VideoNEW YORK, Jan. 27, 2008
Why Obama Won South Carolina
Increased Turnout Among Young And New Voters, Desire For Change Fueled Obama's Victory
-
Photo
Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., greets people in the crowd after a rally in Columbia, S.C., Jan. 26, 2008. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)
-
In-Depth
2008 Presidential Hopefuls
Profiles and the latest news on the Democrats and Republicans running for the White House.
While the political pundits may label the South Carolina win by Barack Obama as all about race, exit polls demonstrate that the truth lies a little deeper. In many ways Obama's win was similar to his early victory in the Iowa caucuses. Increased turnout, specifically among the young and new voters, and a desire among voters of all colors for needed change helped him to a resounding win.
The Voters
In an election year that has repeatedly seen record-breaking turnout in Democratic caucuses and primaries, South Carolina was no exception. For Barack Obama, those who boosted the turnout in Saturday's primary were part of the key to his victory.
Four in every ten voters Saturday were under the age of 45, up eight points from their share of the electorate in 2004 when they were 32 percent. Among these voters, Obama won 64 percent of the vote, compared to the 55 percent he received among those 45 to 59 and the 38 percent among voters 60 and older.
Among those at the polls on Saturday were a new crop of voters - 27 percent reported that this was either their first vote ever, or their first primary vote. Here again, Obama carried the day. He won 63 percent of the vote by first-time voters, and 57 percent among those who had never attended a primary before this year.
Turnout was also high among African-American voters. In 2004 blacks made up 47 percent of the electorate. On Saturday they were 55 percent of those at the polls. And among black voters Obama received 78 percent of the vote. Only 19 percent of African-Americans voted for Hillary Clinton, and only 2 percent for John Edwards.
This is not to say that African-American voters are opposed to Clinton. In fact, they express support for her candidacy, should she win the nomination. Overall, 77 percent of primary voters said they would be satisfied with a Clinton nomination, including 80 percent of black voters.
Among white voters, who were 43 percent of the Democratic primary electorate, 40 percent voted for Edwards and 36 percent supported Clinton. Only 24 percent of whites supported Obama.
While the race was cleanly divided along racial lines, there is evidence that the vote went beyond race. Voters in South Carolina, as in Iowa, found Obama attractive both on issues and on personal characteristics.
Issues Versus Character
Voters said candidates' positions on the issues were more important to them than were candidate characteristics - 59 percent to 39 percent respectively - but other answers seem to tell a different story. Obama won within every issue category, by roughly the same margin as he won overall. When it came to candidate qualities, however, voters made clear distinctions among the candidates.
The economy was the issue Democratic primary voters chose as the most important facing the nation, with 52 percent. The second most important issue - health care at 25 percent - trailed far behind. And only 19 percent of South Carolina's Democratic primary voters chose the war in Iraq as the country's most important issue.
Voters made virtually no differentiation among the candidates on these issues. Within each group of issue voters Obama won over 50 percent of the vote, Clinton never hit 30 percent and Edwards remained below 20 percent.
Despite voters' belief that issues mattered more to their vote than did the candidates' personal qualities, it is on personal qualities that the voters found real differences among the candidates. When asked what mattered most to them in a candidate, 54 percent of voters said they were looking for a candidate who could bring change, including 40 percent of whites and 65 percent of African-Americans.
One quarter of voters wanted a candidate who cared about them, and 14 percent wanted a candidate with experience. Nine percent wanted most a candidate who could win in November.
Not surprisingly, the candidate campaigning primarily as an agent of change - Barack Obama - easily won over voters on this characteristic. Three-quarters (75 percent) of those looking for a candidate to change things voted for Obama. Both whites and African-Americans chose Obama on this characteristic.
As has also been seen in national surveys and preceding exit polls, Clinton was seen as the candidate of experience, and Edwards as the candidate of compassion. Voters who said caring was the most important candidate quality to them voted for Edwards just above Obama - 43 percent to 40 percent. Among those looking for an experienced candidate, Clinton overwhelmingly carried the vote with 84 percent.
