Interim Thread: Big Night For Obama

by: Chris Bowers

Tue May 06, 2008 at 20:58


It looks like Obama will win North Carolina by 15% or more, and manage to only lose Indiana by only 3-4%. Overall, he will beat expectations in both states, so long as expectations are defined as final polling averages. Further, these wins will translate both into an overall delegate victory, and a substantial popular vote victory. Given that Obama was already ahead in both categories (delegate info here and popular vote info here), and that there are now very few states remaining, that is a very good night for him. Really, even though he was already gaining on McCain, it is just what he needed to help turn around the media narrative.

Even though she has some good states left--West Virginia, Kentucky and Puerto Rico--it is extremely hard to see how Clinton catches up now. Obama's overwhelming advantages should start to sink in with the media now, especially given that he beat expectations despite Wright and arugula and whatever. Those attacks are not working. Obama's wins tonight will net him a bunch of superdelegates, too, such as Heath Shuler in NC-11. Fact is, Obama is ahead even with Michigan and Florida included, and even if he receives zero delegates from Michigan. However, it appears he has already won at least 31 delegates from Michigan, even if Clinton gets everything exactly her way when it comes to seating those delegations.

Anyway, I'm taking about three hours off. We know the winners and general trend of the evening, but the final delegate and popular vote counts won't be determined for a while. This is an interim period in the returns, and so here is an interim thread for the evening. I'll be back to blog the final details and totals at midnight.

Chris Bowers :: Interim Thread: Big Night For Obama

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Interim Thread: Big Night For Obama | 59 comments
Considering the Wright affair (4.00 / 1)
it definitely helps Obama to have objective proof that it is a non-factor with most voters.

Had the Wright thing blown up after Hillary dropped out, Democrats would (even if secretly) been nervous of a disaster in November.  I just don't see how that is a reasonable possibility now.

and Maureen Dowd was right (0.00 / 0)
Hillary Clinton gave him the garroting he needed.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
What Proof Are You Using? (0.00 / 0)
How, exactly does it prove that hypothesis?  Obama won neighboring VA with the approx. the same % of AA voters by 29pts.  I don't know what the final total will be in NC, but it looks like he lost at least half of that lead in a little less than three months.
[ Parent ]
It depends on your perspective (4.00 / 4)
Nobody said that Obama wasn't affected by Wright.  The question was whether the Democrats were about to nominate a candidate right as the wheels were coming off the bus, as it were.  It is pretty clear that isn't the case.

Also, the head-to-head polls show that Obama still matches up against McCain.  Again, I'm not saying the guy didn't get bloodied a bit.  But anyone claiming that the Wright affair proves that Obama is unelectable is kidding themselves.  What we've seen over and over is that Democrats will come out in droves to boot the GOP out. As long as Obama does not self-destruct -- and he hasn't -- McCain does not have a prayer.

[ Parent ]
Obama Speaking Now (0.00 / 0)
Damn, he's good.  He talked about having a united Democratic party in November, preventing "John McCain from fulfilling George Bush's third term", about having a "person and party in the White House you can trust"... etc etc.  It was good.  Roommate wants to play his new GTA game and I don't blame him, so I just turned it off.  Hope the end was as good as the beginning.
I knew the speech was going to be great (0.00 / 0)
as soon as I heard that "game-changing" line, which is sure to be replayed ad infinitum.
[ Parent ]
Apropos of nothing... (4.00 / 4)
   Recently I've gotten into the habit of just shutting down all media access on election nights, including blogs. It was just getting too depressing seeing things slip away little by little, minute by minute. I've gotten to prefer to just check the final results the following morning and take it all in one big dose.

  I was doing that again, tonight... until an internet-averse friend of mine just called me and asked me, "Well, what are the blogs saying?" I said, "Don't know... I'm staying away. Too stressful." So he answers, "What do you mean? Obama's kicking ass!!!" Beans spilled...

  So here I am...  :)  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

The Wright "Affair" (0.00 / 0)
is not trivial.  It will be the cornerstone of all Republican attacks in the fall.  A candidate like Obama with no accomplishments and no reservoir of good will with the public is, quite literally, all talk.  It's going to be very hard to persuade fence-sitters to take a chance on Obama when "Maverick" McCain is promising the same bipartisan change.  (Obama's 2002 antiwar speech got him through the primaries but will mean nothing in the fall.  Iraq is a minor issue now.)  

