05-07-2008, 02:21 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Wall looming before Obama?
Was last night good news-bad news for Obama? We can discern a trend. Obama invevitably gets well over 90% of the AA vote, and less than 40% of the white vote. The white vote among those voting in democractic primaries, that is. (Virtually all AA are democrats, right?) In states with enough blacks that they can more than make up the deficit in white votes, he wins, e.g., North Carolina. Otherwise, he loses, e.g., Indiana. What does this portend for the general election?
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 05-07-2008 at 02:23 PM. |
05-07-2008, 02:27 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
|
Quote:
I really think the issue is the guy is an articulate and charismatic Ted Kennedy. Many people will be turned off by that. Unfortunately they will get labled racist for their views. |
|
05-07-2008, 02:31 PM | #3 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
It means to me, that by selecting a moderate in McCain, the Republicans may still have a chance. For some reason, we struck upon a potentially winning formula in a losing year. I've been to several high profile campaign schools in Washington, and one statistic that I remember is the forty percent rule, which holds that any Presidential candidate from either party starts off with 40%. The candidates are merely vying for the middle 20%. You do that with enough cross-over issues to attract the middle. What cross over policies does Obama have? None. The reason he should win is that Bush has so f...ed it up for Republicans it takes a miraculous failure for Democrats to lose. And they may have just concocted the formula failure yet again.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-07-2008, 02:33 PM | #4 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-07-2008, 02:34 PM | #5 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
Yeah, there is no racism involved in rural whites voting against Obama in droves.
|
05-07-2008, 02:41 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
|
|
05-07-2008, 02:42 PM | #7 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
Because he doesn't try to appeal to middle class it should be used against him. If he were truly interested in the moderate vote, people would NOT see him as solely a black candidate.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-07-2008, 02:44 PM | #8 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
Here's the difference. Blacks have come out strong for white candidates.
Rural whites have never come out for a black candidate. |
05-07-2008, 02:50 PM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
|
Quote:
I honestly believe a black candidate has more of a chance of winning in a rural white area than a white candidate has in a black area. Heck, I think it is racist to claim Obama loses because he is black instead of because he is liberal. If he were a republican, he would win in a landslide. |
|
05-07-2008, 02:52 PM | #10 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
I believe you're overplaying the racism and ignoring the extremist position black candidates profess. Absent extremism, I submit those persons would come out in droves for that person. If Castro came to America and shouted down with America in every campaign speech would he engender a loyal following? Well all black candidates essentially shout, "you rural whites are white trash, vote for me."
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|