White guys are new swing voters

votingmachineAmid all the controversy about Barack Obama’s pastor, the Washington Post reported this week that white men are now the crucial swing constituency in the Democratic primary. Blue-collar white males helped give Hillary Clinton the edge in the Ohio primary earlier this month, and could do so again in the Pennsylvania primary April 22. And unlike in states such as Wisconsin that Obama won, working-class white men in Ohio said that race was a factor in how they voted, according to polls. Is the timing of this controversy or Geraldine Ferraro’s remarks merely coincidental?

57 Comments

  1. Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

    How is it that the liberl party is the party most obsessed with race?

  2. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    Yawn – primaries – bore – yawn – Zzzzzz – stretch – stare – Zzzzz

  3. TDT
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    Sol – I think it’s because we have a black man running for President.

  4. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

    OK
    Polls this early are worthless, However:

    http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

    McCain LEADS BY DOUBLE DIGITS!

  5. TDT
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

    Reg – I hate to say this, but I agree with you. I have primary fatigue.

  6. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    The Democrats have always divided people by race and gender and class.

  7. ghotiphaze
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    How is it that the liberl party is the party most obsessed with race?

    gotta admit, Sol, many consider the American Nazis and White Supremist as liberal–because most actually work!

  8. ghotiphaze
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

    Because rich white males are the only republicans that count, econ.

  9. ghotiphaze
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

    And BTW, Sol, the Nazis and Supremeists, as a group or individually, scare me nearly as much as some of the people on this blog.

  10. Rage
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Hey, YOU! White guy here! Butter me up! Buy me lunch! See if you can bribe me!

    (Surely I can get something outta this! :) )

  11. Posted March 20, 2008 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    Wages did rise somewhat under Clinton after falling for decades under Reagan-Bush.

    So, there’s some logic to the blue-collar vote for Hillary.

  12. Posted March 20, 2008 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

    Yesterday I heard an interview on NPR that made me smile.

    It was a call-in show. A minister said that she was visiting an old man in his home and the TV was on. The news involved the campaign. The old man went on and on about how he didn’t like Hillary. Then he asked, “Who is that n*gger guy?

    The minister said, “He is a black man running for president.”

    The old man perked up and said “Yeah! That’s who I’m voting for!”

    Keep playing the race card, Cons. It is, and has always been, the Joker.

  13. Jed
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

    I really don’t care if the nominee is Clinton or Obama. Either would be a vast improvement over the jerk we’ve got now. And either should be able to beat the zombie the repubs are running without too much effort.

  14. Komrade
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

    Yep, the whites are the swing voters and after Obama’s last shenanigans, they’re swinging over to McCain.

    So much for racial theology. May it rest in peace.

  15. Posted March 20, 2008 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

    “Either would be a vast improvement over the jerk we’ve got now.”

    My dog took a crap this morning that would be a vast improvement over the jerk we’ve got now.

  16. GMC70
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    Uh, MH, WHO is playing the “race card?”

    I think that would be democratic primary voters, and, to be blunt, both Hillary and Obama, though in quite different ways. But you keep that fantasy alive, MH. I’m sure it makes you feel better . . .

  17. justoneman
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

    The one thing that you all seem to have missed is the fact that it is “middle-aged white guys” that ultimately pay for all of this crap. You know, all of us dumb-a##es that go to work everyday and pay our taxes and keep the yard mowed and try to correct our kids, and on and on until we are just plain old tired of it all. The one thing that politicians, and the slimy folks that they breed, should fear is the day that us “middle-aged white guys” get tired enough of it and say NO MORE and quit supporting, with our tax dollar, all those special folks out there.

  18. mrbill
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 6:55 pm | Permalink

    Yo Phil, do you think you could make the FONTS in your next post even smaller. This one is just readable and Im bettin you could make it a couple points smaller and be completely invisible.

    Go back to a San Serif font that is at least 12 point. You do not lack room.

  19. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    mrbill,

    Depending on your computer and browser, you can enlarge font several ways on your end:

    (1)Hold Ctrl down and move scroll wheel to enlarger or make smaller
    (1)Hold Ctrl down and “++” to make text larger
    Hold Ctrl down and “+-” to make text go down one size
    Hold Ctrl down and “0″(zero) to make text go to default size.

    HTH

  20. Posted March 20, 2008 at 7:17 pm | Permalink

    Hal Turner, the notorious racist and anti-semitic is an associate of Sean Hannity. Sean Hannity is an employee of Fox News. John McCain has appeared numerous times on Fox News. Therefore John McCain must renounce Hal Turner lest be labeled a supporter of his racist and anti-semitic views.

