The Senate Races Most Likely to Switch

Even if McCain wins, the Democrats are still going to make gains in Congress. It is unlikely the Democrats will pick up nine seats to overturn a fillibuster. The Democrats will probably get about 5 to 6 seats. With this large majority, Harry Reid can move "Traitor" Joe to the other side of the aisle. The Democrats will have an easier time pushing their agenda. If McCain does become president, he will have a nightmare facing the heavily Democratic Congress. If Obama becomes president, the Democrats will steer the agenda for two years and 2010 will probably be a Republican year. We have a list of the seven Senate races that are most likely to switch parties. The Senate race with the 1 next to it is the Senate race that we believe has the best chance of switching parties. Enough chitter chatter, onto the list.

7. Louisiana (held by Democrat)
Mary Landrieu is up for reelection and she won 52%-48% in her last election. She will be facing state treasurer John Kennedy(R) who is a former Democrat. Landrieu will definitely be helped by Obama. He will probably bring large numbers of African Americans to the polls. The African American population of Louisiana was 32%. That number has probably dropped a bit after Katrina and it remains to be seen how many African Americans there are in Lousiana after Katrina. Currently we believe this race is slightly tilting Democratic.

6. Mississippi (held by a Republcan)
Although Thad Cochran is pretty safe, the new Senator Roger Wicker (R) is having a tough time holding onto his seat. The former governer of the state Ronnie Musgrove (D) is running against Wicker. Wicker has never held statewide office before. He was the Representative from the 1st Congressional district of Mississippi. Haley Barbour appointed Wicker to fill Trent Lott's open U.S Senate seat. Musgrove is a conservative white Democrat so he must get enough whites to vote for him so he can win along with the African American turnout Obama will bring. Currently, this race is a toss up.

5. Alaska (held by a Republican)
Although Ted Stevens has been a Senator from Alaska for 40 years, this may be the last term for the longest serving Senator from the Last Frontier. He is facing Democrat Mark Begich, the mayor of Anchorage and the son of former congressman Nick Begich. Stevens usually wins reelection by a wide margin but that will not happen this time. Recently, the FBI raided his house due to an ethics charge. Polls show Stevens and Begich attracting about the same percentage of their own party. The reason for this race being close is that Begich has a large lead of unaffiliated voters. Expect this race to be one of the closest of the cycle. This race is currently a toss up.

4. Colorado (held by a Republican)
Since 2004, Democrats have been making gains in Colorado. They control the Governership, the state Senate and state House along with one U.S Senate seat. Wayne Allard who holds the other U.S Senate seat is retiring. Rep. Mark Udall (D) from Boulder and former Rep. Bob Schaffer (R) from the 4th district which contains Fort Collins and the eastern part of the state are both running for the seat. Recent polls show Udall with a lead and Obama will be contesting Colorado. Those two factors may be enough for Udall to pull off a win. This race currently leans Democratic.


3. New Mexico (held by a Republican)
We were not sure whether to give this spot to New Hampshire or not but we decided to give this to New Mexico. Pete Domenichi (R) is retiring and Rep. Tom Udall (D) who is the cousin of Mark Udall who is running for Senate in Colorado won an easy primary. Rep. Steve Pearce (R) will be running for the seat too. Pearce barely won the primary 51%-49% against Rep. Heather Wilson. Pearce is heavily conservative which is why he won the primary but that will probably not play well into the general election. Udall also is the son of Stewart Udall who was the Secretary of the Interior when Johnson and Kennedy were president. Polls show Udall with a lead which is why we think this race currently leans Democratic.


2. New Hampshire (held by a Republican)
This is not the first contest between former Governer Jeanne Shaheen (D) and Senator John Sumunu (R). In 2002, they ran against each other and Sumunu won only 51%-47%. Now Shaheen is back and polls show she is leading Sumunu in the high single didgits and the low double didgits. Sumunu is a moderate to conservative Republican and McCain is on the top of the ticket which may help Sumunu. Democrats have been doing really well in New Hampshire. Since 2004, Democrats gained the governership, both of New Hampshire's U.S house seats, control of the State House and State Senate. It looks like this may be Sumunu's last term even if McCain does win New Hampshire. This race currently leans Democratic.

1. Virginia (held by a Republican)
This race is almost certain to fall into Democratic hands. John Warner (R) is retiring and former Governer Mark Warner (D) is running for the seat. Former Governer Jim Gilmore (R) is running too but it looks like there is no chance for him. A recent Rasmussen poll shows Warner leading in the high teens. Now that Warner said he will not run for VP, it is certain he will be the Junior Senator of Virginia next year.

These our the opinons we have of the Senate Races most likely to switch this cycle. We plan to soon post rankings of the Senate seats like the rankings for the states in the presidential. In the future, we will make make the list of the Senate races most likely to switch longer.
If you have any thoughts on this list, please feel free to comment it.

State Rankings

Since our last rankings, some states have changed their spots. Michigan was formerly lean Obama but we changed it to toss up. Minniesota will replace Michigan on the lean Obama list. Missouri is being moved from lean Republican to toss up. There will be a few more changes but we believe these are the most important ones. We do believe that the battlegrounds may move to the west and not be as centered on Ohio although the Rust Belt states Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and possibly Indiana will be competitive. Well, here are the rankings.

Solid Obama (154 electoral votes)
California (55) Hawaii (4) Illinois (21) Maryland (10) Massachuttses (12) New York (31) Rhode Island (4) Vermont (3) Washington (11) Washington D.C (3)

Likely Obama(14 electoral votes)
Conneticut (7) Delaware (3) Maine (4)

Leaning Obama (32 electoral votes)
Minniesota (10) New Jersey (15) Oregon (7)

Toss Up(122 electoral votes)
Colorado (9) Iowa (7) Michigan (17) Missouri (11) Nevada (5) New Hampshire (4) New Mexico (5) Ohio (20) Pennsylvania (21) Virginia (13) Wisconsin (10)


Leaning McCain(57 electoral votes)
Florida (27) Georgia (15) North Carolina (15)


Likely McCain(63 electoral votes)
Indiana (11) Louisiana (9) Mississippi (6) Montana (3) Texas (34)

Solid McCain(96 electoral votes)

Alabama (9) Alaska (3) Arizona (10) Arkansas (6) Idaho (4) Kansas (6) Kentucky (8) Nebraska (5) North Dakota (3) Oklahoma (7) South Carolina (8) South Dakota (3) Tennessee (11) Utah (5) West Virginia (5) Wyoming (3)

Total: Obama 200 McCain 216

Obama has managed to narrow the gap a bit but this is what is really important, the majority of the Obama states are solidly for him while the majority of the McCain states are not solidly for him. We moved many states that were formerly likely McCain because those states we believed could be competitive due to high African American populations but we believe they weren't high enough to give Obama those states. We moved Indiana because of the possibility of Evan Bayh being on the ticket (we will have a post about him soon) Texas just should not be ignored. We believe that even though there is a possibility of a high turnout of African Americans in Florida, we do not think it is quite enough to give Obama the state. If you want to test your electoral college scenarios, please go to www.270towin.com We hope to have a post talking about the most competitive states.
If you have any thoughts about the state rankings or something else, please feel free to comment it.

African American Turnout in the Big Battlegrounds

The biggest states that are currently battlegrounds are Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. The percentage of African Americans in these states are all smaller than the states we talked about in our last post. The percentage of African Americans in Florida is 16%, Pennsylvania 11%, Ohio 12%, Michigan 14%. They would have the largest influence in Florida because it has the largest population of African Americans out of these states and many African Americans did not vote in 2004 while African American turnout in Ohio and Pennsylvania was higher.
In 2004, about 900,000 African Americans in Florida which made up about 12% of the voters there voted 86%-13% for Kerry. There are about 2.6 million African Americans in Florida and about 800,000 elligable African Americans did not vote. If Obama wants to win Florida by only using high African American turnout he would probably need between 60%-70% of the African Americans who did not vote to go to the polls on election day. Although McCain will get a boost from turnout of elderly and Hispanics, there will probably not be many new voters in the districts with lots of elderly residents. The turnout in those districts was very high in the 2004 election. For example, in the Florida 5th district which has the highest percentage of elderly residents in the nation (a bit under 40%,) had about 370,000 people vote there. The good side for McCain is that districts like the 5th are growing very quickly so he could get the new voters there to the polls. The congressional districts with large populations of African Americans do not have very high turnout. In the Florida 23rd district which is 51% African American had about 210,000 people vote there in 2004. Assuming about half of the voters there are African American, there are about 100,000 elligable African Americans who did not vote in 2004. There are many new voters Obama can get to the polls but he must do well with Jews and get the 18-29 year olds to the polls.
In Pennsylvania, a large turnout of African Americans will not be as influential as one in Florida. There are about 1.3 million African Americans in Pennsylvania and about 700,000 of them voted in 2004 and Kerry won them 84%-16%. This means there are only 200,000 elligable African Americans who did not vote in 2004. Kerry won Pennsylvania by 145,000 votes so Obama needs to turnout enough African Americans to offset any gains in the working class by McCain. Since the potential number of new African American voters in Pennsylvania is low, they might not be the main factor in giving Obama a victory here but if the vote count is exceedlingly close, they will have made the difference.
In Ohio, 10% of the voters in 2004 were African American and they voted 84%-16% for Kerry. A bit under 600,000 African Americans out of the 1.4 million in Ohio voted in 2004. Subtracting the number of African Americans too young to vote leaves around 370,000 elligable African Americans who did not vote in 2004. Bush won Ohio by 119,000 votes and Obama's percentage among African Americans definitely would increase over Kerry's which means that a bit under 1/3 of the African Americans who did not vote in 2004 would have to vote in 2008. The African American turnout would probably be not as influential here as it would in Florida. Many of the African Americans here vote, for example, 290,000 people voted in the Ohio 11th congressional district which is 55% African American.
In Michigan, about 600,000 out of the 1.4 million African Americans voted in 2004. Kerry won them 89%-10%. This means that there are a bit under 400,000 elligable African Americans in Michigan who did not vote in 2004. Like Florida, the heavily African American congressional districts here do not have as high turnout as Ohio. The 14th congressional district of Michigan had 265,000 voters in 2004 and this district is 61% African American. The problem for the Democrats is that the population of this district declined by 44,000 in the past six years. Obama won Michigan by 166,000 votes and McCain will definitely try to make inroads among the independents and the working class. The African American turnout Obama brings may just be able to offset McCain's margins in other parts of the state.
We do belive that even though Obama can get the highest increase in African American turnout in Florida, we think it is the state Obama has the least chance of winning out of these four. The elderly in Florida will go to McCain more strongly than to Bush and there are not many evangelicals there. Pennsylvania and Michigan are tied for the state that Obama has the best chance of winning. Ohio is in the middle. The levels of African American turnout will probably be historic and if Obama wins, the turnout will have propelled him to victory.
If you have any thoughts about this post, please feel free to comment it.

A Look at Potential African American Turnout in the South

Now the Democratic nominee is certain. Obama as the first African American to be on a major party ticket will be taking on John McCain. The map will be different this year than in 2004. McCain will try to snatch Michigan, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Minniesota and New Jersey from the Democrats. Obama will try to take Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, Ohio and Virginia from the Republicans. We believe that Obama will have more oppurtunities in the South than just Virginia. There has been talk about other states in the South being competitive but the pundits say there are simply not enough African Americans. We do believe that Obama can create a massive turnout and some unenthusiastic evangelicals might not come out and vote.
A few really moderate ones may be inclined to go to Obama if Ted Strickland who is a former minister is on the ticket. Now here is the math to see how many African Americans Obama could get to the polls.
Mississippi has almost 1.1 million African American who voted 90%-10% for Kerry against Bush. About 1.1 million people voted in that election and of those voters, around 380,000 of those voters were African American. 1/3 of the population of Mississippi is under 18 but we do not know the percentage for African Americans. We do estimate that about 300,000 African Americans elligable to vote did not cast ballots. Bush won Mississippi by about 167,000 votes. This does not exactly mean that half of the African Americans who did not vote in 2004 in Mississippi need to vote. Obama will probably win African Americans 95%-5% which will already make his percent of the vote go up at least one point. As we pointed out earlier, many evangelicals are not enthused by McCain and they made up 48% of the voters in 2004. Then some of them hate Obama because of his race. So Obama in order to win Mississippi would have to increase African American turnout by a bit under 50% It is not impossible because that turnout happened in some parts of the Mississippi 1st district during the special election. The reason is that the Republican candidate, Greg Davis tried to tie the Democrat, Travis Childers to Barack Obama. A recent Rasmussen poll showed McCain leading in Mississippi by 6 points. Obama definitely should try hard to win Mississippi.
Even though Mississippi definitely should not be overlooked, it only has 6 electoral votes. Obama should try harder to win a bigger state such as North Carolina with 15 electoral votes. There are 1.9 million African Americans there and they are 22% of the population. In 2004, 900,000 African Americans in North Carolina voted for president and Kerry won them 85%-14%. We believe that there are between 400,000 and 500,000 African Americans who did not vote in 2004. Bush won North Carolina by 436,000 votes but this does not mean Obama needs to get 436,000 more African Americans out than in 2004. Obama will probably win African Americans 95%-5% making his percent of the vote go up 2 points even without the massive turnout. Then North Carolina has Durham with Duke University and the research triangle with well educated whites which has been a strength of Obama's in the primaries. It seems that after we include the turnout in the Durham area along with the drop in the evangelical turnout, Obama will need a bit more than 200,000 African Americans who did not vote in 2004 to vote in 2008. This is not impossible and the RCP poll average shows McCain with a lead of only three points.
Obama has a better shot at winning North Carolina than Georgia and he especially would if he put Edwards on the ticket. Georgia definitely should not be overlooked, it has 15 electoral votes and African Americans are 30% of the population. They cast 25% of the votes in 2004 and Kerry won them 88%-12% They cast over 800,000 votes out of the population of about 2.7 million. A bit under one million of the African Americans are children. That means about 900,000 African Americans elligible to vote didn't. Bush won Georgia in 2004 by 558,000 votes. The evangelicals who do not like McCain may vote for Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate for president who is from Georgia. We need to see how prominent Bob Barr becomes. If he does not become prominent, Obama will need 400,000 to 450,000 more African American voters to win Georgia. If Bob Barr does become prominent we estimate the winning number should over 200,000 African Americans. This is certainly possible for Obama.
Virginia and its 13 electoral votes is the state that Obama has the best chance of winning in the South. Yes, we believe Obama has a better chance here than in Florida. Virginia has about 1.5 million African Americans that are 20% of the population. The African American voting bloc here is not as influential here as in the other states we were talking about. In the 2004 presidential election, a bit over 600,000 African Americans voted and Kerry won them 87%-12% This means about 400,000 elligable African American voters did not vote in 2004. Bush won Virginia by 262,000 votes but this does not mean that Obama will have to get a bit over 200,000 African Americans who did not vote to the polls even counting the evangelicals who won't vote. McCain will probably get a boost of turnout from the military community but it might not be as stronlgy for McCain if Jim Webb is on the ticket. Then there is Northern Virginia which has been trending to the Democrats in recent years so Obama needs to do very well there. The way it looks is that Obama will need about 150,0000 more African Americans in 2004 to vote in the general. These factors make Virginia the most competitive state in the South. The RCP poll average has McCain up by only 1.3 points.
We could go on and on about other states in the South but we do not believe there are enough African Americans in Alabama, Arkansas and Tennessee to tilt the state to Obama. Louisiana may be competitive but we do not think there are enough African Americans and South Carolina has some retirement communities where McCain could do very well. We will have another post soon about how African American turnout can affect the traditional battleground states.
If you have any thoughts on this post, please feel free to comment it.

Why Won't Hillary Quit?

Hillary has almost no chance of getting the nomination. She is behind in pledged and superdelegates and has no way she can come back. She still will not quit. Most presidential hopefuls in Hillary's posistion would have left the race by now. Hillary is a fighter so she will not quit. Is that the real reason? We will discuss why Hillary is still in the race and why she got to where she is now.
When she first announced that she was running for president, all the polls showed her with a wide lead over Barack Obama and John Edwards. She had more money than any of her opponents and she had much higher name recognition than her opponents. That made her belive that she would be the nominee. She ran a general election strategy by going to the center in issues. She knew Iowa was a weak state for her so she got the primary calender to be front loaded with states. She planned to make up a poor showing in Iowa and sweep Super Tuesday. Then she began to falter, she had the issue of having two different opinions about drivers liscenses for illegal immigrants in New York. Hillary Clinton gave Obama an opening to be the anti war candidate by not regretting that she voted for it. That is why Obama began to strike from nowhere and pulled off a win Iowa. Then Hillary came back and won New Hampshire by playing a woman who was bullied by the men. Next, Bill Clinton attacked Obama which later turned out to be a mistake. Obama crushed Clinton in South Carolina by 28 points. The Clintons should have seen it coming, Obama took 83% of the African American vote in Nevada. The Clintons pulled the race card by trying to diminish Martin Luther King's role in history and comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson. If Hillary played the role of an anti war candidate, she would be the Democrats' nominee. Then Hillary did not sweep Super Tuesday as she hoped. She had not set up organizations in the remaining states because she believed the race would be over by then. She kept losing states but came back on March 4th. Then she lied about what happened when she went to Bosnia which did sway enough voters to give Pennsylvania to Obama. The primaries on May 6th told Hillary she would not be the nominee. The delegates of Michigan and Florida will count with half the vote but that will not be enough. Hillary was trapped by the rules she made. Perhaps if Michigan and Florida did count in the begining, Hillary would be the nominee. She herself gave Obama the nomination inadvertantly. Now the superdelegates must decide after the last primaries.
We have thoroughly discussed why Hillary is in this posistion now. Now here is why we believe she will not exit the race. The shock of not being out on top and believing she was inevitable is keeping Hillary in the race. She might still believe she can get it or maybe she wants to make a deal with Obama. It could be that she will be his VP. If Hillary does not drop out a little while after the last primaries, we were thinking that maybe Obama could offer to nominate her to be a Supreme Court justice if one retires. Then again, after the last primaries, the pressure for Hillary to drop out might be too much to resist.

A few more VP picks for Obama

Now that the VP search for Obama has gotten underway, we have a few more ideas about who his VP will be. Here are more possible VPs for Barack Obama:

Ed Rendell: He is the governer of Pennsylvania and he is Jewish. Rendell is extremely popular in the Philadelphia area and that would be very helpful to Obama if Rendell were on the ticket. Having Rendell on the ticket would almost guarentee an Obama win in Pennsylvania. Since Rendell is Jewish, he might help Obama in Florida. Obama might not do as well with Jewish voters as recent Democratic nominees but with Rendell on the ticket, that might not happen.

Ted Strickland: He is the governer of Ohio. That is another competitive state Obama must win in the fall. Strickland will be very helpful to Obama in that state. Another thing is that Strickland has the life story of a working class white in Ohio (Strickland's father was a steelworker who did not go to high school.) Strickland will help Obama with working class whites. That is a group Obama needs to do well with if he wants to be president. Strickland has some experience as he has been in the House for six terms before running for governer. Strickland seems to have the right experience but it might not be enough.

Tom Daschle: No one seems to talk about him as a possible VP candidate. He is an Obama supporter and the former majority leader in the Senate. He is experienced and we believe his the possible VP that Obama can trust the most. Daschle probably cannot deliever South Dakota to Obama and it has only 3 electoral votes anyway. Daschle's wife, Linda Daschle is a lobbyist and that might not go well for Obama since he will not take contributions from lobbyists.

Out of these three, we believe Strickland will be the biggest help to Obama. With the other possible VPs, he is right below Webb on the possibility list. If you have any thoughts on this post, feel free to comment it.

Will Texas be in Play?

All the focus of competitive states has been on states that were competitive in 2004. Now many pundits are talking about states such as Georgia and Mississippi with large African American populations being competitive. No one has ever mentioned Texas, though. The reason is that Texas's African American population is close to the national average and McCain should do well with Hispanics because moderate stances on immigration. Obama can generate a massive turnout of African Americans but that alone will not be enough to put Texas in play. But we have noticed many other factors that favor Obama.
Obama has an appeal to the highly educated so he will do well in parts of the Dallas-Fort Worth mertoplex with rich people along with parts of Houston. The Democrat running against Cornyn for Senate is Rick Noreiga who is Hispanic. He could help Obama by generating a big Hispanic turnout while Obama helped him by bringing out the African Americans. The 2008 election seems to be resembling the statewide elections in 2002 in Texas. That year, Tony Sanchez who was Hispanic ran for governer against Rick Perry. Ron Klink was African American and ran against Cornyn. Sanchez lost by 18 points and Klink lost by 12 points. Hispanic turnout only increased significantly in Laredo where Sanchez came from and African American turnout only increased significantly in Dallas. The two reasons that those two Democrats lost were that they were not running for president and it was not a presidential election year. As it is an election year and Hispanic were about 30% of the Democratic primary voters on March 4th, they will probably turnout in higher numbers. Another thing is that Bush won Texas by 23 points but it would be narrower than that anyway because Bush was from there and would do better in Texas than a general Republican candidate. McCain will not be able to excite the religious conservatives like Bush did. These reasons make Texas be competitive.
A poll done by Rasmussen earlier this month showed McCain ahead of Obama by five points. That seems to be what we believe his lead is. Another poll done by Rasmussen a few weeks ago showed Cornyn with a lead of four points. That race will be close. Although Obama does face an uphill battle in Texas, it is a state where he should spend some time and money.
Please feel free to comment this post.

Obama/Edwards '08?

Is that possible? Although Edwards is not our number one pick for Obama's VP, he is on our list. We always believed that in the end, Edwards would endorse Obama over Clinton. Edwards teamed up with Obama in the debates with Hillary. His style of campaigning was closer to Obama's than Hillary's. But what will an Obama/Edwards ticket bring?
Edwards will help Obama among the working class. That is a group Edwards is popular with and Obama has been struggling to gain. This will be important in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Edwards could help Obama in North Carolina. It is true that Kerry did not do as well with these voters as Gore even with Edwards on the ticket. Also, Bush increased his popular vote margin in North Carolina over his in 2000. Here is why those two things happened, Edwards was not very prominent during the campaign. The focus was not on him. Obama could give Edwards to be more prominent and campaign in heavily working class areas in battleground states. If Edwards does have more prominence, he can make North Carolina become extremely close or even give the state to Obama. North Carolina will probably be close anyway due to the large African American population there which will probably turn out in record numbers for Obama along with the Universities. Obama will try to win South Carolina by creating a heavy turnout of African Americans but definiteky will be helped because Edwards was born there. Edwards's message is that there are two Americas, upper class and lower class and that the government ignores the lower class. It is similar to Obama's message of change and that we are one nation.
Not everything about having Edwards as VP will be positive. Edwards is young and exciting but he does not have much experience in politics. To get the experience factor smaller, Obama would need an experienced VP candidate. Another problem with putting Edwards on the ticket would be that he has already tried for that spot. Some voters may believe that Edwards already had his chance. But it might not be a very big deal because the VP spot is much smaller than the presidential spot. A small issue may be the $400 haircut. Republicans may say someone who pays that much for his hair would not be in touch with the ordinary American. That likely would not outweigh what Edwards has said about the ordinary American. None of this could be a factor because Edwards has said that he would not take the spot. Since this is politics, that may easily change but Republicans may use that against him. Many of these factors may not be a problem because there will probably not be much focus on Edwards if he is VP.
Alltogether, we believe Edwards will have a positive effect on the campaign if he is chosen. Due to the experience issue, we still believe Jim Webb is the best pick for Obama. We will soon post something about a possible VP for Obama we have not mentioned, Ted Strickland, the Governer of Ohio.
Please feel free to share your thoughts by commenting.

Recap of May 6th Primaries

Obama has taken North Carolina by 14 points with 90% of the precints reporting. That number is likely to hold. This took away Hillary's chance for a surprise win and gave Obama a chance to make up his loss in Pennsylvania by delegates and popular vote. Currently, Obama is leading by 212,000 votes. He won due to large margins in the counties containing the big cities and eastern North Carolina. They easily erased Hillary's small lead in western North Carolina.
Indiana is currently too close to call from most networks. Hillary has a 39,000 vote lead with 86% of the precints reporting. This race is closer than we expected. We expected for the race to be called for Hillary much earlier because exit polls showed her with a four point lead. Ohio which had the exit polls showing the same lead before votes came in gave Hillary a ten point win. Obama is running close due to carrying Marion County which contains Indainapolis by 61,000 votes. Since Marion County is about a quarter African American, we expected Obama's margin there to be narrower than his current lead of 34 points. Exit polls show high African American turnout and that is probably what happened in Indianapolis.
We believed that the current percentage margin in Indiana would be reached after Lake County which is in the Chicago media market and has 25% African American population had its votes counted. It will probably be awhile until all the votes are counted there. One reason it is slow is that there was high turnout in Lake County. Although we are currently giving Indiana to Hillary, her winning margin will probably be around 10,000 votes. It could be even narrower and with help from a few more precints in Bloomington and Indainapolis, what happened in Missouri might happen in Indiana.
One thing is certain, Hillary did not receive the win she needed in North Carolina and if she loses Indiana, she will be in big trouble. She cannot make the case Obama cannot win big states (If she calls New Jersey a big state, she must note North Carolina has more people.) The superdelegates will not come flocking to her side and Obama has proved that he can survive a strong attack. That attack was Reverand Wright.
Please feel free to comment on this post.