If I can hijack slightly about the political scene of the West ...

I had a random thought about Sirota's theory about Obama's strengths in this primary. Specifically this idea of the "racial valley," where whites that have never seen a black person (like out West) aren't racist, and so feel free to vote for him. On the side of states like Georgia, the numbers of actual blacks are more than high enough to compensate for the few remaining old racists, especially in a Democratic primary.

White men are essentially a split between these two, so I think a different demographic may be worth investigating.

I can think of another theory, though, based instead on sexism (or rather, a powerful reaction against it). Hillary's power demographic is old white women, those that remember the old sexist barbs and battles, correct? Those that love her as a fellow traveler in life and the experiences shared.

Now, my contention is that the lilly-white western states are also those that have far better affairs in regards to gender equality than the old Eastern seaboard and Appalachia. They're further into the later waves of feminism than over here. Women in power has been a far more comfortable experience, as evidenced by my home state for example, with both Senators and Governor as women.

I'll point to this map as backing evidence (it's on the left column in the article - click to enlarge):

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/weekinreview/18zernike.html?ref=weekinreview

So, my theory here is that Clinton pulls less emotionally out West (in addition to not making her case as strongly out there Feb. 5 as she might have in hindsight) in her key demographics, and this has allowed Obama some advantage.

So, just another factor to consider when thinking about how this particular contest happened to play out.

This also makes me very curious to see some data on Dr. Weston's "emotional constituencies" ...