Top South Carolina Story: Hillary And Obama In Contest For The Black Vote
Here's today's key story out of the South Carolina local press: The State has a story on the competition between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for African-American voters in the key Southern primary. The paper finds that to a certain extent black voters, including black women, genuinely like both candidates — but that this only becomes a new obstacle for Obama to overcome.
"At some point, the gloves have to come off, and he'll have to stop being so nice," said Danielle Vinson, a political science professor at Winthrop University. "He's given us reasons to vote for him. He hasn't given us a reason not to vote for her."
Comments (25)
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 10:49 AM:So, I guess the fact that Bill Clinton used the word "boy" in Southern slang to describe Obama is O.K. for those African-Americans?
RaymondA wrote on November 14, 2007 10:54 AM:The poll out today showing Hillary ahead in SC by 47-33 has an interesting internal number and a significant caveat. The internal number is that Obama now leads by a "5-4" ratio over Hillary among likely black voters. The caveat is that the pollsters disclosed that their methodology for determining likely voters may well undercount African American voters, because it is based on looking at patterns in elections where no African American candidate was on the ballot.
One other tricky thing about forecasting the SC vote: A lot of blacks who like Obama fear that Obama cannot win because too many whites will not be willing to vote for a black man for President. If Obama can win Iowa and then get all the attention that the victory will earn him, that might (a) turn around those SC blacks who fear whites won't vote for him, and (b) infuse black voters in SC with an enormous amount of pride.
So, oddly a win by Obama in lily white Iowa could be what he needs to seal the deal with blacks in South Carolina.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 11:03 AM:I agree -- if Obama wins in lily white Iowa, he will get at least 90% of the African-American vote in South Carolina -- why is he in California instead?!
JakeD
your constant negative comments about Obama are very annoying. You lack creditibility as your responses make you appear as though you beleive that political partisanship trumps reasoned discussion.
Are you kidding me, savvy? I am outraged by the fact that Bill Clinton used the word "boy" to describe Obama -- what exactly have I said that's negative -- I'm shocked more people aren't outraged.
Keith wrote on November 14, 2007 11:14 AM:Because Californians vote too.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 11:17 AM:Keith:
Of course we vote -- but did you miss the poll result above: IA-Pres (D) Nov 13 NYT/CBS Clinton 25%, Edwards 23%, Obama 22% -- of Obama could win in Iowa, and keep the momentum going, by the time California comes around, he can count on a landslide.
Michael wrote on November 14, 2007 11:18 AM:If we stop engaging jake d., he will go away.
savvy wrote on November 14, 2007 11:26 AM:Michael I have been hoping that for several days...he just appears to get worse and post more frequently with annoying commentary. I thought this site had something to keep folks from making comments as frequently as he does. The vast majority of the posts do not contribute to the discussion and often times folks get side tracked on something completely off focus of the thread topic due to numerous inane queries and false and misleading statements. Folks often feel compelled to correct the numerous erroneous posts and that just makes JakeD flame the thread with more insipid posts.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 11:26 AM:If TPM stops posting threads, then I will go away.
Jeremy wrote on November 14, 2007 11:27 AM:Jack D, Obama is not Bill Clinton's "boy", but I don't think that's what Bill meant to imply. He used it as a general term for all of the candidates. I think it was sort of belittling and rude but I don't know that he intended the racial connotations. The former president just needs to choose his words more carefully though.
As far as closing the gap in SC, I think that Obama is very well positioned. If Obama comes out of Iowa and NH strong, SC voters will find themselves with the opportunity to catapult a candidate that truly understands the "fierce urgency of now". I trust that they will seize that opportunity.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 11:31 AM:That's O.K., savvy, if you don't want to back up your claim with actual proof that I've said anything negative about Obama, you don't have to.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 11:34 AM:Jeremy:
What part of "Bill Clinton was using Southern slang" do you think was NOT racial? At first, I thought he was just playing the gender card, too -- but Hillary's campaign is saying that's not the case.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 11:36 AM:Hopefully you don't think that is "off-topic" (you may have to define "spam" for me) here as well.
Jeremy wrote on November 14, 2007 11:49 AM:At least in this thread it relates to perceptions among black voters. In the other thread, it had nothing to do with anything. He called all of the candidates "boys", not just Obama. I just don't think that Clinton intended it racially. You seem to disagree. If enough people see it your way then at least that shows Clinton should choose his words more carefully, I guess.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 11:52 AM:In the other thread, it related to perceptions among all voters (I'm not African-American BTW). Thank you for finally answering the question though -- see you later.
NCSteve wrote on November 14, 2007 11:59 AM:And, once again, Jake D. succesfully hijacks a thread as commenters fall for standard troll tactics and respond to questions that have absolutely nothing to do with the post.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 12:05 PM:For the record, at least Jeremy agrees this thread relates to perceptions among black voters -- but, as always, YMMV -- who knows, maybe you think this thread is about the moon being made of cheese.
DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!
cb wrote on November 14, 2007 2:00 PM:I can't believe I'm feeding a troll- BUT
the reason why Obama is in Mt. View is to release his very progressive and innovative plan regarding technology, net neutrality, and the like. Open Left actually has a positive review of it - I couldn't believe it.
For those who have just tuned in Jake D. is a right wingnut troll who specializes in highjacking threads by trying to create distracting controversy. If we are discussing which of our candidates is best and why, he will try to do something like start a debate on abortion.
All corrections of his logical errors are ignored and his constant attempts are to start quarrels among us and get us to vote for anybody other than the eventual Democratic candidate.
This is about the lowest I've seen him go: with the blatant racism of the currently crop of Rethug candidates he thinks he can get a phony controversy started here.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 2:59 PM:"Phony" controversy? What if a GOP candidate had called Obama "boy"?
DonnaG wrote on November 14, 2007 3:29 PM:I read the local press article. Obama does indeed impressively achieve the groundwork of community organizing. His campaign has a presence in all 46 of the SC counties and, so far, an army of 11,000 volunteers in that state. Also, his lead among black voters is now 37.3% to Hillary's 23.6% [which makes me wonder why EC didn't report the news with a headline like: "Obama Surpasses Clinton Among SC Blacks"].
Jane wrote on November 14, 2007 3:31 PM:We would know based on past actions precisely what was meant. This is also true for Democrats.
Bill Clinton has a record of not being racist.
Name one Rethug who has such a record.
Jake D wrote on November 14, 2007 3:40 PM:Colin Powell.
