"Obama Only Won SC Because of the Black Vote"

I keep hearing this over and over and over. Normally from repugs, but also from the Bill-Hilly supporters on here.(i changed it for the complainers out there, although I suppose it's probably more fitting this way)

You know what, you are right. Obama won SC because of the black vote. But what, would you have liked 50% of the voters to stay home?

I know the Clintons are into voter suppression now (just like bush) but come on, You can't call yourself a democrat when you're wearing a republican comb-over.

American's want progression, not regression.

If you are going to be "an agent for change" as Bill-Hilly claim to be, you CANNOT continue to use the same old dirty cheating lying politics.

...and because Bill Clinton proved once again that he's an asshole.

Next!

we have a winner

...lol..

:mad:

...oh..snap!

They did stay home. Maybe more than 50%.

2.4 million registered voters in SC. 445,000 voted in Republican primary. 550,000 voted in Democratic primary. The rest stayed home

Do the the math. 80%? of the black vote went for Obama. Some 25% of the white vote went for him also.

Hillary got 17% of the black vote and maybe 35% of the white vote. Edwards got more of the white vote than Hillary.

That's roughly how the numbers turned out. Make your own conclusions.

would you have liked for them all to stay home?

Don't try to clinton-spin your way through this. You know exactly what I mean.

Stop using repug tactics.

and besides, even if half of the black voters stayed home, Obama still would have won.

The point was... black people are people too. Or did you foget that? The color of their skin doesn't make them any less american citizens. And I am sick of hearing that the only reason he won is because he is black.

You don't put your race on your ballot, do you?
I doesn't say "black man" on the ballot does it?

If you are going to post, please stay on topic. Stop cherry-picking.

white vote than Hillary did of the black vote. IOW, Obama appeals to broader demographics than Hillary does.

Do the math.

You're overreacting to a simple statement of the voter turnout and calling it repug tactics. Save it for a real fight.

You know, the original post all the way at the top.

That you all are bigots.

last I checked, Black people get the same votes as white, Men the same as women, etc. A vote is a vote, provided its a legal vote.

It does not matter whether you are black or white, male or female, as long as you vote. Period.

From what I gather (I am not black, or a woman) Blacks, like women, and men, and whites, vote as a person, not as a race. The fact that we are still using these monolithic terms just shows how racist we all still are...

Disgusting.

The point is, and should remain this:
We are americans first, last and always.

Its not about racial devisiveness, nor about gender bias. but about the candidates. at least it should not be.
To me it is not, and I have not, nor will not participate in prejudice based on'demographics'....

Whites split between Hillary and Edwards, with 24% to Obama, if I recall correctly. Taken on a national perspective, with the addition of Independent voters, that's a telling little fact.

It's not the positives, but the negatives that will kill us.

...the rest of the contests will go - splitwise.

They know Hillary was for the war in Iraq, for so-called "free trade" agreements and for the death penalty. She supported the notorious 2001 bankruptcy bill, has never been for single-payer health insurance, and has been bribed by insurance company lobbyists.

It wasn't because he's black, it's because he stands for something more progressive than the Clinton machine.

on edit; typo

this ain't faux noise

:wtf:

...that's only in camp clinton... bs... ha ha ha ha ha
I made a funny!

you know..............

You can dish it out, but can't take it.

Typical.

and combining a husband & wife's names.

bennifer, brangelina, the first bennifer...

who do you think you're fooling?

Who the fuck calls Bill Clinton "Billy"??????

or you might get his cooties.

lighten up, or go read another thread.

Simply put, it's hard to tell who is running for president. So, I include them both.

The 2005 Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a pet cause of George W. Bush, essentially forced most state consumer class actions into the backlogged and
Republican dominated federal courts. Like the bankruptcy bill before it, class action reform was a special interest extravaganza, with the insurance, credit card,

banking, pharmaceutical and auto industries hiring so many lobbyists that there was nearly one for every member of Congress. (You can read more about some of the
chicanery involved in selling CAFA in my book.)
Obama's state was also the focus of intense media campaigns surrounding the bill sponsored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. But when the bill came up for a
vote, Obama's fellow Illinois democrat, Sen. Dick Durbin, didn't cave. Potential presidential rival Hillary Clinton voted AGAINST the bill. Even John Kerry, who went on
national television during the 2004 presidential debates and said, "John Edwards and I support tort reform," voted against this bill.

So what's up with Obama? No surprise here, but maybe it's the $2 million in campaign contributions he got from law and lobbying firms that represent many of the big
business interests behind the bill. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, he got $60,000 from Mayer, Brown Rowe & Maw, the heavyweight lobbying firm
whose partners reportedly helped write CAFA. Obama also got $70,000 from Sidley Austin, home of the notorious Dan Troy, the former FDA general counsel who

used his government perch to help drug companies win lawsuits filed by injured consumers.
Obviously the class action vote was just one among many, but I do find it telling. Either Obama didn't fully understand the implications ((((PUSHED WRONG

BUTTON!!))of the bill for consumers (who may be shut out of court when they're ripped off for relatively small amounts of money), or he was voting with an eye on the
White House and (((WHORE))courting future campaign contributors in the business world. Neither scenario gets me especially excited about the Democratic Party's
new rock star.


Let's talk Michelle...as well!

But he didn't get the big 2 wrong... Iraq war vote & bankruptcy (which both clinton & edwards voted for)

see how that works... it's okay to make a concession that your candidate made a mistake. It doesn't hurt.

even tried to make this point in the debates but was cut off!!! Obama has been bought and SOLD.. you a bunch of sh*t!!

edit::pissy spelling!

clinton and edwards both voted for the iraq war resolution, and the first bankruptcy bill. that is what i said.

Did you not read my post...Oh and let's talk IWR...and WAR Funding! PRO WAR Obama voted for every single war funding bill available! uuuurrrr!

avoid using the pejorative/stereotype "Hill-Billy."

And what exactly is your definition of a "Hill-Billy."

You can't have it both ways allinktup.

since it keeps getting harder and harder to tell who is REALLY running for president.

Or would you prefer Bill-Hilly since he is the one really running the show?

People know what I am talking about. I'm not attacking "hillbillies"
Those people wouldn't vote for her anyway.

And I'm not taking any road. I'm just calling it as I see it. The way they are running their campaign disgusts me. It's not democratic. They are hypocrites.

Once again i say, you CANNOT be an agent for change using the same old dirty politics.

and I know sorry and lame.

Just be prepared to take the heat.

...

:eyes:

if you guys wanna be all sensitive, i can to.

I guess you can to. Whatever the fuck that means...

of who's pissed of at me at the moment. Eeh... Oh well.

great - the white christians have their wacko ideas to bring out the republicans - so if obama gets more people involved the better

....in the high percentiles. Go to the SC elections website.

Here is one: http://www.state.sc.us/cgi-bin/scsec/96vr?countykey=ALL&D1=RACE

Obama's SC victory was real, and it was meaningful. It was meaningful no matter what the specific demograghics of South Carolina may be. In fact the DNC moved up Nevada and South Carolina BECAUSE hispanics and blacks have significan representation in those states. How all elements of the American electorate react to the Democratic candidates is relevent and significant. The perspective of every American should be equally important when it comes time to choose a leader for all America.

Clinton supporters as well as repugs is that he only won because he is black, and that over 50% of the SC voters were black.

They still deserve to be counted. People act like it's a crime to be black and it is disgusting.

calling him Osama, that orinigated on fox news, and was intended to link him to a terrorist. You know that as much as I do.

Hill-Billy, I did that myself. A simple play on words meant in a joking manner.

Calling him Osama... well that outraged ALL of us before the race got going, now didn't it.

I call them Hill-Billy because it is increasingly harder to tell which one is actually running here.

At any rate, I'm done with this.

Have a nice day.

:toast:

Usually one resorts to name-calling when he/she has no meritorious argument.

Bake

it had a very valid point.

If you want people to listen to your valid (?) point, skip the pejoratives. Even on a message board. Or maybe especially on a message board.

Bake

...the first time you said how Hillary reminds you of your Republican friends.

Why is that and why are you really here?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4245525&mesg_id=4246231

Democrats -- especially the Clintons.

Or is that "Clintoon" to the OP?

why not take it up with him or her?

I'm dealing directly with YOU, as it is your name calling that I find quite offensive.

and you aren't allowed to ask me that question. check the forum rules.

you shit doesn't pass the smell test.....

On top of the problems you already have, I think you could use a refresher course in Reading Comp 101. Good luck!

to say someone is just pretending to be a democrat.

Or are you lost and confused?


hmmm, I don't recall saying that. Got a guilty conscience or something? Duh

like you just did again.

I have NEVER voted for a repug... can you say the same?

This screams racism. The black voters have been in heavy support of Hillary's views on policy. She did not change them. No, they just finally had a black man they thought could actually win. So alot of them(not all) voted for him BECAUSE he was a black man!!! Which by the way he isn't even black, he is bi-racial, raised by his white mother yet runs away from his white heritage!! SAD.

and no one can take that away from us.

So what's the problem? :)

So I say that makes me the winner. And since it's my post... that makes me right!

hooooorrraaaaaayyyyy 4 me!

;-)

:)

I'm not pissed off -- just impatient.

Dealing with stupid bullshit has that effect on me.

you see, people are only willing to look at something how they want to see it. she wants to get all upset because i combined bill and hillary's names.

she ignores the issue, and goes right after the name i called them. it wasn't derogatory. I really is hard to tell which one of them is running for president.

I see as much of him as i do her. He goes out there, attacks attacks attacks, so she can sit back and say... Well, "I" didn't say it. Give me a break.

The issue here, the original point of this thread, was that I keep hearing from people on here, as well as from repugs elsewhere that he only won because he is black and because black people showed up to vote.

So what. They do make up over half of the population SC. Now, I know the clintons were trying to suppress votes in Nevada, but you can't expect to supress that many people.

I think they are playing dirty, and once again I will say this.

you CANNOT be an angent of change if you continue to use the same old dirty politcs.

:eyes:

This sometimes happens when people get confused by having too many windows open on their computer at once and when they're posting at two different places at the same time. They screw up and read the rules from the wrong forum. I'm not saying it happened with this guy, but I can't think of any other explanation, judging by his interpretation of the rules. :evilgrin:

Both of them!

:shrug:

that some people like to conveniently ignore.

Whether that was shrewd regional politics- or whether it portends more of the same in a general way, time will tell.

It also ignores that Obama has proved he can win support from white folks in Iowa, NH, Nevada. He also won big support from young white voters (under 30) in South Carolina.

Maybe it would be good for the Democratic Party to nominate a candidate who has already proved that she or he can attract support from young people and everyone under 40, plus independents and ex-Republicans, African Americans and other minorities. It's just an idea ...

61 % of the voters in SC were women. I think Hilly thought they should ALL vote for her, and since they did not, she is pulling the "race card".

The black voters in SC had greater group cohesion than the women did - maybe because "black American" is an ethnic and social group whereas "woman" is simply a gender distinction and really doesn't say much about the person's ethnicity or culture.

CNN learned about the whole race and gender issue when last week they posted a "news story" on their web page stating that "black women in SC had a hard decision between voting for someone who was black and someone who was a woman"! Is this really the year 2008?!? Does CNN and other groups in the US think women (especially female members of minority groups) are so STUPID that we can only have one issue in mind when we go to the polls? Do people think we are so shallow and bigoted we can ONLY vote for people who are like us?

Also, why can some people not get that some people simply don't like Hillary and DON'T want her for President - not because they don't think a woman can do the job, but simply because they don't think SHE can/will do the job. After the way she has waffled on torture and the War in Iraq, I don't see what there is to not get - as you said in your post, Americans want change, not more pandering to the Repugs and maintenance of the status quo.

:hippie: