This is a helluva way to pick a president. A handful of people in largely irrelevant states (not that I don't love you, Iowa and New Hampshire, but sheesh) are pandered to for months on end. The candidates move in, steeping themselves in every nuance of these states' local concerns. Then comes the insanity of Super Tuesday, this year even more insane than usual with 22 states weighing in, when these candidates who have only been tested by a bunch of frozen northerners and a national media with short attention spans and lack of ability to grasp nuance. So a narrative shaped by those handful of voters gets forced on the rest of us.
Unless you're California. The giganticness of California's delegate count alone means that they'll get plenty of face time with the candidates and their surrogates, while the rest of us get scraps of attention. For the Mountain West, that's particularly true. Understandable, to an extent, since the regular delegate (as opposed to super delegate) count in these states is relatively insignificant--246 at stake for the Democrats, 189 for the Republicans. California is the western state that counts (though the rest of the west doesn't really claim it--it's an entity unto itself) and the state out here that gets the lion's share of attention once those cold states are dispensed with.
So that could be why the two candidates who actually paid attention to us out here will likely end up winning the west today.
In addition to California, today's contests include Arizona (primary), Colorado (caucus), Utah (primary), and Alaska (caucus) holding either primaries or caucuses for both parties. New Mexico moved up its Democratic primary in hopes of giving a boost to Richardson, so only the Dems vote there today. Only the Idaho Democrats caucuses today, but Montana is holding only Republican caucuses.
My prediction is that this majority of delegates in this swath of geography will go to Obama and Romney. Granted, this is primarily a gut feeling on my part, because there has been next to no polling done in most of these states, but demographics, issues, and where the candidates have been will make the difference.
On the one hand, you have Clinton's inheritance of her husband's legacy, and it isn't good for her in much of the west. The Clinton hangover in the northern tier of Rocky Mountain states stems particularly from environmental wars of the 1990s, where these states were ground zero. Clinton's aggressive environmental initiatives met with intense hostility and were, largely unfairly, saddled with massive job losses in the extractive industries. Those bad feelings still hold, and many Democrats in the region fear that Clinton on the top of the ticket would be a huge motivating factor for the Republican base, making any downticket wins impossible.
For the Republicans, McCain's relative moderate stance on immigration is motivating the base against him in a huge way. Some of these states take a more nuanced view on the subject--particularly in parts of Idaho, who's agriculture economy is hugely dependent on immigrant labor, but the issue hurts him. What should have been his built-in advantage of being the only western candidate left in the race is blunted in parts of Arizona, all of Idaho, and all of Utah by Romney's advantage as a Mormon.
With that very general thumbnail sketch, here's what I expect to see in the individual states.
Alaska: Alaska does it's own thing to such an extent that it's pretty hard to know what they're thinking up there. But Obama has a campaign office in Anchorage, and the thought that they might actually have a say in this contest has Alaskans motivated. Obama also has former Gov. Tony Knowles working the phones for him. This is probably a case where a candidate paying attention to a state is going to make the difference. Expect home-stater Mike Gravel to get some sentimental support, but not much. Alaska Republicans tend to be quixotic. This could actually be the state where Ron Paul wins, though a likelier bet is Romney, who's also made an effort there.
Arizona: On the Dem side, the latest polling shows a statistical dead heat between Clinton and Obama. Both candidates have stumped in the state in the last couple of weeks. Clinton should do well with Latino voters and the substantial number of older women--lots of retirees in Arizona. But the change message is as salient in Arizona as anywhere, with the economy and health care being major concerns. Arizona has been hit pretty hard by the mortgage crisis, and Obama has Governor Napolitano's endorsement. I predict Obama by a narrow margin. On the Republican side, immigration is the overwhelming issue, and one that will probably keep McCain from running away with his home state. In fact, there's a substantial number of Republicans actively working against him. The 11 percent Mormon population here will also give a boost to Romney.
Colorado: I'm in Colorado today, in preparation for observing tonight's caucuses in Larimer County, a swing area where Dem Angie Paccione came oh-so-close to knocking off the odious Marilyn Musgrave. The party is bracing for record turnout tonight, just like everyone else. Both Obama and Clinton have been to the state, but with only cursory visits. Kind of ironic considering the national convention is going to be here. Clinton scored the endorsement of the Denver Post and a lot of the Democratic establishment here. But the Obama has a strong grassroots movement, has an organizing edge, and has the red/purple state appeal. Colorado is probably going to be close, but I think it's going to go Obama. The other is going to be interesting. The Focus on the Family south will most certaily go to Huckabee, though McCain will have a bit of an edge with the old military establishment folks there. That will be McCain's primary area of strength in the state, I think, and the fact that Romney has been organized here (even though his main recent event was at a Ford dealership) gives him the edge.
Idaho: 14,000 people showed up to see Obama speak in Boise on Saturday. Lots of people were surprised by that, but given the 10,000 that turned out for an Al Gore PowerPoint show last January, they probably shouldn't have been. Practically every Democratic office-holder in the state (granted there aren't a whole lot of them) has endorsed Obama. He walks away with it. Idaho is 48 24 percent Mormon. Romney wins (primary in May).
New Mexico: Clinton has the edge in New Mexico, with strong support in the state's Latino community. She's also got strong establishment connections here, and a lot of rank and file party workers. This could give her the same advantage in working the caucuses that it gave her in Nevada. On the other hand, the only recent poll in the state gives Obama as much as 6 point advantage. The New Mexico State University poll has a 5 point MOE, so take it with a grain of salt.
Utah: Obama was set to go to Utah last weekend, but cancelled out of respect for the funeral for Gordon Hinckley, the former president of the Mormon Church. In his stead, Michelle Obama stumped in SLC yesterday. The last minute campaign stop didn't draw the thousands that Obama has been getting in the region, but the fact that the campaign had a presence there, and that they have a field office in the state gives the edge to him again. On the Republican side, need you ask?
A strong Romney showing in the mountain west (and remember, the Republicans are winner take all) could keep his campaign alive for a little while longer. And, depending on Obama's margin of victory in some of these states, the delegate advantage hill receive will keep him in the delegate race for Super Tuesday. They might be little states, but in a race this close, every little bit counts.