MyDD :: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Primary

by Scope441 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:12:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I have also noticed that many Obama supporters say they will never vote for Clinton, but I haven't seen Clinton supporters say that about Obama. Doesn't that mean that these Obama supporters are the ones dividing the democratic party?

by upper left on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:51:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No it means they are the ones on the receiving end of the lies, smears, and distortions.

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

Obama supporters can only hope that Bill and Hillary continue the negative campaigning, because it is so transparent that it fools no one but the diehard Hillary supporters, who are believing anything Bill serves up to them.

Bill's Republican light triangulating regime of the 90s, one that even his own advisors bailed out of after the first term, speaks for itself. This is not the Democratic party; it is another version of the Reagan administration, adaption to the country has moved right theme and a willingness to lead from that perspective.

Today that view is old hat and nobody wants to see it re-instituted. For the Democratic party, it is going backward ala the DLC revolution to remake the Democratic party into the image of the Republican party.

by shergald on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 10:27:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy. - Teddy Roosevelt

I've seen several Clinton supporters here say they would not vote for Obama in the general election.

by minvis on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:51:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by rfahey22 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:54:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, because anecdotal evidence from a handful of posters on a message board is a great way to guage the character of a candidate's supporters.

Re: Yes we can! (none / 0)

why don't you just say "Let's you and him fight!" that would be a little less obvious.
this is the primary season. Obama and Hillary are fighting it out and John Edwards is getting enough delegates to have a voice at the convention. each one of these candidates is head and shoulders above the combined gaggle of Republican wannabes.
are there divisions in the Democratic Party? you bet your sweet bippy there are and there are going to continue to be, but we're going to wipe the floor with whoever the criminal elitist GOP nominates in Minneapolis because the American people are sick and tired of this political charade that's been going on for the last seven years.

by fahrender on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 01:05:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes we can! (2.00 / 1)

Pay attention Steve. You have admitted that the Clintons have distorted Obama's record, statements and actions.

1) Direct mail and e-mail in NH distorting his 100% NARAL, Planned Parenthood Pro-Choice record.

2) Direct Mail in Nevada distorting his proposal to raise SS taxes on the top 4%.

3) Voter suppression law-suit

4) 1600 complaints submitted to the Nevada Dem party about the conduct of the Clinton campaign;

5) Distortion of Obama's historically accurate comments about Reagan and the Repubs;

6) Drug comments by Shaheen, Johnson, and Penn

7) Bill Clintons distortion of Obama's opposition to the war.

8) Nearly everything that has emanated from BC's mouth over the past two weeks.

70% of the voters in SC thought HRC and BC had been unfair to Obama.

We are calling your candidates liars and Rovian because that is how they are treating Obama. I am not stupid.

by upper left on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:49:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

Pay attention. I said you will never unify the party with Clinton-hating rhetoric and I meant it. I don't care how justified you think your Clinton-hatred may be.

The negative stuff in this primary has been trivial compared to primary campaigns of the past, absolutely trivial. You cannot compare anything that has happened this year to the Osama ad that ran against Howard Dean in 2004. You cannot compare anything that has happened this year to Bill Bradley's false claim that Gore was the first one to bring up Willie Horton, a talking point we still hear from the wingnuts thanks to Bradley.

Just because you guys scream bloody murder any time someone says the tiniest thing about your saint of a candidate does not make everyone who opposes him into Karl Rove. You like Barack Obama, well I like Bill Clinton, and I'm not going to sing kumbaya while people are out there calling him Lee Atwater.

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:59:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

70% think Clinton unfair to Obama (none / 0)

That may be but 56% thought Obama was unfair to Clinton. So It is not completely one sided nor is it that far apart in numbers.

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:58:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:45:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He said 'Rovian' but not racist, I have been getting a lot of that myself. BUt you accussed him of labelling the CLinton's as both, can you not see the difference?

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

I am addressing not just one particular individual, but any number of Hillary-haters who have left a very sour taste in my mouth concerning what should have been an inspiring victory for Obama.

If you guys want to keep claiming that a vote for Obama represents a repudiation of supposedly evil tactics employed by the Clintons, be my guest, but you will never get me on board.

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:48:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 02:07:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Fair enough. I agree with the poster on the 'Rovian' part although I wouldn't have used that particular phrase out of respect for progressive sensibilities.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

While it's nice of you to throw me that bone, it really amounts to nothing next to all the other people hurling invective. All in the name of their unifying candidate, of course.

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 02:51:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:17:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, it's been a tough week, maybe we need to lighten up a bit. The blogosphere has a certain toxicity sometimes which is a bit discouraging, and I certainly appreciate your fair-mindedness and good will in spite of our occasional differences of opinion. Consider:

The audience chanted "Race doesn't matter" as it awaited Obama to make his appearance after rolling up 55 percent of the vote in a three-way race.

David Espo and Charles Babington - Obama Routs Clinton in South Carolina AP 26 Jan 08

Naïve, perhaps, but far from irresponsible. We could do a lot worse.

Re: Yes we can! (2.00 / 1)

Believe me, the best thing about this result is that you're no longer going on and on about how Hillary has run a bloody knife through your guy and left him to die like a dog by the side of the road. Now that's change we can believe in.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:22:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:14:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, as I said, this changes nothing regarding Obama's chances, I thought you understood my position on that. In fact as you notice it is reinforcing the frame they crafted that he is offering a narrow 'black' candidacy. I still maintain he is fatally damaged and believe the Clinton's, particularly Bill, did so intentionally. I see no reason to assume that Obama's chances in the Super Tuesday states are any better than they were yesterday.

That's the plan:

Campaigning in South Carolina, Bill Clinton accused the media of adopting the Obama campaign's spin by injecting race into the campaign. "Shame on you," he scolded a reporter. The take in Washington is that if anyone was using race for political advantage, it was the Clintons. "It's like Obi-Wan Kenobi yelling at Luke Skywalker because he's using the Force," exclaimed a Democratic senator, astounded by Clinton's audacity. The cynical view is that the Clintons have deliberately tapped into deep-seated racial feelings.

Eleanor Clift - Cheap Shots, But Valuable? Newsweek 25 Jan 08

As you yourself read earlier in the Dick Morris piece:

If Hillary loses South Carolina and the defeat serves to demonstrate Obama's ability to attract a bloc vote among black Democrats, the message will go out loud and clear to white voters that this is a racial fight. It's one thing for polls to show, as they now do, that Obama beats Hillary among African-Americans by better than 4-to-1 and Hillary carries whites by almost 2-to-1. But most people don't read the fine print on the polls. But if blacks deliver South Carolina to Obama, everybody will know that they are bloc-voting. That will trigger a massive white backlash against Obama and will drive white voters to Hillary Clinton.

Dick Morris How Clinton Will Win the Nomination by Losing S.C. RCP 23 Jan 08

You have also noted the appeal of this narrative to Hillary supporters in another diary, and have advised them to drop it. But they haven't, and neither has her campaign:

Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

This was in response to a question about Obama saying it "took two people to beat him." Jackson had not been mentioned.

Boy, I can't understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as "the black candidate."

Jack Tapper - Bubba: Obama Is Just Like Jesse Jackson ABC 26 Jan 08

The reason being because it is a winner. This framing, with the collateral damage of the current media brouhaha over Bill, which will pass, and the possible alienation of a portion of the black community, is exactly what the Clinton's intended from the moment Bill took over the direction of her campaign. It's the simple truth which has been presented before our very eyes. Why would you suppose that I would no longer believe or assert that Hillary engaged intentionally in the politics of personal destruction to cripple, in fact destroy, her opponent?

I am still convinced that Obama is demolished, that the Clinton's skilfully perpetrated this narrative and that Hillary has, as you say, run a bloody knife through him for the sake of her electoral and presidential ambitions. What's changed? That's the brilliant part, the bigger a margin by which he wins South Carolina pushes the knife in all the more deeply. Ya' gotta' admire it for cunning.

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 05:00:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Whose accusing the Clintons of being racist? Far from it, they are just breathtakingly cynical and ruthlessly calculating. Not to mention ambitious to a fault. All highly regarded qualities by their supporters, as we have heard for months.

by Doug in Virginia on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:28:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh for pete's sake man, you're over the top.

I am inspired by Obama's victory--very much so.

Get over your unnecessary indignation and tell people why you like Clinton so much instead of harping on people who are just on blogs to provoke.

Come on, out of the drivel....elevate!

Regardless of who we nominate, he or she will be 10 times better than McCain or whichever goose egg they lay. Let's not throw a hissy, shall we?

Re: Yes we can! (2.00 / 1)

One reason I like Hillary - who remains my second choice - is that she is not a racist. Thus I am very disinclined to make common cause with those who think she is.

This anti-Clinton narrative that the media has helped author is simply loathsome and I will have no part of it. Obama has played the racial victim card at the expense of two very decent people and that's not right.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:37:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Nope, sorry... (none / 0)

OBAMA....hasn't PLAYED anything!!!! That's the whole friggin' point.

by Doug in Virginia on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:48:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nope, sorry... (2.00 / 1)

People who want to keep race out of it don't say things like "Hillary didn't cry over Katrina."

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:52:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nope, sorry... (none / 0)

People who want to keep race out of is don't send out memos listing every possible item they think might be racist. (Jan 17 Ben Smith)

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 11:27:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nope, sorry... (none / 0)

exactly, i feel that obama painted himself as the black candidate to win over the black vote that he wasn't winning before. now he has at the expense of the dem party unity. with the hatred they have spun toward the clintons (calling them racist) i am not sure clinton can now win these people back in the GE.

by Scope441 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:25:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:33:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You know adding substantially more Hispanic voters builds the party too. Hillary has worked for a long time on that and is bring in many more that we have gotten in the past.

Hispanic votes (none / 0)

Don't forget California (370 delegates), Arizona (67 delegates)

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:59:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

And intelligent people are not falling for it. The Bill and Hillary act are just so transparent that people are bailing out of the Hillary march to another eight years of Republican Lite.

This from an MSNBC article:

The fact that electorate was more than half African-American should not obscure this number: In Greenville County, which has higher average income and a more educated populace than the statewide average and which is 78 percent white, Obama won by a resounding 22 percentage points., annihilating Clinton.

As in New Hampshire and Iowa, exit polls indicated that Obama performed very well among those with post-graduate education and those with incomes over $200,000.

But unlike New Hampshire, Obama also outperformed Clinton among those earning less than $50,000 a year.

Clinton's bastions: women and older voters
According to exit poll interviews Clinton's only strong demographic groups were white women, among whom she won 44 percent to Obama's 22 percent, and voters aged 65 and older, among whom she got 40 percent to his 32 percent.

This differential among the educated will follow Hillary into Big Tuesday, if Obama can get his message out there.

by shergald on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 10:13:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (none / 0)

She won Nevada (a strange first time caucus) by 5-6%. Those modest wins, in states with small populations, don't look so formidable after tonight.

Now I know someone will say "but what about the pollsin California? (or New York, or New Jersey). To which I respond: what about the polls? They have not been spot on yet and they cannot predict momentum. Sleep tight Hillary fans. She could lose this thing.

by nerdoff on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:27:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (2.00 / 1)

I don't think anyone disputes that Obama won a big victory tonight.

Similarly, you cannot dispute that he won it on the strength of the African American vote, which will not carry him to victory in most of the other contests (although I think he may win 1-2 more on it).

by kristoph on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 02:22:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (1.00 / 3)

This argument is, in fact, completely racist. Have you heard nothing that many people, including blacks and whites, have been saying the last few weeks?

Black people are voting for Obama because they like his message. Period. So are whites, women, young, rich, poor, etc. Get over it. People are people, and insinuating that blacks vote for blacks because they are black IS racism. They voted 10% for Sharpton in 2004, and if you're theory about how black people will vote were correct, that would not have happened.

