Yes, it seems that’s the way it went down in New Hampshire.

The New Republic has some factoids:

Here are Clinton’s groups: women, particularly married women, voters over 40, voters making less than $50,000, voters without a college degree, union voters, Democrats, Catholics (an important constituency for the Democrats), people very worried about the economy, voters who thought the economy was most important, voters who valued experience, and voters who evaluated candidates on whether they “care about people like me.”

There were anomalies. Voters who thought the war in Iraq was the most important issue favored Obama by 46 to 33 percent, while voters who favored our withdrawing all troops “as soon as possible” favored Clinton by 40 to 36 percent. That may reflect Clinton’s higher rating as a potential commander-in-chief, or it may just be a statistical anomaly. Clinton’s support by 38 to 20 percent over Obama on the question of which “one of these candidates “cares about people like me” is also interesting, and suggests that Obama has a different kind of charisma than Bill Clinton or George W. Bush. This was, too, Edwards’ strongest category – the only one where he won more support than his rivals.

And another observer sums it up thusly:

What that means is not altogether clear. I’d like to see the correlation with class and gender. She may have won with older, blue-collar Catholic women. But given her identification with abortion, it still comes as a surprise. On the other hand, white Catholics have a fraught history when it comes to race relations, and Obama’s channeling of the Protestant social gospel may not resonate with them. Catholics have been a “homeless” voting bloc since the Kennedy era, so their choices are significant. Clinton the Southern Baptist won them in 1992, Kerry the Catholic lost them in 2004.