« McCain Speech | Main | Obama and Pakistan » Obama Wins!19 Feb 2008 09:21 pm Says NBC. UPDATE: Exits show that Obama crushed Clinton among men, lost women narrowly. Whites are for Obama, as are every age bracket under 65. UPDATE II: Obama wins college graduates and non-graduates; Obama wins liberals, wins moderates, and wins conservatives; Obama wins Protestants and "no religion," Catholics are split. Comments (248)
Thank god. I am so sick of this election Maybe as an Iowan it's a little unfair to make that claim, and if Hillary and Obama had spent more time trying to build a case for democratic solidarity in the face of substantive policy differences it would have been a big help for us. Instead we get this divisiveness and bitterness that helps no one but McCain. 
Awesome. You just keep making those predictions, Matt.
Amazing - the White, working class people of Wisconsin don't count. Why would they do that to themselves?
Unbelievable. Wisconsin, thank you!
Unbelievable. Wisconsin, thank you!
On Obama!
Over 65 crones for Clinton. Excellent!
I'm glad my worries earlier today turned out to be defensive pessimism.
CNN and AP too.
But remember, Matt, Clinton is still in a very strong position - it's not over yet!
Well, just to be fair, males made up over 40% of the electorate. Clinton can't be expected to win with those kind of demographics.
Real cheddar cheese comes from New York. -HRC
As an Obama supporter, I feel excited now.
I don't trust the Republicans butting in.
Cheeseheads can't be trusted. - Hillary
It is too bad that another state decided that they didn't want their vote to count.
Doesn't count!
Obama won among Dems 51-49.
The Clinton's are about to go nuclear. It's gonna be entertaining!
It's over - Obama's the nominee. The only question is how ugly the Clintons will get on their way out the door.
Wow. I don't know if this can be confirmed, but it's amazing, if true: "Voters who decided in the last month picked Obama, 63% to Hillary's 37%."
Hillary knows it's over. Goodbye crone.
Wisconsin doesn't count, since good Wisconsin cheese is white cheese, and white women like white cheese, and Obama can't win white women.
But at least Clinton has won all of the significant states that have voted so far.
She just said that we shouldn't vote for a candidate that relies on words, not work. Stay classy, Hillary (not likely).
Wisconsin has an even number of delegates, so it doesn't count.
Obama looks like he's going to start his speech before Hillary ends hers... does that mean his speech doesn't count? CNN has decided to show both at the same time... and play audio for both at the same time??
Obviously, the superdelegates will soon realize that Obama can't possible beat McCain without the 65+ white female lapsed-Catholic vote behind him.
Hillary's foreclosure 'plan' is a bunch of crap. Talk about destructive voodoo economics...
Of course, as another commenter in a previous post noted, this doesn't count because Wisconsin is next to Illinois. And as Matt pointed out, it doesn't count because Billary lost. Listen, I gained political awareness during the Clinton years and I respect the Clintons and thank them for the successes of the 90s. But I also blame them for the problems that progressives have faced since then, and who can disagree that some fresh blood is exactly what this world needs right now. That said, watch the Clintons go nuclear. I hope the coalition survives their lust for power.
McCain has such an out-of-tune message. Maybe Obama can afford to alienate the Hillary voters. Seems like a bad gamble though.
Ouch. Seems like a bit of a miscalculation to get your big "contrast" speech preempted by Obama's victory speech.
And he said: let all men pass the bypass bridge, and I am, irrationally. For the outcome of this primary, nor proably of the election, will have absolutely no impact on my quality of life. May I ask: does this mean OH+TX will become a massive, crucial showdown? Who thinks HRC should simply retire, so BHO can get stuck into McCain and his falsehoods?
I must admit I never knew what this "crone" reference I keep reading in the comments here meant until I just googled it. Classy.
if you mix up the letters in Wisconsin you can spell "scions win" hi, I'm posting in this thread.
crone n. An ugly, withered old woman; a hag. [Middle English, from Old North French carogne , carrion, cantankerous woman, from Vulgar Latin. Sounds like Hillary to me!
Can anyone show me a link to a stream of Obama's speech?
Seriously, speaking as an Obama supporter, the sexist comments about Hillary are pretty disgusting. Please stop.
I can't wait to have a first lady who has "never" been proud of America before her husband ran for national office.
Hillary'08: Most of My Constituency Will Be Dead Soon
What southpaw said.
I'm an Obama supporter, but this gloating is getting a little out of hand. I understand that many are frustrated with the ridiculous arguments of the Clinton campaign, but just remember, she's a Democrat who supports a lot of great ideas. I happen to like the individual and dislike her campaign. And, need I remind you that there are still decisive contests ahead. Would it kill you all to just hold tight, don't count any chickens, and be magnanimous winners?
Good for Wisconsin, ignoring the bullshit from yesterday.
southpaw, I couldn't agree more. Please, attack HRC for her policies or her tactics, but don't just throw misogynistic comments at her. She deserves better than that (as do, frankly, all women).
Based on the exit polls, it appears that the only people voting for Hillary Clinton to become the next President are the ones that don't really have a vested interest in the matter.
scott: Apparently, the SAT no longer tests antonyms. But here's one for you: What is the opposite of "the first time I've been really proud"? a) "I've never been proud"
I happen to like the individual and dislike her campaign. Uh, OK...she's a lying, spinning, divisive, power hungry, self entitled woman, and her husband is a sexual predator. That's an individual or individuals that you like? Nice standards.
Anyone else think that Obama's speech tonight is . . . boring?
Exit polls [seem to] show that the increasingly negative campaign was not in Clinton's best interest, although it's hard to see how she could have won any more votes if she stayed positive. Obama is like the Great Wall: can't go over it, can't go under it, can't slip around it. ...Or maybe can you slip around it? To the previous commenters: calling Hillary a crone is definitely not going to win Obama any votes. Keep it to yourself.
"Would it kill you all to just hold tight, don't count any chickens, and be magnanimous winners?" i think magnamity(?) would be easier if it didn't seem that HRC was willing to tear apart the Democratic party to win. if she was trouncing him at the polls based entirely on policy and good, solid campaign smarts, then it'd be easier to swallow. before all this started, i didn't have any real problem with HRC, and would've voted for her for Pres, no problem. but watching how ugly her campaign has gotten, i now want Obama to crush her into tiny, hectoring bits.
Not just the sexist comments - which are bad enough - but anything having to do with her appearance at all. It would be nice if people could stick to the tactics and/or policies.
What southpaw, toasters, Philly and Joe said. C'mon people, have more class than the wingnuts.
Obama is going to have about an 160-vote lead among pledged delegates after tonight. I think it's very likely that he'll win Texas, and win enough delegates there to neutralize HRC's win in Ohio, assuming she hangs on there, which isn't a given. At that point, is HRC really going to hang on for six weeks waiting for Pennsylvania, while trailing by such a big margin in the pledged delegates (a gap which will get a little bigger after the Mississippi primary)? Her only argument at that point will be that a large majority of superdelegates should vote for her (why?), and that the Michigan and Florida delegates should be seated, which isn't going to happen (Obama wasn't even on the ballot in MI and didn't campaign in FL). The pressure on her to quit is going to be immense. I think she'll withdraw in mid-March.
Is anyone else watching the speech on CNN? Did anyone hear the weird off-mic talk? "What do you mean you don't have to go to confession anymore? Are you becoming Jewish?" (It sounded like Begala...curious to see if he's on the panel tonight.)
Ditto on rob!'s post. Extreme dislike was learned during this campaign. Defeat isn't enough. Humiliation is required.
Not just the sexist comments - which are bad enough - but anything having to do with her appearance at all. It would be nice if people could stick to the tactics and/or policies.
Miland, depends on whether the SAT was graded on the regular curve or the "Michelle" curve
Wow, I guess I need to redo my antonyms, too... Replace that question with: "What is a logical consequence of the statement 'I've never been really proud'"
i think magnamity(?) would be easier if it didn't seem that HRC was willing to tear apart the Democratic party to win. I think if you can't see the benefit of holding yourself to a higher standard than your opponent, you haven't really been listening to Senator Obama's speeches. I don't mean that in the sense that Obama is a Jesus figure, just that my own admiration for him has grown in seeing how he has ran his campaign: with class and moral standards.
Wow, I guess I need to redo my antonyms, too... Replace that question with: "What is a logical consequence of the statement 'This is the first time I've been really proud'"
I wonder if Hillary Clinton is paying for her cheap attempt at a smear campaign in Wisconsin. Watch her go even more negative now. Problem is, Democrats aren't as easily mobilized by negative attacks as Republicans since liberals have a positive agenda and the repugs have an ideology of reaction.
Um, scott, somehow I'm betting that Michelle Obama's Princeton and Harvard education trumps your Community College associates degree. Moron.
Houston, we have a problem (thx Jon)
You know what? I give up. Clearly I can neither think, nor type.
Milind, never mind. he's now saying he's going to do away with standardized tests, or at least minimize their importance
"I think if you can't see the benefit of holding yourself to a higher standard than your opponent, you haven't really been listening to Senator Obama's speeches." absolutely true, and i'm workin' on it! but--Obama's a better person than me in that regard. that's part of the reason i find him so inspiring.
I never liked darkies and certianly am not starting now.
Is it: The more successful Obama is, the more banal his speeches become -- or: The more successful Obama is, the longer I'm acquainted with his rhetoric, the more banal his speeches seem?
"Hillary should plagiarize his coalition"
M, I think the Obama campaign sees him as vulnerable to the "lack of substance" attacks, (rightly) anticipating that Hillary's going to try and lose ugly, and is using this speech -- probably the most high-profile speech he'll give before TX/OH on March 4 -- to show he's got the policy/substance club in his bag. Not unwise, IMHO.
scott is so funny i might just set fire to this cross i'm currently holding
Miland,
Not sure of the rules here, and tend to be non-polemical on the comment string. But, do feel the Obama balloon is gonna burst and talked at some length to a super-delegate about it today. He/she (uncommitted) tended to agree. And it was not I who posted the stupid comment about "darkies" above.
M: I suspect the type speech he's giving tonight is in direct response to the dullards on the Clinton side of the fence who've shouted 'All rhetoric and no policy' for the past couple of months.
Hear hear on the gratuitous sexist remarks. People vote for all kinds of reasons, and if I were an elderly woman I might well vote for my only chance to see a woman elected president in my lifetime.
Wow, scott, you're so impressive. You're obviously sooo well connected. Give it up, asshole.
'The odds of me standing here are very slim' got me where it matters
I realize that nothing will harsh your mellow, but check the exit polls. The demographics haven't changed. Hillary won white Democrats--closer than usual, but still up by 5 points. Independents and Republicans comprised over 30% of the voters, and they handed Obama the win--not Democrats, who voted for Hillary. As for the reason Obama won the "some college" and "no college degree" groupings--the 18-24 year old group was 17%--much higher than in any other state I've checked. California and Florida were 7 and 9 percent. Same day registration allowed college students to show up for Obama. So again--in terms of demonstrating that Obama can capture white Dem voters, nothing has changed. He's still got to prove that in Texas--or the Dems have a tough decision to make.
If you think Hillary is running a negative campaign against Obama, you haven't been around politics very long. This campaign has been very mild. In fact, as a Hillary person, I think she ought to be a whole lot tougher than she has been.
Keep grasping, Cal. It's entertaining to watch someone who's obviously so deluded. Laughing @ you.
Penn's $5m message: Q) Why should Hillary win the nomination? QED
Congratulations to Barack Obama for his victory tonight. On the campaign going forward, what many of you call "going negative" I call raising some important questions about Obama's readiness to lead and ability to tackle the complex and difficult challenges that the next President will face. Considering only three years ago Barack was just a member of the Illinois legislator, that's a fair question to explore. If Hillary Clinton doesn't raise the issue no one else will. The media certainly hasn't, and you all certainly won't. Somebody's got to unpack these whole concepts of "hope" and "change" and ask the subsequent questions about what those specifically mean in practical terms for our politics and America's future. If Obama cannot respond satisfactorily to a vigorous debate on those questions, and others, then he doesn't deserve to be president.
I understand that it is free airtime and such and that Sen Obama is really good at public speaking, but c'mon... Too much of a good thing may be a bad thing. This is turning into a Clinton State of the Union speech. Someone needs to occasionally reign him in. Don't get me wrong, he is my senator, but seriously...
