Polls released early last week had shown Barack Obama with a comfortable lead over Hillary Clinton in South Carolina. But no one had predicted a win this big. With 99 percent of precincts reporting, the results showed Obama on top with 55 percent of the vote, Hillary Clinton in second place with 27 percent of the vote, and John Edwards trailing even further back at 18 percent.
More than 500,000 voters turned out to vote in the South Carolina's Democratic primary. Obama received 295,091 votes. Clinton received 141,128 votes. Edwards got 93,552. Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, and Bill Richardson each received less than 1,000 votes.
The South Carolina marks the last time the Democratic candidates will compete for delegates before February 5 - Super Tuesday - when voters in 22 states will have their say. All three of the Democrat front runners campaigned heavily in South Carolina, hoping that a victory there would provide valuable momentum going into Super Tuesday.
Campaigning in South Carolina coincided with last week's celebration of Martin Luthor King Day. African American voters turned out in large numbers to support Obama, who is viewed by many as the nation's first truly viable African American candidate for president.
Clinton sought to capitalize on the historic nature of her own campaign by appealing to female voters in South Carolina. But she failed to garner much support among African American women, the majority of whom voted for Obama.
There is still one Democratic primary to go before Super Tuesday: Florida. But the results in Florida will not have any official bearing on the Democratic nomination. The Democratic Party stripped Florida of all of its delegates after the state defined party procedures by moving up the date of its primary. But voters in Florida could still play a role if they turn out in large numbers in a symbolic show of support for one of the Democratic candidates. After all, Florida will be must win territory come November.
An air of suspense now hangs over the race for the Democratic nomination. The candidates, and the nation, will have to wait and see which way voters will go on Super Tuesday. One thing is certain, none of the major candidates on the Democratic side of the race were ready to concede anything after Saturday's results in South Carolina.
"And in nine days, in nine short days, nearly half the nation will have the chance to join us in saying that we are tired of business as usual in Washington. We are hungry for change, and we are ready to believe again," Barack Obama told supporters after his victory in South Carolina.
"I want to congratulate Senator Obama tonight and I want to also thank the people of South Carolina for welcoming us into their homes and their communities. And I want to tell you how excited I am that now the eyes of the country turn to Tennessee and the other states that'll be voting on February 5th and, of course, to the state of Florida that will be voting on Tuesday," Hillary Clinton said during her concession speech on Saturday. Clinton may be hoping that a symbolic victory in Florida will provide her campaign with some renewed momentum going into Super Tuesday.
"I want to join Senator Clinton and President Clinton in congratulating Senator Obama. Now, the three of us move on to February 5th, where millions of Americans will cast their vote and help shape the future of this party and help shape the future of America," John Edwards said during his own concession speech. Edwards had been hoping to chalk up his first victory in South Carolina, his home state. But despite early losses, Edwards has repeatedly vowed to remain in the race right up until the nomination.
The Democratic race could remain undecided even after the results of Super Tueday's massive round of voting become known. This is good news for the large number of Americans living in late voting states. In a typical election year a front runner would have already emerged and victory on Super Tuesday would propel this front runner all the way to the nomination. That means that voters living in late voting states usually have little say in the nominating process. But this time around these voters could play a pivotal role in deciding who will represent the Democratic Party in the general election.
Questions for discussion:
1. What role do you think race and sex have played in the race thus far? What role could these factors play in the general election, if either Clinton or Obama end up facing the Republican nominee?
2. What do you think about the Democratic Party's decision to nullify the results of the elections in Michigan and Florida?
3. Out of the three Democratic frontrunners - Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama - who do you want to see win? Which would you support for vice president?
4. We heard a lot of talk about race and sex in the media's analysis of the race in South Carolina. But do you think that you have a solid understanding of where the candidates stand on the issues that matter to you as a voter?
5. Will the size of Barack Obama's margin of victory in South Carolina provide him with an advantage over Hillary Clinton going into Super Tuesday?
David Anderson is a political correspondent for Gather.com. You can read all of his correspondent articles by clicking here.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 25
I think the actual rolls race and sex play are microscopic in comparison to the major deal the media is trying to make of them. If my experience (Republicans tend to be the sexists and bigots) reflects reality, I'd say not much again for the second half of the question. The Democratic candidate won't need Republican votes, if Democrats vote - and it appears they will.
2. What do you think about the Democratic Party's decision to nullify the results of the elections in Michigan and Florida?
I'm not happy. Since Florida rigs elections anyway, I guess it doesn't matter as much as I think it should.
3. Out of the three Democratic frontrunners - Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama - who do you want to see win? Which would you support for vice president?
I will support any of the three, for either position. This is an exciting time.
4. We heard a lot of talk about race and sex in the media's analysis of the race in South Carolina. But do you think that you have a solid understanding of where the candidates stand on the issues that matter to you as a voter?
