David Sirota's latest column was interesting to me. It pointed out how Obama tends to win states with large black populations and states with very small black populations, while Clinton has been winning most of the states in between. The obvious take-away is that Clinton has been winning states that have both racial tension and not enough African-Americans to outnumber the, um, how to be delicate, racist white vote. It is interesting to consider how that would play out in the general election, when there's a larger pool of racist white people, but not many more African-Americans to counter them. (I'm not saying all white people are racist, at least not beyond the Avenue Q "Everyone's a little bit racist" sort of way. I'm just saying that if there are more white people, there are probably more racist white people, too.)

That said, I'm definitely an Obama supporter. I'm completely against racism by proxy ("I think there are too many racists in this country for a black man to become president, therefore I will discriminate against Obama in the primary because he's black.") Also, I don't know whether non-Democrat racist white voters would ever be likely to vote for a Democrat of any hue or flavor, so perhaps it won't matter much or at all.

Anyway, the analysis would suggest that Obama will win the Oregon primary, and also that there will be plenty of appeals to racism in the general.

Those appeals to racism will include proxies for racism, such as the "Barack Obama attended a radical madrassa"-type attacks (replacing anti-black racism with a supposedly more socially acceptable religious bigotry against Muslims, even when the accuser knows full well that Obama isn't Muslim), as well as the "Barack Obama's preacher hates white people (and Obama secretly does too!)"-type attacks (thereby making racism against black people acceptable because black people were supposedly racist against white people first), and of course the "Barack Obama hates America, the flag, the pledge, and everything else that symbolizes America (and his preacher does, too!)"-style attacks (replacing racism with some simple, good old-fashioned, America-loving McCarthyism).

In fact, McCain seems intent on making "I love America (unlike some people I won't mention)" the official slogan of his campaign. (It's actually, "The American President Americans have been <s>Americaing Americally</s> waiting for." No, really, that's seriously it. It was in his first general-election TV ad.)

Clinton trails by 8 in greater Portland, trails by 16 in the rest of Oregon. Wow. It's already a sixteen percent margain outside of Portland?! I'm interested to see if that holds up or increases. "Greater Portland" must mean Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties combined; thoughtful move by the Obama camp to open field offices in Beaverton and Oregon City. I love backing a smart campaign!

The numbers are about what I expected for Oregon. And the disparity between Portland and the rest of Oregon relates largely to the geographic/demographic popularity or lack of it of the Clinton legacy in Oregon.

What's really interesting about this poll is that the Blue Oregon writers treat it as reliable and newsworthy on this thread, and dismiss it as flawed and meaningless on the Merkley - Novick thread.

i noticed that too, katy. hrm.

Bill R, I read somewhere that Obama's popularity outside of the Tri-County area is tied to his doing well in the western states, and as we are neighbors of Idaho. . . I live in Central Oregon (which some would just call Eastern Oregon) and can see that here informally, that is, not through polling but in signs, bumperstickers etc. Then I can see him doing very well in the I-5 corridor outside of the Portland area, for example in Eugene, because he is perceived as more liberal than Clinton.

I don't want to discuss it on the relevant posts, Kari, I want to discuss your verson of what the overall picture is!

So, go on record now. You are more interested in the election, because THIS will not be US policy if a Dem is elected. Correction. This is not what we will do. I wouldn't be surprised at a Dem declaring for 4 years that we're pulling out immediately, only to find ourselves there 50 years later...

Looks like the clenis has out-Penned Penn.

On Sunday evening, Sen. Hillary Clinton's chief campaign strategist, Mark Penn, resigned from his post after it was revealed he was working (on the side) for the passage of a Colombia Free Trade Agreement that his candidate opposed.

But within the Clinton campaign, Penn is not the highest-ranking adviser with financial ties to groups and individuals supporting the passage of the measure.

Former President Bill Clinton has earned hundreds of thousands of dollars speaking on behalf of a Colombia-based group pushing the trade pact, and representatives of that organization tell The Huffington Post that the former president shared their sentiment.

In June 2005, Clinton was paid $800,000 by the Colombia-based Gold Service International to give four speeches throughout Latin America.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/08/bill-clintons-ties-to-col_n_95651.html

The Clintons are, for all intents and purposes, Republicans.

I for one am not surprised that Obama is doing better outside of the Portland metro area than in it. Roughly, in my social life here in Central Oregon, and in my work life, Obama leads Clinton 2 to 1 - which is roughly what the poll says.

Which brings to mind a point I have long wished to make -

Why take all these polls, they should just ask me .....

I think this number will close a bit, as Senator Clinton wins in PA, KY, WV, and IN by double digits. If you want to say it's because voters there are racist, our fellow democrats, then sadly, you are being divisive in your characterization. I think it is simple....IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID!" Voters remember fondly the Clinton years and this is part of her strength, not to mention her command of this subject, and innovative ideas for handling home foreclosures. As Elizabeth Edwards said, only Hillary's plan is closest to true Universal Healthcare. I think we may have an Edward's endorsement coming, and if so, Hillary may even be competitive in Oregon....But I won't hold my breath, as I too am from Oregon, NE Oregon at that, and I don't think we are the state that supports anything that hints at being "establishment."

"I think this number will close a bit, as Senator Clinton wins in PA, KY, WV, and IN by double digits."

Interesting prediction. After those primaries, we will see how accurate it was. After all, it is the votes that count, not predictions and polls.

I can't wait to vote for Hillary. She is a strong leader who we can all get behind. I don't know about you guys but this econ. is killing me and my family. Everything from food, bills and gas is digging us into a bigger hole. We need help now! And we can't wait for on the job training from Obama.

President Clinton lead one of the best econ. our country has ever seen. We were at peace, I didn't need a second job and the stock market was booming. There is a track record with the Clinton's.

Please, please everyone vote for Hillary. We really, really need someone with experience in the WH. She can dig us out of this Bush recession just like her husband did with Bush II father. America desperately needs someone who will be able to hit the ground running on day 1.

Please vote for Hillary. I know my family can't wait through another failed administration before we get the help we so desperately need.