First thoughts: Obama's opportunity

Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:08 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
COLUMBIA, SC/TAMPA, FL -- It’s been a tough last seven days for Barack Obama. It began with his loss in Nevada, a contest where most polls showed him trailing Clinton; still, many -- buying the spin from Team Clinton -- viewed him as the favorite there because he won the Culinary Workers Union endorsement. Next came the CNN debate, the aftermath of which put the Obama camp on the defensive (over Rezko, single-payer health care). And as the New York Times’ Jeff Zeleny put it this morning, “For all of the sunny self-assurance that has propelled him to this juncture … Mr. Obama grappled to find a balance between defending himself against accusations he called distorted and promoting a message of hopeful change in a state that is essential to his bid for the presidency.” Yet today’s Democratic primary in that state -- South Carolina -- presents him with the opportunity to put the past seven days behind him and give him momentum heading into February 5. Indeed, if we learned one thing from Clinton’s victory in New Hampshire (besides being more cautious about reading polls), it’s that victory and momentum can come out of frustration, disorganization, and total chaos.

*** Will Clinton once again win the expectations game? As for Hillary Clinton, there have been several signs that her campaign is downplaying expectations in South Carolina, despite its strong ad buy and deploying Bill and Chelsea to campaign here. For instance, Hillary skipped the state for two days (on Tuesday and Wednesday) to campaign instead in February 5 states. The campaign also seems to be trying to make Florida as relevant as possible, even though the state won’t be awarding delegates. And now we get word that Clinton won’t even be in South Carolina tonight. Rather, she’ll head to the February 5 state of Tennessee. (By the way, this is a page out of the '92 Clinton playbook -- always be in a state that's about to vote, not a state that's already voted.) Nevertheless, remember that Clinton led in South Carolina polls until early December, and that this is a state her husband carried in 1992.

*** The Edwards factor: Finally, there’s John Edwards… If Obama ends up winning this contest, he can in part thank the former North Carolina senator, who seems to be splitting the white vote with Clinton. Edwards also appears to be riding some momentum with his Mr. Nice Guy approach after Monday’s vicious debate between Clinton and Obama. “While Senator Clinton and Senator Obama seem intent on tearing each other down, I'm intent on building you up,” Edwards says in a new radio ad. Moreover, his campaign actually has been outspending both Obama and Clinton on TV ads this past week. In fact, according to our sources, Obama's ranks THIRD in TV-ad spending here over the past week. Overall, Edwards will have spent more on TV ads in South Carolina than either of the two front-runners combined ... that’s right, combined! Could he finish second here? And what would that mean? Edwards staked his entire candidacy on doing well in the first four contests, especially Iowa. And, unless the unexpected happens, he will finish 0 for 4 -- a result that would only increase the number of vultures circling over his candidacy.

*** Things to keep an eye on: As much as we'd like for race to not be a part of the picture, it is. In 2004, the makeup of the Democratic primary electorate in South Carolina was 51% white and 47% black. In that contest, Edwards won over 50% of the white vote and narrowly won the black vote over Kerry, 37%-34% with Sharpton getting 17%. Overall, Edwards beat Kerry, 45%-30%, followed by Sharpton at 10%. Turnout was just under 300,000 in 2004. Also of note, 24% of the 2004 Dem electorate was independent. What does that mean for today? Well, the most recent MSNBC/McClatchy/Mason-Dixon poll anticipates an electorate that's 55% African-American and 42% white. Obviously, the Obama campaign hopes the electorate today is closer to Mason-Dixon's survey than the 2004 exit poll. And that's basically THE number to watch for -- the black-white split. More importantly, what will the white number be for Obama? In the last poll we conducted, Obama received just 10% of the white vote; that was a 10-point drop from a week earlier. Also, watch how black women break. In the poll and on the ground, young, black women tend to support him, but not older ones necessarily

*** The basics: Polls in South Carolina open at 7:00 am ET and close at 7:00 pm ET. There are 45 pledged delegates at stake. The primary is open, so Democrats, independents, and Republicans can all vote -- provided they didn't participate in the GOP primary last week. And how about this: Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Gravel, Kucinich, Obama, and Richardson will all be on the ballot, per the state election commission.

*** Bill’s Jedi mind tricks: So Bill Clinton apparently isn't interested in just messing with Obama's head; he's also turned his attention to McCain. Here’s what Bill said yesterday: "[Hillary] and John McCain are very close. They always laugh that if they wound up being the nominees of their party it would be the most civilized election in American history and they're afraid they'd put the voters to sleep because they like and respect each other." OK, anyone else think Clinton's up to something? Could Mitt Romney's campaign in Florida have asked for a better soundbite from the ex-president than the one he provided yesterday? Seriously, just as Romney and McCain are sparring over Republican credentials, here comes Bill Clinton insisting that McCain and Hillary Clinton are "very close." At some point, that's going to be turned into a TV ad or a radio ad or an attack direct mail piece. Talk radio will have a FIELD day with that one. Of course, the McCain folks could try and convince the right that this is Bill Clinton using his Jedi mind tricks on them, but will they listen; Are these the conservative droids voters are looking for? By the way, is there an op-ed page in America that doesn't have someone writing negatively about Bill's role in this campaign? Bob Herbert's column today was pretty rough. Once South Carolina is over, are we looking at Bill Clinton becoming the sole focus of attention over the next week leading into February 5?

