The numbers are in. Clinton won Kentucky by 250,000 votes. In exit polls, 21% of those polled admitted openly (how many didn't) that race was a determining factor in their decision. Of that 21%, *80%* voted Clinton. That comes to about 40% of her total margin of victory or about 140,000 votes. You do the math.

Further, on Kos (or TPM) there were maps which showed the concentrations in counties where Clinton got 60% or higher. Except for the lower Texas horn, it was all Appalachia.

To think Obama doesn't care about the poor or rural people is a myth. But as others have pointed out, this group has abondoned the Democratic party in droves for Reagan, et al. What has it gotten them?

If they, or Clinton supporters who are angry they say they will not vote for Obama in the face of the economic gulf between the parties and McCain's vow to overturn Roe vs Wade with Supreme Court Justices, then you will get what you deserve.

This "elitist" label put on Obama by a millionaire many times over, who ran for most of her campaign from a Washington insider out strategy using Republican talking points is exactly what it appears to be-crap.

If they're not ready for the 21st century that's their fucking problem. The rest of the country won't be held hostage by the ugly, racist, backwards-ass beliefs of a bunch of broke-ass losers. Let them keep voting for the GOP who only screws them anyway. If they can't see beyond their racism and xenophobia and bitterness to see who actually offers them the best program to address their economic interests, then they're too fucking stupid to care about anyway.

"...--provided the Democrats show rural voters some respect."

You must mean, Barack Obama and his cheesy elite corps of left-over hippies because the last time I checked Clinton seemed to be doing just fine with this group!

So typical of you, and others, who either don't know or conveniently forget that Democrats have been showing their respect to rural voters - who, by the way, do not usually vote for them - for generations; i.e., minimum wage, G.I. Bill of Rights, farm subsidies, the TVA, labor laws, clean air, clean water, to name a few ways.

Why don't you get off your stereotypical high-horse? You think all the Obama-Rama Carnival Show has to do is mouth a few more platitudes in some hay-seed small town?

My guess is that rural voters and the Democratic Party have shared many values over the years - it's the MESSENGERS that they keep rejecting.

Coming from someone who has lived in either Appalaysha or Appalatcha for 56 years (Pa. and WV), I think Democrats (not Obama alone) could potentially make WV competitive for the Democrats. Yes, there is a significant percentage of people who won't vote for him because he is black. But, as some others have said, it is not so much because they hate black people but because of fear of more change that will work against them.

Democrats can make West Virginia competitive if they get behind Obama and Obama makes his case to West Virginians. The key factor is whether the Clintons and other in-state democrats give him genuine support. That remains to be seen.

Can he win in WV? I think it is unlikely but not impossible. However, by making WV competitive, which I do think is possible, he will do two things---make McCain spend money here, where he might not otherwise, and gain more support for his eventual presidency. Because Obama can out fundraise McCain, the more states he makes competitive the more McCain gets spread thin.

some other comments---

someone mentioned that Obama may have lost votes in WV because of his support for the coal industry. I doubt he lost many because of that. The coal industry employs far fewer people in WV than in the past but still carries hefty polical clout. Obama's support for Big Coal, which is the thing that bothers me the most about him, is still a political plus in WV, unfortunately. Also, Hillary's coal position is not any better.

The level of offense that people in Applachian take to being called 'hillbillies' by others is highly variable. Some don't care at all and others get mildly to highly indignant. On average though my sense is that it is not considered nearly as offensive as the standard racial slurs.

Been reading all these responses, and its really frustrating to see how strong the stereotypes are. Those of us who live here in eastern (Letcher county) Kentucky (and central Appalachia as a whole) know the truth of what you are saying.

It's telling that nearly 5 percent of Kentucky's vote went to John Edwards even though he's not even in the race. That's because he came here and talked to people face-to-face and really listened. Some folks might discount that by saying "well Edwards is a southerner, and grew up in a milltown." But Robert Kennedy got the same response in 1968, and he was a Harvard educated, Boston elite, Yankee. These days Robert Kennedy is some kind of saint in these here mountains.

Folks here just want leaders that are going to look beyond the stereotypes and see the people; leaders who will look at us as real people, as individuals, with hopes and dreams, with real problems and concerns. Folks here in Appalachia care about health care, they care about the environment, they oppose the war in Iraq, they aren't much different than people anywhere else in the U.S.

So, kudos to you for telling the truth!

Thanks, from down the road in Hemphill.

Sue

It is incredible to see such ingorance spouted by people who know nothing about Eastern Kentucky. This region is heavily democratic. Pike County was one of two in KY to vote for Kerry. (the other being Jefferson, where Louisville sits). Yes it is conservative, as is most all of Kentucky. To me racism is less of a problem here as it is in Central Kentucky. I do not hear people make racist jokes or comments to the extent I did while living in other areas of Kentucky. Also, while there are a significant number of uneducated individuals who live here, and probably aren't nearly informed enough about the candidates (and do vote by prejudice), there are several pockets of progressive, highly educated and professional people. I, my wife, and all of our friends out here in our part of the mountains are highly educated professionals.

By the way, I am an Obama supporter who voted for him in the primary and will vote for him in the general. I would bet that many counties in Eastern Ky. will go for Obama over McCain. The problem now is that many people here do not know him well enough to decide if he truly represents their values. They knew (or thought they knew) Hillary b/c of Bill. As this progresses, I am confident that Obama can convince them. Now, as for the rest of Kentucky, aside from Lexington and Louisville, it will go for McCain.

Also, Eastern Ky. has a history of integration in the coal mines and the schools that precedes much of the rest of the South and was generally Union or neutral rather than Confederate in the Civil War. Please be better informed before you spout nonsense.