A reader chimes in with some questions about how it is Lancaster County Dems went for Obama Tuesday night:

1. Are Democrats here more pacifist than Democrats in the rest of the state, and are Obama’s higher numbers partly attributable to a search for the closest thing to an anti-war candidate that this race has to offer? Is it possible that some Anabaptist Republicans or independents who are generally pretty conservative might, for the same reason, have switched parties to vote for Obama? (Perhaps the “pacifist vote” helps to explain Ron Paul’s persistence, as well, though I don’t claim to begin to understand his supporters.)  (Also, certainly this area is less Catholic than other parts of the state, so even Protestants who aren’t pacifist probably proved advantageous to Obama—plus people of other faiths and non-religious people—interesting exit poll data on that.)

2. Is Lancaster County simply more urban than most other counties in the rest of the state or at least less rural in mindset? To what extent does the new young artsy crowd that has been moving into Lancaster City in recent years affect this vote? (Look at the margin in the 9th ward—especially around Wharton Elementary School.) Some of the immediate suburbs (such as Grandview Heights and Hamilton Park) seem to have a pro-city mindset that Obama seemed to connect to more than Hillary.

3. How much of Obama’s success here is attributable to our county’s healthy economy, as compared to the rest of the state?

4. Warwick Township and Lititz went for Obama. Is this at all attributable to an effort to overcome perceptions of the area as racist after the school incidents last year, or to lessons learned in the healing work the district did in the aftermath of it?

5. Are Lancaster County Democrats as a whole actually less racist than Democrats in the rest of the state (which maybe isn’t saying much)? (Friends who work with the immigration and refugee communities here say they experience less hostility than is reported by their colleagues in other areas. Is there a Lancaster County mindset that values hard-working people, even those with “funny-sounding” names who are written off elsewhere?

6. On the flip side, is Lancaster County more sexist than other parts of the state? To what extent does the vote represent anti-Clinton/anti-woman sentiment, rather than pro-Obama?

7. Although Obama has that “most liberal” voting record, how many people really know about that? Is it possible that those who voted actually viewed him as more moderate than Clinton, who has in the past been identified with “socialized medicine,” etc.? (Does this help explain the Obamicans?) Whatever his voting record, his persona may come across as less rancorous and more conciliatory/unifying.

8. How much of the vote simply comes down to a strong sentiment against family dynasties, a revulsion toward Bill Clinton (a fear of the next Lewinsky), or a sense of Obama as inspirational, in the way that Reagan drew votes even from pretty liberal people who were sold by style and ignored substance?

Would take me all week to answer all of this - and on some, I just don’t know. But maybe you do.