In results that exit polls indicated widespread support and apparent backlash to former President Bill Clinton’s highly controversial “gut fighter” role, Democratic Senator Barack Obama scored a huge victory over Senator Hillary Clinton and former Senator John Edwards in the South Carolina primary — repositioning himself as a strong challenger to Mrs. Clinton as voters across the United States head into the crucial Florida and Super Tuesday primaries.
Barack Obama routed Hillary Rodham Clinton in the racially charged South Carolina primary Saturday night, regaining campaign momentum in the prelude to a Feb. 5 coast-to-coast competition for more than 1,600 Democratic National Convention delegates.
“The choice in this election is not about regions or religions or genders,” Obama said at a boisterous victory rally. “It’s not about rich versus poor, young versus old and it’s not about black versus white. It’s about the past versus the future.”
The audience chanted “Race doesn’t matter” as it awaited Obama to make his appearance after rolling up 55 percent of the vote in a three-way race.
But race did play a factor — and in coming days analysts outside of and inside of the Clinton campaign will already start the process that has begun: to try and drive up Obama’s negatives the Clinton campaign (now nicknamed “Billary” in parts of the media) is steadily, inexorably alienating and angering many black voters who have traditionally been counted on as one of the key pegs of Democratic party — and Clinton — support:
About half the voters were black, according to polling place interviews, and four out of five of them supported Obama. Black women turned out in particularly large numbers. Obama, the first-term Illinois senator, got a quarter of the white vote while Clinton and Edwards split the rest.
Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina finished a distant third, a sharp setback in the state where he was born and scored a primary victory in his first presidential campaign four years ago. Even so, he vowed to remain in the race, his goal, he said, to “give voice to all those whose voices aren’t being heard.”
The New York Times notes the dilemma:
The victory was Obama’s first since he won the kickoff Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3. Clinton, a New York senator and former first lady, scored an upset in the New Hampshire primary a few days later. They split the Nevada caucuses, she winning the turnout race, he gaining a one-delegate margin. In an historic race, she hopes to become the first woman to occupy the White House, and Obama is the strongest black contender in history.
Still, his victory came in large part because Mr. Obama was able to turn out significant numbers of black voters, a dynamic that will not necessarily prove as decisive in the 22 states that hold nominating contests on Feb. 5.
If the results buoyed the Obama team, it left the campaign of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton facing a new set of questions. Her advisers’ steady attacks on Mr. Obama appeared to prove fruitless, if not counterproductive, and the attack-dog role of former President Bill Clinton seemed to have backfired.
Indeed, surveys of voters leaving the polls showed that many Democrats who believed Mr. Clinton’s role was important ended up voting for Mr. Obama.
Exit polls showed the high controversial tactics of Bill Clinton didn’t do his wife any favors. First Read:
In the exit polls, we asked voters in this primary if the candidates were attacking each other unfairly. Fifty-six percent of those voting so far think Obama attacked Clinton unfairly, and while that is a high number, more people thought Clinton unfairly attacked Obama — 70%.
The Clintons have been accused of playing the race card in this contest. We do see some potential fallout for the Clintons in the African-American community: 74% of African-American voters think that Clinton unfairly attacked Obama. But when we look at the same question among white voters, a comparable number thought Clinton unfairly attacked Obama — 68%.
Also worth mentioning, a majority of the voters — 56% — said that Bill Clinton’s campaigning was important to their vote today.
UPDATE: The AP reports now that the Clinton campaign now says that Obama is branded as “the black candidate.”
Clinton campaign strategists denied any intentional effort to stir the racial debate. But they said they believe the fallout has had the effect of branding Obama as “the black candidate,” a tag that could hurt him outside the South.
Earlier tonight, Josh Marshall and Andrew Sullivan reported that Bill Clinton was setting up this very same spin — there is VIDEO HERE that shows the advance spin. Sullivan writes:
In a simple phrase: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice”. Listen to it yourself. I’m not making that up.
I don’t think there can be any doubt about the Clintons’ racial strategy now. The people of South Carolina just rejected that logic by voting for Obama – white and black, male and female – in a diverse coalition in the face of a deliberate attempt at racial polarization. They threw the Clintons’ logic back in their faces.
And, in fact, the primary, tone of the “Billary” campaign and reaction by many liberals and Democrats seemed to cast this election in an exotic light: the Clintons, once considered on the cutting edge of Democratic politics as JFK was during his time, seemed to be trying to battle back a campaign that had talked of attempting to unify the country and win the election via a broader coalition — versus stirring up rages, dividing groups and pushing the polarization buttons.
Obama was seemingly arguing for a more cerebral approach and new style of politics, while the Clintons seemed doing the same kind of campaign America has experience for the past 20 years under their “War Room” and Republican political maven Karl Rove.
UPDATE: CNN now reports that a look at its exit polls suggest that Bill Clinton hurt his wife’s campaign:
Bill Clinton’s aggressive campaigning in South Carolina in the days leading up to the state’s primary may have had a net negative effect among South Carolina’s Democratic primary voters, CNN exit polls indicate.
Roughly 6 in 10 South Carolina Democratic primary voters said Bill Clinton’s campaigning was important in how they ultimately decided to vote, and of those voters, 48 percent went for Barack Obama while only 37 percent went for Hillary Clinton. Fourteen percent of those voters voted for John Edwards.
Meanwhile, the exit polls also indicate Obama easily beat Clinton among those voters who decided in the last three days — when news reports heavily covered the former president’s heightened criticisms of Obama. Twenty percent of South Carolina Democrats made their decision in the last three days and 51 percent of them chose Obama, while only 21 percent picked Clinton.
Bill Clinton’s presence on the trail was “very important” to roughly a quarter of those surveyed. Among those voters, Hillary Clinton edged out Barack Obama, 46 to 42 percent.
On the other hand, there are some who believe Bill Clinton HELPED his wife, but not enough in the end to matter (read the full analysis on this link since it is extensive and includes many factors).
Fox News has a more detailed breakdown of the vote:
Barack Obama claimed his second clear victory of the primary season on Saturday. After losing in New Hampshire and having a mixed showing in Nevada, Obama’s win in Iowa was starting to feel like the distant past. In South Carolina, blacks, women, young people and voters looking for change all contributed to his latest success.
Black voters, who made up 53 percent of the electorate in South Carolina — up from 47 percent in 2004 — overwhelmingly backed Obama over fellow front-runner Hillary Clinton by 80 percent to 18 percent.
Clinton (38 percent) and Edwards (38 percent) split most of the vote among whites (45 percent of the electorate, down from 51 percent in 2004), which could point to a potential problem for Obama in future races — although he did take 24 percent of the white vote today – and it’s important to remember he performed well among whites in both Iowa and New Hampshire.
Women were more likely to vote for Obama (53 percent) over Clinton (30 percent), although this is largely due to race. Black women accounted for 33 percent of the electorate, and they supported Obama over Clinton, 79 percent to 19 percent. Among white women, Clinton won by 44 percent to 34 percent for Edwards and 22 percent for Obama.
Similarly, Obama had a clear advantage over Clinton among black men (82 percent to 15 percent). Among white men, Edwards (43 percent) and Clinton (29 percent) outperformed Obama (27 percent). Overall, a 55 percent majority of men went for Obama, while Clinton (23 percent) and Edwards (22 percent) divided the remaining vote evenly.
As noted above, the Clinton campaign has already (via advance spin from Bill and its statement afterwords) now characterized Obama as “the black candidate.”
If past political behavior is any indication, if this is going to be the new strategy that theme will come out via (1)the uses of surrogates or (2)the use of code words such as suggesting American needs a President who’ll be President of all the people.
Newsweek addresses the issue of Bill Clinton’s negative impact and what the Clinton campaign is likely to do next. A tiny taste 4 U:
In the wake of the South Carolina contest, the Clinton campaign will likely have to re-examine the role of Bill Clinton. In the past week, he played attack dog in a way that many party elders found reprehensible. Despite the criticisms, campaign advisers insisted that he was a net-positive for his wife. He campaigned actively for her in the state’s African-American community, which has always been a solid bastion of support for him. Yet he proved incapable of delivering his wife the black vote–and may even have alienated it. (Earlier in the week, Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle attributed Obama’s growing black support to “pride” in him and “a sense of history.”) A little more than an hour after the polls closed in South Carolina, the former president struck a conciliatory note before a crowd in Independence, Mo. Obama “won fair and square” in South Carolina, said Bill Clinton, then immediately questioned the vote’s relevence. “Now we go to February 5, when millions of Americans get in the act.” He also cited the work of his foundation, describing his “current capacity” as “post-politics.”
The Clinton campaign sought to gain control of the news narrative before the polls even closed–and made it clear that they’re willing to wager inter-party warefare to win. Around noon on Saturday, Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s communications director, sent out a memo heavy with spin. “Regardless of today’s outcome,” he wrote, “the race quickly shifts to Florida, where hundreds of thousands of Democrats will turn out to vote on Tuesday.” Because Florida moved up its primary date to Jan. 29 in defiance of party rules, the Democratic National Committee voted to strip the state of its delegates. And after early-voting states protested, the Democratic presidential candidates pledged not to campaign there. Yet Floridians are nevertheless voting, and the polls show Clinton with a substantial lead. So on the eve of the South Carolina primary, she called for the delegates from Florida and Michigan–which was also penalized for moving up its primary, and which Clinton won on Jan. 15 as the only candidate on the ballot–to count at the national convention.
….With two states apiece for Clinton and Obama and a looming tsunami of primaries, be prepared for plenty more spin–and, most likely, rancor. As the campaigns absorbed the results and the pundits opined, the candidates were already preparing for the battlegrounds to come…..
Meanwhile, The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein reports that Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C. attributes the whopping Obama win to voters rejecting the use of the race issue by the Clinton campaign:
Speaking after Sen. Barack Obama’s victory in South Carolina, Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., all but credited the wide-margin of victory to a backlash against the injection of race in the primary by Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Appearing on MSNBC, the third ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives said voters had “recoiled” to the proliferation of racial politics in the election.
“I’m not surprised at that at all,” Clyburn said, when asked about Obama’s big win. “Because I really believe that in the last 48 hours the voters recoiled. They decided to reject the racial animus they seemed to be developing and I’m so pleased.”
Clyburn, who did not endorse a candidate, did not name names. But the implication was fairly obvious. Earlier in the week, Clyburn expressed a sense of disappointment with the Clinton campaign’s tactics and urged Bill Clinton to “chill” with the race-based politicking. And in an interview with the Huffington Post, the congressman suggested that the former president’s aggressive campaigning could be damaging his long-term reputation.
Click on the link to see the video.
HERE’S A CROSS SECTION OF WEBLOG REACTION:
–Pajamas Media has a roundup.
—The Newshoggers:
The polls are closed and the media are calling South Carolina for Obama. The Clintons are not happy….Meanwhile, all this high drama over the primaries may become rather meaningless if the super-delegates end up being the real deciding factor. They hold a hefty margin and a whole lot of power. I have this feeling that both parties are just playing us and in the end, the machine intends to decide who wins.
And what of the Clintons? Bill is out comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson. In fact, the Clintons have made race a sport in this primary election. They are reminding white Democratic voters that Barack Obama is black. How can that tactic work? It seems it can only work if Democrat voters are, in fact, racist. The party of slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow, appears to still be the party of the Klan. Robert Byrd must be pleased.
—Pam’s House Blend did live blogging. Here’s one entry:
7:25: My headline for tonight: The “first black president” flushed his wife’s support from blacks down the toilet in SC. The numbers speak for themselves. Black men: 80% Obama, 17% Clinton; black women: 82% Obama, 17% Clinton.
So Clinton and Obama have split the first four contested races. But things are going to be quite challenging for Obama from now on, since the race will be “national” the rest of the way. Clinton has a decent lead nationally, and will likely will benefit from machine politics in some of the key states.
Bill Clinton is, and always has been, an old-style Southern Democrat racist. A slick, sophisticated operator who knows how to manipulate the African-American community like a fiddle…for his own purposes. But every so often, usually when emotions are running high and a lot is at stake… for him of course…the real Bill Clinton then emerges. That was the case today when it became clear that Hillary will lose in South Carolina. Bill’s reaction? and I kid you not: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ’84 and ’88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here.
After all this time being told by the Clinton campaign that Barack Obama is some kind of closet Reagan-worshipping right-winger, it’s a bit confusing to be told that he’s the second coming of Jesse Jackson, too.
An inspiring speech, again, from Barack Obama – thanking South Carolina for the victory it gave him in today’s primary. An example of what struck me most about the speech: Obama saying we won’t let “cynicism” get in the way of our dreams. Now, when was the last time you heard a Presidential candidate – or a President – use a word like “cynicism” in a speech? I can’t recall any time.
–Los Angeles Times Top of the Ticket Blog:
This past week Sen. Hillary Clinton left South Carolina to campaign in Feb. 5 voting states. But she left behind her husband, Bill, as her surrogate campaigner and attacker of Sen. Barack Obama. It’s looking tonight, as Obama racks up a huge margin of victory in the Palmetto State, like that was a mistake. A large one.
The spectacle of a former president getting down and dirty in the current political trenches with numerous attacks on the freshman Illinois senator may have backfired big-time….Late tonight, a Clinton aide said that Bill Clinton would continue campaigning for his wife. Based on South Carolina’s unfolding results, that may be good news for the Obama crowd.
—The Democratic Daily has a long post that should be read in full (lots of links). But here is a small part of it:
If you were expecting anything other than a big win for Obama in South Carolina today, you weren’t paying attention..Obama and his supporters can claim tonight that it’s about the “past versus the future” but we still have a long ways to go in this primary race, and over confidence after his South Carolina win, could prove to undermine Obama again, as it did after Iowa. Time will tell.
Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ’84 and ’88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here.”
That is quite the implication, isn’t it? “All blacks win here, so what?” is sorta the feeling.It’s strange how filled with pleasure I was at hearing Obama won South Carolina. Is it possible to beat Hillary? Can the Democrats do the right thing and go against the status quo? Can they nominate someone other than a self involved manipulating political machine? Can they??
–Andrew Sullivan has a TON of incisive posts on various facets of the election. Here is just one:
Sorry, but the Clintons were just destroyed in South Carolina in an unprecedented turnout. This was a butt-kicking of massive proportions. How else do you interpret a 28 point margin? It’s staggering.
And I’m sitting here watching Bill Bennett, despite his Republican loyalties, clearly happy that we have achieved this breakthrough in civility, in transcending race, in bringing so many people back into the system. Good for Bennett to see the import of this. This is history.
In some ways, I wonder if the Clintons’ baring of the fangs hasn’t played to Obama’s advantage. He is showing he can beat some of toughest competition out there. If he wins, he will have beaten not just Hillary but Bill as well. He will have redefined the Democratic party and remade its politics. By staying civil, by focusing on the big picture, by refusing to take the low road while defending himself robustly: he won the right way. And he will win in a big way.
If Hillary had hoped to put a South Carolina loss in a racial-politics box, she may have failed. If she set out to lose South Carolina as badly as possible, she certainly succeeded. Barack Obama garnered well over twice as many votes than Hillary and three times as many as John Edwards in easily beating both.