I do.
5. Will the size of Barack Obama's margin of victory in South Carolina provide him with an advantage over Hillary Clinton going into Super Tuesday?
I wish everyone would stop assuming that Democrats are idiots. I hope people will vote their hearts, not South Carolina's hearts.
Race and gender will always affect a portion of the electorate. These drive socially-derived perceptions, and some vote on perceptions rather than serious investigation of positions and election on those positions.
Race and gender do not affect as large a percentage of the electorate as they did 10 years ago, however. I'm not sure if this is do to increased social maturity or just a desire to move beyond the inane. Whatever -- it is a move in the right direction.
2. What do you think about the Democratic Party's decision to nullify the results of the elections in Michigan and Florida?
I think it will alienate voters and, at the conventions, some type of acknowledgement of the votes will have to be made.
3. Out of the three Democratic front-runners - Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama - who do you want to see win? Which would you support for vice president?
I would like to see Obama re-enter the race 8 years out -- his message is enthusiastic, but I am not comfortable that he yet possesses the gravitas needed for the office.
Both Clinton and Edwards have some good ideas, Edwards probably being more defined at this point. Clinton has more contacts, Edwards seems more willing to re-establish relationships around the world which the US desperately needs. This is a hard question because I am not sure either would be a comfortable #2 for the other. Both could, in my view, add a lot to the other's ability to heal the nation if they can get beyond that discomfort.
4. We heard a lot of talk about race and sex in the media's analysis of the race in South Carolina. But do you think that you have a solid understanding of where the candidates stand on the issues that matter to you as a voter?
Edwards is the only major Democratic candidate that has laid out much detail (Clinton comes in second).
The Republican candidates have given more theory than plan, in my view. It is my hope this will change before the election, as another election based on "character" or "leadership" without detail could be disastrous.
5. Will the size of Barack Obama's margin of victory in South Carolina provide him with an advantage over Hillary Clinton going into Super Tuesday?
Not really. The electorates are different.
On number two, I'm not sure I know enough about what's really meant to be behind the moving up of primaries in these states to comment on this now. I would be interested on others' input here on this if they do.
Number 3: Since someone must win, I'll go for Obama. Unlike most say, I think he'll be the easiest for the Republicans to beat, not that I'm nuts for any of them either, but I'm sure I'll drift to my more comfortable zone once the race becomes the usual futile choice of the lesser of evils.
Number 4: I have as solid an understanding as anyone can based on the fact that what they say they intend to do, and what they really do are, in most cases, two completely different things.
Number 5: It's anyone's guess. I haven't analyzed it enough to make a even a fairly probable conjecture, and my conjecture, whatever it might be, won't change the outcome, so I don't really care to give this much thought.
I agree with Sandy that the media is the problem when it comes to race and gender issues, and playing up casual comments by nominees and their supporters who are dead-ass tired and stressed out.
I also agree with Sandy that the Democrats are in a wonderful spot right now with three good candidates. I am not concerned for the country if any one of them is elected.
As for the South Carolina result, Obama has really got black voters excited, and that is very good for the country as a whole. Whether that result will translate into victories in the big Blue coastal states like CA and NY and the great WASP strongholds in New England and the Midwest remains to be seen.
I think gender has played a small role in a strange way and that was in New Hampshire when the pundits attacked Hillary for being emotional and spent the day speculating on what she needed to do to revive her all but dead campaign based on polls taken prior to the voting. There was a backlash. The race between Hillary and Obama was very close. The pundits swung enough of the undecideds to Hillary's side to give her the win. Her win was narrow. Without the pundits, Obama may well have won or it may have been an even narrower win for Hillary.
Yes, race has become a factor thanks once again to the media and the Clintons, most notably Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton's attacks have been out of line and unseemly. Hillary, in reponse to a question posed about how she feels about his attack stance said that he is a strong advocate for her just as Obama's and Edward's spouses are advocates for their spouses. Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Edwards are strong advocates for their spouses. Mr. Clinton is his spouse's hatchet man. That is the difference and I believe it didn't go over well with the voters.
2. What do you think about the Democratic Party's decision to nullify the results of the elections in Michigan and Florida?
They knew that would happen. It was their decision. There is a place for retail politics in the election process. It gives the country a chance to really see the candidates - if they care to watch. It is still a way for a little known candidate to get his or her name out there even if they are not rich. It is an important part of the process. It is with disappointment that I saw in the news that Hillary, after joining the other Democrats in pledging not to violate the Democratic Party's decision to not seat delegates from either state, is now trying to have them seated. Her conduct lately is very disappointing.
3. Out of the three Democratic frontrunners - Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama - who do you want to see win? Which would you support for vice president?
I want to see Barack Obama win the presidency. I believe he can undo much of the harm the Bush Administration has done to this country. I think he can truly lead the country as the president of all the people.
I think the process has been too contentious for a Obama/ Clinton ticket. Perhaps John Edwards. However, I feel that the country might be better served by adding someone else to the ticket. Perhaps Richardson.
4. We heard a lot of talk about race and sex in the media's analysis of the race in South Carolina. But do you think that you have a solid understanding of where the candidates stand on the issues that matter to you as a voter?
Yes, in spite of the the pundits, not because of them.
5. Will the size of Barack Obama's margin of victory in South Carolina provide him with an advantage over Hillary Clinton going into Super Tuesday?
No. At this point, I think there is no advantage to anyone. This is a unique election. It won't be over until it's over. Even at that, it is possible that the decision will be made at the convention. This is a horserace.
Clinton is not reaping any benefit from being the "woman" candidate.
1. The aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
2. The "Jena 6" case in Louisiana.
Firstly, David, a well-written & articulated article! I also commend you for your objective analysis. And, you made a great point with regards to the "late voting states."
Second, I guess Ivan hasn't been paying attention, "Clinton is not reaping any benefit from being the 'woman' candidate." It was the female vote that edged her over Obama in NH.
Third, with all references regarding race, Sen. Obama is not running on the "race card." And, he happens to be Bi-racial, as his mother is white. And, again I take issue with Ivan. We are not "painted" any color (I am Bi-racial, too).
Fourth, I say"Amen" to E.M.!!!
I agree with Bert that all primaries should be held on the same day, but I guess that is at the discretion of each individual state. I would like to see the Electoral College abandoned and every vote counted to see who wins. Who are these mysterious people who vote in my place? As long as we have the Electoral College I don't think there should be a 'winner take all' policy, but electoral ballots should allocated proportionally. After about 60 years I switched allegiance from Republican to Democrat parties. I live among a majority of Republicans so my vote won't count.
I disagree with Linda about McCain being a more viable candidate than Obama. I live in AZ and wouldn't vote for him after seeing his ideas on Social Security and illegal immigration. I think that everyone who is actually looking at McCains stance on any issue better look twice or three times. He said very clearly in his speech in FL that the war in Iraq will continue full force and there will be other wars to fight, that there are going to be hard times for everyone in the USA in regards belt tightening and he clearly believes in the status quo.
That is why I think so many are drawn to Obama. First, he thinks the US can change track, he sees that the people who have had their jobs go overseas need them back and he want to stop giving tax breaks to companies who made them lose their jobs, he wants a fair health care system that everyone can afford without giving up food or a place to live to pay for it.
Unlike HC, thankfully, Obama doesn't have Bill stumping for him. Or in HC's case is it against her. (smile). Even with a tear in her eye, she wouldn't get my vote.
I don't see this as a race or gender issue. I see it as a chance for the USA to stop the madness and begin doing what the people (voters) really want.
Like Ruth, I'd like to see the "Electoral College" disbanded and have the votes of the people counted. It probably would surprise everyone this time, but as long as the staus quo exists, I see the same thing happening over and over until the people of the US stand up and say: "Enough".
Bonnie W
2. I don't think this should be up to individual states since it's a national election for the Presidency. I think everyone should vote on the day, and NH should give up their long tradtion of being the state who elects our President. We aren't just 13 states anymore.
3. I'd like to see Obama win because I am tired of the divide in this country both political and racial. We don't need a war in our own country amongst mud slinging political factions. I would think if Edwards cares as much about change as he says he does, then he'd concede the race he can't possibly win, since he came in dead last in home state, and endorse Obama. Since I don't see that happening, I would chose neither he or HC for VP.
4. What's at stake is too huge not to know the facts. Ultimately people will chose individually what is important to them. If they are chosing for race or gender, God help them. If they are chosing for experience, God help them. To quote Mr Romney, "Washington is broken." If people can't see that both parties are corrupt, God help them. Bill and Hillary are a part of the problem, they had the chance to take out Bin Laden and didn't. They had the chance to do something about healthcare and they didn't. We new a new generation in Washington, and Obama represents the new generation.
5. Unlike Bill Clinton, I believe anything is possible. He can call it a fairytale if he wants to, but I certainly believe change is possible for America. It's only a fairytale if we keep the same old dull-minded politicians in DC. It's time, past time, for moving forward, away from the old school politics, away from war, away from racial divide. I believe Obama can get us moving forward.
What happens to these two states delegates may turn out to be a major issue if none of the Democrats ends up winning enough delegates to seal the nomination. It will be tempting for the party to grant Florida & Michigan their delegates if doing so would produce a nominee. Of course in Michigan Obama and Edwards were not even on the ballot, so inclusion of that states delegates would favor Clinton. One can see the conspiracy theorists foaming at the mouths already!