Feb. 9th primaries & caucuses--Dem. results thread

[Sam Spade]

Link?

[Sam Spade]

Thank you.

[Sam Spade]

Sounds like Obama will win Louisiana by about 10 points, unless blacks act differently than they have before.

[Sam Spade]

Sounds like Obama will win Louisiana by about 10 points, unless blacks act differently than they have before.

Maybe more, if whites vote like they did in GA rather than AL

Dave

The whites in LA are more like the whites in AL, if not more racist. 

[Sam Spade]

Sounds like Obama will win Louisiana by about 10 points, unless blacks act differently than they have before.

Maybe more, if whites vote like they did in GA rather than AL

Dave

The whites in LA are more like the whites in AL, if not more racist. 

So the primary could be even more racially polarised than AL then? Is MS likely to be the same?

Dave

Of course, it's going to be racially polarized (Is the Pope Catholic?).  MS will be as well.

It will "appear" less polarized than AL county-wise, because the blacks are more spread out in LA, but it'll still be there.  

[Sam Spade]

Some of the parish results really do look odd. Assumption parish for one.

Isn't that the weird machine county?

That statement applies for all of Lyonesse

But I think you're thinking of Plaquemines.

Either the blacks showed up, or the Cajuns there like Obama more than I thought. 

[Sam Spade]

I like how Louisiana was called before New Mexico.

Thankfully, NM has to be called by Friday, February 15.

Trust me, it won't be called before then.

[Sam Spade]

I am listening to Obama. Does Obama ever say anything other  than generalities?  Where's the beef? 

He just spoke specifically about making college more affordable, off the top of my head.

How?  Well, I guess through giving away more money, but the specifics of the giving away of money would be nice.

[Sam Spade]

I am listening to Obama. Does Obama ever say anything other  than generalities?  Where's the beef? 

He just spoke specifically about making college more affordable, off the top of my head.

How?  Well, I guess through giving away more money, but the specifics of the giving away of money would be nice.

He spoke about a year in public service would allow the government to fund for college tuition.

I don't get the connection.  Is that forced public service or what (i.e. slave labor) that will free up government funding, or am I missing something?

[Sam Spade]

I am listening to Obama. Does Obama ever say anything other  than generalities?  Where's the beef? 

He just spoke specifically about making college more affordable, off the top of my head.

How?  Well, I guess through giving away more money, but the specifics of the giving away of money would be nice.

He spoke about a year in public service would allow the government to fund for college tuition.

I don't get the connection.  Is that forced public service or what (i.e. slave labor) that will free up government funding, or am I missing something?

Like military service, or community service or something like that. Its not forced either, you can choose whether you want to go to college or not...its not up to the government to decide that.

That really explains nothing, but thanks for trying!

My guess is what you are trying to say is that if you go do military service or community service, we (the government) will pay for your education.  Of course, the government already does that for the military, so...

[Sam Spade]

I am listening to Obama. Does Obama ever say anything other  than generalities?  Where's the beef? 

He just spoke specifically about making college more affordable, off the top of my head.

How?  Well, I guess through giving away more money, but the specifics of the giving away of money would be nice.

He spoke about a year in public service would allow the government to fund for college tuition.

I don't get the connection.  Is that forced public service or what (i.e. slave labor) that will free up government funding, or am I missing something?

Like military service, or community service or something like that. Its not forced either, you can choose whether you want to go to college or not...its not up to the government to decide that.

That really explains nothing, but thanks for trying!

My guess is what you are trying to say is that if you go do military service or community service, we (the government) will pay for your education.  Of course, the government already does that for the military, so...

Its hard to explain, public service to your country. You pick it apart and make a conclusion yourself then.

It's hard to explain because it makes little sense.  NTTAWTT

[Sam Spade]

Higher Education
    * Create the American Opportunity Tax Credit: Obama will make college affordable for all Americans by creating a new American Opportunity Tax Credit. This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college or university and make community college tuition completely free for most students. Obama will also ensure that the tax credit is available to families at the time of enrollment by using prior year's tax data to deliver the credit when tuition is due.

Still costs money - I'm not going to do the math right now.  Probably will drive the quality of a college education down even further from where it already is, increasing the necessity of the graduate degree (which in many ways is already a necessity), but that's that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have no problem with this, at all.

I am still asking about the public service for government money thingy, but that's ok.  I'm patient.

[Sam Spade]

I am still asking about the public service for government money thingy, but that's ok.  I'm patient.

Again, from the website:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, in other words, the government is bribing college kids to do public service.  Ok.  Thanks.

[Sam Spade]

I am still asking about the public service for government money thingy, but that's ok.  I'm patient.

Again, from the website:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, in other words, the government is bribing college kids to do public service.  Ok.  Thanks.

They're investing in their education if they invest in their community. It's a pretty simple and fair concept.

Your language sounds more "eloquent" and lest I say more "hopeful".  But it is still the government bribing kids to do community service.

But look, if it makes you feel better, your line definitely sounds much better than mine.

[Sam Spade]

Edwards (about 4%) and Biden (2%) are doing surprisingly well.

That's the "I'm not voting for a black or a woman" vote.

[Sam Spade]

Alright, I've hijacked the thread enough so far.  We can discuss this at some later time or on other thread.

[Sam Spade]

Guess which county Edwards broke 15% in?

At first, I though St. Bernard, but the Edwards vote wasn't really that high there.

After thinking a little more, I got the joke you were making - it was LaSalle Parish, where the county seat is Jena... 

Also, looks like there was a strong "lying about voting for a woman" tendency in the exit polling, not surprising for this area of the country (if my anecdotal observations in East Texas are any measure).  The strongest Clinton counties had abnormally high numbers of people (10%-20%) voting for white male candidates - amusing protest vote.

[Sam Spade]

After thinking a little more, I got the joke you were making - it was LaSalle Parish, where the county seat is Jena... 

This is why primaries are great. It also voted 66% for David Duke in the '91 runoff (53% in the first round).

Query:  I really haven't had a chance to look through the results in any detail yet.  Do you see any improvement for Obama among the groups he'll need to perform well to have a shot in say, Texas (because rural east Texas will count for something)?

I would say Ohio, but I know how different the two states are.

[Sam Spade]

After thinking a little more, I got the joke you were making - it was LaSalle Parish, where the county seat is Jena... 

This is why primaries are great. It also voted 66% for David Duke in the '91 runoff (53% in the first round).

Query:  I really haven't had a chance to look through the results in any detail yet.  Do you see any improvement for Obama among the groups he'll need to perform well to have a shot in say, Texas (because rural east Texas will count for something)?

I would say Ohio, but I know how different the two states are.

Well in Lyonesse's only two lily white parishes (Cameron, Livingstone) he polled 18% and 22% respectively.

I'm actually about half way through some maps on this general thing so...

I get your point - the answer is (almost likely) no.  Especially since most of east Texas outside Beaumont/Port Arthur resembles those areas and not the rest of Louisiana.

Though I'd be curious to know your thoughts when you're done.

[Sam Spade]

Texas is like California in the Dem primary for Obama but maybe worse. Texas has more blacks, but the Hispanics are probably more conservative/suspicious of blacks than  in California, and the Texas Dem primary is largely sans upper middle class Anglos, and probably has more rednecks still voting in it. Unless Hillary collapses, it's all hers.

I'll bump up my (still incomplete) analysis on the Texas Senate Districts for your perusal sometime later today. 

I'll also fill in my anecdotal reports from largely Hispanic (with redneck whites) east Houston that I get second-hand from a strong familial source.  In other words, when my father tells me of a Hispanic/redneck white he's met who is supporting Obama, I'll let you know. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So far, the working class white areas that resemble Ohio have not looked very pretty for Obama, even in Illinois (she beat him there).

Also, I seem to remember Cleveland having a large ethnic white population that is probably not inclined to vote for blacks.

[Sam Spade]

I get your point - the answer is (almost likely) no.  Especially since most of east Texas outside Beaumont/Port Arthur resembles those areas and not the rest of Louisiana.

Though I'd be curious to know your thoughts when you're done.

And here's the map:

Oh, geez.  Ugly.  But fascinating.

[Sam Spade]

Texas has more blacks, but the Hispanics are probably more conservative/suspicious of blacks than  in California

How is that possible? Most of the racial tensions between Latinos and Blacks have been centered in SoCal. There are also fewer blacks in power in majority Hispanic areas of Texas. Polls also show that TX blacks are more supportive of comprehensive immigration than their CA counterparts.

The less acrimonious relationship between these two groups in TX may aid Obama's inroad efforts in the Valley. With support from Pete Gallego and other TX Latinos, Obama could break the 35% threshold in heavily Latino areas.

Does Obama have the support of any other politicians in the border area (much less the rest of Texas) other than Gallego?  I don't know of one, off the top of my head.  That can often make a difference in that "machine-politic" area of the world.

I do agree that the acrimoniousness (word?) will be strongest in Houston/Dallas (yes there are Hispanics in Dallas) and less in other areas.

[Sam Spade]

Texas is like California in the Dem primary for Obama but maybe worse. Texas has more blacks, but the Hispanics are probably more conservative/suspicious of blacks than  in California, and the Texas Dem primary is largely sans upper middle class Anglos, and probably has more rednecks still voting in it. Unless Hillary collapses, it's all hers.

I'll bump up my (still incomplete) analysis on the Texas Senate Districts for your perusal sometime later today. 

I'll also fill in my anecdotal reports from largely Hispanic (with redneck whites) east Houston that I get second-hand from a strong familial source.  In other words, when my father tells me of a Hispanic/redneck white he's met who is supporting Obama, I'll let you know. 

I doubt enough redneck whites are still democrats to have a significant effect on the Dem primary. Well, except maybe a few of the women. Remember also that in Texas, lower-middle class white doesn't necessarily equate to redneck. Lower class white however, probably does. However most rednecks would never vote for Obama (obvious reasons) OR Hillary (they think she's an atheist lesbian communist). Rather they'll turn out in droves to vote for Huckabee.  

lol

[Sam Spade]

Texas has more blacks, but the Hispanics are probably more conservative/suspicious of blacks than  in California

How is that possible? Most of the racial tensions between Latinos and Blacks have been centered in SoCal. There are also fewer blacks in power in majority Hispanic areas of Texas. Polls also show that TX blacks are more supportive of comprehensive immigration than their CA counterparts.

The less acrimonious relationship between these two groups in TX may aid Obama's inroad efforts in the Valley. With support from Pete Gallego and other TX Latinos, Obama could break the 35% threshold in heavily Latino areas.

Does Obama have the support of any other politicians in the border area (much less the rest of Texas) other than Gallego?  I don't know of one, off the top of my head.  That can often make a difference in that "machine-politic" area of the world.

I do agree that the acrimoniousness (word?) will be strongest in Houston/Dallas (yes there are Hispanics in Dallas) and less in other areas.

Maybe Ciro will endorse Obama?

Clinton has  Reps. Solomon Ortiz, Silvestre Reyes of El Paso, Henry Cuellar of Laredo,  and Rubén Hinojosa of Mercedes.

Garry Mauro is also backing Hillary.

Then she should win Delta County (she will anyways). 

So, the two Hispanic Reps still outstanding are Ciro and Charlie Gonzales.  I think Tony Sanchez also endorsed Hillary, as memory serves me.