PA primary, and a question for Bostonians

[cellio]

No surprises here -- with 99.3% counted Clinton won PA by 8.6% (54.3 - 45.7) (full results here), enough to continue an increasingly-ugly fight but not the clear win she needed in order to be viable. Obama isn't much affected; a win would have helped him but everyone expected him to lose, so a loss doesn't seem to hurt. Apparently she got the older rural white vote and he got the younger urban black vote, as everyone expected. I wonder if months of arguing about demographics will be better or worse than months of mud-slinging? Though I guess after the people are done voting, with no winner, things might change. I do wish that, in the absence of news in one area, the online media were more inclined to report actual news in other areas. (I'm glad my dead-tree newspaper still does a reasonable job of that.)

Some folks have been claiming that the media are biased against Clinton. I don't see it, really; there's plenty of bias against Obama too. Who actually believes that "the media" speak with one voice? It's important to use multiple news sources precisely because they don't. But for those who claim an anti-Clinton bias, what's with reporting this as a win by 10%? At best you can round (legitimately) to 9. (While I was writing this the site updated, now reporting 54.6 to 45.4. That's still not 10% unless you do your math by rounding one number and then substracting from 100 to get the other. I could see some sloppy reporters doing that, but those weren't the published numbers this morning when I saw 10% headlines.)

In unrelated news... friends in Boston, is this report accurate? (Link from Metahacker on LJ.) Legislation is pending to restrict public movement of people suspected of being gang members -- sponsored by Democrats? WTF? That seems really out of character for most Democrats at all, let alone New England Democrats. Or is this some sort of trick where you introduce a bill you know can't pass to get some of your constituents off your back, while hoping other people see what you're doing and don't hold it against you?

Comments

[jducoeur]

I think you're extrapolating a little too much from your friends.

The fraction of MA that you know is largely the techie/fannish contingent, which is about as civil-libertarian as any group you'll find anywhere. But that's still only a modest fraction of the populace. There are far more traditional liberals in the state (who are pro-civil liberties, but it's far from their only high priority, and some of those priorities conflict), and a very large chunk of just plain traditionalists of various stripes. That's more than enough to swing some votes.

It's true that, statistically, MA is more civil-libertarian than just about anywhere else in the country. But that's not saying all that much...

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

I think you're extrapolating a little too much from your friends.

As one of those MA friends, alas, yes. I'm glad we gave that impression, but it's often when we're reacting to the authoriatian tendencies of many of our fellow citizens. *wry smile*