Losses in big states worry Obama camp

Democrats in Wyoming held caucuses yesterday and - following what is now a familiar pattern - are expected to give Senator Barack Obama the majority of their 12 pledged delegates.

The Illinois Democrat's strength in a Republican state that has not voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964 is the latest example of an ingenious strategy that neatly addresses the advantage Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York enjoys in Democratic strongholds where she and her husband have long-standing ties.

But Obama's losses Tuesday in Texas and Ohio - coupled with his February 5 defeats in California, New York and New Jersey - have not only shown the strategy's downside.

They have also given supporters of Clinton an opening for an argument that winning over affluent, educated white voters in small Democratic enclaves, such as Boise, Idaho, and Salt Lake City and running up the score with African Americans in the Republican South exaggerate his strengths in states that will never vote Democratic in the fall.

If Obama becomes the Democratic nominee but cannot win support from working-class whites and Hispanics, they argue, then Democrats will not retake the White House. "If you can't win in the Southwest, if you don't win Ohio, if you don't win Pennsylvania, you've got problems in November," said Democratic Sen. Rob-ert Menendez of New Jersey, a Clinton supporter.

Even some Obama advisers see a real problem. "Ultimately, all that matters is how the nominee stacks up against John McCain," said one adviser who spoke on the condition of anonymity, referring to the senator from Arizona and presumptive GOP nominee. "Right now, Barack is not connecting with the children of the Reagan Democrats. That's a real concern."

"It's now a battle between the base and the new young Democrats and Democrats who are more energised than they've been in the past," agreed Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, an Obama supporter. "I don't know how that's going to play out."

With the campaign moving next week to Mississippi, another Republican state where Obama is expected to do well, these questions will only grow louder as the Clinton camp tries to minimise the importance of those states while raising the stakes for Pennsylvania on April 22.

Obama and his allies counter that California and New York are firmly in the Democratic column and that, as the party's nominee, he could just as easily carry them as Clinton.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, said he is not going to be goaded into shifting from the current strategy, which is to get as many delegates from wherever he can.

And he rejects what he says is the Clinton campaign's attempt to give greater legitimacy to certain states - especially Pennsylvania, where Clinton is expected to have an advantage because of her support by the Democratic establishment there and because its demographics are similar to Ohio's.

Latino votes

But many Democratic elected officials are still worried. "No one's jumping up and down in Okeecho-bee, Florida, saying we've got a perfect ticket," agreed Representative Tim Mahoney of Florida, a moderate, unaffiliated Democrat in a swing district. "If you're a Barack Obama, you're going to have to figure out how to reach out to white, middle-aged men."

Democratic Senator Ken Salazar of Colorado, who like Mahoney has not endorsed either Obama or Clinton, is concerned about Obama's poor performance among Latinos in California and Texas. "It's unfortunate," he said, "because Obama has done very well with Latino voters in Illinois, and I know his heart, and it's for an inclusive agenda."

Obama rejects the charge that he has failed to reach important segments of the party, noting that he has already shown he could crack Clinton's coalition of working-class voters, women and Latinos with his wins in the bellwether state of Missouri, the swing state of Virginia and the Rust Belt redoubt of Wisconsin.

"I don't buy into this demographic argument," Obama said. "Missouri, Wisconsin, Virginia - in many of these states we've won the white vote and the blue-collar vote and so forth. I think it is very important not to somehow focus on a handful of states because the Clintons say those states are important and that the other states are unimportant."

"Senator Obama went where he had to go," said former Iowa Democratic governor Tom Vilsack, a Clinton backer. "They had a well-thought-out strategic plan, and they carried it out with real discipline."

Then came Ohio and Texas, and all the old fears of Obama's narrow appeal came flooding back.

"A lot of the states he's winning are states that we're not going to win in November," said Democratic Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. of New Jersey, a Clinton supporter.

With Pennsylvania looming, Obama has few good options. Some advisers say he should stick to a plan hatched before Tuesday's defeats, to spend some time in the next weeks travelling to Europe, Israel and Asia to bolster his credentials for the general election.

But if he cedes the state completely, he destroys his strategy of winning big in the small states and staying close in the big ones.