Matt Bai over at the New York Times has an article exploring the Democratic Race in the South:

The campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination has thus far been marked by a heightened sense of history and optimism — the former because its two leading candidates are pushing up against societal barriers that were once thought unmovable; the latter because Democrats feel as assured of recapturing the presidency as they have at any time since the post-Watergate election of 1976.

Now it’s reality-check time. After early contests in friendlier territories, the nomination fight moves this week into the heart of the Old South, where the inspiring story line of a woman dueling with an African-American will collide, at last, with another side of history. While much of the primary electorate in South Carolina comprises traditional Democrats (black voters, college-town liberals, etc.), the candidates will nonetheless encounter, in a broader way, a less-welcoming political culture in a state that hasn’t voted for a Democratic nominee since Jimmy Carter.

Jimmy Carter. Geeesh. That certainly seems a long time ago. Bai continues to lead the reader into a walk down Why The Dems Can’t Win The South Lane until he stumbles upon the following:

 It has been in vogue throughout the Bush years for Democrats to assert that the South is unredeemable and politically unnecessary.

Interesting because it’s true.  Dems have had a long standing resentment toward the racist overtones of the Southern Vengeance we engendered with LBJ’s signing of the Civil Rights Act.

South Carolina, I think, is the first of a series of states where it will be interesting to see if Edwards does better and by what margin. As Edward’s voter are, arguably, sucking votes away from Obama (seems natural) will the Dem Primary turn into a race between a white woman and a white man, a white woman and a black man, or White Southern Male vs The Other Two?

Read the article HERE