Jan. 19, 2008
Clinton Wins Nevada Democratic Caucuses
On Republican Side, Mitt Romney Come Out On Top In Contest Ignored By Chief Rivals
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Clinton Cites "Odds" In Nevada
"CBS News RAW:" Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton expressed special gratitude towards her independent and Republican supporters following her victory in the Nevada caucuses.
-
Video
Romney On Nevada Win; Faith
In Jacksonville, Fla., GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney discussed his victory in the Nevada caucuses. While he was speaking about faith, lightning struck outside, much to Romney's surprise.
-
Video
Romney Learns Of Nevada Win
"Only On The Web": Appearing before reporters on a flight to Jacksonville, Fla., Mitt Romney hears about his victory in the Nevada GOP caucuses over the plane's PA system.
-
-
Photo
Milagros Bardot, left, Mercedes Hernandez and Maritza Lopez, right, demonstrate as they caucus for Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton at Rancho High School Saturday, Jan. 19, 2008 in Las Vegas. (AP)
-
Photo
South Carolina voters turn out in the rain to cast their ballots in their state's Republican Presidential Primary at Goose Creek High School in Goose Creek, S.C., Saturday, Jan. 19, 2008. (AP Photo/Alice Keeney)
-
-
In-Depth
2008 Presidential Hopefuls
Profiles and the latest news on the Democrats and Republicans running for the White House.
-
News Tools
Campaign Calendar
The latest list of primary and caucus dates as states continue jockeying for position.
"I guess this is how the West was won," Clinton told cheering supporters in Las Vegas. The victory was her second straight, coming after an upset win in the New Hampshire primary. (Video: Clinton after her win)
With almost all of the state's precincts reporting, Clinton had 51 percent support. Barack Obama had 45 percent and John Edwards had 4 percent.
CBS News estimates that Obama won 13 delegates and Clinton 12. Obama was able to take more delegates despite getting fewer overall votes because of the proportional manner in which Nevada awards delegates.
On the Republican side, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won the state's caucuses. (Video: Romney after his win.)
Romney had 51 percent support, which put him more than 35 percentage points ahead of his nearest competitors. Texas Rep. Ron Paul came in second with 14 percent. Arizona Sen. John McCain the winner of the South Carolina primary also held on Saturday, came in third in Nevada with 13 percent.
Complete Nevada Returns
More than 120,000 Democrats, nearly a third of all Nevada's registered Democrats, showed up at 520 precincts around the state. More than 42,000 Republicans, 10 percent of registered GOP voters, were on hand at 113 precincts.
At the Bellagio hotel-casino, some 200 people stood on each side of the caucus room, shouting loudly across rows of empty chairs separating them. On one side of the room, Clinton backers waved blue signs while the Obama supporters in red T-shirts shouted back.
In CBS News entrance polls, half of Democratic caucus-goers cited the economy as the most important issue to them. Twenty-three percent cited health care and 22 percent cited the Iraq war.
Twenty-nine percent of Democratic voters said they were members of a union household. Fourty-five percent of union voters said they favored Clinton, while 44 percent favored Obama and 7 percent favored Edwards.
Obama won the support of younger voters and Clinton won among older voters. Voters under age 45 broke for Obama over Clinton 48 percent to 34 percent, while those over 45 chose Clinton over Obama 54 percent to 33 percent.
More than half of women said backed Clinton in today's caucuses, while men were more divided in their support, with 43 percent supporting Clinton and 42 percent supporting Obama.
Hispanics made up 14 percent of Democratic caucus-goers in Nevada today, and they overwhelmingly supported Clinton. She got 64 percent support from Hispanics, while Obama got 26 percent and Edwards got 8 percent.
"This was a nice win for Clinton in a contest that was complex and difficult to figure out going in," said CBSNews.com Senior Political Editor Vaughn Ververs.
"Clinton has to be especially heartened at her success among Hispanic voters, a key block in some of the upcoming Super Tuesday states," added Ververs. "For John Edwards, finishing in the low single-digits among delegates selected was a devastating blow to his hopes after polls indicated he would be competative."
Romney, the only Republican to seriously focus on Nevada, earned his second straight victory today, following a win in the Michigan primary earlier in the week.
In a statement released while he flew to Florida, Romney said Nevada Republicans had cast their votes for change. "With a career spent turning around businesses, creating jobs and imposing fiscal discipline, I am ready to get my hands on Washington and turn it inside out," it said.
According to CBS News entrance poll data, Mormons comprised 26 percent of those attending Nevada's GOP caucuses, and 95 percent of them voted for Romney.
Three in four Nevada GOP caucus-goers were conservative, and 45 percent of GOP voters said that it was important that a candidate shares their values. GOP caucus-goers in both categories supported Romney.
The economy and illegal immigration were the issues most on the minds of Nevada's Republican voters today. The two issues were cited as their most important facing the country by more than 70 percent of voters.
Romney had made seven campaign trips to Nevada. He has largely ceded the South Carolina Republican race, also taking place today, to his rivals. South Carolina will hold its Democratic primary next Saturday.
Democrats have been mired in legal disputes, last-minute charges of dirty politics, and exchanges about race in Nevada, the U.S.'s fastest-growing state.
Obama, who won the kickoff Iowa caucuses less than a month ago, absorbed his defeat with a statement that said he had conducted an "honest, uplifting campaign ... that appealed to people's hopes instead of their fears."
His campaign manager, David Plouffe, was far more pointed in a written statement that accused the Clinton campaign of "an entire week's worth of false, divisive attacks designed to mislead caucus-goers and discredit the caucus itself."
Clinton and Edwards ganged up on Obama in the final days, mocking his evocation of former Republican President Ronald Reagan in an effort to offset Obama's endorsement by the powerful Culinary Workers Union. The Illinois senator was thought to benefit from special caucus rules that Clinton supporters tried but failed to overturn in federal court.
Obama responded by suggesting Clinton would be a "president whose plans change with the politics of the moment" as part of one of his most direct critiques of the New York senator yet.
©MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Video
Complete Nevada Returns



- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 9
- next
See all 406 Comments--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by JohnShaft4 at 12:00 PM : Jan 19, 2008
That was great I can''t stop laughing true but funny.
A 700 mile long fence is the dumbest idea I have heard of in a very long time...If I''m Mexican, I am thinking, bulldozers, explosives, ladders, tunnels etc., etc.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
I personally do not intend to vote for either of them but if you are going to accuse one of having a religious following then it would only be fair to mention the following of the other religion oriented candidate.
The arse-licking dogs with the State of New Hampshire are allowing boxes with secure state seals to be accepted as unaltered...EVEN THOUGH THE SIDES OF THE BOXES HAVE BEEN SLIT AND WERE OBVIOUSLY OPENED!!
If Americans can''t get off their dead arses...we are going to have yet another crooked election!
A felon headed the private company that dealt with 81% of the vote. There were significant differences between the hand conted and the machine counted areas...now we see the boxes were tampered with!!
What is it going to take to get the G-- D---ed American people to insist on honest elections and stop being bushwhacked by thieving, lying scum??!!
Romney says lobbyists are not involved in his campaign. Then when pressed by a reporter, he admits that several of his senior advisers just happen to be lobbyists. In 2002 Romney ran as a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage candidate in a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage state. Now, of course, he''s flip flopped to the other side because he wants to be President. How he feels on any issue depends on who he''s talking to. Romney will do or say anything to be President. He''s all ambition and no substance.
The reposrter said a lobbyist LEADS Romney''s campaign. Romney correctly denied that assertion. He did say a lobbyist attended some meetings, but the poit is EVERY campaign is associated with lobbyists.
Peace and Love
.
Sounds like the Republicans were smart enough not to let the illegal immigrants in the Culinary Workers Union vote in their caucus.
It''s a disgrace that O-BOMBA endorses the Culinary Workers efforts to get these illegals - which are the majority of this O-BOMBA-supporting union - to vote. It cheapens the entire concept of democracy when non-US citizens vote in our country.
Does O-BOMBA think we should adopt all the criminal actions of a Kenyan "election"?
.
nwihoosier
Romney also said on this occasion and has said on other occasions that lobbyists are not running his campaign nor is his campaign associated with lobbyists. This is blatantly untrue as he has several lobbyists working at senior levels in his campaign. I believe that most of the problems we face as a nation is because of the corrupting influence of corporate and special interest money in our political system. Romney is aware that this is a rising public concern and is willing to lie about it to get elected.
Peace and love to you.
If you prove it to me, I won''t vote for the man, provided the alternative isn''t worse.
If this is your opinion, you are wasting everyone''s time - who are you to be an ''authority'' in politics ?
but this is kind of like saying that I won the election in my kitchen...
Nevada was in the unrecognized Mormon State of Deseret in the 1880''s and most of it was then in the Utah territory prior to Utah statehood...
Mormon holy land if you will... about like Wyoming- one of Mitt''s other big wins...
Probably was the best strategy for him...
1.- "Si se puede" ex-drug user-seller Muslim Obama
2.- "No Mexican woman is illegal" Hillary Clinton
3.- "All Illegal children must receive free education"Mc Cain
4.- %u201CCome to New York%u2019s sanctuary%u201D Giuliani.
5.- %u201CIllegals deserve several services %u201DHuckabee
"Breaking and entering is a felony and all illegals are felons"
Who is the toughest Candidate with Mexico, Islam%u2019s terror and Illegals?
**** Mitt Romney***** I respect this man greatly.
A.- Romney%u2019s family strong and functional, 5 Married children solid Americans.
B.- Mitt%u2019s a good solid patriotic American, no felonies in his record.
C.- Extremely good record as Governor
D.- Tough on Mexico, Islam%u2019s terror and Illegals.
Mitt Romney will be the best President ever and will restore America to its former greatness.
I would like to point out a common mistake made when using the word ''flip-flop''. The term conjures up the noise when someone walks in a pair of the footware of the same name, which when we use the term in politics implies constant changing of one''s opinion and stance.
To be fair, I have no problem with any politician changing their platform, given a new and better understanding of the topic. I believe this to be wise.
Of course, at some point, a back and forth attitude makes us wonder if the person is seeing new information they should have looked into before making a platform up, or if they are pandering to the current crowd/poll.
I also believe our politicans play us for the fools we are sometimes, in accepting such terminology. If they were to spell out eactly why their competition was ''flip-floping'' as described above, then maybe they would (or shouldn''t) be described as attacking their competition.
I am truly (no joke) interested in facts you can support on your statement. I really know very little about Romney, and DO want more than opinion to help me understand what kind of person he is.
Can you help ?
and your an idiot in your comment. i wish people would get an education and be informed in the real world.
I would definitly agree, if this could be proven. And, have wondered if this is the case. I''m not crazy about the concept of lobbyists, what are the pros and possible cons of ridding ourselves of them, or modifying their influence so that it was acceptable for both the public and the corporation, and how could it be done.
One pro I can see up front is a healing of what the left says is happening, and how the right feels - the two might have more middle ground. Another con I can see is that, unfortunately economies are at stake - and I think they tend to be environments we don''t fully understand (or can''t agree upon if we do understand).
I sure wish folks on this site would use it as a way to understand where folks are coming from.
Unfortunately, posting is VERY easy to misunderstand/misinterpret, which can lead to a snowball effect on flaming individuals.
Now, I freely admit, I, IMHO, am one of the best at the latter aspect ";-), but I''m also irritated by what I perceive as liars or trolls, and get what - I''m human too.
Whadayathink ?
"But Mr. Romney, you were unopposed in Nevada," and aide reminded him.
"I WAS SPEAKING FIGURATIVELY, YOU IDIOT !!" Romney replied.
[The above dialog was not a verbatim account]
You are absolutly correct erpcat about your freedom to express your opinions.
Sorry to hear you won''t share what caused you to feel this way.
But to say, "i am not trying to persuade you or the public one way or the other." is hard to believe. By posting on this site with such strong feelings makes readers think you are trying to persude.
Let me apologize for my previous post. I get the impression you were offended by the way I worded it, and I REALLY am interested in learning about what folks know of this man. I''m not trying to be critical of your opinions, nor your ability as a political analyst. I did state "who are you to", and I sincerely apologize if that will cause you to reconsider on my open-ness to understand why you made your post the way you did.
I''m trying to be open to opinions, as a way to be critical of my own thinking about the candidates. It is not good to disreguard facts, because we have an opinion.
A conclusion is simply the place we got tired of thinking, wouldn''t you agree ?
"But Mr. Romney, you were unopposed in Nevada," and aide reminded him. "I WAS SPEAKING FIGURATIVELY, YOU IDIOT !!" Romney replied.
[The above dialog was not a verbatim account] Posted by Iceman
Sounds like he was irritated by his aid, that''s for sure! Where did you find this ? And, thanks for candid statement at bottom, iceman.
Thank You.
In the duty of performing objective journalism, I think his support should have been noted at the very least.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_080112_twenty_five_u_s__mil.htm
While these brave officers are telling you the truth about 9-11...the mainstream candidates are supporting the Official Lie of the Bush Regime...these men are defending the primacy of truth in public life...they have their work cut out for them admittedly--and many have medals for herorism from other battles in which they stepped forward and led...Please give them your kind attention.
your still an idiot in your comments. get an education.
BTW, someone passed this on to me - it''s a site that allows you to shorten your links so that viewers on this site won''t have to cut and paste the site into a word doc and then take out the line break. It may give you the advantage of having them look at the link, instead of blowing it off as too much effort.
http://tinyurl.com/
Yeah - I know - I''m being too nice today.
I''ll get back to you on your post in a few minutes.
I hope that everyone who sided with the ''winners'' in 2000 and 2004 are satisfied with their Congress and their President and how John Kerry stood up FOR fraud in Ohio...jetting off to party with Arnold Schwartzenegger in Colorado....YOU WON!! Thousands dead and wounded in the Stupid Peoples'' War...TRillions in debt...Open borders...the threat of new wars and corruption as never before seen and staring at Economic Collapse...
As a nominal Paul supporter...I''ll gladly stay with my "losers" in the last two presidential elections... celebrate with your ''winners'' until the cows come home...
I''m not sure I follow you cbville72. Are you speaking metaphorically or are you both ICEMAN and cbville72.
If latter - wouldn''t you think that misleading to have two pen-names, and therefore unethical ?
Please explain your comment. Thanks. Don''t mean to be harsh - just an inquiring mind.
CBS should stop repeating that Clinton filed a suit in Nevada, She did not, the teachers union did and it''s simply not factual. Also, if your going to falsly mention Clinton in that light, it seem only fair to say that Obama response was to claim that Clinton does not care about Hispanics.
It''s a shame that people have to read a half a dozen news sources to get the truth about anything these days. There is nothing that I would like more than to see Clinton win SC and Obama win Nevada.
- Posted by speakinup at 02:25 PM : Jan 19, 2008
The conversation was purely imaginary.
It was a parody of Romney"s lame explanation for his statement that he "saw" his father marching with Dr. Martin Luther King. He said he was using the word "saw" figuratively.
Thank You."
- Posted by cbville72 at 02:25 PM : Jan 19, 2008
I refuse to dignify this idiotic comment with a response.
That was the joke.
January 2, 2008
He predicts more change in the next 10 years than in the last 1,000. Not likely.
Romney says in a TV ad that the U.S. will see more change in the next 10 years "than in the last 10 centuries." More than since the Dark Ages? More changes than the advent of the printing press, railroads, constitutional democracy, penicillin, electricity, telecommunications and the Internet all put together? We don''t think so.
A Romney spokesman said he didn''t mean what he said as fact, calling the statement "a metaphor." We call it a ludicrous exaggeration."
Source:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/romneys_ridiculous_hyperbole.html
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 9
- next
See all 406 Comments