Reason Magazine

Site Search

The North Carolina/Indiana Primary Thread

A word about exit polls: The early ones suck. I do lots of parsing of the first, post-poll-closing wave of numbers, but they are faulty and they get massaged as the night goes on. I anticipated a closer-than-my-prediction race in Pennsylvania when the early exits had him winning the Philadelphia suburbs, but as the night went on Obama's 16-point lead there vanished. So if, for example, the first exit polls show Obama tying Clinton among west North Carolina whites, assume the data sucks.

Indiana (7 p.m.)
The Democrats. If Rev. Jeremiah Wright had greeted the new year with a self-imposed exile to Tibet, or if—even better—he'd turned off the cameras in Trinity United Church and never recorded himself saying "God damn America," Barack Obama would be knocking Hillary Clinton out of the race today. Sure, she would have tried to stagger on after losing Indiana and North Carolina. As Phil Klein points out, her "incredible resilience" is mostly a function of the fact that she's Hillary Clinton and started this race with legions of delegates in her pocket, one of the biggest fundraising lists on the planet, and a list of owed favors that approached Santa Claus naughty-or-nice-list-length.

But if not for Jeremiah Wright, Obama would be crushing her in both primary states. In its widely-circulated post-Super Tuesday spreadsheet of coming delegate fights, Obama's campaign predicted a 7-point win in Indiana. It was even more fertile territory than Wisconsin (they predicted a 7-point win and won by 17) or Virginia (they predicted 2 points and won by 29). It borded Illinois, and voters in the 1st and 8th congressional districts already knew and liked Obama. It was lousy with college towns. It had a small but energized black population that would pad his margin. Obama only needed to win about 40 percent of the white vote to carry the state, and he'd done that in Missouri, a demographically similar state.

Obama is weaker now and will probably lose what he called (in April) a "tiebreaker" state. He won't lose by the 10-point margin of Ohio or 9-point margin of Pennsylvania, because Indiana is more Midwestern than either of those states, and it doesn't touch on the Appalachian Mountains—the single strongest region for Clinton in the entire country. A win wouldn't be impossible, actually, because (as Robert Novak pointed out), Obama could pummel Clinton in the five most vote-rich counties and win, as long as he wasn't totally blown out in the other 87 counties. I think he'll win more than five counties but lose anyway. Clinton 53.5, Obama 46.5, with Clinton netting 5 delegates over Obama.

- Counties to watch: Hamilton, the wealthy, fast-growing county north of Indianapolis. If Clinton's winning easy there, Obama's coalition is coming apart. The Politico suggests that Howard County will be the swing area.

- Demographics to watch: Whites, of course, with a quick glance at the black vote. (The pollsters that show Clinton winning handily show her recovering ground with black voters, but they showed that in Pennsylvania and she lost them by 80 points.) In Pennsylvania Clinton won white Democrats by 30 points. If Obama closes that number to less than 20 points, he wins. If it expands, she wins easily.

- Voters to watch: Republicans. The impact of Rush Limbaugh's campaign (joined by some local hosts) to get Republicans to vote Hillary is really hard to measure, especially now that Obama's image has been damaged by Wright. Republicans went for Obama by 44 points in Wisconsin; they split 50-50 between the candidates in Ohio. (They weren't allowed to vote in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary.) Anecdotal evidence is that the Limbaugh voters are matched by the good-faith Clinton and Obama Republican voters.

- Issue to watch: The gas tax holiday. If exit pollsters ask about it, let's see if the Clinton pander worked.

The Republicans. It's really hard to tell what McCain's margin will be here, as thousands and thousands of Republicans will be bolting their primary to vote for Clinton or Obama. Huckabee, Romney, and Paul are all on the ballot. In 2000, Bush only got 82 percent of the primary vote even though he'd defeated McCain weeks earlier. So I'll guess McCain 78, Paul 10, Others 12.

North Carolina (7:30 p.m.)
I simply don't believe the tightening polls in this state. Not the ones that show it becoming a toss-up.Todd Beeton, a Hillary-leaning blogger, points out something in this expectation-setting post: Southern polls have always underestimated Obama's support as they underestimate the black vote gap between Obama and Clinton (they usually peg it at 50 points, and it ends up around 80) and lowball Obama's white vote. Of course, we haven't had a Southern primary since Wrightgate, and Clinton has worked North Carolina harder than any Southern state since Tennessee, which she won easily. Obama 55, Clinton 44, with a net gain of around 9 delegates for Obama.

- County to watch: Watuga. John Vaught LaBeaume explains why: It's the kind of rural whites-plus-blacks-plus-college kid county that Obama used to dominate.

- Voters to watch: Independents. They've padded Obama's margin in all of the pre-Wright states. What are they doing now?

- Issue to watch: Jeremiah Wright. Apparently voters were split 50/50 on whether they factored him into their vote. What did whites think?

The Republicans. This could actually get interesting. When John McCain criticized the state GOP for running an ad linking Obama and Wright to the state's Democratic gubernatorial candidates, he won his usual dollop of national praise and pissed off a lot of Republicans back here. McCain 72, Paul 12, Others 16.

Other races to watch: The 3rd and 4th district congressional races in North Carolina, and the 5th district race in Indiana. The former to see if Ron Paul endorsees are winning their elections, the latter to see if the grassroots can purge a well-fed insider Republican.

UPDATE 6:08: The Daily Kos has the only early exits that are ever any good: racial voting. Blacks went against Clinton in both states by about 85 points. That's nightmarish and much worse than in the polls that showed her closing strong--they showed her climbing back into the teens. In North Carolina, this matters. Assuming 33 percent black turnout, the difference between a 70-point loss of the black vote and a 85-point loss is about 4 points overall. She'd have to win about 71 percent of the white vote to overcome that.

UPDATE 7:03: NBC calls Indiana "too early to call," which must mean they have clear exits (or else they'd say "too close"). I'm guessing Obama isn't pulling the votes he needs in the Chicago burbs, which have been bombarded with Wright coverage.

UPDATE 7:06: Early, bullshit exits have Clinton winning by 4 in Indiana as Obama carries everything but the rural south and central parts of the state. I'm sure this'll get massaged.

UPDATE 7:11: On MSNBC, John Kerry is really pushing the "Rush Limbaugh is begging Republicans to vote Hillary" meme. They want to discredit a Hillary win if she takes it by the margin of crossover voters. Indeed, the exits have her winning Republicans.

UPDATE 7:30: North Carolina is called a nanosecond after polls close for Obama. Hey, Mickey Kaus, how's that "Obama by 3 or less" prediction holding up?

UPDATE 7:35: North Carolina exits look good, not great, for Obama. He held but didn't gain among white voters: He'll win about 38 percent of them, his best result outside of Virginia and Georgia. Also -- and expect this to change -- he's winning every region of the state. Landslides in the Research Triangle and Charlotte, single-digit wins everywhere else.

UPDATE 7:55: Basically nothing has been counted in the NC-3 and NC-4 races, but Jones and Lawson won big in early voting. Jones is up by 17 points, Lawson is up by about 40 points.

UPDATE 8:01: Unless northwest Indiana breaks for Clinton, she's not holding the current 14-point lead. Her vote is coming in early: Counties like Vigo, Jefferson and Floyd are counted, while Marion (home of Indianapolis) is 15 percent in and Lake (home of Gary) is completely out.

UPDATE 8:45: Good news from Marc Ambinder:

Campaign advisers are saying that the gas tax pause debate helped him ... though they're not terribly happy that the question wasn't on the exit poll questionnaire

Said one adviser:

"It blunted her appeal with middle and downscale and helped us in the burbs with upper income/college educated voters; it showed why Obama was different than her, which we needed to make people make the leap to vote for us. That didn't happen in PA or OH."

Ha. Also, ha.

UPDATE 8:51: Maybe Paul's biographical links to Pennsylvania made the difference for him, because he's running third behind Huckabee in both states. If he's lucky, though, he'll get 80,000 votes from both states, and cross the 1 million vote mark.

UPDATE 8:54: I don't know why NBC hasn't can't Indiana, as the crucial counties that needed to swamp for Obama are coming in rather weak for him. St. Joseph County (with South Bend) by 6 points, for example.

UPDATE 9:04: I just spoke to B.J. Lawson, who is clobbering Augustus Cho 70-30 with more than 60 percent of the vote counted. "We're very excited," he says, although he won't declare victory until Cho concedes. "We're ready to run a positive campaign based on Constitutional values."

UPDATE 9:15: Hm... Obama altered the Indiana line in his speech. He added the word "apparent" when congratulating Clinton on her Indiana win. MSNBC, at least, is eyeing Lake County and calling it too close to call. (It looks in some ways like Missouri, where Obama was losing, and several networks called it against him, until the final precincts of St. Louis came in. The problem for him is that Gary is not St. Louis.)

UPDATE 9:28: NC-3 is going to take forever to report... all of those hard-to-reach coastal towns. But Jones is widening his lead over McLaughlin. Everyone I know thinks Jones has it won.

UPDATE 9:43: Tim Russert is reiterating the "gas tax hurt Clinton" storyline -- it took the focus off Wright at the 11th hour and showed voters the non-pandering Obama they liked in the first place.

UPDATE 9:51: B.J. Lawson wins.

It's a landslide, and a surprisingly big total for a low-turnout GOP primary.

9:56: I can sense the spin moving away from "split decision" to "Obama wins." Even if Clinton wins Indiana now, it's within the margin of Limbaugh-listening spoilers.

10:15: The Daily Kos (yes, I'll link 'em again) begs Clinton to stay in for two weeks in order to reduce the embarrassment of Obama's coming West Virginia (May 13) and Kentucky (May 20) losses. He's on to something. Obama would lose both states even if Clinton dropped out five minutes ago. The question is whether Clinton can take Oregon (also May 20) from his column, something that seems less and less likely as Obama's coalition refuses to budge.

10:39: Clinton speaks! She claims to have "broken the tie" without actually declaring an Indiana victory. Because she can't declare it yet, if she can declare it at all. Sorry if I'm stepping on Ann Althouse's beat, but my God does Bill Clinton ever look red-faced and sad, standing behind Clinton. This is the body language of a mounting defeat.

10:47: With all but 5 (of 17) counties counted, Jones is winning his primary by 20 points. It's over. The pro-war bloc won't get its scalp.
Send this article to:

« Ancient Aztec Ritual Harshed by… | Main | New at Reason »

Comments to "The North Carolina/Indiana Primary Thread":

Add a comment ↓

Danny | May 6, 2008, 6:03pm | #

"The Republicans. This could actually get interesting. ... McCain 72, Paul 12, Others 16."

Interesting... right...

[sarcasm]
Wait, Paul is still running?
[/sarcasm]

Danny | May 6, 2008, 6:03pm | #

... I suck at life.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 6:11pm | #

Indiana:

Clinton 55

Hussein 45

North Carolina:

Hussein 53

Clinton 47

How about | May 6, 2008, 6:13pm | #

the 'reason sucks' thread?

SIV | May 6, 2008, 6:16pm | #

Obama will win Western Carolina whites...in Asheville and Boone. Outside HippieTown "Operation Chaos" will deliver for Hillary

Edward | May 6, 2008, 6:16pm | #

Fuck you, Neil.

How does Ron Paul do with Blacks?

wombat | May 6, 2008, 6:17pm | #

reason sucks!!!!

Edward is a | May 6, 2008, 6:18pm | #

tool

Neil | May 6, 2008, 6:19pm | #

I did my part for Op Chaos, SIV!

Pottsy | May 6, 2008, 6:21pm | #

Watauga

Kwix | May 6, 2008, 6:22pm | #

Wow! Edward and Neil keep it up!

I love a good episode of Troll vs. Troll.

*sits down with a bag of popcorn*

John | May 6, 2008, 6:23pm | #

Edward:

My, my,...are you hostile and fullof hate because Obama's mother named him "Hussein"?

Why the hell is calling him by his name and act of "racism"?

You sound a little fucked up ....

Pottsy | May 6, 2008, 6:24pm | #

Have to agree with Siv on western NC. Too many hippie kids in Asheville, Boone, and Cullowhee. Normally, I'd complain, but since we're talking about trouncing Hillary here...

Jason | May 6, 2008, 6:29pm | #

With all the McCain Republicans voting for Hillary in Indiana (Op Chaos), don't you think Ron Paul will win? Either Ron Paul wins or Op Chaos isn't as big as Rush wants you to think it is. If it was big Ron Paul would win easily. How about some analysis on that possibility instead of discussing crap we already know about.

Pro Libertate | May 6, 2008, 6:35pm | #

joe,

I must ask you something. You posted here that you thought the Obama speech post-Wright did more than get him off the hook, it gave him extra momentum. This does not appear to be the case any longer. Thoughts? Insulting the memory of the American public is an acceptable answer.

joe | May 6, 2008, 6:35pm | #

But if not for Jeremiah Wright, Obama would be crushing her in both primary states.

And your evidence for this is that a political campaign put out a statement a long time before the election that they were optimistic?

Indiana is a natural Hillary state, like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and West Virginia. While the Obama campaign may have predicted a victory there, no one objective looking at the race was calling it an Obama state. They were either calling it a Hillary state, or a contested state, when everyone was looking ahead after Super Tuesday.

Blacks went against Clinton in both states by about 85 points. That's nightmarish and much worse than in the polls that showed her closing strong--they showed her climbing back into the teens. The polls showing a margin of six or less in North Carolina all have one thing in common: they show Obama winning only 70-something % of the black vote. I think this is going to prove to be wildly inaccurate.

Predictions: Indiana Clinton by 2-6.

North Carolina: Obama by at least eight, and probably double digits.

When all is said and done, Obama's margin of victory today, in both popular vote and delegates, meets or exceeds Hillary's from Pennsylvania.

joe | May 6, 2008, 6:39pm | #

Pro Libertate,

Obama's Philadelphia speech did give him momentum. You can see it in the tracking polls, starting from the day after the speech and continuing until recently. Hillary only won Pennsylvania by 9%, a smaller margin than in Ohio. Pennsylvania is whiter, older, more rural, and more working-class than Ohio (all the demographics that have broken towards Hillary throughout the campaign), yet she won it by a smaller margin.

Wright's little "Pay Attention to Me" Tour brought the issue back up.

TallDave | May 6, 2008, 6:40pm | #

I just wish this would end, so we can find out where Obama actually stands on the issues, rather than what he tells people in the heat of a bitterly (ha!) contested primary.

Clinton really should have conceded months ago. That woman just doesn't let go, does she? You'd think Obama could buy her off with the Veep, or something.

TallDave | May 6, 2008, 6:42pm | #

Oh, and Weigel, you're just another shameless tool of Big Democracy. Where's the disclosure?? I bet you even voted, didn't you! Shill!

joe | May 6, 2008, 6:42pm | #

Whoops, didn't mean to submit yet, Pro Lib.

I also think that "Bittergate" hurt him (and he didn't have the strong recovery he got from The Speech), and that Hillary has done a good job of retooling her campaign and adopting a new message and strategy.

The main reason Obama hasn't put her away is because she is Hillary Clinton, a titan in the Democratic Party running for the Democratic nomination.

Naga Sadow | May 6, 2008, 6:42pm | #

*hands Kwix a Heineken, grabs some of his popcorn*

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 6:43pm | #

You'd think Obama could buy her off with the Veep, or something.

Yikes. Who wants the three of them sitting around the White House, scheming up ways to shove government on us?

Neil | May 6, 2008, 6:43pm | #

Don't forget Op Chaos, Joe!

joe | May 6, 2008, 6:49pm | #

"Operation Chaos" is vastly overstated, Neil.

Only a tiny number of people "do" strategic voting.

Pro Libertate | May 6, 2008, 6:50pm | #

joe,

Yeah, Wright didn't do his buddy any favors, did he?

I'm not sure how seriously to take the "bitter" business, but I suppose it was an additional negative to toss into the mix. You'd think that Snipergate would've hurt Clinton more, but maybe it's all getting cloudy with the snipery.

I do not look forward to the general. McCain won't necessarily be directly on the offensive, but the lots of the rest of the GOP will be.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 6:51pm | #

Whatever, Joe. Obama still can't close the deal and my gut tells me he will be blown away and steamrolled tonight.

BTW, Hillary Clinton is going for the nuclear option!!

effay | May 6, 2008, 6:54pm | #

So, where does Hildog go from here if she basically splits another two contests with Obama? That's not momentum in my opinion at a point when she needs to be gaining back ground in leaps.

Pottsy | May 6, 2008, 6:57pm | #

So, where does Hildog go from here...

If the race in Indiana is as tight as is predicted, I'm expecting the bitching and moaning about Florida and Michigan to go full throttle starting tomorrow at 8 a.m.

Michael B Sullivan | May 6, 2008, 6:57pm | #

Pro Libertate: Regarding the sniper story versus the bitter thing, I think that people hold Obama to a higher standard than Clinton. And, even though I'm more or less an Obama supporter, I think that that's fair. Obama's campaigning on the premise that his is a new way of doing politics, one that's more civilized, fairer, and ethical, and that he's respectful of those he disagrees with and will unify the country. Clinton's campaign is, frankly, not about her honesty. It's about her technocratic competence.

So Clinton is hurt relatively little by blatantly lying. Obama is hurt relatively more by showing disdain for people. Fair enough.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 6:58pm | #

So, where does Hildog go from here if she basically splits another two contests with Obama? That's not momentum in my opinion at a point when she needs to be gaining back ground in leaps.

No matter what happens tonight, Hillary will stay in. Next week is West Virginia which she'll win by a lot, and the week after is Kentucky, which she'll win by a lot. She'd still be able to claim some kind of momentum.

joe | May 6, 2008, 6:59pm | #

Pro Lib,

joe,

Yeah, Wright didn't do his buddy any favors, did he?


The conspiracy theory is that Wright deliberately went over the top, so Obama could have a Sistah Souljah moment. An argument for this theory is the observation from people in a position to know that Wright never used to be this crazy. He's got a record going back decades.

I still don't buy it. I think the old man (Wright this time, not McCane) is showing early signs of dementia - he's gotten grouchier and crazier. He should have gone into a well-deserved retirement and salvaged his dignity. I have to wonder if he has anyone around him who can tell him things like that.

anon | May 6, 2008, 7:02pm | #

QUestion: Why is it that when most people I see speaking about this election make it about black or white, female or male? Who is afraid of change in this country? Whomever is afraid of change is only afraid of the unknown. I ask myself two things about these candidates, Who will make a difference for our country, we all forget we seem to be floundering here. And NO I am not talking to you upper-Middle class or very rich americans I mean look deep in your thoughts and think who this gas price really hurts. Can you fill up your SUV still? I am talking about Obama, and you can tell me if I am dead wrong, but give me one reason to vote for him. Cant come up with one on my own - North Carolina

BakedPenguin | May 6, 2008, 7:02pm | #

He should have gone into a well-deserved retirement and salvaged his dignity.
Not to mention he could have been known as the preacher to the (potential) President. Think of the speaking fees.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 7:03pm | #

Drudge is saying Obama will win by 15 in NC.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:05pm | #

LOL 59-40 in Indiana.

anon | May 6, 2008, 7:05pm | #

Mike Drudge is a moron! :-)

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:06pm | #

Drudege always underestimates Clinton numbers, FWIW.

anon | May 6, 2008, 7:07pm | #

Oh you meant matt drudge -- sorry

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:07pm | #

effay,

So, where does Hildog go from here if she basically splits another two contests with Obama?

If Obama wins 50% of the remaining elected delegates, he needs only 22% of the remaining superdelegates to win.

She needs to seriously outperform him from here on out to even have a plausible case for the superdelegates.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:08pm | #

What about The Nuclear Option, Joe?

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 7:10pm | #

Remember, all you folks not planning on voting for Mre. Clinton, remember Eight Bells.

Eight Bells

Eight Bells

Eight Bells

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:10pm | #

"My, my,...are you hostile and fullof hate because Obama's mother named him "Hussein"?"

For me, it's not that it is racist, it's that it is so incredibly stupid. So there is this bad guy in the world named "Hussein." And there is this other guy running for office who has that name as his middle name. So the idea is that people will see the latter and equate it, fantastically, with the bad guy. I mean, yes, of course regular Republican voters are that fucking stupid, but who else is?

It's like not fucking a hot girl with the first name "Hillary" because HRC shares the name. What kind of moron thinks that way? It's an appeal to the lowest denominator in politics I can imagine (hey, that guy has a funny name that is the same as a bad man's!).

On interesting matters, does anybody not see this being a HRC win in Indie and a Obama win in NC? I don't.

Orange Line Special | May 6, 2008, 7:10pm | #

Obama's campaigning on the premise that his is a new way of doing politics, one that's more civilized, fairer, and ethical, and that he's respectful of those he disagrees with and will unify the country.

And, I find that extremely galling. I mean, with all those dumb people out there who actually buy that, why can't I find something to sell them?

I'd suggest that Hill would be the best choice for libertarians, but there aren't enough of them to make a difference.

As for Obama, hopefully it won't be long before those who go to his rallies start seeing these fliers I made. Over 300 visitors to that page in the past day, including from RCP.

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:11pm | #

Neil, you didn't really just post 0%-reporting results five minutes after the polls closed, did you?

I know you didn't just do that. Because that would be immensely silly. Suggestive of someone who doesn't know very much about politics, even.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 7:11pm | #

Guy, way to beat a dead horse

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:11pm | #

5% in, Joe. 5%. Looks just like PA and OH did early!

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:13pm | #

What about The Nuclear Option, Joe? What might that be?

I think Hillary Clinton is very close to the point of diminishing returns with negative campaigning. She risks a serious backlash if she pushes it too much further.

Not to mention, she's put together a solid positive campaign message lately.

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:14pm | #

John,

I think he's angry and bitter because drawing attention to someone's ethnic background as a means of harming his reputation is repellent to decent human beings.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:15pm | #

"I ask myself two things about these candidates, Who will make a difference for our country, we all forget we seem to be floundering here."

Is that Likudian anon or some generic anonymous poster?

I think the only issue I care about is SCOTUS appointments. And I think HRC or Obama would be way better than any GOP. I actually like Scalia and Thomas, but I can think of several decisions they've made lately that are wack (The religion cases, the Bong Hits case, the "police can do anything case", the Executive can do anything cases in the WOT), and I can't think of many Breyer has (except on affirmative action, on which I think he is incredibly wrong).

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:15pm | #

Ohnoes, 5%?!?

I guess that's that, then.

Go to bed, everyone.

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 7:15pm | #

Kolohe,

Thank you.

Eight Bells

Eight Bells

Eight Bells

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:16pm | #

Hey they're saying "too early to call" not too CLOSE=blowout for Clinton.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 7:17pm | #

The exits show Obama winning independents with 53% and Hillary winning Republicans with 53%. Indies were 23% of the votes and Repubs were 11%. I don't think Op Chaos is going to play a very significant role.

Pro Libertate | May 6, 2008, 7:17pm | #

You would think that Wright would've lain low to get to be the next Billy Graham. Guess he's more cranky than ambitious these days.

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:19pm | #

Hey they're saying "too early to call" not too CLOSE=blowout for Clinton.

No, that is not what "Too early to call" means.

It means that she is expected to win, and says nothing about the margin.

BakedPenguin | May 6, 2008, 7:19pm | #

For me, it's not that it is racist, it's that it is so incredibly stupid.
That's about the size of it. Hussein is a pretty common name in the Muslim world, as evidenced by the (unrelated) King of Jordan.

effay | May 6, 2008, 7:20pm | #

"If the race in Indiana is as tight as is predicted, I'm expecting the bitching and moaning about Florida and Michigan to go full throttle starting tomorrow at 8 a.m."

I agree. Getting some sort of credit for Florida and Michigan is really the only way that Hildog can win at this point (and has been for a while). I suspect the Clintons are working hard behind the scenes to this end.

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:20pm | #

Pro Lib,

Wright doesn't seem to have a lot of respect for the government. No, really! This guy told me. He seems to see it as the enemy.

He's an ambitious man, but apparently, his ambitions lay elsewhere.

David Weigel | May 6, 2008, 7:21pm | #

You stated that Lou Dobbs supports mass deportations, but that's not his position. Would you care to issue a retraction?

Oooooh yeah, LoneWacko. That'll destroy him!

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 7:23pm | #

from lonewacko's flyer:

[Sen Obama,] [w]ill you be investigating this foreign meddling in our internal politics?

You know, for a group that considers themselves the modern heirs of the Minutemen, I find it funny that you all are hatin' on foreign meddling.

Tsu Dho Nihm | May 6, 2008, 7:24pm | #

Wright doesn't seem to have a lot of respect for the government.

If that's true, then I really like Reverend Wright!

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 7:25pm | #

DW,

Who are you quoting? Or is my "find" function broken and it only finds "Dobbs" in your 7:21 pm post?

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:27pm | #

Wait a second, Dave: did you mean that Obama was winning black voters WITH 85% (85-15) or BY 85% (92.5%-7.5%?)

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:27pm | #

Baked
It's supposed to be triple scary:
1. It's a common MUSLIM name (and we know they are strange and bad, right?)
2. It's the same name that a KNOWN BAD MAN has (and therefore anyone else with it must be bad as well, right?)
3. It's an unusual name (and people that are different are bad, right?)

Don't get me wrong, Obama's crazy name was one of the reasons why early on I thought he would be a shitty candidate (hey, only a fool would vote against a person because of the person's given name, but fools make up a signficant minority of US voters [luckily they tend to vote Republican, but not all of 'em do]). The Dems got greedy for something they did not have locked up (they thought after 2006 the presidency was theirs and saw a chance to insert their dream candidate [a minority or woman]). Of course, campaigns matter, and they picked two poor campaigners and polarizing candidates and interestingly enough the "stupid party" fell ass backwards in the right direction and picked the best candidate they possibly could have (McCain).

Other than his SCOTUS picks, I like a McCain presidency. The guy has real integrity. He reminds me of my parents Senator, John Warner, a real statesman...

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:29pm | #

Hey, look at that, when you click your mouse on the little red words, it takes you to a page that answers my question.

That is SO COOL, Dave. How did you do that?

*blush*

BakedPenguin | May 6, 2008, 7:29pm | #

Tsu Dho Nihm

I've seen this about 15 times before I finally got it. Thought it looked odd though, with both (apparently) Chinese and Vietnamese names.

Jason | May 6, 2008, 7:29pm | #

Any news on Republican Exit Poll figures yet? I could give 2 shits about the socialists. Oh wait that would include McCain too.

John | May 6, 2008, 7:30pm | #

Obama wins NC

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:30pm | #

MNG,

Having watched Obama come from 70 points back against a popular ex-president's wife, to being the frontrunner for the nomination, how can describe him as a "bad campaigner?"

Dude's been doing something right.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 7:30pm | #

NBC and CNN called NC for Obama.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 7:33pm | #

Dang, BP I really didn't get it until you said something. I was always misreading it as a ver of "You're so dim."

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:34pm | #

Joe a red state Democrat would be doing MUCH better against McCain right now than either of the two losers.

Mike Easley would be ahead 10 by now.

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 7:35pm | #

FNN calls NC for Sen. Obama too.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:36pm | #

"I could give 2 shits about the socialists. Oh wait that would include McCain too."

Ok, I'll bite...How would McCain be more of a socialist than any other Republican Senator? Supposedly the guy has a great record on government spending. He's backed a more market based health care proposal than the public demands. So WTF? You guys with your "socialist" epithets...
"Unless I'm one of those guys with saliva dribbling out of his mouth who wanders into a cafeteria with a shopping bag screaming about socialism." Annie Hall

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 7:37pm | #

Obama isn't winning Marion County (Indianapolis) by even 10 points so far. That's bad for him.

BakedPenguin | May 6, 2008, 7:38pm | #

MNG - I agree with your analysis, except for McCain having integrity. I'd say he has courage, but I have to assume your either don't read or don't agree with anything Matt Welch has written about the man.

Kolohe - it's pretty clever. Props to the anonymous.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:39pm | #

20% in Clinton still waaay ahead. And getting creamed in Indianapolis!!!

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:40pm | #

"Having watched Obama come from 70 points back against a popular ex-president's wife, to being the frontrunner for the nomination, how can describe him as a "bad campaigner?""

joe-He's a media darling. Has been ever since "the speech." There are a lot of elite liberals who would like to see a black man President. It's like an orgasmic dream for some of them. He has monolithic black support (as any black candidate this side of Al Sharpton would). His race protects him from flak that any other candidate would get. And he's running against a candidate that many in her own party think is far too polarizing to have a chance to win in November.

So I'm not suprised by his rise.

Nor his fall for that matter...

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 7:41pm | #

Jerry is in trouble for dissing anybody who had a pony as a kid.

Kramer owes Jerry finner for not decorating with levels.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 7:42pm | #

His race protects him from flak that any other candidate would get.

Eh? I don't think he's been protected from much of anything, especially over the past few weeks.

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 7:42pm | #

*dinner

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:43pm | #

MNG,

Since you're not surpised by his rise, should I assume that you were predicting it in December and January?

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:44pm | #

His race protects him from flak that any other candidate would get.

Uh, yeah, running for president as a black man is a easy. That's why you keep talking about what a dumb move it is to nominate a black guy.

And why the parties have always fallen all over themselves to get a black guy to be their standard bearer.

Huh?

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:46pm | #

Baked
I think I may agree with you and perhaps made a semantic mistake.

I liked how he stood up to Bush on the torture thing when every GOP official pretty much performed fellatio on Bush at the time.

I liked that he hammered Rumsfeld when pretty much every GOP elected official at the time was arguing that "we are winning it's just he media..."

The fact (discovered here from Welch) that he has such a good record on earmarks is something that is amazingly endearing to me.

He took a couple stand during Bush's ascendancy which showed something, courage, integrity, whatever it was it was something sorely lacking in the GOP at the time...

He's clearly not a religious nut (which seperates him from about 70% of prominent Republicans) and is a real war hero. I like the guy.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 7:47pm | #

Obama's now at a 20% lead in Marion County (Indianapolis), with Lake County (Gary) not in at all. Still too early to say what's going on.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:49pm | #

Joe your party does best with red state Dems. They're your winners. (Gore doesn't count because his home state was really Washington, DC).

Even I would be scared to death of a Mike Easley/Harold Ford Jr. ticket.

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:50pm | #

So, after Wright 1, Wright 2, Bittergate, and all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, Barack Obama is doing better among white voters - in a former Confederate state - than in all but 2 of the contests to date.

Still no Indiana call.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 7:51pm | #

Well, it looks like it's going to be another 1-1 draw today.

So, the current 1915-ish stalemate is sustained.

Clinton will win WV next week, which will finally giving her some unmitigated momentum for the first time since NH. And the following week, we'll see a repeat of the 1-1 split w/ KY going for Clinton, and OR going for Obama - so back to a stalemate.

And we head into June with Obama getting victories in Montana and South Dakota - not before the Puerto Rico primary.

I look for a similar situation in PR as in Guam, a 50-50 split. Some have give Clinton an advantage due to her 'hispanic' #'s but I think it's misleading - when your 'minority' is an overwhelming majority, the normal 'racial' patterns don't matter, because all socio-economic demographics are represented. (see also HI vs California for the 'asian' vote - although the 'home town' factor was the overriding factor in Hawaii.)

So, it's going to be an interesting summer.

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:51pm | #

Joe your party does best with red state Dems.

I don't think anyone is going to argue with you.

John Edwards would be picking out his outfit for the inauguration right now.

Jason | May 6, 2008, 7:52pm | #

He's backed a market based health proposal? Its called the "Guarunteed Access Plan." Read between the lines. You get a tax credit and are forced to select an insurance company report back to the federal government of your choice. Will insurance companies be mandated to offer plans within the constrains of the tax credit?

His tax policy is weak. He won't agree to not raise taxes especially on the so-called rich. Anytime to force someone to do something or you take their money to give it to someone else its socialistic.

Eliminate the IRS and I'd take back what I said about McCain being a Socialist. But I think you'll see when he gets in office the real McCain will kick in.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:52pm | #

"Since you're not surpised by his rise, should I assume that you were predicting it in December and January?"

Remember all the fuss after the "speech?" WTF was that about? I knew the guy would do well. Here was this first term senator who had not exactly won the toughest contest in the world to get his seat and he is offered a prime time speaking slot (can you say tokenism?). He does well. But what the hell was that attention about? I'm not sure I thought he would take the frontrunner position like he did, but he was certainly a darling of a lot of influential folks coming in, and that never hurts.

"And why the parties have always fallen all over themselves to get a black guy to be their standard bearer."

joe, you remember the Colin Powell bullshit? Both parties would love to run the first AA who could win. I mean love it. In fact, they would even provide a ton of support and money to a black candidate who, if white with the same level of experience and electoral success, would never get such support.

joe | May 6, 2008, 7:54pm | #

MNG,

I don't see how you could watch Obama's speech at the 2004 convention, and think "They just picked that guy because he's black."

They picked him because he is best speaker any of us have ever seen. You can't see that?

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:55pm | #

John Edwards isnt very well liked down here though even among Democrats. The bit-city liberals, Kos Kids and national DNC people love him, but the NC Dem party can't stand the guy. Theres a reason he didnt run for re-election in 2004 even though he could have.

Orange Line Special | May 6, 2008, 7:55pm | #

David Weigel writes: Oooooh yeah, LoneWacko. That'll destroy him!

I don't know whether that's the real Weigel or not, but in either case I'm not surprised that he can't understand how that question would work.

First, I nice-d it up: I'd just come right out and call him a liar.

But, even in it's nicer form it would help show how Obama is a liar. And, since it would be on video, it would show up on at least one TV show. Hint: it gets over a million viewers.

I wonder: do they put prospective libertarians on a box and kick them out of the movement if it takes less than a half an hour for them to get out of it?

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:56pm | #

Shes still cleaning up in Indiana!

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 7:58pm | #

joe

He's a great, great speaker. Truly great.

But face it, a fair amount of politicians are excellent speakers. Shit, Jerry Brown was as good of a speaker, and much better of script.

If Obama were white he would never, ever have got the slot, or half the money he raised, or half the media attention (nor half the black vote he has). You can't see that?

"Color" me "not impressed" with his wins in Southern states where blacks make up 30% or more of the Democratic primary voters.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:01pm | #

Joe I agree with MNG give me a break of course he wins the southern states with big black populations.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:02pm | #

Neil | May 6, 2008, 7:55pm | #

John Edwards isnt very well liked down here though even among Democrats.


Neil, do you remember the phrase "bank-shot pander?"

It refered to how the Bush campaign put as many black faces as they could on the stage at the convention, and had a "black people love us!" page on their web site, and whatnot. The goal was never to win the votes of black people - that is impossible for Republicans - but to convince skittish white suburban swing voters that it was safe to vote for the Republican.

Edwards would work the same way. You are right, he would probably lose every southern state, just like any other Dem. Maybe pick up VA, LA, AR, or FL if he had big nationwide margin, but probably not.

But his southern - that is, not northeastern or West Coast or upper midwest - background would swing people in western and lower midwestern states.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 8:03pm | #

Well, I'm not Weigel (but I was once pimply faced, and am getting increasingly pudgy) (I keed, I keed!), but I also don't understand how that question would work (to bring down the Obama candidacy, that is).

So, we have all these associations with various people that are plaguing Obama, but a tiff with Lou fuckin' Dobbs is supposed to destroy him? Really?

I think someone kicked the box while you were still in it.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:04pm | #

Still no call in Indiana.

I guess there are a lot of strong Obama precincts that haven't reported.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:06pm | #

Joe if that were true Al Gore shouldve won big because he had a southern accent but no real love in his "home" state (which he wasn't even born in or grew up in).

Edwards was very stupid not to stay in NC politics be a solid centrist-conservative Democrat and THEN run for President instead of start running for President the day he was elected to the Senate.

Instead he did that and also became a fake left-wing liberal populist.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:07pm | #

So far, Ron Paul is getting 8% in IN and 6% in NC. Still probably too soon to make a judgment on that though.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:07pm | #

"Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:01pm | #

Joe I agree with MNG"

ewww, I need a shower...

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:07pm | #

If Obama were white he would never, ever have got the slot, or half the money he raised, or half the media attention (nor half the black vote he has). You can't see that?

Let's not rewrite history here.

He was losing the black vote by a large margin to Hillary a month before Iowa. He moved into the top tier of the race because he campaigned effectively enough to win lily-white Iowa. It was only after that that he started leading among black voters.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:08pm | #

Al Gore had a southern accent?

I never noticed.

Now, John Edwards: THAT GUY has a southern accent.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:09pm | #

"Edwards was very stupid not to stay in NC politics be a solid centrist-conservative Democrat and THEN run for President instead of start running for President the day he was elected to the Senate."

Shit, neil is right again...

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:10pm | #

Heh, they're calling the idea that Clinton is overperforming because of bad-faith crossover Republican votes "the Chaos Theory" on MSNBC.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:10pm | #

I bet you Obama didnt even come close to winning the white vote in NC, or even the white male vote.

BakedPenguin | May 6, 2008, 8:11pm | #

...do they put prospective libertarians on a box and kick them out of the movement if it takes less than a half an hour for them to get out of it?
Of course not, Lonewacko. We're all CorporateConspirators who pay IllegalMexicans to remove the boxes for us. That reminds me, I have to ask FelipeCalderon where my check is...

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:12pm | #

Edwards has an accent that yankees think is "southern". The backwoods mountain accent.

Gore had a low-country accent softened by a few years of elite private school sure, but it was there.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:12pm | #

"He was losing the black vote by a large margin to Hillary a month before Iowa."

Joe, that is incredible. Did you EVER believe that "I'm torn between Obama and Hillary" coy bullshit from black voters (I remember the hilarious interviews on NPR with such voters at the time)? I'll say straight up I never did. That's just naive, brother!

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:15pm | #

I bet you Obama didnt even come close to winning the white vote in NC, or even the white male vote.

He lost whites by a good margin, but won males and females.

Wait, how does that work?

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:20pm | #

Why dont they just call IN for Clinton?

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:20pm | #

Neil,

I bet you Obama didnt even come close to winning the white vote in NC, or even the white male vote.

Dude, read the blog post.

The exits show him winning 38% of the white vote in NC. That's his third-highest total to date. It's better than his average before the Wright story broke.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 8:21pm | #

Adamness
33% of the elecorate is black, which went for Obama +90%.

Or am I missing a joke?

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:22pm | #

MNG,

Did you EVER believe that "I'm torn between Obama and Hillary" coy bullshit from black voters (I remember the hilarious interviews on NPR with such voters at the time)?

I think they believed that a black candidate would be unable to win white votes, and after watching him win Iowa and then place in New Hampshire, they changed their minds about that.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:23pm | #

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:20pm | #

Why dont they just call IN for Clinton?


Heartburn, Neil?

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 8:24pm | #

The exits show him winning 38% of the white vote in NC. That's his third-highest total to date. It's better than his average before the Wright story broke.

That doesn't seem right. Otherwise he wouldn't have been able to have gone on that 10-12 game winning streak. Do you mean 3rd highest to date 'in the south?'

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:24pm | #

Im not worried, she will still win big.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:25pm | #

Or am I missing a joke?

No, it just hurts my brain with all the group breakdowns and winning one group over another, but losing another group, with some groups overlapping.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:26pm | #

joe

NPR had all these reports about how "torn" the black vote was in SC, and black political pundits talked about how "contested" that bloc was.

I hate to quote neil but: LOL!

What % of the black vote did Obama "pull out" from his "great campaigning" there? You're a smart guy, do you think that kind of turn-around from shear campaigning is statistically possible? Those interviews were naive and the interviewees were being coy. But only the most blind idealism could have taken that seriously. And THAT is what is wrong with the Dems this year...

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:26pm | #

Im not worried, she will still win big.

I'm not sure. Most of her areas are already in, and she has a 10% lead with it. A few of his counties are still at 0%. She'll win, but I don't know if it will be 'big.'

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:28pm | #

Its all about white, working class voters. And he cant win them. And the Chicago media market has really focused on Wright hes going to underpreform there.

