The question is why

Demographic change?

Obama's campaigning?

Bush's approval ratings?

The easy way out is to say all 3 but I hope it's the first.

Utah

Obama lost: 34% to 63%

Kerry lost: 27% to 71%

Gore lost: 26% to 67%

Hey, things are looking up!

My homestate of Indiana is blue for the first time in my lifetime for a number of reasons. First, the primary. Ordinarily, the nominee is chosen long before the Indiana primary, but this year, due to the extraordinary campaigns of both Clinton and Obama, Indiana was in play. What a treat! No longer just a flyover state, both candidates actively campaigned, bought ads, and generally mobilized both new and existing voters for the democrats. Despite narrowly losing Indiana to Clinton, Obama was able to keep the ground-game in place for the general election and build on it. Despite the overwhelming angst directed at Clinton, there is no doubt that the drawn out primary helped Obama.

The 50 state strategy was obviously a factor. I can't remember another year when a presidential campaign visited Indiana for anything other than a fundraiser (Dan Quayle doesn't count!!), but Obama was relentless, both in person and in ads. McCain was slow to campaign in Indiana, preferring to use his resources elsewhere. It means something when a candidate cares enough to come to your state.

Finally, and this is easily the biggest factor: cash. Obama had the resources to spend on massive ad buys and to finance his tremendous organization of the state. That meant registering new voters, phone banks, canvassing. There was never a sense in the state that McCain was matching his effort. Even so, it was just barely enough.

Not to over-simplify this result, but Obama did two things that neither Kerry nor Gore were able to do: 1) fought back successfully against the right-wing smears; 2) defined his opponent, which Republicans were able to do against Gore and Kerry. Not to underestimate the environmental factors, the key to the win was Obama's brilliant campaign, organizationally and tactically, and his "message" discipline on the trail, which consistently hit home. Combined with his fund-raising, it made him unbeatable. I think when historians and political scientists look back on 2008, they will see the Obama campaign as a model for 21st century politics.

This should (hopefully) put to rest the Democratic Leadership Council's (DLC) terrible "Blue Bunker" strategy of the Clinton through Kerry years (also tried by HR Clinton), writing off anything but the classic blue strongholds, leaving the rest of the country wide open for the GOP.

By playing offense, Obama caught the GOP offguard. Sure, demographics are part of it, the changing face of America; but the GOP's own ideological stances are so out of step with the majority of Americans, there was plenty of room for the Democrats to do an end-run around them without trying to BE them (ala the DLC).

The DLC waved Bill Clinton in our faces all these years as the only model of success, as an excuse for their timid style, for their "Winning Through Capitulation" brand of politics, but hopefully Obama's triumph will show that there's something far better than the "third way" offered by the DLC, a way for Democrats to organize effectively, a way to win, where there's nothing the Republicans can do about it, because they're simply on the wrong side on every issue that matters to the majority of Americans.

It remains uncalled with an Obama 12106 vote lead and ~40,000 uncounted undeclared provisional ballots. Historically about 1/3rd of those are tossed out.

From the CNN exit polls it showed that McCain won the white vote 55% to 43%, that number seemed high to me..

1) How does that compare with Kerry/Gore/Clinton ?

2) How statistically meaningful are these exit polls, especially considering how many people voted early?

Utah is not a battle ground state by any stretch. But Obama won in 35% of the vote. Ten points better then Kerry or Gore. Obama won in the cities: Salt Lake, Park City, and Moab ... lost in Provo and the small towns.

1. Technology. Every time some Repub thug said some horrific thing that they later denied saying, the video of them saying it was up on YouTube within hours. And it's not just the younger generation that spends time on Facebook/YouTube/Twitter. My peers use them constantly, and I'm 43.

2. Howard Dean. He was the first candidate to truly use and understand the 'Net, and I'm sure the Obama campaign studied his methods.

3. Howard Dean. Replaced that moronic fuckup, Terry McAuliffe, as DNC chair and forced the creaky old farts to get with the program and actually, you know, get out there and campaign for the independent votes.

4. Howard Dean. Showed the Dems how it is done in 2006 - leave no slur unanswered, leave no hypocrisy unremarked.

So, thanks, Howard. I haven't seen you get any props, but really, you are a HUGE part of what happened yesterday.

To expect apologies and retractions from lolcait, KateTex, and all the other trolls who called him Barack Hussein Dukakis, etc.

Oh well, I guess knowing that a bunch of PUMAs are sulking today is good enough.

I am a BIG believer in the 50 state strategy and hailed the rise of Howard Dean to head the DNC. Dean revitalized the state Democratic parties (badly neglected under DLC leadership). Giving them money, resources, donor lists etc etc. He set the stage for the 2006 congressional wins and for this historic election.

Obama embraced the 50 state strategy and made it his own.

Remember the summer when Axelrod pulled out his powerpoint presentations and talked about pushing hard in New Mexico, Montana, Indiana? The DLC people laughed at him, mocked him and called him naive. They said he was foolish.

Axelrod was right. And he gave Obama more than a sqeaker win, he gave him a decisive victory.

But equilly important is the how the organization Dean and Obama built sets up the Democrats for the future. The donor lists, volunteers, phone banks, GOTV etc etc can be tapped in 2010 and 2012. Gains made in Georgia, West Virginia and other red states lost this year can still be built on. Another house seat, a governorship, more state houses.