Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clinton wins 86% of the black vote. It is Obama who bleeds Democratic support if nominated

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 04:54 AM
Original message
Clinton wins 86% of the black vote. It is Obama who bleeds Democratic support if nominated
I ventured over to the Obama supporter's forum and saw a thread making the same argument Obamites have been making for weeks. Obama himself implied this weeks ago when he claimed Hillary's supporters would vote for him but his supporters wouldn't vote for Hillary. It was a thinly veiled racial reference from the man whose national co-chair demands superdelegates of...well forget it. Mentioning another instance of Obama saying one thing in public, doing another in private would divert the thread from its purpose. So I used the friend of those interested in facts, Google. It turns out only Pew has broken down general election support based on race. Clinton gets 86% black support, which is only 2% less than Kerry got in 2004. It is also only seven points less than what St. Obama gets. 7% of 10% is 0.7% of the electorate. It is St. Obama who in fact bleeds Democratic support if nominated. 90% of Obama supporters will vote for Clinton if she is the nominee but only 75% of Clinton supporters will vote for Obama if he is the nominee. Similarly, 20% of white Democrats will vote against St. Obama while only 10% will vote against Clinton--and these numbers are from before Obama was busted as having a racist mentor/pastor for two decades. Assuming 45% of whites will vote Democratic and assuming their share of the vote falls another four percent in four years (from 77% to 73%), 20% of 33% is 6.6%. The poll doesn't even include Latinos another group that surely contributes to the great Clinton support defections. McCain is popular among Latinos. Against Obama many Latinos will vote for him. If we nominate Clinton she will retain this important and growing voting bloc.

For some context, 13% of rethugs voted for Clinton in 96', 8% for Gore, and 6% for Kerry. Apparently 87-94% of rethugs didn't get the memo about DLC members being closet Republicans. Bush won 11% of the Democratic vote both times while Dole won 10%. What makes Obama unusual is not that he loses some Democratic support (and doesn't make up for it among rethugs. He gets the same percentage of the rethug vote Gore got. Did you hear any hype about "Gore Democrats"?) but the degree to which he does so. If we nominate Obama we may have to get used to hearing the term "McCain Democrats" for four years like we heard the term "Reagan Democrats".

Once again St. Obama invited scrutiny on something where the facts don't back him up. Obama himself raised this issue publicly, just as he has raised the issues of religion, judgment, and hypocrisy. Once again an examination of the facts finds St. Obama's rhetoric is not supported by the record. At least in this case it isn't his record that is to blame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lligrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. I Wouldn't Be So Sure After Your Attacks
I'm not the least bit, (not even half like Obama) black and i would have a hard time supporting this BS. You want to lose black and progressive suppot, keep it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:07 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Once again, Obama himself invited this scrutiny. It isn't BS to analyze Obama's lies/myths/distortio
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:09 AM by jackson_dem
Spoken like a true cultist. The data shows Obama is the one who bleeds support on race and bleeds Democratic support. Using the very standard set by St. Obama and his supporters we should nominate Clinton to preserve the Democratic coalition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:09 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. You don't seem to understand that Hillary is not going to be the nominee. She is losing. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:10 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Apparently St. Obama didn't get yet another Obamite netroots memo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. What does your response have to do with the fact that Hillary is losing? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. You mean like one candidate was the front-runner at this point in 1988 before losing?
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:28 AM by jackson_dem
I would mention his name since he was the last candidate to be leading this late and ultimately lose the nomination but I hear if you mention the great man's name it is racist. He must be buried in history to make room for St. Obama I guess. :shrug:

Here is a reminder. The name has been edited out since we can't mention him anymore:

"In early April 1988, _____________ appeared on the covers of both Time and Newsweek magazines. _________ had convincingly won the Michigan primary two weeks earlier. It was his first primary victory in a northern industrial state and gave him the credibility he had been seeking for five years. He could now be considered a frontrunner. Following that primary, ________ led Dukakis in popular votes and was neck and neck with the Massachusetts governor in delegates. And by winning over a quarter of the white vote, _______ appeared to have broken through the image of him as the black presidential candidate."

Undoubtedly the race card will be played at the mere reference to this but in 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 the leader at this point for either party went on to win the nomination. The last time a candidate in either party led this late but last was 1988. The point? This isn't fucking over. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:28 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Obama will be the nominee. Hillary will try to cheat, but she will fail. Face facts and
stop with the little smiley shrugs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:34 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. The candidate who is the choice of the popular willl shall win the nomination
It remains to be seen who that candidate will be. Right now Obama is fixing for a thrashing in the sixth most populous state in the nation...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:37 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. That candidate is and will be Obama. You and the MSM can continue pretending that Hillary has a shot
Cheating, that's her only hope.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:44 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Why isn't Obama himself aware of yet another secret netroots-only "truth"?
Like the one :spray: about the DLC opposing, even fearing, Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:53 AM
Response to Reply #23
29. Here:
drink up

You'll need it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:57 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. The usual spin. Apparently the DLC's top horse in the veepstakes, Nelson, Johnson, et al. and even..
...yes, Al From himself! have not gotten this supersecret netroots only memo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #32
74. Congratulations! You're the first person to complete an exchange with her ..
wherein she failed to use the word "despicable". Also, you appear to have gotten under the skin of the mistress of the smug "n/t" response with your use of the smilie shrug. You would have hit the trifecta if you could have gotten through it without her spamming a link to one of her own posts, but some things just aren't meant to be.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InAbLuEsTaTe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #20
61. She's not even good at cheating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lligrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:31 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. Hmm, Jackson Was A Racist
Funny, you'd choose that user name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:33 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. He, the founder of my party, is one of Obama's Democratic heroes
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:36 AM by jackson_dem
(along with racists Thomas Jefferson and FDR. JFK is another Obama hero and even he appointed some segregationists. All four, TJ, AJ, FDR, and JFK were sexists). Damn. Barack Obama is a racist (and a sexist for the matter) according to yet another Obamite. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lligrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #17
24. Nope, Jackson Alone Is the Racist In The Crowd
Glad you agree about him. Your saying so about the rest doesn't make it true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:01 AM
Response to Reply #24
34. Did you know Jefferson owned and supported slavery?
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 06:02 AM by jackson_dem
FDR supported segregation and sent Japanese-Americans to concentration camps. JFK appointed some segregtionists. These are all facts that surely Obama, who seems to be interested in history, knows,

So you think Barack Obama is a racist for having heroes who were racist when they lived in a time when racism was common? Heroes. That means he will look to them for inspiration in the Oval Office. So are you voting against him now (don't. Clinton's list includes folks who don't pass under 2008 standards either--just like the favorite president lists of everyone outside of Howard Zinn type crowd.)?

BTW, who founded your party? I doubt it was Jackson. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #13
21. False comparison.
it wasn't 'at this point in 1988', because the primary calendar has changed dramatically since 1988. The candidate to whom you refer won 11 primary and caucus contests. Obama has won...count them...thirty (including Democrats Abroad and the Virgin Islands). And gotten more delegates in two of the contests Clinton 'won'.

There are not enough remaining contests in which she has a serious chance of getting the needed vote margin, not enough remaining votes, not enough remaining delegates, for Clinton to 'win' by any real measure (votes, delegates).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. The candidate whose name cannot be mentioned didn't have a much larger margin than Obama does now
He is proof Obama can still lose. The candidate whose name cannot be mentioned lost because after he became the front-runner his support tanked among one demographic.

Wrong. The popular vote scenario for Clinton has been posted numerous times. Let's see what happens in PA. If she loses it is over anyway. If she doesn't win big then the popular vote math is very difficult for her, even with revotes in FL and MI.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #25
37. Posted where? I've not seen it.
You think there is a plausible scenario where Clinton wins either the popular vote or the pledged delgates? Let's hear it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. Definitely
She had a net gain of 230k votes from a 10 point win in Ohio. Pennsylvania is more populous than Ohio, and more importantly she is leading by 15-20 points there right now. Let's assume she wins by 300,000 votes. That cuts the national lead down to 400,000. Then there are Florida and Michigan which she would win in a revote. She already won Florida by 300,000 votes. The turnout should be higher in round two and her margin could conceviably be as much as 400,0000. Let's stick to 300k to be conservative. 300k from PA and FL basically erases Obama's popular vote lead and that isn't getting to Michigan! All of this assumes a relatively even split in the May states. If she wins PA the momentum will be with her and she should win a majority of May votes.

She would need Obama to totally collapse to win the popular vote. I doubt that will happen, unless she opts to pay Obama back for swiftboating her on race by swiftboating Obama on race with pastorgate ads. However she has a very real chance at winning the popular vote. If she does that Obama's argument with superdelegates goes out the window. SD's will have cover regardless of who they choose since they could point to either the popular vote or pledged delegates and they will, as a group, support the candidate most likely to win in the fall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:01 AM
Response to Reply #40
48. There are a few problems.
Obama is closing the gap in PA. Her lead keeps diminishing there. For your scenario, she would have to increase her lead.

Obama wasn't on the ballot in MI, and you think that somehow he will perform worse if he is on the ballot in a revote.

That doesn't even make sense to someone living in a fantasy world, does it? I sure don't understand what you are thinking.

And look at what happened in FL when Obama stopped campaigning there:


http://www.pollster.com/08-FL-Dem-Pres-Primary.php


Your master plan would have him performing worse in FL if he were to campaign there, even with Edwards now out of the race.


It isn't plausible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InAbLuEsTaTe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #3
60. Seems pretty clear. A new day has dawned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
88. perhaps she is trying to become the second black president after
her husband. :sarcasm: what an upside down world this has become. Please, be over soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lligrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Wrong Again
It was spoken as a true realist who has always voted Democratic but sure won't if racism is going to be your winning tactical ploy. Sorry, I do have some standards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:19 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. You're voting for the most racist prez campaign since Reagan to "fight" against racism?
Funny. Are you drunk?

Obama himself made the argument. Using the argument you just made Obama himself is using racism as a tactical ploy. Now we know the data says otherwise.

Ah, the race card again. The only card Obama can play. In order to believe he bleeds white Democratic support because of racism you have to either A) be drunk B) believe Democrats are more racist than independents. He, given the fact the msm has barely attacked him aside from a few days leading up to 3/4 and SOME media outlets on pastorgate (the nightly newscasts all ignored it as did the major newspapers until after Obama gave them their line about denouncing it tonight), does better with white independents than Clinton does. You believe independents, about half who vote consistently for rethugs, are less racist than Democrats? :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:25 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. You have a lot of nerve claiming Obama is racist. Has he ever sanctioned the execution of
a mentally retarded man or defended Bush on Iraq?

Your post is bullshit!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:29 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Only one prez candidate has had his national co-chair ask sd's to vote for him because of his color
Guess who it is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:36 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. They should (and will) because Hillary's campaign has been despicable. You can't
sling shit and then when it hits the fan turn it around to claim you were hit with shit.

Deal with it. Hillary screwed up and she and her campaign have been called on her screw ups. She can't even come out and repudiate a direct racist comments from an actual member of her finance committee.

This faux Wright controversy might have taken that out of the news for a bit, but Hillary's handling of Ferraro's racist comments is a blunder and will be part of the assessment of her campaign's failure.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #19
28. You didn't answer the question. Only one candidate in history has made a racist appeal to SD's
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:52 AM by jackson_dem
Dukakis and Gore didn't do it in 1988. Clinton hasn't done it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:32 AM
Response to Reply #28
43. Because it's your spin. Telling people to repudiate Hillary because of her tactics is politics.
She decided to run a dirty divisive campaign, and she got called on it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libbygurl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #43
65. But to pressure them to vote for BO because he's black still isn't racist to you?
Not that I even agree with your premise here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #28
77. Ah shit, I congratulated you up-thread for completing an exchange with her wherein she didn't ...
use the word "despicable". I should have known better (or at least read the entire thread first). Better luck next time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #19
69. The first thing I saw this morning when I turned on the TV to MSNBC
Was the Wright issue. They showed two soundbites from last nights interview with KO. The first was Obama stating I will not repudiate Rev. Wright. The second soundbite was Obama stating I never heard Rev. Wright making these statements when I was in church. These are just two of the issues confronting him. There will people in the MSM asking why didn't Obama repudiate Rev. Wright. And the other issue is him not being present when Rev. Wright made these statements in his sermon. I would bet the Right Wing will be going through Obama's statements over the past year because it has been reported Obama telling Rev. Wright to stay out of the campaign because of his harshness. I would also think someone will be looking through the videos to see if they can see Obama in the congregation during some of Rev. Wright's sermon where her made some of these statements. This is just two of the issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #15
22. It's become clear what you are
I put flat out disgusting racists on ignore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InAbLuEsTaTe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #11
62. Bingo!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libbygurl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #11
64. Going off-tangent. O's pressuring of black SDs to vote for him bec. he's black IS racist.
Nothing unclear about that. Now, calm down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lligrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:25 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Huh, I'm Not Voting For You
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:26 AM by lligrd
Are you stoned? Wait, after reading your post, I'd have to go with an hallucinogen or years of Oxycotin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SunsetDreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. ...
your data doesn't mean anything without links to back it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Have you heard of Google?
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:21 AM by jackson_dem
Funny. Folks who are so "concerned" about Clinton's electability should know these numbers anyway. Which numbers are you having trouble with? Exit polls can easily be found by searching for "2000 exit poll" or "2004 exit poll".

P.S. The reason you never see Obama supporters offer any data to support their claims on this is because, as the OP shows, the facts cut against their myths.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woolldog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:10 AM
Response to Original message
4. talk to me about numbers
not percentages. She won't lose AAs to McCain. AAs will just stay home en masse. That will be enough to lose Florida and PA. And those states are an integral part of Clinton's GE strategy.

It could all blow over by November though, especially if she somehow wins the nomination legitimately...but I doubt it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
26. good job!
Obamessiah has no chance. But we knew this. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:50 AM
Response to Original message
27. There's something real nasty about many of the people for Hillary
Clinton. Let's see, maybe it's the real insulting tone of the way they discuss things YA THINK? Sure, that's real proof. I say AF (after Ferraro) it's different. Before the racial overtones, the split in the AA vote was 70/30 Obama, after the negative campaigning the vote began changing to around 90/10. Obviously something changed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:55 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. You're right. She was winning the black vote until Obama swiftboated her on race
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:55 AM by jackson_dem
Which will make it ironic if Obama himself is swiftboating on race, which will happen if he is the nominee. There is too much to work with for the rethugs. His pastor/mentor, Michelle Obama's "blacks will wake up" and "first time being proud of my country" comments along with her thesis, and even Obama's first book. These are the same fuckers who swiftboated Kerry with zero to work with. Imagine what they will do to Obama with the numerous sticks of dynamite he and the two most important adults in his life have given. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #27
35. BO started with racializing this primary in NH--then SC--and it continues
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:21 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. Yup. Anyone who thinks saying his record on Iraq is a "fairy tale" is racist is lying
Which is precisely what the Obama machine did to swiftboat the Clintons. The "fairy tale" remark was the most damaging heading into the first majority black primary that Obama needed to win big to be competitive on Super Tuesday (the timeline is critical. The swiftboating began after he choked in New Hampshire. Remember that they were expecting a coronation after the expected double digit NH win.). A close second is Shaheen mentioning Obama's record of drug use. That is racist? What is racist is to imply one racial group has a monopoly on drug use.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libbygurl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #36
66. Yup, the O supporters refuse to accept the overt twisting of Bill C's remarks to make them...
...sound like he condemned the whole campaign, and not BO's claims about his anti-Iraq War stance. That distortion has really sunk into the consciousness of some black voters, alas, since I keep hearing some of them give that as a reason for not voting for HRC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
95. Like the OPer's framing Obama's comment regarding Hillary winning over his supporters ...
... as being racial, rather than a statement on Hillary's negatives with independents and Republicans?

I find it interesting, as well, that the OPer is taking pleasure in their fellow Clinton supporters being demonstrably more racist than Obama supporters. Gotta love the Democratic Party when their talk of equality is actually put to the test.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cooolandrew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:57 AM
Response to Original message
31. So you feel showing off will help that stat stay the shame ...ok
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. Why are Obamites so averse to facts? Obamism is a huge fairy tale. That isn't our fault
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 05:59 AM by jackson_dem
Ah, the race card yet again from an Obamite. As if pointing out another slick Obama lie is racist. :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:23 AM
Response to Reply #33
38. A "fairy tale" that's left Hillary's campaign wounded and trying to device a strategy to cheat. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #38
47. Cheating?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virtualobserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:34 AM
Response to Reply #33
44. you sound just like Sean Hannity
same tone....same talking points.

Hillary campaign....same tactics....namecalling....manipulation

If I agreed with you I would spend my days listening to Rush and Sean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:27 AM
Response to Original message
39. jackson_dem you have consistently stated your facts over
and over again with numbers to explain them...This is very commendable. You remain committed to discussing what appears to be an argument that was brought to my attention in August of 07....Clinton would be able to bet the Republican opponent.

Could you explain what you mean here? McCain is popular among Latinos. Against Obama many Latinos will vote for him. If we nominate Clinton she will retain this important and growing voting bloc. Are you saying that Obama is not receiving the hispanic vote? Thanks...

I've also heard that Democrats will vote for McCain...What is wrong here???? Vote for a Democratic President People....Please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:36 AM
Response to Reply #39
45. Thank you midnight
McCain supports a path to legalization and that gives him a lot of credibility with many Latinos. Remember that he represents a state with a large Latino population. I think Obama would win the Latino vote against McCain but his margin would be much smaller than what we would get from Clinton. The Clintons are beloved among Latinos for their records. Latinos were 7% of voters in 2000 and 8% in 2004. They should be at least 9-10% this time (based on the natural progression from 2000 and 2004. However, Latino turnout has been higher than expected in the 2008 primaries and if this translates to the general Latinos may be 11-12% of voters.). More importantly in political terms, they are concentrated in large states (California, New York, Florida, Texas, New Jersey, etc.) as well as swing states in the southwest and of course the biggest swing state of them all: Florida. If we lose, let's say 10% of Latinos due to Obama (using the extra loss of white Democrats we get as Obama to make this rough estimate) that will cost is 1% nationally but really hurt us in some big states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
41. Obama adds voters from all across the spectrum...
you're 'racial breakdown' bullshit is getting a little tired.

Let's let the people decide the nomiee, sound good?

BTW, your girl's lost (getting stomped several times in the process) 14 of the last 17.

Go team! :rofl:

Hillary Clinton would not stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning a general election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:43 AM
Response to Reply #41
46. Where is the evidence to support another Obamite "belief"?
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 06:45 AM by jackson_dem
The purpose of the thread was to debunk one of the Obama machine's myths and you go out and mention another one in this thread. :)

I agree. Let the people decide. The candidate with the most popular votes should be the nominee. However, it is, as Michelle Obama or Obama's mentor would be quick to tell you, a little naive to think "the people" are a monolith. Demographics matter at the polls in the real world. Don't tell me you think Obama won MS because his message of "hope and change" resonated there...Race is a useful category to look at simply because it covers such large blocs of voters, just like gender (remember when Obamites argued that Clinton bleeds more male support than Obama? Was the sexist? The hypocritical Obama machine didn't whine about that. In fact it is true but the flip side is Obama bleeds more female support. Guess which gender accounts for a larger share of voters?). Age and religion are other important categories but unfortunately there isn't as much data available to us lay folks on them.

I decided to support Clinton after Edwards dropped out because I didn't just buy hype and myths. I looked at the data and political history, the strengths and weaknesses of both candidates and concluded Clinton would be more electable. Obama is weaker now than he was then due to NAFTAgate (goes to his "different kind of politician" brand) and pastorgate (goes his rhetoric about "unity", "getting beyond race" and offers the right-wing a wet dream opportunity to swiftboat him as racist against three out of four voters if he is the nominee.).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
42. REC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
49. What about the new,independent and young voters
Obama has attracted in droves? What will the black turnout be if the Queen wins the nomination?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #49
50. The OP answers the question. New Dems will stay with Hill as will blacks
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 07:40 AM by jackson_dem
Independents are an area where she does worse right now but it is not a wise strategy to cede a large chunk of your base and "hope" to make up for it with indies, especially against msm hero McCain. Why give up folks who are almost certain to vote for you (since 96' the highest amount someone has gotten from the other party is 13%) for wild cards?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #50
51. What new Dems? In another thread you're criticizing Obama for registering them! Stop spinning!
Stop the madness!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. New Dems are good ProSense. Using rethug ringers in a Dem primary is a dirty trick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #53
56. There's the screen name. What about the 24% of Hillary's votes from Limpy Repubs in MS? Obama is
registering Dems!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #56
58. Racial voting. What color are almost all rethugs and who did that color vote for 3:1?
Look at the exit polls. Clinton does much better with rethugs in racial voting states than elsewhere for this reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #50
55. To put it bluntly....
...you have your head up your posterior looking for daylight. You really think that the new voters who came to the party because of Obama will vote for Hillary???

LOL...in your dreams! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #55
57. No, but the data shows 90% of Obama supporters will vote for Clinton
Only 75% of her supporters will vote for him. Of course I understand you operate on what you "hope" and "believe" instead of data.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #50
73. They expand the party
They expand the base - you need young people and independents to win in November. You don't get there with a depressed black turnout, fewer hispanic votes and some white working class voters.

You didn't answer the question - a depressed black turnout is not only possible but likely. Blacks are the Dems' most reliable base and your strategy is to punt them and try to lure them back in the GE. That's a lot more risky than trying to get independent voters.

With Hillary black turnout will be depressed, young voters will stay home, some hispanics and working class whites will go to McCain. That's why sjhe does worse in most McCain matchups.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NOLALady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #49
90. I believe many blacks will be discouraged.
It will be seen as the same old BS and they may stay home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #90
91. I would be
Who wants to vote for someone who uses race as a club?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dcindian Donating Member (881 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
52. Obama's clean campaign encourages democratic supporters
Clinton's rape of the political system has only soured her supporters. Just look at your own multitudes of festering post, not once do you ever put forth a progressive view. It is always anti Obama.

There is a sickness in the democratic party, and your cadre of Clinton's supporters are it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. What data is there to support your gut feeling?
It seems to always come down to feelings, "hope", beliefs, etc. and not evidence with Obama...

Obama has run a negative campaign from day one and that might explain the fact he bleeds Democratic support. Guess what. His chief slogan is "change we can believe in." Odd. Why the need to add the "believe in" part? Hint: it is a thinly veiled attack on a certain candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
59. more irrelevant , mindless empty rhetoric.
that's all you have. Face it Obama is going to be the nominee. If you want to stay home one election day, that's your choice .

You people are getting more ridiculous every day. It's sad to watch your arguments deteriorate into this kind of nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #59
63. sorry but St. obama has not be annoited yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Qanisqineq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
67. I don't quite know what to make of all this
I'm not saying I disagree or agree. I just find it hard to predict who will and won't for whomever. :crazy: LOL

Anyway, the one thing that stuck out for me was that 11% of democrats voted for Bush -- BOTH TIMES. Who was dumb enough to the second time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
68. Did "the google" provide you with the percentage of pissed off
Obama supporters who would sit this one out? The hoards of people being brought into the election aren't turning up because of Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
70. Doesn't Obama do better against McCain than Clinton vs McCain?
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 09:56 AM by AP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #70
82. 2 points better than a candidate who the rethugs have savaged for 16 years
Guess what will happen once they go after Obama...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #82
96. How does your OP make sense if Obama is actually doing better than HRC against McCain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
71. If you think any blacks will vote for Hillary IF she steals the nod, you're insane. And
without facts, as usual. Are you black, by the way? If so, you'll surely understand the growing animosity to her in the black community. No one think Ferraro's comments followed by the outrage over wright were a coincidence. Plus the generally racist tone of her campaign and viola, you have a zero sum game for Hillary and blacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sadie5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #71
72. Your O fight won't hold water
No data to back it up, just talk. Not enough in my book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #71
83. I go by data, not Obama machine myths/lies/distortions. The data is clear: Clinton gets 86%
If she loses the popular vote and the pledeged delegates then you have a point. Let's count all the votes first. If she wins the popular vote all Democrats will accept the outcome (I believe the sd's will go with the popular vote winner).

It is ironic. Obama's machine and his supporters constantly threaten that blacks will leave the party in droves yet never bother to think what will happen if Clinton wins the popular vote and the popular will is overturned at the convention. You think women are going to be happy with that? Women are a majority of voters. We can't afford to alienate them.

Do you understand the definition of facts? Plenty were in the OP. The fact is Obama is the one that bleeds Dem support. Using the very logic of Obamites we should nominate Clinton to preserve the party's coalition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrattotheend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
75. You have to consider turnout
I doubt many blacks will vote for McCain, but if they don't turn out in high enough numbers, Clinton could lose Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, even New Jersey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #75
84. No evidence has ever been presented to back this theory up
It is another Obama machine talking point but the idea that blacks for the first time ever will sit at home doesn't make much sense--unless Clinton loses both the popular vote and pledged delegates and wins due to sd's. A similar thing will happen if Clinton wins the popular vote and the popular will is overturned at the convention. That will cripple us with women, who are turning at clips that cause them to account for 57-59% of voters in the primaries...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
easy_b94 Donating Member (548 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
76. AA turnout is going to be very low. And.........
If I was a john McCain I would ask Colin powell to be my VP. BUT I stil think that BO is going to win :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackORoses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
78. all your blathering won't put Hillary together again
it's just not happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
79. Its the war, stupid.
Obama gets the anti-war vote.


Clinton does not.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marimour Donating Member (696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
80. blacks hate hillary right now (take it from someone who actually knows)
you're crazy if you link you blacks will vote for Hillary. Bill's comments in South Carolina were the deciding factor for most blacks. It wasn't really about NH because most people knew that wasn't racist. But I received email after email about Bill's comments. I know at least a dozen Hillary supporters in my church who switched to Barack Obama after that. I don't know anyone in my neighborhood, relatively large church, college alumni groups, sorority, friends, etc. who will vote for Hillary. Alpha Kappa Alpha, a sorority with hundreds of thousand of members in the US, and a very important group in the black community issued an official statement yesterday expressing outrage at the Ferraro statements. If you watched the State of the Black Union address, thousands of blacks were in the auditorium and they barely clapped. The looks on the audience were angry and bored and people started getting up and leaving when Clinton came in. She is enemy number 1 along with Bill among most blacks. We have a black candidate that is wining fairly and will most likely have a substantial lead in delegates when the primaries are over. If the SD's give it to Hilary when Obama has earned it then there will be uproar. If it is taken from him when he has the lead it will validate the feelings that many blacks have that America is unfair to blacks and destroy trust in the democratic process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cloudythescribbler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
81. "Saint" Obama isn't responsible for what his voters prefer in Nov
There are numerous polls that suggest Obama runs more strongly in head-to-head matchups with HRC. On the other hand, RealClearPolitics suggests that the average lead of BOTH HRC AND Obama is 1.5% exactly (as of today). But Obama is REALLY getting a lot of incoming fire at this point, precisely what HRC folk said would deflate his support to being lower than hers.

Bottom line, ONE reason for supporting either candidate is WHO DO YOU THINK IS MORE LIKELY TO BEAT McCAIN, AND BY THE LARGEST MARGIN? The latter point is crucial both in terms of the risk of a McCain presidency, and also in terms of 'negative coattails' that HRC might render to the party in many many areas of the country (though not in the NE where I live).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #81
85. You are comparing this to what he will get in the general?
You do realize something don't you. This is the first time Obama and Clinton have been tied in the rcp average when it comes to GE match ups. Why do you think this finally happened after over a year? This lends credence to what many of us have long said. If you think this is bad, wait until you see how much he drops after being attacked all summer and all of the fall if he is the nominee.

Clinton. That is why I support her post-Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cloudythescribbler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #85
94. I don't follow the logic here -- my point was that Obama is NOT to blame if many of his ...
supporters, given HRC as the hypothetical nominee, fail to support her in Nov, despite all of Obama's best efforts.

The RCP average as of now shows BOTH Obama AND HRC running about the same against McCain (1.5% ahead as of today). If Obama's numbers against McCain plummet over the next couple of months while HRC's do not, then that might very well be something the SDs might consider.

My own betting is that Obama will rebound from this latest barrage fairly quickly (before PA), and though HRC might still carry PA, Obama will continue to outpoll her b/t now and June 1 overall, as well as garnering more pledged delegates (even if only SLIGHTLY more overall). In that case, going into the convention, Obama will have the MOST pledged delegates. For the Party pooh-bahs under those circumstances to try to install HRC, possibly including jury-rigging some 'special' accomodation to the FL and MI delegates, then you'll REALLY see the Democratic Party go down in Nov.

Looking at the issue apart from circumstances, reasonable observers might differ as to who is likely to run stronger against McCain -- HRC or Obama. I think Obama. I think his positive reception is not just b/c he hasn't been swiftboated like HRC. I think he has a lot of intrinsic appeal for a number of reasons (something HRC has, at least in a backhanded way, herself acknowledged). Obama also seems to be quite resilient as well as adroit.

Of course, as happened with Dukakis and Kerry, sometimes the Democratic nominee has a 50 point IQ drop for some reason as soon as they get the Democratic nomination sewn up. I neither expect this with Obama nor can be confident that he will continue to run and to close as strongly as he has up till now. But the latter is my best guess, which is all someone can do when speculating about future political performance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reflection Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
86. Not buying it.
I can't see HRC drawing 86%. Not after egging HRC into a race battle for so long. The black electorate will be reminded every day how they were gamed by the system (assuming, of course, that Obama doesn't have a fatal implosion along the way)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
87. The NeoDem ("Blue Dog") Extortion racket is nothing new.
I've posted about this a couple of times and some can be found in my Journal. This has become the Corporatist Democrats' scorched earth strategy ... and it has been in effect for over 25 years.

Prior to that time, the "centrist" (a ridiculous euphemism) Democrats eschewed the notion of voting for Republicans. Instead, they stayed home or voted Third Party. Thurmond's Dixiecrats and Wallace's American Independents are examples.

Then came the "Reagan Democrats" ... where the Corporatists (a majority in the GOP and a plurality in the Democratic Party) used social issues as wedges and levers to pursue a "neoliberal" ECONOMIC agenda.

The threat has been that every "centrist" defector makes a TWO VOTE DIFFERENCE (-1 in the "D" column and +1 in the "R" column) while each "leftist" defector makes only a ONE VOTE DIFFERENCE (-1 in the "D" column and either no vote or third party vote - including Nader/Green).

Thus, the Corporatists have found that they can implement a Hostile Takeover of the Democratic party ... as an encore to their Leveraged Buyout of the GOP. It's absolutely no accident that Nader sees little distinction ... since he sees the culminatin of the struggel for control of the Democratic Party. He views the (Good Cop - Bad Cop) SOCIAL 'issues' as mere DOGS chasing the sheeple into their Corporatist Corrals.


Insofar as your ridiculous OM is concerned ... it's an exercise in fallacies and delusions. Clueless. You're a tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
haymakeragain Donating Member (841 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
89. Mix in a couple more paragraphs, that thing is a blur.
Not to mention a bunch of hooey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neshanic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
92. There are so many McCain Democrats it is frightning. They are forgiving the "hug".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
93. You lost me at "thinly veiled racial reference"
What an ignorant statement. Obama's statement was strictly in reference to some percentage of those independents and disaffected Republicans who have voted *FOR* Obama, but would be unlikely to vote for Hillary in the GE.

Your attempt to spin Obama's comment as racial is reprehensible and downright pitiful. I literally feel pity for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmg257 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
97. Wow - more Clinton supporters will back McCain if she loses. WHAT A SURPRISE!
Edited on Sun Mar-16-08 10:31 AM by jmg257
"90% of Obama supporters will vote for Clinton if she is the nominee but only 75% of Clinton supporters will vote for Obama if he is the nominee"


We have been pointing this out for months - Clinton and McCain are near enough they could be on the same ticket - maybe call it the "Scream Team"?? And with so many repubs voting for Hillary in the open primaries just so they have an easier GE, why would anyone be surprised once they end up voting for McCain anyway?


I do not know about others, but I will not let the RW thugs dictate who I will support. We want the change Obama will bring, not a "rethug lite". I am DONE voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 23rd 2014, 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC