New Haven Independent

Posted by: DingDong | February 2, 2008 8:15 PM

'Bellwether' is the correct spelling.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 3, 2008 9:45 AM

Time for a commercial break...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKe1gUgX5do

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 3, 2008 10:08 AM

Just a side note....
As a voter that is flip flopping on the 2 candidates the endorsements are starting to sway me. My fear was that Obama would not have the backing of the country if he won, to make his plan work. But as I see more and more leaders of all kinds backing him I also see the dream of Camelot become a possible reality. I am still afraid that what he wants (what we all want) is to much to ask for. But the more higher level people that jump on board the more I as a voter see it happening.

Posted by: John Patrick Smith | February 3, 2008 11:42 AM

As a Republican-leaning independent, if the Democrats nominate Barack Obama, I'll vote for Barack. If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, I'll vote Republican.

Hillary Clinton's positions on the issues are all based on political expediency with the goal of being president. Like her husband, Hillary Clinton has no attachment to any position, no leadership qualities and no legal, ethical or moral compass to guide her. Also like her husband, she will need to rely on the polls to guide her to a position.

The U.S. needs a uniter not a divider for President.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | February 3, 2008 12:02 PM

Sorry one more comment....(after thought from watching polls)

Does any one know why Obama is getting votes from higher income people where Hillary is winning the votes of the lower and middle income people? Really can anyone one answer this national poll fact?

Posted by: robn | February 3, 2008 4:28 PM

You go Rosa!!!!

...its gonna be just a llitttlle bit uncomfortable in the Capitol lunch room though...

Posted by: True New Havener | February 4, 2008 7:41 AM

Cedarhill --

The race is very dynamic and continues to change. It has been said that Obama gets the votes of higher income people but fewer votes from lower income people but this is not completely correct and is changing rapidly.

The most obvious example of the error among pundits who point to this is that Obama overwhelmingly won lower income people in South Carolina. The states where Obama currently has huge leads (other than Illinois), places like Alabama and Georgia, are high concentration low income voters in the primary. Consider in CT that Obama is doing great in the cities where lower income people are concentrated (New Haven) and less well where they are not (Stamford).

Lower income voters are the bedrock of the Democratic party. So no one wins states in a Democratic primary without winning lower income voters. It could be said that more lower income voters in New Hampshire voted for Clinton than Obama, but if you compare them both to the Republican candidates, they both won overwhelmingly more lower income voters.

College educated voters in the Democratic party have historically been more willing to consider a "change" candidate first. This may have something to do with their personal financial security giving them more time to look at candidates earlier, or maybe that they are more politically involved generally. But no one wins a Democratic primary without winning lower income voters.

The swing you are seeing to Obama over the last few weeks are lower income voters moving to him as they look more seriously at his candidacy.

There is another reason, which goes unreported by pundits talking about the Clinton/Obama divide on income. A huge percentage of low income voters are elderly. Democratic elderly voters are more likely to be on a lower fixed income. And the elderly go overwhelmingly to Clinton. It is more likely that this is because this group is larger percentage women (men die earlier) and because the elderly are less susceptible to a youth/change argument. While it would be exciting if Obama could win all the elderly, it is likely because they are elderly and women, and not specifically because they are poor that they vote stronger for Clinton. And more power to them -- many older women no doubt see the Clinton candidacy as one-in-their-lifetime.

But I am encouraging them and everyone else to vote OBAMA!!

Hopefully that's helpful.