!

I posted an article yesterday: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4503013&mesg_id=4503013

That wondered about Maine polling as well.

Any Mainiacs know what the deal is???

:shrug:

[Zywiec]

1. Why not just wait a few hours for the results? n/t

[WillyT]

3. Cause I'm A Political Junkie And Want My Fix Now ???

:shrug:

[democrattotheend]

24. Me too!

I'm hungry for polls!

[HughMoran]

4. I was thinking the same

Relax dude!

[MADem]

2. Caucus state. All bets are off. The candidate with the most "organizers" wins.

It has NOTHING to do with popular support.

[Windy]

6. what the hell are you talking about. If the majority of the caucus votes for a candidate then that

candidate wins. Hillary people don't like the fact that in a caucus, people have the opportunity to advocate for their candidate which my cause some voters to have a change of heart.

It is ALL about popular support!

[MADem]

10. Yeah, right. Who's disenfranchised in a caucus environment?

People who have to WORK at their JOBS and can't get time off--shift workers, cashiers, cabbies, convenience store workers, gas station attendants, any store that's open has DISENFRANCHISED people working in it.

Public safety officials, cops, firemen, staties, doctors, nurses, hospital workers.

People who are sick, elderly, in hospital, housebound, handicapped, unable to travel due to sickness or lack of transportation.

People who are out of state due to business, vacation, a family emergency.

Members of the military who are deployed.

Popular support, my ass. Only someone who doesn't know the system would even SAY that.

It's a system that is designed to give "activists" an excessive amount of influence, and it fucks those who don't have the time to stand around for hours. Or who are not physically present in the state.

But you go on and call it "popular." It's popular amongst a very SMALL minority of registered voters who attend.

[skooooo]

11. There are plenty of people from all walks of life...

...who don't work on Saturday. If they don't show up, they don't show up.

[MADem]

13. And there are plenty who DO have to work .

The caucus system disenfranchises. And it discriminates against Americans with Disabilities.

There ARE no absentee ballots in the caucus system. If you are handicapped and unable to be moved without an ambulance coming and attendants at your side, you can't voice your opinion in a caucus. You can with an absentee ballot in a primary, though.

If you're working at the firehouse on a 24, you can't participate. If you're a cop on duty, you're out. If you have to drive that cab to feed your kids, you are screwed. If you're out of state due to a family illness, or because you're stuck in Iraq, you're fucked.

But all these people could participate in a primary, with an absentee ballot.

"If they don't show up, they don't show up"....because they have to WORK.

That's quite telling, though, that comment.

:eyes:

[skooooo]

20. Representation.

You mean the Hillary people really couldn't turn out any voters? Is that what you mean? If a candidate has the majority support, then the majority will turn out and support them. That's what happened in Washington yesterday. Obama's support was overwhelming, and it was just from "rich people" it was from all walks of life.

[MADem]

33. She was working the primary states--to good effort, too. She didn't waste money in

the caucus states, particularly the ones that aren't going to vote for the Democrat in the general election anyway.

Obama has a very good organization in those caucus states and those red states, but they are not going to help in the general--they just aren't, no matter how much people insist that red is gonna turn blue--those real reddies are gonna stay that way. He has a shitload of paid operatives that go from state to state organizing at the grassroots level. It's expensive, but it's been reasonably effective.

Clinton's strategy has been to concentrate on states where people actually vote on a ballot. It's more cost-effective if one makes it to the general, because if people have voted for you in the primary, they're going to revalidate their (to them, clever and prescient) choice in the general. You don't have to go back and "re-sell" them. She has also concentrated on blue states, because odds are good they'll stay blue. Obama has won a couple of blue states, Washington being one of them, IL being another, but dreamy reliance him eking out a victory on the hope that red states will be magically turning blue is a pipe dream.

[WillyT]

14. Um... Can't These Folks Vote Absentee ???

<snip>

AUGUSTA, Maine—Maine Democrats were met by some old fashioned New England weather as they headed to municipal caucuses Sunday to declare whether they favor Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama as their party's presidential nominee.

The Maine preference voting came a day after Obama picked up ground on Clinton with wins in Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington and the after he and Clinton made personal appeals to Maine audiences for their support.

Democrats from 420 Maine towns and cities were deciding how the state's 24 delegates will be allotted at the party's national convention in August.

Democrats had expected heavy participation at the caucuses, but up to 8 inches of snow were expected across much of the state with Arctic cold when many of the gatherings were scheduled. Even so, the Democrats started Sunday with more than 4,000 absentee ballots in hand.

Party Executive Director Arden Manning said the weather wouldn't hurt caucus turnout.

"We live in Maine, we deal with snow all time," Manning said. "I can't imagine snow's going to keep people at home and keep them from having their voices heard."

<snip>

Link: http://www.boston.com/news/local/maine/articles/2008/02/10/wintry_weather_greets_maine_democratic_caucus_goers/

:shrug:

[skooooo]

18. Never heard of a caucus that counted ballots.

Caucuses are about bodies being present to be counted.

[MADem]

47. There are two. Maine and NM.

They call themselves caucuses, but you actually go and vote. They're closer to primaries than caucuses, like Iowa, where you stand around for an hour or two and employ peer pressure to choose a candidate.

[MADem]

19. ME is an aberration. Most caucus contests do not permit absentee ballots.

I speak of the caucus system in general. It is an exercise for ACTIVISTS, it is not a "popular" contest.

One person, one ballot, one vote, one ballot box. That's an election. Anything else is just an exercise in peer pressure and organizational skills.

[chascarrillo]

22. Correct. Democratic Party activists choose the nominee of the Democratic Party.

I fail to see the problem here?

[MADem]

34. Yeah. Fuck those registered voters, anyway!!!!!! Fuck 'em!

Especially the ones who have to work for a living!!!!!

:sarcasm:

You're SOMETHING!

[WillyT]

26. Except That Primaries And Caucuses Are Different Than An Actual Election...

I totally agree with... "One person, one ballot, one vote, one ballot box." for the General Election. In an election, you are put into office within the government. With Primaries\Caucuses, your party (National\State\Local), playing by predetermined, and agreed upon rules, is deciding who to put INTO the actual election for that office.

I'm not completely thrilled with some of the processes either, but it is what it is for this election season. All changes need to by made and ratified AFTER this year's GE is over.

:shrug:

[MADem]

29. It is not for US to tell states what to do, anyway, and I am not advocating a switch now, anyway

I am simply voicing an opinion that I think the caucus system is a joke, and it sucks.

States do have the right to choose their pick however they want. If the states wanted to just let party hacks vote, they could do it that way, and say "To hell with the pesky voters." It's actually up to them.

Remember, the popular vote DOES NOT COUNT. If it did, Big Al would be finishing up his second term.

The electoral college is what does it for us.

[lse7581011]

28. Yes!

We were allowed to vote absentee which I didn't realize until 2 weeks ago when I had a call from a very helpful Obama worker!

[LittleBlue]

16. Who is disenfranchised by voting machines with no paper trail?

It's like trading bottle caps for currency: there is no confidence in the system.

At least with a caucus, we know the votes are legit.

[MADem]

38. And just what does that DRAMATIC comment have to do with the CAUCUS SYSTEM?

You can fix the ballot system with paper ballots. It CAN be repaired.

You can't fix the caucus system from disenfranchising the least of our bretheren, the policeman, fireman, soldier, hospital worker, patient, elderly, and so on....

Just because votes are "legit," does not mean they're REPRESENTATIVE of the will of the people.

[Capn Sunshine]

17. All good points

yet when the Obama campaign tried to make workplace caucuses available to union workers in Las Vegas. the Clinton campaign took them to court to stop it.

I'd like to expand the caucuses to two days; it's the DLC Dems in DC that fight this tooth and nail.

[MADem]

40. And their attempt did not work, did it?

But you actually prove my point--see, the system is UNFAIR.

You could expand caucuses to a WEEK, how is that going to help the housebound, the hospitalized, or the people serving in Iraq?

It is just a SHITTY SYSTEM.

It's not up to any of us, though. States can do what they want. Some of them like this bullshit anachronism. For Iowa, it gives them "attention" and several billion dollars in income every four years. It's a set-piece of their economy.

[wellstone dem]

53. In Maine, people could caucus absentee. nt

[democrattotheend]

27. I don't buy that

Organization helps, but if people like one candidate better, that candidate is going to win. The best organization in the world can't get people out to spend 2 hours caucusing for a candidate they're not enthused about.

[MADem]

50. Organization is EVERYTHING. And it is also EXPENSIVE. NT

[papau]

5. Caucus not being held on a working class "work day" - so it favors Clinton

[Inuca]

8. NOnsense

how is SUnday so different from Saturday???

[papau]

52. Turns out you are correct - the poorer folks are working 7 days a week

[MADem]

12. Not really. Those poorer people are more likely to have to work a weekend shift.

The latte drinking, wine sipping, hundred grand and up Obama supporters don't have to work a "shift" at the Target or the KMART on Sunday.

They work nine to five from Monday through Friday.

[FrenchieCat]

15. Why would the poorest support the Corporate candidate?

and why would the latte "set" support the man that came to us after working on the South Side of Chicago for 3 years when he could have been elsewhere?

Name recognition for those who are too busy trying to survive and have good memories of the last Clinton in office and feel that she is a "safe" choice when they have more to lose....

Versus a candidate that those who are able to take the time out to research thoroughly have come to support understanding that he is a superior candidate.

The Poorest of candidates will be voting against their best interest in voting Clinton, or they will find out that Barack is one of them soon enough and will be changing their votes. The ones that have compared the two on policies and electability will not be changing their votes to Hillary.

I therefore give Obama the edge once voters are fully informed...which is why he has been winning the caucuses....where one has to actually listen to the pros and cons of each candidate prior to casting a vote.

[MADem]

25. Because the poor have actually looked at the issues, and not bought the BS hype.

You do your own homework. That's how it breaks down. Johnny and Jane Paycheck go for Clinton, because her policies, from health care to 'It's The Economy, Stupid' favor them. Clinton is way better on UNION issues than Obama. She's also more specific on economic growth and incentives.

Fine Whine and Latte Limo Libs, and counterculture college kids (and those who can't admit they aren't teenagers anymore) come down for Obama, who is less "precise" on his goals for the nation. You just have that epiphany, and vote for him...never mind the details, you just take it on faith that he's "different."

You can't heat your house with Hope, and you can't feed your kids with Change. People who work for a living know that.

[democrattotheend]

31. Which union issues?

I've never heard Obama take credit for his work in a White House that was responsible for NAFTA.

Obama never served on the board of Walmart.

And btw, I'm white collar and I drink wine (though usually on the cheaper end), and I work damn hard to earn a living, so I really resent your characterizations.

[democrattotheend]

32. So African Americans don't work for a living?

Or have they just "bought the hype", rather than being as smart as white and Latino poor people who have "looked at the issues".

[MADem]

36. Yeah, the zillions in Iowa....

Please. Look at the ethnic breakdown of these caucus states, why don't you?

But hey, way to pull out and play that race card! Wasted almost NO time, either!

[democrattotheend]

45. Sorry

You're right, what I said was below the belt. But I was pretty offended by your classification of Obama supporters, including myself.

[MADem]

46. All I was doing is reflecting the polling information. I am not pulling it out of my hat.

If you want to be offended, be offended at the media and the pollsters, and by reality, not me. What I said is fact--if you want to divide it simplistically, the rich(er) are supporting Obama, the poor(er) are supporting Clinton:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/08/EDE3UU6GA.DTL

The Democrats' class war
David Sirota, Creators Syndicate, Inc.

Friday, February 8, 2008

For all the hype about generational and gender wars in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, we have a class war on our hands. And incredibly, corporate America's preferred candidate is winning the poorer "us" versus the wealthier "them"...In most states, polls show Hillary Clinton is beating Barack Obama among voters making $50,000 a year or less - many of whom say the economy is their top concern. Yes, the New York senator who appeared on the cover of Fortune magazine as Big Business's candidate is winning economically insecure, lower-income communities over the Illinois senator who grew up as an organizer helping those communities combat unemployment. This absurd phenomenon is a product of both message and bias.

Obama has let Clinton characterize the 1990s as a nirvana, rather than a time that sowed the seeds of our current troubles. He barely criticizes the Clinton administration for championing job-killing trade agreements. He does not question that same administration's role in deregulating the financial industry and thereby intensifying today's boom-bust catastrophes. And he rarely points out what McClatchy Newspapers reported this week: that Clinton spent most of her career at a law firm "where she represented big companies and served on corporate boards," including Wal-Mart's.

Obama hasn't touched any of this for two reasons.

First, his campaign relies on corporate donations. Though Obama certainly is less industry-owned than Clinton, the Washington Post noted last spring that he was the top recipient of Wall Street contributions. That cash is hush money, contingent on candidates silencing their populist rhetoric.....And so, as Marable says, Obama's pitch includes "no mention of the class struggle or class conflict." It is "hope" instead of an economic case, bromide instead of critique. The result is an oxymoronic dynamic.

Obama, the person who fought blue-collar joblessness in the shadows of shuttered factories, is winning wealthy enclaves. But Clinton, the person whose globalization policies helped shutter those factories, is winning blue-collar strongholds.

Obama, who was schooled by the same organizing networks as Cesar Chavez, is being endorsed by hedge fund managers. But Clinton, business's favorite, is being endorsed by the United Farm Workers - the union that Chavez created.

Obama, the candidate from Chicago's impoverished South Side, is finding support on Connecticut's gilded south coast. But Hillary Clinton, the candidate representing Big Money, is finding support from those with relatively little money.

As the campaign heads to the struggling Rust Belt under banners promising "change," this bizarre class war may end up guaranteeing no real transformation at all.

[democrattotheend]

51. I know the polls say Obama is winning upper income voters

But the way you classified his supporters was pretty offensive.

[MADem]

54. Well, you're easily offended then. NT

[MADem]

55. Well, you're easily offended then. NT

[FrenchieCat]

44. I don't believe what you are saying......

Both have detailed policy papers, and I note that it is Hillary who continuously changes her campaign stump speech to incorporate Obama's approach. I listened to her today, and I am not deaf as to the fact that she is doing this.

Johnny and Jane Paycheck, in the majority, are going with Clinton because they don't know Obama as well and they believe Hillary to be a "safe" candidate.

That has been borne out over and over again. Once they learn of Obama's biography, and the work that he has done in behalf of the Democratic party ideals, they will realize, and rightfully so, that it is not Hillary and her

NAFTA support,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/hillary-clinton-nafta-_b_71544.html


her unapologetic pro IWR vote, against the Levin Amendment, and Oops! Not reading the NIE
http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html


her IRAN Resolution yes vote,
http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/10/25/hillary-clinton%E2%80%99s-bad-iran-vote/


her Bankruptcy vote
http://jinchi.blogspot.com/2007/03/hillary-clinton-and-bankruptcy-bill-of.html


her voting against banning Cluster Bomb
http://www.atlargely.com/2008/02/clinton-vs-obam.html


Her Children Left Behind vote
http://www.bluebloggin.com/2008/02/03/clinton-hypocracy-no-child-left-behind/

Her lack of policies specifically on poverty
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4510484


Her ties to the Corporate world both thru her work on the Board of Wallmart,
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0207-34.htm

her lobbyst donors
http://whazgoinon.wordpress.com/2008/01/13/hillary-clinton-biggest-recipient-of-lobbyist-donations/

and inpending disasters on the millions of contribution to the Clinton library and foundations that are already been leaked out
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4473288


does not represent what these folks really truly want in their candidate

and so, until they are informed as such, Hillary simply remains their "safe" default candidate.

[MADem]

48. Well, what you believe is not important. The numbers shake out that wealthy voters favor Obama,

poorer, working class voters favor Clinton.

It's not your decision--it's theirs. And that's how it is playing out. Every demographic poll validates it. Limo libs to Obama, blue collar workers to Clinton.

[democrattotheend]

30. Nine to five?

When's the last time you visited a white collar workplace? Most people who make over $100k work much longer hours. I don't make that much, but I work in an office and usually put in at least 50 hours a week, sometimes as much as 60 (72 is my record), as do most of my colleagues. And during election season, I frequently have to work weekends.

I don't disagree with your premise that those who have shifts at Target may have a harder time participating in a caucus, but the way you classify white collar workers is pretty insulting.

[MADem]

49. I know many lawyers who take a whole day off midweek, doctors too.

They golf, usually Wednesdays or Thursdays.

Most government workers--white collars, all--are in the door at eight and out by four--they don't work a second longer than they have to.

You might work hard at your particular job, but not "everybody" does. In fact, the more people make, the less they work. When the schmuck making fifty grand is slaving away till eight at night, his boss making a quarter million is off schtuping his secretary.

The divide isn't just WHITE/Blue collar. It's wages. Under fifty grand tends to go to Clinton, over tends towards Obama. The exception is college kids who just like Obama because he's 'cool.'

I posted an article from the SF CHRON elsewhere in this thread on this subject. Here's yet another from the Chicago Trib:

This is by no means a new divide within the Democratic Party, whose economically diverse population includes Hollywood glitterati, union workers and every pay grade in between. (Think Kendall-Jackson meets Anheuser-Busch.)

But the preferences are emerging in such stark terms lately that even the Obama team may be accepting it as a difficult reality. In a memo leaked last week, Obama campaign staffers projected they were likely to lose in a handful of states -- which just happen to be heavy with blue-collar workers.

The beer-wine dynamic is not as significant as the gender divide, which is sending many female voters to Clinton's side. Still, it's an important factor as the race moves into the most competitive phase yet, in which any sliver of the electorate that sticks together might make the difference.

"His support tends to be stronger in suburban areas where you have white-collar professionals," said Brad Coker, managing director of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research. "There has always been a division among the Democratic Party among its limousine liberals and its blue-collar workers."

The party has a history of producing candidates who mesmerize better-educated, wealthier voters, fromAdlai Stevenson to Bill Bradley to Paul Tsongas. But Obama has gone well beyond them in terms of generating excitement and winning states, even among a healthy chunk of lower-income voters.

Clinton might not seem to have a natural appeal to working-class Democrats, but her husband's enduring popularity adds to her image as a fighter for ordinary people in contrast to Obama's sometimes professorial image.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-working_bdfeb10,0,1808709,print.story

[cali]

23. that's silly. Saturday is not a "work day" for most folks either. n/t

[rodeodance]

42. most of country works service jobs now--manybe every 3-4th weekend off if lucky

[rodeodance]

43. idiotcy---service workers--they do not get every weekend of --

[Life Long Dem]

7. It seems a caucus would bring up the issues.

Something that Hillary has been avoiding the whole campaign.

[skooooo]

21. Lots of talking and people expressing themselves...

I'm not saying caucuses are perfect, but there are advantages to meeting with your neighbors and discussing politics. Civil discussions - who'd a thunk it?

[flpoljunkie]

9. Caucuses will be held today between 1PM and 8PM, and expected to last about an hour--depending on

the turnout--which we have seen can be overwhelming,like in Kansas yesterday.

[WillyT]

35. Damn !!! And I Was Just Looking For Some Poll Numbers !!!

:hide::scared::hide:

[Blarch]

37. It's Obama by a inch.

Well, maybe by 8 miles. :patriot:

[Maine-ah]

39. my caucus just opened 20 mins ago

there's only about 2k people in my town, so it shouldn't take long.

[WillyT]

41. Please Give Us A Report When You Get Back

Pretty please???

:hi: