A week that began with the Democratic presidential candidates sharing the Las Vegas spotlight with the AVN awards, ended with Nevadans supporting the candidates who had gained early footholds in the state and captured their respective party establishments. In between, we were treated to a rebuking of O.J. Simpson by Clark County Judge Jackie Glass; an invasion of national and international reporters trying to figure out how to make sense of Nevada politics; a media narrative dead set on accentuating racial and gender differences and refighting the Civil Rights movement; Democratic presidential candidates refusing to take the media’s bait and choosing to play nice (at least during Tuesday’s debate); a feisty and combative Bill Clinton taking on reporters, Barack Obama, and union bosses alike; a lawsuit that laid bear the animosity between traditional unions supporting Hillary Clinton and unions aligned with UNITE HERE! that disdain all things Clinton; a fiery John Edwards who attempted to stay relevant in a state that feels little guilt about ignoring poverty; accusations and counter-charges of dirty politics between the Obama and Clinton campaigns; and a state Democratic Party that did not believe its own hype and was thus, unprepared for so many caucus participants.

In sum, caucus week in the Silver State did not disappoint and in all likelihood established Nevada as the gateway for the battle for the west for the near future. But since we are talking about politics and at the end of the day, politics is about winning, what follows is my round-up of caucus week winners, losers, and those somewhere in between.

Losers:

John Edwards – Although buoyed at the start of the week by stronger than expected poll numbers, Edwards’ support proved to be too disperse to matter. As a consequence, he had a difficult time meeting the fifteen percent viability threshold in many precincts (too wit, at my caucus site, Edwards was one supporter short of viability and since I was the only undecided in the room, I caucused for him to avoid having had his supporters come out in vain). A poor showing in South Carolina in all likelihood will end his second, and presumably last, bid for the White House. At the same time, the energy and passion that he brought to the fight impressed many observers. Unfortunately for Edwards, he was the white guy caught between two candidacies of historical proportions.

Nevada Unions – Quite simply, the state teachers’ union look like a bunch of jackasses for allowing themselves to be used by the Clinton campaign to file a last minute lawsuit over party rules that had been unanimously passed last spring. Putting aside the issue of potential disenfranchisement of many of the Democratic Party’s core supporters in Nevada, did the union really expect the judiciary to intervene in favor of such a blatant and clumsy political machination? The Culinary Union also is taking its lumps for being unable to deliver the support of its members for Barack Obama. While many have suggested that the late endorsement did not give the union the time to organize, from my perspective, it appears that they were competing out of their league. Delivering victories for state legislative races and the Clark County Commission is one thing, but trying to play king maker on the national stage is something entirely different. In the end, Culinary came off looking out of touch with its rank and file members and not quite ready for primetime.

The Pollsters – Despite early indications that the pollsters would be skipping Nevada, in the end, they could not stay away. The net result was both sad and predictable. While, at least on the Democratic side, most of the late polling did get the ordering of the candidates correct (the Review Journal’s January 14-16 poll had Ron Paul placing fifth!), the levels of support suggested by the polls were anything but accurate. The vagaries of the caucus process coupled with the untested early role of Nevada defied easy prediction; these considerations, however, were apparently lost on the polling organizations contracted by the major media outlets in the state.

Some Where in Between:

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama – Both candidates walked away from Nevada with something to hang their hats on. Clinton’s narrow victory resulted in her receiving the lion’s share of the post-caucus media coverage. On the other hand, Barack Obama came close to overcoming what once seemed like an insurmountable statewide gap, dominated many of the rural counties which have long been given up for dead by the Democrats, continued to energize and bring new voters into the process, and because of the quirks of the caucus process, will have near equal support at next month’s county conventions. Presuming that Obama holds on in South Carolina, there will be no clear front-runner on the Democratic side until February 5th at the earliest.

The National Media – While in reporting about the Nevada caucuses the national media could not resist trotting out a seemingly endless string of Las Vegas clichés to (for a particularly egregious example, see Gail Collins’ 1/19/08 op-ed piece in the New York Times), the national media gave the state the attention that it deserved. To its credit, many of the outlets that came to Nevada did try to get up to speed about Nevada politics (last week, I and my UNLV colleague Ken Fernandez responded to upwards of one hundred media inquiries) and as the state continues to play a role in national electoral politics, the coverage should only improve as Nevada becomes more familiar and less of a novelty.

Caucus Participants – Based upon media reports and radio call-in shows, the impressions of caucus goers were decidedly mixed. Many loved the process, never felt so connected to their communities, and would jump at the chance to do it again. Others were completely turned off by the delays and ballot shortages, the chaos and disorder at some sites (anecdotally, it appears that the sites that had multiple precinct caucuses in the same rooms seemed to be especially susceptible to problems), the inability of campaign workers to either behave in a civil manner or adhere to the rules, and the lack of a secret ballot (in my next posting I hope to report the results of an informal, non-representative survey that I commissioned to a get better feel for participants impressions of the caucus process).

Winners:

Harry Reid – At the end of the day, the Senate Majority Leader ended up getting the last laugh. After being ridiculed for months for pushing Nevada to the front of the nomination process on the Democratic side and being scoffed at for suggesting that the turnout would be 100,000, it appears as if the Sage of Searchlight new exactly what he was talking about. With over a quarter of the state’s registered Democrats caucusing on Saturday, the turnout doubled late predictions (including mine) and even exceeded the state party’s own turnout model. Now if he can just end that war in Iraq and get poor kids healthcare he will really be on to something.

Nevada Democratic Party – The state party organization accomplished the three things it needed to do. First, putting aside the complaints and problems that are expected for a first-time event of this magnitude, the party pulled off something that no one thought was possible even just a few months ago. Second, the party mobilized the two constituencies, women and Hispanics, that it needed to engage to make the party viable in close statewide elections. Finally, the scale of the caucuses allowed the party to develop the infrastructure that should offset the Republican Party’s ability to turnout its voters at such a high rate in November. Regardless of whom the eventual nominee is, when he or she campaigns in Nevada, the Democratic standard-bearer will find an energized and organized party base down to the precinct level. When was the last time you could say that?

Jim Gibbons – The biggest winner of all last week was probably Nevada’s governor. The intensity surrounding the Nevada caucuses pushed the governor out of the news. Given his track record to date, any day that he is ignored by the media has to be a good day. Thus, there were no news stories discussing how Gibbons’ budget cuts will undermine the state’s already fragile social services, strain K though 12 budgets to the limit, and further erode funding to the university system. That is the kind of press that the governor could otherwise only dream of receiving!