Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The White Male Voter

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
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:15 AM
Original message
The White Male Voter
I'm listening to a re-broadcast of the Rachel Maddow show, and she just brought up a point that, frankly, hadn't occurred to me before. She mentioned the media's obsession with the White Male Voter, and their almost daily insistence that it's critical Barack Obama appeal to this demographic... and that if he can't win them over, he won't win the GE.

Then she introduced the reality check. Facts.

Democratic candidates received the following percentage of the white male vote:

1980 Presidential Election:
Carter: 38%

1984 Presidential Election:
Mondale: 32%

1988 Presidential Election:
Dukakis: 36%

1992 Presidential Election:
Clinton: 37%

1996 Presidential Election:
Clinton: 38%

2000 Presidential Election:
Gore: 35.2%

2004 Presidential Election:
Kerry: 38%

...to be blunt... WTF! So... Democrats have ALWAYS had a problem attracting this voter... WHY HASN'T ANYONE ON CABLE TV POINTED THIS OUT? Is it because it will make null & void that stupid argument along racial lines, instead of ideological, and they'd, then, have to stop freakin' talking about it??? The Democratic nominee will have to do better with this group, NOT just Barack Obama because he's black.

I point you to, ironically, a site that bears out these statistics: The DLC: The White Male Problem (2001)

Here's a more recent article: Clinton, Obama Make Push for the Neglected White Male Voter

One more: Salon: So Long, White Boy

If Barack Obama gets even 27-30% of the white male vote, it'll be a triumph, all things considered.

I really hope Rachel continues to get airtime on MSNBC, because she will bring this up again and again whenever the "experts" go off on this meme. I'm so tired of it I could puke.

THANK YOU, Rachel.

(I have to go to bed, and can't really post from work - just saying, so that it doesn't look like I just dumped the post and ran. I'll look for it late tomorrow night when I can get back online.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
flor de jasmim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for posting this!
It would be great if there were more people as well-reasoned and well-spoken as Rachel on the various TV programs. We have to take back the media!

Instead of a Commander-in-Chief test, we need a qualifying test for people who aspire to be White House speakers, journalists, anchorpeople, newspaper reporters, editorialists, etc. etc. with questions on history, civics, ethics (!)...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
2. it looks like Clinton did pretty good
considering that there were three candidates in 1992 and 1996. At least Perot got something like 15% didn't he (too lazy to look it up, I am). Maybe it makes the case that Perot did take more support from Republicans,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shimmergal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #2
35. Perot got 19% in 1992;
around 11% in 1996. (Wrote two articles on the Perot phenomenon within the past year--that's why I have the stats in mind. :) What data exists shows he drew fairly equally from both Rep. and Dem voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
69. And that is why Clinton won and Kerry, Mondale, Dukakis, and Carter all lost
Anyone who thinks we can win with 27-33% support from 1/3 of the electorate is crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MattBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #69
78. Which is why we are not nominating Hillary
Her chances with the white male vote are even slimmer than Obamas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. The data shows otherwise. In FL Obama is getting 27% white male support, 28% white female support
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 05:44 PM by jackson_dem
White females are a swing group and even more important than white males. We may not win them, although Bill Clinton did, but we need to do well with them. Clinton does very well with them. Obama, not so much...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
3. bed shmed get out here and defend your post lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
4. Yep....I was listening to this broacast today, and I said....WTF?
So we see now that the Big media ain't "supporting" no Barack Obama....them and their pastorbating sorry selves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. Interesting
So this whole BS about that demographic figuring into Democratic voter rolls is a whole lotta nothing.

I always suspected that the majority of white male voters went Republican. Now, we got proof!

I so dig Rachel Maddow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:26 AM
Response to Original message
6. Excellent post, and I hope the spinners and
the number stretchers and the "Fact" wranglers in the H camp will finally stop with this panic about the white male vote as a reason NOT to nominate Obama -

Unless, of course, they still need to point out their belief that nobody will vote for "the black guy"

Gobama!!

(A 56 year old white male working class Obamaniac)


:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Let's keep this kicked.
Perhaps then, the media (who comes through here looking for shit all of the time) will know that the "gig" is up.

Assholes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woolldog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #6
23. A 56 year old white male working class Obamaniac
According to the media you're a rare, exotic species.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:46 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Does this mean I can get some health insurance now?????
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:37 AM
Response to Original message
7. Just emailed this to some of my co-horts......
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 01:41 AM by FrenchieCat


Thanks! :hi:
(on edit....not the milk carton, but rather this OP! LOL!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. That Nascar dad isn't pastorbaiting, is he????
:rofl:

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.......




:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. With his other hand?
He might be. Didn't think of that! :blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. RE: On edit -
ROFLMAO ----

I mailed the milk carton

:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #7
93. just now getting back to the post...
Thank you! I'm going to save those stats so that, when they start spouting this crap again, I can whip it out, LOL!

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
10. Interesting!!!
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. Ain't it tough.......
Barack might end up doing better with the White Male vote during the GE. Losta Soldiers are ready to come home....and a lot of them fit the demographic, that apparently has been illusive for a long time.

Superdelegates and the media will be getting letters from me on this....along with article links and the stats. They'll soon know what we now know, and what they should have known.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I said it on another post -
EVERY white male I know and interact with regularly is voting for Obama.

This includes business owners and software engineers and a cab driver I've known for 10 years and the kid at the coffee shop and the old redneck who is my landlord..These people cross all geographic and income brackets, they are all apolitical MOST of the time. They are the wild card in the GE that will NOT be swayed by the garbage 527 ads and swiftboaters.

Even my best friend of 35 years, a nasty cynic who HATES American politics is actually very taken by Obama and is going to vote for him. This is major.

:headbang:

Gobama!!



:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:31 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. you obviously do not live in Texas n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Well, I used to live in Austin, but that ain't really Texas, is it....
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. nope and I would know
I lived in Austin 17 years :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. My wife and I lived there for 10....
I sure miss the BBQ and the tex-mex....

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #21
27. I lived there way back
I miss the Armadillo and Stubbs BBQ :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #14
94. very cool!
I have real hopes that the horrible state of this country will make voters overlook any casual objections they may normally have, whether it's racial or ideological. *Fingers crossed!*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:18 AM
Response to Original message
15. The swing group is white women, not white men
Jesus, is this really news? I'm trying to restrain laughter, while reading posts saying they're forwarding the material. Basics like this have been around for more than a decade but Obama supporters are apparently amazed...

Clinton carried white women in the '90s. Then they were virtually split in '00 among Gore and Bush. But 9/11 had a very real Security Mom residue, impacting '02 and '04. White women favored Bush severely, 55-44, against Kerry. That was notable because the percentage didn't hold up down ballot. White women were very content to vote more Democratic in local races, statewide races, and even lower federal races like senate, but not for the presidency.

We've rescued much of the loss since '04, but it was disconcerting that white women still narrowly favored the GOP even in '06, a Democratic landslide year. The pre-election polling all year indicated Democrats would win that block, but there was a late switch and I think it was 2 points pro-GOP. Not comforting, that we couldn't even make it back to 2000 level in a runaway landscape of a second term midterm.

There are more specific breakdowns like single women vs. married, older vs. younger, etc. Too much to detail. In totality Obama needs to come very close to breaking even among white women, particularly since he has apparent vulnerability among Hispanics. That group turned our way in '06 after detour among male Hispanics toward the GOP post-9/11.

BTW, I trust you were joking about the 27-30% of white males, a so-called triumph for Obama. Do the math on that. White males make up about 36% of the electorate, so a deficit along your terms simply cannot be overcome elsewhere.

If we were concerned about the white male vote, Edwards was the only major candidate who could have dented our deficit. It's a bit late to figure that out. Hillary would be destroyed in the white male category even more than Obama, due to threatened white males wanting no part of a woman as president. But Hillary has potential to make that up, among white women and Hispanics. If Obama does, he'll be president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. I think that after Hil's team going after Bill Richardson and Obama's race speech
I think that those thinking that Obama can't get the Hispanic vote will be in for a rude awakening. I think there will be a sizeable shift in his favor on that, and during the GE as well.

In terms of women, if they want Roe overturned, then they can choose to vote for McCain.....so we'll have to see about that.

Further, Obama hasn't yet selected his Veep....and that might make a difference. I tend to believe that it will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramonna Villota Donating Member (57 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #16
102. please no
I do not want to see Obama have to stoop down to select a white male for VP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woolldog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #15
25. What makes you think Edwards would have dented that deficit?
Simply because he's a white male? Other white males didn't dent that deficit: Gore didn't, Clinton didn't, Dukakis didn't, Modale didn't and so on. What makes you think Edwards would've been different?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #15
49. All true, thanks
If Dems want to win they have to stop taking women voters for granted. And they need to stop letting their candidates and the news media beat up on them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
95. this I agree with:
There are more specific breakdowns like single women vs. married, older vs. younger, etc. Too much to detail. In totality Obama needs to come very close to breaking even among white women, particularly since he has apparent vulnerability among Hispanics. That group turned our way in '06 after detour among male Hispanics toward the GOP post-9/11.


That is very true. There's no way to know, at this moment, how he'll fare with white women in November. I suspect he will break even, maybe even do a little better. I'd like to see some comments on what McCain's appeal would be to white women - to any woman, actually. I guess it depends on how deeply that residual "soccer mom" mentality really goes.

BTW, I trust you were joking about the 27-30% of white males, a so-called triumph for Obama. Do the math on that. White males make up about 36% of the electorate, so a deficit along your terms simply cannot be overcome elsewhere.


No I wasn't kidding, though I did consider that my thoughts on that would be misinterpreted. Considering that white candidates could get no more than 38%, I think the 1st viable black candidate for the presidency ever getting 30% of the white vote would be fantastic - NOT in terms of what he needs to win... of course he needs to do better to win. But getting 27%-30% of the white male voter who traditionally votes Republican would, yes, be a truimph, in my opinion. Considering how nasty we all expect this campaign to get, it would say a lot about America. I do have hopes that we can overcome the barriers.

And yes, he will need Latinos to vote heavily in his favor - how heavily will depend on how serious the youth vote is, too. Not to mention a huge black turnout - hopefully large enough to overcome any caging or suppression efforts. All these combinations - young, AAs, Latinos, independents, half the women vote, and at least 30% of the white male vote - I'm hoping, will carry him over the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woolldog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
17. Excellent point by Ms. Maddow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woolldog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
22. "If Barack Obama gets even 27-30% of the white male vote, it'll be a triumph"
I think that's setting the bar rather low...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #22
96. I meant in terms of how nasty this campaign will get...
The GOP will pull all kinds of ugly crap - run the nastiest ads we'll ever see, like they did in TN to Harold Ford - we know it's coming, and McCain will either look the other way or "condemn" it, nod/wink. If Obama can get 27%-30% of the white male vote after THAT... I think it will be a triumph. He definitely needs more than that, of course, and I'm sure he'll campaign hard for their vote - and he may get more than that. But there is a percentage of that demographic who will easily be persuaded by subtle - or not so subtle - ads laced with racism because they want to be.

I didn't mean to set the bar low, I was just being realistic. I will be mighty pleased if he garnished a larger portion of that vote. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
26. Interesting and alarming
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:36 AM
Response to Original message
28. The republicans
I see your point about the overall history of this demographic and the Democratic party. They must usually go for the Republicans, and I can't see much to change their minds in the choice between a woman, a bi-racial man or McCain. He (MCain) is really a good candidate from the perspective of the GOP especially since his own party think he's too soft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MagickMuffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:47 AM
Response to Original message
29. I think one of the main reasons is a lot of white male voters Don't VOTE
They just sit it out instead of exercising their rights by voting.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:08 AM
Response to Original message
30. Obama appears more likely to draw more white male votes than Hillary.
For our purposes as Democrats, that is the compelling argument that he will bring more white male votes, and in doing so, get votes that would otherwise go to McCain. I don't see any of Hillary's Democratic or Indie voters going for McCain in the general, in spite of all the noise to the contrary. I do see the voters who voted for Hillary but never vote Democratic in the general election voting for McCain. That's always been a given. They never intended to vote for her in the general election. 10-20% of her votes have been in that category, so they're not votes she or any other Democrat will get in November.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. psychic
sorry but this sounds too Ghost Hunter for me. People are going too far trying to predict the human animal with this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:10 AM
Response to Original message
31. Why can't we just forget about white males this election?
Don't let them run or vote, just this once?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:13 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. I've got one reason...
it;s only personal, but...I still rather like them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. Yes but they've messed things up for 200 years
Maybe we should give them a 'time out'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. Speaking of which
I'm putting you in time out. Once might be a joke. Twice is a character flaw. buh bye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #36
39. Thank you Texas white male.
Because everything I post at 7am is entirely serious and meant to be taken literally.

And it is your job to discipline all women, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #34
37. revolutionaries
in the French and American Revolutions, the drivers of change have all been White Men, so technically, America wouldn't be here having the debate if not for white men. YES>>> white men are mouthy pains in the arse...so are white women, black women, and black men. Rainbow people of all backrounds can be self-serving pains in the backside. We women are far enough along to work with the system and drive change that way, as the Clintons did all through the 90's. It is a little boring doing the conventional, public service political admin thing, which may be the real reason why there are so few black men and women of any race in government. The white guys are gluttons for punishment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #31
38. Because we can't win without some male votes.
Yes, there are more female than male voters. But if females go 60% for our candidate and males go 65% for McCain, then we lose. The gender gap is a two way street.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #38
43. We could easily win
if Dems tried to win more women voters instead of trying insult, belittle and run them away.

Every insult of Hillary because she's a woman is actually an effort to drive more women voters away from voting Dem.

It makes no sense that Dems would want to drive women voters away from the party, yet they and the news media do it every day. Whether they're doing it deliberately or out of ignorance is irrelevant, but it needs to stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #43
45. including women
yes, natural inclusion instead of battle to participate would be nice. It reminds me of the way that all the male Democrats took revenge on Hillary during that long ago debate. It's the first time I've ever seen such a thing, from Edwards to Richardson to Barry. All of them bashed her. Let's talk old boy's club a little. If it is convenient, boys will gang up on girls. Ask any school teachers you may know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #45
47. They're in denial about their party's base
and unlike the WMV, who is easily duped into voting for Republicans who ship their jobs overseas and rip them off, women voters tend to put up with quite a bit of abuse before they stop voting for Dems. In reality, during the years when Dems lost women voters, they didn't cross over to the GOP as much as they just stayed home.

We would be a better party and a better country if we put our effort into courting women voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #47
51. Yes! and I'd go so far as to say...
that women would be better off too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #45
73. Why shouldn't they bash her?
She is a candidate. She bashes plenty. She can take it and give it. Stop fucking turning her into a victim just because she is a woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. because it was 'dogpile' on Hillary...
she was ambushed! Probably due to resentment of her links/power within the Democratic party. Kerry must have had such an axe to grind against the Clintons to immediately endorse the other candidate that quickly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #76
83. Aw, she was ambushed
As Hillary would say, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. The thing is, she CAN stand the heat. There is no reason to think she doesn't give as good as she gets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #83
85. yup, yur right
It just looked ugly and un Democratic unity-like. All gang-y upp-y, not every one for him/herself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #43
46. I'm not for Hillary but I agree with you
This year has really brought out the latent sexism. Well, it isn't event latent. I always knew that Republican men hated women, I just didn't realize how many Democratic men hated women too. And even though Hillary is not my choice, I find myself reacting to all kinds of stuff. Sure, Hillary has her character flaws but look at John McCain! Let Obama stick around for awhile and we will find out what is annoying when the honeymoon is over.

Men do not like strong women, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #46
48. true (added to)
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 07:57 AM by struck_dumb
I think men like strong women, you just have to keep yourself honest. They go too far sometimes, and guess what sisters, so do we.

But that's not politics and politically and power-wise you are right, they are not taking her at face value and giving her the credit she deserves. They are playing funny bonkers with her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #48
52. Honest?
You need to learn the difference between honesty and being the target of smear attacks that distort the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #52
55. yes, I crossed over topics there
You are absolutely right regarding politics, OzarkDem I started talking individual relations there for some reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #48
53. Men are afraid of the First strong woman.
I think the rest of the world - which has already seen women in the top position, probably wonders what our problem is. In that sense we are really conservative. When I grew up there were no women doctors. Now it is commonplace- most people do not give it a second thought or question the professionalism of women in the "professions".

Same thing with the first woman to any high elected office- I remember when there was a woman elected mayor of Chicago (and its only happened once)- it was a big deal and then after a while people focused on her policy. Looking back I don't think people would consider her successes or failures as related to gender. But I still think that for the US- a woman president is huge. Once that barrier is broken, we will see a lot more female candidates across the board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #53
56. As a woman living abroad...
"I think the rest of the world - which has already seen women in the top position, probably wonders what our problem is."

undeterred, you are not mistaken...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #46
50. The sad fact of the Dem party
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 07:56 AM by OzarkDem
is that its base is women voters, but its leadership is still primarily white men, who are in denial about their base.

To see our Dem male leaders lining up to attack Clinton and support a less experienced candidate is the most self-destructive thing they've done in years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #50
58. But there is more to qualification for office than experience.
Look at how experienced Cheney was and he turned out to be a war criminal. There may well be legitimate policy reasons why some Dems support Obama over Clinton. Don't assume that all opposition to Clinton can be attributed to sexism, because that just isn't true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #58
63. Grasping at straws?
She's qualified, she cares about the country, we already know her husband did great things for the country.

I'd say we're damn lucky to have her as a candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. I didn't say that she isn't a good candidate.
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 04:11 PM by totodeinhere
Of course she is. And I supported Bill Clinton and I agree that he did great things in many areas. I don't support everything he did such as pushing NAFTA, but I believe that historians will ultimately judge him as a great president.

And I am sure that Senator Clinton cares about her country. But that still doesn't mean that there might not be legitimate reasons for supporting Obama. You have got to accept that not everyone will support the same candidate that you do. That's what a primary campaign is all about.

I just feel that in this day and time Senator Obama is better equipped to unite the American people and get things done. And that's not grasping at straws. Millions of people agree with me on that and not all of us are sexists by any means.

Couldn't we agree that there are committed people who love their country and want what is best for their country on both sides of this campaign? And not all of them are either sexists or racists.

(Edited for typo.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. I think Barry is a bit of a puppet...
Who's going to be pulling the strings?

'I just feel that in this day and time Senator Obama is better equipped to unite the American people and get things done.'

Which types of things, though. And exactly when? The Clintons are the only politicians in my lifetime who I have seen 'get things done.' And quickly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #65
72. I haven't seen anything whatsoever to suggest that Obama is anyone's puppet.
And you know what. I wouldn't ever say a similar thing about Senator Clinton, and I wish you'd allow Obama the same level of respect. Making such wild and unsubstantiated claims about Senator Obama is not helpful to our discussion.

As to what he will do, the list is a mile long. I will only name a few things since I am listening to Senator Obama question Petraeus right now and I want to get back to that. He will get us out of Iraq and he will restore our standing in the world. He will get our economy on the right foot. He will be a very strong advocate for our environment, and he will vigorously push gay rights such as repealing DOMA. (Clinton only want's to revise DOMA, not repeal it.) And as I said, he will do much more. And when will he do it? Obviously, after he becomes president he will do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #72
75. thanks for the reply :)
I would say such a thing, about any vague nice person who says nice things and says he wants me to be nice and polite to him and just let him have the Presidency, please. I don't like his hubris at thinking that a 44 yr old novice politician is the right person for the huge job. She has spent her life building bridges across her own party and across party lines... Barry has jumped ahead of her in the line. He's budged ahead, like the guy in PE who says 'pass it to me' A LOT, then never passes to anyone else. He is seeming to have no problems with not having a lot of politcal relationships. It feels like he's using her life's work against her, not working with her or his party.

The reason I say puppet is that he is so vague and untrained at the politics lark that he just seems like he's going to need a lot of help to get anything at all done, like Bush. It's an old saying but she's ready from Day One.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #75
91. For someone so "vague and untrained" he has sure run a great campaign.
To have come from out of nowhere to be within reach of beating a candidate who until a few eeks ago was considered inevitable is some feat. And at the same time Senator Clinton has run a very incompetent campaign, and I'm afraid that if she became president she would continue to make a lot of the same mistakes.

There is no such thing as "turns" when it comes to the presidency. That's the same thing that was said of JFK. And like JFK was then, Obama's time is now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #43
57. that's just ridiculous
other than some people on this board, which Dems have tried to insult or belittle either women in general or Hillary? (and I don't believe there are very many on this board who insult women in general either.)

And women voters are gonna punish the Democratic Party for what the news media does? Of course the M$M would like to drive women voters away from the Democrats, because the M$M isn't liberal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #43
60. No, it doesn't make any sense to try to drive away women voters from the party.
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 12:37 PM by totodeinhere
And if that's happening it's wrong and not very smart politically. But it also doesn't make any sense to drive away male voters. We are one country, male and female. For the life of me, I can't figure out why it has to be an us versus them scenario. Let's have all progressive citizens of this country regardless of gender come together to try to make this a better and more humane country for all of us.

(Edited for typo.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #31
42. Agree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
40. the biggest part of the Dem base is women voters, period
Yet Dem leaders and the news media remain in denial about it.

We're being told we can't have our woman president yet, even though she's the most qualified and experienced candidate.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #40
68. Good point. Obama does far worse with white women than white men
That is where he seems to have a problem and since white women account for 3/4 of female voters that will be huge if O is the nominee and this holds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
41. Ad idea: Beer and Football commercials ...
Famous linebackers go to public places and tackle stupid white guys who speak fondly of McSame.

If Robert Goulet were still alive, he could kick around their papers.

:headbang:

(p.s. Rachel Maddow rocks!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayFredMuggs Donating Member (881 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:42 AM
Response to Original message
44. Very interesting statistics Thanks! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
54. ive heard on a couple of radio talk shows..
after the Wright story,Obama lost a bit of the white men voters...and will lose a ton more, once they begin their smear again. And they will.and NO...Obama needs them. He does well with YOUNGER white men...though that is not the bloc he needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
59. beautiful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
61. Very interesting ~~ leave it to RM to find the facts!
K&R... :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
62. Hah... thanks for posting this!
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
66. If we get 27%-30%, it'll be a triumph?
You call a McCain presidency a triumph?

That's less than the percentage that Mondale got, and he lost 49 states!

The problem is that Obama is doing worse with the white vote overall (male + female) than any of those candidates did on just the white male vote. And all of those candidates LOST, except Clinton because of Perot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #66
70. The Clinton numbers are misleading since there were 3 candidates
You are right. Gore won 42% of the white vote (Bush got 54% with Nader getting the rest) and barely won the popular vote. If we get less than 40% white support it is over. Mondale got 37% and look at what happened...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #66
98. yes... it would be a triumph...
...in terms of overcoming racial boundaries. If white candidates can get no more than 38%, why would the 1st viable black candidate ever be expected - in THIS toxic atmosphere, knowing how nasty the GOP intends to get - to get that much? It's not going to happen. I don't think 33% is impossible - but expecting more than that is unrealistic.

He can make up the difference with youth, AAs, Latinos and independent women, but he must win them handily (a lot may depend on his running mate, especially if it's Richardson). A lot also depends on what kind of candidate McCain turns out to be - that's an unknown, and it's not looking good for him so far, in my opinion. And who knows - I may be underestimating the traditional white male voter. I hope I am.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
67. Because they are over 1/3 of voters
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 04:32 PM by jackson_dem
We don't need to win them but if we get less than 35% we are done. Obamites like Maddow seem to be unable to understand political math. You need 270 electoral votes and as a Dem a certain percentage from each group to win. 27-33% of the white male vote=President McSame, just as we need 60-70% Latino support (70 with Obama since he does worse with whites) and at least 80% black support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harry Monroe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
71. I'll be in that number
This white, male voter is voting for Obama!!! :) :toast: :bounce: :headbang: :woohoo: :applause: :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
74. How did all these candidates do?
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 04:53 PM by jackson_dem
Carter lost 489-49
Mondale lost 525-13
Dukakis lost 426-111

Clinton did solid with this group, since Perot took about a fifth of that group, and he won 370-168 and 379-159.

Gore "lost" 271-267
Kerry lost 286-252

These are the shining examples and they did much better than 27-30%. Guess where 27-30% will get you?

The degree to which Obama supporters are out of touch with reality is amazing. This is why they are supporting a candidate who is much weaker than Clinton, or Edwards before him, in the general election. They actually think Obama is as good or better in the general election because they have no clue what it actually takes to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #74
77. right on my Dem friend!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starbucks Anarchist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #77
105. We should call you "struck_down."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MattBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #74
80. You really think Hillary will fair better with
white mail voters.

You really are stumbling around in a semi delusional state aren't you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struck_dumb Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. no, delusions in check thanks to groundbreaking medications
No, I don't think she will do well with them. If all had gone to plan she might've surprised us. Meaning if she'd got in with the votes of MI and FL, and the distraction of the fight for the nomination hadn't been so blatant she might've surprised us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #80
88. better than Obama and she will do much better with white female voters
In Florida Obama is getting 27% white male and 28% white female support right now (and loses badly to McSame) while Clinton wins the state...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #74
82. And Kerry did better among white males than Clinton in 92
Edited on Tue Apr-08-08 05:54 PM by sniffa
and tied him in 96.

If there's still time, you can go back and edit your other posts in this thread using faulty numbers (or maybe just logic).

Don't say I never did anything for you. :thumbsup:

edit: As did Carter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoldieAZ49 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #74
86. so true! the WMV were not going for Obama before Wright
they damn sure are not afterwards. I don't know if the percentage has improved, but after Wright Obama lost 18% of the indies (Rasmussen).

McCain is very strong with the hispanic population (it was his so called Amnesty Bill with Kennedy that pissed off the repub base) and Richardson is no help to Obama on that, he could not and did not get the hispanic vote himself before dropping out.

White females, the soccer moms turned security moms are still security moms.

Not that any Obama supporters care how the population votes in the GE. It just feels good to be hoping for change.

Reality is a rude awakening.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #86
90. That is part of but many of them think Obama can win with 27% white male support
They don't understand what it takes to win. If you are giving him 27% white male support how much white female support are you assuming he will get? 37%? Let's say that. That comes out to 32%. Mondale won 37% of the white vote (and 90% of the black vote and most Latinos) yet they think Obama can win with 32% of the white vote. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crankychatter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
84. beautiful, go rachel
k/r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoldieAZ49 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
87. is that 'rebroadcast' available online?
I would like to listen to it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bensthename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
89. Very enlightening. Good post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoldieAZ49 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-08-08 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
92. kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJSecularist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
97. I think he'll get around 33-36% of the white male vote.
What he needs is to break even among the white female vote. Which is really why I want HRC on the ticket as his VP. IMO, he needs a woman on his ticket. It is absolutely essential. He needs to do better than he has with the white women demographic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #97
99. someone said that above, and I agree...
He needs to break even or do better than 50% with white women. I'm leery of Hillary, though - not because I hate her - I don't - but she WILL energize that GOP voter who might have stayed home this Nov. I think any women who might vote for that ticket will be offset by the Hillary-hating Republican out there salivating to vote against her - even for a candidate they may detest, like McCain.

I wish Claire McCaskell were more seasoned, and not a junior Senator. She would make an excellent choice for VP - tough, smart, Missouri. But her "inexperience" issues would just complicate his own, in terms of how the ticket will be viewed. I like Sibelius, but I think McCaskell has more presence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #97
104. you mean someone like this lady?
http://www.governor.state.az.us /
Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano

she would make a great vp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
100. thanks, everyone, for your comments!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demasiado Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
101. The White male voter is extremely important
When was the last time a president won the elections while losing this group?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-09-08 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
103. i know of 6 republican voters who are voting for barack
they won`t vote for a woman...these guys are assholes,they won`t vote for the fossil because he has`t voted for any veterans bill in years, so they think that obama/democrats will get the job done. white males? these guys fit that white male stereotype to a t
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 Fri Aug 22nd 2014, 04:51 PM
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