Barack Obama dominated the South Carolina primary on Saturday, drawing more than double the votes of his rivals. He won by a staggering 28 points -- the widest victory of any presidential candidate in either party this year.
The decisive win reflects both a resurgence of support for Obama, who trailed in state polls just last month, and some voters' rejection of the Clinton Campaign's recent spate of harsh and misleading attacks, which were widely condemned by party leaders. Voters who made their decision in the past three days, a period when President Clinton dominated media coverage by attacking Obama and stoking racial issues, broke for Obama by 30 points. Both campaigns also upset voters: 56 percent said Obama attacked Clinton unfairly, while 70 percent said Clinton's attacks were unfair, (according to exit polls).
In his victory speech, Obama promised to "fundamentally change the status quo in Washington," and called on the voters and other candidates to take the high road with him. "As contentious as this campaign may get, we have to remember that this is a contest for the Democratic nomination, and that all of us share an abiding desire to end the disastrous policies of the current administration," he said, in a respectful nod to Clinton and Edwards. He also pleaded with Americans to reject efforts to divide the nation by race or religion, and to rebuff tactics that use "religion as a wedge" or "patriotism as a bludgeon." The Clinton Campaign, however, shows no signs of backing down from its racial and character attacks on Obama.
An AP article after the victory reiterated the claim by Clinton strategists that Obama has been branded "the black candidate" - a supposedly negative development that "could hurt him" as the campaign continues. This "black candidate" strategy was advanced by a "top adviser" to Clinton in another article this weekend, concluding that recent attacks have "marginalize[d] Obama as 'The Black Candidate.'" And one more top adviser to Hillary, former President Bill Clinton, flatly claimed that Obama is "getting votes" because of his race, leaving Hillary with no chance to win South Carolina. The strategy turns on the unstated premise that Hillary will get votes for her race, too, and a lot more of them are available on Super Tuesday.
Pundits and writers were quick to conclude that the Clintons' strategy backfired on Saturday night. But it has not even been tested yet. The state with the largest black primary electorate was not the target -- it was the weapon. And the exit polls say "three-quarters of whites split their votes between the two white candidates." That means the Clintons could win by reproducing those numbers in states with different turnout demographics. It's the kind of divisive, cynical politics that could make one oppose Hillary Clinton -- even if you're not backing the "black candidate."
Ari Melber writes for The Nation, where this column first appeared.
Follow Ari Melber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AriMelber
Obama is basing his campaign on the book by Republican PR Operative (friend of )Rove
Frank Lunz.
Apsychological abuser whose book is called: "It's not what you say but what people hear"
Instead it should be called: "It's what you ImPly and who you implicate with lies"
Obama and campaign turned out to be the George Bush of the Democrats: IMMORAL, DISHONEST, and DIVISIVE.
Yes, he has Ted Sorenson (Kennedy's speech writer) working for him, No wonder her reminds Caroline of her father.
Just because someone is a Democrat doesn't mean their aren't Brainwashed by the Republican controlled Media, beholden to them for Media consolidation.
They consistantly operate like an Opposition Party against the Democratic front-runner...
They have protected Obama FOR NOW while making ERRONEOUS ASSERTIONS AGAINST Hillary.
And then when and IF Obama wins THEY WILL LET HIM HAVE IT IN THE GROIN using the content of his book.
Then the Talking Heads can keep their tax cuts and our country will continue to go over the Cliff while we get more and more Media Consolidaiton.
I am obviously a supporter of Senator CLinton. Because she is the BEST and most MORAL condidatate out there, and I CARE ABOUT MY LIFE AND MY COUNTRY.
How dare Obama equate Hillary with George Bush and the Republicans when The Republicans go after whoever the Democrat is ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE ***EFFECTIVE**THE WAY HILLARY AND BILL WERE.
When Bill run in the early 90s a Republican came to see him and warned him not to run: "with the other Democrats we'll be able to eliminate them by calling them "tax and spend Liberals, but not with you. So if you run will will destroy you. They tried yet Bill left with a 65% approval rating. Sick society.
I am so full of glee to just feel inspired by him. We have always been saying we can do so much better and we have been so divided by Bush/Rove politics.
And here is this man who is saying that we can rise above this crap. What more do we want?
