home

WV Poll: Clinton By 36

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:51:51 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Suffolk University has Hillary Clinton winning West Virginia by 36. Many Obama supporters and media pundits will scream nasty things about West Virginia if that is the result. The reason is they have no understanding that demography has been political destiny in this campaign. West Virginia is 97% white. Barack Obama has not gotten more than 40% of the white vote since Wisconsin, where he won the white vote. So a huge defeat in west Virginia was to be expected. Let me share with you some exit polling regarding white voters in other states. First, from Obama's crushing win in NC - Clinton won whites 61-37. In PA, Clinton won whites 63-37. In Ohio, Clinton won whites 64-34. In MA, Clinton won whites 58-40. In Maryland, Clinton won whites 52-42. Missouri, Clinton won whites 57-39. And the same type of results were found in TN, AR, NJ, GA, MS, AL, FL and so on.

Whatever people want to say about the results in West Virginia tomorrow, it is unfair and a mistake to pretend West Virginia is an anomaly. Outside of the West (Obama won whites in CA, WA, ID, UT, CO, KS, etc) Obama has not fared well with white voters. (Out West, Obama has fared poorly with Latinos.) This is not an Appalachia issue, as some have suggested.

One last thing. the Obama camp predicted a 12 point Clinton win in West Virginia.

Comments closed.

By Big Tent Democrat

< Server Upgrades Tonight | The Candidates on Federal Marijuana Club Raids >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    WV Poll: Clinton By 36 | 205 comments (205 topical)
    Went to WVU (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by kredwyn on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:58:25 AM EST
    There was a serious economic town/gown divide at the time.

    I don't know if this is verboten (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Kathy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:01:40 AM EST
    but someone mentioned last night that in states with very low minority populations, such as OR (less than 2%), Obama does better than in states with higher minority populations.

    I don't see how anyone can ignore her taking WVA and KY by such large margins, but then MSNBC did completely ignore FL--which, to my thinking, just showed that no matter if almost 2 million Americans were doing something, if it shows Clinton in a good light, it's not news.

    There are already some dissenters to the Obama inevitability theory in newspapers and magazines.  Let's see what they do with this.

    obama Is Already Fashioning His GE Run (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:38:11 AM EST
    and I hope these dissenters yell it loud from the rooftops about his acting as though he already has the nomination.  I don't think, if he is the nominee, that playing the race card is going to be a winner for him in the GE.  On a lighter note, Bob Barr is entering the presidential race today as a libertarian.

    [ Parent ]
    Even my Republican boss is mad (5.00 / 2) (#203)
    by angie on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:27:50 AM EST
    about them calling for Hillary to quit (and no, he isn't a Rush dittohead idiot Republican, he's just your average rich white guy Republican). He isn't a political junkie, but first thing this morning when I walked in he said to me "Why is everybody telling Hillary to quit? I thought neither had enough delegates yet." I told him Obama is planning a victory party on May 20 and he was astonished and thought that was absurd. My point in relating this story: even people with no dog in the fight, as long as they don't suffer from CDS, can see what a farce this is.  

    [ Parent ]
    I don't see this as a problem. (none / 0) (#172)
    by independent thinker on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:40:05 AM EST
    The math strongly favors Obama at this point, even taking into account big wins in WV and KY for Clinton. There is a very real possibility that Obama will have the 2025 needed to clinch the nomination after KY and OR.

    Obama has been very careful to say publicly in recent interviews that Clinton has a right to continue...and he has refused to answer questions about possible VP selections because it is "premature".

    But by the same token, turning his attention to McCain and testing out General Election themes is perfectly acceptable in my mind. Now if he were blatently saying things like "this thing is over" or "Clinton should drop out now", that would be going too far at this point.

    [ Parent ]

    Uh (5.00 / 0) (#193)
    by IzikLA on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:10:02 AM EST
    Not only is 2025 NOT the magic number as stated factually here over and over again, but there is no way he will have that number after OR and KY vote, so you have your Obama talking point wrong independent thinker.  His campaign are contending that they will have the "majority of the pledged delegates" at that point using the incorrect 2025 number.  The arrogance of a display like this is astounding, for his sake I hope he doesn't declare victory after these losses.  He will look much better by waiting the 2 more weeks for the primaries to end.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually, he needs to wait (5.00 / 0) (#206)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:36:12 AM EST
    until after the convention. The numbers that separate are not so great that the gap can't be ignored should another misspeak, or questionable association take place. Any declaration of victory is empty without a concession from the other side, especially when he has not won anything. He's just a little bit ahead, and in this game, that's not a win.


    [ Parent ]
    You are incorrect (5.00 / 0) (#207)
    by flyerhawk on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:38:16 AM EST
    it is NOT stated factually that the magic number is not 2025.  It is an opinion based on the argument that both states should be seated with full delegates.

    The FACT is that the magic number currently is 2025.  If the rules committee doesn't change things on May 31st it remains 2025.

    Where you are creating this aura of arrogance from, I have no idea.  Obama has repeatedly said that the race is not over in any way.

    [ Parent ]

    He did do well in states with low AA... (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:43:58 AM EST
    populations, but these were WESTERN States, WVa and Ky, are Southern states, as well as that they are close to those with large black population, so the tendency (not racist)will be to favor the candidate that shows more of their core values.
    I'm sure O's "bitter, gun and religious clinging poor whites..." pronouncements have done more than anyone else to turn these voters against him, that's all.
    How ever the "creative" crowd wants to spin it, the truth cannot be denied.

    [ Parent ]
    WV not is not a "Southern state" (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by KD on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:45:05 AM EST
    West Virginia split from Virginia to go with the North during the Civil War. Wheeling is 50 miles from Pittsburgh. But West Virginia is an Appalachian state with a bunch of people who need good jobs that don't ruin the environment.

    [ Parent ]
    KD, you're right,... (none / 0) (#200)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:25:58 AM EST
    I did not express myself correctly. Wva. and Ky. border southern states, and whose proximity gives them some awareness of southern populations characteristics. BTW, a couple of Kentuckian friends, call KY. the other southern state.

    [ Parent ]
    There are different types of (none / 0) (#205)
    by Eleanor A on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:30:35 AM EST
    "Southern states"...Read a great article about it here a while ago...

    http://www.massinc.org/index.php?id=417

    Dems could have a real shot at VA, KY, TN, AR...especially as more people move into the region and it becomes progressively blue-er.

    [ Parent ]

    ps: meant better with whites (none / 0) (#10)
    by Kathy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:03:19 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Josh Marshall over at TPM (none / 0) (#52)
    by independent thinker on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:33:35 AM EST
    did a piece on this some time back. There is some evidence from exit poll data that in states with small AA populations (say, less than 8%) and states with higher AA populations (over 15%) Obama does well. But in states with AA populations between those two percentages he has had a harder time reaching white voters. The implication is that when the AA population is significant enough to be a factor, but not high enough to overcome some sense of competition,  Obama has not done as well. This is, of course, somewhat anecdotal.

    [ Parent ]
    It is an interesting (5.00 / 2) (#92)
    by eric on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:54:14 AM EST
    phenomenon.  What happens, I believe, is that states that have large black populations have historically had to deal with race issues more openly.  This results in more of a racial identity for people.  Leaving aside blatant racism, the identity forms the basis for different behaviors, like voting.

    In states like mine, Minnesota, where only 4.4% of the population is black, we don't have the same sort of history with race relations.  We tend to be of the "color-blind" mindset.  (This is not to dismiss the real problems that we do have.)  But, people here don't seem to have developed the same racial identity.

    On the other hand, states like Ohio have had open racial conflict and the lines are drawn, so to speak.  Even assuming that racial prejudice isn't present, racial "identity" has been established.

    What this comes down to is this:  a Minnesotan who doesn't necessarily have as much of a racial identity doesn't see identity as a factor in voting behavior.  Someone from Ohio, who has seen race as a dividing factor, sees his identity differently.

    That's my theory, anyway.

    [ Parent ]

    WV hurts that theory as does KY (none / 0) (#69)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:44:05 AM EST
    as does IN as does . . . .

    That theory has fallen apart frankly.

    [ Parent ]

    Agreed. (none / 0) (#88)
    by independent thinker on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:51:31 AM EST
    I almost said as much in my previous post, but decided to keep it short...and you busted me ;-).

    [ Parent ]
    Surely Clinton won the White voters in California? (none / 0) (#197)
    by dotcommodity on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:16:51 AM EST
    She won here.

    Historically, in the GE: how few White voters have Democrats ever won with? Percentage. Although Obama wins 90% of Black voters, isn't that only 12% of the whole population?

    [ Parent ]

    you can be sure there will be enough insults (5.00 / 8) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:01:53 AM EST
    from the creatives to make absolutely sure we will lose the state in the general.
    bu this West Virginian quoted in the Financial Times is correct:

    "If he is the nominee, the Democrats have no chance of winning West Virginia," said Missy Endicott, a 40- year-old school administrator. "He doesn't understand ordinary Americans."

    You (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by sas on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:10:48 AM EST
    are right on this.  And it will be racism, racism, racism 'til the cows come home.  

    [ Parent ]
    and then the cows (5.00 / 5) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:16:06 AM EST
    will be racists

    [ Parent ]
    Only the white ones! (none / 0) (#34)
    by BrandingIron on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:21:12 AM EST



    [ Parent ]
    Heh. Heh. Heh. (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:22:36 AM EST
    Most cows are multi-racial! :-)

    [ Parent ]
    What about the black and white ones...will (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:31:44 AM EST
    they play the race card?

    [ Parent ]
    this sub-thread (5.00 / 4) (#66)
    by DFLer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:43:43 AM EST
    is udderly ridiculous!

    [ Parent ]
    Here's what kills me: (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:16:49 AM EST
    If it IS racism, then what is Obama going to do about it?

    Seems to me if that many Democrats are racist, Obama should not go anywhere near the Presidential race, since he has no chance whatsoever of winning.

    [cricket cricket cricket]

    [ Parent ]

    and these are democrats we are talking about (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:19:20 AM EST
    has anyone notices we havent even started talking about independents and republicans yet?


    [ Parent ]
    We don't need them to win. (5.00 / 6) (#33)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:21:03 AM EST
    Obama will simply register 20 million new voters and they'll all vote for him. Out with the Bubbas, baby!

    /drinks more Kool-Aid

    [ Parent ]

    Don't drink too much Kool-Aid (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by stefystef on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:40:22 AM EST
    It will make your tongue too RED.  LOL

    Oh Yeah!!!

    [ Parent ]

    madamab, that is snark but (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:43:51 AM EST
    i am wondering if that is in fact part of the axelrod agenda. it would explain their attitude toward the core democratic base and the idea that they can have a new democratic party. the divisions that showed up in the primaries just might be permanenet in their eyes for political/power reasons of course. that they are ignoring in fact the latino vote says this is dillusional to me. well maybe the latino vote is ignoring them.

    [ Parent ]
    If Chris Bowers is representative (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:49:11 AM EST
    then I'd say that's exactly what they're doing.

    [ Parent ]
    simply magnificent (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by RalphB on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:11:38 AM EST
    response to the lunacy

    clap clap clap!!!

    [ Parent ]

    thanks for that link, madamab (none / 0) (#157)
    by kempis on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:27:20 AM EST
    What a great, fact-based and rational response to Bowers' bizarro manifesto.

    [ Parent ]
    [blushing] (5.00 / 0) (#170)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:39:52 AM EST
    Thank you!

    I am not going along with this hostile takeover of my Party. I don't care what anyone says.

    [ Parent ]

    Yet another page Axelrod has taken from... (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Maria Garcia on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:09:23 AM EST
    ...the Rove book. Except that Rove knew exactly who his 20 million new voters would be....fundamentalist Christians. Not sure who Axelrod is counting on...young people?

    [ Parent ]
    well by process of elimination (none / 0) (#135)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:15:56 AM EST
    what other group does he have to appeal to in the election especially with all the other groups shown the door. the young college students are limited in number and generally interest. he has the older aa vote pretty much at the break point limit. so the young minority voter seems to be the prize for axelrod to me considering all this discussion about the "new" party.

    [ Parent ]
    The largest number of those would be Latino... (none / 0) (#167)
    by Maria Garcia on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:37:12 AM EST
    ...and I don't think Axelrod will be able to win them with the unity/pony schtick. Maybe they plan to do a big push against anti-immigration agenda after the primaries.

    [ Parent ]
    that is an interesting question. (none / 0) (#180)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:44:53 AM EST
    mccain has appealed to the latino voters. at one time the dems were appealing as well. but with the new democratic party with a large aa base, what will the new policy thinking be?

    [ Parent ]
    "latino voters" (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:51:43 AM EST
    against Obama this is McCains Ace in the hole.
    they like him.
    they do not like Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    A New Democratic Party (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by LibOne on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:19:30 AM EST
    may be the goal.  I have to ask - to what end?  What are they trying to achieve by creating a new party of elites and AA's?  I just don't understand their agenda.

    [ Parent ]
    The "Creative Class" were nerds (5.00 / 3) (#153)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:23:53 AM EST
    in high school, and now they think they have a shot at being the power in the New Plutocratic Party. That's my take, anyway.

    (By the way, AA's are not really part of this new coalition. Their votes are expected but not earned by actually doing anything to address their needs.)

    [ Parent ]

    AA's will be a part of the new (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by ruffian on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:48:45 AM EST
    coalition only as long as they produce charismatic candidates to front the coalition.  After that - there is a bus with their name on it coming down the road. They can take a spot underneath it with us 'old' ladies.

    [ Parent ]
    think about it. what are the (5.00 / 2) (#159)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:28:47 AM EST
    chances of a long term coupling of latte drinkers and aa voters holding? the answer is zero!

    [ Parent ]
    Don't Need To Talk About Indies And Republicans (5.00 / 4) (#91)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:53:38 AM EST
    The Democratic Party is now the racist party. Current meme is that Indies and Republicans are voting for Obama so they are absolved of this label.

    [ Parent ]
    Right on.. (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by daria g on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:47:15 AM EST
    It's such a complicated issue too & becomes all about finger pointing and sound bites.  Racism takes so many forms and I certainly see it frequently in white collar workplaces.  So I believe.. at once, there's more racism out there than just the 5-10% of voters who say race was a factor in their vote, and also, just because people are some degree of racist doesn't mean they won't vote for him, actually.  

    I figure.. come on, I know a few white liberals at a job I had not long ago who were def. condescending and made all kinds of assumptions in their interactions with people of color, and yet, I'm 100% certain they would vote for Obama.

    [ Parent ]

    if he loses it will be blamed on his race (5.00 / 5) (#125)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:09:55 AM EST
    but it is far more complicated than that.
    I think you are correct. very very few people will actually vote against him because he is black.
    many many will vote against him because of his "bitter" comments. because of Wright. because of his wife.  because of his vague Muslim connections.
    there are so many reasons he will lose that have nothing whatever to do with race.
    but that will all be lost in the post game spin.

    [ Parent ]
    And all the women who don't vote (5.00 / 5) (#175)
    by FlaDemFem on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:41:04 AM EST
    for him because of his misogynist campaign will also be accused of racism. Why a candidate who wants to win deliberately alienates 51% of the voting population is a mystery to me. Obama just doesn't understand the deep, deep anger his campaign has unleashed among the women of America.

    I am so disgusted with the Democratic Party that I am thinking of starting my own political party, the American Women's Party. The party platform would be issues that MATTER to American women, no wars to kill our children, clean air and water, health care for everyone, an economy where people other than the rich can make a decent living, housing, etc. etc. Anyone else think this is an idea worth pursuing?

    [ Parent ]

    That wouldn't just be (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by waldenpond on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:21:24 AM EST
    a women's party.  The Dem party used to hold those ideals within the tent.  It's what the Dem party has ceased to be, it just needs a new name and some dedicated bloggers to provide a home so that people can join.  Time for the party to splinter off the NDP (New Democratic Party) and they can take the jack@ss symbol with them. :)

    [ Parent ]
    YES!!! n/t (none / 0) (#198)
    by Eleanor A on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:17:12 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    wait till the general is in (none / 0) (#110)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:04:56 AM EST
    full swing. the tone might be different.

    [ Parent ]
    That woman is bitter (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:11:59 AM EST
    and doesn't feel comfortable with people who don't look like her.

    /drinks more Kool-Aid.

    [ Parent ]

    I would get right on that (5.00 / 4) (#145)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:20:12 AM EST
    you have about 6 months

    [ Parent ]
    Oh, please. (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:20:57 AM EST
    We are not appluading racists, we are acknowledging a very real problem.

    We want to beat McCain but we are worried that Obama can't do it.

    Clear now?

    [ Parent ]

    Why is it acceptable for AA to do (5.00 / 4) (#148)
    by felizarte on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:21:59 AM EST
    "identity voting" and whites are called racists for doing so?  The Obama campaign made their monster.  Let them deal with it, now and in the GE if he is the nominee.

    [ Parent ]
    interesting isnt it (5.00 / 4) (#151)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:23:28 AM EST
    90% of blacks voting for Obama.  no problem.


    [ Parent ]
    Indeed and if Whites voted like AA in W. V. (5.00 / 4) (#169)
    by felizarte on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:38:42 AM EST
    the results would be Clinton 92%, Obama 10%.  One might even go as far as saying that there more whites who are not racists.

    [ Parent ]
    Kerry lost ... (none / 0) (#152)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:23:34 AM EST
    ...because he was a Massachusetts aristocrat without the common touch.

    He also had a weird propensity to contradict himself:

    He wanted to gain the political benefits of being both a war hero and war protestor.  He was politically illogical.

    He still says stupid things that make your head hurt.  Bush is stupid but he's fairly careful about the issues.


    [ Parent ]

    Re: California (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:08:37 AM EST
    Which exit polls are you looking at, BTD?

    the CNN/CBS breakdown of the white vote has Clinton taking it by 1 point (46-45%).  The NY Times polls doesn't have a "race" breakdown, but by extrapolating the race/gender breakdown, Obama wins the white vote by 6 points.

    In general, I've found the CNN data to be more reliable -- the Times doesn't seem to bother doing a final adjustment, and provides far less information in general.

    Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by sas on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:13:11 AM EST
    taking the white vote by 1 point?

    Where?  In a particular state?

    She's been pounding him all over with the white vote margins.

    [ Parent ]

    CNN looks right (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:16:50 AM EST
    they say that white women gave Hillary 56% of the vote and white men gave her 35%.

    It looks like Hillary and Obama were essentially tied among white voters in CA.

    [ Parent ]

    Since CA (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:18:55 AM EST
    Clinton has increased her popularity among white men IIRC. That's why she's been getting such a high percentage of that demographic.

    [ Parent ]
    Can't we acknowledge HRC's accomplishment? (5.00 / 13) (#121)
    by davnee on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:08:53 AM EST
    She has massively turned around the vote of white men over the course of the primary season.  This is pretty impressive.  How has she done this?  I'd say by earning respect for her toughness and by campaigning concretely on the economy which is more resonant with these voters than the hopium.  It probably doesn't hurt that Obama became the "black candidate" simultaneously thanks to his own race baiting and of course Jeremiah Wright.  And as a bonus, Obama basically told small town America to f-off, which couldn't have helped, as he pasted a big elite liberal sticker on his own forehead.  

    But my point here is that Hillary didn't turn Obama black (or elite).  He was black from the beginning.  He could not have started with such a high number among white men if they were racist (or if racism was their most important factor in voting).  This is all cultural.  Obama went from post-partisan smart and nice guy who happens to have darker skin to the radical, anti-American angry black man who thinks white people are crackers.  And what was Clinton doing in the mean-time, she was becoming a Rocky/Annie Oakley combo platter running on populist themes.  She was overcoming the sexist stereotypes held by white men, while Obama was busy scoring a twofer, falling into both the racist and elitist liberal stereotypes held by white men.

    Race and sex and perhaps most importantly class are all at work here, but they do not have to be total destiny.  You can move these groups.  You can defuse the stereotypes.  But you have to know how.  Clinton has figured out how.  Obama not so much.

    [ Parent ]

    Agree (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Athena on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:18:14 AM EST
    Great points.  Hillary's electoral accomplishments are ignored, while Obama's failures become her fault.  

    And Obama's cultural identity now - post-Wright, bittergate, etc. - is quite fixed and unfavorable for him.  I don't think that what he says in the coming months can undo this largely self-made portrait.

    [ Parent ]

    Yep. (5.00 / 3) (#182)
    by liminal on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:47:17 AM EST
    Anecdotally, canvassing and phone banking in WV, I've found that undecided men tend to really respond when I emphasize Clinton's toughness and resilience, particularly when discussing the economy, the importance of enforcing regulations on banks and markets, et cetera.  

    [ Parent ]
    That's absolutely right. (none / 0) (#132)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:14:09 AM EST
    But no, we cannot acknowledge her accomplishments. We can only blame her for everything Obama has done to himself.

    What a wonderful world.

    [ Parent ]

    extrapolated gender in both polls (none / 0) (#42)
    by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:27:45 AM EST
    okay, I extrapolated the race/gender numbers from both the NYTimes and CNN/CBS exit polls in CA.

    Actual final percentages
    Clinton 51.5%, Obama 43.2% Margin=7.3 points

    NY Times Gender/Race extrapolation totals
    Clinton 50.8%, Obama 44.4% Margin = 6.4 points

    CNN/CBS Gender/Race extrapolation totals
    Clinton 52.6% Obama 41.5% margin = 9.1 points

    The Times extrapolation is closer to the actual results, and given that the Times has Obama up by 6 among whites, and CNN has Clinton up by 1, I think that the Obama probably did win the white vote in CA, but by 2 or 3 points.

    [ Parent ]

    Don't forget the Hispanic vote- Most Important! (5.00 / 4) (#81)
    by stefystef on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:49:17 AM EST
    Please, oh PLEASE, do not lump the Hispanic vote with the AA vote.  Two completely different communities and two communities that are actually competing against each other for jobs and social resources.

    No mad love going on there.

    Too much emphasis on the black vote when the Hispanic voting blocks are very powerful in CA, the South West and Florida.

    Of all the states Obama won, I'd be happy to see him win 3 (VT, IL, MD/DC).  Everyone is comparing Obama's polls to Kerry in 2004.

    I'm going to compare him to McGovern of '72.  I get the nasty feeling we are about to have the "McGovern of our generation" in November.

    [ Parent ]

    yup i noted earlier that (none / 0) (#127)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:10:58 AM EST
    the axelrod agenda seems to have ignored the latino vote or at least in part they ignored him. irony, maybe that have too much hope and bitter doesn't appeal to them!

    [ Parent ]
    W. Va.... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by mike in dc on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:16:20 AM EST
    ...if Clinton is beating him by 36 points in polling there, that suggests a 70-30 split of the white vote, or thereabouts.  That would be significantly lower than in North Carolina, but a little bit higher than in Mississippi(where I think whites went about 3-1 for Clinton).
    Statistically, if ever a state demographic were "non-college educated, low-to-moderate income rural whites", West Virginia is it.  Anecdotally speaking, just because the number of African-American residents is small, does not mean that racial antipathy is not fairly high there--my wife, who is A-A, will not set foot in that state.  Does that mean that most people voting for Clinton are voting based on race?  Of course not.  But if you start with a 60-40 split based simply on the theory that Clinton is more effective right now at connecting with this demo, then race only has to be a factor with about 20% of the electorate, in order to skew the results to 70-30.

    I lived in that state... (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by kredwyn on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:10:28 AM EST
    In that state you have a range of income levels that go from high to low. You have a high tech corridor. You have some areas where the folks have never gone out of the state. And you have some world travelers. You have a lot of great colleges and you have quite a few people who have graduated from HS...and that's it. You have some diversity...but not a lot. Charleston is right over the bridge from Cincy, OH.

    Has your wife ever been there? The mountains are beautiful. And the camping is wonderful...the hiking and biking too. (It's mostly an outdoors adventure type tourism industry)

    And you have a lot of misrepresentation of the people based on folks like the Greaseman.

    Why has she made that oath?

    [ Parent ]

    I'm sure all of that is true... (none / 0) (#187)
    by mike in dc on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:51:51 AM EST
    ...and yet it can also be true that there's racial antipathy and large pockets of intolerance at the same time.  You don't need for every other West Virginian to be racially biased for there to be a problem--you probably only need 1 in 5 or 1 in 10 for there to be a problem.  

    WV has a "rep" with African-Americans as a not-very-tolerant place, as far as I can tell.  That recent incident where a woman was kidnapped, raped and tortured for a week probably didn't help that image much.

    [ Parent ]

    I Don't Think He Meant (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by flashman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:20:17 AM EST
    she can actually get 80%.  He was making a point about the turnout needed to make up ground in the pop. vote.  You should read it again, carfully.  

    Classically Taken Out Of Context (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by flashman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:40:39 AM EST
    if you quote him word for word, it should be considered in context.  It's clearly meant to be hypothetical; even 80% of 100K votes wouldn't do her any good.  That's what he's saying here.  The conclusion that her base deserts if she doesn't get they hypothetical portion is inaccurate, IMO.  But I'm sure Clinton's quote will be abused in that way, just as so many other of his has been.

    [ Parent ]
    Good Lord, so sad that people don't understand (5.00 / 4) (#93)
    by stefystef on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:55:02 AM EST
    the "drama" of politics.

    Bill knows the game.  He know she's can't win 80% of the vote.  By the way, no one said anything negative about the 90+ AA votes that Obama gets.  No calls that "racist".  And the MSM is afraid to mention anything about the lopsided racial voting for Obama, in fear of being called "racist".  

    And this is why I've said Obama has played the race card this entire election season.  And that's why McCain will win in November.

    [ Parent ]

    He's not saying "can" (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Klio on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:50:23 AM EST
    meaning that she will.  He's saying can as in 'could.'  

    His point is that even were Hillary to get 80% of the vote, it wouldn't matter should turnout be low.  He's asking them to be neither discouraged nor complacent and to go out and vote for her.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Thank you for clearing it up (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by stefystef on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:57:20 AM EST
    I know the Obama followers like to construe the words of the Clintons to dismiss their statements.

    Pity Bill has been demonized through this entire process.  

    [ Parent ]

    Quite all right, flashman (none / 0) (#47)
    by kmblue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:30:31 AM EST
    We'll have to agree to disagree
    about Joe's alleged point. ;)

    [ Parent ]
    Not hard to understand (none / 0) (#96)
    by daria g on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:56:23 AM EST
    He was talking about the importance of the popular vote.  The number, not the percentage.  It's very clear.  Thus, 80% of 100,000 is less preferable to getting 60% of 250,000, say.

    [ Parent ]
    The Hard Part (5.00 / 3) (#146)
    by flashman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:20:36 AM EST
    is being honest.  Frankly, Clinton's words have dishonestly been twisted by the other campaign too many times.  I expect that in the GE.  It's disgraceful to see it happen in the primary.

    [ Parent ]
    80%? (5.00 / 6) (#35)
    by kenoshaMarge on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:21:39 AM EST
    man them goal posts just keep getting further and further away.

    I don't conclude that her demographic base has given up on her. And that's in spite of the media and nearly everyone else telling them they should.

    well, i watched hannity last night! (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:24:58 AM EST
    ok, i said it. ya'll have me fair and square. i watched part of faux. lets head drop, lowers eyes!
    i'll admit it during this season sometimes i linger there more than i did before while channel surfing.

    my delayed point is that he was showing fairly recent clips of michelle and talking about her very negative view of america and the type of country it is. it seems to me to be reflected somewhat in some of obama's comments ie the "bitter" comment. maybe axelrod is trying to build a coalition of young voters who all think they got a raw deal. and looking back at the thinking of trinity, i wonder. hence we may see greater divisions in the votes along these lines. we certainly do right now in the women who feel it.

    if that is the case then axelrod will have no choice but to issue appeals to this type of voter in the general election and hence even wider divisons down the road and not unity.

    Michelle (5.00 / 5) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:31:36 AM EST
    is a disaster waiting to happen.

    [ Parent ]
    My husband agrees with you. (5.00 / 0) (#188)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:58:30 AM EST
    He was very offended by her "really proud of America" statement. And he is an old hippie!

    [ Parent ]
    she has a new speech going around (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:00:29 AM EST
    that we will hear more about.
    she is going to be a big problem for him in the general.


    [ Parent ]
    young voters (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by DFLer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:50:12 AM EST
    Can you please expand on this theme of young voters thinking they got a raw deal?

    I have not heard it before.

    [ Parent ]

    Well, the usual anti-establishment tendencies (5.00 / 4) (#139)
    by daria g on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:17:38 AM EST
    Plus I bet the war in Iraq is a bigger issue comparatively (I do not have data though), and they are too young to appreciate the Clinton 90's.  And it's true, Obama is young, cool, and stylish, riffs on pop culture, uses slang sometimes, makes occasional hip hop references.  Such as the gestures he made that were def offensive to Hilary, but at the same time isn't it neat that the "dirt off your shoulder" thing is in a Jay-Z song.  That just seems like being cool not crossing a line, esp when your friends are all playing Grand Theft Auto.

    And I get that he appeals to young people wanting to do something meaningful and positive, to make a difference in the world, but not knowing what at all to do.. he tells them what they can do is.. elect him.  Not sure what beyond that?  Seems like telling them the easy way to make change is enough, just vote Obama and you get this magical "new politics" and nobody has to do any hard work of figuring out what change they want or how to make it happen.  

    I can see how the tone of his campaign is almost religious and is going to make his supporters (esp young people who haven't had the experience of seeing a candidate they strongly support lose) get deeply personally invested in it.  So yeah, if he loses they'll personally think they got a raw deal, the "old politics" won the day, etc.  I think it's better now than in November, and I doubt they'll refuse to go to the polls if they don't get Obama.  Most all the Dean people I knew are still actively engaged in politics four years later even after a heartbreaking crash and burn.

    [ Parent ]

    factor in the average joe/jane (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:25:21 AM EST
    getting fed up with being called bitter all the while their way of life is slipping away. do you honestly believe they'll sit back and not go to the polls in record numbers? i sure don't and neither do republicans. i suggest that needs to be factored and soon.

    [ Parent ]
    video games and The Kind. (none / 0) (#158)
    by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:27:28 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    what is hard to take about that? (none / 0) (#97)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:56:33 AM EST
    frankly i don't have to defend that. i am simply commenting that is the possible axelrod agenda. go take a look at the clips. take a good look at the brush his shoulder, clean her off his shoe, and give hillary the bird show. is that to appeal to the older aa voters? i think not!

    [ Parent ]
    sorry i thought you said it was hard to take! (none / 0) (#99)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:57:51 AM EST
    is is hard for me to see this happening. shakes head! i wake up hoping to see a real campaign with issues being discussed and fear what campaigning like this will do.

    [ Parent ]
    now I'm really confused! (none / 0) (#133)
    by DFLer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:15:28 AM EST
    hellothere
    it was not an attack question, by the way...I was trying to figure out what that raw deal may be?

    • the draft?
    • cell phone service drop out?
    • TM charges?
    • paying high rent at mom & dads?

    sorry...I know many fine and upstanding young people. Just found it incredulous that they would have adopted a "raw deal" complaint scenario.(except about the cost of college and college loans, ah course)


    [ Parent ]
    well, there is a large school drop out (none / 0) (#150)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:22:27 AM EST
    rate in the minority communities. the prison population is primarily young minorities. i am thinking in terms of those potential voters. take a look at the thinking in the trinity sermons. it is separation of black/white and blaming the white population for their woes. that is reflected in michelle's comments and barack's to a lesser extent.

    i am not trying to diss anyone here or be racist. i am simply following the vidoes and statements made by the players in this election. you hear about the new democratic party. now the amount of latte liberals is very limited. the amount of young college students is very limited. what does that leave? the young minority as potential voters is my guess and i believe axelrod's.

    [ Parent ]

    thanks (none / 0) (#161)
    by DFLer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:30:31 AM EST
    that's the explanation I was looking for.

    [ Parent ]
    welcome, and i hope i am wrong. (none / 0) (#165)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:34:20 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    She fits the saying (none / 0) (#106)
    by themomcat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:00:25 AM EST
    that behind every successful man is a pushy woman. Oy!
    / "By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes." Macbeth, Wm. Shakespeare
    [ Parent ]
    Michele's outlook on America kinda (5.00 / 3) (#129)
    by athyrio on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:11:24 AM EST
    confirms the fact that she is influenced by that Rev. Wright who she listened to for so long...It is almost proof positive as she obviously has a hard time covering it up in her speeches...I think that is sad but also racism on her part...I think whites are not the only demographic that can be racist and yet noone is saying it...There is a degree of racism in the fact that he gets over 90% of the AA vote....IMO...

    [ Parent ]
    Strong evidence (5.00 / 5) (#39)
    by oldpro on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:26:25 AM EST
    against Obama's electability hopes.

    I'd say that these are 'numbers you can believe in.'

    that kind of talk makes the unity pony cry (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:29:16 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Speaking of Unity Ponies (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by katiebird on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:42:20 AM EST
    Look at Reclusive Leftist's, Write Your Own Caption

    [ Parent ]
    No, it's not a cult. (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:47:15 AM EST
    Why would you think that?

    I'm not sure if Obama is supposed to be Jesus, Elvis or a combination of both.

    [impales eye with fork)

    [ Parent ]

    Zombie in Scene 18: Senndd mmorrre bbrrrainns (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by Ellie on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:30:39 AM EST
    This seems to capture the phenomenon pretty neatly. It was in another TL thread. It's so perfect. (Who can resist Cake?)

    After HRC nails WV, I'm sure the Collective Class's group snit over how she talked to white voters who are -- get this -- white will be sputtering on all thrusters. [/that woman will do anything to get elected]

    [ Parent ]

    all that clacking about hillary and (5.00 / 3) (#166)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:35:17 AM EST
    her "white" comments just might backfire on the media. folks are getting tired of that i think.

    [ Parent ]
    that is strong, katiebird. (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by hellothere on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:03:35 AM EST
    it speaks louder than any captions.

    [ Parent ]
    That doesn't look like Obama.... (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Maria Garcia on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:17:05 AM EST
    ...it looks like that R&B singer Mario. But I guess that's the point.

    [ Parent ]
    at least he is not walking (none / 0) (#95)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:55:28 AM EST
    ON the water.
    yet.


    [ Parent ]
    Obama doesn't walk on water... (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:06:21 AM EST
    he transcends water -- like he transcended the Great Lakes from the the upper mid-west all the way to the Pacific Border states...

    [ Parent ]
    It's hard work (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:08:08 AM EST
    transcending 57 states, but Obama says: Yes We Can!

    /snark

    [ Parent ]

    I heard Obama walked across Lake Michigan (none / 0) (#104)
    by stefystef on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:00:02 AM EST
    Yep, I heard it on the Oprah Show when she was preaching at the Church of Obama.

    And everybody knows Oprah knows everything.

    ~sarcasm~

    [ Parent ]

    the fainting fans at rallies (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:04:36 AM EST
    was enough for me.
    not interested in a president who has fans fainting at rallies.
    sorry.

    [ Parent ]
    IIRC He Did Better Than Walk Across Water (5.00 / 4) (#128)
    by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:11:10 AM EST
    He had the awesome power to move the Great Lakes to Oregon.

    [ Parent ]
    This article by an AA finally addresses it (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by athyrio on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:29:03 AM EST
    This is a good article about it

    Nice conclusion to the article. (none / 0) (#55)
    by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:36:20 AM EST
    This is about facing facts. And history will reflect poorly on Democrats if they believe it is virtuous to ignore race in the name of nominating the first black candidate for the White House - even if it means giving the Republicans a better chance to once again walk away with the big prize of the presidency.

    What he said.


    [ Parent ]

    WV Is More of the Same for Hillary (5.00 / 3) (#100)
    by Athena on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:58:01 AM EST
    A better view of West Virginia and its nearly all-white electorate is that it fully reveals the depth of Hillary's electoral strengths that have been ignored by the MSM in the other states, which you quote above.

    Hillary's ongoing vote majorities are simply ratified by WV, not disputed by them.

    WV is just NC without the influence of the AA vote, which almost entirely goes to Obama.

    It's important to maintain a narrative which does not paint WV as an outlier - but as a continuation of Hillary's voting strengths.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes, it shows her strength (5.00 / 6) (#117)
    by stefystef on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:07:57 AM EST
    It shows that Hillary can get the conservative liberal vote and pull Independents.  These are the votes that the Dems need in November.

    If Hillary would have been the nominee, the AA vote would have come out for