Ben Cahen's blog

As we head into tonight's showdown in the great city of Cleveland (my home town), I came across an interesting article in Sunday's Cleveland Plain Dealer, "Candidates Divide Black Community".

The article raises two familiar concerns in the voting process: 1) The pressure on someone to vote for their own race or gender; and 2) The pressure on the super delegates to either stick with his/her candidate or conform to what the voters want.

In this particular case, it is Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Clinton supporter, that is feeling enormous pressure from the African-American community to support Barack Obama's candidacy. Many of her friends and political allies are Obama supporters and are also urging her to change her position.

Many women and African-Americans I have talked to in Ohio almost feel an obligation to make history for their own respective gender or race. Sometimes that alone can sway someone's support. We saw a lot of that, particularly regarding the vote of African American woman, during the South Carolina primary; but you can imagine the added pressure on an African-American woman who is also both a representative and super delegate.

As far as Rep. Tubbs Jones' role as a super delegate, if she changes her vote she will be going back on her decision and her word. She would be seen by the city as the Carlos Boozer of super delegates. At the same time, if her district (OH-11) ends up supporting Obama, she will be seen as going against the people she represents.

While this controversy will remain on the shores of Lake Erie tonight - and perhaps for several more months - Cleveland voters will face much more pressing questions, like how do you make globalization work in a dying industrial-based economy, how do you solve the mortgage crisis, how do you make health care and college education more affordable, and should the Browns start Derek Anderson or Brady Quinn?

We can only hope that the candidates running for President can offer solutions to these many questions and make the birthplace of rock and roll, one of the hardest hit economic communities in the country, rock again.

Does Iowa really matter? How much does it matter? Those are the questions the cable news shows tried to answer in the hours leading up to the results of the Iowa Caucus last night. Like your star quarterback getting injured the week before the big game, a dramatic shift in a betting line is expected to occur. I looked at the shifts on the betting site www.intrade.com this morning to determine what affect last nights results had on the presidential candidates chances in the New Hampshire primary and ultimately gaining his/her party’s nomination.

Democrat

(Party Nominee)                       (New Hampshire Primary)

Republican

(Party Nominee)                       (New Hampshire Primary)

There are a few interesting points here. On the Democratic side, the numbers were very straight forward. Obama’s chances in both New Hampshire and the party nomination increased, while the other’s decreased. For the Republicans, Mitt Romney’s failure to finish first gave McCain a push for the eventual nomination; however the field for New Hampshire was largely unchanged. Perhaps this is due to Huckabee’s lack of support in that state, or maybe a deep and undecided field. It isn’t clear why the Republican New Hampshire primary numbers didn’t seem to shift dramatically after last night.

The question I would raise here is why what someone thinks in Iowa should affect who I am voting for in New Hampshire (at least on the Democratic side). Shouldn’t they be totally independent? There are two reasons why subsequent primaries may be affected by previous voting patterns. The first is electability. According to MSNBC’s coverage of the Iowa Caucus last night, electability was the third most given answer when people were asked their number one reason for voting for a candidate. The 19 point increase for Obama may have occurred because they see him as more electable than his opponents. The other reason someone may switch is because his/her number one candidate may have been diminished or dropped out of the race all together.

I would argue that there is also a third reason. People joining the bandwagon. Fair-weather voters, if you will. Like all the people I see in DC walking around in Red Sox hats since 2004, voters have the ability to jump on the bandwagon too. It’s easy for someone to say they are a fan if that candidate is ahead or has shown they are a winner.

So, who should you put your money on as the primary season continues? Most gamblers would say the favorite, unless of course you decided to bet on college football this season. It isn’t clear yet, whether the gamblers are the ones jumping on the bandwagon on sites like www.intrade.com or if they are reacting or anticipating the voters jumping on the bandwagon. As we continue to monitor the trends on these betting sites we will soon find out.

As many of you are glued to your televisions tonight to kick off the 2008 primary season, you can rest assured that Presidential politics is as interactive as ever. In the past few years political betting sites have become more and more prevalent on the internet, and now are becoming reliable sources of data on cable news shows.

You could look at the data from the latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll, or you could go to a site like www.intrade.com in order to see your poll numbers. It will be interesting to see in time whether gambling sites like these will gain further credibility among political pundits.

People who put their money where their mouth is may just be a better indicator than a call center or random sample. Just like the stock market, these gamblers are taking all the information available to them in order to make the best decision on where to put their money. In sports like the National Football League, betting lines are universally accepted by analysts as the most accurate predictor of the outcome of a game. Polling for a football game on websites such as www.espn.com is actually secondary to gambling odds.

Between the rise of the Internet in the last few Presidential elections, and the increase in user participation in activities such as fantasy football, it’s not surprising that political betting sites have picked up steam. You can bet on almost anything these days. In fact, I was convinced to join a fantasy bass fishing league this past year, and I have never caught a bass or watched a bass fishing show in my life. There’s no doubt the American population will be betting on the sex of Jamie Lynn Spears’ baby in the coming months.

But as politics and the Internet get increasingly interactive, people will continue to bet on things like who will win the Green party nomination for President or what party will win the next UK election, both available at www.bodoglife.com.

Below are the odds for both the Iowa caucus and the nominations according to www.intrade.com. Get your bets in…

Iowa Caucus

Democrat

Barack Obama	61.1%
Hillary Clinton	24.5%
John Edwards	15.0%

Republican

Mike Huckabee	59.7%
Mitt Romney	40.9%

Presidential Nominee

Democrat

Hillary Clinton	61.5%
Barack Obama	29.2%

Republican

John McCain	27.4%
Rudy Guiliani	24.6%
Mitt Romney	22.3%

Fall Internships
Location: Washington, DC

NDN seeks Washington, DC area college students for a part time internship program this fall.  Interns will get a chance to work on NDN's major initiatives, including the Hispanic Strategy Center, New Politics Insititute, Globalization Initiative, and other NDN advocacy work. 

Successful applicants will be able to work in a fast-paced environment, self-motivate, and show strong committment towards organizational goals. 

Approximate dates of the internship are September 1st  through mid December and are flexible with different school schedules.  NDN asks its interns to commit to a minimum of 12 hours a week.

Please submit resume, writing samples, and areas of interest to jobs@ndn.org.