You don't remember correctly, Scalfin. Edwards received a minimal black vote, 6% in South Carolina, notably LESS THAN CLINTON in that state. This was true even though no one is alleging that he played any race card and it is generally accepted that he had the most progressive economic policies.

Posted at May 13, 2008 2:14 AM in response to The Myth Of The Black Racist Voter

MJ: Why do you keep talking about Obama's position on Israel? Just to vent? Do you really think you are winning ANYONE over?

The people who already hate Israel will vote for Obama without your encouragement. The people who are open to Obama on other issues and concerned about his perceived Israel position will not be at all reassured by your constant baiting of them. Some of his statements may be helpful, but reading you actually makes me want to vote for Obama less and I am both a lifelong Democrat and someone who believed in the Oslo process. I still plan to vote for Obama because some of his other positions are very good and even on Israel, where I have some doubts, I think he will listen more to people like Dennis Ross than you.

Think about what you are "accomplishing" here. Is this just therapy for you? Do you feel guilty for having worked for AIPAC so that you now have turned into the David Horowitz of the Israel issue, going from one manichean view of the conflict to the opposite?

Posted at May 12, 2008 8:22 PM in response to Obama On Israel-Palestine

Yes, Blacks were initially not telling pollsters they would vote for Obama. He wasn't as well known and even among those who were quite familiar with him many African-Americans believed he could not win and another symbolic candidacy like Jesse Jackson's didn't seem to have much appeal. People of all races hesitate to "throw away" their votes. Absent a viable black candidate many wanted to support their preferred choice among remaining options.

But as soon as it appeared Obama could win Black voters were overwhelmingly for him. Because he was a Black candidate who could win. NOT because they liked his health care plan or his energy plan or thought that nominating a candidate with less experience than anyone either party had nominated in over 50 years was in principle a good idea.

Bill Clinton's much-maligned factual statement that Jesse Jackson won in South Carolina too came AFTER Obama won black voters there overwhelmingly, not before. The terrible race-card playing comment before that was HRC's factual statement that LBJ played an important role in the enactment of civil rights laws.

Posted at May 12, 2008 4:23 PM in response to The Myth Of The Black Racist Voter

Mr. Coates, this is a ridiculous statement:

"One very foolish meme that's made it's way into the primary is this notion that black people voting for Barack in large margins is the equivalent (or on the scale of racism, arguably worse) of white people breaking for Hillary in similar margins."

First of all, Blacks are voting for Obama by MUCH more lopsided margins than whites are for HRC.

Beyond that,since when is voting for the candidate with more experience and the better health care plan racist? Is it racist to note that Obama voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill? To note that Hillary actually wrote legal scholarship and everything Obama has ever written has been about himself?

Obama is, as has been noted everywhere, the "wine-track" candidate. The white people who support him come from the same demographic that liked Dean, Bradley, Tsongas and Hart.

What else do these candidates have in common? Negligible black support, even when (as in the cases of Tsongas and Bradley) they had no black opponents.

But because Obama is Black all of a sudden Black voters are flocking to the wine track candidate.

But white Democrats voting for Hillary are thereby racist?

Posted at May 12, 2008 3:58 PM in response to The Myth Of The Black Racist Voter

Lieberman was not the only VP candidate to run for re-election to the Senate. LBJ did this in 1960 and Lloyd Bentsen did it in 1988. In neither case was it a big deal, any more than when Lieberman did it. No one thought the two Texans were not "playing to win." If you think Lieberman would have preferred to remain in the Senate than be Vice President you are crazier than you think he is.

The pick of Lieberman was well-regarded at the time. It was seen as part of Gore's separating himself from Bill Clinton's sleaziness, a factor that, very unfairly, hurt Gore that year. If it was also a "pander" to Jews then given the closeness of the Florida result it seems to have been a well-advised one. Bob Graham might have also been a good choice on that basis, but he was ruled out for other reasons.

Posted at May 12, 2008 3:07 PM in response to Pulling The Plug on Lieberman PLUS Obama Talks About Israel

I love the excuse on Obama's gun control flip-flop. He was too important to fill out the form. Staff did it. Mistakes were made etc.

People! He was a CANDIDATE FOR STATE SENATE at the time. This isn't such an exalted status! You don't have an army of aides when you are a mere aspirant for the state legislature. Of course his handwriting is on the damn thing, so we don't even have to go there. And given the constituency he was sucking up to at the time (not many deer hunters in his Black/University of Chicago white state sen. district) his position was not surprising.

Still it's telling that people are so ready to swallow that lame excuse rather than admit that Mr. Hope is a flip-flopping pol. When Fred Thompson's pro-choice positions on a questionnaire came up and he also tried to pin it on an aide did you "Obama is so dreamy" types believe him? And he was running for the U.S. Senate at the time. If he was cuter and hipper would you have believed Uncle Fred's dodge too?

Posted at April 22, 2008 1:21 AM in response to Harsh Hillary Robocall Accuses Obama Of Lying About His Position On Second Amendment