….How badly does this damage Hillary? She still has a lead in most Super-Dee-Duper Tuesday states, including the important coastal states. She has more superdelegates as well, so a thin and temporary lead in delegates won’t make a big deal of difference. However, the more times he beats her, the thinner that veneer of inevitability becomes. If John Edwards gets a clue and drops out of the race, Hillary could be in serious trouble, especially if he does so before February 5th. She may not be able to beat Obama head to head, if the Clintons continue to alienate potential supporters.
–The ever-original The Heretik (who is a MUST VISIT because his graphics are as original as his prose):
The future lies ahead. Who will lie more about the other candidates in the Democratic field? And will the truth of this election be decided by a politician who appeals to the heart or one who knocks him on the head? Who shares the hope? And is hope enough?
Caroline Kennedy will be endorsing Obama in tomorrow’s New York Times, and you can’t miss the contrast between this daughter of a great president and the wife of one. Feminists may weep that Kennedy speaks from under the shadow of her father to endorse another man, while Hillary can’t seem to wriggle out from the shadow of her husband. But then, it’s not an accident that in South Carolina tonight, Obama beat Clinton among women 53 percent to 30 percent.
It’s not so much that women aren’t ready for a woman president. We are. But there’s something about last week’s spectacle of Bill Clinton crashing through South Carolina like the guy poised to drag her back to his cave by the hair that reminds us that Hillary has some stuff to work out in her marriage before she works it out with the rest of us. Any woman in public life inevitably still struggles to define herself in opposition to men. But Hillary has an even bigger cross to bear: She’s still defining herself in opposition to Bill.
Barack Obama was expected to win South Carolina, but not by 28 points. He was also expected to do poorly among whites South Carolinians, with one poll showing only 10% support among whites. But the exit polls say he received 24% of the white vote, tied Clinton among white males, and took about half of whites under 30. Those are important numbers.
I can only hope that this victory can be THE turning point. That he can take this big victory and translate it into momentum going into Super Tuesday. It brought back images of that Iowa win. It was inspiring.
The Clinton’s spin the bad news but they were wrong on one thing. Their press release says that Obama won by 12. Obama actually won by 28 percentage points over second place Hillary Clinton. It looks like it’s time for another Hillary crying jag.
One of the bobbleheads on television — don’t remember which one — said the Clintons are still running a campaign as if it were the 1990s. This may be why younger and better educated voters in particular are being turned off to the Clintons. It will be interesting to see what adjustments they make.
When I think of Barack Obama’s win, I wonder about the need for more substance beyond a strange Bob the Builder style campaign rhetoric. Now, we need the details. Whether or not Barack can continue to build unity within the Democratic party and beyond remains to be seen.
What do you all think?
I don’t like Hillary. I’ve made that clear. I have my problems with Obama, but I prefer him to Hillary 100%. She would be a horrible nominee and an even worse President in my opinion. I hope that this propels Obama to the nomination and that we can finally turn the page on the Bush-Clinton dynasty.
–The Huffington Post’s Joe Vogel says young voters are continuing to come through for Obama:
They also continue to show that they are overwhelmingly behind Barack Obama.
In South Carolina, 68% of voters aged 18-29 supported Obama. Voters in their twenties and thirties made up a combined 30% of the total vote and nearly 67% went to Barack Obama.
Another interesting statistic: 52% of Southern white voters in the 18-29 group voted for Obama compared to just 15% of their grandparents (age 60 and older). While the reasons for this dramatic generational shift can be argued, I see a lot of hope in these numbers. The South, once plagued by division and discrimination, is slowly becoming more tolerant and inclusive.
Barack Obama’s South Carolina Victory Speech will go down in history, like Iowa, as a watershed moment in American politics.
His message of unity, hope, and change is resonating for young people across the country who are tired of partisan gridlock and politics as usual.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.