- ‹ previous
- 3603 of 8902
- next ›
Ohio Exit Polls - Clinton Gets the Gang Back Together
Voting is staying open late in Ohio due to some nasty weather, but the networks have their exit polls out. Clinton is putting her old coalition (that Obama was meticulously dismantling) back together.
Whites were 75% of the vote — they went 61-38 for Clinton over Obama.
Blacks were 19% of the vote — they went 89-11 for Obama over Clinton.
Voters 44 and under went for Obama. Voters 45 and older went for Clinton.
Men were just 41% of the vote — they went 52-47 for Obama.
Women were 59% of the vote — they went 54-45 for Clinton.
Clinton won voters making under $50,000 a year. Obama just barely won voter making over $50,000 a year. Clinton's 50/50 voters are back!
Self-identified Democrats were two-thirds of the vote. They went 53-46 for Clinton. Self-identified Republicans and independents were one-third of the vote. They went roughly 55-45 for Obama.
Clinton won economic voters (the majority) and health care voters (roughly 20%), while Obama won Iraq War voters (also roughly 20%).
I think it's safe to say that Clinton has arrested Obama's momentum in Ohio. Looking at these numbers, I would guess Clinton takes the state by a small margin. Clinton has her base back together: women, older voters, low-income voters, and core Democrats.
Leading by 20 points a month ago, dropping to 10 points two weeks ago, and hanging on to win a very narrow victory today (51-48, according to this exit poll) is not what I would call "arresting Obama's momentum."
According to the latest returns , Clinton is winning in Ohio, so far, 59% to 39%
Hillary was always projected to win these two states by large margins. This is hardly a turnaround, just an excuse to drag the contest out another two months and pull the party down with her.
So, will Obama leave the race if he doesn't have decisive wins in Ohio and Texas. He has such a narrow lead, why is he tearing the party apart. It's clear he couldn't have won any of these races if Republicans weren't allowed to vote in Democratic primaries.
I went to the caucus in my town to vote for Obama. There were about 10% Clinton supporters there by the first count. By the second count, after supporters got up to make their speeches and *not one person* spoke up for Hillary, there was a 2nd vote and all our delegates went 100% for Obama.
There was no pressure from the Obama supporters' side to "make" Clinton people change their votes, but apparently they did. Who knows why?
(By the way, brassman, we are a party voting state -- to be in the Democratic caucus you have to declare yourself a Democrat, so that shoots down your theory about Obama's earlier wins. I have never voted Republican in my life and I support Obama because of his idealism - candor - intelligence - and yes, his oratory skills. We can use someone to inspire and unite us after so many years of a coWboy in office.
How in the world do the Republicans stand a chance in the general election based on the turnout numbers. The Democrats are doubling the turnout numbers of Republicans. Are Republicans staying home or are they voting in the Democrat primary? The numbers just don't add up to a close election in November no matter who wins the Democrat nomination if people are voting along party lines.
Right on westerner! I agree. Obama would be the best choice. If Hillary wins I bet Jeb will win in 2016 and the military industrial complex rolls on. Why doesn't anyone ask them their position on Blackwater? Just who are these guys accountable to? That is just the tip of the iceberg. Go Barack!
This country is not ready for a change. We like to live in fear, have our jobs exported under the guise of " competion", lied to about socialized medince. Obama, like JFK wants US to turn the page, to seek a better way. However,it looks like more of the same.
It makes me want to spit when I see the overwhelming vote for Obama from blacks and the slight edge for Clinton from whites. We are such a polarized nation, incapable due to centuries of racial rhetoric to see that we are Americans, we are humans, and we are "wherever"-ans as in that our most crucial decisions should be to think globally but act locally. No one can tell me that a dark and light skinned man in one county in Texas are confronted with different political and economic issues. Socially they may be worlds apart due to Darwinist racial-social segregation, but the substantive issues about education, war, healthcare affect each and every one of us in the same way. I actually have a slight pause for concern for certain self-identified groups, because a failure of an Obama or Clinton presidency would have certain ramifications on the electability of anyone sharing the same racial/gender affiliation again due to this ingrained superficial polarization of America.
I'm also -- originally -- from Pennsylvania and I, too, am concerned about polarization, which is why it was so enheartening for me to see a CNN clip this morning which showed a series of interviews of Texan voters, alternating Clinton and Obama supporters. A BLACK female supporter of CLINTON said:
"She implement change. She stands by her words her words. She speak it. She do what she say. She bring it home."
A WHITE MIDDLE-AGED WOMAN supported OBAMA saying that it was the first primary she had ever voted in. A HISPANIC also spoke of voting OBAMA.
As I said -- enheartening -- this resistance on the part of voters to all the "norms" being spewed out at them.