From The Times of London, Sarah Baxter: Analysis:
"After trouncing Hillary Clinton in the South Carolina primary by a margin of two to one, the idea that Obama, the 46-year-old senator for Illinois, could win the Democratic party nomination is conceivable again. He did not just win in a state with a large number of African American voters – pause here for heavy emphasis of the racial component from Clinton supporters – he sent the nation’s premier power couple packing from territory they had once owned."The London Times has more analysis here: South Carolina - Obama Landslide
****
Inspirational rhetoric of the kind deployed his stirring victory speech in South Carolina last night will not be enough to deliver him the nomination. Nor will the well-timed endorsement of Obama by Caroline Kennedy, who writes in today’s New York Times that she recognises in him the qualities of her father, President John F Kennedy, although it could provide him with a new burst of momentum.The best test of Obama’s mettle is to have him slug it out with the Clintons without resorting to the underhand tactics and smears deployed by Bill Clinton and his aides. After “Big Dog” Bill tore into Obama last week, alienating 68 per cent of South Carolina voters, can it really be said that Hillary is better able to withstand the Republican attack machine?
Obama has already proved that he can out-organise the Clintons in key states and match them dollar-for-dollar in fundraising despite keeping a messy desk, a confession that earned him Hillary’s scorn about his ability to run America’s bureaucracy . He has now shown in South Carolina that he can be as much of a “comeback kid” as either of them, without having to overcome bimbo eruptions or getting teary-eyed at the prospect of defeat.
Having built his campaign from scratch and withstood the pressure the Clintons have put on him, it is beginning to look as though he just might be an effective president on Day One, to borrow a phrase from Hillary Clinton’s lexicon. Perhaps he will have the stamina, creativity and brains to cope with whatever crisis is thrown at him, the question that still lingers over his campaign
Speaking of Caroline Kennedy, I was shocked to see her step out and endorse Obama. Has she ever done anything like this before? Or for that matter, did any of the Kennedys endorse anyone for President since Ted challenged Jimmy Carter back in 1980? I do not think so. I think the following are the highlights of Ms. Kennedy's endorsement, for the remainder read A President Like My Father (honestly, I cut very little).
My reasons are patriotic, political and personal, and the three are intertwined. All my life, people have told me that my father changed their lives, that they got involved in public service or politics because he asked them to. And the generation he inspired has passed that spirit on to its children. I meet young people who were born long after John F. Kennedy was president, yet who ask me how to live out his ideals.
Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible.
We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960.
Most of us would prefer to base our voting decision on policy differences. However, the candidates’ goals are similar. They have all laid out detailed plans on everything from strengthening our middle class to investing in early childhood education. So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual.
Senator Obama has demonstrated these qualities throughout his more than two decades of public service, not just in the United States Senate but in Illinois, where he helped turn around struggling communities, taught constitutional law and was an elected state official for eight years. And Senator Obama is showing the same qualities today. He has built a movement that is changing the face of politics in this country, and he has demonstrated a special gift for inspiring young people — known for a willingness to volunteer, but an aversion to politics — to become engaged in the political process.
***
Senator Obama is running a dignified and honest campaign. He has spoken eloquently about the role of faith in his life, and opened a window into his character in two compelling books. And when it comes to judgment, Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning.
I want a president who understands that his responsibility is to articulate a vision and encourage others to achieve it; who holds himself, and those around him, to the highest ethical standards; who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again that our country needs every one of us to get involved.
I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.
Wow. I have read a bit of Ms. Kennedy's books but that is a grand bit of writing. Being about my age, she captures some of my own ideas and feelings better than I do. Then, too, Senator Obama is but a year younger than I am. Maybe it is a generational thing. Checking out The New York Times this afternoon and see this headline: Kennedy to Endorse Obama. While I am not a great fan of Ted Kennedy, this is important stuff.
The New York Times described Obama's victory as Obama Weathers Attacks to Win. Some for you may not be aware of the New York Times endorsing Senator Clinton. Well, she is New York's junior Senator.
If the South Carolina result buoyed the Obama team, it left Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign facing a new set of questions. Her advisers’ steady attacks on Mr. Obama appeared to prove fruitless, if not counterproductive, and the attack-dog role of former President Bill Clinton seemed to have backfired.
Surveys of voters leaving the polls showed that many Democrats who believed that Mr. Clinton’s role in the campaign was important ended up voting for Mr. Obama.
Last week, Clinton advisers believed Mr. Clinton was rattling Mr. Obama and drawing his focus away from his message of moving beyond the politics of the 1990’s and the Bush presidency. The results on Saturday indicated, instead, that voters were impressed with Mr. Obama’s mettle and agreed with him that the Clintons ran an excessively negative campaign here.
“The criticism of Obama ended up really helping him going forward, I think,” said Congressman James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, an influential black Democrat who remained neutral in the primary. “If he ends up winning the nomination, he will definitely face an onslaught of attacks this fall, and he may look back on South Carolina as the place that toughened him up.”
In his victory speech Saturday night, Mr. Obama indeed sounded like a candidate with a cause, saying that the fight for South Carolina produced not only a personal victory but also progress over the divisive politics of the past. His target was clear enough without his naming names.
Yet the race is about to shift in a big way, moving from the state-by-state battle it has been to competition on a national scale. Mr. Obama has some opportunities in Feb. 5 states, among them Georgia and Tennessee, to win over large swaths of black voters as he did in South Carolina.
Hmm, is it possible that the New York Times tries here to follow the Clinton strategy of Obama-as-the-black-candidate instead of the candidate for all of us? As I caught the analysis on MSNBC, it seemed to me that white South Carolina was put off by the Clintons' racial strategy. Good for them. Time to realize that we, the people, can judge quality without being frightened by a bogeyman of race. Certainly, after George W. Bush's tenure we know we need real talent, someone with brains - even if we may never share a beer with the dude. Back to the New York Times:
Mrs. Clinton’s advisers were minimizing the importance of South Carolina even before polls closed, saying the primaries in Florida on Tuesday and in the swath of states on Feb. 5 were more important. But she will have to reckon with the rejection of her candidacy by black voters and the mixed support she received from white Democrats and younger voters here — two groups that she must have by her side in order to build a cross-section of support in the coming contests.
***
He also has bragging rights about a new coalition of support. About as many South Carolina white men voted for Mr. Obama as for Mrs. Clinton, and about 70 percent of white voters said they would be satisfied if Mr. Obama won the Democratic nomination, according to exit polls was conducted by Edison/Mitofsky for the National Election Pool of television networks and the Associated Press.
By the way, today the same story now has the following headline: His Mettle Tested, Obama May Emerge Still Stronger.
The Chicago Tribune analyzes South Carolina at Historic turnout sweeps Obama to victory. Tribune also published Sexism is dealing Clinton a bad hand:
From Day 1 of this seemingly endless election cycle, it has been clear that the media don't have any idea how to handle Clinton. She was first lady for eight years, so it's not as if we haven't seen her before. It's just that we've never seen her like this: a candidate on her own terms, the equal of any man, with a real shot at the presidency.
I think that Clinton's South Carolina strategy transcends sex. After all, the point man was a man: William Jefferson Clinton.,
Not that all is perfect with Obama. Take a look at If you look closely, it's plain: Rezko is Obama's problem. But perfection does not exist amongst us mortals. The question is does he have the brains and talent and integrity and energy to do the job as President? Admittedly, George W. lowered the standards of those categories. Which means for me, that we need the next President is the exact opposite of George W..
Comments for this post