I cannot bare Republicans bashing the "Bill and Hillary" ticket in a general election. Hillary would make a fine President. But Republicans will bash her throughout her term if she is elected. That will be a disaster of ugliness for this country and it will turn off so many. There is a generation of new young voters that are inspired by Barack and this is beyond thrilling!
I just read that Obama is raising $500,000 per hour since his S. Carolina win. I will now send his campaign some more bucks. Not against Hillary...but for Obama.
"The Clintons are proving how incredibly selfish they are. They are doing their best not just to beat, but to destroy, a charismatic young star in their party -- a guy who could do so much to reinvigorate the liberal movement. I sincerely wish them success."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1960157/posts?q=1&;page=51
Then I listened to his speech and so much of what he said really got to me. He talks about leading the entire United States not leaving out anyone whether they vote R or D. But his message is still very progressive.
I lost my mother just about a year ago. She voted for Bush in 2000, she was a life-long Republican. But even she realized her mistake and that Bush was horrible for our nation, she voted for Kerry in 2004. And in 2006 she switched her registration officially from Republican to Democrat and voted a straight D ticket.
We talked about her switch before she died and she repeated to me the only thing I said to her in an effort to appeal to her morals as I knew them - vote what's best for the country not what's best for the party. Not only did she take that to heart but my father (a major lifetime Republican) voted for Strickland and Brown. It's b.s. that Republicans won't cross over for the right candidate. And Democrats should not discourage such a thing.
Obama's point is that he will be the candidate my mother would have been proud to vote for as a former Republican.
I remember her calling me after Obama's speech at the 2004 convention...'you guys should run that guy, he reminds me of Kennedy'. This from a woman who voted for Nixon, Reagan and two Bushes.
The times they are a changin.
this whole thing about the supposed racial undertones of clinton's remarks is such utter bullshit. (and another example of how both campaigns are twisting and distorting statements by the other. it's been a repulsive dispay.)
by saying, "And one more top adviser to Hillary, former President Bill Clinton, flatly claimed that Obama is "getting votes" because of his race, leaving Hillary with no chance to win South Carolina. The strategy turns on the unstated premise that Hillary will get votes for her race, too, and a lot more of them are available on Super Tuesday," you claim bill clinton is saying white people won't vote for obama. in fact, if you bothered to include the context, clinton is explicitly saying the opposite: "As far as I can tell, neither Senator Obama nor Hillary have lost votes because of their race or gender. They are getting votes, to be sure, because of their race or gender..." he's saying that obama will not lose votes on account of his race, but gain them, and ditto with hillary and voters of her gender. that's racist?
Some say that Mrs. Clinton represents gender; Mr. Obama represents race; and Mr. Edwards represents class. How untrue! They have many things in common. Their offers for change are almost the same, but their difference is that Mr. Obama inspires.
My Thesaurus lists the following synonyms for the verb “to inspire†and they are: move, arouse, awaken, uplift, encourage, energize, invigorate, etc. That’s precisely the difference between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama. The only candidate that can communicate all these feelings is Mr. Obama, and he does it with truth and clarity.
Perhaps Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Edwards can move their followers with the same feelings listed in the synonyms, and I sincerely congratulate them. However, I would suggest that they look into their souls and hearts and ask if their candidate really moves, arouses, awakens, uplifts, encourages, energizes and invigorates them as Mr. Obama does,
Obama’s dream is universal; it has no gender, class or race. It embraces everyone who has a dream and wants to follow that dream. And like he said tonight, it’s not about women against men; young against old, white against other races. It is about past against future. Obama represents the future. It’s never too late to embrace this great cause. Join in this universal dream, and be a part of this true and only dream and hope for a better country for Americans and better world for our brethren. VOTE OBAMA, ALL THE WAY AND EVERWHERE.
I wonder what those who earlier predicted that Obama's Iowa success amongst whites would cause him to lose favor among blacks have to say.
But, I'll say that now, I REALLY hope Hillary Clinton doesn't win the nomination. After this recent display of politics, I'd hate to have to vote for her. And yes, I'd vote for her before I'd vote for any of the Republicans.
Here's what it seems people are forgetting: Republicans aren't above racial politics, they're just more certain of where they stand. And it's not with racial minorities or women.