    But will we hear this peep out of the media? Nope, because McCain is a Republican.

  21. Mary Caruso
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

    Why is Obama considered black when his mother was white and he was raised by whites? Isn’t he as much white as he is black, or am I missing something?

  22. Komrade
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

    Why is Obama considered black when his mother was white and he was raised by whites? Isn’t he as much white as he is black, or am I missing something?
    —————————————

    You’re missing something.

    Look at the guy’s picture.

    I think the correct term is actually Mulatto.

  23. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

    There will be more —

    A “Hamas” manifesto was reprinted by the “Trumpet” — which is published by Obama’s Church.

    Obama will not be President.

  24. Mary Caruso
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

    Komrade…I get darker in the summer than many of my black friends and clients…does that make ME black? …Nitwit

  25. Mary Caruso
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

    Obama is biracial…not “mulatto”. Do you still call black people “colored”, too?

  26. Rage
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 8:10 pm | Permalink

    Heh, yeah, no kidding, Mary. Race is 99.99 percent a social construct (god, I hate sounding like a postmodernist–but it’s true!).

    Posted elsewhere:
    By the way, practical definition of ‘black’ (and it’s anything but new): See what happens when you try to hail a cab.

  27. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

    Here is what the Moslem Faith REALLY says about Blacks:

    “On the day when some faces will be whitened and some faces will be blackened, say to those whose faces will be blackened, ‘Did ye reject faith after accepting it? Taste then the penalty for rejecting faith.’ But those whose faces will be whitened, they will be in God’s mercy: therein to dwell.” (Sura Al-i-Imran, 3:106-107)

    It is hard to understand why Black people are attracted to the Moslem Faith.

    It is very hard to understand how a “Christian” Church could be so sympathetic to people like Farakhan.

  28. Mary Caruso
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

    But aren’t most Muslims sorta dark skinned? Many are from Africa.
    And isn’t there a similar reference in the Bible?
    I think all religion is messed up, except maybe the Buddhists.

  29. Posted March 20, 2008 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

    Funny you should mention that Paul, the Christian religion portrays Blacks as the descendents of Ham’s son Canaan as a result of being cursed thusly developing their dark skin.

    Paul, you had best renounce your racist religion or you may never serve as traffic commissioner again.

  30. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

    Doug
    My Faith does NOT say that Black people are, in any way, Biblically “cursed” — do not try to tell me what I believe.

  31. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

    It the election were next Tuesday, Obama would lose by 20 points in PA.

  32. Posted March 20, 2008 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    I’m not talking about your faith Paul, I’m talking about your religion. Ever since Origen, one of the first Christian apologists, Blacks have been viewed as the cursed decendents of Ham.

    Since you didn’t denounce the Christian religion I’ll conclude that you fully embrace the racist ideology espoused by your Christian religion’s leaders since you choose to associate with them.

  33. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 9:27 pm | Permalink

    That is not even a good 19th century analysis Doug.

    Only the misinformed and lack of study would result in the conclusion that the descendant of Ham means dark-skinned peoples.

    It is and always was about the darkness of sin and the way fathers set examples to their children and descendants.

    Darkness does not always mean skin color – you have fallen in the trap of false doctrine.

  34. Posted March 20, 2008 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

    Don’t blame me for thousands of years of Christian history. I wasn’t the one establishing the Mormon church on a foundation of racism. I wasn’t the one who thumped my bible as a justification for enslaving millions of Blacks. I wasn’t the one who, ever since the 2nd century, espoused a racist religion by the name of Christianity.

    Nearly 2000 years of Christian history but all of a sudden that goes away in a big “white”wash of denial. You might as well say Martin Luther’s (leader of the Protestant Reformation) book On the Jews and Their Lies wasn’t hateful towards the Jews, it’s just a matter of interpretation.

  35. Posted March 20, 2008 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

    Thank God, Regular, your “non political” church, after it’s founding in supporting slavery finally came out with a statement that African-Americans are not inferior and slavery was wrong.

    In 1995.

  36. Posted March 20, 2008 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

    C’mon Capn, they were probably wearing an American flag lapel pin when they did that. That means we have to accept it and blindly overlook their past. Behold the power of the almighty pin.

  37. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    Doug
    You are being ridiculous, (again)

    Actually, Christian Churches existed, in Africa, prior to any Christian Churches spreading to Europe.

    The Moslems destroyed most of those early, Christian Churches in Africa.

  38. Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

    Oh right Paul, I guess that means all those Christians never wrote their racist screeds. Way to quickly clear that one up. Ishodad of Merv just poofed into non-existence, as did Ephrem the Syrian as did the entire Mormon church.

    I suppose you just hate to face the facts of the history of the Catholic church. The church owned slaves too (up until the 1970s), even used to run brothels. Paul, you must endorse slavery and prostitution too, otherwise you would have left the church. C’mon Paul, try to be consistent in your reasoning.

  39. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

    Nice try Capn,

    I remember Black Church members in my Church since the 1960s. Don’t know before that I was too young.

    We have several Black members in our Church now and a Senior Black Deacon.

    Not that it matters, it doesn’t matter to any one in our Church.

    The only people that appear to be concerned about assigning racism are the Radical Left Libs.

    It appears that the Radical Left haven’t caught up living in the modern age as yet and are stuck in the 1950s.

  40. Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:26 pm | Permalink

    Good one Regular because even the SBC admits to it’s racist heritage:
    http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=899

    But we can’t believe them since they refused to belong to the SBC anymore so they must still advocate slavery.

  41. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

    Doug
    I rejoice in the fact that YOU, just like the Rev. Wright, do repulse the average voter.
    Your hatred of religion and of religious people is obvious.
    Note to those who read these posts:
    Doug is a DEMOCRAT, you know, in that party that is supposed to “bring us together”!

  42. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:31 pm | Permalink

    No doubt Doug, the Southern Baptists in the South before, during and after the Civil War did some awful things.

    How many years ago was that?

    You and I have common relatives Doug – the Crowders.

    Some of those owned slaves ya know in the Carolinas and in the conglomeration they now call Pennsylvania and Virginia/Maryland.

    So, welcome to the real world where our ancestors made some really stupid choices Doug. They owned slaves and pushed their slave agenda for a couple of centuries.

    Feeling not so clean now Doug?

    (chortles)

  43. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:31 pm | Permalink

    “Africa Was Not The Cradle Of Islam
    Islam was born in the 7th century, in the Arabian Peninsula, which is part of the continent of Asia. Yellow Asia and Black Africa are separated by the Red Sea. Here we are talking about two different continents and two different peoples. Islam went to Africa relatively recently, and it is not the predominant religion there. Africans were most likely either Christians or Animists at the time they were brought to America. Christianity has been present in Africa since the first half of the first century. St. Mark, the writer of the Gospel of Mark, was a North African Jew who preached the Gospel in Egypt. From there, Christianity spread all over North Africa, and to the south of Egypt’s borders. The Eastern church raised to the level of sainthood many Africans including St. Moses The Black from Egypt and St. Tekla Himanote from Ethiopia. Eastern Africa was converted to Christianity through the ministry of a cabinet member of Queen Candace of Ethiopia who was baptized by St. Philip, one of Jesus’ 12 disciples (Acts 8:26-40).”

    http://www.geocities.com/islam_facts/ENGLISH/african.html

  44. Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:38 pm | Permalink

    Can’t say Reg, family goes back a long time. But genetics isn’t a choice, your religion is and you chose to belong to a religion that was founded upon it’s support of slavery.

    Paul, it is the Republicans who have attacked Obama on the basis of religion by first claiming he’s a Muslim. Now you guys attack his pastor for being a Christian. Kinda like how you guys attacked Romney for being a Mormon. Harry Reid’s a Mormon, not a peep out of the Democratic Party, nor was Obama’s Christianity ever an issue. Now McCain wraps himself with a guy who wants to wipe the planet clean of Muslims and Jews. Not even a close comparison.

  45. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:44 pm | Permalink

    And
    “The Nation of Islam” is a cult.

    The entire theology of Louis Farrahkan is hate. Moslem countries, of course, like it that Farrahkan hates Jews and bashes Israel.

    However, the theology of The Nation of Islam is not even in line with standard Moslem faith:

    http://arabicbible.org/christian/witnessing_to_nation_islam.htm

    This is what Elijah Mohammed said:

    “Elijah Muhammad told his followers, “The greatest hindrance to the truth of our people [members of the Nation of Islam] is the preacher of Christianity.”14

    In other words, Pastor Wright, and Obama, BOTH supported the writings of the radical Moslem terroriist group, Hamas, and Wright and Obama BOTH supported Louis Farrahkan, a Nation of Islam leader who preaches hate, and who believes that the White Man IS the Devil.