Brandybuck | May 6, 2008, 8:28pm | #

How long until Loo Rokkwell says Weigel is an Evil™ Cosmotarian® for only predicting a 10% Ron Paul result?

p.s. Two years ago any libertarian would have dreamed of 10%, but now a 10% is considered proof of conspiracy by the Kochtopoid Reason to keep us down. Damn you Weigel! Damn you!

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:29pm | #

"The exits show him winning 38% of the white vote in NC."

Jesus joe, we both lean Democratic. Do you think the Dems can possibly win in Nov. with a candidate who can boast of getting 38% of the white vote in any state? White people are still about 80% of the electorate!

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:29pm | #

CBS called Indiana for the Hillary.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:30pm | #

Thank you Rev. Wright!!!!

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:32pm | #

Paul looks like he got 8% in both states.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:35pm | #

MNG,

What % of the black vote did Obama "pull out" from his "great campaigning" there?

Virtually all of it.

Had he not been a good enough campaigner to win Iowa, those black voters would have continued to believe that a black candidate could not win white votes, and wouldn't have voted for him.

I suppose Iowans only voted for him because he's black, too?

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:36pm | #

John King on CNN
When they nominated John Kerry many of the elites in the party in the South and Midwest wrung their hands because he was too liberal.

No shit. The Dems don't want to win the Presidency. Greedy...

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:38pm | #

MNG,

Do you think the Dems can possibly win in Nov. with a candidate who can boast of getting 38% of the white vote in any state?

Certainly. Most primary voters whose candidate doesn't win go on to vote their party in the general. It's always been that way - most Dean voters voted for Kerry, most Bradley voters voted for Gore, most Gephardt voters voted for Dukakis. The fact that the primary-voter splits are a little different this year doesn't change that.

John C. Randolph | May 6, 2008, 8:40pm | #

Lawson is crushing his opponent. Either he did a terrific job getting the word out about his platform, or Dondero endorsed his opponent.

Either way, I'm glad to see him doing so well.

-jcr

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:40pm | #

Most primary voters whose candidate doesn't win go on to vote their party in the general.

Half of Clinton voters said they'd either vote for McCain or not vote at all.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:41pm | #

"I suppose Iowans only voted for him because he's black, too?"

Uhh, yeah, to a degree. He has attracted a great elite organization and does well in caucuses. And they magnify the influence of people who have a zealous attraction to their candidate (Obama supporters, who see themselves making history). But in addition, what better way to make a point about how tolerant and progressive a state that is seen as a hayseed state. It wasn't a popular vote in Iowa.

"Eggheads and African-Americans" as Begalia says ain't a winning coalition (what he ignores is that HRC ain't gonna get much better)

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:43pm | #

" most Dean voters voted for Kerry, most Bradley voters voted for Gore, most Gephardt voters voted for Dukakis"

Yeah, and those three did so very well...

Joe, you're falling victim to your own Mondalization theory...The guy SHOULD be a winning candidate, but he aint.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:45pm | #

Adamness,

Actually, it's between 1/4 and 1/3.

And that's in line with every other contested primary. No way Bradley voters are going to vote for Gore after that nasty campaign!

2004 was even worse. Dean voters were seriously pissed off at John Kerry.

And right now, every Hillary voter in America realizes that her only chance to win the campaign is for Barack Obama to look unelectable.

Primary voters get over it, and vote for the party. Always.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:47pm | #

h those Kennedy voters really came out in strength for Carter LOL!

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:47pm | #

I think I have a good read on how much to listen to you, MNG.

Barack Obama won Iowa - Iowa! - because he's black.

Race panic, MNG. You're falling for it.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:48pm | #

Not so, Joe:

To Clinton voters: Would you support Obama in November?

Indiana: Yes– 48%, Vote for McCain– 33%, No vote– 17%
North Carolina: Yes– 45%, Vote for McCain– 38%, No vote– 12%

To Obama voters: Would you support Clinton in November?

Indiana: Yes– 59%, Vote for McCain– 21%, No vote– 17%
North Carolina: Yes– 70%, No vote– 14%, McCain 12%

http://thepage.time.com/preliminary-exit-polls-from-cnn-2/

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:49pm | #

Yeah, and those three did so very well...

On topic, they did extremely well among people who voted against them in the primary. Which is, you know, what you asked.

And, of course, 2008 isn't 1988, or 2000, or even 2004. The Democrats could win with a dead fish this year. Even a scary black one.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:50pm | #

Looks an awful lot like 1/4-1/3 to me, Adamness.

21% 38% 33%.

What's "not so?" It's a lot closer to 1/3 than 1/2.

Colin | May 6, 2008, 8:51pm | #

CBS calls Indiana for Hill.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:51pm | #

Joe
I'm sure the PRIMARY voters will for the most part get over it and support the candidate.

My issue with Obama is that the kind of person who votes in the primary is very different than the kind of person who votes in the general election. And I really doubt his appeal there.

I doubted Obama for a long time. I came to think he might actually be a good candidate after looking at the fact that he was bringing in more first time voters than HRC. My opinion was: both are terrible, terrible choices (both turn off a great many voters that a more experienced white candidate with less baggage would). But I thought between the two Obama might actually be better.

But the Wright thing woke me up. For a lot of very valid historical reasons the black community in America just has some really weird fucking beliefs that are guaranteed to turn off mainstream white America. No black politican who has had to rely on black votes for his or her rise is going to be free of such influence.

Oh, and the guy has little track record of electoral success at any impressive level. And he has a funny name. He's not a good candidate.

joe | May 6, 2008, 8:53pm | #

Still no call in Indiana.

Her lead is down to 8.

His best counties still aren't in.

He's peforming better than Pennsylvania.

As for Operation Chaos, Republicans in Indiana split almost exactly like the overall vote.

Bad night for Republicans.

anon | May 6, 2008, 8:53pm | #

shame on anyone who voted because of their race or gender... shame.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 8:54pm | #

Indiana: Yes– 48%, Vote for McCain– 33%, No vote– 17%

33+17=50

So 50% of Hillary supporters in Indiana will not vote for Obama. 38% in NC. Even if it is 1/4-1/3, that's pretty bad. I don't know if he could win with 1/4-1/3 of his base taken away.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:54pm | #

Joe, CBS called it for Hillary a long time ago. Its over.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 8:54pm | #

Adamness Id like t believe that but my part had almost identical numbers for Bush/McCain in 2000.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 8:56pm | #

Joe
With all respect, THIS is "what I asked"

Do you think the Dems can possibly win in Nov. with a candidate who can boast of getting 38% of the white vote in any state?

I don't give a shit if people in the primary who voted against Obama will vote for him in Nov. What I care about (because I want to see the next two SCOTUS appoinments come from a Democrat) is whether people in the GENERAL ELECTION vote for the guy.

Let's face it, the only time since Nixon the Dems have won THAT election is when they picked the Southern white guy who ran to the right of his party.

