A Republican black mayoral candidate in Jackson, Mississippi wants to bring back the noose to fight crime.

George Lambus is the only Republican in the dozen-candidate field for the office. He is considered a long shot in the heavily African-American and Democratic city.

The racially explosive subject has brought consternation to many residents. One resident said of Lambus’ platform: “It’s offensive, but it’s so ridiculous you don’t even know how to get mad.”

Still, Lambus feels it is the only way to get a handle on widespread crime. In his homemade flyers, Jackson wrote:

“Crime can only be alleviated by a noose and a stout tree limb. I will provide the noose and when the economy improves, I will get the jobs here.”

Despite being the only Republican in the field, the GOP is not backing Lambus because of his explosive views. Since Lambus is the only Republican, he will automatically advance to the run-off against the top Democrat.

The pistol-toting Lambus claimed that the Bible approves executions.

“If we look at the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, it’s driven with blood.”

Lambus may be the first African-American politician advocating the lynching of other African-Americans.

Lambus’ flyers refer to Jackson’s leaders as “incompetent negro Democrats.” He is distributing them in mostly white neighborhoods.

Lambus said things are getting worse for Jackson.

“We have a whole generation of blacks that will soon be negroes because they aren’t going to have an education or be able to marry.”

Lambus said many people slam doors in his face and walk out of forums when he is speaking. He doesn’t seem surprised by that either.

(from Foolocracy.com)

McCain – 50%
Obama – 44%

No change from last month with these numbers, but it should be noted that Bush won this state by 20 points in 2004, and 17 points in 2000.

The details…

• While McCain has a solid 57% to 38% lead among men, Obama leads 49% to 44% among women.
• Obama also dominates among the youngest set of voters (age 18-29), 75% to 22%. McCain holds the advantage in voters of all other age groups.
• McCain attracts 84% of Republican voters in Mississippi and 54% of voters who are not affiliated with either party.Obama’s support in the Magnolia State comes from 78% of Democrats and 33% of unaffiliated voters.
• McCain is viewed favorably by 58% of voters and unfavorably by 37% of voters. Obama’s numbers are 48% favorable, 51% unfavorable.

One last note…Mississippi hasn’t voted for a Democrat for President since Jimmy Carter.

More as it develops…

There’s been a lot of talk about Obama’s 50 state strategy, and while I don’t buy that idea completely, the Votemaster over at Electoral-vote.com notes that some states could be in play that would never be if a traditional candidate was running…

But Obama might put strange states in play, like Mississippi. About 37% of the state’s population is black. If they go for Obama for 95%, all he needs is 25% of the white vote. Where might he get that? Young voters and college-educated voters. If the Obama money machine gets up to speed, he could raise $200 million, maybe $300 million, which would make it possible to burn $5 million in Mississippi. He might also go there to campaign for former governor Ronnie Musgrove (D) who is trying to replace Sen. Roger Wicker (R) in the Senate. And many western states such as Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada will certainly be in play, and likely Virginia as well. Maybe Pennsylvania and Michigan, too.

I definitely think we seen evidence that’s suggest Obama has the potential to change the electoral map in ways that Hillary never would, but those discussions have always been about Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada…not necessarily Mississippi. If Obama can land that state, we could be looking at landslide territory.

With Childers’ win in Mississippi’s special election last night, another superdelegate has been added since all state representatives get a vote.

No word on who he’ll back, but Mississippi went really big (61% to 37%) for Obama.

By the way, Clinton and company have now revised their number to 2,210. I point this out only so you’ll know what to ignore.

But since we’re on the topic, here are some delegate numbers:

Pledged Delegates Won
Obama – 1599
Clinton – 1446
Advantage: Obama +153

Super Duper Delegates Won
Obama – 289.5
Clinton – 273.5
Advantage: Obama +16

Total Delegates Won
Obama – 1888.5
Clinton – 1719.5
Advantage: Obama +169

More as it develops…

Senior Republican Party leaders are quite alarmed that the party lost a special election in a Mississippi congressional district that was once considered solidly Republican (the district went for George Bush in 2004 by a 25 point margin). While some Republicans have tried to rationalize away the defeat, National Republican Congressional Committee chairman Tom Cole issued a blunt statement that said, in part:

Tonight’s election highlights two significant challenges Republicans must overcome this November. First, Republicans must be prepared to campaign against Democrat challengers who are running as conservatives, even as they try to join a liberal Democrat majority. Though the Democrats’ task will be more difficult in a November election, the fact is they have pulled off two special election victories with this strategy, and it should be a concern to all Republicans.

The political environment is such that voters remain pessimistic about the direction of the country and the Republican Party in general. I encourage all Republican candidates, whether incumbents or challengers, to take stock of their campaigns and position themselves for challenging campaigns this fall by building the financial resources and grassroots networks that offer them the opportunity and ability to communicate, energize and turn out voters this election.

The message to incumbent Republicans seems to be: don’t assume you’re safe. Even though the Democratic Party leaders are still solidly liberal, the party has smartly recruited qualified centrist and even right-of-center candidates to run in Republican districts and take advantage of the national dissatisfaction with GOP leadership.

There is reason to think that, if the economy continues to slump, gas prices continue to rise and the Iraq conflict continues to remain unresolved, the Democrats could find themselves with the presidency and a powerful congressional majority come November. A Republican Party which once fought so hard for limited government may have, through its own greed and incompetence, created a situation that will usher in a Democratic majority large enough to dramatically expand federal government programs, handouts and socially liberal initiatives.

The Republicans have under six months to figure out how to stop that from happening.

I haven’t followed this race, but this is the 3rd one in a row and could signal a big shift come November. Because this was in a district that voted 62% for Bush in 2004.

From The Hill:

Democrat Travis Childers won Tuesday’s Mississippi special election runoff for Sen. Roger Wicker’s (R) House seat, handing Democrats the biggest of their three special election victories this cycle and sending a listless GOP further into a state of disarray.

Childers, who beat GOP candidate Greg Davis 49-46 three weeks ago but came up just shy of a race-ending majority, joins new Democratic Reps. Bill Foster (Ill.) and Don Cazayoux (La.) to give Democrats a trifecta of upsets in conservative House districts.

The loss could send shockwaves through the Republican Party, where murmurs about a leadership shakeup have become more and more audible.

Democrats are backing up the assertion that they remain on the offensive in the cycle following a 30-seat gain, which has historically not been the case after a wave election.

Again, this is a very conservative district…in Mississippi. The significance of that can’t be understated. The country is definitely looking for change and any Republican that doesn’t understand that will probably find it very hard to win this fall.

Personally, I never thought Rush had this much pull, but if we’re talking about 60,000 people here or 80,000 people there, it begins to make sense. Not a lot of voters are needed to really swing these things or make them closer than they would have been. And closing the gap even by 5% is important in this proportional delegate process the Dems have to slog through.

In any event, that’s the word from the Boston Globe:

For a party that loves to hate the Clintons, Republican voters have cast an awful lot of ballots lately for Senator Hillary Clinton: About 100,000 GOP loyalists voted for her in Ohio, 119,000 in Texas, and about 38,000 in Mississippi, exit polls show.

Spurred by conservative talk radio, GOP voters who say they would never back Clinton in a general election are voting for her now for strategic reasons: Some want to prolong her bitter nomination battle with Barack Obama, others believe she would be easier to beat than Obama in the fall, or they simply want to register objections to Obama.

“It’s as simple as, I don’t think McCain can beat Obama if Obama is the Democratic choice,” said Kyle Britt, 49, a Republican-leaning independent from Huntsville, Texas, who voted for Clinton in the March 4 primary. “I do believe Hillary can mobilize enough [anti-Clinton] people to keep her out of office.”

Britt, who works in financial services, said he is certain he will vote for McCain in November.

About 1,100 miles north, in Granville, Ohio, Ben Rader, a 66-year-old retired entrepreneur, said he voted for Clinton in Ohio’s primary to further confuse the Democratic race. “I’m pretty much tired of the Clintons, and to see her squirm for three or four months with Obama beating her up, it’s great, it’s wonderful,” he said. “It broke my heart, but I had to.”

Local Republican activists say stories like these abound in Texas, Ohio, and Mississippi, the three states where the recent surge in Republicans voting for Clinton was evident.

One thing’s for sure. In the networks’ exit polling of Dem races, they need to start asking Republicans if they plan on voting for the Dem they voted for in the general election. If the answer is no, then you know it’s most likely the Limbaugh effect.

Here’s how that may have effected Texas:

It is also possible, though perhaps unlikely, that enough strategically minded Republicans voted for Clinton in Texas to give her a crucial primary victory there: Clinton received roughly 119,000 GOP votes in Texas, according to exit polls, and she beat Obama by about 101,000 votes.

Will the pollsters start listening?

Michael van der Galien wrote a post yesterday entitled, It’s All About Race. Needless to say it’s about Obama’s overwhelming support among black voters in Tuesday’s contest in Mississippi and why that’s happening.

Let’s take a look at Michael’s argument (note: Mississippi and Louisiana are mixed up here, so read everything in the following as commentary on Mississippi):

So why did Obama [win] so easily in Louisiana? Well, simple: 90% of blacks voted for him, and blacks made up half of the total amount of voters in the Democratic primary. He could not have lost. Because of his plans? Because of his experience? No, because blacks vote for him… because he’s black.

No, that’s not an excuse for Hillary Clinton, but it does give me the impression that African-Americans aren’t voting for people because of her or his politics, but because of his or her… well, in this case, skin color.

So blacks just vote for blacks even if they’re not good candidates? Hmmm. I suppose that’s why Al Sharpton made such an impressive electoral showing in 2004. Or Jesse Jackson in 1984. As is the case with many salvos Michael launches at Obama, the facts simply don’t add up.

But beyond the insensitive and clumsy argument being made here, what bugs me just as much is the technique he’s using to sell it. Here’s how his post starts out at the end of the first paragraph…

I know it’s considered ‘racist’ to point out that 90% is enormous and a nearly idiotic high percentage, but I’m doing so nonetheless.

I’m not sure if this technique has a name, but it should because it’s been around for a LONG time. Basically, the writer prefaces what he is about to say with a promise that somebody will find it offensive enough to call him out on it. And when that actually does happen, like right now, he gains favor from a certain segment of his audience for predicting the inevitable and is therefore seen as being a bold truth-teller who is willing to say what others will not. This is essentially a variation of the same “PC Police” nonsense the right-wing has used for a long, long time to cover their tracks when they say something insensitive and wrong headed.

But just to be clear, I don’t think what Michael said was racist. I know him well enough to discard that outright. And let me point out that I haven’t accused Ferraro of being a racist, nor Bill Clinton, nor anybody else who has made racially insensitive gaffes in this campaign cycle.

I do, however, think what Michael said is incredibly demeaning. People are people are people, and they make up their minds based on many different factors. Yes, blacks are voting for Obama in record numbers. Nobody is denying that. And yes, race is playing a factor in those decisions. But to paint the African-American voting base with such a broad brush, and in such an intellectually dishonest manner, I fear that Michael is indeed beginning to stray into Ferraro territory. And that’s not a good place to be.

This gambit is losing one. Abandon it before it’s too late.

With 99% reporting, Obama has 253,441 and Clinton has 154,852. I don’t know how many delegates this put him up by now, but I’m pretty sure he regained any ground Clinton got last Tuesday.

And here’s an interesting footnote:

The conventional wisdom and to a significant degree the reality in many other states has been that Barack Obama has picked up the lion’s share of Republican crossover voters. Not in Mississippi. According to MSNBC’s exit numbers, Republicans made up either 12% or 13% of the voters in tonight’s primary. And they went for Hillary Clinton by a decisive 3 to 1 margin.

So, do they really like her? Or is this Limbaugh strategy coming to life?

The networks just called it…

MSNBC’s Chuck Todd is crunching the math right now on the air. If Obama gets 63% or more he’ll net nine delegates. If he gets less than that, he’s still likely to net seven — which, again, would equal Hillary’s March 4th gains.

And on the “Commander in Chief threshold” meme?

According to numbers shown on Fox News, Obama holds a solid 10 point lead over Hillary on who voters think is qualified to be “commander-in-chief,” 53%-43%.

So much for momentum…

Looks like he’s set to take it.

AP has more:

JACKSON, Miss. (AP) – Barack Obama seized the lead in the Mississippi primary Tuesday, latest in a string of racially polarized contests across the Deep South in the Democratic presidential campaign and a final tune-up before next month’s high-stakes race with Hillary Rodham Clinton in Pennsylvania.
Obama was winning roughly 90 percent of the black vote but only about one-third of the white vote, extending a pattern that carried him to victory in earlier primaries in South Carolina, Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana.

Obama was leading in the overall vote, according to an Associated Press analysis of surveys of voters as they left the polls.

This could be a short night.

Did anybody hear the latest Penn Spinâ„¢? You know, the memes from Clinton spinmeister Mark Penn that are so obviously intellectually dishonest you actually get dizzy from listening to them?

Well, here’s the latest gem about Hillary’s wins last Tuesday…

“We broke his momentum completely.”

Oh…losing my equilibrium…need to hold onto something…wait, there’s the truth…if I can just grab a hold…got it!

This is obviously BS, but let’s just say it’s true (for once) and now Hillary has the big Mo. I think it’s fair to hear Penn’s answer to the question posed in the title. Because after Obama routed Hill in the Wyoming caucuses and is set to do the same in the Mississippi primaries, will her momentum be broken…completely?

Or were those unimportant states too?

Looking at the numbers, American Research Group shows him leading 54% to 38% in Mississippi. She has made up some ground in the past week in that poll, but not enough to get above 40%. Rasmussen shows a similar spread, 53% to 39%.

It’ll be interesting to see what the Penn Spinâ„¢ is come Wednesday morning.

I can hardly wait!

From TPM:

The American Research Group poll puts Obama way at 58% support, against Hillary Clinton’s 34%. Granted, ARG’s record for primaries this cycle has been spotty. Nevertheless, it would be pretty hard to get it totally wrong on a margin this big.

A big win next Tuesday could wipe out any delegate gain Hillary got this last Tuesday, but he would most likely have to cross the 60% threshold for that to happen.

Something that could make that happen is a radio ad he’s running there that uses these words against her…

“I was shocked when I learned Iowa and Mississippi have never elected a woman governor, senator, or member of Congress,” Clinton was quoted as saying in October by The Des Moines Register. “How can Iowa be ranked with Mississippi? That’s not the quality, that’s not the communitarianism, that’s not the openness I see in Iowa.”

Could it work?

What Mississippi helps him do at this point is get a big win and push the % she needs to win higher than the 55% (or thereabouts) of the remaining delegates.

We shall see…