. . . because much of the content relates both to Washington, D.C., and "outside the beltway" -- the heartland, specifically Iowa -- and because after going from Iowa to Washington via Texas and California I subsequently returned, From DC 2 Iowa.
Showing posts with label Senator Barak Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senator Barak Obama. Show all posts
Read Hunter's piecer. It's entertaining. But whether Hunter intended or not, it also contains some powerful political truths.
Composer, musician and Hollywood TV writer Mason Williams once closed a song, "This is not a true tale, but who needs truth if it's dull?"
We may need the truth, but we certainly don't seek it out. We prefer a good story; one that's not dull. And there are plenty of advertising agencies, political campaign consultants, Hollywood script writers, and politicians more than happy to tell them to us.
Frankly, I think we could handle the political truth, but it's seldom that any of our candidates will trust us with it -- and few voters have ever complained.
Increasingly, we live "mediated" lives: talking on cell phones, listening to iPods, watching audio-visual material on everything from the screens in movie theaters, to our TV sets, to computer screens, to hand-held devices. We are more interested in, and motivated to buy, the advertiser's dream than the product to which it is linked. Having balanced the two competing entertainment sites as equivalent, we conclude we'd rather visit Disneyland than Yosemite National Park.
"Sell the sizzle, not the steak," was the sales advice once offered restaurateurs. So long as we continue to buy the sizzle and ignore the steak (remember "Where's the beef?") that's what we'll be offered, and what we'll get.
So Hunter's insight should not come to us as a surprise. If we are influenced to buy our clothes, and style our hair, on the basis of movie stars' choices, and if we confuse the characters in TV and film with the actors who play them (sending baby gifts to studios when a soap opera character "has a baby"), why would we not have film characters in mind when picking our presidents?
Don't you think Martin Sheen's "'Jed' Bartlett" (from "West Wing") would have run as well as Senators Obama and McCain this fall, had he chosen to run? (I recall "'Jed' Bartlett" coming to Iowa City to endorse, and speak for, Vice President Gore in 2000.)
I recall a politico once telling me that the deal makers in his party were trying to find a candidate who looked like Hal Holbrook in the 1970-71 TV series, "The Senator."
As Hunter writes,
You might consider it [the general election campaign] a lobbying effort not to win an election but to get a starring role in "The Next Four Years." And the star thing that you will contemplate is contrived of two elements: image, as polished and packaged by PR and advertising professionals, but also a kind of truth the camera yields not because of the advisers, but in spite of them, sometimes in counterpoint to the official image. Trying to keep track of what the camera reveals -- both on purpose and by accident -- is like looking at audition clips back in the old days with a bunch of studio scouts, like the one who (possibly apocryphally) concluded about Fred Astaire, "Can't sing. Can't act. Balding. Can dance a little." . . .
Obama's at the clutch of a star's career crisis. He's had his breakthrough. He needs another starring movie to consolidate. Yet the scrutiny will be upgraded, the audience is larger, and rumors are starting to dog him as they do all stars. So it remains to be seen who will get the big role in "The Next Four Years" -- and maybe the sequel "The Next Next Four Years."
You casting agents out there have to make a decision.
There's another famous journalism anecdote Lesley Stahl tells (and for which Jay Rosen has provided some of the best analysis) regarding the comparative impact of words and image. She had produced a "lengthy" (for CBS' evening news pieces) story about President Ronald Reagan's use of video imagery to, often, leave misleading impressions. She thought it was a tough piece, and was concerned about a potential negative reaction from the White House staff.
But that isn’t what happened, she says. When the piece aired, Darman called from the White House. “Way to go, kiddo,” he said to Stahl. “What a great piece. We loved it.” Stahl replied, “Didn’t you hear what I said [in the broadcast]?” Darman’s answer has been frequently quoted:
Stahl: [Darman replied,] “Nobody heard what you said.”
Did I hear him right? “Come on, that was a tough piece.”
[Darman:] “You guys in Televisionland haven’t figured it out, have you? When the pictures are powerful and emotional, they override if not completely drown out the sound. I mean it, Lesley. Nobody heard you.”
All of which squares with what researchers tell us is the impact of candidates faces on voters choices.
When you cast your ballot for president in November, something as simple as the candidate's face could play a role in your decision.
Sound hard to believe?
A growing body of research supports the notion that a candidate's attempts to establish himself as a powerful leader can be helped or hurt by his facial features. Appearance is not, of course, the sole factor that sways voters, but experts who have studied the link between faces and people's perceptions say we place more emphasis on looks than we think.
Facial structure can play a role in how trustworthy, strong and charismatic we perceive someone to be, said Caroline Keating, a psychology professor at Colgate University who studies facial structure and perceptions of power. . . .
Alexander Todorov, an assistant professor of psychology at Princeton University, gave people photos of unfamiliar political candidates who won and were runners-up in state governor races. He asked people to pick the most competent candidates, and they chose the winners 68 percent of the time.
Many thoughts came to mind as I was reading Stephen Hunter's column this morning.
I remembered the conversations with Democrats while marching in the Coralville Fourth of July Parade (for the November 4th conservation bond issue) yesterday, and with others at dinner last night. Those memories called to mind a story my colleague Arthur Bonfield tells. A student came rushing into his office in 1972, all excited. "What is it?" Arthur asked. "Oh, Professor Bonfield, McGovern's going to win!" "Really?" Arthur replied, "And what makes you so confident of that?" "Oh, Professor Bonfield, everybody I know is for McGovern!" The student was truthful; everyone he knew was for McGovern. It's just that there were a lot of people he didn't know who weren't. It seems, I am discovering, that there are a good many Obama supporters who either don't know, or don't care, about his newly found and expressed positions that he may be taking with him into the White House -- or actually prefer the "new Obama" to the "old Obama."
I thought of Bill "Elvis" Clinton, John "Camelot" Kennedy, and the CBS "60 Minutes" segment "Ronald Reagan the Movie."
I was reminded of the Broadway play, "The Selling of the President," with which I was involved in a minor way. The theater doubled as a TV production studio, where the audience watched the transformation of a hayseed Nebraska senator (Pat Hingle's "Senator George W. Mason") into a presidential candidate, complete with singing commercials cleverly designed to appeal to various demographic groups. The point of the musical, to the extent there was one, was to dramatize for the audience some insight into the ways in which they were being manipulated by political campaigns, TV commercials, and the media. It didn't work. I'll never forget, standing in the back of the theater on opening night, listening to the conversations of audience members as they left, when one woman said to her husband, "Wasn't that George Mason simply wonderful? Don't you wish we really had people like that to vote for?" We'd failed in our purpose (or at least my purpose). We'd simply sold her our candidate.
A scene from the 1997 movie, "Wag the Dog" came to mind. A president seeking re-election must deal with a potential sex scandal weeks before election day. He calls in a top political advisor, Conrad Brean (played by Robert DeNiro) who proposes the campaign create "the appearance of a war" to divert the media's attention from the scandal. Brean pitches the idea to a Hollywood producer, Stanley Motss (played by Dustin Hoffman) who, once he figures out what Brean has in mind, responds incredulously, "You want me to produce your war?"
Isn't that what we're confronting? Isn't Senator Obama's transformation, his "re-branding," merely a form of the "producing of a president"? Isn't that what's going on with Senator McCain? Isn't that what's been going on with our selection of America's presidents for at least the last 48 years -- if not, in some earlier variations, from the time of George Washington's swearing in on April 30, 1789?
Hunter's not that far off the mark. I don't know enough about the movies to know if all of his examples and conclusions are sound -- though intuitively they appear to be. What I do know is that he has, as we say in law school, "spotted the issue."
We're not "voters," we're "casting agents," picking the leading man for "Live, from the White House, It's 'The Next Four Years.'"
Let's hope we at least pick one who is not only able to act but, like Fred Astaire, "can dance a little" as well.
February 10, 2008, 11:00 a.m.; February 11, 2008, 7:30 a.m. [Register posts new AP story], 1:30 p.m., 3:15 p.m.; February 12, 2008, 8:00 a.m., 11:45 a.m.; February 13, 2008, 11:30 a.m., 1:00 p.m.; February 14, 2008, 12:30 p.m.
Register Skips a (Presidential) Beat
Yesterday was a really big day for Senator Barack Obama. In one AP story it was called "his best night of the campaign." (All quoted stories are linked, below.)
The New York Times's page-one headline called it "convincing wins" in a story that began, "Senator Barack Obama won decisive victories . . . an impressive sweep . . . just as Mr. Obama is building a strong advantage over Mrs. Clinton in raising money . . .."
The Washington Post's page-one story headlined that "Obama Handily Wins" and began, "Sen. Barack Obama dominated Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in presidential balloting . . . besting her by huge margins . . .."
The Gazette used an AP story that led, "Sen. Barack Obama swept the Louisiana primary and caucuses . . . , slicing into Sen. Hillary Clinton’s slender delegate lead . . .. The Illinois senator also won caucuses in the Virgin Islands, completing his best night of the campaign."
