Clinton camp hopes win means more cash pourin in

PHILADELPHIA — Pivotal? No. Crucial? Yes. At least for Hillary Clinton's hopes of wresting the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination from frontrunner Barack Obama.

With her victory in Pennsylvania's Democratic presidential primary Tuesday, Clinton survives to fight another day, specifically, May 6, in Indiana and North Carolina, the next round of state primaries.

If, that is, she can persuade her supporters to pony up more money to keep her debt-ridden $1 million-a-day campaign going. Or, if she reaches into her own pockets and loans her campaign millions more, as she has already done once before this year.

Terry McAuliffe, the Clinton campaign chairman, predicted the Pennsylvania victory would result in more campaign donations. "We'll have the resources to compete," he said.

Clinton herself, in her remarks at a victory celebration, included a plea for campaign donations. And while Obama "tried to knock us out" by outspending her 3-to-1 in Pennsylvania, Clinton said "the tide is turning" with Tuesday's victory.

But experts said it is still an uphill battle for Clinton in trying to persuade the Democratic Party elders that she should be the party's presidential nominee if, at the end of the primary season June 3, Obama continues to hold his lead in pledged delegates and the popular vote.

If Obama holds those leads, "Senator Clinton is going to have a very difficult time getting the nomination while not ripping the party apart," said John Kennedy, a political science professor at West Chester University and an analyst for Pennsylvania public television.

Obama, at a rally in Evansville, Ind. Tuesday night, tried to get his campaign back on track, acknowledging the difficulties he has encountered in the last six weeks.

"It's easy to get caught up in the distractions and the silliness and the tit-for-tat that consumes our politics, the bickering that none of us are entirely immune to, that trivializes the profound issues ñ two wars, an economy in recession, a planet in peril," he said.

But he also noted that despite the loss in Pennsylvania, "we closed the gap" and brought hundreds of thousands of new voters into the process ñ "new voters who will lead our party to victory in November."

A win is a win, the Clinton camp has argued, especially in big states like Pennsylvania that are important in general elections. And so far, Clinton has won all but one of those states - Illinois, Obama's home state.

"She's winning the states that matter," McAuliffe said.

Moreover, just as in 1992, when her husband won the presidency, "it is the economy, stupid," with voters increasingly worried more about rising gas prices, job losses and the home mortgage crisis than by the war in Iraq, an issue that worked to Obama's advantage and Clinton's disadvantage - she supported the war, he didn't - earlier this year.

Nearly nine in 10 voters in Pennsylvania told pollsters on election day that the country is in an economic recession, and 42 percent of them described the recession as "serious."

But Obama is flush with cash for the final phase of the 2008 Democratic presidential contest. And in Pennsylvania, Obama spent Clinton almost into political oblivion, $11.2 million to $4.8 million.

And while Obama did not win Pennsylvania, he appeared to keep the outcome close enough to hold his lead in pledged delegates to the national convention this summer and to undercut Clinton's argument that she would be the strongest of the two in the general election against presumptive Republican nominee John McCain.

He also appeared to win enough votes in Pennsylvania to hold the lead in the popular vote total for the primaries, blunting yet another argument that Clinton has made to persuade party superdelegates to back her bid.

Neither Obama nor Clinton is likely to win enough delegates to claim the party's nomination without the support of the superdelegates, the party leaders and insiders who also vote at the national convention.

U.S. Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, who supported Obama, said the results Tuesday indicated Obama has established "a strong foundation" in the state and had "connected with people with his message of change."

In fact, the exit polls showed that the quality Pennsylvania voters most admired in a candidate was the ability to bring about change, 49 percent, as opposed to experience, 26 percent, and electability, 8 percent.

Moreover, the turnout in Pennsylvania's primary was a record 52 percent, nearly double the turnout in 2004. And as in most of the contests this year, in Pennsylvania Obama got a boost from new voters. One out of seven Democratic voters in Pennsylvania on Tuesday had registered as a Democrat since January, and 60 percent of them voted for Obama.

Even so, the exit polls in Pennsylvania suggested some trouble spots ahead for Obama. For example, his recent comments about small-town Americans clinging to guns and religion because of economic difficulty – and perhaps lingering concern over comments made by his longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. - appears to have undercut his standing with religious voters in Pennsylvania.

According to exit polls, 39 percent of the voters in Pennsylvania's Democratic primary attend church weekly. And of those, 59 percent voted for Clinton, 41 percent for Obama. And among the 37 percent of Pennsylvania households with a gun owner, Clinton got 58 percent, Obama 42 percent.

Clinton also ran stronger among blue collar workers, a key constituency in Pennsylvania, especially in general elections, and a bulwark of the Democratic Party. She won majorities of those with no college education (63 percent) and those making less than $50,000 a year (55 percent).

The Pennsylvania electorate showed signs of polarization along lines of race, gender and age, most of them benefiting Clinton:

- Ninety-two percent of the state's African Americans voted for Obama, 8 percent for Clinton. Sixty percent of whites voted for Clinton, 40 percent for Obama.

- Clinton got 55 percent of women, Obama got 53 percent of men.

- Obama won a majority of voters under the age of 44, Clinton won a majority of those over 45.

Still, the Obama camp noted that the Illinois senator did better among key groups in Pennsylvania than in Ohio six weeks ago.

For example, in Ohio, Obama got only 28 percent of voters over 60 years old, but in Pennsylvania, he got 41 percent. Also, in Ohio, he got 39 percent of white men, but in Pennsylvania, he got 46 percent.