Obama '08?

I think it's time to back off. BBB was expressing that there remains sexism, specifically in certain cultures, and she's right about that. I don't know if it's fair to then say that Obama is getting his male votes by default -- I think that minimizes Obama's talents. But I don't think she's attacking all men. Ok? Truce?

Re: cyc

Well, she certainly was leading among white men in the opinion polls until last November, when her campaign first started tanking.. I mean, she was 20-25 points ahead in the polls at the time. Same in September, October... White men were opting for her over Obama back then too.

So what changed? Did they only remember how they couldnt possibly vote for a woman two months later?

Again - I'm sure there are bigoted men who would never vote for a woman, even within the Democratic party, and who now vote Obama. Just like there are bigoted whites - men and women - even in the Democratic party, who now vote Hillary rather than the black guy.

But saying that the very reason Obama is now winning white guys over is sexism implies that you think most of the men preferring Obama do so because they couldnt stand a woman President. Do you really believe that?

Re: Dys


Why is it hard for you to believe that men could feel the same way about Obama, then?

I found a graph:



So, Clinton wasn't winning white men outright in every state. And in some she lost them altogether. But in many state she STRONGLY won white men. This doesn't jibe with your theory at all.

Cycloptichorn

I agree with fbaezer, there will be cross-over votes for the dumbest reasons, but in the end probably doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

Re: Dys


Good graph. From pollster.com, reliable source. Lists the share of white men won by Hillary (HRC) and Barack (BO) in every primary so far - data based on exit polls.

Thanks for bringing it - to be honest, I hadnt realised that Hillary had actually outright beaten Obama among white males in no less than twelve states - while he won them only in 11 states.

I hadnt realised/remembered either that Hillary got an absolute majority of white men in eight states, ranging from New York and New Jersey to Oklahoma and states across the South.


So, BBB, the "voting statistics" say that there were plenty of states where Hillary won the white male vote. You told Cyclo to look up those numbers to "correct his thinking", so what do you think now?

Whatever.

Stuff like this is why Obama is going to win; Hillary would NEVER have anything like this, ever!

http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5066

Cycloptichorn

Women either love him or hate him, but they know he's a man, not a dishrag. If they're looking for someone to walk all over, they've got the wrong guy. He stands up straight, opens doors for women and says "Yes, sir" and "No, ma'am."

He might be a Republican and he might be a Democrat; he might be a Libertarian or a Green. He knows that his wife is more emotional than rational, and he guides the family in a rational manner.

He's not a racist, but he is annoyed and disappointed when people of certain backgrounds exhibit behavior that typifies the worst stereotypes of their race. He's willing to give everybody a fair chance if they work hard, play by the rules and learn English.

Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don't pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry. When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers. When Al Sharpton comes on TV, leading some rally for reparations for slavery or some such nonsense, he bites his tongue and he remembers. When a child gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon for mistakenly bringing a penknife to school, he takes note of who the local idiots are in education and law enforcement.

He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. It's not that she is a woman. It's that she is who she is. It's the liberal victim groups she panders to, the "poor me" attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.

There are many millions of Angry White Men. Four million Angry White Men are members of the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton, just as the great majority of them voted for George Bush.

He hopes that she will be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, and he will make sure that she gets beaten like a drum.

... and regular columnist for the National Review (thats where this piece was from).

Because there is noone as qualified to tell us what remorse or other sentiments liberals are experiencing right now than a NR columnist.

Smug 'n' Smiley [Kathleen Parker]


"I love watching Obama's face while Hillary is speaking. He matches her smugness with this little chin-raised smile that says: You may have done all your homework, Miss Priss, but Teacher still likes me best."

You could just link to The Corner instead of reposting everything from there, without links, Finn.

Cycloptichorn

Cyc
Cyc, you failed to include the pollster's comments along with the graph you posted. They are:

February 15, 2008
White Men With Obama Since The Beginning

Much was made this week of Obama's performance among white men in Virginia. Indeed, his support with white men was seen as both the key to Obama's Potomac Primary victories, as well as a sign of broadening support to include those formerly in Clinton's base. Others are skeptical, even worrying that while male superdelegates might tip the scale toward Clinton.

In fact, Virginia was neither the first state (nor even first Southern state) where Obama bested Clinton among white men. Nor was it the state where he won this group by the largest margin. Obama has been doing well with this group since the beginning of primary season.

Below is a table of the Clinton/Obama vote among white men, from exit poll data from every contest thus far. The table is ranked in descending order, with the state showing the largest Obama margin at the top.

Compared to Virginia, Obama did even better with white men in Utah, New Mexico, and California (setting his home state of Illinois aside). This pattern is also not a function of election type or overall outcome. Obama led with white men in states with primaries and states with caucuses, and in states that he won and states that Clinton won.

Further, the country doesn't exactly fall into an obvious North/South divide. While Obama tends to do less well with white men in the South, he still led with the group in Georgia (in addition to Virginia), and trailed with the group in New Jersey and Missouri.

Finally, it's also worth reminding ourselves about the contest that started it all - the Iowa caucuses. Among white men in Iowa, Obama garnered a 10-point lead over Clinton, and an 8-point lead over Edwards.

A friend of mine who lives in Texas, and a political activist, told me that a larger turnout will benefit Obama. I think that's going to happen.

What?

OK, so you admonished Cyclo to look up the "voting statistics", which would show that the white males always already voted for Obama over Hillary. That turns out to not be true. Hillary won more white men than Obama in slightly over half of the primary states so far, for which there are exit polls.

So, confronted with those actual numbers, you now post a copy/paste from some opinionated columnist, based on nothing than the guy's say-so?

And it's a column that says actually nothing about those Democratic primary voters? I mean, come on. Yes, there are four million Angry White Men in the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton -- but exactly how many of them are Obama supporters? Most of those guys wont vote for the black guy either. As argument for your earlier point that the guys voting for Obama now are doing so out of sexism, this doesnt even make any sense!

Re: Cyc


So what? His own commentary doesn't jive with the graph included in his article.

You should really retract your earlier statement. It matches a lot of the sour grape comments I've been reading around the web lately.

Cycloptichorn

Re: Cyc

And how do they change a whit about the actual voting statistics? Those voting statistics that you told Cyclo to look up?

You told him that white men had never voted for Hillary - you know, because of how they wouldnt vote for anyone without a penis. Thats why they are voting Obama. You told him to look up the statistics about it.

So he did. Those are exit poll numbers there - the only measure we have of the actual voting by demographic group. And they show that Hillary beat Obama among white men in 12 out of 23 states for which there are numbers. That is more than half.

I mean, come on. The actual votings statistics prove you wrong. No amount of this or that guy's musings or opinions you paste in change anything about that. Doesnt that change anything about your thoughts?

How can you claim that the reason Obama is winning so many male supporters is sexism when in the primaries so far, Hillary won the white male vote in more states than he did?

Who Won Super Tuesday?
06.02.2008
Who Won Super Tuesday?
--John B. Judis
The New Republic

It's hard to say, but if you put a gun in my head, I'd say John McCain and (very slightly) Hillary Clinton, but the elections revealed weaknesses in McCain and in both of the leading Democratic candidates. McCain blunted Mitt Romney's challenge, but he failed consistently to win over conservative voters. Hillary Clinton won the big states she had to win, and arrested Barack Obama's momentum, but she is going to have problems with white male voters. Obama is having trouble with white working-class voters and Latinos. Here is a rundown.

McCain beat Romney in California--that's the end of Romney. But McCain continues to depend on moderate, non-evangelical Republicans for his victories. In California, conservatives made up 62 percent of the primary electorate; McCain only won 30 percent of them. In Tennessee, 73 percent of the voters were conservatives; McCain won 22 percent. In Missouri, 65 percent were conservatives; McCain won 25 percent. In these states, McCain failed to win a majority of Republicans. And he might face a revolt of these conservatives in the fall. They won't vote for a Democrat, but they might not vote at all.

One group that is clearly dissatisfied with McCain are Republican evangelicals. In Tennessee, which Huckabee won, 73 percent of the primary voters described themselves as born-again Christians. McCain won 29 percent of these voters. In Missouri, 54 percent of voters described themselves this way; McCain won 24 percent. The other group that doesn't like McCain is Republicans who think illegal immigration is the most important issue. In California, 30 percent of the Republicans thought it was; 23 percent voted for Republicans; in Tennessee 25 percent thought it was the most important. Only 21 percent went for McCain. It's not clear how McCain can win these voters over.

Hillary Clinton won most of the big primary states, including California and Massachusetts. Obama won several important states, including Missouri and Connecticut, and, perhaps, more delegates, but many of his victories came in states like Georgia or Alabama that Democrats will not win in November or in caucus states dominated by left-wing activists who are unrepresentative either of the party or the fall electorate.

Clinton got pasted among blacks, but she should be able to win back those voters in November. What's more troubling is her vote among white males and among independents. In California, Clinton lost white men by a whopping 52 to 34 percent. She lost white independents by 58 to 30 percent. In California, 6.5 percent of those voters who didn't vote for Clinton said that gender of the candidate was "an important factor." One must assume that the actual percentage is higher (voters don't like to admit to prejudice) and that many of those voters who would not want to vote for a woman, but who potentially could vote for a Democrat, did not vote at all in the primaries, but will be around in the general election. [/u]

Obama, as I previously noted, had trouble with white working-class voters. In New Jersey, which a Democrat pretty much will have to win in November, Obama won only 31 percent of the white vote. Over 11 percent of those who voted against Obama (a group that might also include some Latinos) said that race was an important factor in their vote. Here, too, one must assume that the actual percentage is higher and that it would be even higher among voters in a general election. Democrats can win a state like Connecticut without winning these voters, but it won't win most of the big Middle Atlantic and Midwestern states without them.

If the economy plummets, and Iraq goes up in flames, or if there is a conservative revolt against McCain, then Clinton or Obama could win with some ease in November, but if conditions are muddier, and if McCain is able to win over the Republican base, then the Democrats could be in trouble. McCain should be able to hold the Deep South and much of the Southwest against a Democrat. He will do well among Latinos in the Southwest (especially, perhaps, against Obama). In states like Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico, he could build a coalition of Republicans, independents, and a share of Latinos.

Democrats will have to win the Far West, the Middle West, the Northeast, and the Middle Atlantic states, and perhaps pick off a border state like Arkansas or Tennessee. White working-class voters make up a majority in many of the key Midwestern and Middle Atlantic states. If a Democrat can't win a majority of these voters in a state like Pennsylvania, Missouri, or Ohio, they'll have trouble winning the election. And as February 5 indicated, both Clinton and Obama are going to have trouble with these voters. Who would have more trouble? My feeling is that it's a standoff. Hillary has less of a handicap than Obama, but she is not his equal as a politician.

BBB
Sadly, there are a lot of women who would never vote for a woman on a strictly gender basis.

BBB

Re: BBB


Are you serious?

You aren't even attempting to be even-handed on this issue unless you admit that there are a lot of men who would be the exact same.

I don't know what's up with ya today BBB, out of character for ya

Cycloptichorn