    These are not just words, this is what the “Nation Of Islam” preaches:

    “”Yakub Myth.” A basic teaching in their belief system is the “Yakub myth.” Yakub was one of the council of 24 black scientist-gods. He rebelled against Allah and the council, causing havoc. He created the white race as a race of devils to strike back at the black race. Elijah Muhammad said that black people are not sinners, but that the white man is at fault for their problems.”

  46. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

    Okay Doug, not going to change your mind, but as usual your assumptions, assignment and rationalization are stretching the bounds of disciplined thinking into chaotic ruminations.

    I prefer wise counsel and structure. In my Church, I receive both. :)

  47. Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:51 pm | Permalink

    Nice that you fully embrace your pro-slavery views Reg. I suppose since the Alabama KKK denounced racism that cleans them of their history too. Diseases should be abolished, not given a fresh suit and a pat on the head.

  48. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 10:56 pm | Permalink

    Ah Doug, now you’re getting confused. No where have I stated I embrace slavery.

    Just because you assign them to someone else, doesn’t make them true.

    There is still hope for you Doug, but you are running out of time – the grave comes quickly.

  49. Posted March 20, 2008 at 11:03 pm | Permalink

    No Reg, I’m just using the reasoning of those who say Obama must agree with everything his pastor says because Obama didn’t leave the church. Either the neo-nut conservatives are wrong or the same applies to everyone. I think they are wrong but Paul seems to think they are right. So perhaps it’s best said that Paul thinks you advocate slavery and he advocates pederasts and the hiding of Nazi war criminals.

  50. Regular
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

    Big difference Doug,

    Obama has emphatically stated that the Reverend Wright is his mentor.

    No one on this blog that I know of has stated that Nazis or perverted men of any kind are their Mentors.

    Only Obama has stated his Mentor, and the left has to deal with that.

  51. cosmos
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 11:26 pm | Permalink

    jimmymac posted March 20, 2008 at 11:07 pm

    No one on this blog that I know of has stated that Nazis or perverted men of any kind are their Mentors.

    Is jimmymac suggesting that someone who served a total of six years in the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Navy, is similar to “Nazis”, and/or “perverted”?

  52. Econ101
    Posted March 20, 2008 at 11:48 pm | Permalink

    Cosmos
    I respect military service.

    However, Tim McVeigh and Lee Harvey Oswald were also veterans.

    So was Benedict Arnold.

    Yes, the Rev. J. Wright is un-American in his views.

  53. cosmos
    Posted March 21, 2008 at 12:03 am | Permalink

    econ101,

    Reverend Wright is a much better American than you are.

    You judge a persons entire life, by watching a few minutes of video.

    And you do not even understand what “double digits” means.

  54. Frank
    Posted March 21, 2008 at 5:01 am | Permalink

    [I]“The one thing that you all seem to have missed is the fact that it is “middle-aged white guys” that ultimately pay for all of this crap. You know, all of us dumb-a##es that go to work everyday and pay our taxes and keep the yard mowed and try to correct our kids, and on and on until we are just plain old tired of it all. The one thing that politicians, and the slimy folks that they breed, should fear is the day that us “middle-aged white guys” get tired enough of it and say NO MORE and quit supporting, with our tax dollar, all those special folks out there.”[/I]

    The quote above was the only comment worth reading on this subject.

  55. Econ101
    Posted March 21, 2008 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    cosmos
    Ok, so, you think it is wrong to use words that a person actually says, or words that a person seems to believe, against that person?

    Why, then, do you and other liberals on this Blog constantly quote the dumb things that conservatives say, from time to time?

    We are all human, and we all make mistakes.

    However, this was NOT a “mistake” on the part of Obama or Wright.

    This issue an accurate reflection of Wright’s beliefs, over a long period of time.

    This issue is also an accurate reflection of Obama’s lack of character, over time.

  56. Econ101
    Posted March 21, 2008 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    One in 5 Democrats will not support the winner, if their candidate does not win the nomination:

    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200803/POL20080321a.html

  57. justoneman
    Posted March 24, 2008 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    Thank you, Frank! It is way past time for the working class MAJORITY to take back the power that we have so foolishly let go of. You know, that 87% of us (of any color) that still believes in God, Still believes that the parents should make the rules of the house, and still believes that our laws should be upheld to the letter of the law. We ,as a nation, have a pretty good set of laws. We just don’t enforce them anymore. To many special folks out there screaming for their “rights” Anyway, I am starting to babble and am dangeroulsy close to sounding like some of these blog experts. So, once again, Thank you.

One Trackback

  1. By Vanna White on April 6, 2008 at 11:30 am

    Vanna White…

    Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !…