Democrats set for trench warfare

Financial Times ^ | Jan. 27, 2008 | By Edward Luce

[jdm]

Barack Obama’s crushing victory over Hillary Clinton in South Carolina, where he received more votes than Mrs Clinton and John Edwards combined, will restore much of the momentum that he briefly enjoyed following his emphatic victory in Iowa.

But Mr Obama’s stunning win is also likely to polarise further an already bitterly divided Democratic Party as the Clintons pull out all stops to maximise their chances on the “Super Tuesday” February 5 primary of 22 states.

Even before the polls had closed on Saturday, Bill Clinton, who has been widely attacked for allegedly “playing the race card” in the last two weeks, sought to downplay Mr Obama’s victory by comparing it to that of Jesse Jackson, who won the same state twice in 1984 and 1988. Mr Obama’s victory was built on the overwhelming support of African Americans, who make up half of South Carolina’s electorate, and whose support divided 81 per cent to 17 per cent in his favour (John Edwards barely registered).

In response to a question about whether Mr Obama had beaten “two Clintons” as opposed to just Hillary, Bill Clinton replied: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice, in ’84 and ’88. And he ran a good campaign. Senator Obama’s run a good campaign here, he’s run a good campaign everywhere.” The implication was clear: Mr Obama is a black candidate whom blacks disproportionately support.

One measure of how much bitterness is now felt by Obama supporters towards the Clintons occurred at Mr Obama’s victory rally in Columbia, South Carolina when Mr Clinton’s face briefly appeared on the big television screen in the hall. The crowd erupted into boos. Mr Obama did not mention either of the Clintons in his speech. But its entire thrust was to counter the argument that he can be compared to Jesse Jackson or other traditional African-American candidates.

Mr Obama reminded the audience of his victory in the Iowa caucuses on January 3, where more than 95 per cent of the population is white. And he also threw his remarks forward to February 5, where as many Hispanics are likely to vote in states such as New York and California as African Americans. Hispanics voted overwhelmingly for Mrs Clinton in the Nevada caucuses last weekend.

Both candidates now have two victories apiece in the primary process although Mr Obama is slightly ahead on the number of delegates who are bound to support him.

“Well, tonight, the cynics who believed that what began in the snows of Iowa was just an illusion were told a different story by the good people of South Carolina,” Mr Obama told a boisterous crowd who were chanting his campaign mantra, “Yes, we can!”

He added: “After four great contests in every corner of this country, we have the most votes, the most delegates, and the most diverse coalition of Americans we’ve seen in a long, long time. They are young and old; rich and poor. They are black and white; Latino and Asian.”

Mrs Clinton, who left South Carolina for a rally in Tennessee before the results had been formally declared, issued a statement after the result that gave a foretaste of the trench warfare for delegates that is now likely to dominate the remaining weeks – and possibly months – of this primary election.

She congratulated Mr Obama but also mentioned the state of Florida, which holds a nominal Democratic primary vote on Tuesday but where all the Democratic candidates have agreed not to campaign. The state was deprived of all its delegates by the Democratic National Committee for having moved its primary date ahead of “Super Tuesday”.

Mrs Clinton, who is ahead in the polls in Florida, has hinted that she would petition the DNC to allow Florida to regain its delegates after the vote. Any such move could reinforce Mr Obama’s allegation that the Clinton’s are practising a cynical brand of politics. “This will not be easy,” said Mr Obama. “Make no mistake about what we are up against.”

Mrs Clinton maintains poll leads in most of the 22 states set to vote on February 5.

[BamaTalker I]

You got it all wrong. Obama is the real deal here. Hillary is a diversion aimed at the right drawing their obsessive attention to her and away from Obama. She’ll not be nominated. Obama will, late in ‘08, too late for the right wing slime/hate machine to re-tool to meet the challenge.

When they do finally start criticizing him, Obama’s supporters will give new meaning to the term ‘racial code words’. The notion of what a racial code word will broaden to the point that meaningful criticism of Obama will be futile. Anything that can be remotely construed as a racial code word will be attached by Obama’s supporters.

Code words have children, descendants so to speak, iterations and such. It will truly be amusing to watch the Council of Christian Conservatives fashion them and feed them to the Republican party for use against Obama. Obama’s supporters will welcome them and use them to club the right and stifle discussion.

The right should be so lucky to have Billary to kick around.

[Dilbert San Diego]

But black voter turnout declining could help tip the balance in some states to the Republican.

For example, Michigan went narrowly for Kerry in 2004 due to overwhelming black support in Detroit, offsetting Republican majorities elsewhere in the state. Same thing happened in Pennsylvania, with Phila. supplying a big Dem. vote to offset Republicans elsewhere in PA. So while there won’t be a surge of blacks to the Republicans, if enough stay home and don’t bother to vote for Billary, it could make a difference.

[arthurus]

The Jesse Jackson comparison, while spoken as a compliment serves to tell white voters that Obama is the same as that obnoxious Black Man and I am sure that was the intent.

[arthurus]

I don’t think Obama will survive until November if he gets enough delegates to win the nomination on Super Tuesday.