Reply #111: Obama's win had racial implications just like Romney's Utah wins and a few others had religious ones

[jackson_dem]

Is it illegal to state the obvious? Does Obama's new politics include bans on some aspects of political analysis?

Demographics matter. The Obama campaign itself pointed to demographics in Wisconsin to further hype its win. Was it trying to say white working class votes matter more than others when it did that? No. It was pointing out Obama did well among a group he previously, and subsequently, has struggled with. There are points to be gained or lost based on expectations. Clinton was trying to lower expectations for his candidate, the Obama campaign raise it for Clinton in Wisconsin after the result was in.

The significance was simple. Of the two dozen states that voted on Super Tuesday only two had demographics similar to South Carolina. Essentially this is what he was trying to say to the msm: "Don't read too much into Obama's win. He won it on racial lines and he won't be able to do that in 20 Super Tuesday states." Of course he could not say so explicitly. That argument failed, largely because the Obama campaign quickly pounced and playing the race card to claim it is racist to point out Obama won on race. Obama then received a shot of momentum that lifted him into a tie for Super Tuesday.

Romney won Utah. It was part of Super Tuesday. Let's suppose it was a week before Super Tuesday. Would it be bigoted if someone mentioned the fact that no one had a shot to beat him there because of the large Mormon population there? If Utah were an early state you can bet that point would have made. Or look at Huckabee. The evangelical populations in the early states were mentioned by the media and political analysts. Would it be bigoted to point out the two early states he did well in, Iowa and South Carolina, had large populations of this group and the three that didn't, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Nevada he fared poorly in? Going back to the Democratic side, JFK won four out of five Catholic votes in 1960. He tipped some states with large Catholic populations that usually voted Republican. Would it be anti-Catholic to put two and two together?