January 15, 2008
Posted: 09:00 PM ET

(CNN) — Hillary Clinton faced a grim statistic in Michigan tonight, despite her primary "win" there: results revealed that she may have reason to worry about her grasp on the African-American vote.

The Michigan primary vote was essentially meaningless: the national party stripped the state of its delegates because it held its contest too early in the election season, and Clinton was the only major Democratic contender whose name appeared on the ballot.

Read full story here

Filed under: Barack Obama • Hillary Clinton • Michigan • South Carolina


TRICIA TIRADO   February 6th, 2008 6:54 pm ET

I just heard Hillary needs money to help win the White House!!! So I just made a donation!!!!

I hope all women of all ages can try and send something too!!!!

Lets all help!!!!

GO HIllary!!!!

NEW YORK LOVES YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tricia

Erika   February 6th, 2008 12:07 am ET

Thought this was interesting, Senator Clinton only lost 1 county in NY to Senator Obama. However, Senator Obama lost 14 counties to Senator Clinton. Very interesting night for both candidates. Looks like we need to move on to the next primaries.

mt   January 30th, 2008 8:14 pm ET

I have just added The NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN (NOW) to my list of extremist groups. Like all extremist who have a dictatorial and narrow definition of people, NOW has determined that they know what is best for ALL women and that women have no choice but to vote for Hillary Clinton. A vote for any other candidate is not a matter of choice but rather a vote AGAINST ALL WOMEN. GIVE ME A BREAK. What about the right of choice???? I suppose NOW can decide when I have a right of choice and when I don't … just like Hillary changed her mind and is now trying to get (non-existent electoral) votes from Florida. Hillary and NOW deserve each other….. and I say this as an independent, educated, liberated woman who surrenders her right of choice to no one.

Anonymous   January 27th, 2008 1:35 am ET

Becky, you/re an idiot. Obama attends a Christian church, he's not a sleeper agent, and you're too stupid to even really deserve an opinion.

Do yourself a favor. Get some teeth, get an education, and stop believing every piece of trash propaganda that some right wing lie-maker forwards to fools like you?

Idiot.

mr drunker   January 26th, 2008 9:35 pm ET

I m sorry john edwards or mccain..not the thought police….

mt   January 23rd, 2008 8:18 pm ET

Ditto to:
Hope in Detroit
favor
WilhelmeniA
Lisa California
anon middle america
Marlene
Angela
steve wilmington

and to all Obama supporters…….
Thank God, only in America can people communicate so fervently and freely.

To others. Don't be deceived. Prepare yourself to deal with it….

THERE WILL BE CHANGE IN 2008!!!! by the name of OBAMA!!!!

Bill Arizona   January 22nd, 2008 9:08 am ET

I struggle with the character issues where Hillary is concerned. Bill was a bright man who couldn't keep his zipper up, and his arrogance lay in never owning his narcisism or attempting to overcome up. Hillary's greatest vulnerability is never distancing herself from him and his decadence. And the arrogance of the "Friends of Bill and Hillary" era was so repugnant, where everything was for sale, from staying a night in the White House, to granting ill-conceived pardons in the last days of his presidency. They have no vision for America, beyond doing what's expedient. There are no convictions, no philosophical grounding, no sense of what the future should hold for our children, or how to bring the world past the pettiness of nationalism, sectarianism and fear. I long for the day when there are candidates available to the electorate that are actually palatable choices, unflawed by personal agendas and bias.

Republican Voting Democratic   January 22nd, 2008 8:31 am ET

Hands down – Obama is the clear choice. My trust level of Hillary has never changed from 0%.

Angela   January 22nd, 2008 2:00 am ET

The democratic debate tonight was tasteless. Hillary Clinton is reaching. I hope she doesn't plan on basing her entire campaign on slandering Obama. She needs to focus more on herself and the issues that are important to her rather than focusing on her opponents, or well Obama. It appears that maybe she is threatened and weak, making me think her opponents ( who always seem more poised) are more qualified than her. And as a final thought, I would really like to stop hearing references to Bill Clinton. The first woman in the white house should not base a victory on her husband, it defeats the purpose in my mind.

Anthony   January 21st, 2008 5:41 pm ET

My thing is this… The Clinton's have had their time in the White House & during that time there were numerous laws passed that have adversly affected African Americans. 3 Strikes, mandatory minimums, habitual felon laws, NAFTA, etc, etc. The effect is that our jobs haved been outsourced, our black men have been institutionalized, murdered by police, our neighborhoods gentrified and our children have been criminalized. Black America is in dire straits and the Clinton's that we love so much have had a very large part in creating this distressed enviroment. Bill and Hillary have had their time in the White House and it is time for them move aside and pass the torch to the next generation. I am sure that they are good people but they are too detached from the Black Community to provide solutions to our issues…

Lisa California   January 20th, 2008 7:15 pm ET

I am in favor of a strong, intelligent woman as President of the United States. As of the past few weeks, Hillary has been sounding both strong and intelligent, so I ask myself, is she stroong and intelligent? How does she make decisions? Does she make decisions like a strong intelligent woman would? In considering this question, the first thing to come to mind is her decision to marry Bill Clinton. Since Bill Clinton is a known womanizer and philanderer, and marriage is certainly one of the most important decisions of one's life; I must conclude that she does not make good decisiions.

I am just really surprised by the amount of women who are supporting her. Granted nobody is perfect, and I can imagine many women might even forgive a man who cheated on them once, but to forgive a habitual cheater and continue an intimate relationship with him is to disrespect oneself, this is not a sign of strength or intelligence. Moreover, what is this behavior modeling for our next generation?

Anonymous   January 20th, 2008 9:44 am ET

voting can be confusing. Too bad the Michigan ballots didn't bave Obama as a choice.

AL THE MAN   January 20th, 2008 3:42 am ET

BLACK, WHITE,YELLOW, RED, BROWN…..A voter votes because of his/her conscience!! not color of the skin

Teresa   January 19th, 2008 11:43 pm ET

Hillary looks good with her WIN in NV. The main reason Obama has no chance is that most of the delegate rich states will lean toward Hillary on 2/5/07. It really is over. It was close for awhile tho :)

Truth   January 18th, 2008 9:13 am ET

Is anyone else confused by anon middle America comments, wasn't it Obama who after graduating from Harvard took a $12, 000 a year job in south Chicago at a community center but didn't Hillary after graduating from Yale accept a partnership at Ross Law Firm.

Anon congratulations you have qualified for MORON ALERT!!!!

To all posters if you make a comment to support your candidate by bashing another candidate but your candidate hasn't demonstrated that they are any better or even a worst offender then the evidence/remarks you are posting to bring another candidate down you will get a MORON ALERT!!!

I forgot to add Becky has also been awarded a MORON ALERT!!!!

Becky is that like Bush Jr going to war with Iraq because it is a vendetta because Saddam had placed George H. W. Bush Sr, his father, on his assignation list

Truth   January 18th, 2008 8:54 am ET

IRT first post

Becky is that like Bush Jr going to war because Iraq is a vendetta because Saddam had placed Georg H. W. Bush Sr, his father, on his assanation list

Wilhemina   January 18th, 2008 6:05 am ET

Let's focus on the issue's the Clinton's beat Obama 20:1 when it comes to negatives. Do you remember their war on drugs?

Rodger Clinton Jr. Bill's brother. When Bill was Governor of Arkansas, Roger was arrested for cocaine possession in 1984 and served a year in federal prison.[2] Subsequently, his brother granted him a pardon amongst the list of pardons issued on January 19, 2001.

However, Roger continued to court legal trouble. On February 17, 2001, he was arrested and charged with two counts of drunken driving and one for disturbing the peace. In a deal that spared him jail time, Roger Clinton pleaded guilty to a non-alcohol-related charge of reckless driving. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

mike king   January 18th, 2008 1:13 am ET

Why is it that Sen. Barack Obama is considered an "African American" candidate
and not considered as a multi racial candidate?

Marleen   January 17th, 2008 2:33 pm ET

When I look at Obama; I don't see colour. When I hear Obama speak; I do not hear racial tones. I see an excellent speaker who stretches his long arms and hands as if to unite Americans together for a common goal. Whether or not all his policies are viable, he has the energy, the confidence to make clear decisions. No one person knows what will face the Americans in 2009, but I personally believe that a strong character such as Obama is capable of leading and listening to the hope and wishes of middle class Americans. Leadership is about having the confidence to gather the right resources and policies when making decisions. Obama's wife and children love him; it's refreshing to see their honest display of affection for each other.

David Snider   January 17th, 2008 2:21 pm ET

Jimmy, stop confusing yourself. There are 7.5 million registered to vote in Michigan. Keep in mind Michigan is a Democrat state. So if half of 7.5 mil is 3.75 mil… 550,000 is a true POOR turnout. Most clinton supporters voted. Most obama voters and Edwards didnt turn out at all. Lets look at the combined Edwards votes in Iowa and New hapshire against Hillarys and you have no arguement at all

Hmm 320,000 compared to 3.75 million democrats registered to vote equals 10% in Michigan for Hillary in my book

anon middle america   January 17th, 2008 7:32 am ET

beser January 16, 2008 10:06 am ET

At first I found it surprising when I kept hearing and reading so many pundits allude to the fact that Hillary draws most of her support from the poorly educated. Then I read the comments by Hillary fanatics here and elsewhere who seem determined to provide anecdotal evidence to bolster that claim.

John, boston, MA January 15, 2008

Hillary lovers have dirtied this whole forum.

^^^^^^^^^ Two prime examples of Obama's supporters?? The candidate promising Unity?

Versus the nasty lewd filth that spews of out the mouths of the hillaryhaters without end? Maybe we should all hope that Obama decides to split the Democratic party and make a third Populist Party for himself and all of his base fans because clearly the Democratic Party of THE people and for THE people no longer applies here.

Obama the candidate for a Change :( FROM the Democratic party!

Please do GO AWAY Obama and take your more upscale academia highfalutin' yuppie guppies and wannabes with you – wasn't once with Kerry enough? The rest of us will even all chip in and send you a nice bottle of French Bordeaux wine – so sorry we can only AFFORFD to buy one.

Oh and further apologies if Barack Obama's group of smug supporters have their more delicate sensibilities offended because not everyone in America is as highly educated, more affluent and of a better socio-economic classier status than they are. Yes, it certainly is true that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is definitely getting smaller after eight years of the Republicans in office. Let us all pray that these same individuals never find themselves in less than flush or fortunate times or older!!

But cheers to OBAMA'S NEW POPULIST PARTY… maybe in 2012 THE OLD Democratic Party can finally field its OWN candidate for a change!

eric   January 17th, 2008 6:41 am ET

As a Flemisch/Belgian/european I truly do not understand some negative comments about Sen H.Clinton.She is intelligent,CEO/COO type,steady and strong and has a good grasp of all socio-economic matters which are important to the people.
Compare it to Obama : good looking,good speaker using big words.Th

For Hillary   January 17th, 2008 1:13 am ET

Go Hillary, You will be one of the best presidents ever because you have the passion, the brains and the commitment to make things better for all of us. Don't listen to your bashers and their hateful comments. They only want to divide and destruct. We, your supporters sees the positives and the good things that you can do and turn this country around after what GWB have put us through. Hillary you will prevail. …..Hillary '08.

brandon   January 16th, 2008 9:47 pm ET

You know what I think gets lost in the Michigan primary is that the Democrats stripped the state of all it's delegates. In other words, the votes meant nothing. Now, just a random thought of hipocrasy, was it not the Democrats that were complaining that so many Americans were disenfranchised in the 2000 election?? They are themselves doing what they said should never be done. Hipocritical? You decide!!

ronald   January 16th, 2008 9:25 pm ET

Go, Go for it HILARY…HILARY CLINTON ALL THE WAY TO THE OVAL OFFICE….USA & The WORLD terribly needs someone like you. Prestige & Respect for the American will slowly but surely be back with you in the office. Please note that I'm NOT AMERICA. Yes, I cannot legally vote, but my voice has to be heard because our economy rely on you….your dollar.

Jimmy   January 16th, 2008 6:41 pm ET

Final vote for Michigan. Breaking the undecided vote 73% Obama, 17% Edwards, 10% others. straight out of the same exit polls CNN is using.

Not to forget that Obama campaign and Edwards campaign put out word two weeks before the election to vote undecided against Senator Clinton, through radio ads, mail flyers, and phone calls. This is after they signed an agreement not to campaign there, Attacking a candidate would be campaigning. Any way the results

Clinton 56.9%
Obama 29.3%
Edwards 6.8%
Kunich 3.6%
Other 3.2%

There where well over 550,000 votes. A very large increase over the last Presedential Primary Senator Clinton had over 328,000 of these votes.

On the Republican side there was just over 600,000 votes. THIS WAS HARDLY A DEAD ELECTION IN MICHIGANB> SENATOR CLINTON WON WITH A LANDSLIDE WITH AS MANY DEMOCRATS VOTING AS REPUBLICANS

SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 2008

martha   January 16th, 2008 6:20 pm ET

I AM NOT SURE WHY YOU GAVE THIS ARTICLE THIS HEAD LINE…CLINTON KNEW AND KNOWS WHAT HAPPEN IN MICHIGAN…WHY IS IT TROUBLING…OR BETTER YET WHEN THEY DECIDE TO GIVE THE DEL BACK TO STATE….WILL IT STILL BE BAD FOR HILL….I DON'T THINK SO……FIND A BETTER TITLE FOR YOUR ARTICLE OR IS THIS JUST A WAY OF GETTING ATTENTION…..WELL IT WORKED….CONGRATS

andy   January 16th, 2008 4:41 pm ET

Im in California and a Latino and what i saw last night at the University Of California Davis was amazing !! I saw what the press estimated to be 10,000 youth for change supporters at a rally and Bill Clinton was the speaker ! it was so exciting to see all the kids on that campus !! In California Hillary does have lots of support i think and they are a mixed crowd not just one race !!!

joann   January 16th, 2008 3:56 pm ET

I will never vote for Hillary Clinton; and come on you "Obama's family are terrorists people"–just stop it and go away

David   January 16th, 2008 3:18 pm ET

only 25 percent of Democrat registered voters voted in Michigan. Most that didnt vote were Obama, Edwards supporters who saw no reason to vote since their choice wasnt listed.

Some, voted, the majority didnt. that means 75 percent didnt vote…sad

Clinton, good Luck winning, you'll need it when the masses arrive

favor   January 16th, 2008 2:20 pm ET

Mark-you are bonafide obama hater-so don't throw dat self-righteous question!!!!!!!!

favor   January 16th, 2008 2:06 pm ET

yes blacks vote for their own race just like whites vote for their own too-why didn't whites vote for jesse jackson-and let me make it care-a president is not in control of economic fluctuations-so when AA enjoyed economic prosperity under their first black president before obama-black bill was not really in control!!!!!why does it pain some people to see more AA vote for obama?

Indus   January 16th, 2008 1:44 pm ET

Lets wait for Feb 5 primary

AL,CA, CO, CT, ID, KA, MA, NJ, NY and TE will be won by Mrs Clinton

IL – OBAMA

AR, GE, MIN are tossups

As for Michigan – What would OBAMA supporters say if uncommitted was ahead than Hillary.

She won the majority of the votes that was polled and ofcourse she as well as OBAMA did not campaign :)

Mark   January 16th, 2008 1:31 pm ET

I am neither a Clinton nor Obama supporter. But my question is to all those Clinton haters and bashers. Can you tell me why you have such a passion against her? I have asked this question of several of my colleagues in my office and no one could tell me why. Could it be that you are just buying into the liberal medias biases. If that is so, grow up.

My second question, all you Obama lovers, can you tell me other than his ability to speak eloquently from a script what his positions are, what he has done to deserve the accalades? Have you looked at his history in the Illinois senate? His record is dismal. Oh sorry, "present"!

Relative to Edwards, I used to like him and could see myself supporting him, but he has become such angry and overy aggressive candidate. Almost seems desparate. His swipes at Clinton are uncharacteristically harsh. This puts him in a "hater" column. John, wake up.

Bottom line. I will vote for the Democratic candidate. But come on everyone, it's okay to think critically, but bring some objectivity to the table.

toni77   January 16th, 2008 1:15 pm ET

go HILLARY GO YOU R THE WINER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

From TX   January 16th, 2008 12:44 pm ET

Let's do the math here…70% of 39 "uncommitted" voters were blacks=27.3%. And 58% of voters went for HILLARY, with 14.7% for others.
Let's now think in term of general election. The AA population counts for 12% of population in the USA, how many of them are registered to vote or take part in major election?Not so many!
If all white in democrat party were to vote they will influence the outcome of election if the race card is played.
Last, but not least why " we balck people" bring the race card in any situation?Also saying that the CLINTONS are racists is unfair and show how we black can be dishonnests and have a short memories about Hillary and Bill.

jamya   January 16th, 2008 12:38 pm ET

i read about how cliton b/c but just b/c i read sum of yall comments i still think clinton should be presdient it dont matter what she said it matter who goin to be the best

carol   January 16th, 2008 12:25 pm ET

Hillary "08″

jamya   January 16th, 2008 12:05 pm ET

i think clinton should win because she a good lady and we need a lady that going to make it right for us ladies

dee   January 16th, 2008 12:03 pm ET

The fact that Hillary went against her own party shows just how polarizing she is. This is what concerns me about HIllary as President, she's too divisive.

B.U   January 16th, 2008 12:00 pm ET

I hope Obama wins south carolina,we need him in the whitehouse

Jr., California   January 16th, 2008 11:10 am ET

The sad truth is that some still believe in "anyone but Hillary" as they decide who to vote for. Last night during the Las Vegas debates, Hillary stated 6 times her 35 years of experience.

But still the moderators failed to confront her on explaining and detailing her 35 years of experience. I would like to see her address this.

Emma Lou Diemer   January 16th, 2008 11:08 am ET

I get so tired of CNN's dour predictions, mostly saying how much trouble Clinton's campaign is in. I am for Hillary Clinton, and every right-thinking woman should be, and even the men (black, white, red, yellow, green, etc.) should be, too. Wonder if this country will ever be big enough, smart enough to realize it is long past time for a woman to be president. As an aside, it's interesting that black men got the right to vote long before any woman did. Let's not extrapolate that to the national political scene, please.

archie h.   January 16th, 2008 10:56 am ET

The prospect of seeing and listening to this self centered female egotist for 4 or 8 years is enough to frighten even the most hardened american voter!

steve wilmington   January 16th, 2008 10:32 am ET

Hillary Clinton uses the black community for her benefit. Typically, its presidents of corporations and higher ups in education. Just look how she used Bob Johnson of BET…
The black community is well aware of the tactics of the Clinton camp. She changes her accent when speaking in the south, flip-flops on issues, and has now degraded Dr. King as not substantial in civil rights. No wonder the black and white community can't trust her.

Poli   January 16th, 2008 10:11 am ET

This is Hillaryous! :) (Pun intended)

Would some please tell me what Hillary has done to further civil rights as an ELECTED OFFICIAL?

The only thing I can tell is that she sleeps with a white man. :)

Go Hillary!

charlotte   January 16th, 2008 10:06 am ET

The people of Michigan paid, in tax dollars, what did read, 10 million to move their primaries up? Thus disinfranchising the democrats and non-committed in their state. This state could've sure use this money elsewhere. Color coded ballots would sure make it easier for us to know if people are black, white, yellow or green. Come on CNN get off the the race thing!

beser   January 16th, 2008 10:06 am ET

At first I found it surprising when I kept hearing and reading so many pundits allude to the fact that Hillary draws most of her support from the poorly educated. Then I read the comments by Hillary fanatics here and elsewhere who seem determined to provide anecdotal evidence to bolster that claim.

After eight years of GWB, we don't need to right around an put another deceitful, unethical, secretive, cynically manipulative, arrogant, special-interest-mercenary president into office. Any Democrat but Hillary is fine with me.

Henry   January 16th, 2008 10:06 am ET

I think that each candidate had the opportunity to run in
Michigan. Clinton ran the others didn't, whose fault is that.?

Ray 4 Hillary!   January 16th, 2008 10:03 am ET

why is this story posted 2 times?

Again..The uncommitted vote is NOT ALL FOR OBAMA Folks!! Thats split with Edwards. SO, his total is much lower. AND, you can say if his name would have been on the balot, he would have got more voters? Well, who;s to say Hillary would not have had more support also show up??

Unknown   January 16th, 2008 9:49 am ET

The numbers so far show that African Americans in general are voting along racial lines. If they succeed, this will be trouble for Senator Clinton. However, if they fail, they should not expect Hilary to be any better to their causes than Republicans. The question still is: Can Obama win against republicans?

dcshungu   January 16th, 2008 9:43 am ET

"70% of Black Voters Pick "Uncommitted" Over Hillary" and she still won by 55% without having campaigned a single day there…

After having been thoroughly humiliated for hyping the polls before New Hampshire, the MSM is back doing the same thing again. Isn't he definition of insanity "to keep doing the same thing over and over again and hope for a different result each time", or something like that.?

sickofwhiners   January 16th, 2008 9:05 am ET

Look through all the the comments here and elswhere. Why is it that Obama's supporters are so hateful and mean-spirited? If this is the type of "unity" that he will bring about in this country, I want no part of it. I'll vote republican instead. Maybe that is what the Obama supporters are going for! How about highlighting issues? Not as much fun I guess.

V.CIFALDI & PAUL   January 16th, 2008 9:00 am ET

ANYONE WITH AN IQ OVER 100 SHOULD KNOW THAT BARRY (A.K.A. BARACK) HAS NO CHANCE OF ACTUALLY WINNING THE WHITE HOUSE. KEEP ON KEEPIN' ON HILLARY; YOU'VE GOT OUR VOTE, OUR MONEY, AND WE'LL EVEN VOLUNTEER!!!!!!

Dwarakesh   January 16th, 2008 8:51 am ET

Well I guess this is just about as right as the other poll's that you have conducted just before NH primary.

Charles Mackie   January 16th, 2008 8:47 am ET

With the DNC officially disenfranchising Michigan, it sounds like a perfect storm for the states attorney generals or an honest federal prosecutor to take on the established parties for corruption, racketeering, and violations of voters equal protection. BOTH political parties need to have their "powers" curtailed and the voters need to actually have a say in which candidates get nominated. Centralized nomination is a cover for corruption. We the people need to break the political machine if we want good / less government.

carol   January 16th, 2008 8:46 am ET

Wow! You had to post it 2 times! Maybe, you didn't watch the debate!

Hillary '08

Thomas, St. Petersburg, FL   January 16th, 2008 8:41 am ET

Most Democrats believe it is the role of government to drag people through life. Therefore, many Democratic voters are looking for the candidate who is promising them the sun and the moon, as opposed to the most qualified candidate who will benefit our nation the most.

Back in the days of FDR, "Give 'em hell Harry", and JFK, it was "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what can you do for our country". Unfortunately, those days are over. In the early 1960s, out of wedlock births among African-Americans were 25%; today it is 75%.

If you think the economy is shaky now, just wait and see what happens if Hillary or Obama become our chief executive and they raise taxes for income redistribution. Neither of these individuals have the experience to lead our nation.

Our only hope is McCain.

Tom, Boston Ma   January 16th, 2008 8:39 am ET

Do not be fooled again, people, by CNN and the mainstream media! Never again! Google Democracy Now and start from there. Google is your best friend.

From The North   January 16th, 2008 8:29 am ET

I agree race has no place in politics regardless of the Nation. However, it looks like it has a Large Place in the Politics of America. And that is very unfortunate.
Also it appears that America's young population from voting age to thirty years is also going to have an impact on this election. And I fear this sector see Obama as America's Rock Star Politician. A view that I would consider worrisome.

I would like to reply to – Let's Turn The Page America As this person's comments left me with a very uneasy feeling.
"Just got back from a month in the UK…Everyone is talking about Obama in Europe. All they want to know is if its going to happen and how great it would be if it does. No one is talking about his race outside the USA, there talking about a positive change and new beginning for America. I got to say…If we as a nation miss this moment its unlikely to come back around any time soon."

Of course UK, Europe, the Mid East are talking about how Great it would be if Obama was elected President. They mean How Great For Them not America.

UK, Europe and the Mid East would be ecstatic with an Obama Victory. They would welcome a less seasoned, more youthful, US President. And I'm sure some factors in the Mid East are thrilled with the Media's on-ending coverage of his Muslim ancenstry. They will interpret that as His being One of Them, one of the Fray. Note, I said, THEY will interpret. Not I, not America.

These Countries will also view an Obama, and/or a Victory by other less seasoned Candidates, as a Leader who will be much easier to sway in international negotiations, A Leader much easier to stall and keep at bay regarding Sanctions. A Leader much easier to handle on Nuclear issues.

It is not about race but rather, LEADERSHIP – CAPABLILITY – EXPERIENCE, To that end, I pray Americans see the whole picture before them. Please Do not assess a Candidate on International Popularity or Media Polls. Don't play their game. They will win and America will pay the ultimate price.

I am a Canadian. I have no racial issues. I stand to gain and loose little by this election short of irritation. However, on the world stage, we all stand to loose a great deal if America elects another incompetent Leader. I am concerned that if Americans listen to the pundits and the International rehetoric they will endure another four years worse than the last seven.

Our citizens of today are living in Perilous times. America truly needs a seasoned, capable, experienced Leader to restore their Nation,quell the devastation in the Mid East and keep the other power hungry Nations at bay.

I do not favour any Candidate. I see favourable and less favourable qualities in all. You know your politicians better than I. I just pray that you vote according to their qualifications, abilities, integrity and loyalty to America. There is no We here.
Americans, You Can Do It. And I know come election day, You Will Make The Right Choice based on what really defines a Competent, Credible, Leader.

Tom, Boston Ma   January 16th, 2008 8:26 am ET

CNN and the rest of the mainstream media have been in the Bush/Cheney/neo-com enterprise all along. remember they are "embedded"? remember Judith Miller of the NYT? NEVER think that they are in the business of informing the public. they are the propaganda machine of the moneyed class. like many millions of others, go to DemocracyNow dot com and start from there. there's no popup adds, they serve no special interests but the public's. the mainstrem media's days are so numbered.

Democracy Now!!!!!!!!!!

ohmygosh   January 16th, 2008 8:22 am ET

35 years of experience and I have not seen an ounce of judgment, a teaspoon of wisdom nor a grain of dignity displayed by this presidential candidate. IT'S TIME TO TURN THE PAGE!

AJ; Montpelier, VT   January 16th, 2008 7:47 am ET

According to CNN is there ever any good news for the Clinton campaign? Or any other campaign for that matter?CNN needs to declare it's endorsement of Obama and stop portraying itself as an objective news network. I have written to the FCC about this problem of "News" outllets like CNN attempting to influence the integrity of our elections. Fox does the same thing. I urge everyone else who thinks that this is a problem to write to the FCC and ask them to look into the matter. News outlets like CNN, Fox and MSMBC have tremendous influence over public perception of political candidates. When that coverage is so skewed towords one candidate or another, the coverage begins to be not only biased but misleading. We, the American public turn to our news networks for clear and unbiased reportiong so that we are able to form an opinion of our candidates. It is vital that we have a neutral source. CNN is not the place to look for a neutral source. Write to the FCC and demand fair news reporting.

Tony, Enterprise, Alabama   January 16th, 2008 7:41 am ET

CNN is so intent on keeping race a part of this campaign, they have this article on the ticker twice!

Wake up CNN! The voters will decide this campaign.

Rothchild   January 16th, 2008 7:39 am ET

Mr Obama seems determined to cry “race” whenever anyone attacks him. He has been playing the game carefully, admittedly, allowing spokesmen and leaked memos to speak for him, while publicly denying that he wants to stoke up the race issue, For a candidate who seeks to be beyond race, it is a dangerous game, Clintons “have historically and consistently been on the right side of civil rights issues. they care about the African-American community and they care about all Americans and they want to see equal rights and equal justice in this country”. And he could have added, but didn't: and I do not believe that they are playing the race card, and I believe they are above that – so stop making those claims in my name said obama.

LARRY   January 16th, 2008 7:21 am ET

GIVEN THE CURRENT STATE OF AMERICA'S FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM DOES THE AMERICAN PUBLIC REALLY THINK MR. OBAMA HAS ANY CHANCE AT BEING ELECTED? ARE THEY REALLY GOING TO VOTE FOR SOMEONE WITH HIS BACKGROUND ? IF HE DOES WIN THE DEM.ELECTION YOU CAN BET YOUR BOTTOM DOLLAR THAT THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE USA WILL BE REPUBLICAN

Patricia M.   January 16th, 2008 7:13 am ET

I see this picture a lot different. I guess. I think it said a lot, for Mrs. Clinton to stay on the Michigan ballot. It told me she won't turn her back on Michigan, no more than she will turn her back on the people of this country. Mrs. Clinton cares! Can you imagine, what she and Bill (he a former president) can do for this country together? I can…
Only good!

She has my vote!

toldya sew   January 16th, 2008 6:55 am ET

The problem isn't just with Hillary, it's with a party that encourages and provides a safe haven for her ilk.

Two examples:
"All Americans must vote Democrat," insisted Jihad Jaara, the Al Aqsa agent who commanded 2002's siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity and used Holy Bibles for toilet paper, which was broadcast worldwide.

The Center for Responsive Politics reports that Mrs. Clinton has raised $269,436 from the pharmaceutical industry, more than any other candidate, including Republicans, and $220,550 from the oil and gas industry, more than double what her closest Democratic rivals raised from the industry.

nuf sed

Jamie   January 16th, 2008 6:46 am ET

I'm not surprised about Hillary. My cousin used to work for her as a PI. His job was to go around and threaten the women Bill Clinton had sexually assaulted.

But after reading the article and comments I am shocked at how little people know about Barack Obama. There is a great deal of information available on the internet, much of it just plain facts about his background.

He is an avowed Marxist-Socialist who despises the competition engendered in capitalism.

He and his extended family hate Jews and Israel, something he has been at odds to hide during the campaign for fear of losing the liberal Jewish vote.

He is a member of a church that espouses Black superiority and separation of all races. If he were a white man, Liberals would label him a bigot for those kind of beliefs.

Democrats need to be careful and not assume this candidate is a uniter. It is too easy to see in someone the fullfillment of hopes engendered in own desires.

Sal   January 16th, 2008 6:42 am ET

Yea for Obama, Nah for Clinton… You go Obama!!! We see today that people are willing to make a sacrifice for change. Even though Obama name wasn't on the ballot i bet majority of those people that vote uncommittted vote for him. The people in America see that Obama will be the best president. Vote Obama 08.

Jim   January 16th, 2008 6:18 am ET

What are you saying Tyrone? I thought Obama said he wasn't a Muslim ?- just attended Muslim School – Ref coke use – He admitted it himself

What does anybody know about this Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago that Obama attends? Is it Racist?

What's the truth about Obama? Somebody get me smart –

I don't care what you call me – I'm NOT voting for a radical Racist

Lisa   January 16th, 2008 5:37 am ET

sure sean, enjoy going for a "tallest person victory" contest in the elementary school you speak of, you may come in first or second if you're lucky. However, stay away from the "smartest person" contest in that school, you would be devastated after coming in last.

Tyrone   January 16th, 2008 5:33 am ET

You White folks better get used to a Black Muslim as your President and knock off the tash talk about him doing coke!

Obama 08

Rob   January 16th, 2008 5:30 am ET

HAS ANYONE CONSIDERED THAT THESE BLACK VOTERS WERE ALSO EDWARDS SUPPORTERS??? OR THAT HILLARY "WON" BECAUSE SHE WAS THE ONLY "NAME" ON THE LIST? What's the % of blacks in MI? AND WHY IS THE MEDIA IS SOOO OBSESSED WITH BLACK VOTERS??? I know why, because most people in the media are white and they are fixated on "OTHERS". Similar to how the media ALWAYS has a negative report about minority health, as if whites NEVER get sick. And BTW folks, Chris Matthews is doing damage control on Hillary because he has been accused of being VERY sexist. He has a tendency to make negative comments about females out of NOWHERE. And he's well known to hate the Clintons. He probably got chewed out because e-mails came in blasting him. Nevertheless, Bill Clinton should be embarrassed after this past week. He should recuse himself from this campaign as a former President, unless he is going to speak positively about his wife. He cannot hold Hillary's hand when other male leaders criticize her. This is unprecedented quasi-nepotism and manipulation of the democratic process. No other presidential candidate in modern history has had a former President attack their candidacy so hard. ***I don't want to see 4 to 8 yrs of THAT crap. And Hillary will pay for Bob Johnson blast Obama and NOT repudiating the comment. Johnson is not respected in the black community anyway.

NORMAN   January 16th, 2008 5:25 am ET

One thing is very CLEAR from this exercise, black people love their own and white people love there own very selves!

Kudos to the Afro-American community for being so UNITED!!!

Go Hill . . . go obama!

jep   January 16th, 2008 5:22 am ET

Go Hilary go and don't listen to what the racists are saying. You rock all the way to the white house come Nov. '08

jep   January 16th, 2008 5:20 am ET

Are we still voting racial in this day and age or as Americans?It beats my logic that my favorite news media CNN is playing race here. Blacks are not the only ones voting in this country, even if they all stayed home, Clinton will still win!! So stop playing this race game even when the candidates have stated to move on and build one America! Bravo Clinton way to go. As for CNN you lose me, MSNBC might be my choice. I am tired of you playing race when you should be uniting.I am black and I vote substance not race!
Hilary '08

Anne   January 16th, 2008 5:10 am ET

I think that the best and the most qualified Democratic Presidential Candidate in this election was Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico. As many may know, he dropped out of the race last week. Apparantely with good reasons. It's unfortunate that Senators Obama and Edwards and other candidate's names were not on the Michigan primary ballot (their choice). I believe that things would have otherwise turned out differently. Now there's squabbling over the Nevada primary, caucas or whatever they call it. So I'm expecting the same thing to happen in Nevada on Jan. 19th as did in Michigan yesterday. Democratic candidates removing their names from the Nevada ballots. History does sometimes repeat itself.

One thing for sure. There are two presidential candidates in the democratic and republican parties that I'm sure I won't be voting for on November 4 if either of them win the presidential nomination. It will be the first time that I didn't vote for a U.S. President. Oh. About the black and the white vote thing. Some of us decide to vote for the candidate we think is the best man or woman for the job. In other words we vote for the person not the political party. I rest my case.

Princeton Student   January 16th, 2008 5:08 am ET

Well duh, this a no-brainer. Of course most African Americans intend to vote for Barack Obama. Some have legitimate reasons, some don't…but my dog could have figured this one out. This is not news, so why the heck is it being reported?

Alex from IL   January 16th, 2008 5:06 am ET

Only 15% more dems would have Hillary over "nobody"? And no way of knowing how many people mistakenly put someone in for Write In? Jesus, I think she has quite an electability problem.

sameera, nigeria   January 16th, 2008 5:02 am ET

clinton proved to be a snitch by continuing with the election despite her fellow party members withdrawal. this is politics and for people to say obama doesnt care about michigan is just shallow on their part because at this stage of the election decisions on where to hold elections should be a party decision not an individual one. clinton has just proved that she will do whatever it takes to win the elections and it is quite clear now that the reason shes a democrat is because there is a high possiblity of america choosing a democrat leader.

Barrack obama is not only popular in america but around the world too. america as the worlds power needs a sensible and positive leader that will bring back the love and hope the world had in america and undo the hatred and bad image it has now due to the ill-thought decisions by the bush administration. i do hope obama wins as clinton is just playing politics and going by the figures instead of genuinely wanting change. so dont be fooled by her, its just pathetic that she plays the sympathy card, the american economy is ridiculously flawed, and the whole world is suffereing due to the rapid drop in the value of the dollar. something needs to be done and Obama is the man for the job.

Aileen Murphy   January 16th, 2008 5:00 am ET

If you analyze all of the statistics accurately, Clinton has actually done very well in the Michigan primary. For example, when asked the question on how the voting would go if all of the candidates were on the ballot, those for Edwards (only 12%) voted 30% for Hillary and 56% uncommitted (probably most for Edwards). For the Barack supporters, 18% voted for Hillary and 76% voted uncommitted (probably most for Barack). Of those who supported Hillary, which was the largest percentage of the total, 97% voted for Hillary and 3% were uncommitted.

This clearly shows that even if Edwards and Obama were in the running, Clinton would be the clear winner.The only category that Clinton did not do well in was with the younger voters. The uncommitted % was higher than the % who voted for Hillary. But, you have to take into consideration that the younger voters only represented 25% of the total voters. That is why Hillary was still able to come out ahead of all of the candidates.

This primary voting shows that Hillary did very well in Michigan. Only about 39% were uncommitted. Most of these votes would probably go to Obama, then to Edwards and then to then rest of the candidates (minimal). So, considering the full slate of candidates, Hillary would have won by over 20% from the second place winner.

Hillary '08—all the way!

Lisa Salt Lake City UT   January 16th, 2008 4:57 am ET

Obama, Yes We Can! Looking forward to Super Duper Tuesday ! Utah loves Obama.

George, Miami, FL   January 16th, 2008 4:56 am ET

The one thing I have learned about the Clintons is just how mean they are. They insult Martin Luther King, they introduce race in several ways. When commentators point that out on TV, they "act offended" and "hurt" that Obama is hurting them.

Even if Obama were inferior as a candidate I'd have to vote for him, just to not reward the bully Clintons. But it turns out that Obama is superior as a candidate.

So I am backing Obama all the way. And I am a white Republican. We have to stop the war, and we have to stop the China bleed.

Jimmy, Ft. Lauderdale, Fl   January 16th, 2008 4:46 am ET

Michigan and Florida are getting the raw end of the deal here.

I want to see what the candidates will say to after the primaries when they have to come back to campaign again during the presidential campaign. It will be the likes of the republicans that will win. I like Barak Obama but if he intentionally skips campaigning in Fl all together I just might vote for Rudy just out of spite.

Watch your steps dems. because the republicans are taking you all for fools for taking away our delegates. It will cost you serious numbers in votes once the real voting in Nov comes. I bet Michigan voters will bear a grudge come Nov. Talk here in Fl shows that. We now refer to most Dems as DUMBASSES

Chuck   January 16th, 2008 4:45 am ET

Look at the statistics! Obama and Edwards were encouraging their supporters for over a week now to come out and vote"uncommitted" against Hillary Clinton. This supposed great show of support between the two of them amounted to 40% and near 4% for Kusinch. Here are the facts:

Hillary got 54% of the white male vote and 71% of the white female vote. The "uncommitted" got 38% of the white male vote and 25% of the white female vote. In all Hillary got 63% of the white vote and 30% of the black vote. Among non-white males Hillary got 45% to 54% for the "uncommitted". Among female non-white voters Hillary got 34% to 64% for "uncommitted".

Age-wise, here are the Stats: 18-24 Hillary 42% Uncommitted 48%
25-29 44 49
30-39 48 47
40-49 57 39
50-64 56 39
65 over 78 21
Hillary won amongst all income groups, except for those earning over $100,000. per year…interesting…and she won among all education levels, except for those higher than a BA level of education…that's also interesting!

Hillary also wins in smaller cities, towns and rural areas….hmmm aren't these places normally called the heartland of America?

Now, here's what you all really wanted to know. How would the democrats of Michigan actually voted today if actually given real choices?…well here's what those who did vote said….Hillary Clinton 46%
Obama 35%
Edwards 12%
Kucinich 2%
Richardson 1%
Hillary Clinton would have won the Michigan Primary by a whopping 11%.
Since there was a strong effort made by the Obama and Edwards camps to get their supporters out to vote for the uncommitted, coupled with these statistical facts, this was definitely a big victory of sorts for Hillary Clinton.

Of course, she lost the black vote, as she may well do in South Carolina, however, her democratic base in states with small black populations is still very strong.

So, people, give credit where it's due and look at the facts, not just what you want to see and believe. They are all good candidates, each with their strengths and weaknesses. For any democrat to say they won't vote democratic in the fall if a certain democrat wins the nomination, is like cutting your nose off to spite your face. You want another Republican President? Get real! Hold your nose and get behind whoever wins the nomination, for the good of the country!

shaun   January 16th, 2008 4:39 am ET

Lex January 15, 2008 11:38 pm ET please read this post..its the most informative, and accurate i've seen thus far

I'm glad Clinton is now aware that she isn't guaranteed the black vote just because "some" black people are fond of her husband. She needs to stop acting as if she has already won the nomination. She HAS NOT! Her campaign tricks and dirty politics are not flying over the heads of Americans. Oh and by the way Tim Russert, Chris Mathews, and the rest of the political commentators and hosts SUCK AT THEIR JOBS! They are totally favoring Hillary. It really is making me sick! How much more obvious can you be? START REPORTING THE FACTS. FACTS FACTS FACTS AND ONLY THE FACTS! Stop trying to influence people with subtle plugs for a "certain" candidate. Stop saying Barack has attacked HIllary, b/c he has not, stop saying hillary has the most experience b/c she DOES NOT, and stop bringing on horrible guests who are completely biased! Why don't you ever say Hillary takes a lot of money from lobbyists & PACS, why not report the fact that Barack has held more government positions than Hillary? Doesn't he deserve equal treatment or are you gunning for the Clintons to win this by any means necessary? MSNBC, CNN, and most news stations ARE A JOKE! STOP FEEDING and being the driving force behind false issues. STAY ON TASK AND GIVE THE PUBLIC THE REAL CHANCE TO SEE WHO EACH CANDIDATE IS!

Festus   January 16th, 2008 4:34 am ET

As far as I am concerned, her comments on MLK amounts to a grave political blunder of the same magnitude as that of John Kerry, that ended his presidential ambition.

Tlc   January 16th, 2008 4:32 am ET

Stratford, your syllogism is flawed. It is equally likely that Obama/Edwards supporters stayed home in that they knew their candidate could not win. It is entirely possible that the voters who stayed who balanced out and the tally gives a relatively accurate picture of the voter's attitudes.

Nathan K   January 16th, 2008 4:28 am ET

The Obama Campaign should take the results of the Michigan Primary and scream it from the rooftops. 4O% OF DEMOCRATS MADE IT A POINT TO VOTE AGAINST HER IN AN UNCONTESTED RACE!!!!!!!!

Lisa   January 16th, 2008 4:22 am ET

People who defend Hillary's "It took a President" for civil rights to happen, ignore what Al Gore has stated in his movie "An Inconvenient Truth" and how he went into politics hoping to create the change in environmental laws. He thought all he needed was good information to be share with good intelligent people and that they would do the "right thing". But they didn't. He left government, and took his information and concern to the people – and he told it to the masses. People began to listen, to care, and to make personal decisions and commitment to change. That was more powerful. Eventually with people letting their representatives know their concerns will get the Washington people to get on board. People make their government change-government doesn't create the change.

Laws against discrimination does not change people's hearts and minds. Does anyone believe that men in power would have given women the right to vote without pressure from the masses?

ronald   January 16th, 2008 4:16 am ET

Hence, HILARY CLINTON is the SUREST THING. Highly committed & intelligent, so why settle for less? WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!!!!!! Although I'm not American, I WILL PRAY FOR HER TO WIN NOT JUST THE NOMINATION BUT BEING THE "1ST WOMAN PRESIDENT OF THE USA".

Raoul   January 16th, 2008 4:14 am ET

She dug this hole herself by pandering to Robert "Bobcat" Johnson and his pocket book. The Clintons have never met a whale donnor they didn't love, ie. Rupert Murdoch's fundraiser for Hillary, Hillary being on WalMart's board, the Lincoln Bedroom, etc. By not standing up to a fourth major swipe at Obama's childhood, yes childhood; she only looks worse. Unfortunately, this story is running out of legs…but if another big donor decides to hiccup in the next month – watch her.

Dan, College Station, TX   January 16th, 2008 4:14 am ET

I've seen a lot of posts from Clinton supporters who seem to think that this 'win' represents a true victory over a combined Edwards/Obama ticket. If they think that this was a truly representative vote, maybe they should look at the fact that Mitt Romney, who had actual real opponents on the ballot got more votes than her. So either admit that this is not a real win, or admit that Hillary would lose Michigan to Mitt Romney in the general election. You can't have it both ways.

ronald   January 16th, 2008 4:11 am ET

HILARY CLINTON IS THE ONE & ONLY HOPE FOR USA TO SURVIVE IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA. THE CLINTONS ARE WELL LOVE & REVERRED BY CITIZENS OF THE WORLD. ACCEPT IT OR NOT BUT THAT'S THE FACT. I'M NOT AMERICAN & I SHOULD KNOW BETTER.

S Perry   January 16th, 2008 3:50 am ET

Independents also failed to show up–so don't be so sure that those who did not show up would have voted for Hillary. It was generally a low turnout, so this really means nothing in the scheme of things. Yes, it's really interesting that a large percentage of blacks voted for Obama over Clinton, but (even though it's not reported here), MSNBC reported that whites favored Hillary over Obama significantly, as well. How about we worry about the primaries/caucuses to come? Clearly the media has nothing better to do but get us anxious about completely useless information…

wede   January 16th, 2008 3:44 am ET

Regardless of how some think Obama and Edwards are only sharing half the 40% undecided. They completely fail to realize Clinton's 55% is terrible and is also benfitting being padded down by Michigan Democrats who are angry Obama and Edwards weren't aknowledging Michigan. Had Edwards and Obama campained thoroughly and didn't chastice Michigan for their early election, Clinton would have more than likel had even less than 55% votes, as she would have never gained Michigan's spite votes for the others not being there.

Those spite votes include voters of all races, not just the African American voters CNN is concerned with. I wish big money didn't own all the news media. It would be great to see the media quit separaing the working class voters by perpetuating racial differences.

Im Black in Michigan   January 16th, 2008 3:42 am ET

I live in Michigan, and once I heard Obama was taking his name off of the Ballot, I decided not to even go vote. Im sure I speak for thousands, if not tens of thousands more.

GA Boy   January 16th, 2008 3:28 am ET

Race has no place in politics. It's simply another divider and unfortunately sells media ads. It's an industry that continues to flourish. Won't we stop it America? This country is too great to continue to be bogged down by this issue. Whenever the media fans racism, we should stand up and tell them to stop it, that we won't support it, and if they continue it, we will boycott any advertisers who advertise on the shows that fan it. So, in our e-mails and phone calls to the media, let's demand that they stop this racism fanning or else. I'm betting that it will come to a screeching halt!

Mike in Kentucky   January 16th, 2008 3:16 am ET

Rather than reporting the election results, CNN, in an Obama biased spin, has reported "analysis" as news.

This is getting a familiar feel and it's not fair and balanced, to borrow a slogan.

What ever happened to: CNN: The Most Respected Name in NEWS?

Steven   January 16th, 2008 3:10 am ET

Racism, the fairy tale says, is a white phenomenon. But for many whites with feelers in the black community the truth is racism is more pervasive and certainly more militant and overt among blacks. Play your racial, gender and politically correct players well, Hillary. But beware the consequences. The game is three-dimensional chess and you may continue to be surprised at the source of the rebellions you incite.

Bea, Hoboken, NJ   January 16th, 2008 3:10 am ET

This post is very deceptive. There was a big push for people to vote undecided as a sign of protest against the DNC.There were politicians asking voters to chose undecided and there were even ads on TV asking the same. Therefore, the exit polls of this "beauty" contest are worthless.

FV, Tampa, FL   January 16th, 2008 3:07 am ET

OMG is CNN out of it's mind?
After the NH poll debacle you are still trying to use one sided polls to justify Obama as the leader in the race?
that's BS!

and so what, if EVERY single black person in America voted for Obama and EVERY single woman (non-black) voted for Clinton, Clinton would win in a LANDSLIDE!
so get some freakin' perspective here!

cnyetx   January 16th, 2008 3:06 am ET

Grant,

I don't normally comment or get involved in "blogs " per-sue but after reading your comment…. that for me will be a thing of the past. You couldn't have summed it up better. I loved it………..Don't let your friends drink and post…. Excellent.

Benchwarmer

Jay   January 16th, 2008 3:04 am ET

I have never seen such Hillary bias. She won against "uncommitted" in double digits.
So even if Obama and Edwards got 30% and 10% respectively, it is still a resounding win for Hillary.
She will be our next president. All you haters will have to accept that.

Lars   January 16th, 2008 3:01 am ET

It sounds like the Democratic party is divided and unless somehow it is unified we will fail in 2008. I don't trust Obama and will not vote for him in 2008, likewise many are saying they won't vote for Hillary. Strangely my friends seem to think like me, probably like yours don't like Hillary.

Regardless tonight showed support for Hillary as obviously Obama and Edwards supporter new that voting Uncommited was voting against Hillary and for Obama & Edwards but they still failed to be her majority in the state.

Where we go from here? Idk. I have deep reservations about the Church that Obama attends, as well as what exactly his policies will be. I am concerned about his stance on Iraq, Iran, & Israel.

You know why I like Hillary? Because she isn't blind hope. I'm tired of it. I don't think Obama should win because he is more charasmatic. This isn't a beauty pagent revolving around charisma and hope. Even the republicans are touting change while they support Bush's policies. As Hillary says, Let us get back to reality and fix things. Can Obama really change America in any way for the better, or in 2012 will I still have a yucky taste in my mouth? I believe Hillary can get us back to where we were under Bill Clinton and that is a step in the right direction. Before we can go forward, we need to erase the mistakes and steps backwards the Bush has taken. This isn't about going to the moon, this is about taking the steps needed which include bargaining, compromise, and dialogue.

Obama can compare himself to JFK or MLK when he HAS accomplished something great, otherwise it insults their great work. Obama gives me no hope, just fear. Hillary has the power and experience to get things done.

proud florida democrat   January 16th, 2008 3:00 am ET

You Got Obamad

Its ironic to me that everybody is for Obama because they want "change".
Heres a guy who is running that he is a uniter and can bring the country together around "change"
He says hes above the politics of Washington.

But despite money rich campaign he has said that he will not pay attention to us during the primary season.
THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!

In 2000 we were disenfranchised and our vote was "stolen" by first term Bush. That lead to this whole mess!!!! Now Obama wants to ignore our vote again.

Well as a "champion" of voters rights (one of his few stances in politics) how can he say Drop Dead Florida?

We have taken many steps here in Florida to become a more politically active state. We are the 4th largest, our electorate is extremly diverse. We have a huge population of black and latino voters. We are a border state. We have areas with old retired folks (alot of veterans) as well as very young and progressive cities. Our capital is in the bible belt. Our biggest city has a major latin population, we have no significent gang or race relation problems. Both Orlando and Miami are international cities and we have very rural farm areas.

Obama is Ignoring all of us. As a man of principle and voters rights shouldnt he stand with us and not bow down to the pressure from NH and Iowa

Due Diligence   January 16th, 2008 2:53 am ET

I hope everyone is taking the time to look at ALL the Candidates for President – and not just going with the ones the media favor and focus on. Because there is plenty of information available to the Public to show that the LAST thing we need to be looking at right now is Partisan Politics or Media Mania.

Use your brain – make sure you are checking out every single Candidate to find out where they stand on the issues and what their history shows they have stood for on the issues.

You can't trust the Political or the Media machines to give you fair and unbiased facts. They've got their own agendas and issues – which may not be the same as yours. Perform your own due diligence – and please make a truly informed decision and not one based on emotion or what you think the Party represents.

Race and/or sex should have nothing to do with evaluating a candidate – either for or against. And if we are ever going to be truly "color blind" and "gender neutral" – it has to be because we don't look either at or for those distinctions.

This election represents the first time in a long time that American's are truly interested enough to make a difference with their vote. History is being made no matter who we choose.

Right now – the FUTURE should be our focus. And it's OUR future – not just mine or yours. We Citizens are in this together.

It's time our Leaders remember that the Constitution is the Law of this Land – not the Parties, not the Politicians, but "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Another Steve   January 16th, 2008 2:52 am ET

In fairness to Hillary, I suppose I should add that yes Hillary was on the original printed ballot and that was supposed to be the reason only her name was printed. I know, another matter that was not within her control once agian. 45 % wrote uncommited, I'm impressed.

Nathan   January 16th, 2008 2:41 am ET

Obama and Edwards supporters voted uncommited and Hillary still won. But keep in mind these two facts:
1. I'm an Obama supporter and I would have been first in line if I could have voted for my candidate, but I wouldn't leave my Lazyboy to vote for Uncommited.
2. There was no campaigning in Michigan, so voters relied more heavily on name recognition… not Obama's strong suit.
Hill should not be proud of the win… she should be embarassed.

Another Steve   January 16th, 2008 2:36 am ET

Let's leave the race issue behind for now. I myself think that Hillary only getting 55% agianst no other person on the ballot tells plenty. She was arrogant enough to stay on the ballot and split the democratic party decision as Obama and Edwards did as they were instructed by the party. This Democrat side of the Michigan election shows us that First, Hillary can't work with others when faced with personal agenda. Second, in the election I believe you actually had to write uncommitted to count as a vote for someone else and 45 % actually did this. Wow. I'm impressed. Obama is gonna kick some butt shortly.

scope213   January 16th, 2008 2:34 am ET

Michigan's message to Hillary is…"get off your husband's tailcoat and hold your own". All Hillary is going on is a handful of Democrats fantasizing that somehow if we get Hillary into the Whitehouse, Bill can secretly get "another" chance to run the show again. Scary stuff.

Obama is the best choice we all know this. Go past the skin color and choose the best candidate. In this case, Obama outshines her ten fold. I'm Republican so I can't do anything next month but come November…he has my vote! And thx to Bush now I'm going Independent, lol.

James   January 16th, 2008 2:34 am ET

Someone should ask Hillary where she stands on S 1955 and how she'll vote on HB 1959 when it reaches the Senate. Write your Reps. They're taking your rights. Who don't they want you to hear? Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich.

Jonathan   January 16th, 2008 2:32 am ET

This is a non-issue to me. The Michigan primary doesn't even affect convention delegates, let's not get too carried away with analysis or exit polls.

As an Obama supporter, after NH, I have learned that all politics is local. You cannot make generalizations about the blacks in this state, the labor workers in that state. In this election, every vote must not just be earned, but KEPT over the course of the campaign. We still have a long way to go.

AS   January 16th, 2008 2:27 am ET

The delegates don't even matter apparently. It's an "empty" win. Basically, she was supposed to join the other candidates and pull out of Michigan for some stupid "Make Michigan Stand In The Corner For Being Naughty" thing that the national Democratic Party wanted, just cuz party official in Detroit Wanted To Be Almost First.

I'm not sure why Clinton didn't toe the party line as well, but basically she got a meaningless vote. Probably more people voted for her in the primary, than there will be in the general election, should we have the major misfortune of having her as the candidate.

I SWEAR to god if she's nominated, I will move to a remote island and worship a cocoanut carved into the likeness of Richard Nixon

Vishal   January 16th, 2008 2:27 am ET

Smart People for Hillary!

I'm sick and tired of asking someone why they're voting for Obama and getting an answer in the general direction of "his message of change". What about the issues?! Americans aren't voting for who's the smartest or who has the greatest chance of beating anyone in the GOP or who has the experience or who even has the best healthcare/economical/security plans for America… just for the one who can motivate the crowd…

All talk and no meat

Jose Card - Independent   January 16th, 2008 2:24 am ET

After Bill and Hillary played hard on her gender card, they played race card on Obama and it backfired on her. Had she admitted her mistake and apologized to Obama, Michigan would have been kinder to her. But no, Bill and Hillary went on and on to waste everybody's time. What kind of 35 years of experience does she have to have such poor judgment? Perhaps it's time to cry again.

I don't think anybody plotted this whole thing against her. This just goes to show her political immaturity and incompetence.

Obama is more qualified than Hillary in every aspect.
Anybody that tries to bank on the race or gender card will suffer.
Hillary deserves the penalty for playing both cards and they should take full responsibility for their mistake or what they really are.

Tom Davie   January 16th, 2008 2:19 am ET

This is an extremely troubling headline.

For 2 candidates whom have let the issue go, the MEDIA certainly isnt.

Whats even more troubling is this:

To keep the race issue alive HURTS Obama. Why cant u people see this?

If 70% of african americans voted for Obama, and we also have to consider all the folks whom voted for Edwards, then WHERE does this 55% vote for clinton come from ???

You must remember the 40% uncommited is Edwards and Obama combined.

Obviously the white vote is going over to Clinton. This is NOT what Obama wanted. CNN is not doing anything to keep it quiet either.

Hillary left her name on there, with the other candidates, so that the PEOPLE of Michigan know that she CARED about their vote. Whether it counts or not.

The national democratic party didnt TELL the candidates to take their names off the ballot .

Did Obama and Edwards think about the PEOPLE of michigan whom wanted to vote for them to show their SUPPORT ???? No.

They didnt seem to care too much about that. Hillary did.

Charles Martin   January 16th, 2008 2:18 am ET

Who said Obama was Black…I thought his dad was Black and his Mom was white. Why doesn't the media say he is white….or biracial. Think People. This country is still filled with racial undertones.

Charles Martin   January 16th, 2008 2:17 am ET

Who said Obama was Black…I thought he was Black and his Mom was white. Why doesn't the media say he is white….or biracial. Think People. This country is still filled with racial undertones.

Let's Turn The Page America   January 16th, 2008 2:15 am ET

Just got back from a month in the UK…Everyone is talking about Obama in Europe. All they want to know is if its going to happen and how great it would be if it does. No one is talking about his race outside the USA, there talking about a positive change and new beginning for America. I got to say…If we as a nation miss this moment its unlikely to come back around any time soon.

The world is watching, lets see how much we actually care.

What really matters   January 16th, 2008 2:14 am ET

Uncommitted doesn't mean she was running against nobody..it's obvious that "uncommitted" represents the other candidates that weren't listed on the ballot. Think about it. I would like to see Uncommitted listed on the final election day. Maybe we'll get a ticket like Obama/Uncommitted as our final running mates.
Since when can we pull a trick like that and actually get it counted? That's like voting for your imaginary friend…doesn't say much about those of you who fell for it.

William   January 16th, 2008 2:06 am ET

It amazes me that Americans would vote for someone with a fancy name than for someone with a proven track record especially when our economy is in a tale spin.

butcher_boy   January 16th, 2008 2:06 am ET

blacks are now the 2nd largest minority. Clinton should care about the Latin vote. I don't know why blacks vote for democrats its republicans that get the things done for their race. :P

jason   January 16th, 2008 2:04 am ET

Obama is clearly the best choice for president. i was considering clinton but after further looking deeper into the candidates, i have come to believe that Obama can really help create change with all of us. Clinton has been around way too long, and she has no reason to change anything if she gets the Presidency. GOD HELP US ALL IF SHE WINS.

ConfusedNYinFL   January 16th, 2008 2:04 am ET

Stats:

70% of african americans didn't vote for Hillary in Michigan
13.4% of american citizens are african american.

Roughly:

300 million us Citizens
40.2 million US citizens are african american
of these about 30 million legally can roughly vote
of these maybe 20-25 million are registered to vote
of these 10-15 million will actually vote on election day
of these how whats the samll numbeer in michigan

Michigan:
Hillary had 328,151 votes
uncommited had 236,723 votes

even if all those went to Obama, which clearly Edwards would have gotten some it stil would be 55% to 40% (not even statistically close)

so why is this trouble im missing the point cnn?????
your own exit poll shows that HIllary would win 46% to Obama's 35% if all candidates were on the ballot… where is the huge downfall…..

Nancy, Dallas TX   January 16th, 2008 2:03 am ET

Residents of Detroit overwhelmingly support Hillary Clinton, as reported by poster Farah who lives and works there. Thankfully Farah has given us an accurate report which CNN has failed AGAIN to do. CNN is shameless.

Campaign coverage has so far been disgraceful, dumbed down and an insult to intelligent voters. Most people are trying to become informed about the candidates and enlightened about the issues. Yet CNN, Fox and much of the media insist on presenting things with conjured drama and a soap opera-ish quality. There just has to be a better source!

Ted   January 16th, 2008 2:03 am ET

Can Hillary supporters think about this. For the first time since the nomination process began. Republicans actually got more total votes than the democrats with Hillary name being the only one on the list. This should sent a message to all democrats for November.

Go Obama.

Disgusting   January 16th, 2008 2:02 am ET

Dear CNN,

OK, WE GET IT: you want Obama to win and are trying to influence your viewers to feel the same. Good god, just look at all the misleading and inflaming articles you have posted on this blog just in the last couple weeks alone!!! Just when I think you might put a stop to it, along comes another one.

Having been a loyal CNN supporter for years, I am very disappointed in the turn your news has taken. You are practicing very poor journalism and should be held accountable for failing to present a fully accurate picture to the public. You are embarrassing yourselves and alienating your readers and I have had enough.

With disappointment,

A former fan

PW Va   January 16th, 2008 2:01 am ET

Well, Hillary…gues since you're the "smartest woman in the world" you can figure this one out: THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN VOTE SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED!

And all of this is due to the nasty little plan you and your hubby concocted which is now beginning to backfire all over the place. Like they say, Hillary…Life is a female dog!!!!

IHNCNH   January 16th, 2008 2:00 am ET

That's whats up mannnnn!!!! GO OBAMA!

Paul Aninyei   January 16th, 2008 1:59 am ET

It seems to me the mainstream media have vested interest in fanning embers of racism in order to keep their ratings high. Hillary didn't start this "race" war. Any right thinking person who listened to her speech understood perfectly well what she was talking about. But the media characteristically mis characterized what she and her husband actually said.

What really matters   January 16th, 2008 1:58 am ET

I did the math for you…MICHIGAN RESULTS…100% counted…

Uncommitted……236,723
Kucinich…………… 21,708
Dodd……………………3,853
Total………………..262,285 45% Hillary……………328,151 55%

Difference of 65,866 10%

What color do you think the other 65,866 are? It doesn't matter.!!!! SHE WON !!! WITH MORE VOTES THAN ALL OF THEM PUT TOGETHER. Analize it all you want the numbers speak for themselves. Like it or not.

Carl L.   January 16th, 2008 1:57 am ET

Vote ABC!

Smart people vote for Change!

Djackson   January 16th, 2008 1:56 am ET

Barack Obama was not on the ballot, but Michigan still showed its support for him. Just imagine what would have happened if he were on the ballot.

So where does that leave us? Since we reached the 15% minimum "uncommitted" vote we can now be assigned delegates through congressional district meetings that will be held on March 29th. Think of it this way. 40% of the vote went "uncommitted" and 40% of the delegates from MI can potentially go to Barack.

Do the math: not on the ballot + Michiganders for Obama = 40% of the delegates. Congrats Michiganders, but we've much work left to be done.

The larger issue for me is that with a confusing primary that was rushed to be put in place, that was ruled unconstitutional and then ruled constitutional then candidates pulled off then state legislators tried to make changes then clerks were required to do a two month job in a two week period. With all of that and with all of the confusion 45% of Democrats showed up to vote against Hillary. Voter turnout was low without all candidates on the ballot and yet they turned out to vote against Her.

Take note Nevada. Be ready South Carolina. Fire it up Super Tuesday states. If we can get delegates without Barack being on the ballot then we should clean house in those places where people can actually cast a vote for him.

concerned citizen   January 16th, 2008 1:56 am ET

I am a grad student in Berkeley in political science, how does cnn put something as a postive victory for Clinton to a negative victory. This amazes me, I was always under the assumption that Fox nes would be doing this sort of reporting but wow CNN just finding every negative thing about Clinton. The 40% that was uncommitted meant that hillary still beats Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards combined. Does that mean anything to this Best Political Team in the country. My god!!!!, CNNN you are destroying your credibility, I wonder how much the Obama campaign is paying you…lol

CAPT D.
US. Army

JIS   January 16th, 2008 1:55 am ET

Why is there rarely any conversation about sexism and the fact that Hillary is courageously running as the first woman president? It shows the growth of this country that the two front runners in the democratic party are an African American Man and a Woman(of any race). But just as there are ways in which racism can be subtely implied, so are there ways that sexism can be implied. There needs to be more awareness about the still existing ways in which women are not considered viable leaders in our country and how this affects our every day thinking. We need to look at the ways we continue to sustain this cultural pattern. When women and men of any race cast their vote, it would be good for them to consider, along with who they believe most qualified, the issue of gender balance in our government and how promoting this, in itself, can create positive social change. Clinton has worked incredibley hard to get where she is, against many obstacles and has still consistently stood up for what she believes in and fought for progressive social reform. She has earned her position by her merit and successes and deserves to at least be respected for this, regardless of who you cast your vote for. To slam any candidate is not a vote in anyone's good favor. Whether or not Obama or Hillary is elected, we will have a shift in our perception of who can be a strong leader for the people of our country.

Michael Mends   January 16th, 2008 1:54 am ET

How is it that when you win with 56% of the total vote there are troubling signs for you? Because nearly 70% of blacks voted for someone (Obama) other than Hillary? How twisted is this logic?
After the media's anti-Clinton rhetoric about race is it any wonder that 70% of black people would choose a black man instead of a white woman? Black people have been marginalized to a color. It was not like this until the media set in. Clinton was doing much better among blacks over Obama until both Clintons words were twisted to mean they were anti-black. Blacks were not viewed then as enamored with race as they can choose a white woman over a black man.
As a black man I feel really sad as the same media is now poised to turn around to criticise blacks as only concerned with their race when they vote overwhelmingly for Obama in S.C.

realworld   January 16th, 2008 1:53 am ET

For a long time, I have wondered if there is a real journalist out there and recently I found that answer in Tim Russert. you definately have my award as the best journalist we have seen for some time now. yeah, you practise real journalism. Thank you once again for always practising your profession unlike the rest of journalist we have seen out there.

Tom Jones   January 16th, 2008 1:51 am ET

First, I think it's ridiculous that Michigan was stripped of their delegates. The only way the primaries are ever going to mean anything and get rid of all this political crap is to spread them all out over a week. People want change in politics but we put up with this lame system of month after month of states voting. The states at the end don't even matter cause half the candidates have given up. The only reason they keep it the way they do is cause Iowa and NH don't want to lose the money. The same reason the NCAA will never go to a playoff system.

Second, I don't see why Hilary has to get the black vote to win the election. One angle nobody seems to pickup on is this. Obama is from Il, Iowa and Michigan happen to be neighboring states you don't think that plays into peoples minds. Bill Clinton was gov of Arkansas you don't think that helped him with the Southern AA vote? Hilary is a senator from NY people don't see her the same way.

Obama for change HA. Yeah thats what we need 4 years of 'uncommitted' and 'present'.

Angela   January 16th, 2008 1:49 am ET

Hillary won 60% of the total votes and only 39% has to be split between Obama and Edwards.

You can slice the 39% anyway you wish, but it won't change Hillary's 60%

Fact: Hillary won Michigan.

Anyone who can't comprehend this must be have "Fuzzy math syndrome"
Don't feel bad though Bush gave it us during the election of 2000.
Anyone remember that one??
What a zinger.!

GO HILLARY!!!!!!!!!

aware   January 16th, 2008 1:46 am ET

I'm committed to a president who is ready on day one. It will be Hillary this time, but Barack would make a good VP for now. :)

Stop with the spin and negativity already! This was a good day, a good debate and good results! The media reps lost this debate. They could not get the candidates to bite and fight.

G. R., Atlanta Georgia   January 16th, 2008 1:44 am ET

I know many African Americans who proudly support Senator Clinton. This story is so vague and based on random exit polls. Well, …we all know how accurate exit polls are…NOT! I believe it would be in the best interest of the media to stop speculating and guessing and just stick to results and facts.

Derek, Walpole NH   January 16th, 2008 1:43 am ET

As New Hampshire showed this country…polls mean nothing. The purpose of polls is to create hype and interest in all us folks so that we tune into CNN or check this website as consistently as we do….but let's be realistic…no "facts" can come from a vote on which no significance was held. No delegates mean who knows what motivated folks to get out to the polls on the Dem side…the only fact that remains is South Carolina is up for grabs…as is the rest of the country.

And no, HRC's "oh so racist" remarks were hardly that. If anyone actually watched the discussion, her tone of voice showed a lot of sincerity and admiration for MLK.. Anyone who thinks otherwise more likely than not has trouble viewing politics through an unbiased lens. And the abundance of comments on how Obama should win because he is "nice" and "sincere" and "yes we can yes we can…"….they lack substance, and the vote in the nice guy mentality is what gave us 8 years of the Bush administration. As usual, history may repeat itself.

Judith   January 16th, 2008 1:42 am ET

CNN has been unfairly biased towards Obama and against Hillary. I think your reporting of Hillary has been disgusting and very unprofessional. With every twist and turn of this campaign you have been pumping up Obama and consistently bashing Hillary. Even Hillary's win in Michigan tonight for 55% of the vote you twist around to look like a defeat by citing that 73% of the Black vote would go to Obama skirting the fact that that is only the Black vote and still not beating Hillary's 55% of the entore voting population. This is where freedom of speech has been abused to create false impressions. Did you reporters not learn your lesson last week by trying to create an assumed win for Obama by all of your hyped up energy for him only to be proven wrong by the Hillary win? Thank God that there are intelligent people in our country who make their own decision regardless of your
commentators who try to cite their biased and false opinions as facts.
I personally, along with many others, have lost all respect for CNN political reporting and no longer consider your reporting credible when it comes to your very unfair coverage of Hillary.

mickey   January 16th, 2008 1:42 am ET

dumb people: johnathan

come on… obama didn't even show up. why was time in talking about 'how' the votes turned out?? let's talk about the votes at hand. let's be progressive people.

issues, votes, and dates.

we need to help others be more informed on these things.

let's all do our part.

Debbie   January 16th, 2008 1:40 am ET

She did win the majority of votes. The census indicates that there are 14% African Americans in the state of Michigan. 70% of registered votes in the African American community were uncommitted. Let's be realistic about statistics. And remember John Edwards is in the race as well. So it wasn't really a defeat for Hillary. She won over 55%. Not a bad showing. Let's forget race and gender and really read what the candidates are supporting and what they will do for this country. Vote for the best. Don't divide the party. I would also like to see more accurate reporting. Statistics and words taken out of context can be massaged whatever way the media wants.

Jacob, Des Moines Iowa   January 16th, 2008 1:39 am ET

To all of those who are supporting hillary and saying things along the lines of
'hillary beat edwards and obama combined…'

let us not forget that THE DEMOCRATS ARENT ACCEPTING ANY DELEGATES FROM THIS STATE.

HILLARY WAS THE ONLY MAJOR CANDIDATE ON THE BALLOT

DEMOCRATS DIDNT REALLY VOTE IN THIS PRIMARY

and losing 70% of African-American votes is something to worry about

she should have never campaigned in iowa

now that she has and got a 3rd place finish there…her candidacy and her "clinton machine" is in jepordy

of course the clintons were going to win NH

do you honestly think the clintons would a been defeated so easily

(if hillary lost both IA and NH, it isnt that the clinton machine would have been defeated so much as it wouldnt be able to stop Obama)

Kinda Cranky   January 16th, 2008 1:38 am ET

Clinton is the only Dem who can lose the general election except for Kucinich.

Tara   January 16th, 2008 1:37 am ET

This race/gender thing is crazy. The civil rights movement for race and gender has been fought for hundreds of years. MLK and LBJ played parts in a bigger issue. You want to talk about the fight for african american civil rights you need to go all the way back to the signing of the declaration of independence.

Also those that think that race is the only civil rights movement you are highly mistaken. Women did not even get the right to vote til a great deal of time after african american men. Women still to this day are fighting to make it into the mens world.

Lets also note that civil rights movements in this nations history include: disabled, hispanic, irish, immigrants, religion, middle eastern, Japanese, Germans, sexual orientation etc. It is truly uninformed to think that civil rights is gender and african american only.

CNN stop reporting on this. It does no one any good. All this story does is making the american people lose faith in this democratic party. This election is about the issues, let the american people vote on the issues.

Greg, Houston TX   January 16th, 2008 1:37 am ET

Wait, wait…I thought this election wasn't about "race" or "gender"? We here the pundits and the candidates reminding us over and again that America has grown up, that voters aren't interested in these things, that they care only about the issues. And then we see the statistics showing that women in NH overwhelmingly support Hillary; that blacks elsewhere overwhelmingly support Obama. Is George Orwell turning over in his grave yet?

John   January 16th, 2008 1:36 am ET

Hey J in Ca … don't you realize that most of the voters either stayed home because they felt it was pointless to vote, or they voted for Romney to offset the Republican race. Hillary is finished, mate.

j larry   January 16th, 2008 1:35 am ET

once edwards drops out – obama will skyrocket

the anti-hillary movement is HUGE- as is should be!

Jufus, Milwaukee, WI   January 16th, 2008 1:33 am ET

CNN has once again been able to game the kindergarten crowd, and get them all upset over NOTHING.

My girl, that would be Hillary, WON by a vote total of 55% for her and 40% for UNCOMMITTED. [No delegates were awarded by the Democratic Party for this election, so one could really say the election was a non-event.]

I know a lot of black people in Michigan, and they do not support Obama; he is simply unelectable!

Finally, I guess we could just raise the discourse, just a bit, here, both by CNN and the people who comment on these extremely negative and obviously biased stories.

MLK didn't fight so long and so hard to see AMERICA turn into this!

aware   January 16th, 2008 1:29 am ET

Edwards and Obama obviously shared the uncomitted vote, and you never said how many African Americans voted??

Good Debate though! Hillary certainly won, but Obama would make a very good VP. Don't worry – he will run again! :) Go team!

Caliman   January 16th, 2008 1:28 am ET

the more that you bash hillary, the more that we work harder to get the votes for her. bring it on…

JB   January 16th, 2008 1:28 am ET

Great Debate.

Good candidates but Barack's the one we need at this time.

Don't miss this opportunity, People !!

JohnS   January 16th, 2008 1:27 am ET

FJ Stratford, I am amazed at your stats wizadery. So, the Clinton supporters did not come out to vote for her? Here is the actual piece that you also missed: the Republicans who very much want to take on Hillary and destroy her easily in the GENERAL election actually came out to vote for her; she did not get that many democrats to vote for her!!! Well, what about that? Those Republicans cannot lay hands on either Obama or Edwards; but they have chest-filled cabnets that they will soon open for Hillary. Oh, how easily the democrates stand to lose this one again by placing another "controverial" candidate out there. God Bless!!!

will   January 16th, 2008 1:26 am ET

My message is to the DNC the damage is already done. If you want the white house you better get behind Barrack. The second message is also for the DNC who do really think all this men voting for nobody over hillary in the general election are going to vote for. I am a dem but i will not vote for hillary sorry. what is more important hillary or the white house.

demos   January 16th, 2008 1:24 am ET

The turnout was not relevant. It just bothers me that clinton would anyway participate in the election. A proof that she only cares about herself and not the democratic party.

Maria   January 16th, 2008 1:23 am ET

Thank you Barack and Edwards supporters for letting your voice be heard and voting uncommitted.

mike   January 16th, 2008 1:21 am ET

she is going win all the states I'm do proud of her give her a change

nikita   January 16th, 2008 1:20 am ET

Is race or gender a valid reason to vote for a candidate? Unfortunately personal prejudices, style or media-hype obscure credibility, experience, legislative contributions, commitment and drive. Who is the best qualified candidate is not a choice of race, bigotry or popular group mentality. Examine closely, Hillary Clinton has a proven record, has never abandoned her constituents and has fought hard for middle-class, minority and Black American values. Barack Hussein Obama does not qualify in legislation or experience yet speaks with a convincing cadence of persuasive sophistry. Who really is this guy? What are his ties to African officials, Muslim foundations or drug use? Specious promises and a dubious evolution leave questions as to how this new guy came up so fast. George Romney, former governor of Michigan was what he was; a politician with his eye on big business deals that collapsed with his term. Romney is big government, big business and a major step back for minorities. Should we be concerned about our economic woes? Without a doubt, Hillary Clinton would reverse the deficit and the shame of unbridled government spending. I do not care if Hillary is a female or White. I do not care if young people see age as a handicap. I see tremendous strength, intelligence and a highly "visible" career dedicated to political, economic and legislative experience.

aware   January 16th, 2008 1:20 am ET

Good Debate! Hillary certainly won, but Obama would make a very good VP.

Bill, TX   January 16th, 2008 1:20 am ET

"There is also the chance that since Clinton was a sure win…"

There were no delegates at stake, nothing was won. By not supporting the solidarity of the Democratic National Committee and leaving her name on the ballot, Ms. Clinton effectively did the same thing as a Writers' Guild of America member crossing the line to work – it makes her look like she thinks she is better than her peers.

"Conversely, the ones who stayed home are more likely Clinton voters."

Why even say something like this? There is no way to prove for whom the the voters that did not attend would vote. Unless of course you personally polled a sample of registered Democrats that chose not to attend.

Steve, Chappaqua, N.Y.   January 16th, 2008 1:19 am ET

I thought Hillary did o.k. in the debate, she has a great understanding of the issues, but she leaves me totally uninspired. She comes off as a bureaucrat, which may mean she will be highly capable, but is that all we are looking for in a president, someone who knows there way around Washington? Seems like we are setting the bar a little low.
I think Obama, and even Edwards to a certain extent, give us a much better chance to take the country in new direction. I thought Obama was absolutely right when he pointed out that Clinton's warning smacked of the politics of fear that we have been force fed by the Bush administration.
I wish someone had brought up the attempt to disenfranchise thousands of voters, many of them Black and Latino, that the Clinton camp is currently undertaking. That to
me is a truer depiction of Clinton's attitudes towards people of color.

preAmerikkkan   January 16th, 2008 1:19 am ET

The debate tonight might change the dynamic since they all downplayed the race/gender issues to keep the party united. The important thing is to get those R's out of there! Any one of these ego maniacs can do the job, just make sure, even if KKKarl tries to steal it again, that those R's are OUT!

ABC!   January 16th, 2008 1:19 am ET

Divisive, divisive, divisive…

Clinton's "spokesmen" the "1st black president", BET's Johnson and Charlie R sure are afraid of someone.

They damage their reputations to insinuate, call names and criticize Obama. Why?

Clinton needs no help shooting herself in the foot. She lacks basic diplomatic skills at the very least and at best she lacks elected experience.

ABC!

A Democrat   January 16th, 2008 1:18 am ET

Did CNN not get the memo? We're sick of the race issue. The Obama camp is sick of it. The Clinton camp is sick of it.

You have an African-American candidate and a majority of African-American voters in this state support him. And this is news? You actually get paid a salary to write this crap?

ENOUGH with race issues! We are all on the same side – Dems in 2008!

Kaan   January 16th, 2008 1:18 am ET

This whole "uncommitted" business is entering the la-la-land of American politics. If Michigan doesn't mean anything for the democrats, than it doesn't mean anything period. The over analysis with the word win in quotes in the article once again has endless negative implications against Hillary Clinton. The statistic is important but it's in one state out of 50. People need to focus on the important issues like what the American people need and what each candidate has to offer. Stop reporting on this "uncommitted" garbage. This election means so much to this country and if we get into this minutia about why Mitt Romney's hair is always well-coiffed or why Michelle Obama picks on her husband publicly or why Hillary Clinton ran against "uncommitted" in Michigan we are going to lose site of the important information that needs to get across to the voters who ultimately will make the decision that will hopefully change this country and bring it out of the sad and worrisome state that it's in. To all of the voting population who may read this, please pay attention to what matters! Don't let this…stuff…ruin this election and let it fall by the wayside…It simply means too much.

Truethis   January 16th, 2008 1:18 am ET

Eric, that not true. Do your homework. It was for both Edwards and Obama. Stop trying to play the race card…….SICK!

jp   January 16th, 2008 1:16 am ET

"…They should be voted on for their character and integrity…"
If that's the criteria, we may as well all stay home.

Stupid   January 16th, 2008 1:16 am ET

This should worry people for the GE, (bc OH and Michigan) are similar in make up. Maybe the republicans can capitalize on this.

Ann Aloha, PA   January 16th, 2008 1:15 am ET

Did any exit poll show how many Clinton voters chose not to go to vote?

Frank D   January 16th, 2008 1:15 am ET

If Hilary learns how not to talk too much and be more articulate on the campaign trail, her position might get stronger. Every so often, she just says things that puts her in trouble and discredits her candidacy, making Bill and the whole campaign to reverse to damage control! A president should be very articulate in speech and action.

Truethis   January 16th, 2008 1:15 am ET

Congratulation CNN. You did it again……..Divideand Conquer. We are trying to bypass this racial issue because we want to know about war, economy, etc. issues. Please……..I like you guys a lot but stop.

Gane, Canada   January 16th, 2008 1:14 am ET

Americans, Americans, Americans…
You really deserve what you get
You HAVE NOT learned your lesson. You vote for "The likable" Bush and end up with 7-8 years of misery going deeper and deeper, but that is not enough, go with the "other likable" guy and UNITED go even deeper.
Because counts how CAN ! He is steel very yang, let him get mote experience and then.. why not?
All you , how do not like Hilary, could you please tell me at least 3 reasons? Or you do not like yourself any more? Your well being is on the stake!
I am observing you politics for 17 years and trust me on it : SHE is you answer considering the american international, economical, political and social situation write now.

brandon   January 16th, 2008 1:14 am ET

The voting populace in SC is very different than in Michigan. Do not confuse how northern African Americans vote with how southern African Americans vote. Besides in the general election most AA will side with the democrat no matter who they are. Clinton will win the majority of the southern states on the way to the nomination. Barrack plays better out west and in the mid west.

Stupid   January 16th, 2008 1:14 am ET

Geez, look Most African Americans don't vote on race. If that was true then Blackwell (OH) would have not lost by oh 30 percent!.

Peter T   January 16th, 2008 1:13 am ET

How naiive can CNN be?In fact Obama should be very worried bacause with the weakening economy ,it will become far more important an issue than Iraq.

I agree with john above.

You have to analyse that Obama/Edwards 40% uncommitted vote against Hillary.

Let us give 30% to Obama and 10% to Edwards – Even then Hillary would have

beaten Obama 55% to 30%.

All things being equal that is a fair calculation.

Marko Dezdri, Portland, OR   January 16th, 2008 1:13 am ET

Read this people: Hillary got 55%. Even if Obama had gotten all of the votes from the uncommitted, Hillary had still won by 15% points. But 40% has to be divided by two other candidates: Obama and Edwards. So her victory over whoever had been second would had been over 15% points.

Michigan is in a deep economic recession and they know Hillary is by far the only candidate able to fix that. To all of you Obama supporters: What's Obama's plan? what is it? I bet anything you don't know what his plan is.

So Obama and Edwards were not in the ballot, so what; 55% is over half the people that voted, to put it into perspective: almost 330,000 voters elected Hillary! That's 11% above the entire voting count all together.

Hillary 08

Sean   January 16th, 2008 1:10 am ET

This article does seem misleading. The huge factor not taken into consideration is Michigan's open primary.

The Democratic vote does not matter since the state is being penalized 100% of its delegates. However, the state has an open primary. Personally, if I were a Democratic voter in Michigan I would have gone to the polls… and voted for the REPUBLICAN that I like the best. At least that way I would actually be having a say.

At the moment I am undecided, so I am not just saying this to support Clinton, but considering the bizarre situation in Michigan, I do not think it is appropriate to draw any conclusions from the Democratic vote. Such conclusions would be built on very faulty foundations.

Justin   January 16th, 2008 1:10 am ET

People who say that the combined efforts of Edwards and Obama (as "uncommitted") lost to Hillary are obviously not thinking the entire situation through. A large number of people who supported Obama or Edwards did not even go vote because their candidates were not on the ballot. There was no point. It was basically Hillary or no one. I could have won if it was me vs. nobody as well. People aren't going to turn out unless there's incentive, and the combined factors of Michigan not having any say for democrats and that Obama and Edwards were not on the ballot kept people from showing up. End of story. I know I wouldn't have voted if the candidate I supported wasn't on the ballot and my vote meant absolutely nothing.

Ross Lippincott; Davenport Iowa.   January 16th, 2008 1:06 am ET

What happened to her saying that the democrat party should stay united? Why didn't she take her name off the ballot as well?

OBAMA /EDWARDS08!!!!!

anewdaypost.com   January 16th, 2008 1:05 am ET

Nobody’s second place finish in Michigan

On Tuesday, With no other major candidates names on the ballot, Hillary Clinton was able to get 55% of the vote in the Michigan Democratic primary, but the real story on Wednesday should be the 225,506 + who left their house and went down to their precinct, knowing their state had been striped of its delegates, and voted uncommitted.
When “nobody” runs against her, “nobody” starts with 40%. And “nobody” didn’t even have to campaign. “Nobody” spent no money in this race. “Nobody” didn’t even run one add. What happens when you add John McCain or Rudy Giuliani in place of “nobody”?
As democrats we have to think long and hard about nominating a candidate who is so divisive. We shouldn’t spend these preciously important years ahead re-fighting old fights or addressing political grudges. If we are what we say we are than we must love our country more than this, and choose a leader who can bring Americans together. Our society’s needs are too great, the time to pivotal, for anything but fundamental change backed by broad-based support from the American people. Senator Obama proved in Iowa he can do this, and nobody proved it on Tuesday.

Mati   January 16th, 2008 1:04 am ET

In Michigan, two thirds of white people voted Clinton and one third uncommitted. These proportions were switched in the case of black voters. Of course, less black than white meant more votes for Clinton. If this rule will apply in SC where % of black and white voters is similar, it will be a tie. Where is the troubling news?

Ysca   January 16th, 2008 1:04 am ET

After New Hampshire, who cares about polls now? Do anyone take notice of CNN's polls at all and their biased journalism? Just state the facts—that is what all Americans want!

You do not even have to analyze things for us—that is for us to do, because when you do, you put way too much meaning into things, ending up saying that which is not meant.

Wayne   January 16th, 2008 1:03 am ET

What a crime that Kucinich was left out of the debate. Kucinich got almost as many votes in the Michigan primary as Giuliani and Thompson did, does that mean that the next corporate propaganda debate that occurs will exclude Giuliani and Thompson? I would expect so!! Good job MSNBC for following suit with the rest of the fascist mainstream media.

Keep on fighting Dennis Kucinich!!!!!

really   January 16th, 2008 1:03 am ET

Blacks are voting for Obama- who would have thought? Apparently the exit polls showed that if the other candidates were on the ballots Hillary still would have won with 45% of the vote. Wonder why that didn't make it into the story.

Xavier   January 16th, 2008 1:03 am ET

I'm certain that many democrats didn't even bother to vote because the other candidates weren't represented on the ballot. Whether Clinton was the only candidate or not, many democrats didn't go to the polls…so the numbers only reflect those that did vote. No one can speaks for those that didn't vote. This story was a whole lot of nothing. Anything for a headline? Maybe…just maybe…

Vickidr   January 16th, 2008 1:03 am ET

Does the media have to find something negative about Hillary Clinton no matter what she does? Michigan is a non-issue due to their delegate situation, and CNN has to make something of it. Media should be reporting, and not influencing the news.

sam   January 16th, 2008 1:02 am ET

CNN wants to divide people in terms of race…..You can't digest Hillary's win ,that's the bottomline!!!

RBG   January 16th, 2008 1:01 am ET

CNN, you are fired!

John   January 16th, 2008 1:00 am ET

Hillary did extremely well!!! 40% uncommitted included Obama PLUS Edwards supporters!If 70% of the blacks voted for Obama/Edwards ,30% voted FOR her.Obviously many of the blacks supporting her did not find it necessary to turn up because she was the ONLY candidate!Probably of that 70% 30% voted for Edwards and 40%for Obama.
You cannot infer from the above that therefore only 30% of the blacks will vote for Hillary in S.Carolina.

Mike Longview, TX   January 16th, 2008 1:00 am ET

It is a shame that the Michigan primary was deemed invalid because even with Obama and Edwards on the ballot, Hillary's numbers would have approached 50% with a CLEAR win.

Hillary was amazing as always tonite in the debate.

I recall the expression "like shooting fish in a barrel"!

HILLARY '08

Kim   January 16th, 2008 12:59 am ET

There was 2 feet of snow on the ground and Dems had nothing to gain so how many supporters of Hillary or Obama didn't even bother to vote? People just take every little crumb the media throws out there and just eats it right up. NV is next, then SC so let's not let the news media fool us again.

For those of you who say it is all Clinton's fault and she can't win…yada yada yada….Obama owned up to his part in the bickering back and forth of late, apparently a lengthy email was sent to the media from his group. So they were involved in all the behind the scenes fueling of the fire while he pretended to be above it all. He said it was a mistake. So they both blamed it on other people in their camps, made nice, and moved on.

If you think all of these dividing stories about Dem candidates are just great press think again. The Dem race is just half of what is going on, who ever wins has to be able to take on the Republican party. They will have all the "positive" media support they can handle. How much negativity do you see right now towards them? Almost none.

Ryan Ryan   January 16th, 2008 12:58 am ET

for those of you making your comments about Chris Matthews…..I totally agree. It's interesting. I've followed him for years and always liked him. Now, I'm losing respect for him on a daily basis. He obviously does not like Hillary as a candidate, but everytime he gets a chance to push her to the forefront, he does. He's becoming a story-pusher…..dare I say it…..???…..a media-w&*%e.

It's too bad. All the more reason we need someone new and different. I'm so tired of the establishment in all of its forms. Go Obama!!

YesWeCan   January 16th, 2008 12:58 am ET

"Otherwise, please offer commentary on the ‘white vote’ as well." ~ Grant,

Um, you do know that when the pundits talk about the Republican Evangelical Vote,They are talking about the "White Vote".

I hear Schneider say the White Evangelical Vote all the time when he talks about Republican poll numbers.

I have also heard pundits refer to White Democrats as "The White Liberal Voters" So, yes. You guys do get a shout out every now and then. Don't feel left out sugar.

;p

John   January 16th, 2008 12:57 am ET

CNN = Completely Nutcase Network. I agree with FJ above, though for different reasons, that the analysis here is flawed. If CNN is somehow using Michigan to predict, or infer something about, future results, then Hillary can sleep comfortably knowing she'll be coasting easily to 55-40 wins all over the country. Let go of the race thing already; even they are past it now. If the voters divide over racial lines, there's no way Obama will win (obviously). Let's hope we don't come to that.

Tony, Lawrence, KS   January 16th, 2008 12:55 am ET

"Clinton won almost 60% of the votes when Obama and Edwards supporters combined voted uncommitted for 39%."

I've seen too many comments like this. Michigan isn't a victory or a loss for anyone on the Democrat side. What about all the Obama and Edwards supporters who stayed home? What about those who cast a vote for Clinton because she was the only viable candidate on the list?

Let's be realistic. Where two of the front-runners aren't on the ballot, the results don't really tell us anything. It ends up being a wash: people will say that Clinton "won" because she got the greatest percentage of votes; others will say that she "lost" because she didn't win >80% of the vote. We should wait for the races where all candidates are on the ballots and delegates are actually won before we make any such assumption.

Shel, Seattle, WA   January 16th, 2008 12:54 am ET

Why does the Ticker consistently put an anti-Hillary article up every night as their last posting, so it will stay up all night long?? I'm noticing a biased pattern here. Hope the Ticker goes back to being more balanced.

aisha naeem   January 16th, 2008 12:54 am ET

and edwards and barach had speeched over and over to people in mi to go and vote uncommited .so if hillary had 55%of votes against 3candidates with 45%guess who is the real winner go hillary .

mike   January 16th, 2008 12:54 am ET

fj, that is your opinion and a nice spin but lets stick to the facts, and the facts are that over 70% of the uncommitted african american vote went to obama. that is a fact not spin…

Jim A   January 16th, 2008 12:49 am ET

I predict the conniving, calculating, egotistical Hillary Clinton will win nomination as well as the Presidency. I also predict that Jeb Bush will seek to unseat Hillary in 2012 or 2016 and if he is successful, we would have successive terms of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush in the White House!!! Hey, who knows Chelsea Clinton may decide it's her birthright to be a President of these United States after Jeb… Perish the thought!!! This country will be truly be great again when all the Bushes and Clinton's leave the political scene for good!!!

CL   January 16th, 2008 12:49 am ET

To those who are upset about CNN's relentless focus on the AA population (as opposed to the Hispanic/White population), quit whining, the odds of your respective groups getting reported will ALWAYS beat that of Asian Americans'.

Tim   January 16th, 2008 12:48 am ET

Obama getting 73% of the black votes in the MI exit polls means nothing. Blacks can think for themselves. Blacks will vote their own minds, not based on race. Those that like Hillary will vote for her and those that like Obama will vote for him but not just because he is black hopefully. It would be stupid to vote for Obama just because he is black and not for what he can do for the country.

Ebony   January 16th, 2008 12:47 am ET

I am an Obama supporter! I was disappointed to see the correspondents on the panel support Clinton .Edwards held his ground and no one really gave him credit. Clinton is riding on the curtails of her husband. Her career is mostly being an attorney.She has been living through her husband.

Obama is the true champion! He was very professional , real ,and understands business and this confused country. I will support Obama until the end. This country is racist and is not truly ready for a change. Hilary will have her husband telling her how to run the country.She can't think for herself. She always changes as she did on Iraq , Bankruptcy bill, and everything else. Obama has been consistent with his answers along with Edwards.

Clinton just has big money pockets which are supporters of her husband. Clinton should have dropped Robert Johnson for his crazy and ridiculous comments. As an African-American woman I ashamed of Mr. Johnson and some of the blacks that are supporting Hillary Clinton. Please do not believe that all blacks are supporting the Clinton's . The Clinton's have not done much in the clack community but put an office in Harlem. Truth be told it was the Bush administration that hired more blacks and Latinos in its administration. We have the highest ranking woman Condie Rice as our Secretary of State and we had Colin Powell.What did the Clinton's do when Bill was president?Blacks should be ashamed of themselves by dumping on Obama. We as a people are not ready for a black president. Also, I would like to know what have Hilary Clinton done for the Hispanic community?

Wally   January 16th, 2008 12:43 am ET

It's highly unfortuante that this is becoming a black and white race. I am an highly educated MBA professional Black man with solid African roots , not just African American who strongly belives that Obama is not experienced enough to be President hence my voting for Hillary Clinton. This should not be about race but about being qualified enough from day one to lead our great country. After all my travels in Europe and Africa, I am insuted that Obama consider his foreign experince is solid with just a few yearrs of living in Indonesia when he was a kid compared to over 100 visits of Hillary as First lady and a Senator. I guess we will be faced with the same insexperience that Bush had when he became President and look at the damage that he has done to our foreign relations. As a country we need to think very well and vote for experience and quality for change. or less we are going to be worse off that we were for the past 8 years

EriK   January 16th, 2008 12:42 am ET

It's really upsetting to see the Clinton camp's strategy. It now seems to be "find a way to bring mudslinging into the public arena without OVERTLY slinging mud." By talking about how *you're not talking about something,* you are effectively talking about it. I'm sad at Bob Johnson and Charlie Rangel are right on board with this scheme, as well. This is the kind of old-style politics Obama and his supporters want to see change. It's shameful, to be quite honest.

What's really surprising is how obvious (to me, at least) that that's what they're doing. I hope it's not actually working on the American people.

CHRIS NY   January 16th, 2008 12:42 am ET

isnt carl rove the same snake behind bush candidacy the same guy they call the mastermind behind the war the guy they say is bush brain he the one whose helping hillary clinton he gonna destroy the country dont let that snake win.

Vitorrio B   January 16th, 2008 12:39 am ET

Listen, friends:

I'm from Michigan, and I'm an African American. And I'm a political junky. But I was not motivated to vote in the DEM primary because…WHO CARES! The votes won't count, and if we didn't get enough uncommitted votes, then still no one really loses.

Do you understand how many other African Americans felt the same way I did. Who didn't feel like standing in line in the cold to vote today, for a pointless, countless election?Hillary lost horribly today, and if Obama had been on the ballot, she would have been annihilated.

Now, what I really hope is that John Edwards stays in the race, because I really like him, and I would love to learn more about him and Obama. Hillary is a characterless, conniving, divider. If her campaign tactics are any indication of how she plays the political game, then i don't want any part of it. We need to be united as one nation when this is over, because we have a lot of problems that need solving.

Dave   January 16th, 2008 12:39 am ET

Here is how I take the Michigan primary results. Clinton was the only major name on the ballot that could be voted for, and the campaign to vote for uncommitted as a protest only existed for about a week prior to todays primary. Therefore, people unaware of the vote uncommitted campaign, or unsure of how it worked, would have stayed home, not Clinton supporters, who could have actually voted for their candidate.

You can not look at the uncommitted vote as being the total of the Obama, Edwards support, as many Democrats also voted in the Republican primary (more moderate Democrats, who are more likely to support Obama or Edwards). Also, the total turnout of this primary is nowhere near what it would have been if candidates were actually campaigning in the state. No one can truly claim victory here, especially Clinton, who only received 55% of the vote in a state where she in effect ran unopposed.

Robin Wagner from ct   January 16th, 2008 12:39 am ET

This is very good new for Barack . That mic African Americans would of voted for Barack . Well maybe she should never started this race thing to begin with .
73% for Barack yes we can . BIG SMILE .

Victoria   January 16th, 2008 12:38 am ET

wow the hillary bashing again….She won the debate and your guys lost..face it..
Obama made statements that he did not push the press to keep going with the race issue and TIm Russett shoved three pages of it in his face….

CHRIS NY   January 16th, 2008 12:38 am ET

PEOPLE THERE SOMETHING ABOUT OBAMA THERE SOME MAGICAL UPLIFTING ENERGY PULLING YOU TOWARDS HIM AND I KNOW ALOT APEOPLE FEEL THE SAME WAY AND AM TELLING YOU DONT FIGHT IT GO WITH THE FLOW FOLLOW YOUR INSTINCTS FOLLOW YOUR HEART IT WILL NEVER LEED YOU A STRAY IT WIL NEVER MAKE YOU GO WRONG VOTE OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT. YES WE CAN AMERIC, YES WE CAN

kai, NYC, NY   January 16th, 2008 12:38 am ET

All these people that are jumping on the Obama band wagon… saying I'm voting Obama because he's got swagger or he's cute. How pathetic is that. Yes the guy talks like a preacher man or a motivational speaker. But charm, swagger, or looks do not make you presidential material. God help us if we vote in someone based on their looks or swagger. How about we elect Tom Cruise or Angelina Jolie for president? This country is going down the toilet.

girrlgil, sanfrancisco   January 16th, 2008 12:38 am ET

CNN WHEN will you guys stop talking about this race issue?

Jack O   January 16th, 2008 12:38 am ET

Obama is a great motivational speaker. It does make sense that the african-american people are more moved by Obama than others simply because they can relate to Obama more. His motivation techniques work more with them. Democracy should be more about experience and talent rather than how much motivation you can provide to your listeners. People seriously need to wake up! Clintons have done so much more for the african-american community that no one can deny. They are the champions of civil rights. Twisted words of Hillary in addition to some motivational techniques should not override the past contributions of the clintons. Again, people seriously need to wake up!

Honestly speaking, Obama has very little experience. Even if he does get the nomination of Democratic Party he will NOT win the presidential election. There are many reasons behind that. One reason would be that he will be slammed by the republicans for his lack of experience. On the other hand, if Hillary gets the nomination overwhelmingly people will vote for her. She already has a good political experience and base.

Dr. Donald Leavitt   January 16th, 2008 12:37 am ET

As South Caroina goes, so goes Alabama, but nothing else!.

Luci   January 16th, 2008 12:36 am ET

For those of you trying to spin this as a Hillary win because she got 55% (with 97% in) The uncomitteds are really telling, yes some of those were probably for Edwards, but exit polling indicates that 73% of those voting uncommitted would have voted for Obama. So before you get all excited because that is still less than Clintons 55%, keep this in mind. There was really no reason to vote as they got no delegates and the weather was bad, so how many people stayed home and how would they have voted, We really don't know, but to have 40% vote uncommitted when yours is the only name on the ballot is a disaster. And I don't think it's just African Americans. I fit right in Sen. Clinton's main demographic (white, female, 40+) and she is the last person I would vote for. I volunteered for Bill Clinton back in '92, but I just can't support Hillary, she voted for the war without even thinking of the consequences.

Mark, Minneapolis, MN   January 16th, 2008 12:36 am ET

Obama and Edwards combined could only muster 40% of the vote for Uncommitted? What's so great about that? It's a solid win for Clinton.

RENEE   January 16th, 2008 12:33 am ET

Obama for president and John Edwards for VP.

Friends don’t let friends post drunk   January 16th, 2008 12:32 am ET

I’m still waiting on the numbers for the ‘white vote’.

Grant

Dc   January 16th, 2008 12:32 am ET

So blacks only vote for there own race?

LaWanda,   January 16th, 2008 12:31 am ET

I am an African American woman and this years Obama voters are the Nader voters of 2000, black, white or orange.

My finances were much more stable under the Clinton's and I am willing to take that chance. I'll go to church for the preaching stuff…

rw   January 16th, 2008 12:31 am ET

I am offended, LBJ worked hard to get the civil rights bill signed into law. I am outraged that his contribution is being minimized by the leaders in the black community, so I am voting for a white candidate.

WHY CAN'T YOU LET THIS GO?   January 16th, 2008 12:31 am ET

IF THE CANDIDATES HAVE CALLED A TRUCE, WHY CAN'T THE MEDIA. WHY ARE YOU STILL ALLOWING THIS TYPE OF NEWS TO CONTINUE? WHAT IS THE PURPOSE? YOU ARE MAKING ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT BLACKS SNUBBING HILLARY. WAS THE QUESTION ASKED "ARE YOU BLACK PEOPLE SNUBBING HILLARY CLINTON – YES OR NO" I DON'T THINK SO! COULD YOU PLEASE LET THESE TYPES OF STORIES GO. IN THE END IT WILL HURT EVERYONE. I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN CNN.

CHRIS NY   January 16th, 2008 12:30 am ET

people of america thier is sign everywhere did you saw those flags tumble down when HILLARY was giving a speech that a sign that god is not please ;that a sign that america is going to tumble if we allow HILLARY to be comes we want OBAMA GOD WANT'S OBAMA TO BECOME PRESIDENT.

Ken, San Diego, CA   January 16th, 2008 12:29 am ET

Of course 70% of black voters voted "uncommitted". I don't blame them, especially if their candidate of choice was Barack Obama. This is no slap to Hillary. The fact of the matter is, she still received 55% of the vote (yes, CNN, that's over half). That ought to be the real story; that not even the COMBINED effect of Obama and Edwards "uncommitted" voters was enough to beat Hillary.

if only   January 16th, 2008 12:29 am ET

Gee, if Obama's name was on the ballet…gee….he…woulda….coulda…shoulda…

These polls don't mean anything, that much is clear….and neither do most of these ticker reports from the Obmarama machine at CNN.

Go Hillary!

Loyd   January 16th, 2008 12:29 am ET

She's so phony it makes me puke. I hope people can see that… and I believe they are starting to.
I'm not saying my race cause honestly, doesn't matter. I'm a 31 and a Democrat from Tennessee and hope the American people can see that Barack Obama is exactly what this country needs.

Ken, San Diego, CA   January 16th, 2008 12:29 am ET

Of course 70% of black voters voted "uncommitted". I don't blame them, especially if their candidate of choice was Barack Obama. This is no slap to Hillary. The fact of the matter is, she still received 55% of the vote (yes, CNN, that's over half). That ought to be the real story; that not even the COMBINED effect of Obama and Edwards "uncommitted" voters was enough to beat Hillary.

Jason C.   January 16th, 2008 12:28 am ET

It amazes me some of the remarks people will make. At the same time, it puts a smile on my face. In this country we have a right to have our voices heard and to what we feel. The fact that people can so blindly and strikingly say Clinton is unelectable amazes me. Unelectable is now serving a second elected term in the Senate.

Obama is a strong candidate as well. His political savy and his passion speak volumes for him. We talk about his experience or lack thereof quite a bit. Tell me honestly, what kind of experience do you want in a President? What do we need from a President? I want someone to unite and improve our country. I believe anyone with a desire to lead and govern our nation could accomplish this. We elect a president who works in community with the other 2 branches of government. It is isn't as if whomever we elect will be allowed to function independent of the other 2. (It was our government collectively, at least the executive and the legislative, who moved us to war.)

I do think one statement is remarkable and should be examined. If African Americans are voting for Obama because of the color of his skin then that of course doesn't speak highly of that community. And ask yourself, you read these polls and you hear these pundits, what do you hear in your community? What about your work? Your family? Your friends? What is the true gauge of what is going on in our country. Most African Americans I know are voting for the candidate they feel is better qualified. (Honestly, they are equally split between the Clinton and Obama.) And as for the hispanics I know, oddly enough it's a race between Clinton and Edwards. And the white people I know, if we were to ever talk about the white vote, well many of those people are for Clinton, but an equal number are against her. (The primary reason most people I know give for not supporting Clinton is more of the gender issue, an issue many people will not speak publicly about.)

Either candidate is extrememly electable. This country is primed for a Democratic victory. Look at voter turnout. The Democrats are showing out in numbers that are quite impressive. If Democrats are this active in the general election as they are in these primaries, Republicans do not stand much of a chance.

Why don't we just start a new party? I know they start all the time, the Green Party, the Libertarians, and all kinds of parties. Those fail for many reasons. Let's just start the Party. We've been needing a really good party in this country for some time. So bring our troops home, let's party. We'll figure it all out. We'll join together, and we'll reclaim our lives, our successes, our economy. The new party is The Party. Sound fun….

kjmatthews   January 16th, 2008 12:28 am ET

I would also like to point out that during the debate tonight, Obama himself stated that he regretted his campaign's pushing the race issue and the Congressman from SC, Clyburn, has stated that he can accept both Hillary's and Bill's explanations. So let's not give charisma a pass. And, as others have stated, the exit polls only reflects those who turned out to vote, which was an extremely low number considering MI has around 7 million registered voters, so they aren't informative for any of the dem candidates.

Beth   January 16th, 2008 12:28 am ET

This doesnt mean anything..Most people stayed home…Why should 70% of African Americans voting for uncommited suprise anyone. Jesse Jackson got %55 when he ran and look where that got him…We wont know anything til after 2-5 unitl then calm down!

liberal & sick of democrats   January 16th, 2008 12:27 am ET

Democrats, you are acting like republicans… no wonder an idiot like Bush won, twice. If Democrats like yourselves continue to name call, continue to be led by a reckless tabloid obssessed media, it will only hurt our chances next November. Republicans must be really enjoying this moment…

CHRIS NY   January 16th, 2008 12:27 am ET

people of america god is giving us a sign did u saw all those flag tumble down when HILLARY was giving a speech on tv that a sign from got that america is going to fall if we all HILLARY to become president

John   January 16th, 2008 12:26 am ET

The "Uncommitted" vote doesn't mean that 37% of Michigan's Democratic votes would have gone to not-Hillary… It means that 37% of the vote was from people who came out in the cold to vote against her. Democratic turnout was fairly low from all accounts, and there's no way to tell what the real result might have been.

It does suggest a fairly strong faction is opposed to Hillary Clinton for president, though.

james   January 16th, 2008 12:25 am ET

Uncommited in 08… now that's a bumper sticker… I'm going to make millions

Travis   January 16th, 2008 12:24 am ET

As a 17 yr old, African American male, I support Hillary Clinton. I hate this argument amongst the Dems. First off, she won the primary. She won 55% of the vote compared to 39-40% of "uncommitted" She didn't even win by that much in New Hampshire and there was one candidate extra on the ballot.

The voters of MI are angry at the Dems for not campaigning there or at least leaving their name on the ballot. That's why Obama nor Edwards even got close to Clinton. She got 312,540 votes to uncommitted's 226,474 votes. She blew them out. Combined Edwards and Obama only got 226,474 votes. That shows that their supporters weren't too happy with them either. Also, while Obama got 70% of the blacks (VOTING) in the primary, it doesn't show how many statewide didn't vote. Also, just because he got 70% doesn't mean black people don't like Hillary. My family( except for me) is supporting Obama because they would like to see a black man in the WH. They LOVE the Clintons!!! They actually feel that Hillary is more qualified. So the black vote is merely support for a black candidate.

K   January 16th, 2008 12:24 am ET

Ok I don't get this reporting. Biased. Uncommitted votes are for Obama and Edwards combined. I don't know who else took their names out. Maybe you could break down % voters of other ethnic groups, too.

MG   January 16th, 2008 12:23 am ET

I am troubled by the subject of this headline. Are we to expect that AA voters are "supposed" to vote for Obama, b/c he is also AA? then should we expect white voters to vote for the white candidates, male voters to vote for the male candidates, and women voters for Clinton? Why are you even evaluating this type of data. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Despite the meaningless Dem primary, it was heartening to see that hundreds of thousands came out, that Clinton won by a landslide over the "uncommitteds", which are both Obama and Edwards put together, and Clinton had more votes than McCain! Don't worry HIllary, america is behind you, the truth will lead you to victory, Obama has absolutely nothing, and Edwards is just riding on the wrong coattails! And you ruled the Nevada debate today, confident, informed, experienced, you will change America!

keith Pike   January 16th, 2008 12:22 am ET

They lost 60% to 39%, They are really going to be disapointed come super tuesday. Whats that mean, They cant suport The Hillary if she wins.

CHRIS NY   January 16th, 2008 12:22 am ET

prediseser are usually worst loot at senior bush he did a good job for the country everyone thought is son would follow in his foot step but he did worst so we dont want to make the same mistake one clinton is enough if u put a second one in the white house it going to distroy the country didn't you see the flags fall when hillary was on stage that i sign of what to come if she become president.

Kyle, COLUMBIA SOUTH CAROLINA   January 16th, 2008 12:21 am ET

Hillary their is a saying that hold well among the African American race "Fool me ONCE then SHAME on YOU; fool me TWICE then SHAME on ME." We African Americans DONT LIKE TO BE PLAYED AS FOOLS!! But don't worry about it cause I can't wait until you get to my state of SOUTH CAROLINA and you'll truly see what happens

K. Annan between Rome and London   January 16th, 2008 12:21 am ET

Please excuse me if I am being highly ignorant here in my misunderstanding of the way in which the system works but why was Senator Clinton's name even left on the ballot? Was she trying to score some kind of psychological victory over the other Democratic candidates (primarily Senator Obama)….?

Ed   January 16th, 2008 12:20 am ET

They're both in the pockets of big-time special interests–for starters. HRC has the health insurers, Obama has the nuke folks and coal producers. Meanwhile, the recession for the poor and middle class keeps deepening, the environment continues to be trashed, corn ethanol (which they both support) threatens the stability of the international food supply and Bush has managed to obligate U.S. significant security (read "troops") to Iraq for at least the next decade. Plus, Obama–and I assume Hillary, as well–would shift resources to Afghanistan in the crazy hope that the U.S. military would become the first and only invading force in recorded history to pacify that famously tough and cantankerous part of the globe. (Obviously, they ceased to teach world history at tony eastern universities long ago. )
These are the people we want to run the country during perilous times? Ugh. They're both slick lawyers with essentially no executive or high-level managerial experience. And both have longtime party hacks and power brokers in their respective in their camps. Face it, the party is listing at a time when we ought to be getting set to stomp the GOP. If Romney finds his footing or a reasonably appealing third party candidate appears in the next couple months, the general election is hardly a lock for either of our major candidates. I've seen this all before. My party has always been good at discovering new ways to blow its chances.

Chris from Colorado Springs   January 16th, 2008 12:19 am ET

More than anything, I am observing which presidential candiate demonstrates the best leadership skills which will best serve our country. Slamming each demonstrates how they may behave with foreign leaders. Our next president needs to be a true diplomat not a gun slinger.

John Lowrey   January 16th, 2008 12:18 am ET

Hillary got 55% that is a clear majority. I listened today to various pundits, the Michigan Democratic Chair, "progressive radio, and Obama supporters pushing uncommitted.
If another candidate got 100% of the uncommitted that candidate would still have lost.
If those of you who cheer the uncommitted are elated, how would you have felt if Obama, Edwards or any other candidate of your choice got 55% as opposed to your candidate. Spin on as you spin out.

Andy   January 16th, 2008 12:17 am ET

All this tells me is 70% of the black vote went to uncommitted and she still won.

This is a win for Hillary!!

Mayby Oboma will be her VP

Anthony, Los Angeles, CA   January 16th, 2008 12:17 am ET

I have nothing negative to say of Obama. I simply prefer Clinton to Obama. I have noticed that CNN and much other media seems to be pro-Obama. The way Hillary's NH win was covered was that of Hillary barely squeaking out a win and more coverage went to 'what went wrong in the poll?' rather than Hillary's come from behind (at least in recent polls) victory. I have been a loyal viewer of CNN and reader of CNN.com and I find the coverage to be troubling. I believe they need to keep a balanced view and stop putting their own spins on campaign activities and elections outcomes. I think they may be trying to keep the race close so that their viewership remains high. Just let the candidates debate it out and let the nation decide the winner without bias. Please.

Swati   January 16th, 2008 12:16 am ET

I don't understand why Obama/Edwards would first send a statement by staying off the ballot and then later send another statement by staying on the ballot as 'uncommitted'.

If anything, the Obama/Edwards statement :

a) Oops, I changed my mind about wanting to be on the ballot or
b) Let's take a gamble and see whether we can beat Hillary numbers.
c) Let's at least see what numbers we can get to get a pulse on the voters. We can interpret whatever we want into the data anyway.

In sum, very flip floppy.

s.positive   January 16th, 2008 12:16 am ET

Guys as it is said, the stew you brew today, you'll drink tomorrow, its that simple…

Chad Galloway   January 16th, 2008 12:16 am ET

You Hillary-haters are irrational. You have a woman who has spent decades working for civil rights, for children, for equal rights for gays, for education … and yet you sit there and belittle her because she's a strong woman who's taken her lumps just as well as, and perhaps better than, her male colleagues. Shame on you for the way you bust on her.

Sure, let's instead elect someone who hasn't even finished a SINGLE term as U.S. Senator. That makes a ton of sense. Sure, let's entrust the country to someone whose biggest legislative feat is making sure that lobbyists have to stand up while buying their Congressmen's lunches.

Don't get me wrong. I like Obama. I like him a lot. But would you want a student teacher to suddenly become Secretary of Education? Would you want someone who just learned to swim last week serving as a lifeguard at the pool where your daughter swims? Obama's got a bright future ahead of him. But right now, our country needs someone who not only has a vision, but also knows how to accomplish it.

Eric   January 16th, 2008 12:16 am ET

Interesting that Obama and Hillary split the male vote in Michigan…well uncommitted and Hillary did…

sluggo   January 16th, 2008 12:15 am ET

Hillary has been toast for several days, the MSM just can't get their mind around it.

keith Pike   January 16th, 2008 12:15 am ET

The young, and the blacks back Obama and still lose 60% to 39%, There really are going to be dissapointed come supper duper tuesday

seth vt   January 16th, 2008 12:15 am ET

Don't you think that those who vote for one dem candidate will support the nominee in th general election? One way or another we're going to have a democratic president whose first task will be to repair the damage done by bush/cheney. I think we really need to focus on the big prize, returning our country to nation of civil liberty and international respectability, ending the crazy wars and big business hand outs. Both of these candidates are capable, both are respectable, both will make history with there election. Lets not hurt either's chances in the general election with nitpicking and borderline slander. The end result just might be President Romney.

chris ny   January 16th, 2008 12:14 am ET

white voter please dont get discourage by the amount of racial talk on the tv this few days HILLARY DOING THIS BECAUSE SHE WANT YOU TO TURN AGAINT OBAMA BUT WE CAN ALL SEE OBAMA IS A NICE HONEST HARDWORKING PERSON DONT WE WANT A PRESIDENT THAT GRASS ROOT AND HAS BEEN THROUGH IT ALL THE GUY GREW UP WITH IS MOTHER ONLY AND FACE SOME REALLY HARD TIME WE WANT A PRESIDENT WHO KNOWS HOW IT FEEL TO BE HUNGRY HOW IT FEEL TO GO TO BED HUNGRY HOW IT FEEL TO WANT SOMETHING AND HAVE TO DO WITH OUT BECAUSE WE CANT AFFORD IT SO WE WANT A PRESIDENT WHO'S A GOOD LISTENER WHO WILL LISEN TO IS PEOPLE CLINTON AS BEEN IN IT FOR 35 YEARS NOW 35YEARS DONT U THINK IT TIME TO GIVE SOMEONE NEW A CHANCE WHAT HER HUSBAND WAS PRESIDENT ISN'T THAT ENOUGH WHAT THEY WANT EVERYONE TO TURN PRESIDENT IN THERE FAMILY IF SHE BECOME THE PRESIDENT THEN NEXT IT CHELSEA WE WANT A HONEST, KIND ,HARDWORKING GOOD LISTENER FOR PRESIDENT WE WANT OBAMA.

R Alabama   January 16th, 2008 12:14 am ET

I think it is bad politics when the candidates take them self off the ballot to try to influence the vote. I actually think they were were afraid they might lose….Obama and Edwards. Should we then split the uncommitted vote count between Obama and Edwards. If the people that voted uncommitted are actually for Obama or Edwards, then what does that say about their candidates?? I am not a democrat, but this is just wrong. Go Hillary (even though you are not getting my vote….at this time). I am not Democrat, Republican, or Independent. My party is AMERICAN!

I would love to see a debate with both parties, same questions, and Lou Dobbs and Glen Beck as moderators.

Former Michigan, now TN   January 16th, 2008 12:14 am ET

I used to live in Michigan so I'm not terribly surprised by the result. Uncommitted did not just get the black vote in Wayne County. Uncommitted also won Washtenaw County (Ann Arbor) outright. Now it's possible that a goodly chunk of Wayne County consisted of Edwards supporters – especially some of the heavily union downriver cities like Wyandotte. But the Washtenaw total comes primarily from young people and from white liberals.

The three parts to the base of the Democratic Party are white liberals, African Americans, and union voters. In Michigan, Hillary only managed to win union members and probably split liberals (especially white women). Hillary did strongest among white women – and probably working class white women. That's a critical constituency in the Democratic Party as New Hampshire showed. But it isn't the only one.

More importantly, nobody campaigned there, very few voters actually showed up (7% turnout I believe), and Clinton was the only major candidate on the ballot. Regardless of the Edwards/Obama split, that 40% of Michigan Democratic voters actually bothered to show up just to register opposition to Clinton is significant. This wasn't just an Obama vote, which presumably would have been much greater had he actually campaigned in the state. It was a rejection of Hillary. And she better take notice before South Carolina.

NOMEDIA   January 16th, 2008 12:13 am ET

Why does the media keep playing "the race card". The candidates are trying to rise above this "segmenting" yet the media keeps dishing it up again and again. I'm sick of it.
And I'm sick of the idiotic bloggers who just spew emotional negative comments. GROW UP. Obama bloggers in particular are showing themselves to be incapable of intelligent comments. Talk about "hate". Nasty.

Lucky Lakeshore   January 16th, 2008 12:12 am ET

Why, then, did the commentator on CNN just a few minutes ago suggest that the large percentage of "uncommitted" voters represented a protest agains the Democratic Party's decision to punish Michigan for going early with its primary? Look at your own map: a majority of Dem. voters in Washtenaw County (home of Ann Arbor and the U. of Michigan) vote uncommitted. It's a very white county. The upshot: many Dems. expressed their disapproval of Clinton, even though she was the only major candidate with her name on the ballot.

Anonymous   January 16th, 2008 12:11 am ET

Everyone is overlooking one important point. The fact that Michigan democrats bothered to vote at all tells us something. It tells us that even though their vote doesn't count they still wanted to be heard. This means some people actually get it. Those uncommitted votes would have gone to either Edwards or Obama therefore HILLARY would have won either way. It means that people cared enough to vote for her even though it didn't count. They also cared enough to not vote for her as well. If anyone saw the debate tonight you would have heard Barack admit that over zelist supporters pushed the issue of race intentionally. If you did not see Meet the Press last Sunday I invite you to check it out on youtube and then decide if what she said was racist. Don't just get your news from spoon fed sound bites tailored to fictionalize the issues. There really isn't much seperation between these 2 fine candidates and this was evident in tonights debate. The only think seperating them is experience.

tc   January 16th, 2008 12:10 am ET

Hillary 56% vs. uncommitted (that is Edwards' and Obama's combined) 39%. Isn't it a landslide victory for Hillary? Folks, Go figure.

mattinhou   January 16th, 2008 12:09 am ET

Jason – I agree it is shocking that blacks refuse to vote for anyone other than black candidates. Such nonsense. Be that as it may, I'll bet it pales in comparison to whites historically refusing to vote for anyone other than white candidates. But then again, how much choice have we really had in this country? Your thoughts and/or admissions?

PA Guy   January 16th, 2008 12:09 am ET

Why do you idiots keep talking race. Sharpton and Clyburn both state the words spoken by the Clinton's were taken out of text. Leave it go Already! Is this you all have to run with? Use those keyboards and do some factual research instead of typing empty, mindless, thoughtless opinions. Get a backbone and back it up with FACTS.
After tonight’s debate, I believe that “The Candidate Who Really Can and Will Bring Change,” and truly displayed leadership qualities and experience is Hillary R. Clinton.

Bill   January 16th, 2008 12:08 am ET

America should not be even considering voting along racial lines, but it clearly is.

It must be a wake up call for a lot of 'white' people.

CNN's apparent bias away from Clinton is deplorable.

sue   January 16th, 2008 12:08 am ET

MARYLOU JONES –

the problem this win presents for Hillary is that in an uncontested election, the "winner" usually wins like 75% to 90% of the vote, so under these circumstances 56% isn't really something to be proud of.

Leah DiMarco   January 16th, 2008 12:07 am ET

Hillary did not even 'anything'!

Let's see – the way that I understand this if I am not mistaken – in order for the uncommitted vote to work it needed to be at least 15% which it was – so now the delegates from Michigan can go to the convention and they will have a 'voice'. So Hillary did not win anything at all by a landslide – she did not even come out of this with 'one' delegate and the delegates can now vote for Obama or Edwards at the convention. YES WE CAN!

Bill   January 16th, 2008 12:07 am ET

This is definitely a Hillary Clinton bashing story. She won a percentage that in any election would have won . Now CNN tries to paint it as a loss. The candidates agree to put race behind them and you are still pushing the issue. I am from Louisiana where in many locales the African-American vote is the majority but whites and other races win the elections against African-Americans all the time. If she only received 20%+ of the African-American vote then she received a huge number of the rest of the race spectrum. South Carolina does have other races that participate in large numbers in the Democratic Primary. Somehow the press wants to fuel the racial devide so bad they will put out any story just to race bait the campaign. Clinton was not aloud to campaign in Michigan and still won handily. CNN is trading in integrity for ratings but how should it be any better than any other news organization.

Michael   January 16th, 2008 12:07 am ET

Racism is alive and well in Michigan as it will be in South Carolina. There is little doubt that IF Barack were white instead of black he would be battling hard to stay out of third place in every state.

As it stands…Barack Obama's color will automatically garner him the majority of black votes anywhere he goes. Too bad…because…yet again (as in President Bush's election wins)…people will vote with their "feelings" instead of with their brains.

Funny…but if Hillary Clinton were black….Barack would be lucky to finish within 30% of a Hillary win in South Carolina.

Again…racism is alive and well on both side of the aisle.

Sweet   January 16th, 2008 12:07 am ET

Why don't the news media ever question Hillary on her 35 years of EXPERIENCE.
Have we overlooked, Hillary is almost 20 years older than Barack. As her own husband stated give me a break.

Titus   January 16th, 2008 12:07 am ET

Time to face the music

CE   January 16th, 2008 12:06 am ET

Registered Democrat here, however if it comes down to a choice between Hillary and Romney, I would choose Romney.

robert fuller   January 16th, 2008 12:05 am ET

since there is some doubt whether the michigan delegates will eventually be seated at the convention, wouldn't the make party officials a bit of potential king-maker? couldn't they decide to seat delegates or not seat them them based on their own preferences as to who should have the nomination?

Kathy   January 16th, 2008 12:05 am ET

James Brown (Independent) got it right, this shows just how unelectable Hillary is. How will Democrats ever expect to regain the White House if they nominate someone who gets 55% of the Democratic vote when she's basically uncontested?? The Republicans will bury her.

Nalla   January 16th, 2008 12:04 am ET

Forget black or white or latino or Asian, humans vote for Obama and robots vote for Hillary.

Human beings for Obama !

Obama is once-in-a-lifetime-candidate, I am just happy to be born in the same era.

fran   January 16th, 2008 12:04 am ET

I am an African America, I think we have forgotten all the Clintons did for the blacks. If a race card is in the issue we better count the Clintons out because they have been helping us ever befor the running for election. For any of us to say the are playing a race card that would be too mean to say. If ever Obama wins Democrat party He better wait for Republican because I have not seen/heard him saying what his plans will be. The problem is not talking the talk, it's doing the job

Marvin, Dallas, TX   January 16th, 2008 12:02 am ET

To MARYLOU JONES,

I don’t think you get it. If Hillary cannot win by a landslide and she is pretty much the ONLY candidate on the ballot. That is Not a Win in any regards.

On top of that after her deliberate attempt to put Race into the Campaigns, Hillary then losses 70 % of the Black vote to a nameless faceless uncommitted.

Face it Hillary just CANNOT keep her head out of that Republican Play Book. We do like that about her as it is continuing to prove to be her undoing.

ForHillary   January 16th, 2008 12:02 am ET

CNN:: You guys are so biased.!!

Even when she wins you somehow make it a point to trash her

Nando   January 16th, 2008 12:01 am ET

GO MICHIGAN way to GO!!!!!!!!!!!Thats how you say no to STATUS QUO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBAMA 08,12

And Hillary if you really think Barak is going to co-sponsor that bill with you , I have some Lots on the Moon I can sell you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Surge   January 16th, 2008 12:01 am ET

It’s cool to give Obama a free pass. The media simply doesn’t hold him to the same standard; they don’t pound away at him like they do Hillary. They’ve been on her for months while his follies go unnoticed. His dear-in-the-headlights response during the last debate when Gibson called him on his claim that he instituted lobbyist reform – when all he did was allow lobbyist gifts to lawmakers as long as they were standing up and not sitting down – was priceless and not a single mainstream media outlet picked up on yet they continued to slam Hillary on anything and everything. I think this is in part due to the fear of being accused of racism for holding Obama to the same standard as Hillary. It’s really liberal white guilt at play here and Obama, like the typical cynical politician that he is, is exploiting it very cleverly.

If it’s not ok that the white woman is a calculating gender-baiting politician then it shouldn’t be ok that the black man is a calculating race-baiting politician either. Otherwise, it’s not truly equality you’re after.

It's also interesting to read all the poor grammar, spelling, punctuation, delivery & grasp of the issues and modern history of the Obama supporters. As a supporter of the only truly qualified person on the ticket I have to say I find it comforting and hysterical. As an American and fellow vote caster, I find it disturbing.

Mart from Chicago   January 16th, 2008 12:00 am ET

Owhh COME ON CNN…the more I read these tickers and news, the more I believe that your affiliations and employees are pro-Obama or Hillary-Haters… Why dont you, CNN, just endorse someone, so that way we know for real if these are biased news/tickers or not. At least get a group of people who are pro-Clinton to write some of the news/tickers so that we can read from both sides of the story. CNN always say MI is unimportant, Hillary wins but the numbers are unimportant to be analyze, that doesnt mean anything CNN says… but only 22% black voters vote for Clinton, and its the big talk of the day and more bad speculations from CNN. I read CNN everyday and I used to find that they are unbiased and good in their newsmaking… very well informed and I come here to read all kind of news.. But please, if you want to be biased, endorse someone and let the people know where CNN as a whole stand. It can be hard for someone in the newsroom to be unbiased, but at least get people who's pro-Clinton to write too, so I can read something that is not demeaning and harsh towards Hillary everytime I read or watch CNN. Coz believe me if all the news CNN has to offer doesnt stop being negative about Hillary and pro Obama all the time, I be the first one out and will look for other companies to get the news..

For Authenticity & Real Ability   January 16th, 2008 12:00 am ET

Barack Obama! Dirty Politics from the Clinton Machine and Media Cronies don't sway those who have done their HW! We support you and we appreciate a real person running for President! Thank you! YES WE CAN!

Vincent   January 16th, 2008 12:00 am ET

Clinton appears to be in trouble… she barely overcame NOBODY. Anyone can beat nobody; the fact that she hardly won an UNCONTESTED election is grim for her indeed. It's like barely beating a punching bag in a boxing match…

isaac   January 15th, 2008 11:58 pm ET

well,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i hope she can she what happened in michigan. without obama and edward. a lot of people did not vote for her,all along i think she is fake, was fake and will always be fake. she won nh because the woman voters felt sorry for her,and voted for her. that all.

Gonzalo   January 15th, 2008 11:55 pm ET

It is funny that so many people are swept up in the Obama illusion. His "world experience" consisted of playing with future Muslim terrorists when he was a child. Then upon reaching adulthood, he dabbled in the fine art of drug use and even in his own words mentioned that he was on the way to becoming a "junkie". Now you have a man who has no real experience in life (except using a crack pipe) who is being blindly followed by the countless number of sheep who vote for him. It is unfortunate that a man who has no real skills and absolutely no world experience is so close to being put in the White House. The rest of the world is laughing loudly at America as I speak. You may have your dream, but I fear the reality you will create.

And don't assume either, that I am a Hillary supporter. On the contrary, I disagree with many of her policies. But when the future of the country that I love dearly is jeopordized by the ignorance of the masses…well, I would pick ANY of the candidates over Obama.

minati   January 15th, 2008 11:55 pm ET

Why hasn't the media picked upon the nasty statement made by Michelle Obama regarding "if you can't run your own house you certainly can't run a white house"

Her statements need to be analyzed and well documented across the media. Yes they sem to have a free ride.

mavis dandridge   January 15th, 2008 11:54 pm ET

Mrs. Clinton will not be getting my vote. I'm a Black woman who does not like her. Her attitude seems to be that she deserves to be president by virtue of her having endured Bill Clinton. She thinks she's entitled. I think she's a closet racist.

francisco   January 15th, 2008 11:54 pm ET

Here we go again, the media trying to finish with hillary's career, Cnn has united with MSNBC, Newsweek to go against one great woman. I hope they come to their senses and stop this media fuzz. At the end Hillary will overcome cnn and msnbc and she will be elected the new president of this country. Then we will see how cnn and msnbc react to that.

Robyn   January 15th, 2008 11:54 pm ET

WE NEED OBAMA in the white house!!

The younger generation is voting for a CHANGE. They are inspired by OBAMA's message and these people are the ones who will vote in future elections.

He has a vision, new ideas and will bring diverse, brilliant and progressive people into the White House and Washington.

NEW SCHOOL POLITICS in '08!!!!

OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT 2008!!!!!!

Jay   January 15th, 2008 11:54 pm ET

What is really troubling is that Clinton won over 60% of the white vote. And many African American politicians in Detroit were pushing the uncommited.

Luther Campbell   January 15th, 2008 11:53 pm ET

Here we go again with the polls. It should be borne in mind that the Michigan democratic primary was meaningless. It is highly possible that black people who feel antipathy against Ms. Clinton were more likely to come out and express that view.

I find it hard to believe that, after supporting the Clintons for years, the black community is suddently going to en masse turn against Hillary. If that is indeed the case it would be disheartening to see how fickle the black community is.

OBAMA4EVER   January 15th, 2008 11:53 pm ET

ahhahahah hillary campaign is claiming victory in MI by being the only one on the ballot!

ugh what a travesty!

Boca   January 15th, 2008 11:53 pm ET

Here in Washtenaw county, Michigan, we hands down rejected senator Clinton as the Democratic party nominee. The exit polls confirm that what gave Hillary the win over "uncommited" in Michigan are white, over 48 citizens. This may be a solid base for Hillary, but as this primary continues to unfold, it is becoming clear that Hillary is a polarizing figure like none the Democratic party has seen in a while.

It is not only the case that democratic voters see Obama and Edwards as viable and competent candidates, but that they refuse to accept senator Clinton as the nominee. If she gets this nomination, it is very possible, based on what has been demonstrated during this primary, that her polarizing effect inside the democratic party will carry over to the general election where centrist candidates such as McCain and Bloomberg can take many democratic votes away from Hillary.

Jeffrey   January 15th, 2008 11:51 pm ET

And the bashing continues…..

No one appreciates negative campaigning. It just hardens the positions of those who oppose you.

Audrey D.   January 15th, 2008 11:51 pm ET

What about women voters in Michigan, what do the exit polls show about their support of Clinton?

FJ Stratford   January 15th, 2008 11:51 pm ET

This development on the black vote could be troubling. However, the analysis is flawed.

There is a dynamic that is missing in this election. One doesn't really feel that there is a choice between Obama and Clinton. There is also the chance that since Clinton was a sure win, many of her supporters (black, white, asian or latino) may have stayed home. Obviously, the ones who came and voted "Uncommited" have self-selected for Obama/Edwards. Conversely, the ones who stayed home are more likely Clinton voters.

It's a warning, but it may not tell the whole story.

Naveen   January 15th, 2008 11:50 pm ET

To Bean Counter…it is not fair to say that Obama and the other Dems do not care about Michigan. The state was stripped of it delegates so why would they spend valuable resources (time, money) into a state which has no bearing on their overall delegate count? From the exit polls, it seems as if the people (or at least the black majority) understand this. Not sure if Hillary's campaigning in that state will hurt her in terms of the afore mentioned resources in the long run.

Marsha   January 15th, 2008 11:50 pm ET

PLEASE! Doesn't anyone think it's a little coincidental that the RACE CARD got played right before SOUTH Carolina? As someone who graduated with a Political Science degree, I see this as very strategic on Obama's part.

If we continue to play this out as a racial Obama will win, which is exactly what he wants. However, he will not win the election, because long term democrats like me will not vote for Obama, because he doesn't have the experience to run the country. Plus, I will not vote for someone that won a Presidential primary by "playing" the race card. I may believe the race is extremely sexist; however I admire Hillary Clinton for saying that she is not running because she is a woman, while Obama thinks he is the next Martin Luther King and preaches his "yes we can" from his pulpit. At least Hillary has not played the gender card – she did not cry on purpose. Her tears were genuinue. Obama has played the race card.

So, if Obama does win the Primary. I will laugh as he divides the democrats, and as he cries foul as Republicans bring up his inexperience and his drug use repeatedly and he is shocked when they offer no apology.

Robert   January 15th, 2008 11:50 pm ET

In some ways, I think this serves her right for the incredibly negative onslaught her campaign has just waged against Obama. The press discusses this recent spat like both groups fomented it equally.
To anyone paying attention, it seems that the Clinton campaign, (candidate, Bill, and surrogates), aggressively tried to spin a few awkward statements to their advantage at the expense of Obama's. I do not for a minute think that the Clintons meant to slander MLK or insult African Americans, but there is no denying that they both had been going all out negative against Obama in NH, then made a few whoops moment comments that could be interpreted to involve race in speeches or to the press. The Obama campaign spent several days not commenting at all on the storm created by the Clintons. However, when many (neutral!) black leaders called for apologies, the Clintons said that the Obama campaign had put them up to it, and began trying to say that Obama had played the race card. Obama finally commented, saying he had no comment, but the storm went on until he finally called for a truce which the Clinton campaign jumped at because they could tell a quagmire when they saw it.
I think the whole episode was unfortunate for their party, and for race relations in our country. A quick clarification and apology on the part of the Clintons (as well as significantly less use of negative campaigning), would solve the whole thing and allow the candidates to talk about real issues!

Earl   January 15th, 2008 11:49 pm ET

I like how the Hillary supporters are claiming this is a "victory". A victory against, who? Dodd, Gravel, and Kucinich? Those three combined couldn't get 10% of the vote if thier livelihoods depended on it.

Seriously … to think that Hillary someone how won, because she got more votes than uncommited is asinine. If my parents went to the polls, and they saw Hillary Rodham and Uncommited, they'd probably just vote for Rodham. It's not that they would want to vote for her, it's because it's the only vote on that there that appears to be logical. Unless you are plugged into the internet or aare a political junky, you're probably not going to know that voting Uncommited was an unerground way to show your dissatisfaction with Rodham.

If I were a Hillary Rodham supporter, and I saw my fellows shouting and hollaring how great a victory this was, I would be embarassed for them, and I would be even more ashamed my candidate did not show solidarity with her party. But then again, when you've got no shame, you leave your name on the ballot to claim VICTORY … against no one!

Donna   January 15th, 2008 11:49 pm ET

The latest responses and use of only her "black" surrogates along with her silence on the statements, says it all. Don't underestimate the ability of African American voters to see through the veil !!!!

James   January 15th, 2008 11:48 pm ET

It is truly amazing how dumb you people are

rick smith   January 15th, 2008 11:48 pm ET

Hillary, was by far the best, in the debate, Obama is a nice guy, but he just not ready to run the goverment, he won the uncommitted in the debate, Hillary is the only of the three who can beat Romney, and lead US out of the dark years of Bush.

Jeff   January 15th, 2008 11:48 pm ET

This is completely predictable – given her "I'm better than you" attitude toward ANYONE, EVERYONE.

May the statesman in this race succeed.

Jim, S.C   January 15th, 2008 11:48 pm ET

The uncommitted would be both Obama and Edwards togather, looks like a landslide for Senator Clinton. Not her fault Michigan messed up there Delagate Count. Both Edwards and Obama are on the Florida Ballet, knowing it too was suspended like Michigan. Senator Clinton is the best candidate for President. A Clinton / Obama ticket would be unbeatable. My gut feeling tells me that Clinton can win without Obama, but I do not feel Obama can win without Clinton. This team would be so GREAT for America.

"Senator Clinton for President of the United States 2008″

Ray in Vegas   January 15th, 2008 11:47 pm ET

I know Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have called a truce, and everything is hunky dory and everything, but the truth of the matter is Senator Obama never brought the subject of race up at all and Clinton only backed off of her attacks when Obama took the high road and rightfully stated that Clinton's civil rights committment wasn't an issue and that he wanted to get away from personal attacks and focus on the issues. The Clinton campaign has been playing some very dirty politics recently, by playing up to stereotypes and having people like BET's Bob Johnson attempt to smear Mr. Obama while Hillary maintains plausible deniability. Those attacks have not fooled many people, and African Americans are increasingly realizing that an attempt is being made to turn them against one of the most competent, intelligent, viable candidates to run for president of the United States in decades, who also happens to be African American.

josh   January 15th, 2008 11:47 pm ET

yeah I can't believe that anyone would actually buy the messianic propaganda from obama that Clinton does not support African Americans. Unbelievable. Logical people for Clinton!

Ann Aloha, PA   January 15th, 2008 11:47 pm ET

Why is this spinning against Clinton?
CNN is appearing more sexist than before and continues to loose the objectiveness that is claimed by america media. All words!!!
Shameful

Seekster, Arlington, TX   January 15th, 2008 11:46 pm ET

Uncommited for President!

rich   January 15th, 2008 11:46 pm ET

Bad omen for South Carolina. Unfortunately, Hillary and Bill has ticked off a large number of blacks who would have otherwise voted for her. Too bad.

Farah   January 15th, 2008 11:46 pm ET

I work at an inner-city hospital in Detroit with an overwhelming majority of African American employees and patients… all I have heard is Hillary Clinton. It truly surprises me what is being suggested about the exit polling.

Gregg   January 15th, 2008 11:46 pm ET

The one sure thing I can say is that if Obama wins the nomination of the Democratic party we are in for another 4 years of a Republican controlled White House. This is not a racist comment, it is the fact. I may be ready and you may be ready but the majority of Americans are not yet there. Sad as it may be, it still remains true.

concerned citizen, Mesa, Arizona   January 15th, 2008 11:46 pm ET

How ignorant you Obama supporters are. If you watched the debate her knowledge of issues is superior to him. I think all 3 would unite the country. If the African American community continues to try to divide the democratic party due to race we will lose the general elction. His answer about being CEO scares me to death.

Drackoe   January 15th, 2008 11:45 pm ET

It has a lot to do with race. Detroit politics are entirely about race.

J, Ca   January 15th, 2008 11:45 pm ET

Who’s this ridiculously biased reporter?
Clinton won almost 60% of the votes when Obama and Edwards supporters combined voted uncommitted for 39%.
End of story.

Drackoe   January 15th, 2008 11:44 pm ET

It has a lot to do with race. Detroit politics are race.

Jr., California   January 15th, 2008 11:44 pm ET

35 years of experience???? Are you kidding me???

know your politics   January 15th, 2008 11:43 pm ET

Hey Bean Counter,

Do us a favor and know your politics. Barack, Fred, and the other Dems didn't show up on the ballot because they decided to respect their party's wishes and withdraw from the race after Michigan suffered penalties for moving today's primary against old, founded National Democratic Party rules. They chose loyalty as opposed to Clinton – who LOOKS like a "big winner" i Michigan and someone one should vote for because she just "must be winning for a reason."

And why in the world are you ticked at Rudy? He's not a Democrat.

I couldn't be happier about this article this evening.

James Brown ( Independent )   January 15th, 2008 11:42 pm ET

I find it pretty telling that she only won by 15% over NOBODY…………..That tells me that Hillary Clinton is UN-ELECTABLE.

Personally i see OBAMA as the only Democrat that stands a chance to win in the general election.

in TX   January 15th, 2008 11:41 pm ET

MI you rock!! Especially Wayne County… thanks for going out and voting uncommitted… Hillary was basically the only person on the ticket and still didn't get the 80%+ you would think a person would get when they are running basically by themselves.

John   January 15th, 2008 11:40 pm ET

The real question is are they voting for him because he is black or because he is the best candidate. I would suggest that many are voting for him because he is black based on the wide difference in voting percentage. If it was based on records seeing that the other two candidates are very qualified the numbers should be closer.

I sure hope this is not the case because it would be a sad statement coming from many people in the black community.

Jay   January 15th, 2008 11:40 pm ET

CNN how about reporting that Sen Clinton would have won by double digits if Sen Obama was on ballot too. So Please stop giving negative spin to any news concerned with Clinton.A news channel should be impartial rather than biased.

Wayne / Wentzville, MO   January 15th, 2008 11:39 pm ET

Basically, it was Hillary's tone of voice regarding her comments about LBJ and the late MLK-Jr. Well all I can say is that one reaps what they sow! Whatever happened to the crying politician from New Hampshire?

I was never fooled, but unfortunately there are many who were fooled. Fooled enough to give her their votes. And by the way, it was Barack's camp that initiated a truce between the two candidates. So again, we're seeing real leadership in Barack! He's the real deal by far!

MARYLOU JONES   January 15th, 2008 11:39 pm ET

AN IGNORANT, MISLEADING HEADING TO A STUPID ARTICLE! BLAH, BLAH, BLAH! HILLARY CLINTON WON 56% OF THE TOTAL VOTES CAST. "UNCOMMITED" WON 39%. ONE HAS TO ASSUME THAT EDWARDS HAD SOME OF THOSE VOTES. SOOOOO, HILLARY BEAT OBAMA AND EDWARDS PUT TOGETHER! GO HILLARY! HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT! WAY TO GO MICHIGAN!

Lex   January 15th, 2008 11:38 pm ET

I'm gad Clinton is now aware that she isn't guaranteed the black vote just because "some" black people are fond of her husband. She needs to stop acting as if she has already won the nomination. She HAS NOT! Her campaign tricks and dirty politics are not flying over the heads of Americans. Oh and by the way Tim Russert, Chris Mathews, and the rest of the political commentators and hosts SUCK AT THEIR JOBS! They are totally favoring Hillary. It really is making me sick! How much more obvious can you be? START REPORTING THE FACTS. FACTS FACTS FACTS AND ONLY THE FACTS! Stop trying to influence people with subtle plugs for a "certain" candidate. Stop saying Barack has attacked HIllary, b/c he has not, stop saying hillary has the most experience b/c she DOES NOT, and stop bringing on horrible guests who are completely biased! Why don't you ever say Hillary takes a lot of money from lobbyists & PACS, why not report the fact that Barack has held more government positions than Hillary? Doesn't he deserve equal treatment or are you gunning for the Clintons to win this by any means necessary? MSNBC, CNN, and most news stations ARE A JOKE! STOP FEEDING and being the driving force behind false issues. STAY ON TASK AND GIVE THE PUBLIC THE REAL CHANCE TO SEE WHO EACH CANDIDATE IS!

bob   January 15th, 2008 11:37 pm ET

the clintons have shown how low they will go (again) here's "hoping" obama is the nation's secong black president

Chris, Orlando FL   January 15th, 2008 11:35 pm ET

To: Hillary
Compiments of: The Obama Smear Machine

Anonymous   January 15th, 2008 11:34 pm ET

I think people should not twist things around and focus on what is on hand not what they think or what others believe what was said. Lets get off the train and start being independent on our decisions, and not follow the negative.

Grace Smith, Charlton, SC   January 15th, 2008 11:33 pm ET

People are seeing Hillary for what she truly is.

If she so fiercely attempted to defend remarks that she INDEED made, why can't she apologize for her vote to authorize the war in Iraq, with the same energy?

I'm white and voting for Obama. If I were black and Obama was not in the race, I would vote for Edwards. There's no way the Clintons deserve a single black vote. Actually, I think the Clinton owe blacks and hispanics so much that she should've dropped out and endorsed Obama or Richardson, or not run at all.

Roland   January 15th, 2008 11:31 pm ET

A major victory for the Democratic Party tonight! A strong showing for 'uncommited' and a win for Mitt Romney!!!

Celina B   January 15th, 2008 11:30 pm ET

What % of whites and Latinos were voting for Clinton and Obama? why only report on AA? This is the kind of politics thats pundits are pushing, and the American people are rejecting, coming together, for a common purpose.

JohnS   January 15th, 2008 11:29 pm ET

Did anyone listen to Chis Matthews this evening? Boy, I almost threw up because of his active support and "politicing" for Clinton. I used to admire and watch this guy for years. Today, I quit. I guess it is because he received a "kiss" from Hillary recently.

Jason   January 15th, 2008 11:29 pm ET

Blacks refusing to vote for anyone other than a black candidate? There's a shock.

EW   January 15th, 2008 11:28 pm ET

Your story is very deceptive. You should have written that 70% of the African American voters who voted in the primary favored "uncommitted." CNN never misses an opportunity to post a story that presents a negative representation of Hillary Clinton. Why is that? CNN readers might begin to wonder whether you are truly reporting the news or trying to influence public opinion.

Friends don’t let friends post drunk   January 15th, 2008 11:28 pm ET

Why is it that the only ethnic grouping that these polls consistently assess is the ‘black’ vote?

Occasionally, the Hispanic vote is evaluated as well. However, I have never (ever) seen an evaluation of the ‘white vote’.

This kind of ethnic based assessment only serves to reinforce racism and stereotyping.

The ‘black vote’ is a very divisive and insulting terminology suggestive of a monolithic, monotonous group that can only act as a single entity, lacking of the ability to think and perform as individuals? This fallacious notion must be thoroughly and forcibly rejected.

Otherwise, please offer commentary on the ‘white vote’ as well.

Grant

Celina B   January 15th, 2008 11:28 pm ET

What % of whites and Latinos were voting for Clinton and Obama? why only report on AA? This is the kind of politics thats pundits are pushing, and the American people are rejecting, coming together, for a common purpose.

Charles T, VA   January 15th, 2008 11:27 pm ET

This is what hillary wanted so that she can split the white voters to go for her and black to Obama to win because she knows some black will feel offended about their remarks. Good job Hillary and good luck to America if she wins. I am not a fool and will still vote for Obama period and hope the white vote will remain confident on Obama.

Hillary your plan will backfire because now Obama will win a landslide because the last thing we need as Americans in this election is a racial divide.

Mary Chandler   January 15th, 2008 11:26 pm ET

Barack Obama won tonight and Chis Matthews is way off. Hillary is not presidential sounding. She knows alot of stuff but she can't get it done. Barack can get results becasuse he can work the system in a diplomatic manner. America needs him.

A. Harrison, Atlanta Georgia   January 15th, 2008 11:25 pm ET

CNN please let this go….are you not aware that MEDIA can influence the masses…especially the ones that don't rely on their own thinking…..SHEESH!!

Eric   January 15th, 2008 11:23 pm ET

But you seem to forget that in 1988 Jesse Jackson won the Michigan Democratic primary with 55% of the vote so African Americans have historically done well in that state. There was also a major push by Obama supporters to vote for uncommitted.

David   January 15th, 2008 11:23 pm ET

Why does the media keep trying to make this a primary race about the color of the skin. Each one is as qualified as the other. They should be voted on for their character and integrity. Each voter should decide who can do more and make this a better country to live in for all the people. If Obama was to get elected or Clinton I would hope it would be because the reasons given and not becuse the color of their skin or the sex of the person.

Jackson   January 15th, 2008 11:19 pm ET

After years of working for civil rights, if black voters turn from Hillary Clinton, it will be because of racial-bias on their part … and nothing to do with her. She has worked very hard for all people and has never wavered on civil rights issues. I don't believe that black voters will do this by and large throughout the country.

David   January 15th, 2008 11:18 pm ET

I'm sorry, was Hillary ever projected to win the black vote over Obama? More important, why is CNN still fanning the flames of race, even though the candidates are moving on? This is a pathetic headline.

Robert Bell   January 15th, 2008 11:18 pm ET

The Democratic National Party will have a "change of heart" just before the National Convention and decide to count the Michigan and Florida primaries, if that means swaying the nomination towards Hillary.

The entire process has been fixed from the beginning. Howard Dean and the party hacks are all pro-Hillary, and hence she has most of the super-delegates.

And just by chance, she did not take her name off the Michigan and Florida primary ballots.

This is a very calculated move that will make the Al Gore 2000 Florida fiasco look amateurish by comparison.

Go Hillary '08 – best candidate money can buy!

Jay   January 15th, 2008 11:18 pm ET

Why make this into a race war?? I will vote for either candidate because I believe in the Democratic Party. Its understandable that black people might want a black president. That would be an incredible sign of racial progress. But I will support either Clinton or Obama as the nominee. (Not Edwards–he's a communist)

Jen, New York, NY   January 15th, 2008 11:17 pm ET

The tides have turned. Damage done and no way to reverse it. Would be interesting to see how SC votes.

sue   January 15th, 2008 11:16 pm ET

Oh no.

She was the ONLY major democrat on the ballot and still 70% of Michigan's African Americans didn't vote for her.

Not good. A little blow back from playing racial politics?

Josh, Chicago, Il   January 15th, 2008 11:15 pm ET

If that's so, many people can't think for themselves, regardless of what colour they are. The whole "race" thing was unnecessary, and told a lie on Hillary Clinton; if you're going to attack someone, at least have some truth to it.

Tom, Boston Ma   January 15th, 2008 11:14 pm ET

Tom Isenberg, is this one of the spins you were told to keep tooting by Karl Rove? you are shameless. you will stop at nothing….

r k martin, New York, NY   January 15th, 2008 11:13 pm ET

once edwards leaves the campaign, Billary will be far, far behind.

The anti-Billary movement is far too large to overcome, much less the loss of support from the AfAm community.

OBAMA 08! Time for a fresh vision

Ron   January 15th, 2008 11:11 pm ET

Any one who doesn't believe that Obama is going to take the majority of the black vote hasn't been paying attention to race politics in the country.

Anonymous   January 15th, 2008 11:09 pm ET

You guys will never stop talking trash about Hillary

Adjetey   January 15th, 2008 11:08 pm ET

She shot herself in the foot by making those complicated racial comments. "Becareful what you wish for."

Todd   January 15th, 2008 11:06 pm ET

Wow! that's not good. This is going to be an interesting 2 weeks. Bill can pull her through!

William Gainesville, FL   January 15th, 2008 11:02 pm ET

I had a good feeling this would happen. African American voters can see through all the tricks and games in this campaign – that Barack Obama is the true candidate who understands the problems Americans face and who has proposed the best solutions to those problems.

GO BARACK!
OBAMA 08!

Roger   January 15th, 2008 11:00 pm ET

So Hillary Clinton's name was the only name on the ballot, and voters were either forced to pick her, or choose "undecided"?

Isn't that what the Soviet Union used to do with its elections?

Biggdawg   January 15th, 2008 10:55 pm ET

Thank goodness Hillary didn't lose to "uncommitted". Otherwise who knows how the media would have spun this so-called meaningless primary. IT IS MEANINGLESS. Those of you who say it isn't, please note that most would say Hillary won in a landslide, garnering nearly 60% of the vote.

So the other side of the equation one could say Obama and his cohorts ticked off a lot of whites by shamelessly and unwarrantedly playing the race card, which means that he and Edwards couldn't even garner 40% of the vote between them. But CNN chooses to highlight the race angle. Good. That only works against Obama.

This from an African-American. Keep fanning the flames of racial divisiveness CNN.

And on that "time to start a race war in the Democratic Party note, CNN: what was the percentage breakdown of the white vote?

Jonathan   January 15th, 2008 10:54 pm ET

I found it interesting that the "uncommited voters" came close to overcoming the Hillary media machine. I think the intelligent folks will in the end pick Obama. He is alot more sincere about overhauling govt.

Smart people for Obama!

Donne   January 15th, 2008 10:52 pm ET

Black people did not reject Clinton because of race but because she was a divider , She was never a uniter.

Clinton have ruled for her safe boasting 35 years , I belive its high time she goes on retirement..

Its wrong and just another blunder to give a ticket to somebody who had misused it before..

If Clinton mistakenly win the nomination, she will fail the generstion because even her democrats will vote for the other party or chose not to vote at all.

Infact she is desperate.

America needs a strong hand like Obama. YES WE CAN;YES WE CAN; YES WE CAN

Carl   January 15th, 2008 10:51 pm ET

Go, South Carolina – you are not alone! Look out West, where Elected Democratic officials like McCaskill consider her "fatal" for the ticket. The down-ticket harm Hillary would do as a uniter of the GOP will be putting a stop to the steady progress red states have made towards the Democratic party. IF HRC would be the nominee, she might actually lose this, as her support in her own party has a definite ceiling, she has virtually NO cross-over appeal, and limited support for independents. IF she would be able to eke out a 50.1% win, and even if she "were ready to lead from day 1″, the other side will be "fired up and ready to go". Hillary for president, Obama for America! Please show the Clintons that the divisive politics should come to an end – she is hurting the party and the country, We are sick of all this, and deserve better. No more games…..

yoyo   January 15th, 2008 10:50 pm ET

Hillary is a cheater

Alex, st paul MN   January 15th, 2008 10:46 pm ET

we never worry about poll, since when we start worring bout it? Sometime i really wonder what your job is a major news network? to report the news or to stirr negative poletics? get over it ….the American people will make the decsion eventually right?

SecondSage   January 15th, 2008 10:45 pm ET

Advice to Clinton, Keep to the truce.

Your uncle tom cronies will only hurt you. Despite the lie Rangel sputed, Obama never injected race as an issue. he has run a clean campaign. This is what is attracting black voters (and white if I'm not mistaken).

Myself, I'm a young independent. I was neutral but your venom after Iowa pushes me toward Obama, Robert Johnson and Charles Rangel hurt you tremendously in my eyes.

I don't speak for all black people. But this black voter was swayed for the following reason. Obama is about the people, all people. He's not running as a black candidate.

Obama also has the right to defend himself when attacked. He's saving it for the republicans, he has the big picture in mind. Elephants shall not return to Pennsylvania Avenue. He's making the whole campaign bigger than him, the reason he's getting mass support.

So Hillary, please save the venom for republicans.

shamous mc   January 15th, 2008 10:45 pm ET

What about the American Indian voter?
Or the Chinese immigrant voter?
What about the white black or the yellow whites?

Division. We'll never unite as a people as long as we continue to subdivide ourselves.

Elizabeth   January 15th, 2008 10:45 pm ET

Character. I think what we have seen in the last 8 years is that character will drive decisions and bad character leads to bad decisions from bad motives and lack of integrity. I encourage the American public to really try to see through what the candidates are really saying and not just with their words and of course, who they surround themselves with.
"Who you are speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you say." -Ralph Waldo Emerson
May the best candidate win!

shaun   January 15th, 2008 10:44 pm ET

I guess your race politics didn't work out to well for you hillary… Did it..

Sean, Detroit, MI   January 15th, 2008 10:42 pm ET

haha nice win, Hillary. Tomorrow I should go into an elementary school classroom and celebrate my "Tallest Person" victory

Bean Counter, Motor City, MI   January 15th, 2008 10:40 pm ET

Obama and the other Dems didn't care about Michigan. Why the heck would anybody in this state ever consider voting for them?

Watching the election results I am so ticked at Barack, Fred and Rudy.

Props to Mitt, John, Ron, Mike and even Dennis for coming to Michigan!

Becky   January 15th, 2008 10:39 pm ET

You know, I kind of think that CNN really wants Hussein to win. I don't. His family is in Kenya…once he is nominated, the terrorist are going to figure this out and then what. What happens when they take his family and behead them???? Is he going to go all tits up and drop the ball? I would rather have a president that doesn't have family living in a situation that would put me at risk. I like me more than that!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just call me selfish, I will answer.

Hope in Detroit and I am white   January 15th, 2008 10:29 pm ET

Come on Obama you rock.

Comments have been closed for this article

subscribe RSS Icon
About The Ticker

The latest political news from CNN's Best Political Team, with campaign coverage, 24-7. Sign up for our twice daily Ticker emails. Got a news tip or feedback? For complete political coverage, bookmark CNNPolitics.com.

CNN=Politics Screensaver

CNN=Politics ScreensaverTap into the power of The Situation Room. Download this powerful new tool that keeps you posted on the latest political news from the campaign trail.
Download (4.1 MB, PC only)

Follow us on Twitter

CNN on TwitterGet Ticker updates the moment they appear online via the Web, SMS, or instant messages.
Follow politicalticker

Categories
CNN Comment Policy: CNN encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. All comments should be relevant to the topic and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. You are solely responsible for your own comments, the consequences of posting those comments, and the consequences of any reliance by you on the comments of others. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNN the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying and other information you provide via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNN Privacy Statement.
Home  |  World  |  U.S.  |  Politics  |  Entertainment  |  Health  |  Tech  |  Travel  |  Living  |  Business  |  Sports  |  Time.com
Podcasts  |  Blogs  |  CNN Mobile  |  Preferences |  Email Alerts  |  CNN Radio  |  CNN Shop  |  Site Map
© 2008 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by WordPress.com VIP