There has been lots of talk about how Clinton is winning big states and Obama more states. Another pattern is emerging however. Obama is winning mostly in states where Bush did very well in 2004, such as extremely red states like Utah and Idaho where more than two-thirds of the people voted Republican. In fact of the 17 contests held in red states that Bush won by more than 7% Obama has won 12 and Clinton only 5. Clinton on the other hand has been winning more swing states. Of the 11 races in states which were decided by less than 7% Clinton has won 7 to Obama's 4.
One theory for this is that Democrats in many red states are more likely to be ideological purists, knowing they have no chance of winning their home state, they therefore want a candidate who makes them feel better about being the minority party. This is Obama, one of the most left-wing US Senators with his message of hope and unity. Clinton's strength in the swing states on the other hand may be attributed to them looking for a candidate who can win the general election. Could this be geographic evidence that pragmatics vote for Clinton and idealists for Obama?
So what does this mean for the states yet to vote? Following this theory the winners should be:
Wyoming (March 8): Obama
Mississippi (March 11): Obama
Pennsylvania (April 22): Clinton
Indiana (May 6): Obama
North Carolina (May 6): Obama
West Virginia (May 13): Obama
Kentucky (May 20): Obama
Oregon (May 20): Clinton
Montana (June 3): Obama
South Dakota (June 3): Obama
We'll see if it holds any weight in the weeks and months to come.
