How Clinton thinks she will win the election by losing SC....

I saw this on thehill.com http://thehill.com/dick-morris/how-clinton-will-win-the-nomination-by-losing-s.c.-2008-01-23.html

HOW CLINTON WILL WIN THE NOMINATION BY LOSING SOUTH CAROLINA

By Dick Morris
TheHill

Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly lose the South Carolina primary as African-Americans line up to vote for Barack Obama. And that defeat will power her drive to the nomination.

The Clintons are encouraging the national media to disregard the whites who vote in South Carolina's Democratic primary and focus on the black turnout, which is expected to be quite large.

They have transformed South Carolina into Washington, D.C. -- an all-black primary that tells us how the African-American vote is going to go.

By saying he will go door to door in black neighborhoods in South Carolina matching his civil rights record against Obama's, Bill Clinton emphasizes the pivotal role the black vote will play in the contest. And by openly matching his record on race with that of the black candidate, he invites more and more scrutiny focused on the race issue.

Of course, Clinton is going to lose that battle.

Blacks in Nevada overwhelmingly backed Obama and will obviously do so again in South Carolina, no matter how loudly former President Clinton protests. So why is he making such a fuss over a contest he knows he's going to lose?

Precisely because he is going to lose it. If Hillary loses South Carolina and the defeat serves to demonstrate Obama's ability to attract a bloc vote among black Democrats, the message will go out loud and clear to white voters that this is a racial fight.

It's one thing for polls to show, as they now do, that Obama beats Hillary among African-Americans by better than 4-to-1 and Hillary carries whites by almost 2-to-1.

But most people don't read the fine print on the polls. But if blacks deliver South Carolina to Obama, everybody will know that they are bloc-voting. That will trigger a massive white backlash against Obama and will drive white voters to Hillary Clinton.

Obama has done everything he possibly could to keep race out of this election. And the Clintons attracted national scorn when they tried to bring it back in by attempting to minimize the role Martin Luther King Jr. played in the civil rights movement. But here they have a way of appearing to seek the black vote, losing it, and getting their white backlash, all without any fingerprints showing. The more President Clinton begs black voters to back his wife, and the more they spurn her, the more the election becomes about race -- and Obama ultimately loses.

The rest is here.. http://thehill.com/dick-morris/how-clinton-will-win-the-nomination-by-losing-s.c.-2008-01-23.html

I don't have to go into detail on who Dick Morris is and why he knows the Clintons so well. If you don't know, then you don't belong on MyDD. :-)

It's important to note that he wrote this article BEFORE the SC primary, but it's almost prophetic. Say what you want about Obama, but he tried his best to keep race out of the election. But yet, after the spanking last night, Bill compares his Baracks' success to Jesse Jackson, another politician whom Obama has nothing in common with except both are Black and live in Chicago. But Bill is introducing the same type of politics ("The Southern Strategy") that the Republicans use to win elections. Minimize the threatening Democratic candidate  by reducing him to his race, so that white America will think he's not mainstream.
Except that this is a primary, and this tactic will bite the Democratic Party in the ass come November.
How do the Clintons expect to win in November, if they marginalize Obama's victories, by marginalizing his voters?  Barack performed well in Iowa, NH and NV, yet the CLinton strategy is to say he won't do well in states with a low Black population.
And the numbers game that I see on MYDD...Barack got 26% of the white vote in South Carolina. Considering that there were two other white candidates (if you want to go down the asinine path of thinking that whites always only vote for white candidates) he slightly underperformed by 7% on an expected return of 33%. Not that bad. What makes this brilliant is that one of the candidates  was born in the state, and the other was the most recognized Democrat in the country.

Mathematically speaking , anytime a candidate gets 80% of a group  , that will skew the percentages of his/her coalition of voters.His white support isn't shrinking, his Black base is just growing.....  I can assure you that Edwards and Hillary will NOT get almost 40% of the white vote in a state that has a low Black population, as long as Obama is running......

The White vote is an integral part of Barack's campaign and his vision for America. He has been about unity from day one. There wasn't much that he told the African-Americans in South Carolina, that he didn't tell the poor, white farmers in Iowa. Being Poor or underinsured or undereducated is the same in ANY state. Anybody in Iowa, Nevada and NH will tell you that. That's how he did so well there and will do well elsewhere.

It's just that Blacks are finally starting to believe in his vision for America too, and they shouldn't be penalized for it.



