Obama was competitive with the South Carolina white vote just a week ago

Obamites (the same ones who are correctly pointing out Hillary's collapse among black voters) are pointing to one poll from December to "hope" nothing has "changed." The record has to be set straight. Obama was competitive with the white vote all of 2007. Competitive means being near, equal to, or even ahead of Edwards and not being 20 points behind Hillary.

Here is what the numbers looked like just last week.

Whites: Hillary 38%, Edwards 29%, Obama 28%

Get it? Last week.

This week: Hillary 43%, Edwards 30%, Obama 19%

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=066ea20c-d300-48cd-a585-cc9c356df4eb&q=44162

Lets see what the next survey usa poll says before you get too excited about Racism.

You reflect your candidate well. Calling others racist has worked wonders for him! :rofl:

They use different sampling techniques, larger/smaller voter pool and some polls are just way off sometimes. So yeah, I don't think you can compare a poll done by Survey USU a month ago with a poll done by another polling company today.

Right now we don't have much post-race card playing (by both Obama and Clinton!) polling to look at. We can "hope" this was unusual.

you don't seem sad.

Cali you like to talk about polls when it comes to Edwards. Why the distaste for polls if Obama is not going up 90 points? Obamites are gleefully looking at the part of the poll that shows Hillary at 19%. Why are they complete flip floppers on the other half? "hope"? Or delusion?

as to why I think you're more gleeful about this than anything else.

in response to a pattern of deliberate provokatsiia -- apparently a Russian term for this kind of political manipulation.

It seems to me that with Oprah and the Iowa results, the HRC camp decided (logically) that they were not going to do terribly well against Obama with black voters. So they logically if abhorrently concluded that highlighting race in the way they've been systematically doing, they'd boost their chances of victory.

I am not entirely confident that this strategy, which seems to be working, will not succeed. But WITHIN the Democratic Party especially, it's a DANGEROUS GAME. The Repukes tried immigration as a golden platter wedge issue in 2006, and it didn't even work for them!

Looks like his fade hurt him equally in NH and SC. That's all that's necessary to explain that.

What were you saying about him fading?

In fact, that steadiness is all the more remarkable considering that Obama's landing otherwise affected his totals across the board, in multiple states.

What were you saying about 4-5 point drops? :shrug:

First, that's rather remarkable that she would *lose* support in one group while otherwise experiencing a nationwide bounce of support and favorable media coverage.

Secondly, what were her numbers a month ago?

Obama is experiencing a nationwide bounce of support and favorable media coverage too. Thanks for making my point!

Is it that you cannot comprehend that there are multiple factors (including but by no means limited to differing methodologies) driving movement of polls, or is that you refuse to acknowledge that?

:shrug:

Give it a rest already, would you? Dig up one of the other posts, probably just a handful down from your own, and comment on it. Instead of creating more bullshit.

Why are you trying to continue to divide the site & party? Isn't it good enough that we're winning (dems in general) - or must you continue to perpetuate this infighting?

Sour Grapes.

No DEMOCRATS that i know would revel in this type of politics working.

I have no doubt that you see this as fun, though.

Just wondering.

believe racism is working. Thats pathetic, man.

That's very pathetic. Why don't you call on Obama to walk the walk on the politics of hope?

Obama's national co-chair implying Hillary is a racist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNrlSn7ndAA
Obama spokesperson: http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/obama_spokesperson_asks_is_there_something_bigger_behind_bill_and_hillarys_race_comments.php
Obama campaign memo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/read-obama-campaign-memo-_n_81220.html

Obamites continue to pretend none of the above happened. The rest of us are not this blind.

What kind of victory is won, when the only reason you win is by swiftboating your competition?

And Obama himself engaged in that in New Hampshire. He is now swiftboating the Clintons as racists. The Clintons are not any better since they are the ones who introduced the race card into the campaign.

And mentioning horrendous votes in an opponent's public record is as far from "swiftboating" as one can get.

They took his strength, being a champion of the working-class, and attacked it with rabid fervor in an effort to make it a weakness. No amount of distortion was too much for that effort. Edwards' refrained from doing the same to Obama.

He continues to speak on a message of unity, and deflect the negativity coming from the clintons. And JE has joined Obama in that regard.

The Clintons? Reach your own conclusion. Many Clintonites believe Obama is swiftboating them as racists. You disagree but that feeling is there.

The first, he's claiming Hillary's tears are phony. He doesn't claim she's a racist anywhere in there.

The second, Obama's spokesperson claims there's a pattern of attacks. I think that means a pattern of base political smears. What makes you think there's race anywhere involved in that?

The third is an internal memo that was leaked by a person who is not a member of the campaign. It is not a talking-points memo, as it doesn't have anything to say anywhere in it. It is only an informative memo, keeping staffers up to date on the Clinton campaign's latest controversial statements about Obama.

