How Voters Think

[Harlan Huckleby]

The mudslinging has actually been quite tame so far in both parties. I'm not at all worried about any longterm splits.

The crowd at that South Carolina debate was very pro-Obama. They groaned whenever Clinton landed a punch on their champion. I think that's why some people thought Obama "won" that debate. The harsh exchanges that were replayed are about 6 minutes out of a 90 minute debate.

Obama went into the debate looking to pick a fight. (Which Hillary emphasized the next day.) Every negative interaction was inititiated by Obama. I think Clinton beat him on facts, but Obama looked a little better.

Obama accused the Clintons of lying about his opposition to the war. Clinton came back by acknowledging Obama's initial opposition, then named three ways he later equivocated. Hisses from the crowd at the dragon woman.

Obama said Clinton was a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Wallmart while he was a poverty activist in Chicago. Hillary responds that she was working to bring healthcare for children in Arkansas while Obama was working for slum lord Rezko in Chicago. Loud groans and boos from the audience.

OK, here's the truth: neither of the accusations are that significant, but Obama's situation was more embarrassing. Rezko turns out to be quite the gangster, and he was courting Obama for many years. They have a string of small connections - contributions, job offers, Obama did some legal work for him, Rezko bought property next to Obama's mansion and transfered it to him.
Clinton a "corporate lawyer" for Wallmart? Ridiculous. As first lady of Arkansas, she was an honorary member of the board of directors briefly back in the 80's. Wallmart is the largest employer in Arkansas. And this was back before they became the notorious evil empire.

South Carolina is hopeless territory for the Clintons, Hillary is wise to have curtailed campaigning there. African-Americans have coalesced in racial solidarity, and even though the Clintons are their former champions, any friction they have with the Obama camp is being recast in a very ugly light. See her factual comment about the role of Lyndon Johnson in civil rights.

[Freak Out]

The mudslinging has actually been quite tame so far in both parties. I'm not at all worried about any longterm splits.

The crowd at that South Carolina debate was very pro-Obama. They groaned whenever Clinton landed a punch on their champion. I think that's why some people thought Obama "won" that debate. The harsh exchanges that were replayed are about 6 minutes out of a 90 minute debate.

Obama went into the debate looking to pick a fight. (Which Hillary emphasized the next day.) Every negative interaction was inititiated by Obama. I think Clinton beat him on facts, but Obama looked a little better.

Obama accused the Clintons of lying about his opposition to the war. Clinton came back by acknowledging Obama's initial opposition, then named three ways he later equivocated. Hisses from the crowd at the dragon woman.

Obama said Clinton was a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Wallmart while he was a poverty activist in Chicago. Hillary responds that she was working to bring healthcare for children in Arkansas while Obama was working for slum lord Rezko in Chicago. Loud groans and boos from the audience.

OK, here's the truth: neither of the accusations are that significant, but Obama's situation was more embarrassing. Rezko turns out to be quite the gangster, and he was courting Obama for many years. They have a string of small connections - contributions, job offers, Obama did some legal work for him, Rezko bought property next to Obama's mansion and transfered it to him.
Clinton a "corporate lawyer" for Wallmart? Ridiculous. As first lady of Arkansas, she was an honorary member of the board of directors briefly back in the 80's. Wallmart is the largest employer in Arkansas. And this was back before they became the notorious evil empire.

South Carolina is hopeless territory for the Clintons, Hillary is wise to have curtailed campaigning there. African-Americans have coalesced in racial solidarity, and even though the Clintons are their former champions, any friction they have with the Obama camp is being recast in a very ugly light. See her factual comment about the role of Lyndon Johnson in civil rights.

Many Dems are going to vote for Edwards in SC...who is the forgotten man now.

[The Leaper]

John McCain is famous for having a bad temper. And he can be very aggressive, even insulting, in debates & speeches. Ever hear anybody say they won't vote for him because he's too bitchy?

Bill Clinton has just as bad of a temper as McCain...didn't seem to hurt him when running for president.

Hillary's negatives are remarkably high...it is not unprecidented, but they pose a challenge that she will need to overcome. She is DESPISED by many on the right...and her nomination would actually energize the Republican base which is currently not very excited about politics at the moment.

The Democrats probably would have a better chance with a candidate that could just fly under the radar this year...because more Democratic voters are likely to vote than Republican voters in November. However, with a polarizing figure like Hillary running, that gap probably shrinks considerably.

And regardless of how well Hillary might appeal to NY moderates, there is no questioning the fact that McCain is viewed far more favorably by moderates as a whole than Hillary is. Hillary is viewed as a cut-and-dry liberal. McCain is viewed as a maverick who is willing to stand for his beliefs, not toe a party line. That appeals to moderates.

[The Leaper]

The mudslinging has actually been quite tame so far in both parties. I'm not at all worried about any longterm splits.

Huck, you are nuts.

The mudslinging between Clinton and Obama is at a very high level considering we are just a couple weeks into the PRIMARY season. Sure, mudslinging in the summer between the two parties can get intense...but it usually is never this bad this early.

Campaigning within your party typically is far more civilized than when the gloves come off against the opposing party. Occasionally, you'll see primary candidates have a couple days of bickering in a particular state. However, the spat between Clinton and Obama has spread over several states and weeks at this point.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I agree with Leaper, it's gotten testy real quick between these two.

There was the whole "inevitability" claim by Clinton's campaign and I really think they thought they were going to coast through the primaries. Obama has given her way more of a fight then she expected and now she's got to really push hard to put him down.

It's almost like Apollo Creed (Hillary as the more polished and pure politician) vs Rocky (Obama as a scrappy fan favorite).

Now, it's just a matter of if the ending will be from I or II.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

John McCain is famous for having a bad temper. And he can be very aggressive, even insulting, in debates & speeches. Ever hear anybody say they won't vote for him because he's too bitchy?

Bill Clinton has just as bad of a temper as McCain...didn't seem to hurt him when running for president.

Hillary's negatives are remarkably high...it is not unprecidented, but they pose a challenge that she will need to overcome. She is DESPISED by many on the right...and her nomination would actually energize the Republican base which is currently not very excited about politics at the moment.

The Democrats probably would have a better chance with a candidate that could just fly under the radar this year...because more Democratic voters are likely to vote than Republican voters in November. However, with a polarizing figure like Hillary running, that gap probably shrinks considerably.

And regardless of how well Hillary might appeal to NY moderates, there is no questioning the fact that McCain is viewed far more favorably by moderates as a whole than Hillary is. Hillary is viewed as a cut-and-dry liberal. McCain is viewed as a maverick who is willing to stand for his beliefs, not toe a party line. That appeals to moderates.

You are little off base if you think Clinton has as bad a temper as McCain. You would be hard pressed to find any examples of his temper prior to his election or even when he was prez.

Don't interpret standing up to Chris Wallace as a temper.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I agree with Leaper, it's gotten testy real quick between these two.

The only really ugly, damaging moment was when Clinton was depicted as disrespecting Martin Luther King. Both parties have pulled back sharply from creating that racial divide, which could seriously f-up the democratic party. Initially, Obama said he was "deeply disturbed" by her Johnson-King statement. Within two days he was emphatically praising the Clintons for their longstanding commitment to civil rights and economic justice.

The Obama folks are painfully aware that they are walking on the edge of a trap. The minute he becomes "the black people's candidate" ala Jessie Jackson, he is done.
Don't you think it is a little curious that Oprah Winfrey has been withdrawn from the frontlines of South Carolina? She was drawing HUGE crowds of (mostly) African Americans two weeks ago.
Notice that Black celebrities and politicians are not speaking out publically on Obama's behalf. James Clyburn, the big cheese black politician in SC, has stepped back from his implicit support of Obama.

Obama has given her way more of a fight then she expected and now she's got to really push hard to put him down.

I think your analyis works for New Hampshire, where there was a whiff of desperation about the Clintons. But since then, it is Obama and supporters who are throwing most of the punches. Clinton has a strong lead in the national polls, which should return results on February 5. If you watch the last debate, Obama initiated every single one of their testy exchanges.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Many Dems are going to vote for Edwards in SC...who is the forgotten man now.

Finishing third out of three is hard to characterize as "many". The only story out of S.C. is that Obama is gonna win by 20 points or so.
This is the state that Edwards had to win to be a serious candidate. Edwards will stay in the race on a shoe-string budget and continue to pickup delegates, he might have a role to play at the convention.

It was interesting to see Edwards on Letterman this week. He was loose, funny, engaging. Two months ago he went on Letterman and was defensive and stiff as a board. Now that the pressure is off, guess he can let his well-coiffed hair down. (Letterman reached-over and messed it up at the end of the show.)

I'm also glad to see that Elizabeth Edwards is not traveling and campaigning anymore. She did not look so well, I think that lady needs regular sleep and a regular schedule.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Just saw a new poll on MSNBC.

Barak Obama is getting 10% support among white democrat voters in South Carolina.

That's 10 percent. Ten.

[Joemailman]

What's really interesting about that poll is that Edwards beats Clinton among white voters 40%-36%. However, Edwards only gets 4% of the black vote. Are blacks in South Carolina unwilling to vote for a white man from the south? Or is it just that he is up against two candidates that have a lot of popularity among black voters?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Edwards only gets 4% of the black vote. Are blacks in South Carolina unwilling to vote for a white man from the south? Or is it just that he is up against two candidates that have a lot of popularity among black voters?

Option 2. Both Obama & Clinton are such huge favorites of the black community, it really doesn't say much that Edwards has little support there. (Edit: Bill Clinton won 82% of African American vote when he won S.C. primary in 92, so blacks will support a white man.)

Edwards WON the South Carolina primary in 2004, he was born in South Carolina, he's really a favorite son candidate.

Clinton will likely pull enough black votes to finish second.

I expect the Obama people very much regret pouncing on Clinton for allegedly dissing Martin Luther King. They are paying a price for opening that pandora's box. Blacks are only 12% of the population nationally, and there's still a lot of racial mistrust/rivalry beneath the surface.

The NY Times endorsed McCain & Hillary this evening, for what its worth.

I'll enthusiastically back Obama if he gets the nomination. I like him, I just don't think he is ready to be a President.

[Joemailman]

Did McCain accept the endorsement?

[The Leaper]

The only really ugly, damaging moment was when Clinton was depicted as disrespecting Martin Luther King.

Think about this...a DEMOCRAT seemingly dissed MLK...when the democratic party is reliant on the black vote to win elections. I'm sure she did not really mean it as she said it...but those slipups can do a lot of damage at the highest level of politics.

You do not find this race dynamic to be potentially damaging at all to the Democratic party? While I doubt blacks will run to vote Republican, they may not be as easy to pull to the voting booths for Democrats if Hillary is the nominee.

The growing chasm bewteen democratic white voters (who back Hillary in droves) and democratic black voters (who back Obama in droves) has to be upsetting for the leaders in the Democratic Party.

[The Leaper]

I expect the Obama people very much regret pouncing on Clinton for allegedly dissing Martin Luther King.

I doubt it. What she said was stupid. She deserved to be called for it.

Even if you take the comment for what she MEANT, rather than at face value, it was dead wrong. She was trying to claim that she was someone who can get things done...while Obama is just a hopeful dreamer.

What has she done though? She has no evidence of any meaningful legislation to her credit. She touts her "experience"...what experience? Watching Bill get blow jobs in the Oval Office? She wasn't a policy maker as First Lady. She didn't sit in on Cabinet meetings. She hasn't done anything particularly noteworthy in the Senate.

She's running on Bill's record...but she's not Bill.

[The Leaper]

You are little off base if you think Clinton has as bad a temper as McCain. You would be hard pressed to find any examples of his temper prior to his election or even when he was prez.

I'm hardly off base. Bill Clinton's anger is well-known in Washington...and beyond.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/19/wuspols619.xml

His blowups are legendary if you read any of the books done by people who were in his administration...even more legendary than his blowjobs.

Both Clinton and McCain have volcanic tempers. My point was that if it didn't really hurt Bill, it isn't really going to hurt John. People don't mind a president who blows his top once in awhile...as long as he gets things done.