Obama Wins Big on Independents

The Democrats' Super Tuesday battle offers a revealing yet indeterminate snapshot of a Democratic Party that is unusually energized and firmly divided. Barack Obama won the most states, including pivotal red territory like Missouri, Georgia and Kansas, while Hillary Clinton ran up large margins in the blue strongholds of California, Massachusetts and New Jersey. Final estimates for delegates, which ultimately choose the nominee, were close and still being tabulated overnight.

Across the country, over three million more voters turned out in Democratic primaries than Republican contests -- a trend that persisted even in traditionally conservative states. Turnout in Missouri's Democratic primary was a whopping 70% higher than the G.O.P. contest, for example, where Obama won by a point. The last time the state held two contested primaries, in 2000, Republicans beat Democratic turnout by 56%.

Those numbers suggests that in both Red and Blue states, Democrats are bolstering their ranks with an intense contest between two compelling, celebrity candidates. If Super Tuesday settled anything, it flatly debunked the baseless (and supposedly altruistic) insider concern that a long race is automatically "bad" for the Democratic Party. In reality, a primary's impact depends on the contest, the candidates and the national mood. This one is working wonders for Democratic mobilization.

While Obama strategist David Axelrod reiterated that his candidate is "always the underdog" on Tuesday night, the campaign also seized on the results as evidence that Obama has more national appeal than Clinton. While Clinton scored a few victories in key coastal states like California, she only broke 60 percent in one state, Arkansas. Obama not only won more states, but racked up victories over 60 percent in seven states, buoyed in part by organizing prowess in caucus contests. More consequentially, he won independents by large margins in most regions, including states in Clinton's column, such as Arizona and New Jersey, where one out of five primary voters were independents. He won them by 15 points in Clinton's home state of New York, and by 30 points in California. In the swing state of Missouri, independents flocked to Obama by a decisive 37 points, securing his narrow victory there.

For months, skeptics said Obama might have niche appeal among independents in small states that reward retail politicking, but he could not scale those advantages in a national race. In a single day, Obama proved his independent appeal in about half the country.

In his Tuesday night speech, Obama took the skeptics head on. "I want to speak directly to all those Americans who have yet to join this movement, but still hunger for change. We need you," he said. Calling on citizens who have been "taught to be cynical" to answer the feeling "in their gut," Obama pleaded for support to unite the nation, change American foreign policy and destroy Washington corruption. "We are the ones we've been waiting for!" Obama thundered, adding another memorable, movement-oriented line to his stump speech. (The idea, which has been credited to Arizona's Hopi Tribe and an old civil rights song, recently surfaced in Maria Shriver's endorsement of Obama on Monday.) Obama also said he would draw the best policy contrasts in the general election, as a nominee who flatly opposed the Iraq war, rejecting the Bush-Cheney policy in Iran, and never "wavered" on "fundamental" values like human rights and opposing torture.

While Clinton's speech was less pointed, she also aimed for an inspirational, unifying vision. "Here in America, we face our challenges and we embrace all of our people," she said. "We say with one voice -- give us the child who wants to learn, give us the people in need of work, give us the veterans who need our care. We say give us this economy to rebuild and this war to end!" The closing called on voters to not only back her campaign, but a cause: "Give us this nation to heal, this world to lead, this moment to seize."

Comments (14)

1. The John Nichols "Huckabee's Miracles" post just disappeared, but I'll repost my thoughts here (a reply to Dented Pat's concerns about John McCain).

   John McCain is, without any serious doubt, the best chance for the Repugs to sustain control of the White House in November but it won't help for Dems to wish him bad luck and pull for Huckabee --who is my personal fave among the pugs-- since McCain is now a virtual lock to seal the deal. Romney is pretty much toast.

   I suggest that we take solace in the fact that Obama is now solidly on the inside track to take the White House for three basic reasons. He's the inspirational candidate along the lines of some of our most revered historical figures of hope --Lincoln, FDR, JFK/RFK. He's almost singlehandedly driving voter turnout --with an assist from Dick and Dubya's foul stench-- and garnering the votes of the young, independents and even some crossover Republicans. And last but certainly not least, he's begun to tilt the moneybag laden teeter-totter to his side.

   Of course, the money handlers will not be pleased when and if they see Barack "The Rorschach" Obama resolve himself into a full blown progressive, but it's the hope we hang onto that that's exactly what we are getting in Barack Obama.

   Whatever the outcome, the die has almost certainly been cast.

   We, as progressives, can all assist in the final tally by throwing in our combined weight to tilt the tables in our favor. With the big game now fully under way, now is a good time to start pushing --or pulling. We'd better get on the same page quickly.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 02/06/2008 @ 03:30am

2. cynicism blinds as surely as naivete.

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/06/2008 @ 08:04am

3. cynicism blinds as surely as naivete.

   but naivete has more fun.

   Posted by emile duBois at 02/06/2008 @ 08:22am

4. "We are the ones we've been waiting for!"

   seems more like waiting for godot.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 02/06/2008 @ 09:26am

5. "We are the ones we've been waiting for!" Obama thundered

   "We Are The People Our Parents Warned Us About" by Jimmy Buffet

   I was supposed to have been a Jesuit priest or a Naval Academy grad

   That was the way that my parents perceived me

   Those were the plans that they had

   Though I couldn't fit the part too dumb or too smart

   Ain't it funny how we all turned out

   I guess we are the people our parents warned us about

   You know I could have worked the rigs when the money was big

   Or hopped a freighter south to Trinidad

   And when they tried to draft me I earned a college degree

   Buyin' time till things were not so bad

   But when I got a guitar found a job in a bar, playin' acid rock til I was numb

   Tell me where are the flashbacks they all warned us would come.

   We are the people they couldn't figure out

   We are the people our parents warned us about

   Hey hey, Gardner McKay, take us on the leaky Tiki with you

   Clear skies bound for Shanghai, sailin' on the ocean blue

   Now I got quarters in my loafers tryin' to fight inflation

   When it only used to take a cent

   Sometimes I wish I was back in my crashpad days before I knew what cash flow meant

   Seems everybody's joggin' or heavy into health shit

   Don't tell me that I ought to get rolffed

   'Cause I love cajun martinis and playin' afternoon golf

   We are the people there isn't any doubt

   We are the people they still can't figure out

   We are the people who love to sing "Twist and Shout"

   (Shake it up, Baby now)

   We are the people our parents warned us about.

   Posted by Turk33 at 02/06/2008 @ 10:17am

6. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 02/06/2008 @ 09:26am | ignore this person

   waiting for Godot. I think Beckett leaned a little too heavy on Kafka in this one. but so did everyone.

   Posted by emile duBois at 02/06/2008 @ 11:20am

7. I don't think that democratic voters know which way to turn. For the first time there is an opportunity to elect a woman or an African American, but both are politically correct and only one can be president.

   Posted by P. J. Casey at 02/06/2008 @ 11:48am

8. Posted by P. J. CASEY 02/06/2008 @ 11:48am | ignore this person

   gender and race are not their only attributes. let's say the repubs ran Katherine Harris and Colon Powell. it would also be a woman and a black, but what a difference. Hill and Barry have what the country wants. either one will be a fine choice and the faithful will fall in line with the winner. our country depends on it.

   Posted by emile duBois at 02/06/2008 @ 11:52am

9. I don't think the time has come yet. We need at least 4 years for Hillary to clean up the big mess we are in. I say to Obama: "before making pretty speeches, go clean up your room".

   Posted by nursevic at 02/06/2008 @ 1:44pm

10. Posted by NURSEVIC 02/06/2008 @ 1:44pm

    Uh, oh....looks like the "newbies who JUST HAPPEN to support Hillary" are back!

    Posted by Mask at 02/06/2008 @ 3:47pm

11. I am a moderate Democrat but I am enthusiastically supporting Barack Obama because I believe he will bring about the changes our nation so badly needs by reaching across the aisle and working with members of both parties. The bitter partisanship in Congress is making it impossible to get reforms in healthcare, the environment, immigration and our foreign policy. Hillary Clinton has ran a nasty, mean-spirted campaign against Obama, full of mud-slingling, character assassination and the politics of personal destruction. As President she and her husband will make the presidencies of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush pale in comparison when it comes their vindictiveness, secretiveness and wanting to get back at their enemies.

    America has too many problems that need to be resolved and they never will be resolved if we demonize those who disagree with us. Obama has proven he can work with those whose views don't always equal his in a way to find common ground and get meaningful legislation passed that will benefit all Americans. He will hold true to his beliefs but will still be able to get majorities to pass legislation because of the type of leader he is.

    We don't need more partisanship in Congress, we need less. We don't need more lies, more mud slinging, and more dirty campaigning. Nixon is long gone, and Bush will soon be gone. If revenge and getting back at the Republicans is your motive, then vote for Hillary Clinton. If progress and change and laws protecting our environment, extending healthcare to more of our citizens, a fair and decent immigration policy, and a foreign policy that will restore American values without making us a pariah in the world is what you want, then you have one clear choice: Barack Obama.

    Posted by markkoch at 02/06/2008 @ 4:46pm

12. I am/was an Edwards supporter. I probably lean towards Obama because I'm trusting enough of my friends who think he has the best chance in the general and that he'll get it right on health care, etc. even though I have seriuos concerns about how he'll actually make all this change happen and is lacking lots of details (still hoping he'll grab Edwards to help out)...I have serious issues with Clinton, but still feel she'd be a fine president (if she could get through the general).

    I just wish the numbers weren't being sliced and diced in a factually irresponsible way by the media..especially left-leaning media that should be smarter and know better. Obama won some great victories last night (I live in Missouri and voted for Edwards) but have to admit Obama's 1 point win was impressive (820,000 Dems. voted to the Repubs. 583,000!), Minnesota impressive...but his "big wins" Alabama, Kansas, (where I grew up) 75% of 36,000 votes...that's not a big deal...because I'd put it all on him not winning there in the general. If he's good enough to win Kansas in the general then he's going to win about 43 states and it truly will be historic. Winning Dem. primaries in "red" states doesn't mean that much does it? Same for CNN trying to point out that white men voted for Obama in Georgia...well they're DEMOCRATIC white men right, I should hope so, they're not the bigoted bubbas! Not saying the South hasn't changed...but we are talking about good guy partisans. I think last night just told us Dems. are conflicted right now between two good, but not perfect candidates. I think we need some perspective on these numbers, that's all.

    Posted by Ryan Tull at 02/06/2008 @ 5:03pm

13. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=Ryan%20Tull

    any relation to Jethro?

    Posted by emile duBois at 02/06/2008 @ 5:26pm

14. Nursevic,

    If anyone needs to go and clean their room it would be Hillary. The Clintons have had 35 years of experience there has to be a lot of dirty laundry piling up there. Obama doesnt have any laundry he hasnt been in Washington long enough and thats the second biggest thing that makes him appealing the first being the fact that he is a community activist. I would love to see a grassroots President in the white house.

    Carol

    Posted by harriscrl3 at 02/06/2008 @ 10:18pm