It's hard to know where the good news ends for Barack Obama as results pile in from the Potomac. There was no question that Obama would dominate in DC and Maryland. But his overwhelming romp in Virginia--one of a handful of formerly "red" states that are toss-ups for 2008--made the best case yet that the Illinois senator just might live up to his promise of blasting the red-blue electoral map to smithereens come November.

Meanwhile, the surprising Republican results in Virginia, where Mike Huckabee gave John McCain a scare, bolstered Obama's argument just as effectively. It wasn't a shock that McCain fared poorly among right-wing Christians and the sorts of NASCAR Republicans who've been guffawing happily this week over the revelation that the genial theocrat from Arkansas fried squirrel in a popcorn popper during his heck-raising college days. But the results underscored an undercurrent that defies conventional wisdom: McCain's shakiness among the very voters--suburban independents--who are supposed to be his ace in the hole. While Obama was winning over all kinds of Virginians he was not supposed to have a prayer with, McCain was losing some of those he absolutely has to have. And losing them in a state that he has to carry to have any chance of becoming President.

Like Missouri and Colorado, both of which Obama won last week, Virginia can make a valid case for being one of the "next Ohios" of 2008--the next ideologically mixed, demographically topsy-turvy state where Republicans will have to fight mighty hard to defend their turf. With the influx of non-native professional types and Hispanic immigrants into Northern Virginia in recent decades, the Old Dominion has become a thoroughly Middle American state of the 21st century in terms of its politics--a lively mash-up of conservative Christians, Blue State liberals, rural populists and swelling ranks of independents (more than one-third of Virginians no longer register D or R). It's American politics in miniature And that is what makes the results--on both sides--so revealing.

Obama won pretty much every constituency where he's presumed to be weakest: women (58 percent in rough exit polls), rural voters (60 percent), Latinos (55 percent) and folks without college educations (63 percent). He won handily among people who think Iraq matters most, who think health care matters most, and who think the economy matters most. He took more than 60 percent of the vote among those making both less and more than $50,000. Obama narrowly carried the white vote in Virginia, continuing to build on his momentum among the notoriously stubborn Caucasian Democrats of Dixie, having won 25 percent of white votes in South Carolina (when the race was still three-way) and then bucked it up to 43 percent in Georgia last week. He also won the stubbornest demographic in Virginia, whites over 65. Only white women went for Clinton, and by nowhere near Obama's 16-point margin among white men.

As Democrats look forward to a match-up with McCain--and even with the looming threat of superdelegates, why shouldn't them?--one set of numbers sticks out from the rest: Obama nearly doubled Clinton's vote among white independents in Virginia, winning 63 percent. Meanwhile, in the single most stunning number of the night, McCain actually lost among independents who cast their ballots in the Republican primary. His margin of victory came not from independents, but from Republicans--a terrible omen for his "electability." Huckabee also beat McCain in those bastions of independent (but also, of course, megachurch) voting, the suburbs, while Obama was pulling 60 percent of suburbanites on the other side. The other prime indicators of how independents might vote in November looked equally good for Obama and lousy for McCain: While Obama won big with under-45 voters, who are the most likely to register independent, McCain lost big among the youngest voters (under 30) while taking 47 percent of the 30-44 age group. To add just one more bit of sour news for McCain, fewer independents voted in the Republican primary in Virginia this year -- 76 percent of the voters were card-carrying GOPers, as opposed to just 63 percent in 2000.

On the night when McCain vanquished his last remaining (long-shot) competitor, Republican voters made one thing bleedingly evident: They'd like nothing more than a do-over of this whole nomination business. Preferably with an entirely different cast of candidates. Meanwhile, the optimistic-but-fretful Democrats soldier on toward March 4, when Obama gets his own chance to deliver a knockout punch in Ohio and Texas. It's still presumptuous--as the change-monger himself likes to say--to count Clinton out. Obama will have to earn those victories, and earn them in the most valuable way--by selling himself to two vital groups of purple-state folks he hasn't convinced yet, white economic populists in Ohio (who tend to vote a whole lot like white Southerners) and Latinos all across the Lone Star state. But a distinct pattern has already emerged: Obama runs stronger in states where the party has an historic chance to win back the middle--states like Iowa, Missouri, Colorado--and now, Virginia.

Purple America is ready, and eager, for Obama. His popularity with young voters, independents and suburbanites could very well translate into an overwhelming general-election victory. As for McCain--who is being hectored to pander even more to the GOP's right-wingnuts, which will only further alienate his former independent fans--his chances seem to boil down to one increasingly improbably headline: "Hillary Clinton Wins Democratic Nomination."

Comments (70)

1. Well Bob, it sure seems, if all your % holds up, Obama is now the generic Superman for whatever cause is the most important to you. Sure seems like he's the modern version of Jesus! Whatever ails you, come to me, "We're the ones we're waiting for!"

   I am in awe of this phenomenon....but getting a bit more cynical....in essence, your article says that everybody thinks he IS the solution, or wants him to be the solution......Is there any more sane, or even objective but non-HRC supporting Dems or Writers left?

   Posted by Happy at 02/13/2008 @ 12:06am

2. Nichols:

   Obama won pretty much every constituency where he's presumed to be weakest: women (58 percent in rough exit polls), rural voters (60 percent), Latinos (55 percent) and folks without college educations (63 percent). He won handily among people who think Iraq matters most, who think health care matters most, and who think the economy matters most. He took more than 60 percent of the vote among those making both less and more than $50,000. Obama narrowly carried the white vote in Virginia, continuing to build on his momentum among the notoriously stubborn Caucasian Democrats of Dixie, having won 25 percent of white votes in South Carolina (when the race was still three-way) and then bucked it up to 43 percent in Georgia last week. He also won the stubbornest demographic in Virginia, whites over 65. Only white women went for Clinton, and by nowhere near Obama's 16-point margin among white men.

   The O-Train continues to pick up steam --and new passengers-- as it rushes headlong toward a date with destiny --The White House, after a swearing in on the steps of the Capitol.

   What a joyous contrast that will be to the egg throwing and catcalls on that oh so dreary day seemingly a lifetime ago --in January of 2001. I believe it was the first time in history that the president to be had to be driven all the way to the swearing in site for fear of his safety.

   And what a wonderfully bizarre circumstance to be on the verge of having one, Barack Hussein Obama, as the 44th prez. After 220 years of all those John Smith white northern European names.

   Surreal.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 02/13/2008 @ 12:33am

3. Billary put their money in the wrong place not on the ground organization; where Barack did and it's paying off. Barack has shown that he has the skills.

   Texas and Ohio will start looking like Wisconsin.

   Soon this:

   http://www.pollster.com/08-TX-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

   Will look like this:

   http://www.pollster.com/08-WI-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

   Bet this changes likewise week by week:

   Ohio:____Survey USA____Date: 2/10-11

   2/13/08 __Est. MoE = 3.6%

   Hillary Clinton ________56%

   Barack Obama _______39%

   Unsure_______________2%

   Other________________3%

   http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/ohio.html

   Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 12:39am

4. Posted by BOB MOSER at 02/12/2008 @ 11:41pm

   aaagghhhh.

   haven't read this yet, but one paragraph?

   "return" button stuck?

   Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 01:00am

5. "fried squirrel"

   lol. the link is to the "raw story" website.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 01:02am

6. Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:06am

   "i want to be different.

   just like all my friends!"

   Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 01:08am

7. Posted by B_KOOL_66 02/13/2008 @ 12:33am

   341 days 22 hours 50 minutes and 20.9 seconds left.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 01:10am

8. I just heard that Barack has been winning by such large margins that he's now winning in the popular vote--- even if you include the vote from MI/FL for Billary!

   Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 01:13am

9. Re FISA:

   "Obama did the right thing, he didnt roll over, he didnt try to roll over while having it both ways, he just simply did the right thing." Posted by LIBSWARNEDU 02/13/2008 @ 12:21am

   HRC did nothing.

   Nothing.

   Nuff said.

   Posted by sloper at 02/13/2008 @ 01:49am

10. Another Billary ouch in time for campaigning in Texas:

    http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=27389

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 02:02am

11. Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:06am

    I don't think he is the solution Happy by any means. But I think in a time when our hope in ourselves is almost dashed and our love of the American government is almost gone he is a refreshing face. Someone who inspires people. Inspires them not to think HE has all the solutions but that WE the American people do. His speech tonight underlined that a lot. I don't think he is the hope or savior of this country but I think he is a breath of fresh air and a ray of sunshine from this dark nightmare that has been the last 8 years.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 03:25am

12. Jomamma:

    Blueprint for Change on his website. Elementary research. This must be the 1,000th time I've done similar research-in-a-post for someone who doesn't do their homework and yet says he stands for nothing. You might not prefer his plan, but he does have one.

    Also, for two good talks on policy, here are two sources. Honestly, I'm too enervated at the moment to do much more than link, so I'm counting on you to do this due diligence:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2008/01/18/MNSNUH8DR .DTL&o=0&type=politics

    That goes to the SF Gate editorial board interview. Its an hour -- you should look at the whole thing if your question was intellectually honest and not a cheap way to try and score a point. Likewise:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nnj7r1wCD4

    The above is a Q+A at Google's campus. Starts a little slow, but has great information on specifics, including some very innovative plans. There is a second part to the interview which will be obvious as a related vid when you are on the page.

    Hope it helps.

    Posted by Ian Tepoot at 02/13/2008 @ 03:26am

13. Posted by JOMAMMA 02/13/2008 @ 02:16am

    I don't know if that's the case. I can see multiple things going on here. Multiple scenarios. He could be holding back his policy talks for the generals since no one has forced him. His speech tonight hinted at his policy ideas and how he plans to achieve them without going into detail, it seems almost like he is saving it for the generals. Like it's there he's just not saying it. I could be wrong but tonight was the first speech I have ever watched by him and he did talk about policy issues but again he more of hinted and talked about what he wanted to do and only skimmed the details.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 03:30am

14. And actually yes he does talk about issues on his site Jom. Again not in depth but summaries on where he stands on things and how he plans to change them. Look on his site under the heading ISSUES.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 03:33am

15. "Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans."

    Happy that has to be something you can get behind since you don't believe in an income tax. This is directly off his website.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 03:35am

16. I've never looked at it before but all the information is pretty easily found.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 03:36am

17. Actually Happy if you look at the economic policies on his site he shares some with you. I am reading many things on here that you have said we should do. Wow I shoulda checked this out earlier for the details.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 03:38am

18. Ian,

    The SFgate link didn't send me to anything. The google video is, I think, an example of his being vague and tending towards platitudes, rather than as a refutation of that point.

    There were a couple of low points to this google interview. The endorsement of Paygo, the endorsement of Clinton's New Democrat strategy in the early to mid-nineties and another reference to the excesses of the democrats in the 1960s and 1970s.

    One standard I like to employ is that a candidate ought to show a deeper knowledge of the core issues than I have. Obama's website passes, but Obama in speeches and interviews does not. And this is not saying something good about me, but bad about Obama. I am not a policy wonk, I am a policy analysis amatuer. Now no candidate does really well on this. I think we have seen the gradual dumbing down of our political discourse for years, and that certainly isn't Obama's fault. But Obama is still operating within a framework where what is important is personal narrative, perceived character and verbal nimbleness. In the absence of his clearly taking sides on some of the key debates (like when he says globalization is a good thing but that it just needs reform. It is hard to know what the cash value of that is. That could range anywhere from the Joe Stiglitz position where the World Bank, IMF and WTO need reform so significant that they wouldn't really be the same institutions afterward, to the Clinton position where you run unrestricted free trade bills down congresses throat and then claim that innovation and job retraining takes care of all the externalities.) we have nothing to go on because the candidates don't talk about the details of policy.

    This has come out in the debates. Charlie Gibson cut off the debate on health care in the NH debate just when they were finally getting to the real debate, saying that they were getting into the weeds. Part of that is that Gibson is a glorified entertainment reporter and was out of his depth. Part of it was that political culture just sucks in this country. It came out in the back and forth between Obama and Edwards about the Peru FTA. Obama claimed that there were strong labor and environmental standards in the agreement, and Edwards responded by saying that Obama was leaving the enforcement to Bush. This was a gotcha line that might have scored some points for Edwards but fundamentally misrepresented the problems with the Peru deal. The Peru deal had no real labor protections because there is no transparency to the enforcement mechanisms. It isn't that Bush runs them, it is that Peru and the US can staff the commissions and the tribunals with busness leaders and stop any meaningful labor organization in its tracks. Fleshing this out woudl have taken a detailed policy debate and it is not clear that either Obama or Edwards were in a position to have that debate.

    This criticism of Obama still has bite. He is not building this coalition of his around a set of policies, he is building it around himself. And given that when he speaks it has tended to be in vague generalities, the coalition has the potential to vanish once he starts doing the work of president, when people will be focusing on the policies he proposes and less on how much more intelligent, witty and inspirational he is than any other candidate. This isn't a reason to support Clinton over Obama. This wasn't sufficeint reason, even in my mind, to prefer Edwards over Obama. But it is a real worry about the strategy he has adopted. Reagan, to whom he sometimes compares himself, didn't build the coalition during the 1980 presidential cycle. The coalition was slowly built throughout the seventies around regressive tax policies, deregulation, traditionalist public morality and militant anti-communism (later militant american imperialism). Reagan's political and rhetorical skills were necessary to make those set of policies attractive to the general public, but the republican coalition was built around those policies and not Reagan. That is how the deeply uncharismatic Bush I, Newt Gingrich and Bush II were able to win elections with basically the same policy positions and political coalitions.

    (I apologize for the length of this post and the typos I know are there. But it is 7am and I am tired.)

    Posted by dentedpat at 02/13/2008 @ 07:01am

19. I present the top ten ways in which the Democrats differ fro the Republicans: http://www.mickeyz.net

    Posted by coolobserver at 02/13/2008 @ 07:51am

20. top ten way republicans differ from democrats [mickeyz.net]

    Posted by coolobserver at 02/13/2008 @ 07:51am

21. ok, kids, it's over. Hill and the old old soldier will remain senators, for now,

    and Barry will be the next pres.

    incidentally he looks and sounds a lot like Malcolm X, a greatly under rated American.

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 08:20am

22. hey Maasch, how is your Hillary prediction holding up? ready to concede?

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 08:21am

23. (I apologize for the length of this post and the typos I know are there. But it is 7am and I am tired.)

    Posted by DENTEDPAT 02/13/2008 @ 07:01am | ignore this person

    great work, dp.

    don't worry about the length. type more. just submit each paragraph as a separate post -- that always fools them.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 08:21am

24. Posted by COOLOBSERVER 02/13/2008 @ 07:51am | ignore this person

    what a bullshit site.

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 08:22am

25. Posted by EMILE DUBOIS 02/13/2008 @ 08:20am

    ask gary hart first.

    (but, yeah, i agree)

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 08:23am

26. Obama carried white Catholics in Virginia. It's over. White Catholics helped put Bill Clinton in the White House in the '90s. This primary season has been their first chance, post-Lewinsky, to take their vote back. The Kennedy endorsements were the tipping point: the Kennedys had given their support to the Clintons in the '90s and have withdrawn it. (And a lot of others have taken their votes back too.) Bill's escapades in the White House have had a lot to do with Hillary's defeat. She probably couldn't have gotten this far without him, and she can't go all the way with him. Partners in power, partners in defeat.

    Posted by fougasseu at 02/13/2008 @ 08:42am

27. Hillary's Firewall Problem...

    This abandonment of Wisconsin (Sure, I understand skipping Hawaii...Obama was born there) is ridiculous. It means that NEXT week he wins Hawaii and Wisconsin by HUGE margins, and then everybody moves from talking about an "Obama express" to "Obama inevitability" (her FORMER strong suit claim).

    Meanwhile down in Texas and over in Ohio, folks start see Obama winning TEN IN A ROW...and Hillary basically using them (as Rudy used Florida) as fodder to save the nomination for her, and not as voters, and start thinking "Why should I vote for her just to save her ass, when nobody else in the country wants her?!?!?"

    Posted by Mask at 02/13/2008 @ 08:59am

28. Posted by MASK 02/13/2008 @ 08:59am

    yep. optimism. cool.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 09:06am

29. Things to consider about Virginia: 1. McCain has the nomination wrapped up and that accounts some for the lower turnout among Republicans. 2. Independents and some Republicans voted for Obama because McCain was a done deal and they wanted to do everything they could to kill the candidacy of Clinton----I know---I was one of them and so were many of my friends. 3. Among many Democrats and Independents in Virginia their first choice is Obama their second choice is McCain. 4. If people like Mr. Moser continue to be condescending to folks who follow NASCAR and hunt, the democrats can yet take an election year in which all signs point to success and blow it.

    Posted by Len Mosse at 02/13/2008 @ 09:23am

30. When Barack Obama won the South Carolina primary the Clinton's disparaged and debased African Americans by explaining he won only because of his race. When he won in States such as Minnesota, Maine, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Washington - States with less than 10% African American population the Clinton's again tried to belittle his wins by stating that Democrats won't win those States in November anyway. I fervently hope and pray that the voters in Texas and Ohio see what the Clinton's are doing and make their voices heard when they vote in their State's primaries. They need to send the Clinton's a very strong message that the politics of mud slingling, lies, rumors, innuendos, racism, character assassination and personal destruction will no longer be tolerated. The despicable manner in which Clinton has conducted her campaign should be something the American people need to speak loudly and clearly about - that they have had enough and will not tolerate the Clinton's and their win at all costs, mean spirited nasty brand of politics. Voters in Ohio and Texas please let your fellow Americans know that you too want change and a candidate who will inspire you and uplift you. There is only one candidate running who has a message of change, hope, and working together to solve our nations problems and that candidate is Barack Obama. Say NO to divisiveness. Say NO to polarization. Say NO to Hillary Clinton.

    Posted by mjkoch at 02/13/2008 @ 09:24am

31. LEN, can you explain this CONTRADICTION!?!?!?!

    "3. Among many Democrats and Independents in Virginia their first choice is Obama their second choice is McCain."

    "4. ... the democrats can yet take an election year in which all signs point to success and blow it."----Posted by LEN MOSSE 02/13/2008 @ 09:23am

    How do Dems AND Indies pick Obama over McCain...but "people like Mr Moser" are going to get them to switch?!?!?!

    Posted by Mask at 02/13/2008 @ 09:49am

32. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/13/2008 @ 09:06am

    Yeah, but they thought they had killed "Cloverfield" and it still ate Hud!

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 02/13/2008 @ 09:50am

33. ask gary hart first.

    (but, yeah, i agree)

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/13/2008 @ 08:23am | ignore this person

    how many primaries did Hart win?

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 10:46am

34. Posted by DENTEDPAT 02/13/2008 @ 07:01am

    It's posts like that why I enjoy reading this blog. I learn so much from posts such as yourself. Great job!

    Posted by Preston-P at 02/13/2008 @ 11:13am

35. Posted by PRESTON-P 02/13/2008 @ 11:13am

    I meant to say "posters" such as yourself. Sorry about that.

    Posted by Preston-P at 02/13/2008 @ 11:14am

36. How do Dems AND Indies pick Obama over McCain...but "people like Mr Moser" are going to get them to switch?!?!?!

    Virginia has not voted for a Democrat for President since 1964---this election is probably the first real chance the Dems have in caring Virginia. Virginia is still a conservative state that will elect democrats, but not of the extreme liberal persuassion. The Independents, many of which are moderate to conservative, believe in the second Amendment, are outdoorsmen, followers of NASCAR, etc.etc---find it extremely condescending for people like Moser to demean their lifestyle and values. That Independent vote for Obama can disappear easily in the general election and end up in the hands of McCain.

    Posted by Len Mosse at 02/13/2008 @ 11:17am

37. Posted by MASK 02/13/2008 @ 08:59am

    I was watching "Morning Joe" this morning and Tim Russert mentioned that there was a 21 % black turn out among black voters in Texas in 2004. With Obama it's safe to say that number will increase. I think Texas will be one battle both are going to scratch and claw their way out of for a win.

    Posted by Preston-P at 02/13/2008 @ 11:20am

38. Eh, I don't think that Independents voting for Obama instead of McCain makes the case you think it does. Huck's dying struggles notwithstanding, the GOP race is basically settled for McCain. Why vote in the Republican primary, where your vote doesn't make much of a difference, when you can wreak your long desired revenge on the Clintons by voting for Obama?

    Posted by CassandraS at 02/13/2008 @ 11:54am

39. hanks, but I don't think 500 and 1000 dollar tax credits are anything..and I think the check all will get from the treasury this year as part of a stimulus package are either..waste.

    so, when it goes to the upper 10,000 tax cut GOOD, when it goes to regular folk, a waste.

    exactly the opposite what most economists propose.

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 11:55am

40. Posted by CASSANDRAS 02/13/2008 @ 11:54am

    You trying the "Repubs are voting for Obama, only reason he's winning" crap?

    Posted by Mask at 02/13/2008 @ 12:11pm

41. Posted by JOMAMMA 02/13/2008 @ 11:40am | ignore this person

    wanna bet?

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 12:34pm

42. Lets try this here too:

    Yup, Barack's got the skills. Billary's got the spills...

    &&&&&

    Get out the quills, take some pills, or head for the hills...

    Either way, one's gatta feel

    The appeal that's for real

    And then peal

    The frill

    From the drill

    Can't just chill

    It's more up-hill.

    Boom boom boom

    Don't know why, my mind is fried

    If my name were Billary

    And I wouldn't head for the Hillery,

    It's all been foolery

    To pull the bullery

    Leave the jewelry

    Give me some purity

    Its got the security.

    Boom boom boom

    Barack's got our back, but don't relax

    Packs some rope to hope, and just scope us

    We're removing our harness

    We're reducing the carnage

    We're reviewing our largesse

    We're removing the dumbass

    We're recruiting more substance

    From our distance, from consistence

    We won't resist us.

    Boom boom boom

    Posted by HSUBFOOLS 02/13/2008 @ 12:21pm

    Anybody want to put it to music-- go for it.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 12:42pm

43. ....the "Repubs are voting for Obama, only reason he's winning" crap?

    Posted by MASK 02/13/2008 @ 12:11pm

    Sometimes, you can be such simpleton......As FRANKG pointed out tirelessly, and I think Len Moss mentioned somewhere today, there ARE Repubs voting for Obama, just as I will on March 4th here in TX. While we don't `give' Obama the win, we are a part of those eye-popping winning margin.

    I look at this Primary as my first-ever chance to vote for a black man for POTUS....of course, he nor HRC, will get my vote in Nov. Reality, it's a bitch, ain't it!

    Posted by Happy at 02/13/2008 @ 12:42pm

44. If anyone knows the sting of a superdelegate vote, it is former Sen. Gary Hart. Today he is an Obama supporter, but in 1984, when he ran for president, neither he nor Walter Mondale had won a majority of delegates going into the Democratic convention.

    "I think virtually every superdelegate voted for Walter Mondale. In the teeth of polls the weekend before the convention, showing that Fritz ran 15 to 17 points behind Reagan and I ran 4 to 5 points behind Reagan, they still voted for Mondale, and Mondale lost very badly," Hart said.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 12:44pm

45. Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:42pm |

    HAPPY, you got ANY evidence that a large...or even substantial portion of what's giving him those "those eye-popping winning margins"....are Republican votes?

    Posted by Mask at 02/13/2008 @ 12:45pm

46. Posted by PRESTON-P 02/13/2008 @ 11:13am

    ¿dentedpost?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 02/13/2008 @ 12:45pm

47. This criticism of Obama still has bite. He is not building this coalition of his around a set of policies, he is building it around himself.

    Nonsense! He is building his coalition around "us"!

    II. Create a Transparent and Connected Democracy

    Open Up Government to its Citizens: The Bush Administration has been one of the most secretive, closed administrations in American history. Our nation's progress has been stifled by a system corrupted by millions of lobbying dollars contributed to political campaigns, the revolving door between government and industry, and privileged access to inside information--all of which have led to policies that favor the few against the public interest.

    An Obama presidency will use cutting-edge technologies to reverse this dynamic, creating a new level of transparency, accountability and participation for America's citizens. Technology-enabled citizen participation has already produced ideas driving Obama's campaign and its vision for how technology can help connect government to its citizens and engage citizens in a democracy. Barack Obama will use the most current technological tools available to make government less beholden to special interest groups and lobbyists and promote citizen participation in government decision-making. Obama will integrate citizens into the actual business of government by:

    • Making government data available online in universally accessible formats to allow citizens to make use of that data to comment, derive value, and take action in their own communities. Greater access to environmental data, for example, will help citizens learn about pollution in their communities, provide information about local conditions back to government and empower people to protect themselves.

    • Establishing pilot programs to open up government decision-making and involve the public in the work of agencies, not simply by soliciting opinions, but by tapping into the vast and distributed expertise of the American citizenry to help government make more informed decisions.

    • Requiring his appointees who lead Executive Branch departments and rulemaking agencies to conduct the significant business of the agency in public, so that any citizen can watch a live feed on the Internet as the agencies debate and deliberate the issues that affect American society. He will ensure that these proceedings are archived for all Americans to review, discuss and respond. He will require his appointees to employ all the technological tools available to allow citizens not just to observe, but also to participate and be heard in these meetings.

    • Restoring the basic principle that government decisions should be based on the best-available, scientifically-valid evidence and not on the ideological predispositions of agency officials.

    • Lifting the veil from secret deals in Washington with a web site, a search engine, and other web tools that enable citizens easily to track online federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts with government officials.

    • Giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days before signing any non-emergency legislation.

    • Bringing democracy and policy deliberations directly to the people by requiring his Cabinet officials to have periodic national online town hall meetings to answer questions and discuss issues before their agencies.

    • Employing technologies, including blogs, wikis and social networking tools, to modernize internal, cross-agency, and public communication and information sharing to improve government decisionmaking. Bring Government into the 21st Century: Barack Obama will use technology to reform government and improve the exchange of information between the federal government and citizens while ensuring the security of our networks. Obama believes in the American people and in their intelligence, expertise, and ability and willingness to give and to give back to make government work better.

    • Obama will appoint the nation's first Chief Technology Officer (CTO) to ensure that our government and all its agencies have the right infrastructure, policies and services for the 21st century. The CTO will ensure the safety of our networks and will lead an interagency effort, working with chief technology and chief information officers of each of the federal agencies, to ensure that they use best-in-class technologies and share best practices.

    • The CTO will have a specific focus on transparency, by ensuring that each arm of the federal government makes its records open and accessible as the E-Government Act requires. The CTO will also focus on using new technologies to solicit and receive information back from citizens to improve the functioning of democratic government.

    • The CTO will also ensure technological interoperability of key government functions. For example, the Chief Technology Officer will oversee the development of a national, interoperable wireless network for local, state and federal first responders as the 9/11 commission recommended. This will ensure that fire officials, police officers and EMTs from different jurisdictions have the ability to communicate with each other during a crisis and we do not have a repeat of the failure to deliver critical public services that occurred in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

    • In the 21st century, our economic success will depend not only on economic analysis but also on technological sophistication and direct experience in this powerful engine of our economy. In an Obama administration, the government's economic policy-making organizations and councils will include individuals with backgrounds in our technology industry.

    Posted by Metteyya at 02/13/2008 @ 12:49pm

48. ....got ANY evidence that a large...or even substantial portion of what's giving him those "those eye-popping winning margins"....are Republican votes?

    Posted by MASK 02/13/2008 @ 12:45pm

    I see that "Irrational Exuberance" has infected you.....good and comforting (to me).

    Re-Read what I said: "we are a part of those eye-popping winning margin."....Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:42pm

    Now, did I say "a large...or even substantial portion"??????????

    As for evidence, I know there is me and Len and I think he said some of his friends....that's enough to constitute "a part", DUH!

    Posted by Happy at 02/13/2008 @ 12:59pm

49. I know there is me and Len and I think he said some of his friends....

    Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:59pm

    Actually, at a dinner this past weekend w/2 other couples, I asked them all to vote for Obama.....noen seemed terribly interest in the Primary.....but are Gen. election voters.

    Posted by Happy at 02/13/2008 @ 1:02pm

50. Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:59pm

    And I asked for any EVIDENCE that a "portion" or a "part" (big enough to matter) of what's pushing Obama over the top...are Republicans who'll switch back to McCain in November, or any Repubs at all.

    Do you have any?

    Posted by Mask at 02/13/2008 @ 1:02pm

51. This maybe counterintuitive, I'm getting into the Obama spirit.....and look forward to a Obama/McCain battle just as much as vs. HRC.

    Can't wait for Obama to defend his 100+ "Present" votes....among numerous other things the Repubs are honing their `machine' poring over!

    Posted by Happy at 02/13/2008 @ 1:04pm

52. And I asked for any EVIDENCE that a "portion" or a "part" (big enough to matter) of what's pushing Obama over the top...are Republicans who'll switch back to McCain in November, or any Repubs at all.

    Do you have any?

    Posted by MASK 02/13/2008 @ 1:02pm

    The media, like you (now), have `thrills' running up their legs.....they won't delve into why his margins are large or the Indyie/Repub voting for Obama just for the `historical' fun of it all ....they are smitten....like you and every Magic supporters here.

    Posted by Happy at 02/13/2008 @ 1:06pm

53. Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 1:06pm\

    Fine, HAPPY, prove "me and the Media" wrong...and post the EVIDENCE that a "part" or "portion" (big enough to boost Obama's huge margins)....are Republicans just trying to "gum up the works" or "vote against Hillary", but who'll swing back to McCain cometh the fall and Obama's support will fade as a result during the General.

    Evidence?

    Posted by Mask at 02/13/2008 @ 1:09pm

54. HAPPY, you got ANY evidence that a large...or even substantial portion of what's giving him those "those eye-popping winning margins"....are Republican votes?

    Posted by MASK 02/13/2008 @ 12:45pm | ignore this person

    The evidence is anecdotal---and at this time not documentd---I voted for Obama and so did my wife and at least 14 of my friends----McCain will recive our votes in November. I don't think anyone out there is looked into this---From my personnel experience I do believe that it going on---I would say it would go under the category of the "I hate Hillary/Bill" vote.

    Posted by Len Mosse at 02/13/2008 @ 1:14pm

55. has looked into this---sorry

    Posted by Len Mosse at 02/13/2008 @ 1:15pm

56. you guys are whistling in the dark.

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 1:20pm

57. Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:59pm

    I would agree with you Republicans are voting and leading to bigger margins. But I think he would still be winning by substantial amounts even without the republicans switching over. I definitely think it's helping though. But I also don't entirely agree with you that all of them will switch back to McCain. I think some of them are permanent jumpers on this general.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 1:28pm

58. Actually I do believe one of the 'MSM' exit polls stated that Billary got more repub votes percentage-wise, by like maybe 3-5%. Not a great deal but then if repubs feel that Billary is easier to take down by McCave, one can easily see by them doing that that repubs are not only voting against their own interests in multiple disorganized ways, they're probably setting their own party up for even less turn out per demoralized repubs not even bothering in the general as dems got more than twice the repub vote already in the primaries.

    Still one has to be considering and not ever forget about all the foot tapping/under-aged page chancing pervs in the repub party, that their 'self-hate' is as much a good reason for them voting dem as any other reason I suppose...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 1:33pm

59. I would agree with you Republicans are voting and leading to bigger margins. But I think he would still be winning by substantial amounts even without the republicans switching over. I definitely think it's helping though. But I also don't entirely agree with you that all of them will switch back to McCain. I think some of them are permanent jumpers on this general.

    Posted by CCCOMFO1 02/13/2008 @ 1:28pm

    For a 21-yrs old, you've got a future in analyzing politics....I don't have as much time to `chat' w/you but I read most of what you post......I completely agree with every word above.

    BTW, I don't think it is in Repubs' interest to delve into this phenomenon (of margin contribution).....I want the Dems to think Obama has got this Election in the bag IF he beats HRC.ccNow, as I've gone out and stated that HRC will win TX....but if she doesn't, it will be in part due to Repubs like me and my `friends'....like Len & his friends.

    Lunch run is in order!

    Posted by Happy at 02/13/2008 @ 1:35pm

60. er, Still one has to be considering and not ever forget about all the foot tapping/under-aged page 'chasing' pervs in the repub party,...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 1:46pm

61. I would agree with you Republicans are voting and leading to bigger margins.

    repugs can only vote in open dem primaries. how many of the last ten were open?

    Alabama - Open Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (10 Days - Jan 26). Alaska - Caucuses (Feb 5). Deadline (30 Days - Jan 6). Arizona - Closed PPE (Feb 5). Deadline (30 Days - Jan 6). Arkansas - Open Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (30 Days - Jan 6). California - Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (15 Days - Jan 22). Colorado - Caucuses (Feb 5). Deadline (29 Days - Jan 7). (For Democrats, the deadline to register is Feb 5) Connecticut - Closed Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (12 Noon, Feb 4). Delaware - Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (24 Days - Jan 12). District of Columbia - Primary (Feb 12). Deadline (30 Days - Jan 13) Florida - Primary (Jan 29). Deadline (29 Days - Jan 1). Georgia - Open Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (Jan 7). Hawaii - Open Caucuses (Mar 2). Deadline (30 Days - Feb 1). Idaho - Open Primary (May 27). Deadline (May 2 for pre registration. Registration allowed on Election Day). Illinois - Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (27 Days - Jan 9). Indiana - Open Primary (May 6). Deadline (28 Days - Apr 9). Iowa - Caucus (Jan 3). Deadline (10 days - Dec 24, 2007). Kansas - Caucuses (Feb 9). Deadline (15 Days - Jan 25). Kentucky - Closed Primary (May 20). Deadline for new registrations (28 Days - Apr 22). Deadline for party switch (Dec 31, 2007) Louisiana - Caucus (Feb 9). Deadline (Jan 11). Maine - Caucuses (February 1 through February 3). Deadline (None - Day of Election though check the rules regarding this caucus). Maryland - Closed Primary (Feb 12). Deadline (21 Days - Jan 22). Massachusetts - Semi-Closed Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (1 Day - Jan 16). Michigan - Open Primary (Jan 15). Deadline (30 Days - Jan 6). Minnesota - Open Caucuses (Feb 5 *). Deadline (20 Days - Jan 16). Mississippi - Open Primary (Mar 11). Deadline (30 Days - Feb 10). Missouri - Open Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (4th Wednesday Prior - Jan 9). Montana - Open Primary (Jun 3). Deadline (30 Days - May 4). Nebraska - Primary (May 13 *). Deadline (Second Friday before an election, May 2). Nevada - Caucuses (Jan 19). Deadline (30 Days - Dec 20, 2007). New Hampshire - Semi-Open Primary (Jan 8). Deadline (10 Days - Dec 28, 2007).[7] New Jersey - Primary (Feb 5). Deadline for new registrations (21 Days - Jan 15, 2008). Deadline for party switch (50 days - Dec 17, 2007). Unaffiliated voters can declare on the day of primary. New Mexico - Republican Primary (Jun 3). Deadline (28 Days - May 6) Democrat closed caucus Feb 5, 2008 (deadline January 4). New York - Closed Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (25 Days - Jan 11). North Carolina - Primary (May 6 *). Deadline (30 Days - Apr 6). North Dakota - Open Caucuses (Feb 5). Deadline (No registration. Must have residency for 30 days - Jan 6). Ohio - Semi-Open Primary (Mar 4). Deadline (30 Days - Feb 3). Oklahoma - Closed Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (24 Days - Jan 12). Oregon - Closed Primary (May 20). Deadline (21 Days - Apr 29). Pennsylvania - Primary (Apr 22). Deadline (30 Days - Mar 23). Rhode Island - Primary (Mar 4). Deadline (30 Days - Feb 3). South Carolina - Open Primary (Jan 19 for Republicans, Jan 26 for Democrats). Deadline (30 days - Dec 20, 2007 for Republicans and Dec 25, 2007 for Democrats)). South Dakota - Closed Primary (Jun 3). Deadline (15 Days - May 19). Tennessee - Open Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (30 Days - Jan 6). Texas - Semi-Open Primary (Mar 4) & Closed Caucus (begins Mar 4, schedule based on party rules). Voting in primary is prerequisite for caucusing at precinct convention, which convenes after primary polls close. Deadline (Feb 4, 2008). Utah - Closed Primary (Feb 5). Deadline (30 Days - Jan 6). Vermont - Open Primary (Mar 4). Deadline (Feb 27, 2008). Virginia - Open Primary (Feb 12). Deadline (29 Days - Jan 14). Washington - Open Caucus (Feb 9) & Primary (Feb 19). This is a two step process. Deadline (30 Days via mail or online, 15 Days in Person Friday, Jan 25). West Virginia -Closed Primary (18 Delegates at the State Convention on Feb 5 (ask the state party for details), 12 Delegates for the May 13 Primary). Deadline (21 days to register or change your party to Republican - Apr 22 for the Primary). Wisconsin - Open Primary (Feb 19). Deadline (The day before or the day of at your polling precinct). Wyoming - Caucus (Mar 8).

    * - Note that these Primaries / Caucuses may be changed to a date earlier than stated.

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 1:52pm

62. Nonsense! He is building his coalition around "us"!

    People like Mett make me really scared for the future of our democracy.

    Posted by dentedpat at 02/13/2008 @ 1:58pm

63. Posted by EMILE DUBOIS 02/13/2008 @ 1:52pm

    But they can always re-register as Dem or Indep. It not like its impossible for Repubs to switch over or Dems to switch over.

    Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 1:35pm

    Thank you for the compliment. I do agree with you on Texas and a lot of the more definitively red states. He is going to have to pull some Republicans in to get those states and many of those he pulls in will probably be people who switch back come the generals. I don't think he has the race in the bag if he beats Hillary he still has a long hard fight with McCain, but so far he has proven himself adept at performing miracles, like beating town Hillary's inevitable campaign to the point of barely hanging on and possibly having to back room deals and broken promises to win, for God's sake he got her to turn one of her main groups against her.

    Also for those of you who say he is only getting the black vote BECAUSE he is black I want to enlighten you a little more. You realize Obama at the beginning of this race couldn't get blacks to vote for him. Not because thy thought he couldn't win it was because many lower class blacks, which are most blacks, don't like his type of black person. It has been culturally ingrained into many of us that upper class blacks who are wealthy and well spoken are sell outs. Considering I am one of those people who are well-educated and hopefully one day wealthy I despise that about my culture. However lets not just say it's because he's black because a lot of blacks didn't like him because they viewed him as a sellout.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 02/13/2008 @ 2:05pm

64. Posted by HAPPY 02/13/2008 @ 12:59pm

    I've read that some Republicans are skipping their race and voting for Clinton. I have no doubt that Republicans are voting in Democratic primaries, but I don't think Republican open primary votes are much of a factor for either candidate. If anything, it's Republicans deluding themselves about their own importance.

    Posted by srjenkins at 02/13/2008 @ 2:05pm

65. If anything, it's Republicans deluding themselves about their own importance.

    Posted by SRJENKINS 02/13/2008 @ 2:05pm | ignore this person

    you nailed it. losers all.

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/13/2008 @ 2:09pm

66. you nailed it. losers all.

    Posted by EMILE DUBOIS 02/13/2008 @ 2:09pm

    Be warned boys and girls, this is what drugs will do to your mind; render it incapable of cognitive ability.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 02/13/2008 @ 2:27pm

67. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/13/2008 @ 2:27pm

    Hasn't stopped me yet!

    Posted by k330k at 02/13/2008 @ 2:39pm

68. ¬v¬, the depleted uranium eater, telling people 'no' to doing drugs--- now that's rich.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 3:26pm

69. McCave just lost the presidency:

    http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/13/mccain-waterboarding-fail/

    Posted by hsuBfools at 02/13/2008 @ 8:04pm

70. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs

    Posted by Malcontent at 02/13/2008 @ 10:27pm