Two weeks ago, I posted a "purple" map of the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries in a my first diary, saying that I would post an updated map after the March 4 primaries.
I've added the results from Vermont, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Texas, as well as recoloring the Hawaii results by county instead of congressional district (thanks Erick for the more detailed results link). I will also note that the Texas results displayed here are the primary results, not the caucus, which was more in Obama's favor. I chose to use just the primary results for a few reasons, the main ones being that the caucus results aren't all in yet (the vast majority of the primary results are) and there's no easy way to add the two results together as there were different turnout levels, different weighting, etc. for those two processes
As well, like last time, here are some versions of the same map with the candidates' colors rearranged:
One thing I found interesting about the maps was the great deal of continuity in the patterns, even between states that voted on different days. Each of the additional states looks like another piece of a jigsaw puzzle nicely added in, with the possible exception of Vermont, which is sandwiched between Senator Clinton's constituent state of New York and New Hampshire, which had a significant Edwards vote. In fact, over all, early states with significant Edwards votes and to a lesser extent "home states" tend to be the only major disruption to trends across state lines.
One of the major trends that continued was that, with the exception of New England, Senator Obama tends to do better in cities and well populated areas, while Senator Clinton does better in rural areas, which in many states makes the results appear to be further skewed in Clinton's favor than the actual vote count. This is especially true in Ohio and Texas, where the rural-urban bias was very pronounced.
In terms of Ohio in particular, I want to point out that despite the observation by the media that the demographics seem similar to Wisconsin, that there are cultural differences between the states that do not figure into the demographic analysis that they typically make. So, I don't think that Senator Clinton "reclaimed her base" on Tuesday. Rather, I don't think she ever lost it. Instead she has been losing contest where cultural trends play out against her.