I don't see the race card anywhere there. Why do you?

Also, care to show me where "my candidate" has made any comment on this race issue?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4059438&mesg_id=4059524

Keep the smearing up. Obamites are showing how ugly Obama's "politics of hope" really are. It has done wonders for him, as has his use of the same tactics! :rofl:

instead of just a man.

and your examples are all low level surrogates. You said Obama himself needed to rise above the "smears". So once again I ask you, when did OBAMA do go below the fray created by the Clintons??

Obamites say one thing when it comes to Hillary's use of the race card and another about Obama's. I call bullshit on both.

one is fair or the other is--that is, either surrogates speak for the campaign, or they don't. You're not even thinking before you type any more, are you?

Obamites: Obama's surrogates are rogues, Hillary's surrogates speak for her campaign.

Obama's spokesperson, aide, and national co-chair don't count but Bob Johnson and Andrew Cuomo do for Hillary? :rofl:

"well, maybe one might and one might not, depending on the situation."

Your smilie, he laughs at you.

Isolated incidents are different because candidates can't control what every supporter says. This is why I thought nothing about Obama supporter Chris Rock's comment about Hillary being an "old white lady" until I heard Jesse Jackson Jr.'s comment.

Seriously, what did he say that made you think he was playing the race card? He had two points, and this is how I interpret them:

1. Hillary's tears were probably phony. I mean, look: she cries when her campaign's on the line, but doesn't shed a tear for the greatest tragedy in recent American history, among others.

2. We're now going to South Carolina. SC has a large population of black voters who (to a special extent) see Obama is a candidate of change and hope. Cynical politics won't play to that audience.

The Clintons have been in public life for three decades. Why did the "Clintons are racist!" meme appear just in time for the 2008 South Carolina primary?

what the more-excitable Obama supporters here were doing with calling the "Clinton-surrogate" remarks racist?

Even Bush didn't directly play the race or gay card. The way they do it is through surrogates, implications either through words or actions (like speaking at Bob Jones).

If we've lowered the threshold for "X has played the race card" to:

"a person in some way affiliated with X's campaign has, in a non-official capacity, made remarks which might be construed to mean that opponent Y does not have a positive view on race relations, but which of course might equally well be construed to have a wholly benign meaning,"

then I think we have completely stripped the term of all meaning. Al Sharpton plays the race card. Bill O'Reilly plays the race card. Obama and Clinton do not.

We can at least agree with that?

of race in any American political campaign--more so when one candidate has a long (and mostly positive) record with the black community, and another has dark skin. Here's my quick-and-dirty timeline as for what just happened:

0. Obama is kicking Clinton's ass with his inspiring message of hope/change, versus Clinton's dry message of competence. Clintons deride Obama's message of hope.

1a. Obama makes veiled statements comparing self to MLK in speeches.

1b. Person asks Clinton how she's holding up. Clinton gets emotional.

2. Clinton campaign sees they've struck gold, pushes issue. Other candidates think they've got her running, push issue.

3. Clinton wins N.H., in campaign-defining comeback.

4a. Smarting from loss, JJJ goes on-air, claims tears are phony, briefly brings up Katrina, in a subtle pander to black folk. May be done to help Obama campaign, may be done because he has an enormous black constituency.

4b. Clinton campaign uses Obama-MLK comparison to point out how competence and change are entwined.

4c. Clinton campaign makes several other maladroit remarks. Perhaps intentional, perhaps not.

5a. Several in black community and pro-Obama community get pissed about comparison in 4b; see Clinton's words as belittling King's achievements.

5b. Several in black community and pro-Obama community get pissed about remarks in 4c.

5c. Obama's campaign circulates internal memo regarding 4b/4c. Intent unknown; I believe to help campaign keep tabs on opposition's possible weaknesses. Memo leaked by activist.

6a. Clinton campaign realizes they can cast entire affair in terms of race, something Obama has successfully prevented in past. Issues statement decrying Obama for playing race card in 4a, 5a, 5b, 5c; conflates communities in 5a/5b with Obama.

6b. Obama campaign realizes that entwining Obama with racial issues will destroy campaign; decides to shut up and hope the whole thing goes away quickly. No comments on issue.

6c. Michelle Obama, not getting the fucking memo, makes innocuous remark regarding Iowa successes containing the words "black people."

7. Here we are.

Only after things heated up with the primaries starting and neither candidate emerging with a big advantage did it become a factor, and just in time for the SC primary where half of voters are black. The argument until last week was always "experience" versus "change."

Do you think Michelle "black America will wake up" Obama made a mistake tonight or was that part of her marching orders?

She didn't make a mistake; she said exactly what she meant to. And I'd bet virtually everyone drawing a paycheck from Obama's campaign groaned when they heard it. The last thing they need is to racialize this campaign.

Think about it--racializing it would either support Clinton or Obama; at this point it's a zero-sum game. Now, you've been most of the night trying to prove it'll hurt Obama, so there's that. Moreover, Clinton has clearly attempted to racialize it, given her press release. So I see three options:

1. Obama is trying to racialize the campaign (and playing some sort of super-double-reverse-judo and Clinton's walking into it by also racializing it.)

2. Clinton is trying to racialize the campaign (and Obama is as well, because he's an absolute fucking moron who can't see past SC--where he was handily leading before this racial bullshit, so there's not even that motive.)

3. Clinton is trying to racialize it, and Obama is not, despite some stupid backers.

Obama may be thinking he can destroy Hillary with the black vote while not losing much, or anything among whites. He can stay above the fray while his surrogates do his dirty work. He can then, as he is doing, deny having anything do with that. The gamble may be that he won't lose much among whites, if anything, and that whatever he loses among whites would be made up by gains among blacks. Blacks are about a fifth of Democratic primary voters. If he can guarantee 75-80% of the black vote by doing this it is plausible that he would do this in the hope that he only loses a small percentage of the white vote. If Obama loses only 10 or 15% of his white vote that is still only about three points nationally. Obama is screwed only if he loses a big percentage of his white vote. That has not happened yet, although if this continues it might.

I heard that somewhere around these parts.

remember, Hillary is benefiting from her post NH bounce. Some of that movement is more
likely to be the effect of her primary win. The racial tension has really only heated up in the
last few days. Let's wait and see when the race gets closer and who wins in Nevada.
We may see shift in the other direction at that point.

I was referring to the precipitous drop of 10 points in his white support only. I am
glad to see his black support is strong.

If he wins SC with mainly black support, Clinton will argue that he is not the national candidate
he had attempted to be. Sad, but that is what her surrogates will likely spread.

I think it is sad the first competitive minority candidate has been hoodwinked by an experienced couple into falling into the most vicious of traps.

Clinton and crew win by dividing us. They are bad for the psyche of the country.

They want to "pray it away" (where have we heard this before from Obama's world?) and "hope" nothing has happened. Saint Obama is making rookie mistakes that are hurting his candidacy and all Obamites do is happily keep the band playing.

But I do believe we share a common humanity and I believe that can bring people together for our common good.

So sue me when I kick the cynics to the curb.

I choose hope.

This is a completely different poll, with different models, and no basis on anything other then what Survey USA saw just last week. Lets see what there next poll says.

I hear it is racist to state the obvious, expect when Obamites are pointing out Hillary being down to 19% among blacks. Racist? That isn't racist! That is the truth! That is the natural result of what her campaign has done for the past week. Right? Right?

after south carolina hillary will lose only illinois .edwards will get around 30% but that`s the last time he will poll that high. after south carolina barrack will rebound to a distant second. the race will be over after south carolina.

The polls show Hillary will win big on Super Tuesday but Obamites continue to "hope" Obama will dominate on Super Tuesday. It will be like the night of New Hampshire here when Obama loses California, New York, New Jersey, and the majority of states.

Perhaps you forgot which Democrat you were "supporting."

The ideal scenario for him is winning four or five states and then using that momentum to relaunch his campaign in the states that follow. The race will not be over on Super Tuesday.

True, much as marathons continue even after the first hundred people have crossed the line.

Our party uses proportional voting. If it were winner-take-all then it may have ended on Super Tuesday.

that the party will, as a whole, begin to treat one as the nominee, and later states will fall in line accordingly. People are looking for a "frontrunner" now; they'll be looking for a nominee after ST. I think it'll all be for show after then.

Whichever way it breaks, I don't think it will be close.

I think the overall result will look something like Hillary 45, Obama 30, Edwards 20. That won't be enough.

;)

Obama will win Georgia and Illinois on Super Tuesday. Those are big states, even though Illinois is to be expected. He will win several other states too. I think he will be very much alive after Super Tuesday.

but I am still hoping Obama can put together a winning coalition. The timing of Tsunami Tuesday, with SUCH A HUGE number of states, including many of the main ones (CA, CO, NY, NJ,GA ...) make an insurgent candidacy like Obama's all but impossible.

I would expect that even if Obama's campaign collapses according to the madrchsod scenario, he will win at least some other Southern primaries other than SC.

I agree that Edwards will fade after SC and I guess will drop out. I strongly suspect he might endorse Obama ....

Obamaites are hoping he will drop out and somehow save Obama but he is in at least until Super Tuesday. He will win states on Super Tuesday and win something like 15-20% of delegates nationally. No one will have a majority. There will be no reason for him to quit after Super Tuesday.

:crazy: