Nevada holds its caucus on Saturday. NV has only held one caucus ever and the turnout was only 9,000 people statewide. It is anyone's guess how many people will come out this time. I have heard estimates of 60,000 but no one really knows. The question is how many people will be willing to take time out of their Saturday morning to participate. The caucus starts at 11:30 a.m.
YOU HAVE TO BE AT YOUR CAUCUS LOCATION BY 11:00. IF YOU ARE NOT IN LINE BEFORE 11:30, YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE.
So if you live in NV, and it is getting close to 10:00 am, head on over to your caucus site and put off that last errand until after the caucus. The caucuses should be over by 12:30-1:00 pm.
Diary follows below the fold.
The NV caucus is similar to Iowa's, in that people have to show up at their local caucus site and stand up for the candidate of their choice. One big difference however, is that NV has very little experience with holding a caucus and the field of Democrats has now been reduced to only 3 - thus the advantage that Obama had in Iowa, when the other Democratic candidates asked their supporters to make Obama their second choice, is not operating here, with the exception of Denise Kucinich, who is expected again to ask his supporters to make Obama their second choice.
Key to success here will be the Latino vote. The Clintons' surrogates here in NV may have tipped the balance to Obama for the Latino community with their lawsuit to disenfranchise the casino workers in LV by trying to shut down the casino caucus sites. These sites are not just open to casino workers. They are open to anyone who works within 2.5 miles of the strip. Many of those who work on and near the strip are Latino. This latest tactic, assuming the courts do not support the suit, may help Obama get the Latino support he needs to put him over the top. However, many Latinos are very loyal to Bill Clinton and may vote for Hillary because they can get a "twofer." This kind of blind loyalty is almost impossible to overcome. But the Clinton surrogates' efforts to take away Latino access to participate in the caucus may not sit well with many voters and may push the Latino population that is on the fence toward Obama. I also thought that Obama's response in the debate last night that the Latino's in IL supported him might also help those Latino's who remain undecided.
The African American population in LV is relatively small but it is expected that they may turn out in disproportionately high numbers. Again, the attempt last week of the Clintons and their surrogates to attack Obama using race may have backfired big time in the African American community here. It is a very good thing that the Clintons and Obama called a cease fire, but there is a sense that the damage has been done, and even though the Clintons have always enjoyed good relationships with the African American community and have a strong civil rights record, their past behavior cannot erase their most recent behavior. Again, their missteps may advantage Obama in the African American community, as well.
The tv and radio airwaves are filled with campaign commercials. But the majority seem to be for Clinton and Obama (and Ron Paul - go figure). My guess is that Kucinich and Edwards simply don't have the resources to purchase ads in great volume in NV. In this case, this does really seem to be a contest between Clinton and Obama (sorry John Edwards supporters). On the Republican side, there are a few ads for Guilliani, Romney and McCain, but none for Huckabee. Again, this is probably a problem of resources.
I also wanted to make a comment on Edwards' efforts to compare Obama with Clinton in terms of his campaign contributions from the pharmaceutical industry and the health care industry. His attempt to smear Obama on this point failed miserably and he should be called out on the tactic he used. Clinton has received 100's of thousands of dollars from Federal Lobbyists and PACs in the pharmaceutical and health care industries. Neither Obama nor Edward accepts Federal Lobbyist or PAC contributions. What Edwards was referring to were the individuals who work in these industries who have taken money out of their own pockets to contribute to Obama's campaign. Hillary already got in trouble for calling out an Obama campaign worker because she didn't like his job. Now Edwards is calling out individual Americans who have given their hard earned dollars to support the Presidential candidate of their choice because he does not like where they work? His statement about Obama was misleading and wrong. It is very dangerous for our democracy when candidates start going after another candidate's campaign staff and contributers because they don't like their jobs. As Americans we have the right to work wherever we want and to support any politician we want. This kind of attack has got to stop and I hope it backfires and once again advantages Obama, who has not and will not engage in this kind of politics.
This also raises another point that I hope voters understand and will influence their decisions. Obama and Edwards have both pledged to begin the hard work of getting universal coverage their first year and have pledged to have enacted universal health care by the end of their first term. Mrs. Clinton, on the other hand, has not pledged to begin work on universal coverage her first year or her first term. When asked, she said she will get universal health care by the end of her second term (9 years from now in 2016). This is not surprising for two main reasons. 1. She was terribly burned as First Lady when her health care reform effort failed miserably and she is not about to start off her Presidency addressing this issue and 2) it is unlikely she can "take on the health insurers and pharmaceutical industry" as she has promised because she has taken so much money in campaign contributions from these industries. She is NOT independent of them in the way that Obama and Edwards are. So if you want the next President to actually make universal coverage a top priority, Hillary Clinton is NOT your candidate. She has made this very clear every single time she is asked the question.
So it will come down to a horse race between Obama and Clinton here in NV. And don't even bother to read the polls. No one trusts them and it is unlikely that they have any better idea who will caucus than anyone else. This one is up to the people of Nevada, who I hope will decide to exercise their right to help choose the next President of the United States and attend the caucus on Saturday morning. Stay tuned.