So what did we learn from the South Carolina primary?
Obama won big. He won with not only a huge percentage of the African American vote, but 25 percent of the white vote.
The question is, will South Carolina have Clinton "winning by losing" or will she have some real work to do?
Will Bill Clinton step away from the microphone for a while since he managed to irritate many long time democratic voters as well as many of the influential democratic pundits and commentators? Is having him out on the stump a good way of keeping Hillary off the airwaves, Hillary who's voice has gotten much shriller and jarring over the past 24 hours?
John Edwards has no endorsement from senators, a fact that may be due to (as the NYTimes says) not many senators care for him.
Hillary received 4 in 10 of the white woman vote, but only 3 in ten women's votes overall. What's with the white middle aged women being so in Hillary's camp anyway?
In Florida, hundreds of thousands of Floridians have early voted. Is it possible this could be good for Guiliani who had the state to himself until just recently? With the huge win in South Carolina by Obama and the winds of support for him moving in fast, will there be any regrets by those who voted for Clinton several weeks ago? There's something to be said for not voting early.
Bandwagon tour January 27th edition: Caroline Kennedy has endorsed Barack Obama in an op ed for the NYT's today titled, "A President Like My Father". And, it appears as though Ted Kennedy will do the same at a rally tomorrow.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch endorsed Obama and McCain today as well as saying this about Hillary Clinton: "we confess to a certain "Clinton fatigue." The emergence of the former president as the Luca Brasi of the campaign trail reminds us of the worst of the Clinton years: the divisiveness and the bickering; the too-casual, if artful, blend of truth and half-truth. We're not eager for the replay."
The Belleville News-Democrat has also endorsed Obama and McCain.
The Clintons seem to believe that the bigger, more populated, more urban, states holding primaries on February 5th will be their ticket to the nomination. They especially look to California with its high Hispanic population, hoping that the animosity between Hispanics and African Americans will put those Hispanic votes into her column. More racial games by the Clintons. I have no link for this belief, but heard it from one cable news pundit after another last night after the SC primary. So what will California do? Be taken in by Bill or see through him like so many other democrats have lately?
There are so many reasons I wouldn't vote for Barack Obama they are overwhelming. But it started when he campaigned with the homophobic black ministers.
A presidency of unity, right?
Wrong.
I'd vote republican before I'd vote Obama.
Posted by: mary lynch | January 27, 2008 at 02:53 PM
Hillary got 36% of all white votes, so I don't think it's a surprise that women voted more for her than men did. I'd imagine in every demographic in each primary so far she does better with women than with men.
Posted by: Rand | January 27, 2008 at 06:27 PM
Good Post.....
See my post here to give links to support your Black/Hispanic dynamic that is happening in places like New York, California and even Nevada.
http://ilgopnet.com/node/458
Posted by: Mark W Johnson | January 27, 2008 at 07:24 PM
There is a deepening divide between Latinos and blacks. This not good news for the democratic party. Factor in the bigotry among many older democratic white voters and you have a receipt for disaster.
Unfortunately, the ineptness of the Republican party to reach out to either the blacks or Latinos in any meaniful way is a major political failing.
Posted by: Ron | January 28, 2008 at 09:09 AM