After Super Tuesday

Read more Super Tuesday coverage on HuffPost

Now that Super Tuesday voters have made their wishes known, this is where we stand. On the Republican side, it's no surprise that Arizona Sen. John McCain is a lot closer today to securing the Republican nomination. He had significant victories in many Super Tuesday states.

For Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, Super Tuesday provided enough victory to build rationales for continuing their campaigns, but they are now well behind McCain in delegate count and momentum. Their campaigns may now be less about winning the nomination and more about making statements, and perhaps setting the stage for their political futures.

It's hard to picture a scenario to stop McCain, however, there are significant shadows lurking around the corner: Conservatives voted heavily for his two opponents. In fact, exit polls show four in 10 conservatives voted for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, as did four in 10 for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. McCain needs to consolidate the Republican conservative base. While he offers the Republicans a unique opportunity to grab the center of the political spectrum in the general election -- moderates and independents -- his real problem is obtaining support among that core of conservatives who neither like him nor trust him. His position on Iraq and national security should be of great appeal to conservatives, as should his biography of being a former prisoner of war. But, what is very troubling to them is that he has not been a Republican stalwart, he has little or no economic plan, and he is moderate on immigration.

On the other hand, he offers Republicans a very unique chance to neutralize the issue of illegal immigration and its negative impact on the all-important Hispanic vote. McCain alone can help stem the tide of declining Hispanic support for Republicans.

There is also the opportunity for Republican conservatives to unite behind McCain and take advantage of Democratic disunity. That's a choice that conservatives have to make for themselves.

Democrats have a few very important choices too. Will this be 1932 and a chance to elect an historic candidate with an historic mission for change? That could be either the first woman or the first African American. Also, Democrats have an opportunity to turn this into a new New Deal, or a similar 1980 Reagan moment. Each of those cases offered a package for change with a new kind of vision. I have said elsewhere that Franklin Roosevelt did not have a New Deal until after his campaign. That came after he read the will of the moment, and that came after the election.

On the other hand, will Democrat race degenerate into a repeat of 1968? That year, supporters of Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy, who were very opposed to the war in Vietnam, refused to warm up to party nominee Hubert Humphrey. Their lukewarm support cost Humphrey the election, and helped to elect Nixon by one point.

Now we will turn to some demographics. Each candidate has created a coalition, and they are revealed in Tuesday's exit polls.

• For Clinton, it's older women, Hispanics, and the oldest voters.
• For Obama, it's the very young, African Americans, liberals, and college educated voters. Obama also now gets 40% of the white male vote.

But, in order for either of the two candidates to secure the nomination, they must have greater crossover appeal. What separates these two candidates is not simply personality and tone, it's the fact that there are warring demographics that represent each candidacy. For Clinton, it's older women feeling that this is the last glass ceiling to break during their lifetime. For Obama, it's young voters and African Americans who are saying it's our turn and that the U.S. image both overseas and to its own citizens is at stake.

These conflicts represent serious rifts in the Democratic Party, and the longer it takes to heal those rifts the greater the advantage for McCain and the Republicans. In summary, lots of choices here need to be made. Will African Americans accept Clinton? Will young people vote in great numbers even if Obama is not the candidate? Will older women reject Obama? What will conservatives do?

About California: Some of you may have noticed our pre-election polling differed from the actual results. It appears that we underestimated Hispanic turnout and overestimated the importance of younger Hispanic voters. We also overestimated turnout among African-American voters. Those of you who have been following our work know that we have gotten 13 out of 17 races right this year, and so many others over the years. This does happen.

Read more Super Tuesday coverage on HuffPost

Comments

[kash79]

I had some degree of respect for Zogby poll- but after super tuesday- It's sad that all these pollsters are still at it.

I think at this point- we can figure this out with out your help. We may not always get it right, but we don't have to get paid to get it wrong.

[eddiestardust]

Obama isn't Bobby and he didn't win California either!

[eddiestardust]

Do you really want a re-run of 1968?

[jsarets]

I suspect that the early voting ballots also had a substantial impact on the CA primary. Many of those votes went to Edwards before he dropped out, and Obama didn't really break through in CA until after the early ballots were due. Obama was down 3 points in the exit polls and ended up down 10 points in the official tally. The 7-point gap can easily be due to early voting.

There was also a piece in a big newspaper on Tuesday morning about the Obama campaign requesting a while back that his picture not be taken with Gavin Newsom, the so-called "gay marriage mayor" of San Francisco. The same newspaper endorsed Obama after this particular incident took place, so it stands to question why they felt the need to run this piece on election day.

Obama still seems to have a problem with too many voters who must be living under rocks and who aren't being exposed to his message until it's too late. According to the local media, there were many Californians who voted for Clinton and then regretted their vote after watching Obama's speech that night. Not because it was substantially different from his previous speeches, but because it was probably the first time they'd watched him speak outside the context of a 30-second spot.

[thejoshuablog]

I can't believe my comment was removed. Wow.

[eddiestardust]

After all of us AlGore.orgg) found out that Gore would not run, I decided that I would support Edwards.

Then Edwards bowed out.

No way will I ever vote for Obama BEFORE the convention­...all he has going for him is that he is Black.

I will vote for Hillary in the Pennsylvania Primary.

Obama doesn't have a two-fer..H­illary DOES!

[woodbuck]

Before Tuesday, i replied to a post, with the comment, that this year reminded me of 1968, as Zogby points out, we might be looking at a replay of that scenario. If the Clintons choose to use their establishment muscle to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations, along with their super-delagates, to win over Obama at the convention, there will be a grass-roots rebellion from those of us who support Obama. We will either stay home, vote for McCain, or give very lukewarm support to Clinton. A lot depends on who McCain picks as his running mate, if it is someone who is a moderate on social issues, Clinton will not have a chance.

[ObamaEdwards]

THIS liberal, progressive, middle-aged (I guess that's "older") feminist is voting for Obama.

You are confused. The Obama campaign is continuing to build momentum, while the Republican Party is split in all different directions.

The only way the Dems can LOSE this election is if the party backs Clinton.

[Acebass]

And then there's the Edwards factor. With Johns 2000 votes in New Mexico there would be a clear winner.
John Edwards and his supporters may be ignored by the MSM but his followers are still out here, and we will be heard!

I'm an Edwards Democrat

[FirstAve]

George Bush lied us into war. Going to war is not necessarily the wrong move but the lies are what makes it so unacceptable. Hillary Clinton voted for the war because she believed that as a woman who wanted to be president it was far more important, politically, that she be seen as a person who could be just as much of a hawk as George Bush or any republican. Today, when asked about her vote, she lies. She double talks until everyone is so confused that they always just move to the next subject. She is lying her way into the White House just as sure as Bush lied us into war. Both are unacceptable and, as a far left liberal, I would rather have four more years of Bush than to vote for a liar from my own party. If I am given the choice I will vote for John McCain. I would rather be lied to by the republicans than by a member of my own party.

As to the polls? Well, I will only say that I was against all forms of torture until last night. John Zogby should be water boarded until his emotions have suffered what he caused ours last night. We fell for his garbage again. What an idiot this man is. Is he being paid by the Clintons?

[joebaggadonuts]

As the economy goes into the toilet, these "factions" realize they are all in this together. Stop trying to make it into a fight between them when it's not there. The only folks we have to fight are the autocrats who stole our national treasures and used it for their and their friend's financial gain while undermining good government and the Constitution. That's where the fight is.

[plutorage]

I think the key in this election will be a shift of latinos from Hilary to Obama, each getting half or so.

It makes no sense for Latinos to be voting for Hilary by big margins. Obama's campaign can't be doing their job here. I can understand the old fogies sitting around in their rocking chairs spitting their dentures into their laps as they fume about a Negro President. Obviously HIlary has that vote locked up.
But Latinos? Makes no sense and I think Zogby owes us an explanation.

[La Chatte]

To use one of Dubya's favorite words, it seems Zogby misunderestimated Hillary's appeal once again. John, maybe you can get some federal funding for job retraining, because I think maybe you need it. Or maybe there's a place for you on Teddy's staff. Or maybe you can ride off into the sunset with John Kerry on the wrong horse.

I'm getting pretty fed up with hearing how Obambi appeals to the college educated. I guess that means we Hillary fans are all auto-mechanics, burger-flippers, and janitors. (Perhaps I should go home and burn my various college degrees-- summa with a perfect GPA, honors, distinction in applied linguistics, speak 5 languages and working on #6-- so I can fit the profile of a Hillary supporter.­) In my circle of highly educated, successful, professional friends who come from both younger and older generations, every one of them supports Hillary. Why? It's a no brainer. She knows what the Hell she's doing, takes a position, knows all the power players personally-- both domestic and foreign-- and shows up to vote something beside "present."

That said, I'd like to pose a question, Mr. Zogby. You can't get a poll right. Why should anyone believe your other statistics?

[standforpeace]

I'm confused. Last night I heard quite a few pundits talking about the excitement of Democratic voters leaving the polls and how they were expressing satisfaction with their field and also noting that they would be willing to support either Democrat in November. Also Obama has already started making up the lag with white voters that we saw in South Carolina(largely by getting more white men on board) and he has made at least some inroads with Hispanic voters from where he started in the opinion polling. Now that the race is slowing down a little, what's to say that he won't be able to do even better going forward?

The fact that yesterday Latinos preferred Hillary Clinton 3 to 2 doesn't mean that they won't accept Obama as the eventual candidate (the same for Blacks and Hillary Clinton) in preference to whoever the Republican candidate is. Likewise aren't Hillary's supporters likely to get onboard with any pro-choice nominee (because whoever that Democratic nominee is, he or she will be the only thing standing between us and 40 years of the vast right wing conspiracy dominating the Supreme Court since the next president is widely expected to get a couple more picks).

Afterall aren't primaries about getting to voice disagreement over who should be the nominee of one's party? What is the problem with that?

[Spookcatcher]

Another election that is a farce. The BEST Candidates for America got scratched, and the other American Citizens that could truly be a candidate for a vast majority of the whole country nevr even try to run or go into politics because it is so dispicable, persoanlly damaging and you constently get faced with blackmail and put into a corrupting envirnment. We need a transparent and solid 3rd party or open field election process, without parties, and publicly financed.