This morning's Register, by contrast, headlines this news "Obama, Clinton Fight in 3 States," puts the story on page 2, and leads with news of Senator McCain -- following which they note that Obama and Clinton "competed for convention delegates across three states" in a race that was "close and likely to get closer."
Spreading the Clinton campaign's usual pre-results spin (if Obama wins this one it was to be expected and doesn't mean anything; of course if we win it is a major upset showing the momentum is now going with us) the story notes "nearly half those casting ballots [in Louisiana] were black. As a group, African-Americans have overwhelmingly favored Obama . . .."
The story reports the merged (pledged and super) delegate count (in which Clinton has a slight edge) rather than the caucus and primary delegate count (in which Obama leads). It mentions that "people were turned away from a University of Maine [event where] Clinton spoke to a capacity crowd of about 1750 people" (with of course no mention of Obama's crowd of 21,000 at a Washington State event earlier in the week).
Morever, immediately under this page 2 placement, in the "Campaign News" sidebar, following the heading for "DEMOCRATS" is, immediately "Hillary Clinton" -- in bold. It goes on to quote her view "that she, not Barack Obama, is best positioned to beat [McCain]." Only later in that paragraph is there a quote from Senator Barak Obama, referred to as simply "Obama" at that point, and in regular font rather than bold, without a paragraph break, and thus something the reader's eye would not quickly catch.
I have no real problem with the Register deciding that its corporate, or ideological, or political, or public spirited interests or inclinations lean it in the direction of an editorial endorsement of Clinton over Obama. That's the right and choice of those who buy printers' ink by the barrel.
But I do think that running this AP story and "Campaign News" blub favoring Senator Clinton -- without more -- raises questions regarding the extent to which that editorial ink is bleeding over into the news pages.
Now the Register may respond that this was all that was available to it when the paper went to press. (The AP story it used ran about 5:00 p.m. CT Saturday.) To which I would respond with the following questions and comments:
1. When do you go to press with the up-to-date "news" for the first, "Section A," portion of your Sunday paper? Is there no way you could do that any later in the afternoon or evening?
2. If not, wouldn't it have been better -- knowing that the page-one news all across America (and the world, for that matter) this morning was going to be results in yesterday's Democratic contests -- to put a notice on page one indicating that you were aware of the importance of the results in the primaries and caucuses, but that your paper had to be printed before any results could be known?
3. Finally, since you have an online version of the paper, to which you often add news and updates before the next hard copy paper version is printed, why did you not post results -- and stories -- there once they were available? (Perhaps you have by now; but I couldn't find them when I looked this morning at the same time I was getting the stories from the Times, Post and Gazette).
[Feb. 11, 7:30 a.m.: The Register has an AP item on its Web site this morning that tells the story of Obama's impressive sweep of five events over the weekend: the Washington, Nebraska and Virgin Islands caucuses, to which he added the Maine caucus on Sunday, plus the primary in Louisiana -- all by substantial 2-to-1 or close to 3-to-1 margins over Clinton. Charles Babington, "Obama Basks in Crowds, Momentum," Associated Press/Des Moines Register, February 11, 2008, 7:47 a.m. ET. (Also noting that Obama's crowds are "several times larger" than those for Clinton, Obama's having won a Grammy as well (over Bill Clinton), and the shake-up in Clinton's top campaign staff.) [The link now [4:00 p.m.] takes you to a 4:46 p.m. ET rewrite of the Babington story.]
The addition of the Maine victory makes this an even bigger national/international story this morning than it was yesterday. I haven't yet seen a hard copy paper version of this morning's [Feb. 11] Des Moines Register, but if it still contains no mention of Obama's string of major victories during the prior 48 hours I think it has some explaining to do.
Feb. 11, 1:30 p.m.: Having now seen my hard copy Register for today I'm sad to report that the paper's choice of AP stories continues to leave it open to charges of (pro-Clinton) news (as distinguished from editorial) bias. Details later this afternoon.
3:15 p.m.: On p. A1 is Beth Fouhy, "Clinton Overhauls Campaign Leadership," Associated Press, with a cheery picture of Hillary Clinton. [A version of this story can be found as Beth Fouhy, "Clinton Replaces Campaign Manager," Associated Press/WTOPNews.com, February 11, 2008, 12:34 a.m. -- a version from which the Register 's version deletes from its lead: "engineering a shake-up in a presidential campaign struggling to overcome rival Sen. Barack Obama's financial and political strengths."]