Display:


Obama introduced race into election. (none / 0)

A huge mistake because it gave the Clinton's the opportunity to marginalize a result that could have not been much of surprise. You're welcome to disagree with Morris' thesis but it seems to hold a lot more water than your pious exhortations.  


by ottovbvs on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:46:24 PM EST

Re: Obama introduced race into election. (none / 0)

you know thats a lie.


zombies are coming
by leewesley on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 03:50:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama introduced race into election. (none / 0)

No I don't. You see I don't indulge in absolutist hyperbole. I'll be the first to admit the Clintons took maximum advantage of a mistep by Obama or more likely Axelrod when he introduced the racial component into the response to her comment about LBJ which was entirely accurate btw. But Obama's campaign started it and I'm sure the Clintons couldn't believe their luck. Now the other construction you can put on this which Morris does, and presumably you subscribe to, is that this was a deep Machiavellian trap by the Clintons which Obama walked into. Which do you prefer. Neither seems to reflect well on the acuity of your candidate but I'll leave the choice up to you.      


by ottovbvs on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:11:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama introduced race into election. (none / 0)

Let get this right. Hillary talks about MLK and LBJ first, Obama  repsonds, and that's falling into a trap' ?
I suppose you are still in the 'Hillary should be ordained, and how DARE anybody give her competition, camp' right?
Seriously, the average Hillary support will concede that Barack tried to hardest not to make his a racial candidacy. Hell, Blacks weren't even supporting him in the beginning, because we wasn't endorsed by the usual Black Leaders.
Now that he is picking up Black support, do you really think that playing the race card now isn't part of Billary's plan ?

A PROUD Hopium user!
by xodus1914 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:32:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama introduced race into election. (none / 0)

No xodus; Obama compared himself to King; Hillary said it also took a President to pass the civil rights act and move the agenda forward in Congress. She was sdaying she could be that type of President. FACT: LBJ had to fight hard and dirty to push any civil rights legislation through Congress. LBJ and Kennedy had to front down state militia who were attacking AA protesters as they marched for voting rights and the right to sit at a counter and stay in a hotel and drink at a water fountain. King worked diligently with both Kennedy's and LBJ to force America to acquiesce. Yes it took a President. MLK couldn't do it by himself. How idiotic to cry "racist". FACT: A President had to force states to open schools to AA. Democrats left the party en mass in the South because of LBJ's leadership. They still haven't come back. I suggest you listen to the LBJ tapes on C-SPAN. History is amazing. Check out the National Archives pictures and Dr. King's biography.  Nothing "racial" in trying to compare oneself to LBJ. Civil rights and the war on poverty were his legacy, along with King's.


by India on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:56:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama introduced race into election. (none / 0)

xodus so you are telling me that you never expected the AA vote to rally to Obama. I'm shaking my head.

Cut all the emotional stuff please. The LBJ comments were factually correct and didn't have an iota of racialism about them until Obama chose to endow them with some. I don't think this was a Clinton plot. You and Morris maybe do. If it was a plot he walkd into it. You can't have it both ways.


by ottovbvs on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 05:15:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Clinton (none / 0)

Well I certainly don't think he has tried to keep race out of it at all- and really- that 4-page memo of his- that's trying his best to keep race out of it?  You're delusional- you don't see him for anything other than perfect- he is the one that brought it all into it- blah- but I certainly don't see him out of the game- in fact, it seems he's right back in it, I hate to say, and he still has a shot at it all.


by reasonwarrior on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 04:17:15 PM EST

Re: How Clinton thinks she will win the election (none / 0)

Umm -- The race thing didnt start with the MLK/LBJ comment, it started with Jesse Jackson Jr, right after she won NH when he said "She didnt cry about Katrina, She didnt cry about Jena 6."

THAT Started the race issue


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 05:24:02 PM EST

fuck dick morris (none / 0)

Umm -- The race thing didnt start with the MLK/LBJ comment, it started with Jesse Jackson Jr, right after she won NH when he said "She didnt cry about Katrina, She didnt cry about Jena 6."

THAT Started the race issue


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 05:24:10 PM EST

Re:This has already been addressd (none / 0)

Demlady. Basically I agree absolutely with your basic diagnosis but Morris advanced what is a reasonable theory although I believe he started it and the Clintons just made use of the opening. They are maneuvering like he is. So we don't have to be too starry eyed about it. It's probably heresy but the most sensible pundit I've seen in all of this has been Buchanan. He hates the Clintons but he's not completely a prisoner of intellectual dishonesty and kneejerkism.    


by ottovbvs on Sun Jan 27, 2008 at 06:09:28 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.