Obama's SC victory must not be spun as Clintons wish [UPDATED]
By gamecock Posted in Archived — Comments (49) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I predicted last summer, after seeing Barack Obama give a long speech, and when he trailed Hillary Clinton by over 20 points in the South Carolina polls, that he would win my native Palmetto State's primary.
He has now done so.
Jesse Jackson won the SC caucuses in 1984 and 1988 after all. [As a side note, yours truly, pre-2000 conservative epiphany, was a delegate for Jackson in those caucuses. Gamecock has traveled a long road to the right!] I was the only white delegate for Jackson from my precinct in Spartanburg County in 1984, and one of less than ten in the whole county in 1984 and 1988. Moreover, Jackson's "rainbow" coalition of delegates at the state convention was extremely lacking in non-white hues in both years.
Not so for Obama, the winner of the near all white Iowa caucuses. It will be Hillary's coalition that is mostly monochrome this year.
So I have to strongly disagree with the spin I am watching on the MSM, that Obama's "mere" 25% of the white vote in today's SC primary makes him a "black" candidate only now, as opposed to being a candidate that happened to be Black yesterday.
An even split of the white vote would give a candidate 33%. By my math, twenty-five percent is only seven percent less, the margin of error in some polls!
I know that the Clinton Machine's plan was to make the spin that Barack only appeals to Blacks, coming out of SC, but with Obama getting 1 of 4, and Hillary and SC native John Edwards getting only 1 and 1/2 of 4 whites, I would suggest that the schizophrenic Clinton strategy did not produce the numbers they thought necessary to justify such a spin.
Obama has at least quadrupled the portion of the white vote Jackson received in the 80s, and garnered at least ten-fold more votes than Al Sharpton did in his efforts in SC.
The Clintons, as predicted by Dick Morris, and documented by my Will voluntary servitude of Black Dems survive public humiliation at Hillary’s hands? and The Audacity of Hope-dashing Democratic Party racism raged a virtual race "war" against the fellow Democrat as opposed to the typical race "cards" regularly dealt via the MSM against Republicans.
At first they were going to cede the state with virtually no effort by the candidate. Then they decided that they could best metamorphasize the non-racial Barack into, as one liberal pundit described, a "pet negro" that couldn't win in the general, by having Bill Clinton campaign 24/7 and have Hillary speak twice, so as to be seen as trying hard to win, only to lose due to racist whites and blacks. Not only painting SC democrats as racist, but inferring that Democrats and Americans generally are racists.
Of course they always call us in the GOP racists, with no proof. But what the Clintons' obsessive ambition brought into the open was evidence of the rabid racism that rules in the Democratic Party, a racism that I have bemoaned for 10 years, and which led me to the GOP.
Great damage has been done to the Democratic Party, and we should all (if religious) get on our knees and thank God for it. The damage is so great, because Blacks have seen the Clinton's play the game many of their own Black leaders regularly have played with the Clinton's against Republican whites.
That's why SC's James Clyburn, the US House Majority Leader, nearly endorsed Obama.
The message was clear.
All the race talk has obscured some other major facts:
1 - SC blacks didn't turn their support to Obama until AFTER they were shown he could win white votes in Iowa.
2 - Obama, unlike Jackson, has a chance to win, and provides many reasons other than melanin and genitalia to back him over Hillary.
3 - Bill Clinton has been on fire in SC with substantive arguments for Hillary 24/7, yet Obama still got 25% of the white vote.
Local TV and talk radio (as well as national talk radio) has been filled with reports of blacks that are alienated from the Clinton Dem Party. Many say they would stay home if Obama is destroyed, but many also say they would consider the GOP in the Fall. [Many, but not all, couple that possibility with a McCain or a Huckabee being on the GOP ticket.]
Obama has not responded well to the attacks, but
the fact is that the Dems are damaged more than Obama. The GOP needs to take heed of the events in Dixie today.
They must overtly go after Black voters. They should highlight Obama's "community organizing" activities (a staple from the democratic party anger/grievance ginning up playbook) as a young lawyer, a subject too taboo to speak of in public that Bob Johnson, in "Uncle Bill" (as dubbed by Rush Limbaugh to highlight the absurd Dem lable of "Uncle Tom" that liberals ascribe to black conservatives) mode, inadvertently mentioned when called on for an oblique reference to Obama's admitted youthful drug use.
But mostly, they need to highlight and demand scrutiny of states' motor-votor rolls and the voter ID issue. If the Democrats are writing off Blacks, their only chance to win in November is with dead or illegal voters.
That the GOP has not made a stink over this since Hillary's NY-Spitzer drivers' licenses gaffe, is an example of why we aren't in control of Congress.
Dems can't win majorities when only legal citizens vote. Why else do they cry racism against laws that require a voter to provide a photo ID?
It's obvious.
And post-SC, the Donkeys are even more dependent on voters that dare not be photographed. The GOP must not let the Dems make jack asses of them by being outlawyered. We should be about purging motor-voter rolls of illegals, not to mention, the dead, NOW.
[UPDATE]
Attempted Ghettoization: Now that Bill Clinton has explicitly belittled Obama's South Carolina victory by comparing it to Jesse Jackson's, how does Obama's share of the white vote compare with Jackson's in 1988? Obama got about a quarter of the white vote, according to exit polls. ... Was there even an exit poll of the 1988 caucuses? I can't find one. ... Update: Alert emailer L finds the following in a Christian Science Monitor story from March 17, 1988:
Although Jackson's white support was significantly higher in South Carolina than in 1984 - it is estimated this year at between 5 and 10 percent of the voters - he has not made much headway with populist, blue-collar whites ... [E.A.]
25% vs. 5-10%. It looks as if Bill Clinton's comparison will not work to his wife's advantage. ...
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
The HinzSight Report
The Minority Report
Huck is history in the Race 4 2008
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
time it's for an indisputably worthy cause!
Great job, GC!
SC may have been a nail in HRC's coffin like it was for McCain in 2000.
Sure, McCain had a chance to bounce back just as HRC does this year.
But it's hard to bounce back when you go from being 20 points ahead in the polls to a 28-point beatdown.
The Clintons will, sniff-sniff, beat him in (meaningless) Florida. That'll learn him.
Romney 2008
Unless Obama can get more of the vote than Hillary he is not demonstrating crossover appeal. He especially needs to do that with voters that aren't Democrats. Who knows what percentage of Hill's and Edwards votes are voters that wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances ? (My own intuition is Edwards votes are voters that won't be coming out to the general if Hill, or Obama get it)
The democrats are in the process of picking who they offend in this election I don't think its going to be pretty.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
John. I guarantee you that the Clintons thought thye needed to hold Obama to less than 15% of the white vote to justify the spin.
prespective
Don't be spun J. That's what they want. This was huge. You are looking too much at race here.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
...winning is good? I want Clinton to destroy Obama in the primary and in the process, destroy the Democrat party.
You sound like Kos cheering on Obama.
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
Obama, and the Dem Party stays intact. A real serious challenge and Obama taking the Southern states, FORCES Hillary to unleash the "politics of personal destruction," of which, the Clintons are supreme.
This could be delicious.
paint the state as racist. I know that it is not, and now maybe a few clueless yankees know it. It weakens the Clintons, who I would still rather face and expect to face in Nov. I am proud of the 25% of whites that went for Obama. That is 4 times Jackson's vote!! That is good for America.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
...and I don't think left-wing senators getting closer to the White House is good for American either.
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
I'm glad that the likely one that we will face got damaged tonight and my state showed itself proud.
I don't care to have my joy this evening sullied further, so go away from me for 24 hours.
luv ya
smile
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
What's best for America is all that matters.
I want the general to be between our best candidate and their best candidate.
"If all men were just, there would be no need of valor."
- Agesilaus
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
elected delegates, then let the dems watch in horror as HRC uses her unelected "super-delegates" to steal the win from B.O.
Let's see if the Clinton's can coax the black vote out in November after doing to one of them what Gore tried to do to Bush in 2000 (steal a win by using an army of technicalities and lawyers).
Romney 2008
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
But more and more of the Dem establishment seems to be warmimg up to Obama, so Hillary is less of a lock for those super-delegates. Hillary has been laying the groundwork since she ran for Senate - campaigning for and donating money to campaign after campaign of some other Dem whose favors she would need later. But Bill seems to be doing her no favors, and Obama has stayed above the fray, so Hillary's inevitability took a huge hit yesterday on top of earlier damage.
As noted in some other thread, The Clinton's #1 concern is is always what's best for the Clinton's. After getting pummeled yesterday, Hillary and Bill's instincts are that Obama must be destroyed since this will be her only chance to get her rightful place on Penn Ave. Best scenario for us is that her attack machine goes all out and destroys Obama is as bloody a manner as possible, leaving her wondering why black voters abandoned her come November.
It would be an interesting scenario but unlikely. If that were to happen, it would be suicide for the Democratic party. Just look around at the Obama supporters you see, they are some of the younger, more passionate voters in the Democratic primaries. To spit in the face of them would be a disaster for the party and hurt them not only in 2008, but years of future elections.
The party has made some bonehead moves over the years, but I can't fathom they'd make one of such epic proportions.
I wonder if candidates who had Clinton actively campaign for them won or lost for the most part. Somebody must have researched this.
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
This is one GLORIOUS night for our republic! A stunning, massive Clinton defeat!
I really didn't see this reaction on my part coming. But to see so many of MY PEOPLE, and yes, even my former Dems in SC, reject the Clinton race game and for the nation to see all those whites vote for a black man against Bill, who was here all week and actually gave some good speeches and is liked (but Hillary ain't him!)and Hill and John, and all the spin, just made me so satisfied. I have known for 20 years and more that SC had shed its racism, esp the GOP, and to see more vestiges in the dem party shed too, just makes me think of my late Dad and Mom that coached the first integrated little league and cub scouts in Spartanburg.
Thank you Jesus.
Some things are bigger than politics.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
It seems some on the left have decided to get off the Clinton plantation...it's a good day in America...:)
Nice post.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
http://www.slate.com/id/2182569/#jacksoncomp
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
The last thing we need in this country is a weak woman like Hill (who never accomplished anything without her man) as president, and a weak (morally) man like Slick as first laddy...
I have the audacity to hope that Republicans could even enlist Obama to help blacks (and all Americans) reclaim the American dream.
Details in my blog entry.
Don't give weight to any state that holds artificial "caucuses" over true primaries. As such, ignore the Iowa results for both parties, when imparting meaning to the general election.
There is no harangue when you are trying to vote. There is no peer pressure to make the socially expected vote.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
The final step in nomination is the convention, which is far more like a caucus than a primary.
I don't see why it's 'artificial.' Choosing our nominee is a process distinct from engaging in the election.
In our case its much less so because we don't have the double voting. People vote after being harassed campaigned and thats that.
IIRC the democrat like our convention has the delegates bound for the first vote. They have no choice, so unless it goes to a second vote it doesn't matter. The only ones at issue are the super delegates.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
But being in favor of replacing all primaries with caucuses, I just don't see why the word 'artificial' applies to party members gathering together and selecting delegates to their state convention.
Its not like this process occurs in nature.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Only 29% of S. Carolina is Black. Obama won 55% of the Democrat vote.
Folks would like to spin the exit polls, but the facts of the actual vote are there: even if every Black person (and they are all Democrats) in the state voted for Obama (which is ridiculous), Obama took almost 37% of the non-Black vote!
When I lived in Chicago only the Democrat primaries mattered, so I voted Democrat in the primaries. I cast a primary vote for Jesse, just to mess with the National Party. Having some experience of the man, let's just say my opinions are not as favorable as my vote might indicate.
Obama is not Jesse! But the Clintons (and some Republicans) would like to say so. When Hillary first mentioned MLK and LBJ in the same sentence, I knew she was setting a trap. Ever since, the talking heads are obsessed with race. If Obama sticks with his original messages, he can beat Hillary.
Yes, the GOP needs more outreach to the Black community ... we made some inroads under Bush II. And race should never be a GOP issue.
Voter ID is a great point ... "motor-voter" was a really bad idea for the country and a great idea for the Democrats. But those [purge-the-rolls] actions need to be taken NOW, not in October.
"Vote Early, Vote Often" is a great Chicago slogan!
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Of the SC voters are represented in the Dem Primary. If the vote represented the (say) 60% who are not GOP or -leaning Indies, then BO's vote represents only about 7% of the non-black vote (if he got the usual 90% black-race vote.) Much too complicated for this type of analysis.
Anyway, I love when, as my daddy said: "Let's you and him fight."
Go ahead, make your jokes, Mr. Jokey... Joke-maker. But let me hit you with some knowledge. Quit now.
-White Goodman
Well said, and recommended Gamecock.
I agree that SC has repudiated the racism stereotype, as did my state of "lily-white" Iowa. Your argument that an elitist racism exists in the Democratic party was bolstered by none other than Bill Clinton himself. He saw the same thing you described and tried to exploit it with his recent tactics.
But the rank-and-file voters in SC (and IA) didn't buy it. Clinton's gambit wasn't just a sideshow to attract one constituency. He had to know his tactics would be blared across the media and become THE story of the SC race. He chose to do it anyway. Why? Because he thought racism was widespread enough in SC that it was a winning strategy? Well, SC proved him wrong in a big way.
I celebrated too after Iowa, and share your pride in SC. Enjoy it!
God bless you man and thanks
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
Nah as expected Obama did very well with black voters (thats why I do not like him being Dem nominee I see him helping a Landrieu out in LA etc; more blacks would come out of the wood work) but whites voted hardly for him
It is interesting to me that it seems if you were a Dean supporter you'd be in Obama camp now (I notice in NYC all the elite liberals are flocking to Obama)
Some interesting numbers from this show that the Clinton spin is far off base.
- Obama won in Greenville County by 22%. Greenville is upper class, educated county that is 78% white.
- Obama won amongst not only poor voters, but those with incomes over $200,000.
- Obama won with highly educated people.
- Edwards won the white male vote, while Clinton and Obama essentially tied.
- Clinton won big in white females, while also slightly carrying senior citizens. Those are the only two areas she won in.
It's a unique makeup to say the least. The upcoming states don't have a huge white male voting demographic either.
I think the biggest factor coming up will be John Edwards and where his supporters will go if he pulls out (or his supporters realize it's a worthless cause and put their vote toward someone else). Will those white males go toward Clinton or Obama? Edwards message matches Obama's a little more and could benefit him considering how high Clinton's negatives are. I think Edwards is the x-factor right now and if he pulls out, gives Obama his support, Clinton is done.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
that the white vote in SC was split 3 ways and OBAMA was getting nearly 1 out of 3 white votes.