Local Politics

Indiana primary now carries more clout than N.C.

Posted April 23, 2008
Updated April 29, 2008

— After weeks in the national spotlight, North Carolina's role in the presidential race appears to be shifting again.

Nine states have yet to hold their primaries, and the biggest chunk of delegates still up for grabs will be parceled out on May 6, when North Carolina and Indiana voters go to the polls.

Although North Carolina's 134 delegates, including superdelegates, are the biggest prize remaining, political observers began saying Wednesday that an Indiana victory by either Hillary Rodham Clinton or Barack Obama could be more crucial to deciding the Democratic nominee for president.

Obama has a double-digit lead over Clinton in North Carolina, according to several polls, while the race in Indiana is much closer.

"If Obama can win there, he can perhaps start delivering his closing arguments," said Andrew Taylor, a political science professor at North Carolina State University.

North Carolina has enjoyed frequent visits from Obama and Clinton – along with former President Bill Clinton – in recent weeks because the state's primary has been seen nationally as increasingly important.

"Obviously, we're going to get a lot of attention here, and we matter in some way, shape or form. But are we going to be definitive as far as the outcome is concerned? I very much doubt it," Taylor said.

At this stage of the race, beating expectations is almost as important as winning states, he said. Clinton's double-digit win Tuesday in Pennsylvania, where she was supposed to win handily, was the latest example of that.

If Clinton closes on Obama in North Carolina, that hurts him. Likewise, if Clinton can't hold onto Indiana, that deflates her chances.

Democratic party insiders still play up North Carolina's role.

"Sen. Obama is not taking North Carolina for granted. He and the campaign are going flat-out to win, and in my opinion, it's the most important primary left," said Ed Turlington, the Raleigh attorney who ran John Edwards' 2004 presidential campaign and backing Obama now.

Turlington pointed to ongoing television ads by both candidates and continued visits to the state as an indication North Carolina remains a player in the presidential race.


This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • wildervb Apr 24, 2008

    wralblog, If you look at other countries with "Universal" systems, they all have lower costs, lower admin costs as well.

    I'm including the out of pocket money plus the taxes.

    Here's my basic problem with the way things work in the US. If you healthy, your ok, you can afford to buy your own insurance, or if you happen to work for a company that provides it, again you're ok. But if you should lose your job, or work at a place that doesn't provide coverage you could lose everything should you become sick.

  • JustAName Apr 24, 2008

    You did notice that the citizens still paid a bunch of money out of their pockets in those other countries. Yes, the U.S. spends more money per person, but as far as getting treatment, we are probably more efficient than other countries.

    And of course, when the government pays 80%, where do they get the money? Taxes, of course.

  • wildervb Apr 24, 2008

    Garnerwolf1, no the healthcare systems that were compared included the UK, Germany, Swizterland, Japan and Taiwan.

    They all had different systems. The UK was the only completely socialized, the others had a mix of private insurers and private providers. Taiwan enacted theirs not to long ago, they did a study off all the world's existing systems, including the US's and put together their own. We could do the same, or continue with the status quo. (Which is the most expensive system in the world).

  • Garnerwolf1 Apr 24, 2008

    wildervb - was one of those countries Canada by chance?

  • bs101fly Apr 24, 2008

    IF "religious affiliation and gun laws" are all you have to worry about in your life, more power to you. For the rest of us who see a lot more clearly you better take a 2nd look at the Clinton past and be aware of what your future WILL BE, should you choose to go that route again. Operation chaos will seem like a carnival ride compared to a "Billary" administration!!!

  • nodoginthisfight Apr 24, 2008

    Operation Chaos lives......

  • Bob Sidel Apr 24, 2008

    "It's time NC stand up and send the message that we do NOT want more of them same "

    kinda of hard when the controlling issues in this state are religious affiliation and gun laws.

  • wildervb Apr 24, 2008

    Here's a link about overall health care systems throughout the world.


    Ours is by far the least efficient. It's screaming for reform, yet gets blocked by politics in the country.

  • wildervb Apr 24, 2008

    "Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult."

    Sweeping change will be difficult, but it is needed. Last Sunday, I watched a great documentry on Health care systems on a program called "FrontLine". They went to five different countries all with different forms of nationalized health care. In each case these systems cost less than what we Americans pay, in each case the patients were basically happy with their systems, in every case these countries cover everyone and nobody goes bankrupt because of health care costs. The fact is, we can't afford not to have some form of national health insurance, it's putting us at a competitive disadvantage to our trading partners.

  • Just Ice Apr 24, 2008


    The Democrats are already retreating and their candidates keep making promises they know they can't possibly keep.


    Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult.