So Goes Omaha, So Goes the Nation!
In a front page article (A01), The Washington Post theorizes that the entire presidential election could come down to the one electoral vote of Nebraska’s 2nd district. Nebraska is only one of two states (other is Maine) that splits its five electoral votes by district. So three of the electoral votes go to the candidate according to each of Nebraska’s three districts and the other two go to the candidate with most votes state wide.
Palin came to Omaha’s Civic Center last night which indicates that the district is in play. The presidential battle is also having an effect on the 2nd district congressional district between Republican incumbent Lee Terry and Democratic challenger Jim Esch. Lee Terry has already indicated that if Esch wins (lost by 9% points in 2006) it will be because of Obama. Obaha is pouring cash money into western Iowa TV markets which cover part of Omaha. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has also added Esch to its Red to Blue program which means he will be getting money from headquarters.
Please note this cheap shot from WaPo article:
“More common in the neighborhood was deep skepticism about Obama.
Electrician Jeremy Miller, 30, thinks Obama would be a better president for the working class but believes the false reports that Obama — a Christian born in Hawaii — is actually a Muslim and a foreigner.
‘Him not being an actual American, that’s got me worried,’ Miller said. ‘This might be one of those years when I don’t vote.’”
In the final month of both the presidential campaigns and Nebraska’s 2nd congressional race, I can only encourage supporters of the candidates to vote early and vote often!
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
