Landscape for Obama is more favorable from here on

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Saturday:
Louisiana - blacks
Nebraska - caucus, plus see states like North Dakota and Kansas
Washington - caucus, plus Democrats here are more liberal than average

Sunday:
Maine - caucus

Feb 12th:
DC - duh
MD - blacks
Virginia - blacks

Feb 19th:
Hawaii - caucus, plus his sort of home state
Wisconsin - Milwaukee blacks + Madison liberals + see my state

March 4th:
Ohio - blacks, but kind of icky otherwise
Rhode Island - If Obama can take CT...
Texas - Might be too many Hispanics, but they turn out poorly, and there's also blacks and Austin liberals, if Obama has the momentum from previous wins...
Vermont - duh

[หมูเด้ง]

We should go 9-3 then?

[Aizen]

OH and TX are bad states for Obama. Fortunately, Obama has a month to win state after state and build up momentum

[© tweed]

there's every chance he sweeps through to March 4th.  but Ohio and Texas are going to be tough regardless.

[Ebowed]

Louisiana, Ohio, Rhode Island & Texas will be trouble.

[Lief 🗽]

A solid of month of victories, plus a massive cash advantage, should make TX and OH much closer.

In Texas, I think that Obama will win the big cities of Houston, Dallas and Texas by large margins (due to black support in the first two, and latte liberal support/college support here in Austin). Clinton will win the Valley, as well as San Antonio and El Paso, plus most of the East Texas counties. Not sure who take the panhandle: on the one hand, Obama seems to do well with western, rural whites, but on the other, he failed miserably in neighboring Oklahoma.

[exopolitician]

A solid of month of victories, plus a massive cash advantage, should make TX and OH much closer.

In Texas, I think that Obama will win the big cities of Houston, Dallas and Texas by large margins (due to black support in the first two, and latte liberal support/college support here in Austin). Clinton will win the Valley, as well as San Antonio and El Paso, plus most of the East Texas counties. Not sure who take the panhandle: on the one hand, Obama seems to do well with western, rural whites, but on the other, he failed miserably in neighboring Oklahoma.

Like I said...he needs to visit these states HIMSELF....and bring his friends along with him....instead of sending them without him wherever he pleases.

[Lief 🗽]

I'm sure Obama will make a swing through Austin, Dallas and Houston before the month is done.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Louisiana, Ohio, Rhode Island & Texas will be trouble.

Why would Louisiana be trouble? It's probably a majority black electorate.

Like I said in Ohio, he could hammer on NAFTA.

[Ebowed]

Louisiana voted for Bill Clinton twice.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Louisiana voted for Bill Clinton twice.

So did my state.

Extrapolating the CNN exit poll, almost 60% of Kerry voters in Louisiana are black. It's probably slightly less than that now due to Katrina, but hardly favorable numbers for Hillary, it's close Georgia or South Carolina numbers.

[© tweed]

Louisiana voted for Bill Clinton twice.

as did Connecticut, Iowa, Missouri...

[Aizen]

Lousiana has double the amount of black people than Arkansas does. Lastly, LA has more black people than Alabama

[Lief 🗽]

I have a hard time seeing Obama lose Louisiana after winning Alabama and Georgia so convincingly.

[Ebowed]

Louisiana voted for Bill Clinton twice.

as did Connecticut, Iowa, Missouri...

Of course.  But in the South, it's different.

Georgia, SC, Alabama voted against WJC.  Arkansas, Tennessee, Florida (once), & Louisiana voted for him.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect HRC to do well in Louisiana.

[Sam Spade]

Ohio and Texas are the real problems.  Obama won't win RI, sorry.  Virginia will be closer than you might want to think.  Wisconsin is weird - lots of Catholics, good sized black population + liberals.  Maine is a caucus, but that state is odd too.

Other than that, he should win the rest, although no one really has an idea what the Louisiana black population is now, and the Democratic whites in Louisiana are quite poor.  Also, don't make the faulty assumption that all of these races are going to be blowouts - Clinton was maximizing resources this time around in certain places - we'll see whether she does so down the line.

[Padfoot]

Ohio will probably be the closest and most contested true to Buckeye form.  Obama will do well in the six big city counties as well as Athens County in southeast Ohio.  Also, if his trend of winning in the suburbs continues he should win some suburban counties surrounding the big city counties.  Clinton will do well in the mid size cities like Youngstown, Canton, Lima, ect. as well as the western rural counties and southeastern Appalachian counties.

[Lief 🗽]

Ohio and Texas are the real problems.  Obama won't win RI, sorry.  Virginia will be closer than you might want to think.  Wisconsin is weird - lots of Catholics, good sized black population + liberals.  Maine is a caucus, but that state is odd too.

Other than that, he should win the rest, although no one really has an idea what the Louisiana black population is now, and the Democratic whites in Louisiana are quite poor.  Also, don't make the faulty assumption that all of these races are going to be blowouts - Clinton was maximizing resources this time around in certain places - we'll see whether she does so down the line.

Sam, how do you think the Democratic race will play out in Texas? Will Obama's margin's in the big cities be able to outweight the Valley and east Texas vote for Clinton?

[Sam Spade]

Ohio and Texas are the real problems.  Obama won't win RI, sorry.  Virginia will be closer than you might want to think.  Wisconsin is weird - lots of Catholics, good sized black population + liberals.  Maine is a caucus, but that state is odd too.

Other than that, he should win the rest, although no one really has an idea what the Louisiana black population is now, and the Democratic whites in Louisiana are quite poor.  Also, don't make the faulty assumption that all of these races are going to be blowouts - Clinton was maximizing resources this time around in certain places - we'll see whether she does so down the line.

Sam, how do you think the Democratic race will play out in Texas? Will Obama's margin's in the big cities be able to outweight the Valley and east Texas vote for Clinton?

You're missing San Antonio and El Paso, but ok.  He should "win" Houston and Dallas, but it would be close - these areas have larger Hispanic populations than you're giving them credit for, and Houston has a subtle redneck vote.

In a "normal" Democratic primary, Obama could never win.  So, therefore a lot may depend on crossover voting - Obama will need independents and a lot.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Virginia will be closer than you might want to think.

Why? Obama will win NOVA if previous patterns hold, and he'll take the college and black areas too obviously. He probably won't win the poor rural areas but that's not where the population is, plus most such areas are Republican.

Wisconsin is weird - lots of Catholics, good sized black population + liberals.

Midwestern German Catholics appear to be a different breed than "ethnic" Catholics. Hell, look at Stearns County in my state. Before tonight even I would've said there's no way Obama could've won there. Plus there's also the fact it's right north of Illinois, yes I know I've dismissed the whole neighboring state advantage in the past, but I'll admit it probably has some relevance in primaries even if only for an influx of GOTV volunteers. If southern Wisconsin is like eastern Iowa, Obama should take it.

Maine is a caucus, but that state is odd too.

Not in any way that benefits Clinton can I see. I suppose it's fairly poor, but Obama hasn't had that much trouble with poor whites outside of major metro areas and the south.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Not in any way that benefits Clinton can I see. I suppose it's fairly poor, but Obama hasn't had that much trouble with poor whites outside of major metro areas and the south.

There aren't many poor whites in the U.S outside the south and industrial/certain metropolitan areas.

[Verily]

Not in any way that benefits Clinton can I see. I suppose it's fairly poor, but Obama hasn't had that much trouble with poor whites outside of major metro areas and the south.

There aren't many poor whites in the U.S outside the south and industrial/certain metropolitan areas.

Is this Al admitting that West Virginia is *gasp* Southern?

[Verily]

Louisiana voted for Bill Clinton twice.

as did Connecticut, Iowa, Missouri...

Of course.  But in the South, it's different.

Georgia, SC, Alabama voted against WJC.  Arkansas, Tennessee, Florida (once), & Louisiana voted for him.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect HRC to do well in Louisiana.

Georgia voted for him in 1992 (as often as Florida).

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Not in any way that benefits Clinton can I see. I suppose it's fairly poor, but Obama hasn't had that much trouble with poor whites outside of major metro areas and the south.

There aren't many poor whites in the U.S outside the south and industrial/certain metropolitan areas.

You're saying this to someone who grew up in North Dakota?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Is this Al admitting that West Virginia is *gasp* Southern?

It is in certain respects (though not the most important ones) but it's also industrial

And I was obviously making a sweeping generalisation