Charles Krauthammer be damned, there is evidence that John Edwards is experiencing something of a mini-surge in South Carolina polls. However, it appears that the best Edwards can hope for is to inch ahead of Hillary Clinton for a distant second-place finish to Barack Obama, much like in Iowa.
MyDD’s Todd Beeton says the Edwards surge may be temporary:
while the Edwards surge is impressive, hidden within these three-day rolling averages may be the real story once the votes are counted Saturday night: a potential New Hampshire-like late surge of voters coming home to Clinton.
James Joyner discounts the momentum:
So, let’s say he “shocks the world” by coming in second in a place where people talk like him (he’s from next-door North Carolina, after all) beating out a Yankee senator. Yay for him. Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats allocate their South Carolina delegates proportionally. So he’d get a couple more than if he’d finished third. But so what? He’s not going to suddenly become a contender.
While Open Left’s Chris Bowers says a second-place Edwards finish would be good news for Obama:
Obviously, the ideal situation for Obama would be a double-digit victory coupled with a second-place finish for Edwards. That doesn't seem too likely, but it also isn't impossible.
![[RSS]](http://67.192.49.194/templates/images/rss_icon.gif){kind=icon}
Comments
After New Hampshire, I will believe it is over when the fat lady has sung her last high B-flat.
Posted by: bonncaruso
| January 25, 2008 5:26 PM
I'm undecided about who & which party I’m voting for, but found this great article called "Black Voters and a Twist of Bias" on the BlogZine SAVAGE POLITICS.
http://savagepolitics.com/?p=59
WOW- all I have to say!
Here is an excerpt: “Last Saturday’s South Carolina Democratic Primary produced the widely expected result of a Barack Obama victory. From the beginning of the week, it was the ethnic composition of the State in question which was amply discussed by both the Media and it’s multiple pundits. It was here and through other sources that we discovered that 55% percent of Democratic voters in South Carolina were African American. An interesting number when you consider the “coincidence” that Obama actually won the election by exactly the same margin: 55%. Of course, many in Clinton’s campaign have used this demographic reality to spin their defeat, vociferating that they had always expected to loose from the start. It should be noted that it has been this exact attitude which they have ridiculed Obama’s camp for, insinuating that they had proved to be “sore losers” by not admitting their own failures in stating their case to the American People. As we all know, in modern politics, no campaign is free of idiotic childishness, sadly resurfacing the reality that our current political existence is dominated by whining imbeciles of the lowest ilk. Nevertheless, the Clinton Campaign’s affirmation (victory based on a unified ethnic constituency) is valid, especially when we consider the data.
The Primary’s exit polling, presented by all major networks, were utilized by analysts to determine how was Obama’s, Edwards’, and Clinton’s support spread throughout different social markers. Their results indicated that 80% of the Black vote, and only 20% of the White vote, went towards Barack Obama. Regarding most White voters in the State, you could easily identify their split between John Edwards and Hillary Clinton. The significance of this racial division is crucial in understanding the fate of Barack Obama’s campaign, and the Democratic Party, if they chose to face the General Election with him at the helm.…” Find the rest of the article at http://savagepolitics.com/?p=59
Posted by: elsylee
| January 29, 2008 1:06 PM
Post A Comment