The Hillary Belt:

Obama is Green, Hillary is Republican Red.

Source: USElectionatlas.org


This is a map that includes Florida and Michigan, and also gives the Texas primary precedence over the caucus. I did not make this map, but I find it interesting that she has this contiguous diagonal belt across the whole of the country through some very different states. Clearly, Obama has won the nomination, but this map is just fascinating from this perspective.

Imagine my disappointment

She's claiming us, but Obama won the caucuses - so, it's a wash:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Democratic_primary_and_caucuses,_2008#Primary_results

The media allowed her to claim victory after the popular vote but before the caucus results.

In truth, the caucus was merely a subset of the primary electorate, not a different electorate.

Versus how many in the caucus?

the fact is, the delegates awarded turned out as a wash in Texas, and for Hillary to claim it as some huge victory is (like most everything she does) disingenuous.

Also, as a native East Texan, I can tell you for a fact that a large percentage of her votes came from racists at best and Republican racists who will vote GOP in November at worst. In East Texas, the Dem primary is all that counts for local races, so everyone votes in it.

Color it grey.

Incidentally, if you didn't make the map, it's probably good form to credit the person who did.

Since he's said such nice things about them, and all.

of their self-interest (which is what Obama was talking about with that comment). HRC appeals to that more than Obama does--but that's a pretty poor reason to go with HRC, since McCain is not going to lose the good-ol-boy culture vote to a First Lady cum New York liberal Senator. Her advantage there is ripe to be shot down with a week's worth of attack ads.

What Obama was saying--and which is true--was that in order to win them, we have to either begin appealing more to their values than Republicans do (which will be difficult), or to convince them that yes, Democrats can and will actually help them in a real-world way, and in doing such reorient their voting values towards their families and their jobs instead of their guns and their churches.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6060833&mesg_id=6060859

Shows Clintons base, and doesn't show states Obama won, like Texas and Nevada.

You've got Arkansas, clear Clinton state, obvious reasons.

Appalachia, rural pennsylvania, and New York.

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=3254

The logic behind the Clinton argument that she is more electable than the presumptive nominee is based upon the assumption that Clinton would win the big states whose primaries she has won but Obama cannot. I’ve noted several flaws in the big state argument in the past. New Jersey has already provided one example of where Clinton won the primary by ten points but a subsequent poll in late April showed Obama leading Clinton by seven. California now provides another example.

A recent poll shows that, “California voters would change their February primary vote for Hillary Clinton to a vote for Barack Obama if the vote were held again.” Clinton won the primary by ten points, but the poll shows that if they could vote again, California voters prefer Obama by seven points.

This has no bearing on the primary which already occurred, but like the poll in New Jersey does demonstrate that Obama can pick up support over time and win the states in November which Clinton won in the winter and spring. Obama would also do better in a general election race in these states than Clinton would since there is a different population of voters in the general election than in the primary.

over her now.

on name recognition - there was not extended exposure to Obama for fence sitters to feel comfortable with him, so they jumped on the side of the fence they were familiar with.

Which is why Hillary wanted FL and MI to be front-loaded as well - she knew that would keep them in her camp, and didn't want to risk losing them to him.

You count Michigan and Florida. Tehre were no legitimate votes cast in either state.

looks like the Appalachain mountains.

On a revote, or in other words a real vote, Obama would win Michigan
If re-held, I think Obama would win California too.
Hillary would marginally retain Florida due to age.
New Mexico, Az, Nevada and Texas could go either way.

All that realy leaves her with is New York (duh), Arkansas (double duh), and Appalachia. There's something about the culture about Appalachia that really likes her. I'm not exactly sure what it is and I don't think it is just racism. However, it seems her "base" there seems to be very unreliable voters (voting for Reagan and Bush often) and I'd hate if the rest of the country had to pander to people that don't seem to be well informed on basic things called facts.

Finally, across the whole country, Clinton's support has been middle aged and senior white women, aka as "people exactly like her" and there happens to be a lot of them. They think this is their due and I truly think they will be let down and PO'd when Hillary is finally muscled out of the race. But if Obama is not the clear nominee it will be outright theft based on racial overtones.

The best thing Hillary could do for women is gracefully drop out and advocate for a woman as VP, aka Kathleen Sebelius.

I think this map reflects the strongholds of those populations, with a couple small exceptions.

before Obama became well known and before his momentum started, PLUS the primary was moved up considerably this year.

I have spoken to many Dems who say they would have voted for Obama had the primary been held later because they would have known more about him and, more importantly, more about Hillary and her tactics.

too bad landmass does count for shit eh?