The mixed race guy with the Islamic name running to the left of his party is not that. For us liberals it would be a wonderful world if this nation were bigger than that, but this is reality and we should not fall to the "Mondalization" effect you have so smartly described among the GOP here in the past.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 8:57pm | #

Campaign advisers are saying that the gas tax pause debate helped him ... though they're not terribly happy that the question wasn't on the exit poll questionnaire

I'm kinda surprised that they're 'not terribly happy.'

Say what you want about the tenets of a Gas Tax Holiday, at least it's an issue.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 8:58pm | #

whoops misread the double negative.

I thought the question *was* on the questionnaire, to the dismay of the Obama campaign.

BakedPenguin | May 6, 2008, 9:00pm | #

John C Randolph - where are you getting the Lawson v Cho results? I can't find crap on it anywhere.

joe | May 6, 2008, 9:00pm | #

Adamness,

Yes, you are correct, 38% is his third-best result among whites IN THE SOUTH, not overall.

Which should answer the Reverend Wright question. It's not even moving white southern men.

The effect of Wright-gate in the fall is going to be to increase the Republican base's motivation (which is no small matter in and of itself, especially this year, with a "RINO" running), but it's not changing votes.

Hillary and Obama performed roughly the same among different demographics before and after that story broke.

joe | May 6, 2008, 9:03pm | #

Neil,

Down to 6 in Indiana.

She's still going to win, and we knew that weeks ago. The open question is the margin.

Six, and dropping.

Neil | May 6, 2008, 9:04pm | #

He still just cant close the deal can he?

Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008, 9:04pm | #

Looks like a good night for libertarian Republicans. Lawson wins in North Carolina.

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 9:04pm | #

Six, and dropping.

Gary, IN still reporting 0%.

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 9:04pm | #

Joe
I hope you are right. It will be very hard to not have Obama as the candidate (who here wants to be the person to tell black america, after so many decades of being screwed, that though the black guy won a majority of delegates under the rules as they were at the time that he is not "really" the winner?). I hope he can pull it off.

He's smart. He's a great speaker. He's being unfairly targeted. He would be (well, only on the SCOTUS thing) better for America than McCain.

But, he gives a potential voter, one who admittedly does not think much like you or me probably, a LOT of reasons to note vote for him. Another candidate, in such a Democratic leaning year, would have been a better choice. You don't think so?

Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008, 9:05pm | #

Lawson was just endorsed by the Log Cabin Clubs. Wonder if that was the decisive factor?

joe | May 6, 2008, 9:06pm | #

MNG,

Let's face it, the only time since Nixon the Dems have won THAT election is when they picked the Southern white guy who ran to the right of his party.

And if it was 1972, 1984, or 1992, you'd be right.

But it's not. It's 2006 +2. The electorate looks vastly different.

Maybe there are other candidates who would do better in the general election - in a year so favorable to the Democrats, they don't have to thread the needle to squeak out a victory.

And for all the slicing and dicing of the demographics we do beforehand, these two candidates still have to get in the ring and face off. And Barack Obama is a much more talented politician than John McCain.

Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008, 9:06pm | #

Most important news aside from Lawson's win, for libertarians today regarding the elections is that McCain pledged to nominate "Alito/Roberts like PROPERTY RIGHTS Kelo decision overturning Justices to the Supreme Court." He made this announcement in a speech in Wake Forest, NC.

Also, wants justices who will overturn Affirmative Action and secure Gun Rights.

That's three solid libertarian issues in McCain's favor.

BakedPenguin | May 6, 2008, 9:06pm | #

Never mind - I found it. That's great that Lawson's going to win. If a few other "Paul Republicans" get elected, Congress will suck that much less.

Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008, 9:07pm | #

Not sure Lawson is a "Paul Republican." His support came from socially moderate Republicans like the Log Cabin Clubs.

Are you saying Paul backed him, as well?

joe | May 6, 2008, 9:08pm | #

He still just cant close the deal can he?

I think everyone realized on February 5 that this wasn't going to be a "close the deal" primary. Both of the candidates are too strong, and have reliable bases that are too large, for either of them to go the way of Edwards, Huckabee, or Romney.

joe | May 6, 2008, 9:09pm | #

...which makes it very possible that he's going to have to put Hillary on the ticket.

Icl | May 6, 2008, 9:10pm | #

Obama won big among college graduates in both states. This means that Hillary took the uneducated vote, plus brainwashed-by-Limbaugh vote(Neil).

Sparky | May 6, 2008, 9:10pm | #

So what's NC going to end up at? Presumably it's not going to stay at 20+ for Obama.

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 9:12pm | #

What? The NYT lied to us? How is Mr. Obama clobbering Mrs. clinton by 42% of the NC vote? They were just telling us the other morning that Mr. Obama's lead had dwindled to less than 10%. Not expressing surprise at the outcome. Actually, not expressing true surprise at the slant either.

Shouldn't Mrs. Clinton be leading by a lot more in Indiana?

Adamness | May 6, 2008, 9:12pm | #

NBC changed it from 'too early to call' to 'too close to call' in Indiana.'

Rick Barton | May 6, 2008, 9:12pm | #

Edward is an idiot. (Sometimes there's no way to dress up the truth)

Mr. Nice Guy | May 6, 2008, 9:12pm | #

"Maybe there are other candidates who would do better in the general election - in a year so favorable to the Democrats, they don't have to thread the needle to squeak out a victory."

Jesus joe I hope you are right! My position has just been: why fuck with victory like this? I really am worried that this is the very overconfidence that will get us the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th years of Republican Executive rule. IMHO it seems like a crazy attitude for a party out of power for so long...Take what we can get and call it a day!

"And Barack Obama is a much more talented politician than John McCain."

Yeah, Obama has had so much proven electoral success at the big time level and McCain has not. WTF joe? C'mon, this is Mondalization if I've ever seen it!

Chris Potter | May 6, 2008, 9:13pm | #

Ah, so DONDEROOOOOOOOOOOO!'s pimping McCain now?

Damn. I knew I should've used pencil for this scorecard.

Guy Montag | May 6, 2008, 9:13pm | #

Ack! 20% NC, not 40%

Ali | May 6, 2008, 9:13pm | #

Eric- How's your buddy the new mayor of London doing? Libertarian he is, right?

Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008, 9:15pm | #

No, just acknowledging that McCain is coming out for Property Rights. That's a positive. Shouldn't be viewed as a negative as some libertarians like to think.

Wonder if we'll see Obama talking of repealing Kelo?

Eric Dondero | May 6, 2008, 9:16pm | #

Yes, as a matter of fact, the new Mayor of London is a "libertarian" Ali. Thanks for mentioning that. A major win for the libertarian movement, particularly for Pro-Defense libertarians and anti-Political Correctness libertarians.

Kolohe | May 6, 2008, 9:16pm | #

Obama pretty much conceded IN to Cl