Who Voted for Hillary in Florida?

Florida by the numbers (from her campaign):

  • Hillary will end up with more votes than John McCain.
  • She won women, men, and just about every age category. She won the youth vote.
  • She won 6 in 10 Latinos and nearly 3 in 10 African American voters.
  • More than 1.5 million Democrats voted today, more than twice the number of voters in the 2004 primary.
  • Among those who decided on Election Day, a plurality of those chose Hillary.

< John McCain Wins Florida -- FL. Live Thread Two | Who Voted for Obama in Florida? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    FL democratic voting today wasn't (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:03:26 PM EST
    a beauty contest, a term I despise, but, to my way of thinking, HRC's campaign is maybe a bit over the top in the horn-tooting dept. here.

    Why over the top? (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by miriam on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:58:33 PM EST
    She won a solid victory in a state that more closely resembles the national average demographics than any of the previous primaried states.  You can't say this time that she won only because of this or only because of that.  She even won the male vote.  

    I didn't check to see where the stats originated (none / 0) (#42)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:02:06 PM EST
    from, but was struck by the % of Latinos.  If the "given" is that Latino (Cuban?)voters usually vote GOP, what does that stat mean?  Of course, I've also read that younger Cuban/Americans in FL agreed w/Obama's proposal to lift the Cuban embargo.  

    Cubans Made Up 3% Of The Vote (none / 0) (#56)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:34:35 PM EST
    Evidently the numbers were too small to register in any of the individual candidate columns.

    The Hispanico vote is more than Cuban in Florida (none / 0) (#80)
    by Molly Bloom on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:26:36 AM EST
    Though without checking statistics, I'd guess the largest Hispanic voting block is Cuban. There is a sizable Puerto Rican population here as well. They tend to vote Democratic.

    I spoke with a former colleague yesterday- Hispanic, but not Cuban, and he voted for HRC. He told me that, when her name was first bandied about as a possible candidate, he said to himself, if she runs, I will vote for her and nothing has changed his mind.


    I essentially (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jgarza on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:10:41 PM EST
    agree with you.  I can't figure out what the right balance is, or the word.

    And yes my other comments on this subject are not my opinion, it is me taking the inverse argument of the ones you guys make.


    What? (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by oldpro on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:19:20 PM EST
    Well, could you please color code them or put an asterisk or something next to the posts which AREN'T your opinion?  I can't see the expression on your face or your body language, so....

    plus almost half the Democrats voted for (none / 0) (#7)
    by byteb on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:15:36 PM EST
    someone else.

    In Iowa 62% Chose Someone Other Than Obama (none / 0) (#76)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 02:21:28 AM EST
    so I'm not sure where you want to go with that theme.

    She is being roundly thrashed (none / 0) (#59)
    by magnetics on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:52:20 PM EST
    (overly IMO) for this over at Big Orange, where things have degenerated into what I am forced to call shark fest.  You can look up my today's comments  there if you are morbidly curious.

    some fair-minded folks are defending (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by diplomatic on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:42:18 AM EST
    myself included.  Highly inaccurate front page post got a lot of scorn just now, so there is hope.

    I just added my 2 bits to that one. (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:43:21 AM EST
    Inaccurate Is Right (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 01:03:41 AM EST
    The diaries are bad enough, but when FPers put up posts that are not fact based, it is really damaging the site. Unfortunately, too many are in feeding frenzy mode and don't really care as long as it bashes Clinton.

    Heh. Had some fun there, didn't we? (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Cream City on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 01:21:45 AM EST
    oldnorthstate beat me to the first comment, darn it, but I got in there with the second callout . . . and within minutes, it was a heck of a pile-on to try to get back to, y'know, being reality-based.  

    But I think it's too late.  The front page.  Sigh.


    Just Came Back From Looking At That Post (5.00 / 0) (#77)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 02:23:40 AM EST
    There is a major revolt going on in the comments section. About time.

    I disagree (5.00 / 6) (#3)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:07:08 PM EST
    When 1.3 million Democrats vote and she beats Obama by 19 points, that's a big deal.

    Whether it will result in delegates is another matter.

    But more people voted in Florida than all the other states so far combined.

    They didn't need to campaign there, the turnout, more than twice that in 2004, tells you these people knew the candidates. You'd have to be living in a cave to avoid the publicity since Iowa.

    CNN has it (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:19:23 PM EST
    as a 17 point lead, 50 to 33% and 1.5 million Democrats voting.

    Hillary has more votes than (none / 0) (#15)
    by oldpro on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:25:49 PM EST
    McCain by (over 160,000+) while Obama has fewer than Romney (23,000 or so).

    Verrrrry in-ter-es-ting.


    No...but (none / 0) (#16)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:27:21 PM EST
    don't believe what you see.

    Meaning? (none / 0) (#18)
    by oldpro on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:28:31 PM EST
    Don't believe your eyes (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:34:19 PM EST
    but listen to what they tell you. Ha..ha.

    The Math (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by horseloverfat on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:25:42 PM EST
    It is very unlikely that seating the delegates would have an effect, one way or the other, given that HRC would probably only get slightly over half the hypothetical delegates at issue.

    The main value of the win is symbolic, to derail any momentum that BO may have been building lately.  Plus, HRC took advantage of a chance for some favorable face time on TV.


    May depend on what Edwards (none / 0) (#17)
    by oldpro on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:27:30 PM EST
    and his delegates do....

    According to Huff Post, Edwards (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:30:14 PM EST
    canceled a couple of campaign appearances and is heading to New Orleans to give a policy speech on, ta dum, poverty.  Then he'll help build a house at the musicians' village for Habitat, then back to the campaign trial.  Good for him.

    I disagree (none / 0) (#45)
    by along on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:06:54 PM EST
    they did need to campaign there. the state wasn't contested. in that case, clinton's 16 years as a national figure trump everything. there's simply no question that if they all campaigned, these results would have been different. of course she was the favorite, and she probably would have won. but it still would have been different, and it would have been legitimate.

    I feel bad for the Democratic citizens of Florida. But there's just no way their votes from this primary will be allowed to make a difference in the nomination.

    Now, if the state party decided to hold a separate statewide caucus, those results probably would be accepted by the national committee. That would outrage many voters, but it would still offer them a chance to make their votes count.


    Its not Obama surging the GOTV totals (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by ding7777 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:17:21 PM EST
    After looking at Florida, its either being "punished" by the DNC or eveyone is just fed up with Bush that is bringing so many out to vote.  

    Fed Up (none / 0) (#11)
    by squeaky on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:18:55 PM EST
    Obama did get a small bounce (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by miriam on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:34:37 PM EST
    from SC in terms of who voted during that period, according to the NY Times numbers, but Hillary picked up more votes today.  Makes you wonder about the multi-media extravaganza staged yesterday over Ted Kennedy's endorsement.  She also won in every income and every education group,and won independents (Obama got only 28%). Also every age group, even the youngest, and got 42% of males to Obama's 38%.

    Florida is far more diverse than the previous states, so I think these results could spell grim news for Obama. Especially as he is dropping among whites who in Florida gave him only 23%. (Clinton 53%, Edwards 20%).

    So, its either Bill putting a damper on his (none / 0) (#27)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:40:29 PM EST
    talk, the "snub," more bad publicity about Rezko, or voters are reacting adversely to the Kennedy hype.

    Or all of the above. (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by miriam on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:51:27 PM EST
    add to this list (5.00 / 0) (#35)
    by jen on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:53:57 PM EST
    maybe more people are aware that the media is not our friend. ;)

    the media (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:09:46 PM EST
    CNN just said Obama lost because he couldn't campaign there and he wins in states after he has a chance to campaign in them. In other words, it wasn't any of those things like Bill. Wish they'd make up their minds.

    Ho, ho, what a spin (5.00 / 0) (#57)
    by miriam on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:38:41 PM EST
    Did they "forget" about New Hampshire and Nevada?  It's true that Obama spent a lot of time in Iowa...Hillary spent much less time there.  If they knew as much as they tell us they know, they'd recall, publicly, that there was controversy in HRC's campaign about whether she should even compete in Iowa.  CNN's guest talking heads, like the grossly self-indulgent Bennett, and MSNBC's commentators have become worse than FOX, because everybody knows FOX is a illegitimate source.. (Although at times tonight, when I could not stand another second of the other two networks, I tuned to FOX and thought it was more....ready?...balanced.  But it didn't last long.

    Edwards practically moved to Iowa after the 2004 (none / 0) (#63)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:13:52 AM EST
    election.  He should have won in a landslide.

    The spin here is like 'string theory' in physics: (none / 0) (#61)
    by magnetics on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:55:24 PM EST
    the theorists always have a ready explanation why the observations didn't break their way.

    Name (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by G Davis on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:45:20 PM EST
    Before I got excited I might think there is name recognition going on here.

    The Clintons had a giant national lead before the campaigns started...30-40 points.  Each state they have held a big lead going into that state's campaign...20-30 points.

    There's nothing to be ashamed of admitting that the name brand is attractive to folks.

    But to give any vote a lot of credence when there was no campaign at all is sort of tipping over as was her victory speech event.

    Good for her she got some mo back.  And good for her to get some free air time.  Now carry it forward with less Bill and more Hill and she'll be fine.

    Is the campaign (none / 0) (#55)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:30:30 PM EST
    not national? Yes Iowa and NH and SC got a lot of hands on, but the elections from now on are not hands on, more like Florida. So, when we say electability, what does that mean. Will the 400,000 some Obama voters vote for McCain in the GE, will they not vote? What does campaigning mean from now on TV commercials, and getting the vote out. Obama got tv. commercials in Florida, Hillary did not.

    In One Of The Posts Over At DKos (none / 0) (#78)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 02:30:09 AM EST
    a commenter from Florida said that all three candidates had very strong totally grassroots organizations and they worked hard to GOTV.

    And... (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by jen on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:52:15 PM EST
    Exit polls: Clinton wins late deciders.

    There goes Obama supporters defense that most of Hillary's votes were cast by mail before the Kennedy endorsement.


    h/t mad4clark

    I think some of the "late deciders" (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:57:57 PM EST
    are heavily influenced by the news cycle.  In SC, that was bad Bill.  FL, who knows.

    The last news cycle (none / 0) (#47)
    by diplomatic on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:11:14 PM EST
    it was all about Ted Kennedy endorsing Barack and then the late-breaking "snub" thing.

    Well, Ted, "snub" and more Rezko. (none / 0) (#51)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:20:56 PM EST
    oh yea, that third thing (none / 0) (#54)
    by diplomatic on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:29:51 PM EST
    I don't mention such things anymore.  My comments get deleted you know.

    I sense a loosening of the Rezko (none / 0) (#58)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:38:48 PM EST
    restrictions. Statements about ethnic background immed. catch the attention of BTD though. Very sensitive antennae, likely for good reason.  [I did find the information about the Iraqi businessperson living in London and wiring huge amounts of money to Chicago rather intriguing. Also, who wrote the letter on behalf of this fellow, who was denied a U.S. visa?]  

    Ok,... (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:47:19 AM EST
    It's your fault you are an enabler. I did my Rezko shtick at Kos, violated by anti Kos rule.

    Yes but. (none / 0) (#69)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:48:58 AM EST
    Is "co-dependent" still a valid label?

    They have (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:52:09 AM EST
    400 + comments, mine are last..so what. But, all that reading had to be used to something.

    And over 300 recommends. (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 01:45:42 AM EST
    I don't know what you're saying (none / 0) (#64)
    by diplomatic on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:40:28 AM EST
    it's a non issue I've been told.

    You take direction very well. (none / 0) (#67)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:44:45 AM EST
    You can talk about Rezko (none / 0) (#72)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 01:08:16 AM EST
    all you want on an open thread or on the Rezko threads we've posted. You just have to stay on the topic of the thread. I'm pretty strict about that.

    And yes (none / 0) (#73)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 01:08:52 AM EST
    off-topic comments are likely to be deleted to avoid having the thread hijacked.

    Jeralyn (none / 0) (#83)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:38:45 AM EST
    Can we get a new Rezko thread based on the NBC report?  The old one is mighty cluttered, and those of us who are not computer savvy are having a hard time scrolling.

    To me this just reinforces that (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by seanwright on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:59:03 PM EST
    inertia favors Hillary.  Barack has to go into each state and earn votes.  He has to organize and earn votes.  Where there's no competing Hillary just coasts on the Clinton name.  An object at rest tends to vote Clinton. That's why they call her the status quo candidate.

    Way To Go Hillary! (none / 0) (#1)
    by squeaky on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:03:20 PM EST

    The people (none / 0) (#5)
    by talkingpoint on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:10:57 PM EST
    wanted their voices to be heard and it was. It's time for the democrat party to stop their little stop rules issue and let the people voices translates into delegates.

    Has to be chilling for the candidates: why (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:15:12 PM EST
    the heck am I prostituting myself to raise campaign $$ and wearing myself tearing around campaigning?

    Who voted for McCain? (none / 0) (#8)
    by americangoy on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:15:52 PM EST
    Apparently, according to AP on yahoo, Elderly and moderates.

    The elderly I can see ("That fella is a moslem Hussein Obama what kind of name is that Ethel?  And he's....blaaaaack, Ethel!") but moderates?

    Moderates voted for a guy who sung "bomb bomb bomb Iran"?

    What kind of moderates do we have in America these days?

    Wrong thread - meh (none / 0) (#9)
    by americangoy on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:17:18 PM EST
    Warning TPM bash (none / 0) (#20)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:30:27 PM EST
    Hillary said: I take responsibility, TPM headline
    ALL THE SPOUSES DO IT Her apology was hedged and conditioned, but Hillary seemed to go out of her way tonight in an interview on CNN to try to address the damage done by her South Carolina campaign:
    TPM You decide?

    Bounce (none / 0) (#26)
    by athyrio on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:39:04 PM EST
    bet there is a great big bounce for Hillary from this....No matter how hard NBC tries to block the news..because other news outlets will report it...ABC newscast tonite was quite fair ....I am an ABC person now....

    Why is Obama (none / 0) (#29)
    by talkingpoint on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:46:06 PM EST
    losing White support? does anyone have an opinion?

    I think (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by echinopsia on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:16:28 PM EST
    the feet of clay are starting to show.

    Maybe I'm a poor judge, because he has never impressed me all that much. But I think people might actually realize that however much the media hates the Clintons, it is patently absurd to try to portray them as racist.

    Obama is an unknown compared to Hillary, and judging from his relations with the press and his content-free speeches, he's trying to stay that way. The more people find out, the less there is to like.

    But hey, that's just me.


    The read Orange recommended diares (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by ding7777 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:21:51 PM EST
    That is one fine comment. In a word: (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:26:30 PM EST
    backlash.  About time.

    Obama white support (5.00 / 0) (#84)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:40:24 AM EST
    I think he is losing it because, while a good deal of white people give no credence to anyone's race, they do not want to be REMINDED of race.  If that makes sense.  It's OJ all over again.  

    My 2 cents: he (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:49:50 PM EST
    weighted the scales more towards the black half of his ethnicity going into SC. I don't blame Bill Clinton for calling Obama's ethnicity to the attention of voters in SC.  I think Obama's campaign did it by calling foul so much, even before that.

    It's not race (none / 0) (#34)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:52:43 PM EST
    People don't buy the hype. Hillary says stuff. People want to hear stuff.

    I believe you (none / 0) (#36)
    by talkingpoint on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 10:54:56 PM EST
    are correct. More White voters supported him until South Carolina, then something happened during the South Carolina Primary.

    In a word: Bill (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by miriam on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:54:25 PM EST
    For all the media's faux outrage about big bad Bill, ruining poor little Hillary's chances, my best guess is that Bill Clinton knew exactly what he was doing: baiting Obama.  And it worked, primarily because Obama was too arrogant to think he could be: baited.  It worked because it exposed Obama for his shallow, hollow-rhetoric and his pettiness.  As they so wisely say: Pride goeth before a fall.  

    The story (none / 0) (#44)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:04:15 PM EST
    Hillary got more votes than McCain. What is there to discuss? This pundits calling it Spring Training.

    Please stay on topic (none / 0) (#48)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:11:26 PM EST
    the topic is the Florida primary.

    The Florida Primary?! (none / 0) (#49)
    by markkraft on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:15:46 PM EST
    This is a test of the Florida Democratic primary.

    The party leaders in your area, in violation of Democratic national authorities, have developed this unofficial primary to try to cut ahead of other states, in the event of an actual election.

    For the next sixty seconds, you will hear a high-pitched whining tone that will let you know that your fellow Floridians just threw their votes away, followed by a collective yawn from the rest of America.

    Remember, this is only a test.



    This has been a test of the Florida Democratic primary. If this had been an actual primary, you would have been instructed to vote one week later at one of the polling stations in your area.

    This concludes this test of the Florida Democratic Primary.

    The FL Dem Party wasn't at fault (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by Xeno on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 11:59:01 PM EST
    It was the repub-dominated state legislature that moved the primary date up. By law, both political parties have no say in setting the primary schedule.

    Since the decision was out of the party's control (and out of the hands of the voters), Howard Dean's decision to penalize Florida's Democratic voters was utterly ridiculous. It was also terribly damaging to the party as a whole, a point Dean appears not to understand. I begin to see why party leaders didn't want him as DNC head. Many of his actions don't make political sense.


    Impressive (none / 0) (#79)
    by bob h on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 05:38:32 AM EST
    150,000 more votes than bellicose John McCain without even trying!

    Hillary & Scandal & McCain (none / 0) (#81)
    by tjproudamerican on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:47:36 AM EST
    Hillary won in a Primary that was not officially allowed to happen. She WILL win the Democratic nomination and was always going to win it. She has more money and more professionals and she has Bill's machine. Their subsequent attacking Obama and running off queasy supporters of them like me (voted for each twice) was and is so unnecessary.

    I think she will get trounced in the election because she is the greatest hope Republicans have.

    What do the Clinton's do besides do favors and get favors, and drag our nation through Bill's id and Hillary's school ma'rm superego?

    The Clinton Playbook is self-pity and attack joined at the hip. Poor Hillary! If we could only talk about how evil Obama is, she would get 100% of the vote.

    Of all the reasons to vote against Obama and for Hillary, "clean hands" is the least likely.

    Bill & Hillary's friends, like John McCain's friends, have been very (very!) good to them, and vice versa. McCain will get a Free Pass. Hillary will not. Rezsko? What about Mark Rich and Norman Hsu and so many others?

    Yes, all politicians enrich themselves by doing favors for others by letting them feed at the Public Trough. And yes, I suppose Hillary has a Hit List of McCain's enrichments. But she comes fully certified: she and Bill are multi-millionaire-public servants, like Rudy.

    We will hear about Marc Rich and Norman Hsu. Bill Clinton will wag his finger and lecture on morality and shame. This time the whole lousy show will have a tragic ending for us, however. Hillary fighting back tears and Bill trying to decide how he should play the role of gracious loser standing nearby looking as though he was thinking,"I told you so."

    " Florida Republicans Support Hillary " (none / 0) (#82)
    by jward52 on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:19:56 AM EST
      Hillary IS - IS supported by the Washington Elite, and many Republican $Special Interests! McCain & Romney Supporters know that a Republican Win is only possible if they run against Clinton. So until after the Convention,- the $Elite Washington Handlers are hoping Clinton wins the Democratic Nomination. Otherwise, they Lose against Edwards or Obama! In Florida many Democrats, especially the mis-informed youth, voted for Clinton, not understanding the possible long-term negative consequences of moving towards another Debt/War/Banker Republican President!? -- Real Change is Seriously Necessary for Our Great Nations Survival. Or is it too late?! -- "Grassroots-Burning"