South Carolina Primary WireEverybody wants to rule the world.

!!OBAMA!!

Clinton...then Edwards...
BO: 51%....HRC:....30%.....JRE:....19%

Obama to speak at 9pm ET...
** 6 in 10 voters say Bill Clinton's campaigning was important; of those, a plurality voted for Obama.
More exit poll data from CBS News:
** HRC and Edwards won 38% of the white vote
** HRC won 20% of the black vote to Edwards's 2 percent, which means she'll finish second.
** Black voters accounted for 53% of the electorate, up from 47%
** Obama brings in thousands of new voters...
** HRC/Edwards battle for third...may have split white voters...(Edwards: 39, HRC: 36, Obama: 24)
** Gender: Black men: 80 to 17, Obama to HRC. Black women: 82 Obama, 17 Clinton.
** Edwards win white men: Clinton/Obama tie... Clinton wins white women...

Early exit polls analyzed by CBS News show that the economy was the major issue for more than half of voters.....
**57% say Bill Clinton's campaigning was important in determining their vote
**53% of voters wanted change, versus 24% who wanted a president who cared about them, versus 14% who wanted a president with experience
** Independents about 23% of the electorate

---

** Turnout said to exceed 500,000... **Cable nets know who won and by how much ...can barely contain the news... ** Fox News: 1 on 4 white voters voted for Obama; 8 in 10 black voters chose Obama **ABC News: More than half of voters in SC are black...

Comments

This is all a tease.... but Clinton going to Tennessee combined with Cable nets knowing who won means a big night for Obama is probably on tap.

Posted by HJE | January 26, 2008 6:30 PM

Assume that Clinton gets the lion share of the experience voters, puts her at about 35%. Assume Obama gets about 65% of the change voters, and according to another story, 3/4 of his voters said that was their top issue...do the math and he's at about 46%, Edwards still gets statewide delegates though with 19%...

Posted by Chris | January 26, 2008 6:35 PM

6:35PM - Fox News exits: Obama winning black vote 81-19 over Clinton. White vote is Edwards 39, Clinton 36. Obama winning on issue of economy 51-30 over Clinton, with Edwards at 18.

Some quick math with ABC news' release makes it seem as if Obama will win GOING AWAY..... He could top 50%

Posted by HJE | January 26, 2008 6:52 PM

If Fox's exit poll #s are right, Obama has just won SC by easily over 20 percentage points.
Now what??????

Posted by byron | January 26, 2008 7:00 PM

Like Marc's header.

"Tears For Fears" - A good way to sum up the last eight years, I think.

Posted by lampwick | January 26, 2008 7:03 PM

byron,
if that's the case, this changes everything. Even though he was expected, I don't think anyone expected these margins. And he's doing much better among white voters than expected. The only good news for Hillary is that she probably beat Edwards for third.

Posted by Mike | January 26, 2008 7:05 PM

Hey Marc,

If this is a big Obama win, the press' "Did Bill screw up Hillary's chances?" narrative is going to totally swamp their "Hillary stands up for Florida" fairy tale.

Posted by lampwick | January 26, 2008 7:06 PM

The real headline is that Obama did better in the white vote than expected. Pundits were all lamenting that he dropped from 20% to 10% among whites in the last week and he ended up getting 24%. Now this is not great, but considering that its south carolina, one of the most racially polarized states in the country, 24% is not bad. Considering he was running against the wife of a former president and another candidate who won SC last time who has a home state advantage, Obama did better than the media expected with whites.

The CW is that in a 2 wy race as most other states will be, Obama needs to pull about 40% of the white vote to have a good chance. 24% in a state with SC's special consitions is really not bad. When you combine this finding with HIllary's collpse in the rasmussen poll and look at the last california field poll which showed Obama and Clinton ties with nonhispanic whites, you have a compelling reason to think that a) Obama does not have a "white voter" problem and b) the tactics of the clinton campaign are backfiring. If johnny Edwards can get more white votes than her, even with this special case in SC, it does not bode well for the raciall divisive polarization at the heart of Hillary's stratgey.

Another key question you all in the media ought to ask yourselves? What is more likley? Is Obama more likley to gain in white votes going forward or is it more likley that Hillary will chip into his dominance with black voters. I would argue that Obama has the black vote sewn up and he can campaign aggressively to increase with white and hispanic voters and will be able to stay competitive with Clinton and perhaps get an edge.

I think it is time for the media to change its CW that the Hillary racial polarization stratgey is going to work, especially given that john Edwards is here to stay and Hillary had to robocall attack him.

The media needs to stop writing off Obama's chances.

Posted by RKA | January 26, 2008 7:07 PM

Obviously, a phenomenal win for Obama. Huge margins emerging and the more you look at the data the better it looks for him. Combine this with the shift in the Rasmussen tracking last night and the Hillary people must be starting to remember what January 3rd felt like.

For Obama to get a quarter of the white vote in South Carolina while John Edwards remains active is just amazing. And lends credence to the view that he and Edwards can hold Hillary off in the South well enough together to make it to the convention with 51% between them. I don't think many John Edwards supporters would be too disappointed with Attorney General Edwards, would they? Seems like the job he was born to do.

Posted by Vincent | January 26, 2008 7:13 PM

I want to put a word of caution here for my fellow Obama supporters. We are going to happy tonight, but do not forget what happened after Iowa.

I predict that Hillary is going to switch from nasty attack mode to victim, sympathy mode just in time for super tuesday.

Obama and his supporters need to be careful to be humble. No strutting, no gloating. The sad fact of the matter is that many in the public don't like to see a black man acting cocky and Obama did get a little cocky after Iowa. The fact that he has won makes it easier for HIllary to play the victim.

The Obama people need to be constantly vigalent about hillary's ability to make an emotional moment to trigger a gender backlash. Indeed, much of this prmary is the result of backlash dynamics. HIllary benefited from blacklash in NH and Obama benefitted from backlash in SC. We must be vigalent that its now Hllary's turn to benefit from backlash.

The media will probably go overboard in eviscerating the clintons, and Obama supoprters might get a little too excited. The danger is that Hillary will find a way to create a gender backlash. She has done as much with race as possible for now....the clinton stratgey is going to be to switch back to gender triablism just in time for super tuesday.

Obama needs to go out of his way to be humble, gracious. No "likable enough" stuff. If the media beats up on Hillary in a way that anyone can perceive as sexist, Obama needs to defend Hillary. If he can stay on the high road, he has a great chance of victory.

Posted by RKA | January 26, 2008 7:16 PM

Not only he did better among whites than expected but according to exit polls he TIES Clinton among white MEN.
It is among white women that he lags a bit.
No racism here ! His only problem right now is female solidarity because obviously he is convincing all other groups based on his own merits.

Posted by Benjamin | January 26, 2008 7:16 PM

Wouldn't it make more sense to say that Clinton and Edwards are battling for second, rather than third?

Posted by minderbender | January 26, 2008 7:17 PM

Maybe minderbender but when the distance between the winner and the two followers is more than 20 points it "feels" like a third place LOL

(Yes, I am gloating.)

Posted by Benjamin | January 26, 2008 7:26 PM

It appears Obama won 49% of young white voters. His share decreased with every age group down to 16% with voters over 60.

The times they are a changin'.

Posted by Pug | January 26, 2008 7:31 PM

RKA is dead on. BO screwed up on gender in NH, and missed a real chance in not defending her in the pre-NH debate. HRC continues to do *very* well among working women. He needs to recalibrate and speak directly to those folks.

If getting a woman into the White House matters to you, you look around and say, if not HRC, who? What other women are on the political horizon? So there's a psychic cost in *not* supporting her, and he needs to find the words to help people make that choice.

It won't be easy because HRC will keep attacking, and he has to find a way to rebut and parry without looking mean or taking satisfaction when she does poorly.

Posted by c | January 26, 2008 7:34 PM

Barack should promise to make Michelle his VP. That would do something to cut down Hillary's female-solidarity votes, and formalize what Bill and Hillary seem to want to do informally.

Posted by lampwick | January 26, 2008 7:43 PM

Well, that has to count as a mighty ass-whipping for HRC and WJC, and richly deserved too! It seems HRC has compounded this with a nasty and personal attack on Edwards, essentially calling him a rich lawyer who is not sincere, but pretends to be one of the people in SC, while in Washington he's himself. Not a good approach, in my opinion.

Posted by sashaqz | January 26, 2008 7:44 PM

c, thanks for the comments.

I just thought of something else that Obama should do. He should give off indicators that he is open to having a female running mate. He should prominently campaign with Napalatano from AZ and McCaskil from MO. Rumor is that Sebalius from KS will endorse him after she gives the response to the state of the union. Some have said she would be a good running mate for Obama. He needs to encourage such speculation. He can't underestimate the feelings that women have in wanting to see one of their own in the white house. Hell, he should even say he is open to HIllary being his VP, even if he is not. He needs to let female voters know that he understands the sentiments they have and does not disrespect them. If he can do that, he will be the nominee.

Posted by RKA | January 26, 2008 7:47 PM

c, I completely agree with you. I think Obama needs a counter-Sister Soulja for women right now. His best move is to wait for Hillary to play the sympathy card and then BE VERY PUBLIC AND SEEN AS GIVING HER SYMPATHY. He could even try to bash Edwards if Edwards slips up like he did with the crying thing in New Hampshire. Obama needs to go the opposite route and play it very humble and human.

Obama needs to be seen as the kind and gentlemanly man who weathered getting slapped across the face by the Clintons only to rise above them. If he does this and manages to even the female vote, he can win this primary.

Posted by Abe | January 26, 2008 7:51 PM

re: pres. clinton's comments about jackson winning the sc primary twice, does anyone know what his share of the white vote was in '88? Can't seem to find it anywhere.

Posted by jmscher | January 26, 2008 7:52 PM

RKA - I agree about having women campaign with him, but I think that a VP pick is showing his hand too early, and may be poorly regarded by voters as a sign of overconfidence/arrogance. Plus, much of the party would want to see the door kept open for a Clinton-Obama reconciliation after the blood is mopped up. Denying them that (unlikely as it may seem) might well have a negative impact.

Posted by maraschion | January 26, 2008 7:53 PM

RKA - Hillary might try to change her tune from attack back to an more emotional play - but as Carl Berstein on CNN said - the cat is out of the bag -Democrats are on notice - a vote for Hillary is a vote for Billary and they will do anything to get back in the White House. They took the genuine good will offered by the voters of N.H. and turned it into a buzz saw - no one is going to buy the tears again. She's going to actually have to earn this nomination on her own. Which I don't believe she can do, and that's why Bill had to come out of the closet to turn it around.

Posted by C.B. | January 26, 2008 7:59 PM

Will Obama beat Hillary in SC by a larger margin than Hillary beat "uncommitted" in Michigan?

Posted by PJ | January 26, 2008 8:15 PM

There would be no harm campaigning with people like McCaskill and Napolitano. He partly needs to learn, and fast. Being a working woman and having to deal with *ssh*le men is not part of his experience. While he was happily bonding with Charlie Gibson over football, he simply missed the dynamic that was going on in that room and on the screen, the idea that to be an ambitious woman automatically makes you a bitch.

The age differentials that were evident in Iowa were evident in SC too. I don't know how you deal with that.

Posted by c | January 26, 2008 8:41 PM

I've remained troubled, angered by the not-so-hidden patronizing attitude of the Clintons toward Senator Obama. At every debate, HRC's condescending tone, interruptions, and denigrating manner towards Senator Obama have, to me, been offensive. Now HRC's plea-bargained partner, has added the comedic irony that it is Senator Obama, who is playing the race card. I'm honestly wondering what the impact would be should HRC with her "own voice" now exemplify her superior "readiness" and "experience" by referring to Senator Obama's "boyish appeal" or more candidly, simply refer to him as "boy".
I pray that the ancient, patronizing politics of the 60's will be set behind us. It's the voices of the young and, like Caroline Kennedy, young in Spirit that must lead us. There is an "urgency of now"

Posted by dov | January 27, 2008 4:36 PM