USA Politics

Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

wasted155 said:
So, Obama leads Clinton in SC


:yey:  I must say I'm surprised because I heard that a lot of blacks do not want Obama as a president because they say that he does not know what it is to be an Afro-American, born and raised in America, with ancestors in the slave period in America, etc. etc. etc. I thought Hillary would come closer.


From the New York times:

Democrats Vote in South Carolina; Big Turnout Seen

COLUMBIA, S.C. — Democratic voters were taking their turn Saturday in the first Southern primary of the presidential campaign, the final contest before the race expands into a state-by-state battle for the party’s nomination.

Senator Barack Obama made a stop at Harper's restaurant in Columbia, S.C., on primary day. 
As Senators Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and former Senator John Edwards made last-minute appeals for support, thousands of their volunteers waved signs on street corners, manned telephone banks and drove voters to polling stations that opened across the state at 7 a.m. and will close at 7 p.m.

Party officials were predicting a record-setting turnout. Throughout the state, party officials said they had early reports of high turnout, in predominantly white and black precincts. Several precincts in York County, on the state’s northern edge, had surpassed their complete voting totals from four years ago by early afternoon. Officials said similar turnout patterns were coming in from Aiken County, on the Georgia border.

Four years ago, about 290,000 people voted in the presidential primary here, but officials are predicting that as many as 350,000 voters could participate this time.

With 45 delegates to the Democratic National Convention at stake, which will be divided among the candidates, South Carolina offers the most diverse contest to date in the party’s nominating season. Black voters, party officials predict, will make up at least half of the electorate.

A combative weeklong campaign, particularly between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton, as well as former President Bill Clinton, closed largely with positive messages. Yet during a rally here that concluded just before midnight on Friday, Mr. Obama make an oblique reference to his rivals as he implored voters to believe in his call for change.

“After we won Iowa, everyone was so excited. Everybody said, ‘Oh, look at this, an African-American is winning in a state with almost no African-Americans and everybody is excited, young people came out,’” Mr. Obama said. “Well, you know what? The status quo does not give up that easily.”

Mrs. Clinton dashed to several sites across the state to greet voters. She was scheduled to fly to Tennessee for a Saturday evening rally, one of several signs that the campaign was seeking to lower expectations in the state.

Meanwhile, Mr. Obama took a break from doing satellite television interviews and making calls to key political leaders to drop by Harper’s Restaurant near downtown Columbia. He greeted nearly every customer in the restaurant, including Scott Boyd, 42, who said he is a lifelong Republican but voted for Mr. Obama on Saturday.

“He’s an aggregator,” said Mr. Boyd, a neurosurgeon in Columbia. “I think he can bring people together. For me to be brought out of my Republican shell – I’m a convert now.”

With a victory in New Hampshire and Nevada on Mrs. Clinton’s side, Mr. Obama is seeking to even the odds with her in advance of 22 primaries and caucuses on Feb. 5. Mr. Edwards, who was born in South Carolina, was looking to keep his candidacy alive with a strong showing here.

The voting took place against a backdrop of intense racial discussions. One poignant reminder of South Carolina’s historic racial divide, the Confederate flag, was swaying in the cool breeze on Saturday only a few yards from where supporters waved placards for Mr. Obama, who would become the nation’s first black president.

Some of Mr. Obama’s strategists worried that the discussions on race could influence the outcome here on Saturday and drive some white voters away from Mr. Obama’s candidacy, boosting the efforts of Mr. Edwards or Mrs. Clinton.

Rick Wade, a senior adviser to the Obama campaign, disagreed with the suggestion that support from white voters had decreased or that race would be a deciding factor in the primary’s outcome.

“At the end of the day, I believe that South Carolinians are going to look beyond the rhetoric and the conversations taking place and are more concerned about issues,” Mr. Wade said. “You have to build a broad coalition. It’s the only way you can win in this state.”

Mr. Edwards began his day with a morning stop at a cafe in Mount Pleasant, outside Charleston, where he shook hands with diners and posed for pictures. Speaking to reporters in front of the café, he called Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama “two candidates who are devoting all their time and energy to tearing each other down.”

And he vowed to continue in his bid for the Democratic nomination, no matter what the result of the South Carolina primary. “I’m keeping moving no matter what,” he said.

Later in the morning, Mr. Edwards stopped at a polling station in Columbia, accompanied by Leon Howard, a South Carolina state representative who has endorsed Mr. Edwards.

In an appearance on the “Today” show Saturday morning, Mr. Edwards called himself “way the underdog” and said he believed the circumstances of the race have changed this week.

“I think things have shifted some this week, because of what happened in the debate and what’s happened subsequently with a lot of the petty squabbling that’s come from the others,” Mr. Edwards said. “I think what people in South Carolina seem to be responding to is that I’m talking about them and the things that affect their lives, like jobs and health care.”

According to a recent poll, Mr. Edwards is within striking distance of a second-place finish in South Carolina, where he won the Democratic primary in 2004. On Sunday, he plans to depart on a two-day campaign swing through Georgia, Tennessee and Missouri, states that will hold primary contests on Feb. 5.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

No kidding, guys.  The race card played by the media is just sad.  Some reports are saying that black women have it the hardest because they have to choose between a black candidate and a woman candidate.  Media is pathetic!
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Well, Hillary got lots of votes of women. In New Hampshire, 13% more women voted for her than for Obama.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Which, if memory serves correctly, was the 'turning of the tide' for N.H.  Seems that they (the media) had the women more for Obama, and with all the (media) coverage of the 'tears of anguish' from Clinton, it brought more women over- so sayeth some media sources.

And, yes, the race card is something that really bothers me, because its all just people voting.  It seems as if the 'nation' of the US are all just a bunch of stupid hicks that vote on color and gender (as per the media) but each individual doesn't seem to do that.  As stated in some above statements, there is desparity in the choices of african-americans, because they either do vote for an african-american, or they shouldn't because he isn't enough of an african-american. 

@LC, yes, it is a shame that some would suggest that SC vote doesn't count based on its population. 

I think I am voting for 'news media' to be listed as a curse word.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

OBAMANIA strikes in SC!

Obama won 55% of the vote to absolutely trounce in South Carolina.  His victory crossed gender and ethnic lines, winning the majority or plurality of almost every possible demographic.  He was polling at around 35-40%, but a 55% victory is not just big - it's a landslide.  The remaining 45% was split fairly evenly between Clinton and Edwards.

It's hard to tell if this win lets Obama become the frontrunner for Super Duper Tuesday, but it certainly puts him only a step or two behind Hillary.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Great atmosphere during his speech!

*Crowd yells "race doesn't matter, race doesn't matter, race doesn't matter.."*
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

LooseCannon said:
It's hard to tell if this win lets Obama become the frontrunner for Super Duper Tuesday, but it certainly puts him only a step or two behind Hillary.

I was under the impression he was the front runner coming into Super Tuesday.  I'll dig around.
Damn!  I was not close.

"Overall, Clinton has 249 delegates, followed by Obama with 167 and Edwards with 58."  Source.

Edwards will stay in the race, "to give voice to the voiceless".
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Right, but that includes superdelegates - party leaders and elected officials who have publicly supported Hillary/Barack/Edwards.  Including Hillary and Bill Clinton's votes towards Hillary, for instance.  So it is a misleading total.  Hillary has more estimated votes currently, yes, but any one or more of those Senators, Congresspeople, etc. may change who they want to vote for.  Barack is leading in pledged, guaranteed votes, because he was close in three races and blew Hillary away last night.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

LooseCannon said:
Right, but that includes superdelegates - party leaders and elected officials who have publicly supported Hillary/Barack/Edwards.  Including Hillary and Bill Clinton's votes towards Hillary, for instance.  So it is a misleading total.  Hillary has more estimated votes currently, yes, but any one or more of those Senators, Congresspeople, etc. may change who they want to vote for.  Barack is leading in pledged, guaranteed votes, because he was close in three races and blew Hillary away last night.

What makes it REALLY interesting is that if Edwards stays on until the DNC, he'll likley make it so neither B. Hussein Obama and Billary Clinton get the majority needed for the nomination on the first ballot. If they work like I think they do, one the second ballot ALL pledged delegates are then "unpledged" and can vote form whomever they want, even if their candidate is still in the race.

Edwards will likely play the role of King(or queen) maker. Which means he's probably going to  get a plush job if the Democrats' nominee wins in November. Potentially even on the ballot of either one as VPotUS. Or, if he doesn't run, Secretary of State, maybe.

Don't blame me, I voted for Zombie Reagan.
zombie-reagan.jpg
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

It depends on the amount of delegates that Edwards has going in.  20% of delegates for the DNC are PLEO (party leaders and elected officials) who don't have to vote for anyone on the first ballot.  If there is no majority secured on the first ballot, all hell can certainly break loose, with delegates voting for whoever the heck they want.  And that could mean the possibility of a dark horse candidate.  If Al Gore or Wes Clark or another charismatic, popular Democrat shows up, they could suddenly find themselves on the ticket.

The situation for the Republicans could be very similar.  Romney, McCain, Huckabee, and possibly Giuliani may each grab a quarter of the vote.  Current polls suggest a close race in Florida between Romney and McCain; Maine is currently polling towards Romney, and then it's Super Duper Tuesday.

Current polling suggests the following:

Romney will win Massachusetts & Utah.
McCain will win Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Missouri, Minnesota, Arizona & California.
Huckabee will win Alabama, Georgia, Oklahoma & Montana.
Giuliani will win Minnesota.

However, this doesn't take into effect the withdrawal of Fred Thompson from the race.  Thompson had about 5-10% in most states, more in the South, which should divide fairly evenly between Romney and Huckabee.  The real issue will be whether or not McCain can grab enough ballots on the 5th to convince everyone else to drop out - a surprise win by Romney in Florida could give him a lot of support in states where it is very close.  If Giuliani or Huckabee somehow pull out a Florida win, both of them will have large resurgences in their campaigns - surprisingly, Huckabee is only a few points back in states like Illinois and Minnesota.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Ted Kennedy endorsing Obama is very good for Obama's campaign, especially in New England where he seems to have been lacking votes.  Obama is polling in the lead now in a few mid-western states, like Colorado.  No other new polls since his overwhelming awesome victory have been displayed.

Romney and McCain are polling neck and neck in Florida.  It looks like Giuliani is done.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Caroline is nice.  Ted is the deal breaker.  He has major political mojo.

Let's talk endorsements for awhile, actually.  Hillary only has a double handful of Senatorial endorsements, and none with the star power of Ted Kennedy.  Obama has the Massachusetts duo of Kennedy and Kerry, as well as former senator Ted Daschale.  And let's not forget Oprah Winfrey.

Nancy Pelosi has not yet endorsed a candidate.  Which really isn't such a bad thing.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Indeed a blow to Hillary, if she tried to get the Kennedies for herself. I don't know much about it but I heard that this family is very, very popular in the States.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

A lot of older Democrats in their 60s and such remember the dynamic rise of Jack & Bobby Kennedy as the pinnacle of their age of politics.  That's why the Kennedy family legacy was very important to the Clintons.  The Clintons will be remembered by those in their 30s and 40s as the pinnacle of their age of politics.

Obama is winning in the endorsement category.  While Hillary has gotten more votes via endorsements (PLEOs), Obama has gotten major star power - many African-American celebrities have publicly endorsed him, whereas the number of celebrities behind Clinton is noticeably less.  I would suggest that Oprah endorsing Obama is the biggest boon to his campaign in a long time - until the Kennedy call.

Looking at the results of the four Democratic primaries to date, what's clear is this - the young kids love Barack Obama.  He's won the 18-29 bracket in *every* primary, in every demographic.  The Kennedys can deliver people 55 and up to the Obama camp.  Hillary and Bill Clinton, according to reports, have spent the last month trying to convince Ted Kennedy to remain neutral, that's how afraid of it they are.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

I wonder how that 'youth movement' will continue.  I know that in the last few elections, especially with Kerry, everyone thought the younger vote was what would win him the vote, and in the end, a very small percentage actually showed up to vote.  Obama does, however, really carry the flag of change well, in that he has less of a political history than the Clinton group does, which is a very good turn on for him.  The difference between him and Ewdards in the last election (04) is that Edwards didnt have the charisma that Obama seems to posses.  (in my opinion)
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Well, it's turned out so far. And people are far less likely to vote in primaries than full elections, so it's a good sign.  He does need to keep them motivated...the 5th will be a good sign of what age groups we'll keep seeing.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

That is true, and I also read somewhere that Obama got more votes for himself, than total votes in the last primary in SC.  So you are correct, there has been huge voter turn out!

Of course, that is another really sad commentary on previous elections, that so few voters actually turn out to vote. (drives me crazy)
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

LooseCannon said:
Caroline is nice.  Ted is the deal breaker.  He has major political mojo.

Let's talk endorsements for awhile, actually.  Hillary only has a double handful of Senatorial endorsements, and none with the star power of Ted Kennedy.  Obama has the Massachusetts duo of Kennedy and Kerry, as well as former senator Ted Daschale.  And let's not forget Oprah Winfrey.

Nancy Pelosi has not yet endorsed a candidate.  Which really isn't such a bad thing.

I've read that Oprah has since down-played her vocal support for Obama, not necessarily because she does not believe in him but rather that her fans have vehemently objected to her choosing a 'race card' instead of the 'gender card'.  The fan message was clearly 'we women need to stick together.'  Funny, Oprah, as far as I know, has not had any public support for Hilary.  Fans just need to get over the fact that Oprah is allowed to have a personal opinion despite her public figure.
 
Back
Top