<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama, McCain Prevail in Mississippi</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:46:45 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dodd</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/comment-page-1/#comment-299323</link>
		<dc:creator>Dodd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:45:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/03/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/#comment-299323</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;It’s a little early in the morning for math but I’m at a loss as to how Clinton did as well as she did&lt;/em&gt;

She got 70+% pf the white vote, which comprised just over 50% of the votes cast. Obama got 92% of the black vote, but it was only 48%. 

What I can&#039;t figure out is why 1 in 4 of the people who said Hillary! isn&#039;t honest and trustworthy still voted for her....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>It&rsquo;s a little early in the morning for math but I&rsquo;m at a loss as to how Clinton did as well as she did</em></p>
<p>She got 70+% pf the white vote, which comprised just over 50% of the votes cast. Obama got 92% of the black vote, but it was only 48%. </p>
<p>What I can't figure out is why 1 in 4 of the people who said Hillary! isn't honest and trustworthy still voted for her....</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yetanotherjohn</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/comment-page-1/#comment-299242</link>
		<dc:creator>yetanotherjohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:58:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/03/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/#comment-299242</guid>
		<description>James,

I&#039;ll do the math for you. Based on the % of voters and which direction they went, the data in the blog posts indicates that Clinton should get 40.51% of the vote and Obama get 57.82% of the vote. The actual results are &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#MS&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Clinton 37% of the vote and Obama 61% of the vote&lt;/a&gt;.

Given the disparity between the sacred exit polls and the actual count, may I be the first to suggest that it is obvious to anyone who has studied the data that since Obama&#039;s poll results are better than the exit poll reports Diebold must have stolen the election for Obama.

I think it is also instructive to look at the demographics of the vote.

Vote by Party and Race 
                    Clinton Obama               
White Democrats (25%) 70% 23%               
White Independents (12%) 55% 40%               
Black Democrats (44%) 9% 91% 
All Republicans (13%) 76% 24% 

That is a heck of a racial divide. Given the identity politics in the democratic party, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James,</p>
<p>I'll do the math for you. Based on the % of voters and which direction they went, the data in the blog posts indicates that Clinton should get 40.51% of the vote and Obama get 57.82% of the vote. The actual results are <a href="http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#MS" rel="nofollow">Clinton 37% of the vote and Obama 61% of the vote</a>.</p>
<p>Given the disparity between the sacred exit polls and the actual count, may I be the first to suggest that it is obvious to anyone who has studied the data that since Obama's poll results are better than the exit poll reports Diebold must have stolen the election for Obama.</p>
<p>I think it is also instructive to look at the demographics of the vote.</p>
<p>Vote by Party and Race<br />
                    Clinton Obama<br />
White Democrats (25%) 70% 23%<br />
White Independents (12%) 55% 40%<br />
Black Democrats (44%) 9% 91%<br />
All Republicans (13%) 76% 24% </p>
<p>That is a heck of a racial divide. Given the identity politics in the democratic party, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anderson</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/comment-page-1/#comment-299195</link>
		<dc:creator>Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:51:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/03/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/#comment-299195</guid>
		<description>JJ, as Rob M says of Texas, there are still some older Mississippians who never left the Democrats during the Reagan revolution, yet who are indeed quite conservative (and, methinks, unlikely to vote for a black man).

So I wouldn&#039;t necessarily conclude that there was much &quot;jinx the Dems&quot; crossover voting.

N.b. also the hotly contested race to replace Chip Pickering in the 3d district.  Voting in yesterday&#039;s primary disqualified one from voting in the inevitable runoff, and I&#039;m sure that not many Repubs in that district blew their chance to vote on that race, just so they could mess with the Dems&#039; minds.

If anything, Obama won by much more than the polls had suggested.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JJ, as Rob M says of Texas, there are still some older Mississippians who never left the Democrats during the Reagan revolution, yet who are indeed quite conservative (and, methinks, unlikely to vote for a black man).</p>
<p>So I wouldn't necessarily conclude that there was much "jinx the Dems" crossover voting.</p>
<p>N.b. also the hotly contested race to replace Chip Pickering in the 3d district.  Voting in yesterday's primary disqualified one from voting in the inevitable runoff, and I'm sure that not many Repubs in that district blew their chance to vote on that race, just so they could mess with the Dems' minds.</p>
<p>If anything, Obama won by much more than the polls had suggested.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob M</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/comment-page-1/#comment-299172</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/03/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/#comment-299172</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s Texas.  You have a large number of conservative southern Democrats.  Blue Dogs still live</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It's Texas.  You have a large number of conservative southern Democrats.  Blue Dogs still live</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DL</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/comment-page-1/#comment-299117</link>
		<dc:creator>DL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:49:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/03/obama_mccain_prevail_in_mississippi/#comment-299117</guid>
		<description>You can talk about the &quot;Magnolia effect&quot; if you want , but the bigger picture is that (for the most part) all those Democrats who voted against the other guy (Hillary or Obama) will be voting heavily for whichever one of those survives and none of those Republicans will be crossing over in Nov. How much support McCain will get from his base remains to be seen.

Fear of the ememy is insufficient reason to risk being shot in the back by your own. Particularly if he is so loved by the ememy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can talk about the "Magnolia effect" if you want , but the bigger picture is that (for the most part) all those Democrats who voted against the other guy (Hillary or Obama) will be voting heavily for whichever one of those survives and none of those Republicans will be crossing over in Nov. How much support McCain will get from his base remains to be seen.</p>
<p>Fear of the ememy is insufficient reason to risk being shot in the back by your own. Particularly if he is so loved by the ememy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
