How Clinton Won
March 5th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
We’re thumbing through the exit polling today to break down Hillary Clinton’s important win in the Texas primary. Of course, it’s a rare treat to even have an exit poll — usually no one cares enough about presidential politics in Texas to conduct one. You can read the raw numbers here, courtesy of MSNBC.
Two on-going trends continued in Texas. The generation gap that has opened between Obama and Clinton supporters was as wide as ever. (Obama dominated the 35 and under set; Clinton was equally dominant with voters over 50.)
Also, Clinton continued to attract overwhelming support from Latinos. Here, we pause to offer well-deserved back-patting for Democratic consultant Leland Beatty, who told us weeks ago he expected Latinos to comprise 31 percent of the Democratic primary electorate. (Other prognosticators threw out wild numbers like 40 and 50 percent.) The actual Latino share, according to the exit poll, was 32 percent.
Clinton won the Latino vote 66 percent to 32. We wrote in our election preview that Obama would have to keep Clinton’s share of Latinos below 60 percent to have a chance. He didn’t, and she won, thanks to her huge advantages in San Antonio and throughout South Texas.
A few other interesting tidbits about Clinton’s coalition: The biggest demographic of voters was white folks age 45-59, who comprised 18 percent of the electorate. Clinton won them by 20 points. She won white voters overall by 55-44.
Women comprised 57 percent of voters and Obama lost this group 54-45.
Finally, the exit poll data offers one other interesting possibility: Have conservative Republicans begun sand-bagging for Hillary?
As I drove to Fort Worth yesterday to cover the election, I caught some of right-wing radio host Laura Ingraham’s show. She was encouraging Republicans to “take one for the team,” by crossing over to vote for Clinton in the Democratic primary. Ingraham believes Clinton will be the weaker general election candidate by uniting conservatives behind John McCain. Ingraham was fielding calls from die-hard Republicans, some who were state GOP committee members, in Ohio and Texas who said they had followed Ingraham’s advice and voted for Hillary. Rush Limbaugh has been pulling the same act.
This is anecdotal, of course, and it’s hard to know how wide-spread it is. But with the GOP primary now decided, Republicans are free to meddle.
And it’s worth noting that in both Ohio and Texas, Republicans and independents comprised a higher percentage of the Democratic primary than in previous states. Based on past results, you would think that favors Obama, who has done well in “open” Democratic primaries where Republicans can cross-over on election day.
For instance, in California on February 5, Obama won among independents 58-32 percent, even though Clinton won the state. In Virginia, he won GOPers by 72-23 and independents by 69-30. And in Missouri, which Obama narrowly won, he took Republicans by 75-21 and independents 67-30.
But in Texas and Ohio — all of a sudden — that trend was halted. In Ohio, Clinton and Obama split the Republican and independent votes.
In Texas, non-Democrats made up 34 percent of the Democratic primary vote. And Obama barely won among Republicans (53-46) and independents divided their votes evenly.
It’s hard to know if the sand-baggers are responsible for this turn-around. Whatever the explanation, it’s a stinging reversal for Obama.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Hillary’s WATERSHED MOMENT… or WATERBOARD ?
if the DEM nomination battle is now going to take another 3 months to resolve itself, then the six weeks between the MS (11March) and PN (22April) primaries could be considered a “HALFTIME”, during which the DEM party leaders will hash out issues like FL & MI, setting the stage for the “second half”.
the DEM party ‘elders’ who are charged with determing what is best for the party, and making their superdelegated decisions thusly, will eye closely the delegate/vote totals for the two candidates. but they will also give heavy weight to many other factors.
polls between the choices and the GOP nominee McCain, on a state-by-state basis, with an eye toward the electoral college.
reviewing the history of which of the two candidates can bring in the most money. which coincides with who, of the two, can do the most to assist in making a reality another potential tsunami at the polls in November, electing another 30+ Dems to the HoR and perhaps up to 9 new Dem Senators.
and perhaps even which of the two would be the most likely to inspire less GOP turnout.
so what will the superdelegates do?
Q: “what do Politicians always do when they are faced with making a decision that is guaranteed to cut them to ribbons, whichever way they choose?”
A: they “punt”. (distract, delay, etc. and hope like hell that ‘events’ will decide for them)
thus, most Superdelegates being Politicians themselves, i expect they will sit still and allow the campaigns to go on, and on, until either the math, or a major event, changes the equations and makes the decision for them.
if that is so, then the question becomes: “Can Hillary do the IMPOSSIBLE?” no, not winning the DEM nomination, can Hillary accept the #2 slot?
her utterances this morning may be the beginning of the process toward “yes”
(and i’d expect SD’s to soon begin pushing that solution)
but it seems that sometime in the next 12 weeks, Hillary is going to have her “John Connally Moment”
(see below)
——
JFK in 1960 asked LBJ to be on the ticket with him. LBJ said he had to think about it. LBJ goes to his most trusted aide, John Connally (as JC told it) and asks him “what am i gonna do?”
to which Connally replied “i don’t see you have any choice”
LBJ said “what do you mean i don’t have any choice ?”
Connally’s reply enters the annals of political history.
“Well” Connally said “you’ve got 4 possibilities.
1. you turn it down and JFK loses, in which case you will be blamed for the loss.
2. you accept and the ticket loses, JFK will be blamed for the loss.
3. you turn it down, and JFK wins with someone else, in which case you will be marginalized into insignificance.
4. you accept and the ticket wins, in which case you’re the Vice-President of the United States, and that’s a pretty good job to have.”
March 6th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
would you consider griping and nitpicking? if i were to ask that the thread title be changed to
How Hillary Won… The Primary
or perhaps another thread
How Obama Won
March 7th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Work 5 PM, colleagues laughing about voting “For” HC. Those who had already done it saying they’d wait for those who hadn’t in the bar next door. Chuckles all around.
Later, in school cafeteria where I caucused…….results from the primary coming in, crowd (2-1 for Obama) gets quiet. Conversation in my group was whether you would for “her” in the November election. Group was split between those who said they would actually vote for McCain and the other group who agreed they’d vote for local/state Democratic candidates and leave the vote for President BLANK.
Let’s hope the powers that be take this into account.