Here are the latest results out of Oregon:

Here's SUSA's write up:

Though the results are only slightly more in favor of Obama than SurveyUSA's most recent track point, released 11 days ago, before results of North Carolina and Indiana were known, there is movement in Oregon among women. 5 weeks ago, Clinton led by 7 among Oregon women. Today, Obama leads by 7. See the interactive tracking graph here. Among voters younger than Obama, Obama leads by 24 points. Among voters older than Republican John McCain, Clinton leads, but just barely, and by a lot less than she had. See the interactive tracking graph here. 4 in 10 of likely voters have already returned a ballot. Among the actual voters, Clinton and Obama tie. Obama's advantage comes entirely from the 6 in 10 likely voters who tell SurveyUSA they will return their ballot before 8 pm on Primary Day, but have not yet done so. All voting in Oregon is by U.S. mail. Ballots may be returned until 8 pm on 05/20/08.

Oregon will have the largest convention delegation of any of the remaining states or territories holding contests here on out (though Puerto Rico has slightly more pledged delegates). Perhaps more importantly, it's the only "blue" state remaining to vote, having backed every Democratic presidential nominee since Michael Dukakis and not having elected a Republican to a statewide elected position (other than Gordon Smith) in about a decade. So while there will be talk about tonight's results in West Virginia and those next week in Kentucky (and those from the other remaining primaries and caucuses), it looks like Oregon might be the only state left in play that will actually be key to putting a Democrat in the White House in November. With one week of balloting to go in the state (it conducts its vote completely by mail), this should be interesting.

Update [2008-5-13 17:58:32 by Jonathan Singer]: Obama is up 20 points in a Portland Tribune poll.

In the flow of endorsements in recent days and weeks -- and indeed over the past few months as well -- one thing we haven't seen is very many Senate candidates come out and endorse in the presidential race. There have been a few -- both Jeff Merkley and Steve Novick in Oregon have endorsed Barack Obama, for instance. But by and large, top-tier Senate candidates have refrained from wading into the presidential contest, whether out of fear of alienating half of the party or a desire not to make press in that way. Yet today, an endorsement from a Democratic Senate hopeful and Congressman (and thus a superdelegate to boost) for Obama.

Congressman Tom Allen is throwing his support behind Sen. Barack Obama as the Democratic presidential nominee.

Allen, a superdelegate to this summer's Democratic National Convention, said Monday he believes Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton are both "supremely qualified" to be president. Allen has been friends for decades with Clinton and her husband, former president Bill Clinton.

But Allen says most of the nation's primary voters have spoken, and that the time has come to bring a "graceful end" to the primary campaign.

Thus far, people like Mark Warner and Tom Udall and Mark Udall -- the top-tier of Democratic Senate hopefuls -- have not come out and endorsed either candidate for President. As alluded to before, in the eyes of most Senate campaigns, the risks of such an endorsement outweigh the potential benefits. Or at least they did.

It remains to be seen if the Allen endorsement foreshadows more to come -- if it is a dipping of the toe in water, in a sense -- or if it simply represents one American coming to a public decision about his views on the race for the Democratic nomination. In the coming weeks, we will have to wait to see if any more Udalls or Warners come out and publicly support either Obama or Hillary Clinton. But if others do follow in Allen's footsteps, we could see a new stage of coalescing in the Democratic presidential primary in which the campaign class of the party, as well as candidates who will actually face the voters in competitive general elections in the fall, are ready to see one nominee emerge.

According to new polling from Gallup, American Jewish voters, who have tended to overwhelmingly support Democrats in elections going back at least about a century, are no more likely to defect from the Democratic ranks should Barack Obama be the party's nominee rather than Hillary Clinton.

Barack Obama is faring better than might be expected among Jewish voters, beating John McCain in Gallup Poll Daily general-election matchups and trailing Hillary Clinton only slightly in Jewish Democrats' preferences for the Democratic nomination.

[...]

In terms of the general election, Jewish voters nationwide are nearly as likely to say they would vote for Obama if he were the Democratic nominee running against the Republican McCain (61%), as to say they would vote for Clinton (66%).

[...]

According to Gallup's aggregated tracking data for all of April, 61% of Jewish voters would vote for Obama, much higher than the national average of 45% of all registered voters.

Rather than declining between March and April, support for Obama versus McCain among Jewish voters has increased slightly, from a 23-point margin in favor of Obama (58% to 35%) to a 29-point margin (61% to 32%).

The results are similar for Clinton, who received 66% of the vote from Jewish Democrats in April, compared with 27% for McCain -- a 39-point lead. Clinton led McCain by 29 points in March, 61% to 32%.

Gallup does not provide a margin of error for this aggregation of polling data, but doing the math it looks like the margin of error for this data is about plus or minus 3.5 percentage points -- meaning that the difference between the general election performance among American Jews between Clinton and Obama is statistically insignificant.

Now the fact that Obama beats McCain only by a 61 percent to 32 margin among Jewish voters might be a cause for concern for some. After all, John Kerry defeated George W. Bush by a 78 percent to 22 percent margin (.pdf) within this demographic in the two-party vote. However, it's well worth noting that polling at the outset of the Democratic race in late 2003/early 2004 showed Kerry, as well as most of the other Democratic contenders at the time, beating Bush among American Jews by only about 60 percent to 30 percent margin. Even Joe Lieberman only carried the Jewish vote in a hypothetical head-to-head match up at the time by a 71 percent to 24 percent margin. And as late in the game as September 2004, polling indicated that Kerry only led Bush in this subgroup by a 69 percent to 24 percent margin even though he ended wup winning by about a net dozen points more.

So when you actually delve into the numbers, it becomes clear that these numbers actually bode fairly well for Obama's chances among Jewish voters in November. What's more, these numbers seriously undercut the notion that Obama has a serious problem among American Jews resulting from false smear emails or whatever else.

NBC News calls Hillary Clinton the "apparent" winner in Indiana. Fox News is projecting a Clinton victory in the Hoosier state, as is CNN.

The first two thread on Indiana are full, so time for a third one. Here are the numbers from CNN:

22,019-vote margin for Clinton

√ Hillary Clinton: 637,389 votes (51 percent)
Barack Obama: 615,370 votes (49 percent)

With 99 percent of precincts reporting at 1:10 AM Eastern

Lake County, home to the city of Gary, is beginning to report, and thus far with about a quarter of the vote there tallied Obama is leading by a 3-to-1 margin. This is a real nail-biter, so stay tuned...

Update [2008-5-7 0:19:33 by Jonathan Singer]: Note, too, that there remains about a third of the vote in Monroe County -- home to the city of Bloomington (and thus Indiana University) -- a county where Obama is leading by about a 2-to-1 margin. NBC News estimates that as many as 10,000 votes could remain there, as well, so Obama might not need to pick up the entire remaining margin from Lake County (and the city of Gary).

Update [2008-5-7 0:23:28 by Jonathan Singer]: It looks like there may be a couple/few thousand votes remaining to be counted from 2 percent of precincts in Marion County, where the city of Indianapolis is located. At present, Obama is leading in the county by a 67 percent to 33 percent margin.

Update [2008-5-7 0:39:16 by Jonathan Singer]: Monroe County (Bloomington/IU) is now basically all in, 56 percent of the precincts in Lake County (Gary) are in, and Obama has cut the lead to a little under 17,000 votes. Only 5 percent of precincts statewide remain, so Obama might not be able to quite make it to even (at least tonight before all of the absentee and provisional ballots are counted). But we shall wait and see...

Update [2008-5-7 1:12:51 by Jonathan Singer]: We're up to 99 percent of precincts reporting (though still 2 percent in Marion County [Indianapolis] not reporting), and Clinton's lead has bumped up from about 17,000 votes to about 22,000 votes. Just about all of the vote in Lake County has now been counted. Looks like this might be about it for the night -- about a 2 percentage point victory (or perhaps slightly less, closer to 1.75 percentage points, to be precise) for Clinton.

The previous thread is getting a bit full, so time for a second one on the Indiana results. Here are the numbers from CNN:

38,311-vote margin for Clinton

Hillary Clinton: 574,643 votes (52 percent)
Barack Obama: 536,332 votes (48 percent)

With 88 percent of precincts reporting at 11:33 PM Eastern

Still waiting on Gary. For what it's worth, the mayor of the city is suggesting that Obama might have enough votes there to make up his small deficit elsewhere in the state.

Consider this a thread on Hillary Clinton's speech from Indianapolis following the Indiana primary.

Update [2008-5-6 22:58:31 by Todd Beeton]:Unity ticket alert. Note her use of the pronoun "we."

And I think standing up for working people is about the American dream and the Democratic Party. And I think standing up for the middle class is about who we are and who we can be if we stick together. So it is important that as we go forward in this campaign that we recognize that we are all on the same team. We're going to be standing up for you. We're going to be looking for a way to turn this country around and bring it back to what it should stand for and be all about. Better futures for you and your children, solving the problems that affect us here in America. I know that people are watching this race and their wondering, I win, he wins, I win, he wins. It's so close and I think that says a lot about how excited and passionate our supporters are and how intent so many Americans are to taking their country back. But I can assure you that no matter what happens, I will work for the nominee of the Democratic Party because we must win in November. And I know that Senator Obama feels the same way.

I have to say, I don't think this leaves any doubt that if Obama does win this nomination, that Hillary Clinton would accept the VP slot. Am I reading too much into this?

Consider this a thread on Barack Obama's speech following his North Carolina primary victory from Raleigh.

Update [2008-5-6 21:37:47 by Todd Beeton]:Again, Obama is taking on the unpatriotic BS head on.

I love this country too much to see it divided and distracted at this critical moment in history. I believe in our ability to perfect this nation because it's the only reason I'm standing here today. I know the promise of America because I've lived it...it is the light of opportunity that led my father across an ocean, it's the founding ideals that the flag draped over my father's coffin stand for. It's life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In this country justice can be won against the greatest odds...and when we are told that we can not bring about the change that we seek, we answer in one voice: Yes we can!

Nice.