Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Clinton's ConcessionContrast S... | The Coming End of Expensive En... »

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Wisconsin Primary Returns

posted by on February 19 at 18:05 PM

The polls have now closed, and the AP immediately projects McCain as the winner.

No word yet on Clinton vs. Obama.

UPDATE: NBC calls it for Obama. Exit poll results are here.

This is the ninth contest in a row that Obama has won and, scanning the exit polls quickly, the few demographic groups that Clinton is holding on to in Wisconsin include voters with little education, voters who said race was a factor in their decision, Catholics (just barely), white women, and voters over 65 years old.

UPDATE: McCain’s victory speech previews his line of attack on Obama, via The Caucus:

Mr. McCain says he will make sure that “Americans are not deceived by an eloquent but empty call for change,” a swipe at Mr. Obama that gets the crowd going. He then completes the sentence, adding that this empty call for change “promises no more than a holiday from history.”

Mr. McCain takes another swipe at Mr. Obama on the foreign policy front, saying that he once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and sitting down with leaders of rogue nations. This speech is essentially an outline of how Mr. McCain would campaign against Mr. Obama in a general election — painting him as weak and inexperienced on the world stage.

And in case you missed the point, Mr. McCain says: “I’m not the youngest candidate, but I am the most experienced.”

Full McCain speech here.

UPDATE: Obama, at a celebratory rally in Texas, declares: “Houston, we have liftoff.

RSS icon Comments

1

MSNBC just called Wisconsin for Obama!

Posted by ghostlawns | February 19, 2008 6:21 PM
2

So has CNN

Posted by YO | February 19, 2008 6:26 PM
3

cnn projects a win for obama as well

Posted by Jiberish | February 19, 2008 6:26 PM
4

and AP

Posted by gnossos | February 19, 2008 6:27 PM
5

Memo to the Obama fanatics: don't even start gloating, you lemmings.

It's pretty obvious that Wisconsin was not a fair vote and should not count:

  1. This is supposed to be the friggin' Democratic primary, but Wisconsin allowed pathetic independents to vote.
  2. You think it's a coincidence that it was 3 degrees Fahrenheit on voting day? You think that was an accident? Don't be so naïve. The Obama campaign and the weather gods obviously conspired to produce these weather conditions, thus disenfranchising Hillary's core constituency, voters who are only marginally motivated.

Posted by cressona | February 19, 2008 6:36 PM
6

I'm beginning to feel sorry for Hillary. Of course, the big (important)states are coming to her rescue. So, I'm sure she'll win big.

Posted by It's ON! | February 19, 2008 6:41 PM
7

margins people, margins. we need to know how much he won by.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | February 19, 2008 6:41 PM
8

10 to 12 points but it's early

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 19, 2008 6:49 PM
9

Link please.

Posted by unPC | February 19, 2008 6:52 PM
10

Hold on ONE MINUTE!!!!

Wisconsin doesn't count!

1. Because it's a caucus state!
2. Because of all the black voters!
3. Because it's a red state!

Oh, never mind. It's all about Texas!!! Or maybe Ohio.

Posted by oneway | February 19, 2008 6:52 PM
11

abcnews.com

Real-time Race Results: Updated February 19, 2008 - 9:51 PM (all times Eastern Standard)
Precincts Reporting 16%
Candidate Votes Vote % Delegates Projected Winner
Obama 91,312 56% 15 Winner
Clinton 70,871 43% 11

Posted by unPC | February 19, 2008 6:55 PM
12

Obama has begun his speech to 20,000. What percentage of those in attendence have fainted thus far?

Posted by johnnie | February 19, 2008 6:58 PM
13

@5, you are right, unless you have voted for Democrats for at least 20 years you should not be allowed to vote. Especially if that means voting for Obama over Clinton. I mean, VOTING?? Where the hell do those independents get off doing that? The nerve, actually voting.

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | February 19, 2008 7:02 PM
14

Wisconsin: Officially Irrelevant Since 2008

Posted by tsm | February 19, 2008 7:07 PM
15

At the risk of sounding like ECB... I'm listening to Obama now and it's just blah blah more of the same lines. I want some new sparks.

Although to do fair I guess it's a rally for Texas and not necessarily meant as a new national speech. But seriously, I could mutter these lines in my sleep at this point.

Posted by stinkbug | February 19, 2008 7:07 PM
16

Also, there are way too many idiots behind him who are phoning their friends and then doing a "can you see me?!" wave.

Posted by stinkbug | February 19, 2008 7:09 PM
17

@15: I'm watching right now, too, and he is murdering it in Texas. The Clinton sideswipes are making his speeches stronger and filled with more numbers and facts.

And, now he drops the Yes, I Can bomb? We're going to see a good race in Texas.

Change gonna come. Obama is our Democratic Nominee. Sorry, Erica.

Posted by kerri harrop | February 19, 2008 7:15 PM
18

Sloggers, my poor friend Jay Inslee and others wavering, really, all of us, when are we going to slow down and understand that our leaders are resources, limited munitions that need to be deployed with great attention for the present and careful consideration for the future?

Should we not support the competent Hillary in her only realistic moment to take the presidency, and later, the engaging and bridge-building Barack, who will still be there for us, doubtless with a more focused and compelling agenda?

These United States, foundering, need a methodical, long, and satisfying electoral effort over the coming 16 years. Let us not, in our feverish anxiety for a new direction after a dry and fruitless period, blow our wad on Obama quite yet, but let the well-equipped Mrs. Clinton bear the hard brunt of the rough Bush years, and then, united, bring our politics to a new level with sunny and seductive Barack just when we are all primed and ready for real 21st century fireworks. Let us not seek selfish, desperate and relative gains, but turn their equally justified candidacies and our mutually inclusive needs into a pair of Democratic leaders that will, for the sake of all, come together.

Posted by KOM | February 19, 2008 7:17 PM
19

Either CNN is looping it or else my stream reset because he started repeating things and then I realized I was back towards the start of the speech. God, that confused me.

Posted by stinkbug | February 19, 2008 7:19 PM
20

NYTimes' blog seems to be taking great issue with the fact that Obama started speaking in the middle of Clinton's speech. "She’s just giving her stump speech, and hasn’t acknowledged his win today so he isn’t exactly interrupting her concession but it does seem like a breach of etiquette." and "OK, was it fair for the TV stations to have bumped Mrs. Clinton off the air while she was still speaking but then show Mr. Obama going on at length with his stump speech? The networks obviously had to follow the Wisconsin winner, but what a move by Mr. Obama, to hop up on stage shortly after she started speaking. And the Obama speech is going more than 30 minutes."

Posted by johnnie | February 19, 2008 7:25 PM
21

Yeah, and if he'd called her up and coordinated the best time to start his speech, you'd be calling it a conspiracy. So full of shit.

Posted by elenchos | February 19, 2008 7:28 PM
22

Elenchos, in case this is your first election, let me remind you - whoever is winning typically waits for all other parties to respond before giving their final speech. It allows them the last word, allows others to make their concessions gracefully and is what the nytimes cites as etiquette. It does not require a consipracy; nor terribly amounts of planning beforehand. Granted, Clinton's speech is not a concession and Obama's is a planned rally, but it would have been a bit more in line with decorum for him to have waited an extra twenty minutes before begining his own speech.

Posted by johnnie | February 19, 2008 7:33 PM
23

John "Bomb bomb bomb/Bomb bomb Iran" McCain is going to go after Obama for being trigger-happy? That should work.

Posted by Eric F | February 19, 2008 7:33 PM
24

@22

...allows you to have some chickenshit to grouse about. Go do some research and come back with something that matters. This thing is going go on and on; you have the time.

Posted by elenchos | February 19, 2008 7:36 PM
25

@24, again. My clit.

Posted by johnnie | February 19, 2008 7:38 PM
26

it's also in line with decorum for the loser to call and congratulate the winner. clinton hasn't done that since january, so it's a pretty safe bet that response he's supposed to wait for ain't gonna happen.

Posted by brandon | February 19, 2008 7:41 PM
27

No we dopn't need 16 years of Democratic rule. Obama will bring Change so he won't even be rpesident 8 years.

In the Change we will solve all the big problems. Conflict, politics and partisanship will be gone. I mean, that's what the Change is all about.
It won't matter who is president after that, it will just be an administrative job. We may all be in the Unity Party then, too.

The Change is going to come.
[insert response non mockingly]
There won't be politics after The Change.
[insert response non mockingly]
The Change is going to come!
[insert response non mockingly]

Posted by unPC | February 19, 2008 7:42 PM
28

I'm usually pretty big on etiquette and manners. But at some point I think it just doesn't matter. I mean, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been doing this for months now. They did the niceties thing for a while, but one can only be gracious for so long.

This isn't the "loser/winner" type of situation, so then why must the normal "loser/winner" manners thing stand? If Hillary has decided not to congratulate Obama, then why, after several speeches where she refuses to congratulate him, should he also continue the supposed niceties and wait until she's done accusing him of plagiarism?

Posted by Michigan Matt | February 19, 2008 7:42 PM
29

elenchos, are you by any chance letting your kid brother / neighbor post under your name today? You're not being your usual articulate self. Perhaps you're drunk?

Congratulations, Obama supporters. As I said last week, it is indeed all over but the shouting.

Posted by Big Sven | February 19, 2008 7:44 PM
30

brandon@26:

it's also in line with decorum for the loser to call and congratulate the winner. clinton hasn't done that since january

There would have been so many concession calls, and she's so strapped for cash, that she would have had to call collect. And that's just awkward for everyone.

Posted by Big Sven | February 19, 2008 7:47 PM
31

I don't have a problem with Clinton not conceding to Obama or congratulating Obama (the last thing she wants to do is remind voters she's on a 9-state losing spree). However it is kind of shitty not to thank the people who DID vote for you in Wisconsin.

She did it with Maryland, DC, etc too...didn't even bother to thank the people who did cast a ballot for a third term for Bill.

Posted by JJ | February 19, 2008 7:50 PM
32
She did it with Maryland, DC, etc too...didn't even bother to thank the people who did cast a ballot for a third term for Bill.

Every time I start to feel positive about Obama, and start to come to terms with his inevitable victory, some douchebag opens their ungracious mouth and ruins it. And I have to start all over again.

Hey, JJ? You need us Clinton supporters if you're going to get your guy into the White House. We get discouraged and stay home, your guy stays the junior Senator from Illinois. Fucking think about that before the next time you post, m'kay?

Posted by Big Sven | February 19, 2008 7:55 PM
33

Go Obama. He's now won 23 states (plus D.C. and Virgin Islands) compared to 10 for Hillary, with Barack winning the last 9 contests. Hillary, please put your campaign out of its misery.

Posted by Mike in Iowa | February 19, 2008 8:01 PM
34

Hey, Big Sven--

I know it's gotta be tough now for you and other Clinton supporters. Realize,though, that this has been pretty hotly contested and emotions run high. I know I've said things, ahem, that weren't terribly productive.

Hillary Clinton is a fine Senator and a good American. She'd probably make a wonderful President, too. We're lucky to have two fine candidates competing for the Democratic ticket. But don't worry, soon our Obamatons will track you down, and you, too, will be drinking the kool-aid and chanting with the rest of us. j/k

Cheers.

Posted by Michigan Matt | February 19, 2008 8:15 PM
35

Big Sven @ 29


elenchos, are you by any chance letting your kid brother / neighbor post under your name today? You're not being your usual articulate self. Perhaps you're drunk?


Has Elenchos had a hissy fit yet and threatened to bitch slap all of the Clinton supporters if they fuck up the election? If the answer is "no" then she's probably not drunk or posting from work.

Posted by wile_e_quixote | February 19, 2008 8:29 PM
36

What?

Posted by elenchos | February 19, 2008 8:32 PM
37

Wile, though I'm relieved to see you didn't accuse anyone of being a cock sucker and aren't counting down the moments until anyone's death in your latest post, if you've exhausted yourself to the point where you have nothing left but adhominem attacks, why bother posting any more?

Posted by johnnie | February 19, 2008 8:35 PM
38

i can'st speak for elenchos. but i'm drunk! whoo-hoo!!!

Posted by some dude | February 19, 2008 8:48 PM
39

@18:

Fuck that!

Posted by AMB | February 19, 2008 8:49 PM
40

One more victory, one step closer to a better America. Time for Hillary to do the right thing, pull out, and begin campaigning for Obama full time.

Posted by Gitai | February 19, 2008 8:51 PM
41

You do have to wonder just how many more losses it's gonna take for her to realize that she's history.

Posted by AMB | February 19, 2008 8:54 PM
42

And also, I'm sure this is shocking news, looks like HRC's campaign is actually behind the whole "plagiarism" non-issue:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080220/D8UTNA980.html

Yet another reason why she is deserving this loss.

Posted by AMB | February 19, 2008 8:56 PM
43

Please. Can't this part of the eletion be over. I tire of the HRC Obama thing. She's a strong, smart woman and I dig her but she need to call it quits.
Plus I'm really tired of Bill.

Posted by poster girl | February 19, 2008 9:22 PM
44

I feel sorry for Hillary too. It's the old story of a hard, but uncharismatic, worker getting blown out of the water by the cool kid.

Although I hope the same thing happens to McCain.

Posted by keshmeshi | February 19, 2008 9:38 PM
45

the thing that i love is the somewhat pathetic "negotiation" of telling obama to wait his goddamn turn so hillary can be president.

KOM, when you're on the ropes you need to block punches, not try to agree to split rounds so you come out on top.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | February 19, 2008 9:56 PM
46

@45,

It's also a fantastic bit of hubris to assume that the Dems will hold the presidency for 16 years. The Republicans haven't been able to do that since McKinley/Roosevelt/Taft.

Posted by keshmeshi | February 19, 2008 10:34 PM
47

Hell, no party has held the White House for 4 straight terms since Roosevelt/Truman.

Posted by gnossos | February 19, 2008 10:54 PM
48

So, when do we see the Clinton campaign roll out their attack YouTube vid accusing Sen Obama of borrowing the phrase "Houston, We Have Liftoff!"

I give it 24 hours.

Not that voters care. They don't.

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 19, 2008 11:07 PM
49

wile_e@35, I answered your ridiculous ad hominem screed in another thread. A response that has gone unanswered.

Meanwhile, elenchos is someone that I know and like, and usually really enjoy reading. Unlike you. So fuck you.

Posted by Big Sven | February 20, 2008 8:50 AM
50

wile_e@35-

ps- not to ruin your masturbatory fantasies or anything, but elenchos is a dude.

Posted by Big Sven | February 20, 2008 8:52 AM
51

@ 18... Obama has pretty much said this is it as far as running for President goes so if he were to "stand aside" and let Hillary have her "turn" (because politics is all about taking turns)... we would be giving up the opportunity to have a president Obama.

And I am way more interested in having a President Obama than a President Clinton III.

Posted by SDizzle | February 20, 2008 9:45 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).