by hilzoy
The networks seem to have called North Carolina for Obama at the very moment the polls closed. As I write, Indiana has not been called, though Clinton is ahead 57-43 with a third of the votes counted. CNN has the results for NC and IN with nifty maps: just hold your mouse over an individual county, and its results so far will appear. Junkie food ;)
If you live in the Pacific northwest, don't let this open thread distract you from the dog you have been longing for. (You know you have. Really.)
Otherwise, discuss away.
yes, this is great for the party
* 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.
thanks Hillary, you're the best ! awesome job.
Posted by: cleek | May 06, 2008 at 08:19 PM
The exit polls in Indiana look closer than 55/45.
I want to know who's getting the Amish vote.
Posted by: david kilmer | May 06, 2008 at 08:33 PM
I have some hope that those numbers are soft, and once people realize how many kinds of crazy McCain is...
Posted by: Pooh | May 06, 2008 at 08:34 PM
Interesting: Clinton's lead has been narrowing slowly all evening. I mean, it's still at 8 points, but as noted above, it was at 14 earlier. And I believe several serious Obama strongholds have yet to kick in.
I am not saying I think he'll somehow pull this one off. I don't. Just remarking.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 06, 2008 at 08:47 PM
NYT also has a good map, complete with mouseover-activated demographic data.
Which brings up a question that's been gnawing at me for a while:
I've always believed that Obama has the stronger crossover appeal, due to both his more conciliatory rhetoric and his lack of history as a polarizing figure. But in the recent contests his strengths have been predominantly in traditional Democratic territory -- urban areas with diverse and more educated voters -- while Clinton has been picking up poorer, rural, white (ie. stereotypically Republican) votes.
As an effete urban Obama supporter, I'm inclined to believe that Clinton is picking up the low-information, identity-politics-motivated Democratic vote, which is pretty much mutually exclusive of the low-information, identity-politics-motivated Republican vote, and that the real swing voters are more likely to be relatively independent urban Republicans (of whom I know several, all supporting Obama). But that's not much more than a wishful hunch.
Has anyone done a more thorough analysis of this?
Posted by: rubble | May 06, 2008 at 08:55 PM
The Democratic party is somewhere between the past and the future. This election is, if nothing else, about the soul of the Democratic Party:
Are they about the overwhelmingly incessant partisan fratricide of the past? Or are they about a vision of of the future that includes all people working together? The white working class(who have yet to be convinced) as well as the black working class?
If the Democrats blow this opportunity to take and shape the future (because they are afraid of "losing") they deserve what they get: Nothing. (least of all the future)
Prediction (no I did not need a glass ball to see this): Obama, NC by a large margin. Clinton: IN by a narrow margin.
The politics of divisiveness will continue thru Aug. (It is her only hope)
signed by, a long time union carpenter who is just plain tired.
Posted by: tom p | May 06, 2008 at 08:57 PM
I'm watching Obama's speech now, he's pulling the stops out. When the audience chants "yes we can" it makes me think he really needs his own militia. I'd dig that.
Posted by: byrningman | May 06, 2008 at 09:22 PM
Indiana is now under a 5% spread (52.4-47.6 9:28PM ET) with 71% reporting.
This will be a close race in Indiana, and that's leaving aside a North Carolina win looking to be well within the double digits.
Posted by: Warren Terra | May 06, 2008 at 09:32 PM
A quick mouse-over of the counties suggests that Obama will narrow the gap further. Many of the rural Clinton counties seem to have all precincts in, while Indianapolis and Hamilton County, apparently an Indianapolis suburb, still have many precincts out, and are running pro-Obama.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 06, 2008 at 09:39 PM
Remember: Gary IN hasn't reported at all...
Posted by: hilzoy | May 06, 2008 at 09:42 PM
Lake county, which contains Gary, is the little white bit in the NW corner of the state. Wikipedia:
Posted by: hilzoy | May 06, 2008 at 09:49 PM
Remember: Gary IN hasn't reported at all...
How is Gary likely to vote? Blue-collar pro-Clinton? Lake County is 25% black, so pro-Obama?
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 06, 2008 at 09:50 PM
Geez, hilzoy. I could have saved myself some effort by waiting for you to do the work.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 06, 2008 at 09:52 PM
Gary is seen as an Obama stronghold, but probably not a big enough one to overcome.
According to comments on other blogs, the Obama campaign is apparently leaking that they predict losing Indiana by 10,000 votes - i.e., 1% - when all the votes are in.
And, of course, Clinton needed double-digit wins in both states to start making up her pledged delegate gap.
Posted by: Warren Terra | May 06, 2008 at 09:55 PM
In other election news my sister informs me she has been elected a Town Meeting representative in Brookline, MA.
She ran on the Progressive slate, though I can't imagine what a Brookline conservative slate looks like.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 06, 2008 at 09:56 PM
Heh: we live to serve. ;)
Gary itself is (Wikipedia again) almost 85% black, so I'm betting it goes for Obama. The question is the rest of the county. But I would think it would go for Obama. But by what margin? who can say?
Posted by: hilzoy | May 06, 2008 at 09:57 PM
The thing is, though: its the second most populous county in the state (Wikipedia yet again), and so far *none* of its precincts are in.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 06, 2008 at 09:58 PM
Suppose Clinton gets a narrow win in Indiana.
