I've read a lot of junk from right wing sites before before, but Eric really stoops as low as one can go as he does his best Sean Hannity impersonation:
In South Carolina tonight, Democratic voters would rather vote for the rich, Southern, white man than either the black man or the female yankee.
In fact, exit polling by and large shows that John Edwards, by staying in the race, is taking votes that would otherwise typically go to Barack Obama. Is this a racist ploy? Is John Edwards in league with the Clintons to make sure white voters, who don't want to vote for Clinton, have a white alternative to go to, lest Barack Obama get more traction?
He obviously doesn't know what delegate politics are. The more John accumulates---the better position he is in to push his ideas. And to even suggest Edwards would collude to something like white voter suppression is ludicrous. By the way, Obama did very well with white voters in South Carolina which shatters his lunatic narrative on race. What an Idiot.
And as Digby explains:
One of the big successes of the Obama campaign, for instance, is the successful courting of the ever elusive youth vote, which has been touted as the promised land so often that older cynics like me are prone to dismiss it out of hand. But it seems to be real this time and it has to do with the inspirational style and generational identification with the candidate but also the technology the campaign is using to reach their potential voters.
(I wrote this yesterday, but couldn't post it due to tech problems)