Obama won Democrats, but apparently Blacks don't count in Cal's world, so only winning White Democrats is important. This is ridiculous.
Cal, so does that mean Dems aren't going to vote for their nominee because they're white and he's black?
then he doesn't deserve to be president. And thank God morons like you ultimately don't make that judgement.
Interesting (to me) find in the exit polls. Obama ran stronger with the more conservative voters. Do they realize how liberal he is? Probably more so than HRC. He's gotta be likely to lose those voters to McCain in November. I just wonder if people are really paying attention to policy right now ... Vote by Ideology:
John Petty, I've been trying to make that case for weeks here, but I'm guessing many of the commenters are so emotionally invested in Obama they can't abide a single negative word, or the only prior campaign they followed was student body president. Check out Somerby for related, wise, commentary this subject, particularly the race 'issue'.
Tim K, It's not a vigorous debate about the issues. If you read Obama's website or even listen to one of his speeches in its entirety, he gives lots of policy details. Clinton is trying to win with "gotcha" politics. She's trying to win with superficial details and Republican talking points and it's not working.
Tim K, unpack my heart with words. Obama unpacks his own concepts: they are the rhetorical gloss on his actual agenda, which is laid out in numerous policy documents and speeches. In other words, you get the style AND the substance. Happy Birthday.
Additional thought: I wonder if those who think HRC has been terribly negative in this campaign, tearing Democrats apart, thought the same of Ned Lamont last year?
Andruw -- Of course, they're going to go negative. But they have so much more on Clinton it's not funny.
The other split I'm looking at is Obama again lost white Democrats (52-47). This feels like some sort of red flag to me for November.
If Hillary Clinton doesn't raise the issue no one else will. The media certainly hasn't, and you all certainly won't. I would generally agree with this, Tim K, but Hillary has served as poor instrument by which to vet Obama. Even the rickety coalition McCain is hoping to keep together will come up with something tougher than the meat-fisted, crude, and almost parody-level material we've seen coming from the Clinton people. The Clinton campaign serves no purpose any longer except to prepare Obama for the general election. They need to get better at it, or stop wasting everyone's time and fold up tent graciously.
One correction to my above post--18-24 year olds made up 11% of the voting population, which is far more than usual. But Republicans and independents were 35%. Cal, so does that mean Dems aren't going to vote for their nominee because they're white and he's black? I think it likely that many whites will vote for McCain if the Dems are suicidal enough to put him up in the general with these results, but that's not the point. The point, again, is why do the Dems want to put up someone who can't win over white Democrat voters--and who hasn't (yet) demonstrated he can capture Hispanics? When I first heard that he'd won Wisconsin, I was fully expecting to see a change in the demographics. Instead, he won on the strength of independents and Republicans, as well as a disproportionately high college student vote.
ben: Yes he does give plenty of details on his website. His policy agenda is almost identical to what Hillary Clinton is talking about (with a few notable exception on the mortgage crisis and health care) or what any Democratic nominee would promise. The question is whether he is the right person to get it done. And you can't just take the candidate's word on that one. Ultimately it's not Obama the man who lacks substance, and it's not his platform that lacks substance, it's his rhetoric. Listening intently to his speeches his message seems to be that America cannot afford to wait any longer for Barack Obama to become the president, and that's a callow argument. The ascent of Barack Obama in national politics is not in itself an historic moment in America's history. We are not the one's we have been waiting for, because we've been here all along.
Still Undecided, Of course! If Obama appeals to independents and some conservatives, it must follow that he'll lose in the general election. Andruw, Lamont had substantial support amongst CT democrats (he won with something like 65% of the primary vote). I don't know what kind of mythical "negative attacks" you think he unleashed on Lieberman, but they couldn't possibly compare to the Zell Miller-esque crap Lieberman spewed on Democrats regularly.
Another thing: Clinton is nowhere near vetted enough, and she's benefited from Obama's refusal to engage in that kind of politics (most of the time). And frankly, her campaign has got to the stage where Obama doesn't need to drive her negatives up -- she's doing a great job of that all by herself. If I were a Clinton supporter, I'd be wondering what happened to her vaunted fighting ability.
I found the clip of Hillary's speech I watched sweet and poignant. Kept thinking, 'I would have supported you ...' Because I am male, perhaps I feel a black presidency would be the greater revolution
Listening intently to his speeches his message seems to be that America cannot afford to wait any longer for Barack Obama to become the president, and that's a callow argument.-Tim K And yet, via most metrics that actually, you know, count, it's been a strangely effective one. Good to see you still fighting Tim. I'm not sure what the heck you're trying to accomplish at this point, but am impressed at your resilience. Of course, what's that saying about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?
This is starting to get pathetic. There's whining about how well Obama did with conservative voters, ignoring how well he did with liberal voters. Far worse than that, though, is the absurd meme that the only votes that matter are those of white, self-identified Democrats. I don't have exact numbers on me, but if memory seres, roughly the same number of American voters self-identify as Democrats as independents. Presumably, most Democrats will vote for a Democrat (and he is the favored candidate, even at this stage, in Wisconsin, of >45% of white Democrats), but independents will be far harder to draw out in November, and you want a candidate who has shown he can do that. Now, the reason that people are deciding that only white, self-identified Democrats count is obvious: that's the only straw left to clutch at for Clinton partisans. Whoops, I'm sorry: it's the only straw left for the "Undecided" among us.
So Obama will likely end up depending on all those white Hillary Clinton democrats ...
The losing democratic candidate received more votes than McCain and Huckabee combined.
Everyone's attacking Obama. This is exactly where he needs to be.
The ascent of Barack Obama in national politics is not in itself an historic moment in America's history. Dude, do you really think that? 60 years after the Dixiecrats won Louisiana, Alabama, and South Carolina, a black man has the best shot to win the Democratic Party's nomination. That's not historic? Really?
Hey, where the white women at? No, seriously, where'd they all go?
I like crones. They are the mysterious oracles in Yeats' late poems and plays. Those who insult them usually rue the day, as well they should. Anyway, I'm happy that the zombies have found something to say about Obama. Oh, the wife wasn't blubblubblubering proud of the country, like Sly at the end of Rambo II! One of the beautiful things about this race is that the hate radio crowd has been so utterly shut out. And, when Obama wins in November, they will be pissing themselves. It will be sweet.
ben, to be clear, I effin' hate Joe Lieberman. My point was more about the delicate, and perhaps shifting, sensibilities of Obama supporters, ot at least some folks in the progressive blogoshphere.
Kraz, I think what Cal is saying's indeed that white independents matter, because there are more of them, and if Obama can't win the white Democrats in WI, how does he have a hope among white independents?
Listen, Barack Obama is doing very well he's now the clear front-runner. But that doesn't mean his critics are supposed to shut up, that's not how democracy works. It's also a good illustration of why he's not going to be able to magically silence his detractors and accomplish this transformative revolution in politics. Guess what... the whole country doesn't agree with him or the Democratic party, there's an opposition party. So get used to it.
Of course Obama will need the support of white Democrats in November, and of course he will get it. No one has put forth any evidence that Clinton's slim lead among white Democrats in Wisconsin means that those voters wouldn't turn out for Obama in November. In fact, it was apparent from the exit polls that more Clinton voters would be satisfied with Obama as a nominee than the other way around. As for the (probably true) idea that conservatives won't turn out in November for Obama: how about his leads among liberals and moderates? He won across the board. Besides, even if conservatives don't like him, they hate him a lot, lot, lot less than they hate Hillary Clinton, and that matters.
And yet Obama consistently beats McCain in the national polls... Yeats is terrible.
southpaw: You're confusing Obama the man and Obama the black man. I'm not talking about his race. You cannot elect a whole race or gender or religion president. Electing BARACK OBAMA is not an historic moment. The fact he is black would be a great symbolic victory, but the challenges America faces are too great to choose based on symbolism.
I'm not sure you're getting the point Kraz
While the resident trolls seem to be keeping up with the same line of attack, things over at Talk Left are rather muted. People over there seem to be starting to come to terms with the fact that Obama is the likely nominee.
Andruw, I'm not sure what you're talking about. There aren't a whole lot of significant parallels between |
Goodbye cruel world. I'm checkin out.
Posted by Tim K | February 19, 2008 9:24 PM