Can she really justify continuing her campaign? More important, I suppose, will her supporters stay with her?
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 06, 2008 at 10:08 PM
Gary is such a tease.
Posted by: byrningman | May 06, 2008 at 10:09 PM
"Has anyone done a more thorough analysis of this?"
The exit polls support your hunches. I'd say "mutually inclusive" though.
And kudos for "low-information, identity-politics-motivated". It couldn't have been put more politely.
Posted by: david kilmer | May 06, 2008 at 10:13 PM
I always assumed that Clinton would win Indiana/ I thought that was generally assumed to be the probable result.
A NC Obama blowout and a narrow win for Clinton in IN is a vwery good result for Obama. My guess is that Clinton will stay iinn but as a sideshow. She is out of money again, the press will start a deathwatch on her, and the Obama campaign, in conjunction with the DNC is about to launch an all out voter registration drive. I think Obama will go out now against McCain as if CLinton isn't in the race any more.
That's what my crystal ball says!
Posted by: wonkie | May 06, 2008 at 10:21 PM
If there is a just God, HRC will lose IN just for that thoroughly obnoxious opening remark.
Posted by: femdem | May 06, 2008 at 10:42 PM
Lake County is alive.
28K Obama, 9500 Clinton with 28% of precincts reporting. If that ratio holds Obama will win.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 06, 2008 at 11:51 PM
I may stay Catholic after all :-)
Posted by: femdem | May 06, 2008 at 11:55 PM
I may stay Catholic after all.
Oh ye of little faith.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 06, 2008 at 11:56 PM
Little faith, lotta hope :-)
Posted by: femdem | May 06, 2008 at 11:58 PM
Well, I'm going to bed. Who knows when those people in Lake County will finish counting.
Come on, Lake County counters, it's not that hard!
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 07, 2008 at 12:29 AM
Going to bed means you don't care ;)
Posted by: david kilmer | May 07, 2008 at 12:41 AM
I'm seeing people advocating voting on skin color. Much different than the Maryland Senate election. Odd that.
Posted by: DaveC | May 07, 2008 at 12:48 AM
DaveC,
What are you talking about? Who are these people? Where are there statements? What do they have to do with anyone here? And what on earth does MD have to do with anything at all?
Posted by: Turbulence | May 07, 2008 at 12:51 AM
Well, you should stop talking in front of the mirror then.
Posted by: gwangung | May 07, 2008 at 12:57 AM
Get a clue. Read upthread. You will see the expectations and hope for Lake County, . And the comments about Michigan.
Posted by: DaveC | May 07, 2008 at 01:07 AM
DaveC, how about you quote the specific bits of text you're talking about instead? Please quote the specific sentences where multiple people advocate voting on skin color.
Posted by: Turbulence | May 07, 2008 at 01:14 AM
DaveC: there's a difference between predicting and advocating.
In other news, with 99% in from IN, Clinton leads by 22,000 votes.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 07, 2008 at 01:16 AM
For someone who's exhorting someone to get a clue, you're rather bereft of one yourself.
Try reading more carefully. And stay away from mirrors.
Posted by: gwangung | May 07, 2008 at 01:20 AM
Absent Rev. Wright's recent escapade , Obama takes Indiana by a narrow margin. Discuss
Posted by: stonetools | May 07, 2008 at 09:15 AM
I think Obama will go out now against McCain as if CLinton isn't in the race any more.
That's pretty much what he did at his speech in NC. Clinton was mentioned, in words meant to soothe her supporters, but the big target was McCain.
Posted by: Jeff | May 07, 2008 at 01:49 PM
Absent Rev. Wright's recent escapade , Obama takes Indiana by a narrow margin. Discuss
also, absent Limbaugh's efforts, Obama wins by a narrow margin.
On a broader level, among the 17 percent of primary goers who said they would choose Sen. John McCain over Hillary Clinton in a hypothetical general election match-up, 41 percent of that group came from Clinton's own camp. In essence, roughly seven percent of Clinton support in Indiana (40 percent of 17 percent) said they would defect to the Republican should she end up the nominee.
7% of her votes is roughly 45K. she beat Obama by 18K.
Posted by: cleek | May 07, 2008 at 02:08 PM
"If there is a just God, HRC will lose IN just for that thoroughly obnoxious opening remark."
What remark, where?
"DaveC,
What are you talking about?"
DNFTT.
Posted by: Gary Farber | May 08, 2008 at 01:25 PM
Cleek,
The article you cite is a little confusing, but I think your calculation is wrong because the bolded sentence seems wrong. Seven percent of primary voters both (voted for Clinton) and (prefer McCain to Clinton).
That means that about 14% of Clinton voters prefer McCain. That's pretty bizarre. Not sure I believe it.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | May 08, 2008 at 04:26 PM
"That means that about 14% of Clinton voters prefer McCain. That's pretty bizarre. Not sure I believe it."
You think all those people reportedly voting for Clinton because of Rush Limbaugh, etc., aren't?
Do you also doubt that Hilzoy and I and zillions of other Democrats caucused as, or voted as, Republicans for John Anderson in the caucuses and primaries of 1980? Or was that somehow different?
Posted by: Gary Farber | May 09, 2008 at 11:58 AM
This is funny:
Posted by: hilzoy | May 09, 2008 at 12:15 PM