*** The Florida sideshow: It’s also interesting to see the Clinton campaign work the non-binding Florida primary vote so hard. First, the campaign releases a statement promising to sit the Florida delegation at the convention. Then, a few hours later, the state's senior Democrat, Sen. Bill Nelson, endorses Clinton (a rare recent red-state endorsement for her). Clearly, the Clinton campaign is nervous Obama gets a head of steam out of South Carolina today, and they'd like to blunt the momentum a tad. A convincing straw vote finish on Tuesday could do that. Will she hold a rally that night so that there is something for the news channels to dip into and she can give a victory speech? Tuesday night gamesmanship on the Democratic side will be interesting to follow. Sure, we'll be focused on the incredible McCain-Romney race in Florida and the potential end of the Giuliani candidacy. But seeing how Clinton declares victory in Florida and watching Obama handle the night will make for a good sideshow.

*** Florida's main event: What a difference a day makes. Thursday night, the Republican candidates wanted nothing nasty to do with each other. A day later? And it appears McCain decided to use all of his negative oppo against Romney and vice versa. Does McCain regret not using some of his negative Romney message in Thursday's debate? Because yesterday, he couldn't avoid the topic. Will this be how things close in Florida with McCain-Romney in a knock-down drag out?

*** On the trail: On the Dem side, Clinton has various events in South Carolina before heading to Nashville, TN, where she holds a town hall this evening; Edwards, who spend his entire day in the Palmetto State, stumps in Mt. Pleasant and Columbia, where he holds his Election Night party; and Obama also is in the state, and he has his Election Night party at the Columbia Convention Center. On the GOP side, Giuliani, Huckabee, McCain, and Romney are all in Florida, although Huckabee later travels to an event in Birmingham, AL.

Countdown to Florida: 3 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 10 days
Countdown to Chesapeake Tuesday: 17 days
Countdown to Ohio and Texas: 38 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 283 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 360 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.

Text FIRST to 622639 to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

I can't wait until we are done with SC...The Clintons have made this an uncomfortable situation....

To open up a few people internal-prejudices….To essentially master mind the manipulation and division of southerners….Is an emotional crime….And I don't know if this can ever be forgiven....….

When it is all said and done….If Hillary doesn’t win she and Bill are still financially successful….And the same goes for Senator Obama…But guess what, while the Clintons were busy baiting you racially, they manage to make you forget what this is really all about….and that’s survival……

We don’t really deal with this type of nonsense in California…Times are really hard and the only thing many of my friends are focusing on is our cost of living….Our health-care cost…Gas prices, which has caused many other things to rise such as groceries….We want to know how are we going to send our children to college….that and many more other important things are what we should be concentrating on……

Stirring up racial tension is not going to make anyone financially better…..

We can’t lose sight to what this is really about…..

MLG (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:22 AM)

OMG!!

"RACE MISTAKES" BLACK PUNDITS AND OBAMA...

BLACK POLITICAL PUNDITS AND BLACK POLITICIANS, PLAYED THE RACE CARD... IT ORIGINATED THERE, WITH DISTORTION OF BILL'S "FAIRY TALE" COMMENT ABOUT THE IRAQ WAR, AND HILLARY'S COMMENTS ABOUT LBJ AND PRESIDENTIAL LEGISLATION. THEY STUPIDLY FELL BACK ON THE OLD MANTRA, TRYING TO PLAY RACE TO THEIR ADVANTAGE WITH THE LIBERAL MEDIA. IT HAS BEEN A DISASTER, AND IS FURTHER POOF THAT POLITICAL PUNDITS, UNDERSTANDING OF THE POLITICAL PROCESS IS RIGHT DOWN THERE WITH GEORGE BUSH'S UNDERSTANDING OF FOREIGN POLICY.... WHICH AIN'T MUCH...

The blacks who are disappointed with Obama's now (polarizing) image have to look to their own and ask why... The truth is it's really quite simple, they simply did not understand what they were doing, it's a lot like using a pack of hounds to chase a rabbit out the garden... Yes the hounds are successful at chasing the rabbit out, but look at the damage they do in the process.

It (was) fine for Oprah to support Obama, even though she did come dangerously close to bringing ethnic "race" into the political race. But she got away with it, there were a few soft groans, among white Pundits, but they were just plain scared to push the issue. Wisely, they left Oprah's racial overtones alone, considering most of the white political pundits, I have watched and listened to, are in fact pro Obama, and want/wanted him to win... They all seemed to like Obama, both liberal and conservative pundits, embracing him as something new.

But not to worry, where White Pundits backed away, Black Pundits and Politicians jumped in with all four feet. They just couldn't resist and they trotted out the "Jim Crow" car, and super hyped *Los Angeles* Mayor Thomas J Bradley's, Governor run scenario... Saying that White People just won't vote "behind the curtain" for Black Politician's.

INCREDIBLY, AS I WATCHED THE BLACK PUNDITS "PITCH" THIS LINE OF (BS) SIDE BY SIDE WITH WHITE PUNDITS, LISTENING AND SOME INDICATING THAT MAYBE IT IS TRUE. **All**, failed to mention that MAYOR BRADLEY, served as mayor of Los Angeles California for 5 consecutive terms from 1973-1993... No one ever talked about this... Black or White Political pundits, at the time they were digging up race... Mayor Bradley ran for Governor in 1982 and *narrowly* lost, and the Pundits say it's because he was Black... "The Bradley Effect."

Yes this is the same "narrow" perspective of Black Political Pundits and Black Politicians that unintentionally, may derail Obama's presidential ambitions. You have to look to them folks, they are the ones who have shot Obama in the foot... and the Clinton's have benefited enormously from their mistakes.

But for people who are politically aware, Obama is really an improved slicked up [*Jesse Jackson package take II.*] Of course there are differences, Obama is more articulate, that is with actual pronunciation of words. He speaks clearly, like the Harvard Graduate Lawyer he is, without the muffled sound and ear straining words of Jesse Jackson. Also Obama has real political experience, both state and National level But make no mistake, Jesse Jackson's "soring rhetoric" (Obama's soring rhetoric, so far, is his claim to political fame) is every bit on level with Obama's, maybe even better... considering Jackson's lack of higher education, and analytical training.

Frankie Crosby, Columbus Georgia. (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:22 AM)

Florida will be as meaningless as Michigan on the Democratic side; it's not a real race unless both sides are actively competing, and the Republican race on the other side on the same night will again take up all the attention (even moreso now than in Michigan, as Florida could potential decide it all for the GOP).

South Carolina, on the other hand, has been fought hard for by Clinton. She has spent tons of money there, locked down key endorsements, returned to campaign there in the last couple days, and Bill Clinton has been campaigning hard for her all this week. If Hillary loses, and loses by a decisive margin, that really hurts her campaign, because Obama will have two landslide wins vs. Clinton's two close wins, and be even more ahead on delegates than he already is; it also raises questions as to whether Clinton can win in the heartland and deep south with Democrats the way she can in the West and Northeast.

Given how hard she has worked in South Carolina, if Clinton finishes behind Obama by double digits, or worse, gets almost tied by Edwards (or worst of all, somehow falls behind him), it would be absolutely devastating for her campaign going into Super Tuesday.

Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:37 AM)

You know, this used to be a lot easier. I’ve been a die-hard Democrat since my first campaign, when I served as a precinct captain for George McGovern in Minneapolis. How’s that for die-hard? I’ve always heaped scorn on liberals and progressives who don’t have the good sense to pull together for the general election and support the Democratic nominee as the best choice to advance their viewpoint. Don’t get me started on Ralph Nader and his Green Party for the Strategically Impaired.

Now I’m suddenly getting a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach watching the campaign the Clintons are running against Obama. I’m afraid they are going to make me choose between what is best for my country and what is best for my party. If Bill and Hillary succeed with these tactics and she becomes the nominee, then where does it end? If we continue to reward this kind of sorry excuse for political dialogue with our votes, it will never end. My country has to come first.

We’re facing some pretty grim domestic and global problems and we’re fast running out of time to address them. We just lost eight years we could not afford because of the train wreck Bill Clinton engineered for the Democrats in 2000. Yeah, Ralph held the winning margin and threw it away, but if not for Bill’s incredibly irresponsible behavior that election would never have been close enough for the Greens to have made a difference. I can’t believe that any Democrat would seriously consider letting this guy anywhere near the White House after the way he let us all down, particularly when you look at the consequences over these past seven years.

As an old culture warrior, I say it’s time we put down our verbal weapons and look to the future and what is best for our nation and our planet. Bill and Hillary will never change. They have way too much experience with the slash and burn politics of decades past and carry too many scars to lead us where we need to go. Just watch them in action now. Old habits die hard.

So, what am I supposed to do if she wins with this divide and conquer strategy? Vote for Ralph? Join the draft Bloomberg movement? (He’s really a Democrat, you know). Leave the top of my ballot blank? Please, please, please people. Help us out here. As long as we keep responding to this crap we will never get the issue-oriented dialogue across party lines we so desperately need. The media will just keep covering the election process as though it was fight night, and everybody loses. We’re running out of time, and at this point in history how we win has got to become as important as winning. Think before you vote!

Jaycee, Ventura, California (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:39 AM)

CLINTONS = VELOCIRAPTORS - political dinosaurs. Most
Americans are really turned off by the slash em up tactics. They will be changing strategies (AGAIN) tomorrow.

Jim (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:39 AM)

Why don't we just continue to move the goal post with Obama. It doesn't matter what he does it will never be enough for you guys. So lets make Sc about race. Tell me why didn't Edwards or Clinton carry the white vote in IA? Aren't AA a part of the deomocratic party, why aren't they expected to carry the AA vote? Obama carried the white vote again, in IA. Shouldn't they be doing just as good as Edwards and Kerry did in 2004? Afterall isn't Hillary married to the "first Black President".

Bottom line this is SC THE SOUTH...democratics won't win in in the GE regardless of who the dem is. Why don't you guys grow up and stop trying to divide the country even more than it already is.

george (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:43 AM)

Hmmmm, earlier THIS WEEK First Read ran a blog entry about Senator Clinton "standing by" her no campaigning in Florida pledge. Now she's magically changed her mind. How not surprising. More "change the rules in the middled of the game" from the Clinton campaign, just like Nevada. Whatever it takes, right?

Nashville_fan (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:45 AM)

Actually, if it's Clinton vs. McCain, look for the Dems to "Goldwater" him -- casting ol' John as a dangerous proponent of endless Middle East warfare ... while Hillary disassociates herself from any such attacks and tries to stay above the fray.

Smooth strategy; but just like in '64, we'll get the war no matter who is elected. That's why the MSM has marginalized genuine anti-war candidates right from the get-go, significantly aiding the process of weeding out anyone who didn't vote to authorize or fund the war in Iraq, or at least offer plenty of verbal support if they were not actually members of Congress.

The more things change ...

Rick Lapin, Albuquerque, NM (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:46 AM)

I think Bill Clinton is one of the most brilliant political minds of out time. He displays this over and over when his tactics work. Whether you like it or not, I have to say I wouldn't mind have someone that clever in the whitehouse again even behind the scenes. I do believe two heads are better than one and as Hillary definitely had the intellectual brain power that is necessary too. We could use some brilliance in the white house after what we've had there for the past 7 years!!

Susan, MN (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:52 AM)

I do hope that Howard Dean and his democratic party put a sock in the mouth of ex-President Clinton. To think I voted for this man twice!!

ALL the democrats in the US (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:52 AM)

The democratic party lost 1 generation in 1980. It is about to loose another in 2008.
This past month the supposed first black president reminds many of the recent republican campaigns and seems as black as Governor Wallace in 1968.
What we have learned in recent weeks is that for publications like the New York Times winning the race for delegates is a loss. (Obama in Nevada and a Tie with Clinton in New Hampshire).
That before this past new year when Bill Clinton morphed into Governor Wallace he was christened by such publications as "the first black president".
What we have learned is that the New Your Times, in its rush to promote the Clinton campaign, (The must have some powerful markers with that dyNASTY)has been very busy promoting the idea of race over the story of Obama's winning rural white voters by a 65% margin in Iowa, New Hampshire & Nevada.
Regardless, the major media in its rush to protect their chips in the grand game by promoting and protecting the Clinton's remind me of "journalists" that covering the Klan rally in Washington a century ago.
At that time many in the media said that the Klan was a social organization with an important agenda for social change.
Reminds me more of the Clinton campaign today.

P. Walker, Memphis, TN (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:53 AM)

you, the media, are making this about race. the rest of us are content to vote for the person we respect most.

shame on you.
you just don't/won't stop, will you?

sincerely,
someone who respects obama, clinton, and edwards

kelly, chicago il (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:54 AM)

Can your network please grow just a little journalistic integrity? I've been watching Morning Joe for a half hour this morning and it's been entirely Obama >> Hillary. I'm an Obama supporter, but this is nauseating. Hopefully you realize that your viewers are not so daft as to be spoon-fed your clearly biased coverage.

Joe quoting Maureen Dowd (of all people) with regard to Hillary... that's not biased...(sarcasm for those who won't pick that up). He just did it again while I wrote this.

All three (and every guest I've seen so far) are pegging the rise of the "race issue" on the Clintons when any objective viewer can plainly see that the media itself is the one propagating this nonsense. If the Clintons picked up the "race issue", it was only because they saw that you media bobble-heads will run with it. I personally want to move beyond race as an issue and gender as an issue, but I can't turn on the TV or surf the internet (sorry newspapers... I don't pick you up) without reading a story about it. Believe it or not... it is possible for someone to objectively consider a candidate without considering their race or gender. It will be a wonderful world when phrases like "white vote", "black vote", "hispanic vote", and "woman vote" have no meaning because we realize everyone is an individual able to think for themselves, not a caricature of their race or gender.

Anderson, Savoy, IL (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:58 AM)

" ...still, many -- buying the spin from Team Clinton ..."
--Thank you, somebody in the media finally made note of that, ummm 1 week later.

" ...in South Carolina, despite its strong ad buy and deploying Bill and Chelsea to campaign here."
--Does this mean that Bill Clinton will have lost some political clout. Huh? A former President becoming increasingly irrelevant. I'm not sure, but it would seem to me that W.J. Clinton comes off the big loser.

"[Hillary] and John McCain are very close. ...it would be the most civilized election in American history ...because they like and respect each other."
--Seriously, could anyone believe this--'cept for Hill-nuts? If I were J. McCain, it seems similar to a Rovian strategy, because they know McCain would be their strongest opponent. On a final note, any election w/ the word "Clinton" will not be civilized.

**The Clinton's are going to fight to go against DNC rules and seat FL and MI delegates--because they were the only ones on a ballot. What a cheap Clintonian trick.

(For those counting at home, that's 2, count them 2, cheap Clinton tricks before America even wakes up!)

--NSMsnbc (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:06 AM)

Seems like you forgot to mention that Obama left Nevada while the caucuses were still in progress . . . be a little more discrete in your slanted bias toward Obama Chuck.

JJC (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:10 AM)

The Clintons want the world to know that SC has Race problem but the truth of the matter is, SC is just like Iowa.In 2004, Edwards won over 50% of the white vote and narrowly won the black vote over Kerry, 37%-34% with Sharpton getting 17%. If Blacks were voting Blacks, Sharpton could have won majority Black votes.

Amos Ajo (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:11 AM)

Sen. Barack Obam will win win win !!!
Brace yourself Chuck you can handle it !!!!

Ken Collins/Wagoner,Oklahoma (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:12 AM)

Hillary left SC but left Bill and Chelsea to campaign full-time while she was gone. The Clintons continue to play political games; lowering expectations, saying things like, "oh we know she won't win since there are so many african americans here" meanwhile, campaigning like crazy.

Why doesn't anyone in the media remind readers that just like 60 days ago,

HILLARY LED BARACK IN SC BY LIKE 25 POINTS!!!

If Obama wins AT ALL it should be considered a victory...
but since voters don't decide- media and pundits do- i guess we'll have to see.

jds (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:12 AM)

Bill is shameless. I, like all of us, knew he wasn't always truthful in the past. And I kind of knew in my gut he and his wife might really say anything, if they saw political advantage.

But this rapid fire of ludicrous statements is stunning. Now Bill is saying that a McCain-Clinton race would be too civil? Please. If anything, we've seen a Clinton instinct to over attack. They attack when its questionable whether its in their interests to do so.

Sorry, Bill, but given all the benefit of doubt you've lost, and given this Clinton campaign's track record, its simply not believable that the campaign would suddenly find a new kind of politics because they are running against a Republican for whom Hillary has so much respect and high regard.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:15 AM)

Hillary Clinton is the Republicans' strongest rallying force. They are praying that she will be the nominee. Everyone knows that people are more likely to vote AGAINST someone than FOR someone. This is the Republicans' solution to not having anyone they can get excited about. Romney? McCain? ZZZZZ. But Hillary? That'll get them motivated!

So if Democrats want to lose again, vote Hillary.

Frank A., Burke, VA (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:17 AM)

"still- many buying the spin from team clinton" re: Nevada............PLEASE,,is there any group on the planet that takes less responsibility for their mistakes and lack of judgement than the media?? I learned of the power of the Culinary Union from Tim Russert(and others) long before the caucus..Russert said on to Joe S. or Matthews that "whoever gets the Cul Union will have a huge advantage...it's HUGE, HUGE(he said it twice)..It's tadamount to winning the caucus...""" that's what he said ..look at the tape...so how was it that the Clinton set all this up?

Kitty White New Orleans, La (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:19 AM)

Oprah Winfrey has & will remain to be one the best daytime talk show host we've seen. She has a following of viewer's that are loyal to her show.When she agreed to come out on the campaign trail, it was said that she injected race as an issue.What she said was " Is he the One", meaning, African American voter's finally had a viable candidate that could reach across racial lines & appeal to voter's on a broad spectrum. The answer has been a Resounding YES!
How soon people forget the car's she gave to Every Audience member (WOMEN) one day. There was NO racial aspect from her Generosity that day.People( WOMEN) were vetted as to thier need for such a Generous Gift.It was'nt some random day when someone had a Ticket for her show. OPRAH HAD EVERYONE IN THE PALM OF HER HAND FROM THAT GENEROSITY.Some other day's(random)thier are great gift's under audience member's seat's.Again, she has them in the palm of her hand.Other day's, she has a company's come on & promote product's & just by Chance, again, audience member's are rewarded for being there.
Women had no Problem accepting her generosity at those times.Has Hillary done anything Remotely close to that for Women or anyone for that matter.THE ANSWER IS NO!Yet women, now call Oprah a racist for making her Political view Known in this election.Hillary get's a Pass, because she shed a few tear's.
Hillary came out of New Hampshire proclaiming, she had found her Voice. Well, anyone with half a Brain know's what that voice is. It IS BILL CLINTON!Now he's out there protecting his Wife( who he cheated on Numerous times) from the Big Bad MSM, & from the new guy( who just happen's to be an African-American).Everyone of you women would've Kicked Bill to the Curb, a long long long time ago & YOU KNOW IT.This woman ( Hillary)has done nothing Personally for you, to help in Your everyday Life.She only say's, Vote for Me, I Am Woman, Hear US ROAR.Yet, somehow, you can call Oprah a Racist & at the same time, Accept her Generosity, That actually save's some Lucky one's $$$$$.
Talk about Hypocrisy! I am woman Hear me ROAR, with Bill as my New VOICE!

Rick,ky (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:20 AM)

I like when I see the ladies come to their senses like MICA and relize that only a man and it doesn't matter what color but only a man can run things and women should be seen and not heard and in the kitchen and the bedroom just admit it Hilliary cant do the job cause of womanhoodYO GO MICA try and control the girlyness when talking about obama

Joe buchanan matthews tuckerwille (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:20 AM)

Quit making this so damn race-centric!

JazzyJEF (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:21 AM)

"So Bill Clinton apparently isn't interested in just messing with Obama's head; he's also turned his attention to McCain." -- M

How about the NY Times -- a pro-Clinton outlet-- endorsement coming on the same day?

Bill and the NY Times are in cahoots, handing ammunition to Romney and Giuliani which will allow them to tar McCain as the "liberal" their conservative base fears he is. Romney will win Florida on this.

folk_astronomy (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:25 AM)

I think the tactics the Clintons have resorted to say a great deal about them and most of it isn't very good. Making race an open issue when Obama's acceptance by white voters was surging, even if it ends up being a stroke of genius, will still be seen as both devious and malicious. It may hand them the candidacy but it will almost certainly cost them the general election. Many of us who could have supported either Obama or Clinton based on their policies can now see the huge difference in their characters. If, after 16 years in which we have been unable to trust our president, the majority of Americans are willing to vote for four more years of the same I will be shocked and disappointed. The Republican candidate, if it is McCain, is known for his honesty and integrity. If it is him versus Clinton the Republicans will hold on to the White House.

david dial, akron, ohio (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:27 AM)

The Clintons make me sick.

Angela, Charleston, SC (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:30 AM)

I've heard on Morning Joe's this morning the question re: what does this say about Obama if he can't bring in the people representing the diversity of the Democratic Party? I wonder what does this say about us -- the 'white' us?
Is there a rationalization going on having to do with youth, experience, etc. that apparently leads away from Obama?

Sue Jens (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:33 AM)

Jezz one post and ya cant keep it going you guys do this as well as you report on things why not hire someone to do it .NOT like anything is happening today like a primary whats a matter chris Mathews not up yet .we all wait, us news junkies, for the most exciting station reporting the election to wake up and get going.need help

kenn (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:34 AM)

All of this back and forth and speculations from the media is driving me crazy. I am a 46 year old woman from Arizona and I have been WAITING for years for Hillary Clinton to run for President. Now that the time has come, I am now introduced to Barack Obama. And you know what?? I LIKE the guy. I'm not going to vote for him on Feb. 5th, but come November if he is the Democratic Nominee then I will vote for him. I will be perfectly ok with him as our President. This has nothing to do with race for me personally. It is about supporting someone that I have liked for years versus someone that I have liked for a short period of time. Period. If I saw something from Obama that was drastically different from Hillary that I felt strongly about, it would make a difference. But at this point I don't...

Kelli Wickwire, Prescott, AZ (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:38 AM)

First read might as well be posted as a Obama campaign headquarters blog. There is no pretense at objective journalism. A daily read of First read gives the impression that the Obama team never has a motive beyond the pure and transparent. Is he not a politician? Is he not capable of turning the screw? Has he no ambition? Pure paternalism from this blog.

Ed, San Antonio, texas (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:39 AM)

the media has molded this campaign and served it up on a platter for obama and he has failed miserably by going racial with it...the debate times are completely loaded in his favor and the Nevada debate had his time as doubled that of john edwards and 20% more time than clinton...the nightly news shows give Edwards about 45 seconds total on-air time per hour and give obama 60%....every TV story is geared positively toward obama and when he can't come to his own defense the media does it for him....Hillary is doing very well defending herself on the air and while stumping...she stops and answers every racial and gendre question thrown at her and then politely moves on with her stump...its great that edwards has remained out of the fray, but he really doesn't get any credit from the media...hopefully as in New Hampshire the media can get this one wrong too!!...as for obama: i don't see any much needed change in strategy from the so-called "change" candidate and eventually his act is going to wear thin in states like Cal, NY, and PA

anotherdummycrat, Trout Creek, NY (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:44 AM)

It will be interesting to see, if this informatin can be extracted in an exit poll, whether there is a reverse Bradley effect where in white males vote for Obama but won't "confess" it in public. Why not. if people feel constrained to say what is socially acceptable locally?

John Ferguson, Green Cove Springs, FL (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:44 AM)

Hillary has found her voice, and it's Bill's. At first I thought the Clintons were guilty of being advocates for African Americans only while the recipients of their advocacy remain beholden and in their proper place. I thought that yes, the smears and lies against Obama were race based. Now I realize that Hillary will smear and lie about ANYONE who gets in her way, regardless of race. Somehow I'm not reassured.

Barb, Newport OR (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:55 AM)

Hillary Clinton is the Tonya Harding of politics.

Don't we deserve integrity in the White House?

Obama out classes her any day of the week.

Colene, New York, New York (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:55 AM)

why is it that u guys always think that the clintons are playing tricks. the obama people are much worse. they have been managing the media far more. he has no credentials, no record of anything but is still seen as someone who is a great competitor.in the last debate he was far from civil. as for the republicans

john doe, carbondale il (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:56 AM)

I have long been a supporter of Bill Clinton. Until now. Mrs. Clinton has achieved the impossible; she has made me dislike her husband. They will say anything and do anything to be elected. Sen. Obama was right to point out that Mrs. Cinton really didn't have 35 years of experience, her husband did. I think Ted Sorenson was quoted saying "you can't get experience by osmosis."

As for the Rezco photo with the Clinton's, Mrs. Clinton dismisses it as one of tens of thousands of photos taken. Meaningless. Politicians beg, borrow and steal for people's money in exchange for a meaningless photo. The comment alone is enough to show that the whore mongering system must be changed.

Adding insult to injury, we now know Mrs. Clinton is the Queen of earmarks (more than all the other candidates combined), exchanging more than Kodak moments for campaign contribitions, but rather federal dollars.

There is no healing the wounds these two will inflict on this country.

Chris, Washington, DC (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 11:58 AM)

I hope John Edwards benefits from the split in the party today.He would be a good president.The media has provided us with their blah,blah,blah to tell us Obama will win the black vote and blow the doors off of the white vote---according to Chuck Todd.I so appreciate their know all and tell all.

HMT-MI (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:03 PM)

Unbelievable, Hillary wins buy 2 points in NH and MSNBC states that she got her mojo back. She came in third in Iowa and will lose handily today. And one final point. Did anyone expect an African American to get a large majority of the white vote in a backward state such as South Carolina? If we look closely at the poll John Edwards will get a large majority of the white vote (a white male). All in all she is a very divisive figure who will never win a general election. Just look at the head to head matchup with any Republican. Hillary loses to every candidate. Democrats better wakeup or they will pick a losing horse. That horse is named Billary (Hillary and lying Bill).

Ted Heluski,Cleveland, OH (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:06 PM)

Well.
Do not be surprised if what happened in New Hampshire repeats in South Carolina.

Hillary Clinton is on song among African American women, young and old in South Carolina!
They love her.

Hillary Clinton id the real deal.

Cheers and God bless.

Orikinla Osinachi (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:07 PM)

I hope many people heard Rep. Jim Clyburn this morning on MSNBC. He very eloquently explained how the White community in the Deep South state of SC is still not quite as open to an African-American as in a state like Iowa. He also said that the Black community does interpret certain things that the Clinton campaign has said - Bill, Hillary, and surrogates - as "code words." Joe Scarborough said, as a Southerner, he completely understood. I don't want to get into all of the details, but you have to be fair in your analysis and not buy into this Clintonian spin that Obama can't win White votes. OBAMA HAS WON MORE DELEGATES IN THE FIRST THREE MOSTLY WHITE STATES THAN HAS HILLARY!! OBAMA BEAT HILLARY IN IOWA BY TEN POINTS - IOWA WHICH IS 95% WHITE!! In NEVADA OBAMA WON IN THE WHITEST DISTRICTS! To appear SHOCKED that because Obama doesn't win a lot of the anti-Hillary portion of SC's WHITE vote - against John Edwards who is the NATIVE-BORN SON of SC, who WON SC in 2004, and who had a good debate performance - and against the Clinton Campaign AND the media, who have been stirring this racial pot - is most biased, and frankly, patently UNFAIR!! Also remember that SC is a Deep South state that still flies the Confederate Flag and has been SOLIDLY in the GOP Electoral column since 1980. The GOP has a lock on the Deep South states. Neither Obama nor Hillary would be likely to carry SC. The COMPETITIVE STATES in the fall like IOWA and NH and NEVADA have PROVEN THAT OBAMA TRANSCENDS RACE AND WINS THE MOST DELEGATES WITH HIS MESSAGE OF HOPE!! So just let the win speak for itself - if it's a win for Obama, or Edwards, or Hillary, just give credit to whoever wins! AND STOP STIRRING THIS RACIAL POT - it is disgusting and very, very transparent!

Jane, Cary, NC (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:11 PM)

With all the heat in the race right now, I think everyone has lost track of the fact that America has no time left to argue. We need to stand up now or get passed by. We can't stand up if we don't stand together.

This game of doing anything necessary to win does not help. It is short sighted and is only being used for personal gain. It has no place in bringing us together to solve real problems.

This isn't new, we've played this game for 30 years. And we haven't accomplished anything on healthcare, social security, energy, education, and on and on.

But today we find ourselves in a situation that if we don't solve these problems we are actually in trouble as a country. Both our friends and our enemies are competing against us these days. We are 28th in education, can make enough energy to keep our economy running, have no influence oversees are surronded by forclosure and homelessness. Do we sound like a country that can lead the world for much longer?

We don't have time to play games anymore. This time we have to choose someone with the ability to unify us all around one idea. Leadership is what we have lacked. We don't need a bureaucrat that knows how to get the different departments of the government to work better. For 30 years we've had politicians with detailed policies that could never get passed.

We know the answers to our problems, what we need is a president that can compromise to get all the american people to act as one and solve these problems.

For those that think this is "pie in the sky" I say that we should find a compromise. I'm ready to work with you, if you can find a way to work with me. We don't have any more time to argue while the rest of the world passes us by.

Christopher, DC (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:16 PM)

Everything is done at it's own time. Thank you America and it's media. We all know how things have been rearranged for the Clintons even if it means lying and former president bending low.
Did I say there are voting machines that we haven't focused on?

rachel (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:16 PM)

The race question needs to be turn around. Pundits should be asking can Hillary Clinton get the black vote? She has not proven that she can get the black vote. She has had varies black politicians, ministers, etc. to endorse her, but that is not the black vote. She can not win without the black vote. If she thinks that black people will vote for her by default, she is mistaking. Her behavior is serving to suppress the black in the general election.

Lydia Lindsey (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:21 PM)

Sounds to me like the media is trying to make it's readers believe Clinton's already won...and, if people believe that, they will vote for her? I suppose some will...not me. I wish the news/reporting would be more impartial...

NanD (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:23 PM)

The longer that Edwards stays in the race, the better for Obama...just like Thompson hurt Huckabee in South Carolina, Edwards takes white votes away from Clinton.
This race is all about race and splitting the white vote between two white candudates benefits the only black cndidate.

Chicago Paul (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:25 PM)

The Republicans have the Clintons to thank for giving them the Presidency. Look at the 'trash' they left behind in trying to beat up on Obama. The lost focus on the larger prize. Good luck to the Democrats! The Dems really know how to blow opportunities.

Sandose (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:25 PM)

come on lets get off bill clinton hes starting to become a pain in the butt along with all those Ferry tails hes talkint about....Whats he trying to do become a king so we can worship him for the next four year...Tired of the same old politcs and they are they old policts...Why dont you the news media give the same opportuninty to the rest of the canadates as you do the clintons..Every time you watch the news its hill and bill..Boy you guys must really be looking for dirt to get highlights...This conuntry is in a mess Why dont you spend sometime on that, what brought ous to it and who....I would love to see a list of all the pork barrell and its sponsors so i can thank them for puuting there interest first while Americnas suffer..So let me first say to them thank you...Your pockets come first...Change and your part of it.

Russ Wells, Maine (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:27 PM)

From a middle class white male: Tell bill clinton and that sorry wife of his to go crawl back under the rock that they crawled out from under. bill disgraced this country enough, and we don't need the type of shame, and politics that they illustrate. I am spending my vote on Mr. Oboma. Tell bill clinton that the next time that he wants to use the words SHAME, then he needs to look himself in the mirrior, and to stay out of the cameras.

Tim Hicks Eugene, Oregon (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:27 PM)

The Obama campain has made this contest and henceforth the national contest wether it be Alabama or elsewhere about race. the only chane I see them trying to usser in is blacks want their time 'our time has come' to be the rulers over the white majority. It wont happen . That is why the republican media favors the Obama campaign over the senator from N.Y. The republican party knows that a black is still not electable for the highest office in the land .
Ihave livedwith blacks and know blacks from the days as a youth cheering on civil rights . todays blacks want a superior position to their white coworkers based on the color of their skin,thats why they cry raceism everytime a recession looms. so that their race may keep their jobs based on race and not qualifications or seniority . Ask yourself this question. IF Martian luther king wanted to help the poor where hast the black help for the white poor been?
Hiding behind Obammas silver toung?For blacks its never been about helping poor whites its only been blacks first.

reality checker (Sent Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:33 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=611078