Among the only nine percent who went to the polls looking for electability, the vote divided in Obama's favor between him and Clinton. Forty percent of this group voted for Obama and 36 percent chose Clinton.
Is America Ready for a Black President?
One racial issue that lingers over all of the primaries and caucuses is America's readiness for an African-American president. In South Carolina, Democratic voters are optimistic - but black voters more so than white voters.
Forty-two percent of South Carolina Democratic primary voters believe America is definitely ready for a black president. Another 34 percent believe we are probably ready. These numbers are sharply divided by race, however. Only 27 percent of white voters think America is ready, half the number of blacks, of whom 56 percent feel the country is ready.
Obama's vote share was tied somewhat to these beliefs. Among voters who said we are either definitely or probably ready to elect a black president, 63 percent supported Obama, while among those who feel we are either probably or definitely not ready, only 23 percent supported Obama (48 percent supported Clinton).
Among African-Americans these beliefs make less of a difference, however. Sixteen percent of blacks say America is not ready to elect a black president, but even among these skeptics, Obama won 51 percent of the vote to Clinton's 43 percent.
Whites are more pragmatic - among the 29 percent who do not think America will elect a black president yet, only four percent supported Obama in the primary. Just over half, 51 percent, of these voters supported Clinton, and 45 percent chose Edwards.
The CBS News South Carolina Democratic primary exit poll was conducted by Edison Media Research. The poll includes 1,905 voters surveyed as they left the polls in South Carolina on Saturday, January 26, 2008. The margin of error for the survey is +/- 2 percentage points.
Monika L. McDermott is assistant professor of political science at the University of Connecticut, where she teaches and conducts research on voting behavior and public opinion. Before joining the University of Connecticut, McDermott worked in election polling for CBS News and the Los Angeles Times. She holds a Ph.D. in political science from the University of California, Los Angeles.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Video and Galleries from Politics
-
Video
G8 Summit On Environment
-
Video
A Presidential Mistep
-
Video
Washington Unplugged 7-9-09
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 144 CommentsNot that I love Hil - any Dem running is a gutless wonder, as is Ronnie Paulistinian...but this is a hypocritical boy wonder who stands for nothing except charming the Hollyweirdo and Victicrat crowds.
We vote for America - not for boy wonder. The guy is already on record saying he won''t defend us, ergo, anyone who votes for him won''t mind another 9/11.
What other choice do we have, Hillary and Bill?
Two U.S. soldiers were killed in separate bombings in Baghdad, the military said Sunday.
Many Americans know Senator Barack Obama will end the Iraq War!
3,934 U.S. Military Dead in Iraq as of today.
This may have a little to do with it.
Sen. Obama always makes the point the Iraq War should never have been authorized, no matter how well its going, the Senator claims the U.S. should never have went there in the first place.
Native Southerner Edwards was disappointed, despite his appeal on a wide platform of economic justice-- redeveloping American prosperity, and helping the middle class recover from the Bush years.
Son of a textile mill worker, Edwards knows growing American poverty and declining middle class prosperity brings doom to this nation.
Written to the Rustbelt, and other blighted urban areas across America, the Edwards platform fits the whole country better than a strictly regional appeal to the South.
On Iraq, Edwards-- unlike the others-- has a definite timetable and plan to extricate us from a regional civil war that has raged longer than WW2. Unlike Clinton, he has no intention of an "Iraq Lite" into the indefinite future.
Since poor healthcare is the chief burden of poverty, Edwards offered the first, and most comprehensive of national healthcare plans of the three candidates.
Clinton''s healthcare plan is closer to the hopes of those who want no plan, at all. Clinton''s plan relies on strategic private "partnerships", which sounds like HMO advertising. Strangely, Clinton continues to get cash from the same people who opposed her first effort at a national healthcare system. For his part, Obama stood in the senate lobby during a vote to let seniors buy drugs from Canada-- later revealing he gets money from the drug industry.