Without Hillary as a foil, Obama will have to run on his own merits.  He doesn't bring much to the table, which will make it easy for Republicans to raise doubts about him.

Uh huh (4.00 / 1)
Obama has shown no crossover appeal, that's your story? He can't draw independents? Data so far says the opposite.
[ Parent ]
Iraq is a minor issue? (4.00 / 2)
  That must be some pretty good hash you're smoking.

 If Obama can successfully tie the faltering economy to the Iraq war -- a more than reasonable assumption -- McCain is shredded wheat.

  If the Republicans were that confident about beating Obama this fall, Rush Limbaugh would have instructed his sheep to vote for Barack, not Hillary. And the media would have quietly sat on the Wright "scandal" until September, making sure no effort was expended disrupting Obama's path to the nomination.

 McCain's gotten a big wet kiss from the media for years, in large part because the Democrats haven't challenged him. That will change.

  McCain will be significantly easier for Obama to beat than Hillary.

 

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

[ Parent ]
Maverick McCain is 71 years old (0.00 / 0)
And he isnlt really promising any change at all.  just 4 more years of G. Bush, if he survives them all.  This is nonsense.  Once the conservatism of McCain's positions becomes better known (hint--give to the DNC) he will drop in the polls.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.
[ Parent ]
Sick and tired (4.00 / 1)
of this BS about Obama and his lack of accomplishments.  What has McCain or HRC done that is so earth changing, that makes them the obvious choice for voters.  NOTHING.  McCain has more in common with HRC as far as what they are proposing.  Two miracles need to happen for McCain to have a chance in November, economy recovers and peace in Iraq.  Which of those two are you going to bet on?
[ Parent ]
According To TPM (0.00 / 0)
Obama has BIG  problems:

CNN: Exits Show That Half Of Hillary's Indiana Backers Say They Wouldn't Back Obama Against McCain
By Greg Sargent - May 6, 2008, 6:36PM

As noted below, the exits reveal intense polarization in the Dem electorate. CNN has a detailed breakdown of these numbers:

* Half of Hillary backers in Indiana wouldn't support Obama in a general elex against McCain, compared to a third of Obama backers who wouldn't back Hillary.

* It's worse in North Carolina: There, only 45% of Hillary supporters say they'd back Obama against McCain, compared to 59% of Obama backers who'd vote for Hillary.

These numbers obviously reflect the white-hot passions of the moment, and they're much higher in these states on the eve of Dem primary voting than they are in the Dem electorate as a whole. But there's no denying that they represent a pretty grim starting place for Dems as they look ahead to the coming confrontation with McCain.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talk...

Of course a lot of those who won't vote for Obama are the Reagan Democrats that I have posted about before. Without them in key swing states Obama just cannot win the general election. It's that simple.

I'd really like to hear from Chris on this and how he sees the electoral maps playing out when it is quite clear that Obama can't carry probably the most important Democratic constituency there is.

The most important Democratic constituency there is? (4.00 / 4)
Uh, what about African Americans? They constituted 22% of Kerry's total votes in 2004.  If Obama has a "Reagan Democrat" problem, then Hillary has a massive African-American problem.  She cannot win the general election without them.
[ Parent ]
Don't you know that white males are inherantly more important than African-Americans? (sarcasm) n/t (4.00 / 1)


End this war. Stop John McCain. Cindy McCain is filthy rich.
[ Parent ]
Its hot air (4.00 / 2)
these threats are posturing by voters to try to sway other votes and sway super delegates. partisans on both sides have been playing this game for months and months. the vast majority will fall in line. they're not going to vote for McInsane.  

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Wow (0.00 / 0)
You really don't know what swing voters are do you? They are real. They do vote for different parties in different elections based on who is running. There is such a thing as Reagan Democrats which is why Reagan won when he did.

Talking about 'hot air' is hot air when you have no sense of history or facts.

[ Parent ]
The swing vote goes to Obama (4.00 / 1)
He has better numbers among independents and republicans than Clinton. This is opnme of the stroies of the entire surprising campiagn. One doesnt fear ones strengths, one applies them.  

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Ha ha (0.00 / 0)
The exit polls referred to by TPM say exactly the opposite of what you are. In fact what they say has been discussed for weeks now, it is nothing new as previous exit polls have said the same thing.

But yet you - you know better than the actual voters who said who they would not vote for. Amazing! You better get busy telling them what they actually think.

I've heard of ignoring facts and creating your own reality but when voters are actually saying what they would do and other people ignore that and say something different is in fact the truth then all I can do is laugh. What else is there to do?

[ Parent ]
HRC lost, McCain will lose. Im sorry SIL things just arent going your way. (0.00 / 0)


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
My sense (4.00 / 1)
of history says that old dusty term (Reagan Democrats) lost it's relevance in a while ago. Obama Republicans is a more likely political term for this century than Reagan Democrats.
[ Parent ]
Really (0.00 / 0)
More Clinton supporters say they won't vote for Obama as opposed to vise versa.

Given that the Clinton supporters fit the old Reagan Democrat White blue collar worker profile and have been saying the same thing in other exit polls just what would you call them today?

They are not Obama Republicans because they are Clinton supporters not Obama supporters.

So what would you call those White blue collar workers who the rest of the nation still refers to as Reagan Democrats because their profile has not changed in over 40 years?

[ Parent ]
Blah, blah, blah (4.00 / 1)
I'm not sure why you bother, you not likely to convince anyone here. Moreover, your premise, which is exit poll based, ignores that Obama and Clinton run the same against McCain, and the superdelegates, whom you accused me previously of neglecting, have been steadily heading towards Obama for the past 3 months. Why the most politically savvy people in the country don't see what you see might give a lesser person pause. But not you.  
[ Parent ]
negative attention (0.00 / 0)
...is still attention.
[ Parent ]
lol (0.00 / 0)
too true

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Yeah Clinton (0.00 / 0)
winning 4 of the last 6 primaries really give me pause.

The fact that Obama can't close this out gives me pause also.

The fact that Obama has damaged himself going into the General gives me big pause.

No I'm not going to change your minds. Even facts don't change your minds. I post what Obama has said about Republicans and you all ignore it. Either you ignore it or you buy into it. And if you buy into it and are willing to dilute the Progressive movement the you really are not Progressives at all. In fact by embracing Republicans with Obama you are more Bush Dogs that Progressives. That is what baffles me about Chris and Matt. Here they fight Bush Dogs and then they endorse someone who is worse than a Bush Dog in a lot of ways. Real progressive Dems just don't talk about Republicans in the manner that Obama does. They just don't.

[ Parent ]
please (0.00 / 0)
Can you list those states (the 4 out of 6).
[ Parent ]
Ahh the facts of loudoverloudandover Now with Oxymoron![TM] (0.00 / 0)


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Indiana "Dem Electorate" isn't just Democrats (4.00 / 2)
Not quite. Sargent is seriously misreading the data from Indiana when he leaps from the exit polls to making a conclusion about the "Dem Electorate".

Here's the definition of the Democratic Primary Electorate in Indiana given by CNN:

Open primary: Voters do not register by party so any registered voter may vote in either primary, though they may be asked to sign a document declaring their affiliation with the party in whose primary they intend to vote.

A large percentage of voters today were Republicans. They'll be voting for McCain in November. For decades now Indiana has voted to elect the Republican for President. No one should be surprised to find that the Republican Party is strong in Indiana. So the question to be answered is what percentage of Republicans voted in todays Democratic Primary.

The exit poll you and Sargent cite didn't ask that question.

Whoops.

We can make guesses about how many Republicans were available to vote in the Dem Primary. One way is to look at how many Republicans voted in their own primary. None of those voters could have also voted in the Democratic Primary so if the number is huge then perhaps all Republicans voted in their own primary.

The number wasn't huge.

With 84% reporting there were 1,039,781 Democratic votes cast compared to only 371,079 Republican primary votes.

The Democratic vote is triple the Republican vote. In Indiana!

Think a few of those missing Republicans just might be voting in the Democratic Primary? Of course. I personally know of 3 Republicans who all voted Democratic this time. Of those, 2 almost certainly will vote for McCain in the fall. The other is a potential Obama vote. They weren't unique.

A huge number of Republicans likely voted in todays Indiana primary. Because of that, drawing dire conclusions about the "Democratic Electorate" is unwarranted and not supported by the data. The argument that Indiana shows Obama weakness is flat-out wrong.

[ Parent ]
How Convienent (0.00 / 0)
that you left out N.Carolina which TPM says:

"* It's worse in North Carolina: There, only 45% of Hillary supporters say they'd back Obama against McCain, compared to 59% of Obama backers who'd vote for Hillary."

Nothing like arguing the half of the post that you can spin and avoiding the other half that you can't spin.

[ Parent ]
Great Night for Obama (4.00 / 1)
Combining the blowout in North Carolina with the narrow result in Indiana I'd have to say it was a great night for Senator Obama. Of course neither state is likely to go Democratic in November but it's very encouraging to see the huge turnout by Democrats.

Once the nominee is decided, which may well be soon, the attacks will only be coming from the right-wing instead of the double-teaming we are seeing now. Our nominee will certainly benefit from campaigning in an environment in which the choice is "more of the same with John McCain" or the Democrat who represents a turning away from Bush and the Republicans. We've got a tailwind this year and the poll numbers will start to head up for the Democratic candidate shortly after the losing nominee concedes. Projecting a November loss based on May weakness in cherry-picked demographics just isn't warranted.

I know you think we should all be quaking in our boots with worry that Obama can't carry the party to victory, but frankly, I think you're dealing with a Democratic Party that is heading towards a 2006 instead of a 2004. The mood of the country has changed and Obama certainly can win in 2008.  I'd also argue that Senator Clinton could herself win the Presidency in November were she to be the nominee. However, she's just not going to get that chance no matter how much her supporters may want that to be.

[ Parent ]
Actually (0.00 / 0)
Obama would likely make NC competitive. Look at this polling of Obama vs. McCain in NC.
[ Parent ]
Obama - North Carolina - General Election (0.00 / 0)
Having read that report I think you are right to not count out Obama in North Carolina in the general election. But it's just hard for me to credit that given they elected Jesse Helms for life. Times and places do change but Obama is a long, long, way from Jesse Helms.
[ Parent ]
Feminist women will vote for McCain? (4.00 / 3)
People say this at this point in the electuion season, but they evebntually come on board.  McCain, who famously called his wife a c**t in public and has called for Rove v. Wade to be overturned, is not getting a majority of women's votes.

And Reagan Dems aren't the main Dem constituency--they didn't vote for Kerry.  

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
Dumb Argument (0.00 / 0)
The figures are not that 100% that won't vote for Obama so that leaves a lot of room for some women to vote for him.

Personally if he is the nominee I will write in John Edwards because I refuse to support someone who wants to dilute the Progressive cause by sleeping with Republicans as he does. He doesn't miss a speech or a TV appearance without praising Republicans in some manner.

And down ticket candidates! Why would people not vote for Republicans under an Obama Presidency? If he likes Republicans and says they have good ideas then why would people who might lean a little in the Republican direction not vote for them? If they are OK with Obama then why can't they be OK for them?

And how about those SCOTUS judges anyway? With Obama embracing Republicans and needing their votes to confirm isn't he more likely to nominate 'moderate' judges instead of Liberal ones? Of course he will.

And todays congress? Hell the Blue Dogs will rule the day along with the Republican votes in congress. Obama has pretty much said so. No divisive politics and such you know. And no divisiveness means compromise which means middle of the road policies which means no Progressive agenda.

You see Obama can't embrace them as he does and then neglect them and lose his coalition. No siree missy - the ones who will get neglected are the ones he has been neglecting all along - and that is the Progressives that he runs from. He doesn't read Left Blogs. He threw dKos off the bus after Obama defended his Blue Dogs friends votes at dKos and got ran off by the poster there. He ran from the Liberal label on Fox, etc-etc. Nope the losers here are the naive Lefties - anyone who can read and see knows that is coming. Obama has not tried to hide that one bit.

So enjoy McCain or enjoy Obama - either way you won't have a real Progressive or a real Dem in the WH. And don't expect for Obama to endorse progressive challengers to Republican seats or Blue Dog seats.

Or pray for a Clinton win. You may not like everything about her but at least you don't hear her embracing Republicans. No instead she has said from the beginning that she wants to fight them. But then who in the blogosphere wants to fight Republicans anymore when they support throwing in with them?

[ Parent ]
Is it possible (0.00 / 0)
that many of those voters are women?  Is it likely that those women are going to give McCain a chance to appoint 2 supreme court judges?
[ Parent ]
Read my reply to Mimi above. (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
I'm sorry (0.00 / 0)
you seem to be living in some alternative universe, where things happen just because you wish them to.  I don't mind that he compliments Repubs.  In fact it is somewhat refreshing.  That doesn't mean that he has to agree with them.  I'm just sick and tired of all the shouting and yelling about crap that comes from Washington and nothing ever gets done.  Maybe Obama won't get everything just the way you want it, but maybe we will actually make progress on issues that have been ignored and demonized by the right.  By reading your posts you seem to think that you have all the right ideas and that no Republican anywhere could possibley have an idea worth considering.  From my experience, people that think they have all answers usually don't and are also completely unable to admit when they are wrong.  You may want all the finger pointing, and venom to continue, but I for one would rather see Washington actually accomplish something even if it's not everything I wanted.
[ Parent ]
But he does agree with them (0.00 / 0)
Obviously you don't read his speeches or watch he TV appearances where he say so. For instance within the last 10 days he said on TV that Republicans have good ideas to not have government regulate polluting companies. he said that on Fox and the transcript is available to read.

You people have no idea who you are supporting. You are living in some fantasy world that is formed by the talking points you read online. You do no research of your own, that is obvious because of what you say and don't say on this blog.

[ Parent ]
You are obviously correct. (0.00 / 0)
I do no individual research on my own and could not possibly have made an informed decision since I do not support HRC in this primary.  My apologies, I will now switch my allegiance to HRC and blindly follow her.  I think not.  Would you like a compilation of the articles, books, and news sources that I have read to make the decision to support Obama?  I have a feeling that would be a waste of my time, since you obviously know all and have all the answers already, and I could not possibly be as informed as you are.
[ Parent ]
Indiana Too Close to Call. (4.00 / 1)
The numbers are worse for Hillary than imangined. On reporter going through the numbers, just said "if you put a gun to my head I cant tell you who is going to win," in Indiana.

This is a huge night for Obama. That close is fantastic news, for Obama, his winning would be a huge embarrassment for Clinton.

I think we can say that this candidate has what it takes. And he did it, I want to remind bloggers and readers and thinkers, he did it while taking the high road on oil and gas taxes, by not stooping, by telling the complex truth, and not the simple lie.

Good for Obama, good for citizens, good for democracy.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

Lake Country still not reported (0.00 / 0)
largely black, north west most corner of IN near Chicago. CNN is talking that this is so close and with Lake County pending and Monroe County still reporting that its definitely possible Obama could still win the state.

Country by county reporting at CNN for nail biters:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/20...

I really shouldn't get my hopes up. Also worth keeping in mind, this is Obama making it close in IN with operation chaos too.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Jimmy Christmas - CNN is talking midnight (0.00 / 0)
they said Lake County might be counting until midnight.

Anyone know how big lake county is?

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
Second largest county in Indiana. 25% African American population. Right near Chicago. Probably Obama territory but probably not enough to close a 40,000+ gap.  Although Monroe County still has a long way to go and that's Obama land as well as Tippecano (sp?) County.
[ Parent ]
Tippecanoe is 100% in (0.00 / 0)
Monroe seems small. Lake must be very very big if CNN is waiting until midnight while neighboring counties are still reporting which are delivering votes to Hillary.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
CNN has Lake County at " 0% " Reporting even now! (0.00 / 0)
What the hell is going on, the rest of the state is over 90% aand a lot is 100%. Anybody know what is happening in that hugely Obama county?

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Anybody know what is happening in that hugely Obama county? (0.00 / 0)
FIESTA!

just speculating.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Reporting live from Tippecanoe Cty. (0.00 / 0)
Correct on all counts about IN, except that Obama could not net 40,ooo votes from Lake Cty.  The reason it hasn't reported yet is because of large turnout.  Based on Marion Cty's  63-37 split, Obama could net 40,000 votes.  There could be as many as 180,000 votes left to count in Lake.
[ Parent ]
could not? (0.00 / 0)
If there are 180,000 votes he could net 60,000 judging by the split in Indianapolis [BO:120,000 vs HRC:60,000].

no?

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Sorry (0.00 / 0)
I stated that poorly.  Yes he could have netted the 40,000 he needed had he carried the same percentage.  Either way this race is now over.
[ Parent ]
Money money money (4.00 / 1)
I expect to see the media pick up a bit more on Clinton's fundraising, or lack thereof. Brokaw tonight already brought it up - it's been in the background and I think it'll be a more persistent part of the story the next couple of weeks. If it hits the front page, it'll snowball into a major problem for her even if she racks up whatever debt necessary to run the rest of the calendar.  

"I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that."
-Lawrence Summers
The Limbaugh effect (0.00 / 0)
It looks like even if Hillary wins Indiana, it will only be because of Republicans crossing over to try to saddle Democrats with the candidate they consider the weaker nominee against McCain:

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs...

HillaryCo must be so proud!

Yeah, it sucks (0.00 / 0)
But in the end, this was a bad night for Hillary. The fact that Indiana is this close, after she trumpeted her victory there for the last week straight, looks bad, because it hurts her narrative that she "has the momentum." It is pretty hard to get SD's to overturn the recorded will of the people when you are dropping in the polls, since it means you have absolutely no argument. Even if she wins Indiana, which she still likely will, it is happening so late in the night, that the media narrative is already being set by impatient journalists, and that narrative is that tonight was an Obama victory, and he has effectively weathered the "Wright" and "Bitter" fiascoes.  

Former Edwards Supporter, Obama Supporter since January 30, 2008
[ Parent ]
Wow (4.00 / 1)
A 200,000 vote edge now for Obama in NC. Still 15% of the vote outstanding. Neutralizes his popular vote loss in PA and then some.
Southern States Comparison (4.00 / 1)
State Final RCP Ave. Actual Tally Closest Poll
South Carolina Obama +12 Obama +28 Obama +20 (PPP)
Virginia Obama +18 Obama +29 Obama +22 (SUSA)
Georgia Obama +18 Obama +36 Obama +22 (Strategic Vision)
North Carolina Obama +8 Obama +14(?) Obama +14(Zogby)

http://www.mydd.com/main/4

I think Obama has been hurt by the Wright stories, he has lost about half his lead of February.

Maybe (4.00 / 1)
Or maybe Hillary had some momentum as well.  
[ Parent ]
Under 4% in IN (0.00 / 0)
It's 4% exactly now, with 85% counted, but there's only 7 smaller Clinton counties and three Obama counties where the results aren't in.

Clinton's:
Porter
LaPorte
Hendricks
Howard
Hendricks
Hancock
Jennings

Obama's
Marion
Hamilton
Monroe

Because the Obama ones have more voters, the odds are good he'll be less than 4% behind at the end. The only wildcards are Lake and Union counties where no votes are in.

County mouseover map here

He lost half his lead, but (4.00 / 1)
So far, there's not been one upset in any primary since.

Clinton did better than expected in PA and OH. Obama outperformed in TX and NC.

Clinton's run her best campaign in the past two months and sure, Wright hurt some. Without that, Clinton would be completely gone from the race. As it is, her big donors have dried up, she's bleeding crossover superdelegates and in the next two days, a growing tide of supers will be endorsing Obama.

Tiny WV won't stem that tide. OR will offset KY's big win for Clinton. There's simply no way to stop the momentum now. And she knows it. I stand by my prediction that she'll be out no later than May 22nd.

The story is not the primary, but the general. (0.00 / 0)
In bad times, if there's a charismatic change candidate, then that candidate wins. 1932. 1976. 1980. 1992.

Nothing's changed in this 2008 Dem primary race since South Carolina. It's been a predictable race since late January.

Obama won about 45% of the white vote in MD/VA and about 40% of the white vote tonight in NC. Perhaps one out of twenty white Democrats, or less, switched to Clinton - the cumulative effect of the gas tax, Wright, the ABC debate, and the other jibber-jabber of the past several weeks and months. Nearly effectless. So many wasted words.

The big picture remains constant and compelling. Resolved: Obama = change. I could argue that one either way, but the presidential candidates aren't.

Instead, CRUCIALLY, neither Clinton nor McCain have successfully argued that Obama's campaign doesn't represent change. Instead they mostly say that it's the wrong kind of change, or that it's impractical change, or that something else matters more. Clinton tried "change you can xerox". That was short-lived.  

As progressive critics of Obama have found, it is very difficult to argue that Obama doesn't represent real change. John McCain - an old man who's been in the Senate for decades - will likely either avoid that argument or lose it badly.

In bad times, charismatic change candidates win.

Plan on President Obama.  

It is helpful because  

Interim Thread: Big Night For Obama | 59 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox