I have no idea what will happen today in South Carolina.

[cali]

I don't trust ANY of the polls, not even as a rough measure of voter sentiment. This much I do know: If the polls reflecting a racial divide are accurate, we all lose.

It's a cliche but of course it's true, breaking something is much easier than building it. If Obama gets only 10% or so of the white vote and 70% or so of the black vote, the story will be about his being only a candidate who attracts the black vote- despite his strength with white voters in NH and IA.

There are people actually wishing to see this happen. That's so shortsighted, not to mention, ugly. These people are assuming that the democratic coalition will hold no matter what. And it may. Or it may not.

Anyone who thinks a racial divide in voting in South Carolina is a good thing or not a big deal, is woefully wrong. Anyone saying a coalition can survive anything, isn't acknowledging reality or history.

If this comes to pass, it's not a good thing. And make no mistake, the repukes would be thrilled to see it happen.

One more thing: It doesn't matter who you think is at fault. That won't matter a hill of beans.

[H2O Man]

1. It is going

to be interesting.

[cali]

2. Yes, but it could be interesting in a destructive way to the

democratic party.

[H2O Man]

3. Right.

The reaction to today's primary has the potential to damage the party. It's interesting to think about: on one hand, it is a group dynamic (actually, "groups"); on the other hand, it involves individuals. It would be interesting to see if the DU dynamics can focus on the positive in the next 48 hours. That would require individuals to conduct themselves in a civilized manner. (CNN is replaying their MLK special -- hence, I can dream.)

[cali]

4. I will congratulate the winner

If that's Clinton, so be it. If it's Edwards, he'll have accomplished something remarkable. If it's Obama, I'll be happy to see the candidate that I support prevail. But I'm concerned that the reaction to an Obama win that's largely due to AA support will be very ugly indeed. And there's ample reason to think that.

[H2O Man]

5. It will be

important to look at who places second and third, and to consider the margins.

Each of the campaigns will attempt to spin the results. The news media will attempt to slam the "losers." And so there are the makings of tension and conflict right there.

There is a line in the movie "Cinderella Man," where the manager of the heavyweight boxer and unlikely champion asks him, "Is there anywhere else you's rather be?" I think of that when I watch the strange events unfolding before us.

[robbedvoter]

10. And so shall I.

[BeyondGeography]

6. Obama has already proven himself in predominantly white states

if white voters in SC don't support him beyond 10% or so, it's a commentary on them, not him.

[H2O Man]

7. Interesting point.

I think that the recent increases in support for John Edwards should be seen as a result of two things: concern about the quarreling between Clinton and Obama, and -- more importantly -- people beginning to find Edwards to be a very strong choice. It may be viewed in terms of human beings making the choices they sincerely believe in. Of course, the media will twist it. But we do not have to.

[B Calm]

8. I agree, people are seeing that John Edwards has a great platform

for the working class, and the sad thing is the media will twist it as a anti black/women vote.

[BeyondGeography]

11. Here are a couple of Edwards supporters who are not thinking straight

==But in interviews in several rural South Carolina communities this week, a number of voters said they believed that Obama is, or was at one time, a Muslim, and some said it could influence their votes.

"He's acknowledged he was raised up Muslim, he says now he's changed," said Glenn McLain, 72, who owns a car lot and body shop in Patrick, a tiny town northeast of Columbia, S.C. "With ties like that, I don't think it would be good for our country."

McLain said he heard Obama had grown up Muslim on television, but he could not be more specific about when or on what program. McLain, who said he would probably vote for John Edwards, said he would not consider voting for Obama mainly because he is inexperienced, but also partly because of his religious beliefs.

Jackie Blanton, 78, a retired schoolteacher who lives in Gaffney, said she had heard Obama would not take his oath of office as a new senator in the traditional way.

"He did not want to use the Holy Bible, he wanted to use the Koran, and I resent that," she said.

Like McLain, Blanton, a longtime Edwards supporter, said her objection to Obama mostly had to do with his lack of experience, but she said she was also disturbed by the rumor she had heard.==

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/01/26/obama_fighting_false_e_mail_rumors_in_south_carolina/

This isn't Edwards' fault, nor is it Obama's; it's just people being foooled by other people who don't represent the candidates. The media will make the outcome all about the candidates, which is superficial and false.

[B Calm]

13. I'm sure you can find a few examples, but the majority of Edwards

supporters know he has the best platform. I'm sure with a little search I could find one a few examples from Obama supporters who are voting for him only because he's black. Same is true with Hillary and the women. I'm not supporting Edwards because he's white, I'm voting for him because I want a government for the people and not a government paid for by the corporations!

[BeyondGeography]

14. Correct; Edwards has always done well with black voters as has Obama with whites

Which is why anyone who says today's result is more about the candidates' limitations with certain racial groups than South Carolina's response to these candidates along racial lines has got it wrong.

[H2O Man]

15. Right.

The media always tries to do two things: sell their product, and frame issues in a manner that benefits their corporate ownership. Thus, they cannot report that voters made an intelligent, thoughtful decision. They have to try to create controversy.

And there are always a few jackasses who confuse stirring the pot with helping their candidate -- just as there are a few stupid people who fall for their crap. We see some who like to stir shit up here on DU, hoping to convince the less insightful of some lie or another. But as Gandhi said, just because a few drops of water in the ocean are dirty, it does not make the ocean dirty.

[ellisonz]

16. "He did not want to use the Holy Bible, he wanted to use the Koran, and I resent that,"

:rofl:

[BeyondGeography]

17. As another poster pointed out on another thread, that's a SCHOOLTEACHER talking

[ellisonz]

18. Retired, I hope?

Pity the children.

[H2O Man]

12. I like all three

of the democratic candidates. I'm confident that rach one could make a strong, capable President of the United States. (I thought Joseph Biden could, also.) I have not tried to decide which one of the three to support in the primaries, though I've been fascinated by the process. I like the debates, and think it is good for the party; hence, I've donated to each of their campaigns.

Since late November/ early December, I've said that the John Edwards campaign would gain strength in the period between South Carolina and Super Tuesday. Of course, lots of others have made similar predictions. These calls are not made based upon racism or sexism. It is simply because of the process: as Arthur Schlesinger Jr. said, politics isn't so much math as it is a chemical reaction. People are hearing John Edwards' message.

[robbedvoter]

9. I DO KNOW: I know that you're absolutely right! and wish this isn't the case

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4180669