Remember this: Iowa = caucus, NH = primary

[ButterflyBlood]

Nevada = CAUCUS

There's a bunch of theories as to why a caucus might benefit Obama, but whatever the case, they're holding true so far.

[Bicoastal]

1. I got yer caucus RIGHT HERE....

....sorry, I'm in a bad mood.

[youthere]

18. Lol! Now that was funny.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Look at it this way - nighttime voting vs. daytime voting makes participants different.

women over 65 - strong HRC supporters - don't want to go out at night. People with kids - another strong group for her - also have issues with going out at night.

[ButterflyBlood]

4. Correct

There's also the Bradley Effect, not an issue in a public vote.

[Zueda]

9. Exactly...

Obama take Nevada because it's a caucus...then take SC because I should think that African-American voters don't suffer from the Bradley Effect.

[Captain Hilts]

13. Nevada gives HRC some of her highest numbers. nt

[ixion]

3. and Hillary = GOP lite

enjoy.

[jlake]

6. And Obama = GOP Heavy

[AX10]

11. kick

And Obama = GOP Heavy

[ixion]

19. I'm for neither of them... so yeah, that's fine

by me.

[William769]

5. The Latino vote will be the difference in Nevada

And thats great news for Hillary.

[cmaff05]

7. Good point

You would have to think that a caucus environment helps Obama more than it helps Hillary. The dynamics of a caucus play into Obama's campaign and young support perfectly.

[1corona4u]

10. According to the NV Caucus site....

and the people polled there, it's a tight race...

You Decide!
Which Democrat will win the Nevada Caucus?
Hillary Clinton 30.8%
Barack Obama 28.5%
John Edwards 18.5%
Bill Richardson 15.8%
Dennis Kucinich 6.4%
Total votes: 8431


http://thenevadacaucus.com/index.php

I would have thought Richardson would do ok there too. There's this one too...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html

[cmaff05]

14. It's too close to call

Which is why I think both candidates will spend a good amount of time there. Too many delegates to just ignore it.

[Texas_Kat]

8. From the ARG pollster...

John Edwards should be mad that the Des Moines Register Poll was wrong

Conventional wisdom on the Internet is that the final Des Moines Register poll accurately predicted the official outcome of the Democratic caucus. When the results of the Des Moines Register poll are compared to the results of the Democratic entrance poll, however, it becomes clear that the party composition of the Register's Democratic sample was deeply flawed.

From the Register poll:

The support from non-Democrats is significant because a whopping 40 percent of those planning to attend described themselves as independent and another 5 percent as Republican.
The entrance poll shows, however, that only 24%, not the 45% in the Register's sample, of Democratic caucus participants were independents or Republicans. That is a "whopping" polling mistake.

Contrary to what the results of the Register's poll suggest, Barack Obama did not exclusively energize and turn out a wave of new caucus participants.

If the results from the Register's poll are adjusted based on party composition of the entrance poll, the Register's final poll results would be Obama 30%, Clinton 29%, and Edwards 24%. Using the final caucus results that include only the viable candidates, Obama picked up 8 percentage points of second choices (thanks in large part to the Richardson campaign), Clinton picked up about 1 percentage point, and Edwards picked up 6 percentage points.

Obama's margin of victory in the final delegate tally had more to do with the energy generated by the non-viable candidates than it did with his own campaign.

As the campaign moves to New Hampshire and its 373,000 undeclared (independent) voters, the conventional wisdom is that only Obama will vie for the undeclared voters with John McCain. Undeclared voters in New Hampshire, representing 44% of all registered voters in the state, are not a monolithic block. It is hard to imagine, for example, anti-war undeclared voters even considering McCain.

The Obama myth fueled by the flawed Register poll sample damages John Edwards because Edwards gains significant strength from middle-aged independents. Of all the Democrats, Edwards is more apt to compete with McCain for undeclared voters and those undeclared voters could make Edwards very competitive with Obama and Clinton in New Hampshire.

-Dick Bennet

Edited to add link: http://americanresearchgroup.com/

[PretzelWarrior]

12. Remember this. Paul Tsongas won NH in 92

and we all know where that got him.

[Captain Hilts]

15. He was a 'favorite son' as Lowell is right on the border. That pattern is absent here. nt

[zulchzulu]

16. Bill Clinton claiming second in NH in 1992 got him on a roll

McCain won New Hampshire in 2000. Patrick Buchanan won it in 1996 for the GOP. So did Paul Tsongas in 1992. Gary Hart won it in 1984.

[ButterflyBlood]

17. Good point, 2000 race:

Bush wins Iowa, McCain wins NH. Who comes out on top?

[fightindonkey]

20. Gore.

[fightindonkey]

21. And BTW, Bush Won Once They Went More South.

[ButterflyBlood]

22. Ah yes the South

Which consists mostly of two types of voters:

1-Whites who would rather commit ritual suicide than vote for Hillary Clinton
2-Blacks

I wonder who that benefits?