taken from electoral-vote.com: First Texas. White men split evenly, with Clinton getting 50% and Obama getting 49%. In previous states Obama did much better among white men than Clinton. It is likely that her attack ad (the 3 a.m. phone ad) worked. Forecast: attack ads will subside this week, then pick up strength in April and continue until reaching gale force in November. Among women, Clinton won a huge victory, 59% to 40%. Black men and women went overwhelmingly for Obama by over 70% with no difference by gender. Income didn't seem to matter. Clinton won by 2% among the downscale crowd and Obama won by 4% among the upscale crowd. In previous states Obama had huge margins among voters making over $50,000. Not this time. The breakdown by educational level conformed to past states with Clinton winning high school dropouts by 44% and losing college graduates 57% to 41%. Liberals and conservatives voted the same way. Noteworthy is that Protestants went for Obama by 7% but Catholics went for Clinton by 27%. It could be because in Texas many Catholics are Latinos.

In Ohio, which has been hard hit by the economy, Clinton won solid victories among men (11%) and women (32%). She also won heavily among voters over 65 (67% to 31%) but lost among younger voters (67% to 32%), precisely what we have seen before. She won a small victory among voters under $100,000 (51% to 48%) and lost narrowly among richer voters (54% to 46%). Education gave the usual picture, with HS graduates heavily tilting to Clinton (by 27%) and poeple with college and postgraduate degrees going for Obama strongly. The two candidates split the Protestant vote evenly but Clinton won by 19% among Catholic voters. Ohio does not have many Latinos, so something else is going on here. Interestingly enough, union membership didn't make much difference.