What does the Hillary victory in Nevada mean for the upcoming South Carolina primary. Is this a crucial tide-turning win that will give Hillary even more support?
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Effects of Nevada Results
posted by Jack Craver at 3:12 PM
9/3/06 - 9/10/06
9/10/06 - 9/17/06
9/17/06 - 9/24/06
9/24/06 - 10/1/06
10/1/06 - 10/8/06
10/8/06 - 10/15/06
10/15/06 - 10/22/06
10/22/06 - 10/29/06
10/29/06 - 11/5/06
11/5/06 - 11/12/06
11/12/06 - 11/19/06
11/19/06 - 11/26/06
11/26/06 - 12/3/06
12/3/06 - 12/10/06
12/10/06 - 12/17/06
12/17/06 - 12/24/06
12/24/06 - 12/31/06
12/31/06 - 1/7/07
1/7/07 - 1/14/07
1/14/07 - 1/21/07
1/21/07 - 1/28/07
1/28/07 - 2/4/07
2/4/07 - 2/11/07
2/11/07 - 2/18/07
2/18/07 - 2/25/07
2/25/07 - 3/4/07
3/4/07 - 3/11/07
3/18/07 - 3/25/07
3/25/07 - 4/1/07
4/1/07 - 4/8/07
4/8/07 - 4/15/07
4/15/07 - 4/22/07
4/22/07 - 4/29/07
4/29/07 - 5/6/07
5/6/07 - 5/13/07
5/13/07 - 5/20/07
5/20/07 - 5/27/07
5/27/07 - 6/3/07
6/3/07 - 6/10/07
6/10/07 - 6/17/07
6/17/07 - 6/24/07
6/24/07 - 7/1/07
7/1/07 - 7/8/07
7/8/07 - 7/15/07
7/15/07 - 7/22/07
7/22/07 - 7/29/07
7/29/07 - 8/5/07
8/5/07 - 8/12/07
8/12/07 - 8/19/07
8/19/07 - 8/26/07
8/26/07 - 9/2/07
9/2/07 - 9/9/07
9/9/07 - 9/16/07
9/16/07 - 9/23/07
9/23/07 - 9/30/07
9/30/07 - 10/7/07
10/7/07 - 10/14/07
10/14/07 - 10/21/07
10/21/07 - 10/28/07
10/28/07 - 11/4/07
11/4/07 - 11/11/07
11/11/07 - 11/18/07
11/18/07 - 11/25/07
11/25/07 - 12/2/07
12/2/07 - 12/9/07
12/9/07 - 12/16/07
12/16/07 - 12/23/07
12/23/07 - 12/30/07
12/30/07 - 1/6/08
1/6/08 - 1/13/08
1/13/08 - 1/20/08
1/20/08 - 1/27/08
1/27/08 - 2/3/08
2/3/08 - 2/10/08
2/10/08 - 2/17/08
2/17/08 - 2/24/08
2/24/08 - 3/2/08
3/2/08 - 3/9/08
3/9/08 - 3/16/08
3/16/08 - 3/23/08
3/23/08 - 3/30/08
3/30/08 - 4/6/08
4/6/08 - 4/13/08
4/13/08 - 4/20/08
4/20/08 - 4/27/08
4/27/08 - 5/4/08
5/4/08 - 5/11/08
5/11/08 - 5/18/08
5/18/08 - 5/25/08
5/25/08 - 6/1/08
6/1/08 - 6/8/08
6/8/08 - 6/15/08
6/15/08 - 6/22/08
6/22/08 - 6/29/08
6/29/08 - 7/6/08
7/6/08 - 7/13/08
7/13/08 - 7/20/08
7/20/08 - 7/27/08
7/27/08 - 8/3/08
8/3/08 - 8/10/08
8/17/08 - 8/24/08
8/24/08 - 8/31/08
8/31/08 - 9/7/08
9/7/08 - 9/14/08
9/14/08 - 9/21/08
9/21/08 - 9/28/08
9/28/08 - 10/5/08
10/12/08 - 10/19/08
11/30/08 - 12/7/08
Subscribe in a reader 
Download the blog feed Dashboard Widget
Subscribe in a reader Download the blog feed Dashboard Widget
The views and opinions expressed in this blog do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the UW-Madison College Democrats. They are the views of their authors. Postings by individual board members to not necessarily represent a consensus opinion of the board or organization.
5 Comments:
Yeah, I can still see Obama winning South Carolina but I don't think he'll have enough momentum for to beat Clinton on Super Tuesday.
I highly recommend this article from The Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7934.html) because I think it seems to reflect a pattern for black candidates in general. I don't think pundits pay enough attention to the crucial role demographics play in determining election outcomes and way too much attention to things like endorsements and fundraising.
If you don't have the time, the gist of the article is that black candidates either do well in states with such a large black population (like in the deep south, think SC) that they make up enough of the electorate to win without much support from whites, or they do well in states with almost no minorities (iowa, new hampshire) and thus no racial tensions. States where African Americans make up about the same percentage as the national average (Nevada, New York, California, Florida) are where black candidates do the worst against white candidates in primaries (the article uses Jesse Jackson's run for president in 1988 as a model).
It sucks to think of political outcomes almost set in stone and to think of voting patterns still so racially polarized in this day in age but the pattern has fit so far and...I guess we'll see what happens in Florida and then on Super Tuesday.
The theory makes sense, but I think the reason that blacks might not do as well in a state like California or Nevada or even New York, is more attributed to the lack of support for black candidates among Hispanics.
Jesse Jackson won Michigan in the 1988 primary. Michigan is a state with 15% black population, just like NY, but there isn't a rival minority block to oppose it the way there is in NY.
And of course there are almost too many differences to count between Obama and Jackson. There's something about how Jackson was running so strongly AS a black man, decrying racial injustices, that just seems to turn white people off. But to Obama his race is almost an afterthought to his campaign or something of a symbol indicating that he will transcend partisan divisions just like he transcends racial divides.
Along this line, I think there's a lot of truth to what Kos says here
(http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/19/161612/858/815/439564). As much as people accuse Clinton of being a triangulator pandering to moderates in the general election, if you ever listen to one of her speeches, there is never any shortage of fighting words or red meat for the Democratic base. Contrast that with the new politics rhetoric of Obama. Even though he has a more liberal voting record than Clinton he never emphasizes that he's a Democrat or talks about how much he wants to beat those damn Republicans who have been running our country into the ground or whatever. And then of course there's his proclivity to kind of use Republican framing in his rhetoric like when he called social security a "crisis", complements Reagan, uses strawman representations of Democrats about religion, and fear tactics in ads on health care mandates. I don't think it's a stretch to say that's hurt him among the partisan Democratic base.
But, this is starting to sound like Obama's political obituary and the primaries aren't over yet!
Hillary's general election liabilities are being apparent. Hillary won basically by high turnout in Las Vegas, while Obama won the rest of the state (Reno, and rural areas). She also lost amongst men, and independents. This are demographics that Democrats need to win in a general. I dont think she's the queen of electability as she claims.
As an Edwards supporter, Im dissappointed in today's results. Im thinking I might switch over to Obama.
By the way, there is some debate going on right now as to which candidate won more delegates from NV. Obama might have gotten 13 to Hillary's twelve based on the geography; Obama's support was throughout the state while Hillary's was based primarily in Clark County.
the obama campaign is claiming 13 delegates to clinton's 12... if anyone has more info on that let me know.
Post a Comment
<< Home