Page A2 has the carry-over from the p. A1 story, and two additional Associated Press stories: Stephen Ohlemacher and Jim Kuhnhenn, "Clinton Leads With Insiders" [a version of this story can be found as, Stephen Ohlemacher and Jim Kuhnhenn, "Clinton Has Lead With Party Insiders," Associated Press/WTOPNews.com, February 10, 2008, 9:44 p.m.], and Pauline Arrillaga, "Obama's Appeal Among Hispanics Could Prove Critical; Polls Show It's Lagging, Whereas Hillary Clinton Has Solid Support From This Segment of Voters." [A version of the Arrillaga story -- with a much more balanced headline and a story from which the Register stripped all the balanced positives about Obama and Hispanics -- is available as Pauline Arrillaga, "Democratic candidate Barack Obama says 'Yes, We Can!' but Hispanic voters ask: Can he?," Associated Press/Minneapolis Star Tribune, February 10, 2008, 2:04 p.m.]
The only mention of Obama's extraordinary string of victories is a little boxed story on p. A2 with no by-line: "Maine Voters Hand Obama Another Victory." As the headline suggests it is, almost in its entirety, merely a very brief report from Maine. Thus, so far as I know the Register has yet to run a story regarding Obama's having bested Clinton, often by 2 or 3-to-one, in 5 straight contests during 48 hours -- contests in America's Northeast, Northwest, Midwest, South and Virgin Islands.
Feb. 12, 8:00 a.m. -- And the (Register's) beat (up on Obama) goes on: Haven't seen the hard copy yet, but The Gazette features the AP story pointing out how much better Obama does against McCain than does Clinton. The Register's online "national news" uses the AP story repeating the Clinton "expectations" spin, designed to diminish any Obama victories, while downplaying and burying the "Obama Beats McCain" story and presenting only the Clinton camp response to it. Beth Fouhy, "Obama Hopes to Rout Clinton in Primaries," February 12, 2008, 8:22 a.m. EST.
11:45 a.m.What the Register runs in its hard copy paper edition is a different AP story (90% of which deals with Clinton and McCain) on page 2: Kristin Jensen and Indira Lakshmanan, "Democrats Work Crowds Ahead of 3 Primaries Today," Associated Press/Des Moines Register, February 12, 2008, p. A2 -- along with a smiling picture of Senator Clinton trying to look her most charming, and an expressionless picture of Obama. (It's not available from the Register's online site, but is available here: Kristin Jensen and Indira Lakshmanan, "Clinton Woes Small Groups, Obama Rallies Crowds," Associate Press/Bloomberg.com, February 11, 2008.)
As the Bloomberg version reveals, not only did the Register's headline give the story an entirely different spin than Bloomberg, the Register also chose to omit from its version of the story paragraphs such as the following:
Obama held his first rally today at the Comcast Center arena at the University of Maryland's College Park campus. The arena, which seats more than 17,500 people, was packed with cheering Obama supporters. He plans a similar event at a stadium in Baltimore.
. . .
Weekend Contests
Obama bested Clinton in four states over the weekend, winning caucuses in Maine yesterday 60 percent to 40 percent and rolling up similar margins in caucuses in Nebraska and Washington along with the primary in Louisiana.
Meanwhile, The Daily Iowan printed the AP story reported by Alan Fram and Trevor Tompson, under the headline, "Obama Bests McCain in New AP Poll," The Daily Iowan, February 12, 2008, p. A5 (which I cannot find in its online edition). Against McCain Obama wins by 48-42%; Clinton and McCain are in virtual tie at 45-46%. Clinton did no better than Obama with two groups that have previously favored her: whites and women. (While among men, in a McCain-Clinton match-up, they prefer McCain by 9 points, but split evenly with Obama; younger men favor Obama by 9 points over McCain.) Matched against McCain, women choose Obama by 12 points, and Clinton by 11. Among minorities, Obama gets 74% of their votes when running against McCain -- 7 points more than Clinton.
In short, this is a major, major story -- especially given the role of the super delegates and the emphasis they tend to put on who can win (as do Democratic voters generally). And yet the Register chooses to dismiss it with the line in a little sidebar, "MATCHUPS: McCain remains competitive in head-to-head matchups against both Democratic contenders . . .." [p. A2].
Feb. 13, 11:30 a.m. -- Register acknowledges existence of 2008 presidential election contest. David Espo/Associated Press, "Win in Virginia is Sixth Straight for Obama; On the Republican Side, John McCain Narrowly Edges Mike Huckabee," Associated Press/Des Moines Register, February 13, 2008, p. A1. (Although not available from Register online, it can be found as David Espo, "Obama, McCain Win Virginia Primaries," Associated Press/AP Online, February 12, 2008, 9:46 p.m.) Below the fold, at the bottom of the page, it was at least on page one, and a fairly straight story -- although the Register deleted the line, "An Associated Press-Ipsos poll found Obama with a narrow lead over the Arizona senator [Senator John McCain] in a potential match-up, and Clinton running about even," characterizing Obama's lead as simply, "the two camps debated which contender is more likely to defeat McCain in the general election." And of course, presumably because of early deadlines, the Register's headline referred only to "Sixth Straight for Obama" rather than the eight it now is. Nor did the story report anything beyond bland generalities regarding the extent to which Obama is not only winning eight contests in a row, not only winning by margins of 2-or-3-to-one but, most significantly, now increasingly adding to his base demographic (African-Americans, upper income, well educated, and young people) larger and larger shares -- often even besting Clinton -- of those demographics formerly providing her support (women, white men, older voters).
1:00 p.m.: The great irony is that the Register columnist, David Yepsen, has written a balanced column about what's really going on in this primary.That's the good news. The bad news? It's not in the paper! It's a blog entry, available only to those who search for it. David Yepsen, "On Politics: Of Delegates and Demographics,"Des Moines Register Online, February 12, 2008. He begins, "Despite all the network talk about how close the Hillary Clinton-Barack Obama race has become, Obama is starting to put this away." He then itemizes six categories of reasons why and concludes,
"Bottom line: He’s winning. She’s losing. It’s only a matter of time. While there will be lots of talk about how this will have to be decided by the superdelegates, the fact is those superdelegates are politicians. They can put a wet finger in the wind quicker than any of the rest of us and sense that reality.
They will also want to get with a winner. They will want to unify their party and move on. O-mentum will accelerate."
Has this already appeared in the Register's hard copy paper edition? Is it (or some revision thereof) scheduled for publication later? If not, why not? What is going on at the Register?
Feb. 14, 12:30 p.m. -- It's Valentines Day; Time to Credit the Register Where Credit is Due. Today's page one, bottom of the page, in the "Inside Today's Register" feature, there's a picture of a charming, smiling, energized Senator Clinton, but a headline: "Clinton's Support Slipping Among Women, Whites." So, it may be coming nearly one week late, but the paper is finally acknowledging (on page A6) that its candidate is in real serious trouble (as its columnist, David Yepsen, pointed out yesterday -- though from a blog entry that's yet to appear in the hard copy paper).
The demographics that have been thought to be hers have been moving over to Senator Obama. The story on page 6 (unavailable from the Register online) is Alan Fram and Trevor Tompson, "Women, Whites Leaving Clinton; Her Support Among Other Groups Also Seems to be Slipping, Exit Polls Show," Associated Press/Des Moines Register, February 14, 2008, p. A6.
The story is available online as Alan Fram and Trevor Tompson, "Clinton's Edge Slips With Whites, Women," Associated Press/wtopnews.com, February 14, 2008, 6:32 a.m. ET. (This version contains a good deal more than the Register's edit, but I cannot say that either is more or less favorable to Senator Clinton than the other.)
So thank you, and Happy Valentine's Day, Register!]
What Follows Are Links to, and Quotes From, the Stories Referenced in the February 10th Portion of This Blog Entry
WASHINGTON — Sen. Barack Obama swept the Louisiana primary and caucuses in Nebraska and Washington state Saturday night, slicing into Sen. Hillary Clinton’s slender delegate lead in their historic race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The Illinois senator also won caucuses in the Virgin Islands, completing his best night of the campaign.
“Today, voters from the West Coast to the Gulf Coast to the heart of America stood up to say ‘Yes, we can,’” Obama told a cheering audience of Democrats at a party dinner in Richmond, Va.
Sen. Barack Obama dominated Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in presidential balloting in Nebraska, Louisiana and Washington state last night, besting her by huge margins in those contests and further narrowing her slender advantage in delegates needed to claim the Democratic presidential nomination.
Senator Barack Obama won decisive victories over Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in Washington, Louisiana and Nebraska on Saturday, giving him an impressive sweep going into a month when the Democratic nominating contests are expected to favor him. The successes come just as Mr. Obama is building a strong advantage over Mrs. Clinton in raising money, providing important fuel for the nominating contests ahead.
David Espo, Associated Press, "Obama, Clinton Fight in 3 States; Huckabee Wins 1," Des Moines Register, February 10, 2008, p. A2 [not available from Register online].
Although the Register does not make an online version available of the AP story it used, what follows is a version of it as presented by Yahoo! News. The Register did not run all of it; the portions it omitted are [enclosed in brackets] -- for example, the AP story's noting that Obama raised $7 million in two days and Clinton had to loan her campaign $5 million.
Sen. John McCain flunked his first ballot test since becoming the Republican nominee-in-waiting, losing the Kansas caucuses on Saturday. Democratic rivals Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton competed for convention delegates across three states in their landmark struggle for the party's presidential nomination.
McCain fell in Kansas to Mike Huckabee, who got nearly 60 percent of the caucus vote a few hours after telling conservatives in Washington, "I majored in miracles, and I still believe in them." The former Arkansas governor won all 36 delegates at stake.
Republicans also voted in a primary in Louisiana and held caucuses in Washington.
McCain began the day with 719 delegates, far ahead of his remaining rivals. Huckabee's Kansas victory left him with 234.
The Democratic race was far different, close and likely to get closer.
A total of 158 delegates was at stake in the Louisiana primary and caucuses in Nebraska and Washington. Caucuses in the Virgin Islands offered three more.
Preliminary results of a survey of voters leaving their polling places in Louisiana showed that nearly half of those casting ballots were black. As a group, African-Americans have overwhelmingly favored Obama in earlier primaries, helping him to wins in South Carolina, Alabama and Georgia.
One in seven Democratic voters and about one in 10 Republicans said Hurricane Katrina had caused their families severe hardship from which they have not recovered. There was another indication of the impact the storm had on the state. Early results suggested that northern Louisiana accounted for a larger share of the electorate than in the past, presumably the result of the decline of population in the hurricane-battered New Orleans area.
Clinton began the day with a slender delegate lead in The Associated Press count. She had 1,055 delegates to 998 for Obama. A total of 2,025 is required to win the nomination at the party convention in Denver.
[The day's contests opened a new phase in the Democratic race between Clinton, attempting to become the first woman in the White House, and Obama, hoping to become the first black.]
The Feb. 5 Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses in 22 states, which once looked likely to effectively settle the race, instead produced a near-equal delegate split.
That left Obama and Clinton facing the likelihood of a grind-it-out competition lasting into spring — if not to the convention itself.
[With the night's events, 29 of the 50 states have selected delegates.]
[Two more — Michigan and Florida — held renegade primaries and the Democratic National Committee has vowed not to seat any delegates chosen at either of them.]
Maine, with 24 delegates, holds caucuses on Sunday. [Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia and voting by Americans overseas are next, on Tuesday, with 175 combined.]
[Then follows a brief intermission, followed by a string of election nights, some crowded, some not.]
[The date of March 4 looms large, 370 delegates in primaries in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont.]
[Mississippi is alone in holding a primary one week later, with a relatively small 33 delegates at stake.]
[Puerto Rico anchors the Democratic calendar, with 55 delegates chosen in caucuses on June 7.]
People were turned away from a University of Maine student center Saturday morning as Clinton spoke to a capacity crowd of about 1,750 people. [She urged supporters to participate in Sunday's caucuses.]
"This is your chance to be part of helping Maine pick a president," she said. "So I hope even if you've never, ever caucused before, tomorrow will be your first time ... because there is so much at stake in this election."
Obama, also campaigning in Maine, looked ahead to the general election, criticizing Republican McCain without mentioning his Democratic rival.
McCain initially "stood up to George Bush and opposed his first cuts," Obama said at Nicky's Diner in Bangor. Now the GOP senator is calling for continuing those tax cuts, which grant significant breaks to high-income taxpayers, "in his rush to embrace the worst of the Bush legacy."
[If Super Tuesday failed to settle the campaign, it produced a remarkable surge in fundraising.]
[Obama's aides announced he had raised more than $7 million on line in the two days that followed.]
[Clinton disclosed she had loaned her campaign $5 million late last month in an attempt to counter her rival's Super Tuesday television advertising. She raised more than $6 million in the two days after the busiest night in primary history.]
[The television ad wars continued unabated.]
[Obama has been airing commercials for more than a week in television markets serving every state that has a contest though Feb 19.]
[Clinton began airing ads midweek in Washington state, Maine and Nebraska, and added Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia on Friday.]
[The exit poll was conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for The Associated Press and the television networks.]
