Barack Obama has defeated Hillary Clinton in the Wisconsin primary, a loss whose significance cannot be overstated.
With a small number of precincts counted and based on exit polls, Obama had 53% to Clinton’s 46%, for his ninth straight win. He finished at 58% – a true landslide.
Clinton needed a win or a narrow loss in Wisconsin, not for delegates (74) or momentum, but because the Democatic electorate there is largely made up of her core supporters: white voters making less than $50,000 per year.
An Obama campaign official told CNN during the day that Wisconsin was a “no excuses” state for Clinton, that with previous losses she offered excuses such as it was a caucus and she doesn’t do well in caucuses or there was a large African-American population. Wisconsin, heavily white and working class and with a primary, affords her no excuses.
Exit polling showed Obama made great inroads with blue collar workers, and in fact beat her in that demographic, while maintaining his enormous support among young voters.
The Wisconsin electorate is similar to that in Ohio, now even more a must-win for Clinton March 4.
This is also caucus day in Hawaii, where Obama spent part of his youth; he’s expected to benefit from being thought of as a native son. [Update: he got 76%.]
The leaderboard is here.
Related:
Ohio and Texas or She’s Out Obama Leads, Clinton Spins
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
… just wondering, if Obama gets it, wouldn’t it be great if he chose Clinton as his ’second’? Meaning, America would get his idealism, youth, freshness tempered by her feminism, savvy, governmental experience and it would keep her husband distanced and OUT of the OVAL office, so to speak … ‘Checks & balances’ are essential for a ‘working’ democracy. If the deck is loaded with too much of one, the ‘game’ is not much of a ‘game’, but rather just one potential politico potentate running rough-shot over others. It is impossible to IGNORE the impact of powerful lobbies, money, the market, and foreign policy. The Democrats stand a better chance, long term, if the front runners ‘align’, no?
Indeed, this was her Swang Song, no question.
I don’t believe Barack will pick Hillary as his running mate; however, I would be overjoyed if he chose a woman. I was pondering this morning, and had dreams of Diane Feinstein, but that is a flight of fancy.
Bill Richardson may be a big boon, but a huge disappointment to those still waiting for the day we see a woman on a successful party ticket.
If he’s for change, I don’t see how he can miss this golden opportunity for real social equality; the golden boy of the elites should be able to cough up a nod to those women who pinned their hopes on Hillary.
Just thoughts. Thanks for the entry, ella.
I don’t remember her name but both my parnter, T, and I thought that the senator from Missouri that was interviewed on Bill Maher last Friday was quite impressive with both honesty and her reasons for supporting Obama over Clinton. I don’t really see Clinton as a second fiddle, no matter what.
@canadada – Like my friend Blue Smoke, I don’t think he’ll choose Hillary. But I also think she’d refuse if he did. I can’t imagine her playing second fiddle to him, even with hopes of succeeding him if he wins in November. She would certainly have more power as a big-state senator than as a US veep, and I think that’s heady stuff.
I’m not sure how he might balance the ticket. He’ll need to assess where his weaknesses are, both geographical and ideological. And McCain’s choice could also be an influence. Whatever choice is made it will be, as it always is, a matter of pure politics.
@Blue Smoke – Yes, I think you’re both realistic and right about Feinstein. And that’s a shame.
If Hillary had taken Wisconsin by even a little bit I would not say it’s over for her. But it is over. All the post-Super Tuesday contests she didn’t bother campaigning for, possibly because months earlier she assumed she’d have the nomination after ST, became a case of voters dancing with the one who brought them.
I think she’s going to lose Texas. I do not think it will be close. She could also lose Ohio, but I’m not willing yet to say she will. But even if she wins Ohio and loses Texas she will probably drop out the next day. Just my hunch. (Vermont’s primary is the same day. I’m seeing a lot of Obama ads. I have not seen one of hers. Dance card, anyone?)
@rhbee – I think you mean Claire McCaskill. She’s in her first term and I don’t know a lot about her. I do know she’s the first woman elected by Missouri to the US Senate.
Agree about that fiddle!
Yes, Claire McCaskill. I had the same feeling about her that I get when I listen to or read Obama’s plans. I especially liked her reasons for changing her vote as they are congruent with what I really feel is happening as more and more voters get involved. We really do want a world without war, a world where we work together to solve problems, and world where we trust each other out of our own self confidence and self worth. Reminds me of the start of every new school year back when I was enjoying teaching. This is going to be work but it’s going to be fun, too.