February 5th, 2008
11:43 PM ET
7 years ago

How Clinton, McCain may have won California

(CNN) – Sen. Hillary Clinton can thank Latino and Asian voters for her projected victory in California. Early exit polls indicate that Sen. Barack Obama carried white voters in California because of his overwhelming support among white men. White women, as in other states, more often supported Clinton. Black voters overwhelmingly favored Obama but Asian voters, whose numbers are comparable to blacks, went overwhelmingly for Clinton. The deciding factor may have been Latinos, who make up roughly 30 percent of California's Democratic vote. They went for Clinton by a two-to-one margin.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, exit polls show Latino and Asian Republicans may also have played an important part in John McCain's victory in the GOP primary. Mitt Romney led among white Republican voters but McCain led among Latinos and Asians, the second- and third-largest voting blocs behind whites among California Republicans.

Related: CNN Analysts say Super Tuesday didn't distinguish Democratic candidates


Filed under: California • Hillary Clinton
soundoff (572 Responses)
  1. AXEL Action

    Hilary Clinton isn't even anywhere near being the best candidate for president.

    February 6, 2008 02:45 am at 2:45 am |
  2. Jessica

    How in the hell does someone win the nomination without carrying states like CA, MA, NY, and NJ?????????
    I think this was a bad night for Obama. He won states that won't even matter in the general because they almost ALWAYS trend Republican.

    February 6, 2008 02:45 am at 2:45 am |
  3. mary from california

    I voted for Hillary, but i have to say to all those who are throwing the race card and sex care . it is not about what color you are or what gender, in the end it is about who can really offer some great change. Both Hillary an Obama have very similar stands and to me no matter who wins at this time it would be great that in the end they come together and take this office for president and vice president they would make a great team in the end. Now that would be a great change not to mention history in the making.

    February 6, 2008 02:46 am at 2:46 am |
  4. Patrick

    The celebs and media are behind Obama, but the American People are behind Hillary CLINTON!!

    CLINTON 08!

    February 6, 2008 02:47 am at 2:47 am |
  5. Ramon in Santa Clara

    Thank God for California, the nation's conscience during the Republican dark ages.

    Mainstream media bias ≠ Obama win

    GO HILLARY!

    February 6, 2008 02:48 am at 2:48 am |
  6. sfunk1x

    Yeah. "Strong and experienced". What a load of crap.

    That "Strong and Experienced" woman voted on TWO BLANK CHECKS to Shrub to use our military overseas. This from a woman who is OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER TONKIN GULF!

    You retards that keep pushing Hillary aren't pushing anything more than the same ol' same 'ol. You want a woman in the white house? Vote Cindy Sheehan. You want change, vote Obama. No measure of experience in our candidates today shows that they knew well enough to NOT allow Bush to send troops to Iraq. Those candidates lost out early.

    You will lie in the bed you make.

    February 6, 2008 02:48 am at 2:48 am |
  7. squirlygrrrl

    it's not over yet people. to paraphrase a friends quote – the clinton dynasty will continue to let down true progressives for the next 15 years as they've done for the last 15 years and galvanize the republicans so that democrat will not win an election for cycles to come...

    Clinton = the same old insider politics we've been complaining about for decades, people. Bush was so bad that so many people have been duped into thinking that Clinton is a good candidate. Good environmentalists, feminists, pro-gay, and progressives all around did not have it that great under Clinton either. WHY GO BACK?

    You can try to discredit Obama based on his lack of experience, but after W it's
    CLEAR that experience is not necessary to run the country.

    Obama will surround himself with bright minds and experienced people. Clinton would surround herself with all of Bill's unfinished paybacks.

    Obama has a FRESH PERSPECTIVE and he's SMART. He's truly an "of the people" breed.

    Just know when you go to sleep that EVERY right wing conservative can't wait to have Hillary win the nomination because they know she'll get creamed. (That is of course unless the election tampering schemes that the Republicans used in 2000 and 2004 are employed by the Clinton dynasty...which I wouldn't put past them in a heartbeat).

    February 6, 2008 02:48 am at 2:48 am |
  8. Enough Already

    I'm so tired of exit polls, starting about a minute and a half after the voting stops. Seems like an excuse for alot of people to say alot of meaningless stuff. Why don't we wait and see what happens? Either Obama or Hillary – heck of alot better than the Republicans.

    February 6, 2008 02:48 am at 2:48 am |
  9. Jesse

    Um, I'm not exactly sure what all the commotion is about but winning California does not a winner make. Check it out...

    Chuck Todd, NBC News’ political director, said that while Clinton was winning more of the big primary states, Obama was picking up significant delegate totals, notably in New York, where he could come away with nearly 40 percent of the total.

    Obama was also doing “extremely well” in the states that were holding caucuses, Todd said, particularly Minnesota, North Dakota, Idaho and Colorado.

    As a result, Todd said, Clinton could end up with the most votes at the end of the evening, but the delegate count could be nearly even, with Obama winning 841 to Clinton’s 837....

    What exactly are the Hillary supporters celebrating again?

    February 6, 2008 02:50 am at 2:50 am |
  10. Mark

    Missing from the analysis is the effect of early voting.
    Looking at some of the vote counts, it looked to me like this could have been a huge effect.
    How is this captured by exit polls?
    The number of votes for candidates who have dropped out was shocking to me.
    Edwards was getting 7-10% overall and near 20% in some demographics.
    That would seem to represent some high early voting percentages... maybe up to 20% of the total.

    Either that or large portions of the electorate was exhibiting some other strange, semi-rational, or poorly informed behavior.

    I don't have enough info to know. But it definitely suggests something strange was going on. And if its mainly early polling, that would be the type of thing that election day exit polls could miss.

    February 6, 2008 02:51 am at 2:51 am |
  11. SMK

    B.O. stinks. He might have the support of the Kennedys, Stevie Wonder, Oprah, Maria Schriver, John Kerry etc... but he still sticks. As a Junior Senator of Illinois he lacks experience Foreign Relations and the Economy and all he does is speak in circles about HOPE, DREAMS, CHANGE yet can't articulate anything concretely all we hear is his empty commentary. We will certainly experience change in the next election as the majority of the country will vote Democratic. The key issue today is that we need someone with a proven record .... Hilary is the only answer.

    February 6, 2008 02:53 am at 2:53 am |
  12. Anna

    To "rick from Wisconsin:" Rick, Rick, Rick.....I want you to pay very close attention to my words here. What does Hillary have to do with cigars? Now wait. Before you go there, listen to me again: What does HILLARY have to do with cigars? She had a cheating husband. So-effin'-what. So did I, and you had better not be suggesting that I had ANYTHING to do with it. or that it in any way affects the kind of person I am, or my ability to lead. You get me? Grow up. Get an education.

    February 6, 2008 02:53 am at 2:53 am |
  13. Andrew

    it was the early birds who caught the worm in California

    February 6, 2008 02:54 am at 2:54 am |
  14. Fred Smith

    The way CNN is reporting the results on their web site is very missleading.

    CNN must make it clear that there are 415 delegates that can vote at the 'democratic' convention, who have not been elected by the people and represent no one, and no state, or congressional distrct.

    These "super" deligates should not be added to the totals by state since they are under no obligation to vote for anyone, having not been elected by the people of any state, or pledged to any candidate.

    A note should be made how many delegates out of a states total are not elected, and if there is speculartion about how those non elected deligates are planning at this time to vote at the convention, than it should shown in an other section.

    It does make sense to show the members of congress, the senate, and the governors with the state, but the non elected deligates should not be shown with their state, but in a group by themselves.

    February 6, 2008 02:54 am at 2:54 am |
  15. James

    People, face reality. Obama has done more to hurt the Democratic Party than any person in many, many years. If the Dems lose the election, blame him for splitting the party in half.

    February 6, 2008 02:55 am at 2:55 am |
  16. Scott

    Hey saps, Obama won or will win 14 out of 22 states and from all parts of the country. Pretty much anyone who can count understands he won the majority of states. And everyone knows the longer this thing drags on the more it favors Obama. He can raise more money than her, she has no reserves to go to, he's going to take Louisiana and Maryland, he's realistic and honest about health care, Iraq and Immigration reform. I heard Hillary's crap in 1993, and her health care reform was a resounding flop. Why? Because she is not a bridgebuilder, she doesn't know the meaning of the word bi-partisan, or inclusive. She does things her way without input from others. She alienated not only Republicans in 93' but her fellow Dems. You people who think she going to get "universal" health care are living in a land of make believe and fairy tales. While your at it you might want to put a tooth under your pillow tonight and hope for a nice quarter, in the meantime I'll keep my hopes up for a real change in politics; honesty and Barack Obama.

    February 6, 2008 02:56 am at 2:56 am |
  17. Tim

    mary smith February 6, 2008 12:55 am ET

    I hope Latinos get what they deserve: deportation.
    ------------------------

    I second this. Only Ron Paul and Mitt Romney support this. But sadly they didn't get enough votes.

    February 6, 2008 02:57 am at 2:57 am |
  18. Mike

    I think Hillary got the more diverse vote in California because people are tired of Obama racially polarized politics. The numbers have it in California. Obama may be clearly thinking only in black and white while Hillary is winning it for everyone, regardless or gender, race, and age. Between Democrats and moderates, in California, Hillary won. In NY Hillary won. In Florida, Hillary won. Democrats are tired or the rhetoric. Look at tonights speeches, clearly one was positive while the other was simply mud swinging to get more votes. The numbers show that American workers are voting for Hillary. Obama is a good person and he has good intentions, but he is not perfect. Obama stop dividing the country on racial lines. Its time for unity, it is time for change, it is time for experience. Hillary is all that!

    Hillary 08

    Hillary/Obama 08

    Hillary/ Clark 08

    Stop the Republican machine like you have in the past!

    February 6, 2008 02:57 am at 2:57 am |
  19. Eli George

    America is waking up to the Clinton scheme to avoid term limits. Bill may be living through Hill but we must REJECT a POSSIBLE 36 YEARS OF BUSH/CLINTON/BUSH/CLINTON...Let's turn the page on almost 2 decades of scandals, divisive tactics, misleading manipulative politics hoisted on us by these 2 power hungry families...Let's finally show the world that we can elect the best candidate this time. BY THE WAY I'D LIKE TO SEE A WOMEN PRESIDENT BUT HILL IN MY OPINION IS THE FEMALE VERSION OF DICK CHENEY.

    February 6, 2008 02:58 am at 2:58 am |
  20. CA for Hillary

    GOOOOO HILLARY 2008!!! A candidate can't win the general election if they can't win FL, CA, and NY!

    February 6, 2008 02:58 am at 2:58 am |
  21. GavinMR

    WOW CONGRATULATIONS SENATOR CLINTON...
    THE BEST CANDIDATE WON THE BIG PRIZE TONIGHT...

    Go all the way Hillary! We're with you through ALL the states

    February 6, 2008 02:59 am at 2:59 am |
  22. Jack

    This is history for Hilliary Clinton. Look at all of the powerful endrosements Obama, received. Lets start off with Gov. Schwarzenegger, wife Oprah Winfrey, Caroline Kennedy, Ted kennedy, and John Kerry. Also, Ted Kennedy, and John Kerry, could not win their home state. Again Hillary, have made history.

    February 6, 2008 02:59 am at 2:59 am |
  23. Silvia

    After reading all the comments here; If Obama's supporters reflect who he is, then I am deeply sadden about the future of this country if Obama wins 2008

    February 6, 2008 02:59 am at 2:59 am |
  24. Song

    India, Germany, Srilanka and Pakistan had women presidents (leaders) long before the US – Indra Gandhi and Bhutto.

    And yet, here we are still in 2008 – the United States of America – debating whether a woman can lead this country. For all our claims about being a progressive and forward looking nation, when it comes to the core of the matter, we're still the same old same old.

    February 6, 2008 03:01 am at 3:01 am |
  25. gnosis

    **Lee from NJ** Typical Clinton supporter. Calling Obama "boy" and saying he needs to "heel" you sound like Bill Clinton after South Carolina, when he said " remember Jesse Jackson won here in 84 & 88 ...." please leave the racial comments at the door or moderators please do a better job policing these bigots.

    February 6, 2008 03:01 am at 3:01 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23