Nor would it have happened that Obama won among 95%+ white Democratic electorate in Iowa, and placed a very close second among the same type of electorate in New Hampshire, where he won among men.

But, hey, keep thinking there's inevitable coronation coming.

by Doug in Virginia on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:34:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (none / 0)

Please, PLEASE, don't call someone a racist without evidence.

by OrangeFur on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:59:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (none / 0)

Ummmm, can you READ!? I did not call anyone a racist. I said the ARGUMENT was racist. And it is.

This is why people are so repulsed by what the Clinton's are doing, my friend.

by Doug in Virginia on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 02:08:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (none / 0)

Again with the personal insults. What kind of people make racist arguments?

by OrangeFur on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 05:34:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (none / 0)

Sharpton was not really a serious candidate.

Whenever there is a serious candidate running, his/her ethnicity will play a role, naturally. A serious Hispanic candidate for any office will find a more receptive audience in a predominantly Hispanic neighborhood. Hillary has a lot of women support partly because women believe her programs benefit them more, but also partly because she is a woman like them. I think your bluster here is out of line, but also seriously wrong. There is nothing racist about the argument put forth, it is actually the truth. It makes complete sense: A Hispanic running as a serious candidate for Congress ina a pre-dominantly Hispanic district will usually have the upper hand because there is a "he is one of us" effect, and in addition the underlying feeling that since the candidate is Hispanic he/she would have a better grasp on the special needs, issues, gripes and deisres of the larger Hispanic community. Again, the same situation holds true for Hillary with women. She is "one of them," which is a powerful argument. Likewise, Obama was always going to carry a strong majority of the black vote. Just the facts. Nothing at all racist about this.

by georgep on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 04:56:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won New Hampshire by 2%. (none / 0)

By this estimate, the Hillary camp are actually spinning a loss in New Hampshire where she was expected to win by double digits.

Then Obama arrived.

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

by shergald on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 10:15:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Todd, I think this means that HRC will have to put BHO on the general election ticket and ask him to become the first African-American Vice President nominee. It seems like hes pulling votes that were going to need in November in order to win the g.e. I guess Obama was right when he said he would bring new 1st time voters into the election voting process.
What say you?

by nzubechukwu on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:22:40 PM EST

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

conventional wisdom still seems to be that their personal animus would preclude it but the longer this goes on, the more I don't see any other option for Clinton if she wins the nomination, especially if they want to unite the dem party. did you notice the clinton campaign today released some statement saying how great they think obama is? laying the groundwork, perhaps?

by Todd Beeton on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:30:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Not a chance. And it isn't about animosity, I just can't imagine such a crowded White House, honestly with Bill in the West Wing what kind of role would a VP look forward too?

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:48:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Obama would provide a different angle of attack in the GE. He might not be a great attack dog but he would provide cover for a Presidential candidate with his rhetoric. It would need some subtle shifts, but he is shrewd enough to pull it off.

ENOUGH!

by JDF on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 01:34:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

LOL.... After everything that Bill Clinton has said about Obama, that's not going to happen.

And what makes you so sure that Hillary will win the nomination?

A PROUD Hopium user!

by xodus1914 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:30:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Well, at least at the moment, the demographics certainly favor Clinton.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:11:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

BS!!!! n/t (none / 0)

by Doug in Virginia on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:37:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

I think Obama on the ballot would, at the very least, unify the party quickly and efficiently.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:36:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (2.00 / 1)

I wonder if he would accept after all the lies and distortions?

by upper left on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:41:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

I can't imagine it but for different reasons.

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:46:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

I think they are both shrewd politicians, and if they both think it's the best thing to do to win the g.e., then she'll offer and he'll accept.

by GingertheDem on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:56:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

The question of experience remains the same: experienced at what?

Hillary has not backed away from single payer health care to the point that she is against a basic liberal-socialist program, like Medicare and Medicaid. Instead, she has become a steadfast supporter of corporate medical care and the rape of medical care dollars. She doesn't tell us how she expects to pay for her program, especially the 20% the corporate medical industry is going to take off the top.

On foreign policy, no one doesn't see Hillary as a hawk on the level of John McCain, and in a debate with him, she will obviously argue that she is more hawkish. It's a losing strategy that would put McCain into the presidency. That is probably why Hillary can't even beat McCain in the polls in spite of his being a steadfast supporter of Bush. People only expect the same from her.

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

by shergald on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 10:19:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

"no one doesn't see Hillary as a hawk on the level of John McCain." pure comedy!

There are lots of rational reasons to oppose Hillary Clinton. Will you ever find one?

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 10:34:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

The best way to get to the truth is to stop responding to Steven M critiques of second-hand Hillary critiques by political observers. Somehow you believe that what I am saying is original and not what has been said all along about the Hillary campaign.

Hillary is a drumbeating hawk on Iran and distinctly a right wing proIsrael/antiPalestinian supporter way to the right of Bush. In short, foreign policy under Hillary is right out of the AIPAC play book. We don't need AIPAC running our foreign policy for another eight years because it is detrimental of America. How much longer do we have to be hated by most of the world?

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

by shergald on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 11:46:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

I'm very familiar with the people who have been "saying this all along." They are the fringe and will always be the fringe. It's just funny to see you take yourself so seriously.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:12:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Today's fringe is tomorrow's mainstream. Actually it is called the Democratic platform. The one you are hinting at is the one we have had for the past seven years. Who wants to stay in Iraq? Who doesn't want to talk to Iran. And who believes that Palestinians, who have lived for 40 years under military occupation, are terrorists?

You get one guess.

Click on Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land and learn the truth about the I/P conflict.

by shergald on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 08:52:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

dem turnout everywhere is HUGE

vote blue in 2008

by sepulvedaj3 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:23:49 PM EST

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

yeah but this is the first truly red state that's voted. granted it's not typical demographically, but it's stunning.

by Todd Beeton on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:27:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

It is also the first and only state with this large a percent African-American vote.

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:36:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Looks like Obama rc'vd more votes than McCain and Huck combined.

by NoahKunin on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:27:35 PM EST

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Question: I understand SC is an open primary, so how many of these voters were registered I or R?

Regardless, the tremendous turnout offers more empirical data suggesting the Democrats -- if they hold serve -- will get it done in November. Hard to argue that these same voters won't continue to vote for the eventual Democratic nominee.

by wolff109 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:34:31 PM EST

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

You have to stick with who you voted, that is, you can't vote in both Primaries.

by MNPundit on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

percent Republican, Independent (none / 0)

From CNN, 4% Republican, 23% Independent

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:40:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Breaking down the numbers more (none / 0)

Some quick analysis from this CNN results page:

530K voted in the Democratic Primary compared to 443K for the Republicans. So SC voters went 54/46 Democratic in a state that went 60/41 for Bush in 2004. More South Carolinians voted for Obama than for McCain and Huckabee combined. Distant runner up Hillary Clinton nearly had as many votes as GOP winner John McCain.

The GOP is the party of old geezers as well, as over a third of GOP voters was over 60 but only a quarter of Democratic voters were in the same age group. Things look good for November.

Leftmost Bit

by Luigi Montanez on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:35:00 PM EST

Re: Breaking down the numbers more (none / 0)

Oops, meant to say 58/41 for Bush in 2004, as 60/41 would be impossible. ;-)

Leftmost Bit

by Luigi Montanez on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:37:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Breaking down the numbers more (none / 0)

Leave it to the Repubs to make the impossible vote count possible ;-)

ENOUGH!

by JDF on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 01:35:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Repudiation of the Clintons and their lies (1.00 / 2)

Anybody who doesn't think the Clintons are using race needs to check out this post on my blog.

http://nobhillobserver.blogspot.com/2008 /01/bill-clinton-racist-strategy.html

The Clintons are not fit to be President.

by mwfolsom on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:35:11 PM EST

Re: Repudiation of the Clintons and their lies (none / 0)

keep that shit on your blog and dont pollute this one plesae

vote blue in 2008

by sepulvedaj3 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:38:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Repudiation of the Clintons and their lies (1.50 / 2)

this place has long been a swamp

by aiko on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:07:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Repudiation of the Clintons and their lies (none / 0)

Let's not get carried away, here.

Whatever Bill & Hillary do or have done with respect to the politics of race -- and I am no fan -- is very mild and insignificant in comparison to traditional modern politics. Willie Horton: remember that? Or how about the "call me" TV ad in Tennessee against Harold Ford?

Trying to minimize the impact of Obama's victory is within bounds for the Clintons. References to race is hardly the use of wedge-style racism.

You're way overboard to declare Jihad against them.

by wolff109 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:45:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Repudiation of the Clintons and their lies (none / 0)

The Clintons are NOT racist, stop saying that crap! The Clintons have done more for the AA community than any other president. Obama won SC because he carried the AA vote. Stating that fact doesn't make someone a racist.

by Scope441 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:18:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

please explain (none / 0)

what exactly did the clintons do for blacks? this is one of the great myths of recent political history.

by highgrade on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:27:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Repudiation of the Clintons and their lies (none / 0)

Can you please cut this out?

Obama just won & you don't waste anytime in calling the Clinton family Racist?

What a moron !

And you call yourself a democrat?

by labanman on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:06:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

Obama won South Carolina, but he is trying to make race an issue in his quest for the White House.
He will do anything to win.
He plays dirty, and will not win.
New York will laugh at him, and people will get sick of him.
Super Tuesday will break him, but he will try to lie his way to some wins.
See through him, and vote for another candidate.
I am,

George Vreeland Hill

GEORGE VREELAND HILL

by Vreeland on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:37:37 PM EST

How? (none / 0)

How is Obama "trying to make race and issue?" His victory speech was explicitly anti-racial identity politics. But hey...Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice so I'm sure it's all just those black folks sticking together. Sigh.

by elrod on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:03:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Question (none / 0)

What was the percent of total vote that was AA vs white?
I see a lot about who got most of it but not percent of total vote.

by del on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:43:49 PM EST

Obama won 49 of the non-black vote under 60 (none / 0)

Obama crushed among the 60+ white voters with 16 percent. Obama won white men against Hillary by 1 point, Edwards was the big winner among white men taking 40% of the total.

I am fairly sure Clinton won among white women as a whole but not sure of the numbers.

by MNPundit on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:11:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama won 49 of the non-black vote under 60 (none / 0)

That isn't what I meant, BUT I found my answer,

55% AA vote
43% white
1% Hispanic (I thin they are 3.5% of total population)
1% other

I was curious if the percent of AA went up this year or not. It looks like it went up a little but not a lot.

by del on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:42:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

vp tickets (none / 0)

the thinking in making hillary or obama veep is quite clear, healing and unity. obama with hillary will help heal any wounds the racial politics of the last few weeks have created. for obama it would be to bring women over, but she would never accept the vp position. more likely he would choose a female governor or senator, an elder stateswoman most likely. janet napalitino, blanche lincoln, patty muray, (neither the sens nor gov from michigan because of the economic woes) or mikulski. hillary meanwhile only has deval patrick to bring in to help heal racial wounds, and he hasn't had the best first term so far, (plus they're from the same region, and do we really want another mass liberal on a prez ticket?)

Mccain/Palin '08: Grandpa's losin' it.

by Doug Tuttle on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:47:19 PM EST

Re: 500,000 People Voted In The SC Democratic Prim (none / 0)

This is great news, that people are able to vote without fear and with enthusiasm. I am encouraged that the voting process is becoming something we can believe in.

by Joannems on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:59:42 PM EST

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

It seems the media is now going with the story line that blacks were the key to Obama's win in SC.

by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:01:40 PM EST

by del on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:11:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Weren't they? What was the percent of AA vote? They are no higher that 20% in any remaining state.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

That's not true at all.

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:12:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:15:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What's not true? It is certainly true that African American voters were to key to Obama's victory. Without them he would have come in 3rd.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

AA voters will be more than 20% of the electorate in several remaining states.

by Steve M on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:21:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by del on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:44:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What states are you talking about?

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 01:02:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

AA voters were just 8 percent of the turnout in the California Democratic primary four years ago. They were 15 percent in Missouri, 20 percent in New York, 23 percent in Tennessee and 47 percent in Georgia -- all states that are among those that will vote 10 days after South Carolina

by elrod on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:07:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Without the large African American population and Democratic vote South Carolina would not be South Carolina. Without the sizable black population in the state, the politics in South Carolina would be decidedly different (note that only 2% of GOP voters last week were black).

The key is this: Bill Clinton was supposed to have been the first black President, and he and his wife carried a lot of support from the black community through early December. But then Hillary lost the black community's support seemingly overnight. Why did Hillary suddenly hemorrage black support? That's the question Hillary supporters should be asking themselves.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

Because Obama won in Iowa. That's what the poll numbers show. Hillary didn't lead a single SC poll after Iowa.

by Steve M on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:18:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

by Scope441 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:20:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Because the Obama camp spins everything that the clintons say into a racial slur. How is using the term fairy tale racist? how is saying jesse jackson won sc racist? obama camp wasn't winning the AA vote before IA and knew it needed to or it didn't have a chance. funny how this was the exact moment race became an issue. hillary still had the AA vote so she didnt' need to make it an issue. so obama camp put jesse jackson jr. on the air saying things like clinton didn't cry for katrina victims to fire up the AA community. they then have spun everything clinton says into a racial slap. it worked, they have fired up the AA community and are starting to create a racial divide among dems. sad because clinton really did wonderful things for the AA community. we all know the clintons are not racist.

Keep on spinnin' on.....keepin' on spinnin' n/t (none / 0)

by Doug in Virginia on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:42:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

percent AA in N.H. & Iowa (none / 0)

Well, apparently:

N.H. had 1% AA vote and everyone got 0%.

Iowa had 4% AA and Obama got 72% Clinton got 16%

by del on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 12:51:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

by del on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:24:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry I meant of the super Tuesday contests. There are a few states with higher percent AA population but now higher percent of Dem vote.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:14:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually they are in some of the southern states.

The other southern states? (none / 0)

What are the demographics there. I find it hard to believe that there is only a 20% black voting population in Mississippi for example.

by MNPundit on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:14:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The other southern states? (none / 0)

You are correct they probably are. I amended my statement above, I meant super Tuesday contests and didn't specify that i my original post.

by del on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:50:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

Well, I think they're 30% here in Ga but most states, especially out west, don't have that high of a percentage. AL is 25% which is probably why Obama isn't polling well there. I think it's 7% in CA. So, yeah there are a bunch of states where the demographics are not favorable to Obama.

by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:28:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by rapcetera on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:16:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually they are not. They are saying it was a broad based victory...

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

That's what the Obama campaign is saying not what the headlines are saying.

MSNBC: Strong Black vote boosts Obama is one headline.

by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:29:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by India on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:52:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You know, Hillary right now is giving me hope. She's on C-Span, taking questions at the end of her speech. Amazing.

hehe...wrong!! (none / 0)

of course he was powered by the black vote, but the margin of victory was made great because he got a healthy chunk of the white vote too. He won 49% of all the white vote below the age of 30. sorry but it was a broad based win

by rapcetera on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:16:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hehe...wrong!! (none / 0)

He didn't even win the majority of the white vote below thirty? That's what you are telling me?

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 07:29:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hehe...wrong!! (none / 0)

you can't cherry pick an age group. he won only 24% of the white vote and 81% of the AA vote. its clear, without the AA support he wouldn't have won SC.

now i think it is great that he had such a great victory, very well deserved. but i am not sure that he can go on to win the primary with numbers like this.

by Scope441 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 10:58:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hehe...wrong!! (none / 0)

You are repeating the dubious logic of the 'Clinton Southern Strategy.' Careful, these posts are archived for a long time.

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 05:34:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22859978/

Landslide margins among black voters powered Barack Obama to his win Saturday in South Carolina's Democratic presidential primary, allowing him to overcome the telling edge Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Edwards had among whites.

by kristoph on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:31:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They also see that Caroline Kennedy (none / 0)

has endorsed Barack Obama with an editorial titled "A President Like My Father"

That is a powerful endorsement which makes people pause.

Also, the MSM are saying that Obama got almost as many white males and Clinton so they are saying is it more of a multi-racial coalition.

by puma on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:44:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by bentlife on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:36:29 PM EST

Here's the simple fact of the South Carolina numbers. Obama can't get elected President of the US. You can't win a primary with 80% of the black vote and 25% of the white vote and expect that that is going to translate into a winning national election.

When all is said and done Democrats don't need a "change agent" with a nebulous message. We need a candidate who can get elected. I'm not so sure that Clinton is electable but the SC numbers clearly demonstrate that Obama is not.

Bentlife

by rfahey22 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:43:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And Iowa enters into your calculations ... how? For all the people that point to Obama's win as "proof" that he can't win in the general, I would like this spelled out, because it seems like a glaring and agenda-driven omission.

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 01:01:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It is. You may have noticed the new 'Clinton Southern Strategy' almost universally adopted among Hillary supporters:

Clinton campaign strategists denied any intentional effort to stir the racial debate. But they said they believe the fallout has had the effect of branding Obama as "the black candidate," a tag that could hurt him outside the South.

AP Obama wins in South Carolina 26 Jan 08

But they didn't intend to do it, it was all Obama's doing, you see. In spite of the carefully crafted narrative emerging from Bill and their surrogates, in the wake of Hillary's now infamous MLK/LBJ remark. It's not racism, though, it's industrial-strength cynicism and that marvellous will to win you hear so much about. And a pretty brilliant kill of a credible opponent.

by Scope441 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 01:08:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Stop calling the clintons racist, its only dividing the party. How is the MLK/LBJ comment racist? Its true, one couldn't happen without the other. if MLK didn't inspire/dream, the CRA woudln't have been thought up. If LBJ wasn't in office and a republican was, then CRA never would have gone into law and remained a dream. You need both, the dreamer and the law maker working together to pass such things. how is fairy tale racist? how is jesse jackson winning sc racist? explain to me how jesse jackson jr. comments about hillary not crying for katrina victims was not painting her as a racist? who talks about this all the time in the media? the obama camp. they needed to win over the black vote because before this, the AA vote was still with clinton and they needed it. perfect way to energize the AA community to vote for obama is to call clinton racist. worked it seems...

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 02:05:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hmm... Let's see, what part of it's not racist is hard to understand?

by OrangeFur on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:05:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Race-baiting is hardly a lesser accusation than racism.

Enough with that tired MLK/LBJ thing. John Lewis is fine with it. He should know something about the subject.

by Shaun Appleby on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:42:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't see it as 'race-baiting,' although that is certainly the framing which some of the media has settled on. I don't believe the Clintons are racist in the least, in fact not at all. What they are is immensely cunning and ruthlessly cynical. Obama's significant margin in South Carolina reinforces the narrative they have constructed for his candidacy in the last few weeks, that's the beauty of it from their point of view. It's obvious they were willing to concede South Carolina to gain this advantage heading in to the Super Tuesday states.

The only thing which has the potential to thwart this political ploy is if their means and motives become widely understood in the electorate, which is highly unlikely given the convenient smokescreen of 'he said/she said' now surrounding these events. It is no wonder that Hillary supporters are attempting to maintain this cover, at the same time, you will notice, they are celebrating the narrative that Obama's chances are now somehow tied to his support among the black electorate. There was nothing like this being discussed during the lengthy campaign in Iowa. It is new, and presents a significant, one might assume fatal, challenge to Senator Obama's campaign.

by cilerder86 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:43:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah, because black votes don't count as much as white votes?! Really, Obama broke through the bullshit when he won lily-white Iowa. Hacktacular: the SC numbers say that Obama is not electable. Dumbest comment of the night.

Jim Oberweis