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 wi