South CarolinaClintonJacksonThe ostensible purpose of Clinton's doing so was not to win South
Carolina, although the Clinton
campaign expected to do much better with the state's African Americans than
they did. It would have been to send a signal to white and Latino voters in
future primaries that Obama, like Jackson,
was a "black candidate." After the election, the campaign circulated
a blog post
on The Left Coaster noting that Obama
had "actually underperformed on the white vote (significantly) ... in South Carolina compared to Nevada." The message of this post
seemed to be that as a result of his reliance on black voters in South Carolina, Obama
would continue to underperform among whites.
This analysis is
questionable. Nevada's
whites voted in a caucus, not a primary. They were likely to be more liberal
than their South Carolina
counterparts and to belong to unions. But the general point could be correct.
By painting Obama as the black candidate, Hillary Clinton might have lost the African-American
vote but won the nomination. On February 5, it will be important to look at the
Latino vote in California, New
Mexico, Arizona, New York, and New Jersey,
and the white vote in states like Tennessee, Arkansas, and Missouri,
where Obama's overwhelming support among blacks may not be sufficient to carry
the state.
There are, of course, moral
drawbacks to this strategy, but there are also political drawbacks that could
appear not just in the primaries, but also in the general election. In the
primaries, the Clinton
campaign's resort to the race card--however fleeting--coupled with Obama's
victory, should lead to increased black turnout and support for Obama in the coming primaries. Many of these
primaries take place in states with significant African American populations. In
the 2004 Democratic primaries, for instance, blacks comprised 47 percent of Georgia voters, 35 percent of voters in Maryland, 23 percent in Tennessee,
21 percent in Texas, 33 percent in Virginia, 20 percent in New York,
15 percent in Missouri, 14 percent in Ohio, and 8 percent in California.
It's fair to assume that
black turnout will increase over 2004, and at a rate higher than white or
Latino turnout. In South Carolina
this year, black turnout went from 47 percent to 55 percent of the electorate--a
17 percent increase. At that rate, black turnout could make up over 50 percent
in Georgia, over 40 percent
in Maryland, and almost 25 percent of the electorate
in New York. If
Obama wins 80 percent of the black vote, as he did in South
Carolina, then Clinton
could have difficulty winning primaries in these states.