On the popular vote, Obama lost to Clinton by roughly 400,000 votes, but he beat McCain by 800,000 votes. Of course, the Democrats had almost two million more people vote in their primary than voted in the Republican primary, but if we talk percentages of the total votes cast that day, Obama took 27% of the vote while McCain took 15% (of course, Clinton wins with 33.5%).

You’re right about Hispanics though. In California, Latino men made up 13% of the vote and 62% of them voted for Clinton; Latino women made up 16% of the vote and 69% of them voted for Clinton. On the Republican side, Latino’s weren’t broken down by gender, but they made up 13% of the vote, with 33% of them voting for McCain.

Now, more Hispanics voted in the Democratic primary than in the Republican primary. But let’s take a look at the numbers anyway.

McCain’s 13% equals 333,549 votes.
Obama’s 37% of Latino men and 30% of Latino women equals 409,075 votes.

Again, this is all proves nothing, but it’s interesting to look at.

Comparing the wins in a primary election with the potential wins in a national election isn’t as easy as saying Obama lost Ohio to Clinton, therefore he will lose Ohio to McCain.

Not that this really matter, but for comparison’s sake, look at the popular vote from Ohio:

• Clinton: 1,207,806 votes
• Obama: 979,025 votes
• McCain: 636,256 votes

Let me repeat, the fact that Obama lost to Clinton yet still beat McCain doesn’t prove anything, but it is interesting to think about.

Plus, New York, California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey are pretty much Democratic strongholds, so even if Obama lost in the Dem. primary, it’s a safe bet he’d take those states in November.

What I think the primary results show is that Obama plays better than Clinton in the states that traditionally go Republican: Kansas, the Carolinas, the Rocky mountains, etc. That seems to suggest that he is more electable, that he has more of an ability to win the votes of independents and Republicans than does Clinton.

And that’s why I think the polls show Obama beating McCain by a wider margin than Hillary (the average spread shows Obama beating McCain by 5.2%, while Clinton only wins by 1.7%).

Also…as a side note, you said Clinton won Florida, but that’s only because no one campaigned there, as per the rules of this year’s primary. If Howard Dean has his way and they re-do the Michigan and Florida primaries, I’m not so sure Clinton wins.

There are some numbers to support it…weakly. For example, in Ohio, roughly 25% of the voters said they would only be satisfied if Sen. Obama was the nominee (44% said they’d be satisfied with either one). 97% of the people who said that voted for Obama (no idea what the other 3% were thinking). There’s a chance that some those voters don’t show up in November, and there’s chance that some of those who do will cast their vote for the “independent minded” John McCain. Remember, 13% of Ohio voters declared themselves Conservative, and 53% of those voted for Obama. It’s easy to imagine at least a few percentage points shifting from Obama to McCain and not from Obama to Clinton.

Speculation? Okay. But we’re talking predictions of what might happen eight months from now, so yeah, there’s gonna be some speculation.

This isn’t a textbook man. It’s a blog. Speculation is half the fun!

I object on pure speculation. It does not mean that these people will not vote for Clinton over mcCain just that they prefer Obama.