home

South Carolina

Speaking for me only

When Barack Obama wins South Carolina tonight, the question of race is going to be discussed by the Media ad nauseum. Credit to Craig Crawford on MSNBC who this morning said, what did the Clintons do to "inject race" in this campaign? Can anyone point to ANYTHING they said that "injected race?" The Media "injected race." As Crawford noted, it was the Media that decided to irresponsibly discuss the "Bradley Effect" to explain its grievous coverage of New Hampshire. So it really was Andrew Kohut of Pew Research who "injected race" in this campaign.

But let's be honest, no one has to "inject race" in our country. And it is silly to act shocked that race is an issue in politics.

More . . .

For myself, I am confident and think it is proven that Barack Obama can win non-African American votes, at least outside of the Deep South. Since Democrats never win in the Deep South anyway, it is not an issue in my opinion for Obama's electability.

That said, while South Carolina will be a big win for Obama tonight, its Democratic primary demographics are very different than the rest of the country and I suspect it will have little impact on the primaries to come. But it will be great to get past this South Carolina primary, which has not been good for the campaign.

Update [2008-1-26 9:28:10 by Big Tent Democrat]:

The Media is truly unbelievable in its hatred of the Clintons. Craig Crawford calls them out wonderfully this morning on MSNBC. And Joe Scarborough says something that is remarkable - that Barack Obama's drop with white voters is due to "Clinton race baiting." But this simply ignores the fact that Obama made a much more explicit appeal to African Americans for months prior to that, indeed in response to the bogus "is he black enough concerns. Moreover, the polling simply does not bear out Scarborough's analysis. Consider Obama's percentage of the white vote in South Carolina as polled by Mason Dixon.

In a December 3-6 poll, Obama got 10% of the white vote (37% of the A-A vote.)

In a January 14-16 poll, Obama got 20% of the white vote (56% of the A-A vote.)

In a January 22-23 poll, Obama got 10% of the white vote (59% of the A-A vote.)

Obama has NEVER gotten the white vote in South Carolina. Never. And indeed, what has happened is that Obama has completely solidified the African American vote.

Of course that is one poll. In the Survey USA poll, Obama's white support has remained steady at 21% for the past 10 days.

In the Zogby poll, Obama's white support has GONE UP 1 point this week, from 18% to 19%.

In the Rassmussen poll, Obama's white support has remained EXACTLY the same this week, at 21%.

The fact is the demographics of support for the candidates has remained VIRTUALLY unchanged this entire month! If the race card was played THIS week, then it failed miserably. Nothing has changed in this race at all.

These figures are important as the Media is sure to try an inject the racebaiting narrative tonight. Keep these figures in mind.

< Rules Are Rules | South Carolina Whites Are Not Moving Away From Obama >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Craig Crawford (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:09:02 AM EST
    doing a great job on MSNBC.

    Craig Crawford (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by jessied44 on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:17:44 AM EST
    Craig might not be the most well known of the pundits, but he is regularly the voice of sanity amid the chattering classes.  He has this bad habit of poking holes in sloppy thinking and demagoguery.

    I know I am new here (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by Kathy on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:30:59 AM EST
    But I really don't like this "deep south" stuff.  It was the predominantly northern media who stirred up this race thing, the same way they did after Katrina when we were all screaming, "it's not about race!  It's about poverty!".  Going by your lead paragraph (which I totally agree with), you seem to put forward this thesis yourself: the media caused this problem.

    We southerners feared for a long time that after Iowa, when Obama started to get true scrutiny and his train started to slow, we would get the blame for being racist for not voting for him, when the fact is, a lot of whites and blacks and latinos and others are changing their minds because they feel that Obama cannot take the heat--or they think Hillary or John Edwards is the better/more viable candidate.  According to polls, this is happening around the country, not just in the south.  Are we all racist or are we just informed voters?  Or are we so sick of race being highlighted constantly in the media that it's turned us off, the way some say Bill Clinton being in the media so much has turned some dems off?  And what about the majority of blacks going for Obama?  Are they racist as well?  It's a circular argument, but at the center of this circle is the media, which, again, is controlled predominantly by the North (Ted Turner would have never let CNN pull this crap, I must say)

    The fact is that Obama went into SC with a strong showing among whites.  What has happened in the last few weeks to change this?  The media, the media, the media-white and black.  So, I think that, again (and most respectfully), referring to your opening paragraph, the point is that the media made this awful mess.

    (and fyi, again I want to say how much I respect your opinion and enjoy your posts, and hope that you read this with that in mind; and ps: SC not really deep south)

    Thoughtful, thank you, but considering the update (none / 0) (#33)
    by Cream City on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:41:09 AM EST
    above now, showing what white support was and is for Obama, did he really have a "strong showing" from white voters in SC a few weeks ago, as you say?  

    Parent
    Cream (none / 0) (#38)
    by Kathy on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 12:16:28 PM EST
    It seems to me from my reading of the polls that his pull for white voters pre the media "race war" has been pretty consistent across the board nationally--around 33%.  

    I don't quite trust polls, though--and not because of NH.

    Parent

    bordering on mental illness. (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by CathyinLa on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:01:01 AM EST
    Go Craig Crawford!

    Yes, he said the media and their determination to be as unfair as possible to the Clintons is bordering on mental illness.

    And it is.

    One thing to consider as well about the white vote is that Iowa had the benefit of a long campaign of retail politics, SC did not.  The media expects this momentum thing to play out despite that on both sides, traditional momentum expectations isn't panning out on either side.

    The idea is plainly insane that if you say "race and gender" you are fixing the election against the African American who wants to transcend race.  As Craig Crawford pointed out, you can't make blatant appeals to African American pride and pretend merely saying words like "race and gender" in a sentence is some brilliant ploy to affect the vote that only an evil cynic could dream up.

    I'm so glad I decided to check in here a week or so ago.  I thought I was losing my mind because I couldn't join in on what I saw was madness in the media and a whole lot of the blogging left.

    The over analysis of the Clintons has been in nutville for some time.  And I don't have any reluctance to critique them, but a sense for irony and consistency has made for some nutty conclusions being drawn.

    Well (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:06:30 AM EST
    I think folks want to ignore a central fact - the South has a race problem.

    The country does as well. But if the Media want to play the race game, they will have to point the finger at South Carolina, not the Clintons.

    Parent

    Absolutely. (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by CathyinLa on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:22:07 AM EST
    They don't want to admit that the South still has a problem with race but they'll sit around openly suggesting that New Hampshire is a hot bed of racist, lying to polsters.

    Oh wow, are you still listening to MSNBC?  Joe Scarborogh is being ridiculous today.  The constant repetition of The Clintons and race, and now how divisive Bill is.  But debate night the other night it was hoot when his party went after Hillary.  It's just fine for Republicans to search for the most unapologetic partisan conservatives, but Democrats have to transcend all of that or we are bad citizens.

    Parent

    Of course (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:24:34 AM EST
    Joe Scarborough, like the Media, hates the Clintons.

    What bothers me is when DEMOCRATS saywhat Scarborough says.

    Parent

    bothers me too (none / 0) (#18)
    by athyrio on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:30:29 AM EST
    I have long suspected that Rove, long ago got many young republicans to join in the "conversation" on some of these blogs just to stir them up....That would be just the type of long term game he would play....and if it works the republicans win...Sad but effective...

    Parent
    Pat (none / 0) (#22)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:46:30 AM EST
    sure was geeting back at him. WOW! Heated discussion.

    Parent
    Opps (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:47:39 AM EST
    getting not geeting... I found my self yelling at the TV!! LOL!

    Parent
    The South absolutely has a race problem (none / 0) (#19)
    by andgarden on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:41:16 AM EST
    but in 2007, how much of that problem is left in the Democratic party? My guess is not much.

    Parent
    how can you say (none / 0) (#21)
    by Kathy on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:44:30 AM EST
    that states like CT and IA don't have a race problem when their minority population is less than five percent?  It's very easy to say that certain areas are not racist when "white" is the only race.  In states like NY and CA, where there is more of a mix, and Clinton, Edwards and Obama seem to be holding onto the same polling trends as they do in the south, that's not called "racist."  Been to Harlem or Watts lately?  Talked to Rodney King?

    I know I am shouting at a closed door, but I just have to make my last stand here.  The rest of the nation's failure to understand how southern society works is being born out all over the media: race, race, race.  If you listen to people from the south who actually live here and know the dynamics, it is a very different thing.

    I heard an interesting southerner being interviewed on the news this morning--a professor at Clark Atlanta University.  She was talking about why black women find Hillary appealing, and what a revelation it is to have a candidate who is talking about women's issues.  Folks, all of this is much more complicated than race.  It's an easy explanation that takes the responsibility off the rest of America.


    Parent

    Well, with much of this, I agree (none / 0) (#34)
    by Cream City on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:44:41 AM EST
    as I live in one of the most segregated cities in the country.

    And it is in so-called "progressive" Wisconsin.

    Then again, it is where more than 95 percent of all African Americans in Wisconsin live.  So we always hear from the lily-white rest of our state how racist my city is.  Nice how that works, huh?

    Parent

    Cream (none / 0) (#37)
    by Kathy on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 12:12:38 PM EST
    It is a horrible trap.  It really is.

    Parent
    Those "nasty" Clintons (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by BernieO on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:52:02 AM EST
    I am always amazed at how many in the media keep repeating that the Clintons are really nasty attack dogs. I have watched them closely since they were in Arkansas and have never seen them do anything that was out of the ordinary in their compaigns. They, on the other hand, have been the subject of unbelievable abuse by the far right which the media often went along with. (I urge everyone to read "The Hunting of the President" by Gene Lyons and Joe Conason to get a real understanding of what was done to them and how the media played along.)
    I have never seen the Clintons, or any Democrat, do anything remotely like what Bush did to McCain in South Carolina in 2000, (something that Republicans have revisited this year in that state) or the trashing of Al Gore, whom the media despised, or the Swiftboating of John Kerry.
    Even John Kerry, who was the victim of those despicable attacks on his honor, has joined in the whining and accused the Clintons of Swiftboating Obama, as if hardball politics is comparable to vicious lies that trash a person's character. Funny how I never heard John complain when the Clintons were being accused of murder or when Gore was constantly being lied about. If Democrats really think that their candidate this time will get a pass, they are delusional. Funny how so many Dems support the guys who allowed themselves to be defeated by these tactics, yet trash the only two who have consistently managed to prevail against them.


    Parent
    National poll (none / 0) (#30)
    by TheRealFrank on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:11:00 AM EST
    I saw that Rasmussen national tracking poll today had a sudden drop for Clinton: 5%, that's the biggest drop I've seen ever in that tracking poll.

    So she had a really bad sample yesterday, and it made me wonder if people are, nationally, falling for the "evil Clintons" narrative.

    Of course, a sample that bad may just be a strange outlier, but it's worth keeping an eye on.


    Parent

    Rassmussen is a joke (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:15:36 AM EST
    I am stunned people pay attention to him.

    He is a Zogby.

    Parent

    I looked at the data.. (none / 0) (#32)
    by TheRealFrank on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:34:03 AM EST
    I actually can't match the numbers for a 4-day rolling average to produce 42-41-41-36. Unless Clinton dropped, say, 20 points in one day.

    I think I'll see what he produces tomorrow.


    Parent

    Guess why? (none / 0) (#41)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 12:28:17 PM EST
    Rassmussen is a charlatan just like Zogby.

    Parent
    Number 1 diary on Kos: (none / 0) (#42)
    by Teresa on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 12:41:46 PM EST
    Hillary is collapsing says Rassumusen! It's made their day.

    Parent
    Craig Crawford (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by BernieO on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:21:08 AM EST
    I urge everyone to email Craig Crawford and thank him for having the guts to stand up to the media group think.
    ccrawford@cq.com

    Also I strongly urge everyone to complain to MSNBC/NBC for pushing this incredibly divisive storyline. Their irrational hatred of the Clintons is beyond belief. Lest you think the Clintons deserve it, they also hated Gore and lied about him so much that a lot of Democrats bought their garbage and voted for Nader. Tonight would be a good time for them to receive an avalanche of complaints.

    I am hoping someone gets a You Tube of it. (none / 0) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:31:47 AM EST
    CNN is just as bad. All race all the time. (none / 0) (#26)
    by Teresa on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:32:04 AM EST
    I am convinced that Obama would have been better off if his campaign had not brought this subject up.

    Parent
    Short term gain in S. Ca (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:43:29 AM EST
    Long term loss.

    I said as much last Saturday.

    Parent

    We may get a bit of a reprieve (none / 0) (#36)
    by Teresa on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 12:05:33 PM EST
    tonight. Tweety won't be there - David Gregory is on with Keith.

    Parent
    Really? (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 12:27:11 PM EST
    That is good. In a contest like this the last thing we need is that arsonist.

    Parent
    BBSC: Black Before South Carolina (none / 0) (#1)
    by JoeCHI on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 07:37:50 AM EST
    I'm sorry, but, didn't the electorate know that Obama was black before South Carolina?

    Why is this treated as news?

    They don't see color. (none / 0) (#2)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:04:24 AM EST


    Looking at the person (none / 0) (#3)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:05:52 AM EST
    Always looking at the person rather than race, gender, etc... is great ideological goal for our society. This will require change by all involved. (there is that change word again)

    I remember watching Oprah in an interview say "As a BLACK WOMEN". I look at my husband and said, "Oprah is black?" In my view I had related to her as a women and her race was not part of my connection to her. In a way my gender was the connection. (This may be a part of the gender and race support connection)

    That said,.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by dutchfox on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:31:14 AM EST
    while South Carolina will be a big win for Obama tonight, its Democratic primary demographics are very different than the rest of the country and I suspect it will have little impact on the primaries to come.

    BTD, you could also write the same thing about the New Hampshire primary and Iowa caucuses. Correct?

    Indeed (none / 0) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:33:01 AM EST
    The difference was the momentum aspect of those races.

    Parent
    If you believe the polls ... (none / 0) (#9)
    by robrecht on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:37:04 AM EST
    ... and I'm not savvy enough to know which ones are better than others, supposedly Obama has lost half of his white support in SC, losing much of it to John Edwards.  Race is still an issue.  To a large extent the media and pollsters are highlighting this, but it was there all along.  I agree with you BTD, and I'd like to hear the Obama supporters or pundits give some specifics to back up their claims that the Clintons are somehow subtly playing the race card.  There was some comment by Bill I heard about race and gender being deciding factors in SC so it may be that Bill is indeed trying to highlight this at least to manage expectations and put a limiting spin on Hillary's expected loss in SC.  That doesn't make him a racist, just a spinmeister.

    BTD, thanks for your additional info ... (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by robrecht on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:43:01 AM EST
    ... on other polls than what the MSM is emphasizing currently.

    Parent
    If you believe A POLL (none / 0) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:40:42 AM EST
    with a margin of error in the subsample of 8%.

    Parent
    Thanks, BTD (none / 0) (#12)
    by robrecht on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:43:40 AM EST
    I am from a western state(Montana) (none / 0) (#15)
    by athyrio on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:07:25 AM EST
    and am voting for either Edwards or Hillary, because I just sense that Obama is "all hat and no cattle". He just doesnt ring true with me and that hasnt a thing to do with race....He lacks details and comes across as a preacher instead of a politican....we need toughness and details to save this GOP mess that has been created....

    OT point (none / 0) (#20)
    by andgarden on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 09:43:34 AM EST
    one big reason I look forward to the resolution of this primary, whenever that happens, is so that I can begin to enjoy Bob Herbert again.

    Michelle Obama said (none / 0) (#27)
    by PlayInPeoria on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 10:40:13 AM EST
    "Black Americans will wake up and get it" back in November.

    I believe the pendulum has swung too far to the other side. It would be nice to see this move to the middle.

    Query: why such a strong reaction (none / 0) (#35)
    by oculus on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 11:56:11 AM EST
    yesterday to a commenter merely stating the ethic background of Rezko?  That reacction strikes me as inconsistent with posts such as this one.

    I see it exactly opposite (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 12:26:20 PM EST
    This post is intended to demonstrate that there was no race baiting issue.

    That Obama's win was not marred by it.

    It is what it is.

    Parent

    I agree with this post, but (none / 0) (#43)
    by oculus on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 01:07:51 PM EST
    note it does contain factual information about the ethnic background of the candidates.

    Parent
    the race question (none / 0) (#44)
    by lilburro on Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 06:32:05 PM EST
    I traveled down to Myrtle Beach today to volunteer for Senator Clinton.  I've been looking forward to this for a long time (I just relocated to North Carolina from Pennsylvania).  I was curious as to what my fellow volunteers, who voted in the SC primaries today, thought about race (my fellow volunteers being white, mostly female senior citizens; as for me, I'm 22).  To my absolute disgust, some of them actually said amongst each other that they don't want a black president or would not vote for one.  Some suggested they would vote for McCain before Obama for this reason - because Obama is black.  I was blown away.  This racism was here long before the Clintons.  The media doesn't need to tell them Obama is black - they know it all too well.  This post-racial society b.s. might work in certain areas of the country, in certain wealth brackets, but sleazy racism still lives and breathes in the Democratic Party.  I asked a woman I was phonebanking with if she thought the Clintons were stoking racial tension.  She said it didn't have to be stoked and sadly, based on today, I agree.  I never thought helping Hillary campaign would feel like I was aiding and abetting the racism of "liberals."  
    My brain remains fried.  I'm just incredibly disappointed in these people.  People who are working hard to get Hillary elected - but who will not lift a finger to help Obama, because he's black.  What is the deal?  
    Just thought I'd contribute this experience.  It's moved me to post though I've enjoyed reading this blog the past few weeks.

    My opinion (none / 0) (#45)
    by dan1919 on Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 05:46:16 AM EST
    I am not good in matters related to politics. But i am trying to improve my knowledge in politics bu reading articles written by people like you.

    ==========
    Dan
    South Carolina Treatment Centers