Primaries
Clyburn: Momentum Key in S.C. Race
House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said that a "snapshot" of the presidential race today revealed a two-person contest in South Carolina between Sens. Hillary Rodham and Barack Obama but added that voters will be closely watching what happens in places like Iowa and New Hampshire before making up their minds.
"If one of these top two were to falter, finish third or fourth in Iowa, it would be a different ballgame," said Clyburn.
Asked what the three main issues were on the minds of South Carolina Democrats, Clyburn said simply: "Healthcare first, healthcare second, healthcare third." Iraq, added Clyburn, is a less clear political winner for his party in South Carolina than in other parts of the country due to the strong military presence in the state. "Even if you're for or against [the war], you're all about health care," he said.
Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House, made his comments during an interview for washingtonpost.com's "PostTalk" program.
During the course of the 20-minute sitdown, Clyburn made clear he was reluctant to endorse any candidate prior to the Iowa caucuses citing his experience in 2004.
"I was with [former Missouri Rep. Dick] Gephardt four years ago and I thought we had it all set up for him in South Carolina," said Clyburn. "But the problem is he didn't get to South Carolina." (After a poor showing in Iowa, Gephardt dropped his candidacy.)
So, does that mean Clyburn won't make an endorsement? Not necessarily. "I'm not making any plans to endorse," he said, a statement that leaves him enough wiggle room that he could eventually choose to do so. He added an endorsement - if one came - would likely be just before the South Carolina vote.
Clyburn said that South Carolina voters -- particularly in the African-American community -- will be heavily influenced by the votes that come before the state's primary on Jan. 29.
Black voters, argued Clyburn, are aware that they make up a minority of the population in the United States and that to win the White House in 2008 the Democratic candidate must be able to demonstrate considerable appeal among white voters.
That is the fundamental challenge for Obama, said Clyburn. If Obama is able to win or come in a close second in places like Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire, Clyburn predicted the Illinois Senator would "sweep" the black vote in South Carolina -- giving him a major leg up in winning the state's primary.
--Chris Cillizza and Dan Balz
Posted at 6:00 AM ET on Jul 31, 2007
| Category:
Primaries
Share This: 
Technorati
| Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Posted by: dancermommd | August 1, 2007 3:55 PM
Mr. Clyburn is saying and doing exactly as he should! He should wait and see who survives Iowa and New Hampshire before he endorses anyone, the man is being practical and some you nethering nabobs of negatism are player hating! My advice do not hate the player hate the game!
Posted by: barn1666 | August 1, 2007 9:40 AM
I disagree w/ john above. Endorsements are the games of the past. We Americans should make every attempts to know our political candidates, and vote for the most qualified and agreeable w/ our personal beliefs.
To vote w/ your congressman, senator, pastor, and other prominent/respectable figures,blindly, is not fulfilling your civic duties as intended by our constitution.
Posted by: lavandai | July 31, 2007 12:49 PM
The real problem is the honesty and patriotism of the canidate.....most all of them are selfserving and greedy individuals that don't give a damn about the American taxpaying citizens....or the civic duties of the American citizens
Posted by: Harry2 | July 31, 2007 10:27 PM
I personally attended both debates here in SC and I tried to listen carefully inorder to make my vote count the most so we Dems can win the Nov 08 election. I have determined that our best shot at winning the White House back is to nominate John Edwards for the person at the top of the ticket. Most folks around my neck of the woods say they would have vote Democratic for President last time if the ticket had been Edwards/kerry instead of the otherway around. Edwards can be competive in the Nov '08 general election in places like Va, Tenn, Ky, Ark. and NC. while the others will lose all the same states we lost last time. Once again it will all boil down to Fla and Ohio, and we have not had much sucess in either lately. With Edwards it will not even be close. I hope Jim Clyburn will please think about which candidate can actually get us across the finish line, because in the end that is the only way our African American friends and all of our working class people can win! Think about WINNING, not just endoresments. Edwards can WIN, just look at the polling in head to head match ups with various GOP and Dem candidates in places like Virginia, then you will understand why I ahve gone to the trouble of writing this posting.
Posted by: southerndemocrat | July 31, 2007 10:26 PM
Mr. Clyburn is looking for a Democratic winner, not a Democratic Party division. His statement indicates that he is comfortable with the three top candidates for the nomination.
Posted by: vtmem | July 31, 2007 1:41 PM
I disagree w/ john above. Endorsements are the games of the past. We Americans should make every attempts to know our political candidates, and vote for the most qualified and agreeable w/ our personal beliefs.
To vote w/ your congressman, senator, pastor, and other prominent/respectable figures,blindly, is not fulfilling your civic duties as intended by our constitution.
Posted by: lavandai | July 31, 2007 12:49 PM
People should endorse and vote for the person they think will make the best president and win in the general election. Mr. Clyburn is being opportunistic in that he is waiting to see who will win the primary before he endorses. This is backwards and indicative of what is wrong with our political process; endorsements should drive a candidacy, not the other way around. Clyburn is just waiting to make sure he jumps on the right bandwagon this time. I can't help but wonder at his motives.
Posted by: johnrehmeyer | July 31, 2007 10:13 AM
People should endorse and vote for the person they think will make the best president and win in the general election. Mr. Clyburn is being opportunistic in that he is waiting to see who will win the primary before he endorses. This is backwards and indicative of what is wrong with our political process; endorsements should drive a candidacy, not the other way around. Clyburn is just waiting to make sure he jumps on the right bandwagon this time. I can't help but wonder at his motives.
Posted by: johnrehmeyer | July 31, 2007 10:12 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
It's ridiculous we wait on these primary elections to figure out who we will vote for. For pete's sake, let's have all the primarys on the the same day like we do for the general election. And vote for the person who can do the best job, which may not be your chosen political party.