Not that I love Hil - any Dem running is a gutless wonder, as is Ronnie Paulistinian...but this is a hypocritical boy wonder who stands for nothing except charming the Hollyweirdo and Victicrat crowds.
We vote for America - not for boy wonder. The guy is already on record saying he won''''t defend us, ergo, anyone who votes for him won''''t mind another 9/11.
Posted by Pelosistilho at 11:01 PM : Jan 27, 2008
-Pelosistilho, your name speaks for what you are. And you think we''re gonna defend Obama in front of an idiot such as you? Obama needs no such votes as yours.
-You vote for the loser Giuliani, or Geez'' Heck''aBee.
-If none is pleasing you, well soon you''d have the opportunity to cast your ballot for an Israeli Prime Minister, once Ehud would be busted out of Knesset
Many Americans know Senator Barack Obama will end the Iraq War!
3,934 U.S. Military Dead in Iraq as of today.
This may have a little to do with it.
Sen. Obama always makes the point the Iraq War should never have been authorized, no matter how well its going, the Senator claims the U.S. should never have went there in the first place.
Posted by tbweb at 11:20 PM : Jan 27, 2008
-And Senator Obama is dammm right, now that It''s been proven Walking-Liar has lied 935 times to the Nation and the World who is listening and shaping an idea about how are we governed.
Lest ye forget, Hillary was one of the first persons EVER to prepare a universal health care program, and was stymied when the republicans would not relent on any funding for it, and called it SOCIALISM!
Not Edwards or anybody else can plan a DEFINITE exit plan for Iraq because we don''t know what Mr. Bush is going to get us into while he''s still in office. ALL the candidates have said they will get us out of Iraq as soon as possible, and that''s all they can do.
ALL the democratic candidates have a plan for re=developing prosperity for the middle class. But I have yet to hear from Mr. Obama exactly what his is. If you will remember, up until a month he hadn''t developed a plan whatsoever! And STILL can''t formulate answers to complex questions regarding the issues of this country. Promoting hope, and change is wonderful, but if you have nothing to back it up with, it is just rather wonderful oratory.
Mr. Edwards just loves all the unfortunate folks that have helped make him a millionnaire many times over. And he enjoys his $1200 hair cuts and $6 million mansion that the suffering of others provides for him.
This election need really serious thoughtful voting.
Good one CBS!
What is this race stuff?
I am sick of race, being a factor on this small rock that we all dwell on. let it go.
We are all human
We are all human
Posted by republic1776 at 12:05 AM : Jan 28, 2008
But race IS a factor! Don''t you see that if we ignore Obama''s race we ignore the contributions African Americans have added to our society! We belittle all that Barack has come through to reach this point! Martin Luther King did NOT want us to ignore race, but rather to embrace all races as our brothers and sisters! There IS a difference!
Let me write it proudly. Barack Hussein Obama
Obama 08
So not a race issue?"
Posted by trapbreak
I''m just going to point this out just for the sake of pointing it out, you feel free to go ahead and say what you gotta say . . .
. . . there are 2 ''groups'' of people who are ''half'' like both Clinton and Obama - it''s not just black women, it''s also white men. You know what I mean? Like black women share race with Obama and share gender with Clinton while white men share gender with Obama and race with Clinton. Anyway, blacks weren''t a factor in the first two contests and Obama beat Clinton for the black women''s vote in NV and SC - much has been made about that. But apparently for the white guy''s vote, Obama''s beaten Clinton the first three times (Iowa, NH, NV) and basically tied her in SC as well.
* * *
Anyway, just thought I''d point out that 76% of the white South Carolinians voted for the white candidate. I''ve never been to SC, but maybe the OP''s comment plus the contrast points to the figures being a reflection more of life in SC than these 3 candidates (?) Anybody here ever been to SC?
If we were all the same color, I guess I''d would be part of the big nosed tribe.
I''m am proud of having a big nose.
There ought to be a law for us big noses.
Why do black candidates such as Jesse Jackson and Barrack win here? It''s has more to do with a sense of pride than an anti anyone vote. He will also probablly carry Georgia and Tennesee as well a few other southern states and some northern states but the sad fact is that he''s not going to do so well in most of the south or the west.
Each one of us has a choice:
A choice to put our voice forward or be dictated to
Can you see?
A choice to be resilient or passive victims
Can you see?
A choice to seek for inspiration or be despondent in fatalism
Can you see?
A choice to revitalize and motivate our youth or encourage apathy
Can you see?
A choice to demand morality and truthfulness from our leaders or accept deception
Can you see?
A choice between finding a higher cause or hating each other for our differences
Can you see?
A choice to understand that we are stronger standing together than divided
Can you see?
A choice to go forward in hope or to continue in fear
Open your eyes%u2026
Posted by trapbreak at 12:16 AM : Jan 28, 2008
Yo0u''re not pretending to be surprised or offended are you? For the first time in their lives a man comes along who is not only the embodiment of what equality in America is supposed to be, but who also happens to be black and you''d expect them to vote for some one else?
Most white people voted for him in Iowa too. Hardly a black state.
Posted by trapbreak
Clinton does well in the big cities for some reason - not sure what the story is behind that, but all the rural people seem to really dig Barack . . .
Posted by trapbreak at 12:27 AM : Jan 28, 2008
Isn''t it a bit more then a little disingeuous to present black voters with a wonderful and perfectly acceptable candidate who also happens to be black and then claim it''s a racial issue because they vote for him?
Posted by jaykay221 at 12:30 AM : Jan 28, 2008
No argument from me. Sounds like we agree 100%!
---
Commendably, CBS would transcend the issue of race politics. But voting as a racial bloc was the elephant in the SC primary no pundit wants to acknowledge.
Analyst McDermott underplays the role of race-bloc voting, saying exit polls show Obama support distributed among all the issues, in the same proportion as Obama won. Yet, separate data for black and white voters shows a different result. For example, blacks are 30 percent of registered SC voters, but cast 55 percent of ballots. And of their ballots, 78 percent went to Obama.
Likewise, exit polls are a weakness in survey method, asking voters to rationalize their concerns by the ballot just cast. That is, to say afterward Clinton is strongest on healthcare, the economy and six other issues, when this voter in truth cared little about healthcare before the election-- and actually liked Edwards on several issues better-- but voted for Clinton, anyway?
A better indication of issues driving the vote is to compare pre-polls vs. exit polls on the same issues. This, of course, was not done.
Historically, Southern race bloc-voting is a defensive tactic, and generations of blacks voted against oppressive white politicians. But despite changing times and pan-bloc appeals from all three candidates, race-bloc voting for too many in the South persists as a stark, oversimplified choice-- "Black" or "White"?
Most white people voted for him in Iowa too. Hardly a black state.
Posted by SgtRDS at 12:26 AM : Jan 28, 2008
Sgt, Most people "DID NOT" vote for Barack in SC but you make an excellent point about Iowa where most white voters did not vote for him either. Still he did get the largest share which is very significant.
In regard to your comment, Iowa is certainly mostly white, but there is a BIG, let me repeat that, a BIG difference between Iowa and Dixie. Yankees vote for yankees all the time but we haven''t allowed one in the white house for forty years. It''s been longer than that since we allowed a black one to get in, so don''t let the media spin you too fast. Hillary still has a double digit lead nationally and that all that matters now.
Barack Obama IS the future face American. Barack Obama IS America! Not black America or white America or Christian America or Muslim America, but OUIR America! It''s time to embrace the future fearlessly and without the petty racism and prejudices of the past.
Yes WE can!
Posted by alphaa10
Wow, that really captures the essence of the debate . . . it feels like there''s been progress, but is there . . .
Posted by trapbreak at 12:36 AM : Jan 28, 2008
No offense, but you don''t get it. It doesn''t matter if black voters in SC voted for him because he was black. Set that aside and support him or not because of how YOU feel about him. Hell JFK won the majority of the Irish Catholic vote. Does that mean non-Catholics should have worried about that before deciding if they wanted to vote for him? It does NOT matter why anyone else voted for him or against him. It matters why YOU wnat to vote for him or against him.
Posted by shanev137 at 12:44 AM : Jan 28, 2008
I believe it too. I admit I''m a late convert, but I believe it too! For the first time since Bobby was killed, I believe it too!
---
But your argument is, itself, disingenuous. The candidates, issuewise, were not nearly the same-- and it was not a matter of fine print.
Yet, the one factor driving 30 percent of registered SC black voters to cast 55 percent of ballots-- 78 percent of them for Obama-- appears to be race. If, as you suggest, Obama was one of three perfectly acceptable candidates, why should race so strongly correlate unless it were The Issue with black voters?
Race-bloc voting was widely accepted by the press when it first appeared in the South because The Issue was indeed race, not political subtexts like healthcare or the economy. Voting white racist sheriffs out of office mattered a great deal.
But despite changing times and pan-bloc appeals from all three candidates, race-bloc voting for too many in the South persists as a stark, oversimplified choice-- "Black" or "White"?
Posted by trapbreak at 12:47 AM : Jan 28, 2008
That''s true and we must never lose sight of the prize. If Obama or Edwards or even Hillary is the party nominee, then we have to put past differences aside (and I have no doubt that we will) and support the Democratic nominee. The ultimate goal of making sure that we bring an end to the polices of the rich vs the middle-class and poor must stop. Ultimately the GOP is all of real Americans enemy.
Posted by alphaa10 at 12:50 AM : Jan 28, 2008
But I disagree. Issue wise there is no appreciable difference between Hillary and Barack, esp when compared to the Draconian GOP.
Far left liberals want to take advantage of the democrats chances of winning and far right conservatives scared to death of her electability.
Clinton is taking it from all sides with both sides of the media manufacturing racial slurs and the conservative''s actually praising Obama more than their own candidates if you can believe that. Their licking their chops at the prospect of divideing the race but when pressed, they''ll all admit that Barrack doesn''t have much of a chance.
"How, then, has Obama been saddled with an image of being long on inspiration and short on details? The answer is that journalists are not accustomed to covering a candidate who moves crowds the way Obama does, who uses speech cadences and rhythm like Martin Luther King Jr. without making his talk explicitly about race. Sen. Clinton already owned the policy-wonk slot, so by default, Obama was cast as the poetic one."
There is a larger truth to the question he poses, something that finds its answer in a speech given by President John F. Kennedy (and which refutes the Clinton approach to politics)...
"When power leads man toward arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations. When power narrows the area of man''s concern, poetry reminds him of the richness and diversity of existence. When power corrupts, poetry cleanses."
America is tired of the arrogance, corruption and lack of that elusive thing called grace that characterized Bill Clinton''s "co-presidency" with Hillary.
Or, to put it another way, as the ancient Romans said: "When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said, ''How well he spoke,'' but when Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said, ''Let us march.''"
America is on the move again.
Martin Edwin Andersen
Posted by Spinster2 at 12:55 AM : Jan 28, 2008
But you''re wrong. It''s not a case of if America is ready for a black president, it''s a case of if America wants to change for the disastrous Bush policies and all the GOP candidates promise is to try to out-Bush Bush. Their 15 minutes of fame is over. Now it''s the people''s turn to run our nation and it doesn''t matter if the leader is black or white or id people voted for them because they were or were not a woman. Now is the time to vote for a real leader.
Posted by trapbreak at 01:01 AM : Jan 28, 2008
Umm....Eugene McCarthy was never the Democratic presidential nominee......
I have never heard an explination for why Hillary took the silverware but likely as not, she thought it perfectly acceptable. I''ve never heard her side of the story but the Bush''s currently eat off china that Hillary donated.
Right wing troll..........
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 144 Comments