May 11, 2008

Why will Obama get trounced in West Virginia and Kentucky?

Given every metric, Barack Obama is obviously well positioned to win the Democratic presidential nomination. And yet, on Tuesday, he’s going to lose the West Virginia primary by a very large margin. A week later, he’s going to lose the Kentucky primary by a whole lot of percentage points, too.

Polling is a little sketchy, but Hillary Clinton should win West Virginia by about 40 points (Bill Clinton suggested the other day HRC’s margin could be as high as 80 points). Polls in Kentucky point to a Clinton victory in the 35-point range.

It’s not an altogether pleasant subject, but it’s probably worth taking a moment to consider why Obama, just as he wraps up the nomination, is going to get his hat handed to him. McClatchy takes a closer look at the landscape in Kentucky, and suggests race is a dominating factor.

More than one in five likely Democratic voters surveyed said being black hurts Obama’s chances of winning an election in Kentucky, compared to 4 percent who said Obama’s race helps him…. “Race is still the elephant in the room, and the Rev. Wright issue hits at remaining racial prejudices and fears that people here might have,” said Saundra Ardrey, head of the political science department at Western Kentucky University. […]

“I’ll be very blunt,” said pollster Del Ali, president of Research 2000. “Even if there wasn’t a Rev. Wright controversy, I think Obama would have a tough time in Kentucky, for obvious reasons.”

The thing is, Ali alluded to the “obvious” reasons, but didn’t want to come right out and acknowledge them. I don’t want to put words in his mouth, but by virtue of his stated desire to be “very blunt,” I suspect the pollster was thinking, “A lot of white folks in Kentucky aren’t going to vote for a black man.”

The evidence is entirely anecdotal, but an analysis of the race in West Virginia produced similar results.

The LAT had a good, but painful-to-read piece today on why Obama is struggling in the Mountain State, noting local party leaders who worry that West Virginians “will be turned off by Obama’s black heritage.”

“My worry is there’s just too many people in this country who aren’t ready to elect a black president,” said Charles L. Silliman, a retired Air Force officer who is Hardy County’s Democratic Party co-chairman. “There’s a lot to like about him. But I’m just afraid that too many people will vote against him based on their fears and prejudice.”

Silliman and his wife, Carmen, are Clinton supporters, drawn by her healthcare plan and her endurance on the campaign trail. Still, the couple repeatedly have found themselves defending Obama, correcting acquaintances who relay baseless rumors about his name and religion.

Carmen Silliman has collected a sheaf of poisonous e-mails that have flowed into her in-box. “We do not need a Muslim to lead the good ole USA,” reads one. Obama is, in fact, a Christian.

Neil Gillies, an Obama supporter who runs a local environmental nonprofit group, glumly recounted the gibes that his wife, a schoolteacher, hears regularly from her students. “They’re convinced [Obama] is a Muslim, a terrorist, a guy who’s coming to take away their guns,” Gillies said. “It’s just sad.”

The LAT talked to a farmer, who voted for Bush but regrets it, but who appears more than a little reluctant to vote for the presumptive Democratic nominee. “Obama,” the farmer said, “just doesn’t sound right for an American president.” The president of the West Virginia Coon Hunters Assn. told the Times he rejects Obama “because of, you know, who he is.”

I’m also reminded of this New Yorker piece from George Packer a couple of weeks ago, about Obama struggling to win over voters in Kentucky.

After [a John McCain speech in Inez, Kentucky], I left the county courthouse and crossed the main street to talk to a small group of demonstrators holding signs next to McCain’s campaign bus. J. K. Patrick, a retired state employee from a neighboring county, wore a button on his shirt that said “Hillary: Smart Choice.”

“East of Lexington she’ll carry seventy per cent of the primary vote,” he said. Kentucky votes on May 20. “She could win the general election in Kentucky.” I asked about Obama. “Obama couldn’t win.”

Why not? “Race,” Patrick said matter-of-factly. “I’ve talked to people — a woman who was chair of county elections last year, she said she wouldn’t vote for a black man.” Patrick said he wouldn’t vote for Obama either.

Why not? “Race. I really don’t want an African-American as President. Race.”

What about race? “I thought about it. I think he would put too many minorities in positions over the white race. That’s my opinion. After 1964, you saw what the South did.” He meant that it went Republican. “Now what caused that? Race. There’s a lot of white people that just wouldn’t vote for a colored person. Especially older people. They know what happened in the sixties.”

I thought about all of this after reading an item from MyDD’s Jerome Armstrong, who has made clear his strong distaste for Obama, and who argued yesterday that it’s offensive to accuse voters of bigotry. “Racism is ignorance, but unfounded accusations of racism are just as low on the scum-radar,” Armstrong wrote. He suggested that unless Obama’s supporters have proof of electoral racism, they shouldn’t carelessly throw the charges around.

Armstrong’s point is well taken. Unfounded accusations of racism are obviously wrong, and it’s especially awkward in the context of two Democratic primaries. There’s considerable anecdotal evidence that racial animus is driving voters in Kentucky and West Virginia away from Obama, but anecdotes are not data.

My only follow up would be this: what else can explain Obama’s 40-point deficits in West Virginia and Kentucky? The states are lacking in some of Obama’s most reliable constituencies, but so are states like Nebraska, South North Dakota, Idaho, Wyoming, and Alaska, but Obama won each of those contests easily. What’s more, looking at county data, some of Obama’s worst performing counties just happen to be throughout Appalachia.

Unfounded accusations of racism have no place in the political debate. But if regional attitudes on race aren’t keeping Obama’s numbers down in Kentucky and West Virginia, what is? Given Obama’s otherwise-strong position, what else explains why he’s about to get trounced?

 
Discussion

What do you think? Leave a comment. Alternatively, write a post on your own weblog; this blog accepts trackbacks.

172 Comments
1.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:37 pm, Martin said:

The president of the West Virginia Coon Hunters Assn. told the Times he rejects Obama “because of, you know, who he is.”

Well, this is an unfortunate organization for this person to be the president of.

2.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:39 pm, Screamin' Demon said:

So West Virginia’s full of inbred racist coon hunters. Who knew?

“Obama,” the farmer said, “just doesn’t sound right for an American president.”

Sir, you’re too stupid to vote. Please don’t.

3.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:40 pm, just guessing said:

This says more about the people of West Virginia and Kentucky than anything about Obama. I guess this is now the Clinton’s base - I hope they are proud.

4.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:42 pm, The Commander Guy said:

According to Begala it would be due to an absence of egg heads and african americans in those there parts.

5.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:46 pm, entheo said:

this is why clinton is still in the race, because they too don’ think the country will elect an african american. and based on the clinton’s long standing work for civil rights this is about politics, not prejudice.

so for many americans it will come down to race vs. age vs. gender. pretty sad state of affairs, but i guess it’s less sad than other options.

6.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:52 pm, Dale said:

Hillary might be holding on for two more victory speeches.

I remember the good old days when Obama transcended race. If the Dems make this about battling rascism, they’re gonna lose. Obama winning the presidency is all the statement about race that needs to be made right now.

7.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:52 pm, jimBOB said:

Obama will win without these people. Both Kentucky and WV are deep red states, and have been for a long time. Neither was a realistic Dem possibility for November.

It’s sad, really. Still, Bush’s two terms already told us that there were a great many people in the U.S. with incredibly poor political judgment.

8.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:58 pm, Appalachian said:

The racism that older Appalachian whites feel is reflected across the nation in the hearts and minds of old white people. This is repulsive to many people. used to spend a lot of time in Tennessee, West Virginia, and eastern Kentucky. I knew some fantastic people who were really progressive on a lot of issues, especially when it came to economics and social programs. But they were racist. That was always a tough contradiction to deal with. Great on some issues and potentially loyal Democrats. Except for their commitment to white supremacy. These are the people Obama can’t win over.

9.
On May 11th, 2008 at 12:58 pm, jacksmith said:

MY FELLOW “BITTER”, STUPID, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE :-)

If you think like Barack Obama, that WORKING CLASS PEOPLE are just a bunch of “BITTER”!, STUPID, PEASANTS, Cash COWS!, and CANNON FODDER. :-(

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary’s than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards

jacksmith… Working Class :-)

p.s. You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you don’t know that the huge amounts of money funding the Obama campaign to try and defeat Hillary Clinton is coming in from the insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your suffering…

You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the audacity, and nerve to try and get quality, affordable universal health care for everyone to prevent the suffering and needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of you each year. :-)

Approx. 100,000 of you die each year from medical accidents from a rush to profit by the insurance, and medical industry. Another 120,000 of you die each year from treatable illness that people in other developed countries don’t die from. And I could go on, and on…

OBAMA AIDE: “WORKING-CLASS VOTERS NOT KEY FOR DEMOCRATS” :o

p.s. I have been under heavy attacks for some time now. But it wont stop me. :-)

10.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:02 pm, steve said:

geesh, if they don’t vote for obama, they must be a racist.
whatever… this type of crap is what he has been feeding people the whole time.
from what I see, he (obama) is as much of a racist as the rest. You cant tell me his “mentor’ hasn’t spewed that crap for 20 years and he just politely listens and doesnt hold the same views. maybe if an acquaintence spewed that stuff you would ignore it, but someone obama looks up to? for 20 years ?
he has to believe some of it, or why look up to him ?

11.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, john said:

I guess Steve @10 did not read the post…?

12.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, TR said:

whatever… this type of crap is what he has been feeding people the whole time.

Really? I’ve been following the race closely and I haven’t heard it once.

Why don’t you provide some citations to back your claim up, steve? Because otherwise, I might just have to believe you’re completely full of shit.

13.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, abiodun said:

Jacksmith:
Who really is the idiot?

14.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, Michael said:

Please, let’s not be surprised by any of this. While Armstrong’s point is well taken, to suggest that every vote against Obama is based on policy, or just a simple preference for Hillary, is, to use Armstrong’s words, to stick your head in the sand. Racism is alive and well in America. It’s got a nicer suit, and it’s a bit more well-spoken than it used to be, but there are still a good number of white Americans - particularly in certain areas of the country - who will not, under any cirsumstances, vote for a black man.

And that’s even if he didn’t have the middle name “Hussein.”

Are all Appalachians racists? No. But many are. To suggest otherwise is pretty ignorant in itself.

FWIW, I don’t believe this to be a prohibitive obstacle in the general. Yes, there will be some states that Obama loses even worse than Demoacrts normally do, but there are enough others that he puts into play that your typical DNC Dem would not. And the huge number of new voters his campaign is registering won’t hury either.

15.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:10 pm, Onus said:

#10:
If this was the doing of Obama, it was really nice of the Obamas campaign to dig up all these negative commentators, and send them to McClatchy. It was also a really nice coincidence that McClatchy fell for it.

I have a word for the only person in the room who sees what’s really going on:

Wrong.

16.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:11 pm, JoeW said:

Funny, for people who don’t like being labled inbred, ignorant bigots, appalachia folk sure like to act that way.

17.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:17 pm, criss said:

people like that are too dumb to vote…i’d rather have them stayhome

18.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:18 pm, Steve said:

West Virginia has some really good trout fishing.

They also have ramp festivals in West Virginia. Every April, they get together and spend the whole day hunting, digging, cooking and eating ramps

Ramps, by the way, are tiny, wild onions. They reek to high heaven and give you chronic diarrhea—and those people absolutely worship them, whenever they’re not huddled up in their neighborhood bars, general-store gun departments, or uber-fundie churches.

There’s nothing in the world like being in the same room with a ramp-scarfing fundie who’s just polished off a six-pack while cleaning out his Remington—which is why I don’t go trout fishing in West Virginia any more….

19.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:18 pm, Chris O. said:

There’s no reason to bend over backwards to be reasonable to Jerome. He’s been bent out of shape on the primary for a long time, and whenever he gets especially cranky about something like this, it’s because he’s on the wrong side of the issue, and deep down he knows it.

20.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:19 pm, jeff said:

Barack will win without these states. Unfortunately the working class whites in the south will continue to vote against their best interests. They will continue to enthusiastically vote for white republican candidates who will carry on the Bush tradition of siphoning money from the middle class and into the hands of the super rich. This time it won’t affect the outcome of the general election because the majority of the country is so fed up with how bad Bush has bungled things that they’ll vote for Barack in droves.

Also, Hillary may win the primaries in Kentucky and West VA, but she would never win the general election there. Why would a racist vote for a white woman when they could vote for a white man (McCain)? (even though if he wins, his policies are going to make your economic situation deterioriate even further over the next four years - unless you’re already rich, that is).

21.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:21 pm, Martha Davidson said:

On May 11th, 2008 at 12:58 pm, jacksmith said:

Poor jack. I’m sure you fit all of the following catagories.

The demographics have established it, and Hillary takes pride in it - her voter base is made up of uneducated white people.

So, here it is, the official “Should you be voting for Hilary” Test

You should be voting for Hilary…

1. If your Mother (Ma) and your Aunt(y) are the same person.

2. If you own a dog named ‘Dog”

3. If a bathroom renovation means getting a 3-holer.

4. If anyone in your immediate family has given birth as a result of alien abduction.

5. If you used to have a pet raccoon, but you ate it.

6. If you have a rag for a gas-cap

7. If you have to leave the house to get something from the fridge.

8. If you have ever had to climb a water tower with a bucket of paint, to defend your sister’s honor.

9. If you refer to the fifth grade as “Senior Year”

And…

10. You think that loading the dishwasher means getting your wife drunk.

Then VOTE FOR HILLARY!!!!

22.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:23 pm, vicki morse said:

Hey JimBob –

Kentucky and WVA are deep red states and have been for a long time? Then how did Bill Clinton win them both twice? Actually, there hasn’t been a democratic president elected without carrying WVA since 1916. Doesn’t seem all that deep red to me. Just seems like a typical situation where the dems are running a seemingly snobby, ultraliberal candidate (think John Kerry) who can’t possible carry a state like WVA — regardless of the color of his skin.

23.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:25 pm, Nickberry said:

You stated “The states are lacking in some of Obama’s most reliable constituencies, but so are states like Nebraska, South Dakota, Idaho, Wyoming, and Alaska, but Obama won each of those contests easily.”… …Which is the Obama campaign talking point.

First… The number of “white” Democrats in those “talking point” states is equivalent to one HANDFUL each… and these people are NOT majority white blue collar workers (who are Republicans), but rather the “elitists” of Barak’s base.

Second… West Virginia has MORE Democratic voters than Republican. The state has historically voted Democratic until Bush. These people are the lower income, less educated, conservative “white” voter who are missing from Obama’s base. You cannot compare West Virginia to the “white” states that Obama won.

Third… Why should anyone vote for Obama in West Virginia when he deigns not to campaign there? In May 1988, Jesse Jackson campaigned there even though his chances were slim to none against Dukakis, the presumptive front runner. But Jackson did it for the greater good…. as he stated then— ”When I come into these situations,” Mr. Jackson said, ”I know I am not just getting a vote and leaving. I am also expanding the horizons of our culture. I have to face that prejudgment every day, even when it’s unstated, which makes makes my candidacy a little different.”

Even though he lost by landslide, Jesse Jackson was courageous. Obama is a coward for not walking his own talk. He has already revealed that he will NOT be the President for all the people…. especially West Virginia.

24.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:26 pm, anonymensch said:

There are battles worth fighting, and battles not worth fighting.

Take the premise that the United States electorate as a whole is too racist to elect a person of color–even when that person is obviously talented and expresses popular policies, and the clear alternative is a continuation of policies the public has unambiguously rejected. That’s a battle worth fighting, and I’d go so far as to say that if Barack Obama can’t get elected in 2008, when the political winds will be strongly at the Democrats’ backs, the country really is more strongly racist than most of us want to believe.

A battle not worth fighting is the West Virginia primary, where you’re dealing with an older, poorer, less educated electorate. Whether it’s simply that they’re admitted racists, like J.K. Patrick, or because racism factors into the decision at some level (”I’m just not comfortable with Obama”), it’s not going to happen for him there. You absorb the defeat and move on.

West Virginia is the Clintons’ version of the District of Columbia primary–which featured an electorate overwhelmingly comprised of African-Americans and college-educated white liberals. As it happened, that vote was held on Feb. 12, and Obama won 75 percent to 24 percent.

25.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:27 pm, Sterling Greenwood said:

From the getgo, despite all the primaries hoopla, this presidential election was always going to boil down to a choice between a third term for Dubya and a third term for Bubba. There’s just too much at stake to allow choice of the “most powerful person in the world,” to be left to the general public. If the voting machines don’t get rigged to beat a outsider like Obama, then big media will spin him into oblivion. And if all this fails, and the outsider seems to be winning anyway, super delegates who in reality control the nominating process won’t comply with wishes of the electorate. They will nominate whom they please. Count on it.

Sterling Greenwood
Aspen Free Press

26.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:28 pm, lou said:

Take a look at the 2004 Senate Race in Illinois between the two black candidates, Obama and Alan Keyes:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/IL/S/01/index.html

Generally, you can see that Obama’s support was lower downstate than in northern IL.
Also, rather amazingly, Keyes actually won a few downstate counties that are both geographically, demographically, and economically close to many KY counties.

The exit polls from that election are rather revealing:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/IL/S/01/epolls.0.html

Many of the same factors other than race between the candidates in the 2008 democratic primary were at play in 2004 between the two black candidates. There were obviously major policy differences between Obama and Keyes than now exist between Obama and Clinton, but if anything, I’d say that Hillary has been better able to exploit some of the key symbols that have united more conservative candidates, whether they be democrats or republicans, with the more rural, lower income, less well educated, and more religious voters of the states where she has a large lead. Even without the gaff about bitterness, Obama would by default be identified as not just a black man, but an urban liberal who many of these rural folk look down upon and do not trust.

It should also be noted that Hillary’s initial support of the Iraq war was much more of a positive for her in many of the areas where support for the war was much stronger. This is all part of what I see as her triangulation strategy going back several years to help her gain this segment of the population. She has been running for president since she left the White House and this is one reason why it is so difficult for her to admit defeat.

27.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:28 pm, little bear said:

I remember the good old days when Obama transcended race.

That was before shillary launched the most blatant racist campaign since george wallace. The democratic party has to accept some responsibility here - there are plenty of issues where the dems have clear advantages - ideas and policies that most of America consistently support.

We do not need to pander to the most ignorent, racist people in America. Our “decider,” dur chimpfurher is the lest respected president and has the lowest popular support in modern times - mclame is promising to be more of the same.

We can win big in 2008 (White House, Senate, House) without pandering to folks that undermine the credibility of the party and the change that the vast majority of Americans support (no more war in Iraq, healthcare for all, an economy that allows working families to raise their children with dignity).

If shillary ran a respectful campaign that didn’t play on race, perhaps more in these states wouldn’t worry about the color of Obama’s skin. She did not cause racism in those states, but she is playing up to it big-time.

The clintons have lost a lot of respect from people all over America - she did not have to go negative like she did and doing so has made it impossible to be a “uniter.”

It really does not matter what WV or KY says - if they stand for racism and more of the status quo, they are actually irrelevant in 2008.

Shillary could have run a campaign where she generated respect and support for demicratic ideals - she chose not to.

28.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:28 pm, MAX PRIDE said:

I’m not American but I’m learning that West Virginia is probably the most racist state in the United States, Though this wont stop Obama being elected as 44th President of the Unite States.

29.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:28 pm, JR said:

jacksmith…..I have another one for you.

If you put a smiley face at the end of every comment.

You ARE an idiot.

30.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:29 pm, marcsa said:

I’d vote for Obama even if I was racist. That’s how good he is ;-)

31.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:32 pm, TR said:

Jacksmith: Who really is the idiot?

I think you need to remove the punctuation from that.

32.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:33 pm, Jules said:

Excellent thoughtful writing. Racism will affect voting in West Virginia and Kentucky. But to dismiss the electorial results from these states with unproven charges of racism is a more insidious prejudice because such thinking is the future of racism rather than the past. A vote is a vote. A state won has to be acknowledged as a full-fledged victory. According to the electorial math, Senator Obama is better investing time and energy in Oregon, Montana and the General Election swing states. But come Tuesday, I’ll be respecting my fellow voting Americans in West Virginia without prejudicial caveat.

33.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:34 pm, Moysh said:

I reject the lable of “racists” thrown at Hilary supporters. What has Obama accomplished?

34.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:35 pm, Obama44thpresident said:

Yes indeed, it’s sad to say but race is still a real problem in this country. It’s truly pathetic that people who call themself “intelligent” aren’t able to judge based on the content of one’s character rather than the color of one’s skin.

It’s equally pathetic that some are so blinded by Sen. Obama’s heritage that they can’t see that he’s the best hope of everyone in American experiencing shared prosperity.

I’t time for REAL change in Washington, it’s time for Barack Obama for president!
http://barackobama44thpresidentofusa.blogspot.com/

35.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:35 pm, jurisdoctor said:

West Virginia? Is that a state? Forget Obama, I dont think anybody cares what people think in West Virginia. We should take all the garbage in NJ and start dumping it there. It is already full of white trash. And Kentucky? That’s just like a suburb of West Virginia. These are people that vote for Republicans and Hillary. I wondurrr what they see in hurrr?

36.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:35 pm, oklgsd said:

What about hussian obama is there to vote for. he talks of change in every speech and whicte idiots go ape ____ over him. the mans had 4 yrs in congress, spent time in the ill. govt. and was rally quiet silent on change. infact he was just one of the good ole liberal boys who didn’t rock the boat. and not his contest for the presidency was kicked off by non other than the number one liberal ass of all times “ted kennedy.
I personally don’t know what is wrong with the people in the west who voted for him in such large numbers other than they think he would be an easier canadate to beat in the general election I supect those republican cross over votes will vote the same number for mccain in november.
It’s obvious hussian obama doesn’t have any platform other than keeping clinton out of office. the blacks have cut their own throats as they are probe to doin supporting a man who is running as a balck canadate but in reality is much more white in culture and only half white in reality.
Hussians’s racism speakes for himself when he talks of his white grandparents on his mothers side and his grandparents when talking of his fathers side.
Hilery is not a good choice for president nor is mccain but next to hussian obama they both shine like beacon lights. wake up people before it’s too late.

37.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:37 pm, jurisdoctor said:

Read the comment above— Point made

38.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:38 pm, Miri said:

I support Obama for president, but that is not what this post is about.
I am a New Yorker. I apologize to all the hardworking people white or not whom my Senator has defamed. While she believes that white people w/o college degrees are racist, I know that is untrue.
I am puzzled as to working people supporting a former Wal-Mart board member corporate lawyer over person who chose community law when he could have made millions working in the corporate world. I suspect it is because people credit her with her husband’s achievements and forget the turmoil he inflicted on the country when he was president largely because she neglected to keep him out of trouble. (Sorry to be sexist but we women have to do that w/ our men)
However, I would never attribute racist motives to the decent people of this great country and I apologize that the Senator from my state has done so. I admit that I campaigned and voted for her. I will not do so again. She is not a typical New Yorker. We are better than that.

39.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:40 pm, Henry said:

I spent my teenage years in Radcliff KY and went to college in Huntington, WV. Some of the sweetest people I have met in my life were found in these two states. But at the same time, there are some of the most stubbornly ignorant Americans in these two states. And what impressed (or depressed) me most is that they LIKE it that way. The allow the coal barons to rape their land and poison their water. The “cancer valley” in WV is just a disgrace, but what do the people care so long as it brings jobs. May kill their children or their children’s childre, but at least we have a job today. No vision, no foresight. Just dumb. And once they hear a rumor (no matter how outlandish), it is FACT for generations to come. Just listen to them: “We aren’t racists, but by god we won’t vote for a black man.” Just sad and depressing in the 21st century.

40.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:42 pm, Rick Dickinson said:

Racism? Maybe some. But there are a lot more issues at play than just that. Check out this very insightful article on Appalachian politics/issues: http://bluenc.com/obama%2C-go-there.

41.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:43 pm, Henry said:

One word I hope WV will recall this year and never forget again: Matewan.

42.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:44 pm, MP Girl said:

Senator Clinton’s campaign pandered to the WORST in Americans with regard to race, gender, socio-economic class…….and she had quite a bit of help from the so-called “patriotic” conservative extreme media to help Americans think that a true patriot always wears an American flag pin on their lapel (which, by the way, I have YET to see on the lapels of Clinton or McCain) and worships in a church that would never call out sin, even if it is the sin of the nation (which, by the way, the bible is FULL of prophets who stood before the kings of the land and its people to tell them that their policies and way of life was sinful and an abomination before God….and one of those prophets was……..guess…….JEREMIAH! And then of course, let us NOT forget Jesus, who was fed to the political establishment by the politico/religious establishment of his own people).

The hypocrisy of this nation and what we say we stand for is sickening at times, and is precisely why we may never reach the greatness to which I truly believe God plans for us to be. As long as we continue to divide ourselves in a negative way along lines that are supposed to STRENGTHEN us, we will go down in history as the most publicly failed experiment in freedom and democracy, and we can look back on this campaign knowing that this is where the failure got its traction.

43.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:46 pm, Just reality said:

When it comes to race and understanding I am better than my parents were, my parent were better than theirs and my children are better than me.

States like WV, KY, MI, OH and so on are loosing their younger population. These are states that really do not have much of a future for young people and the traditional industrial base of coal, steel and cars is not work that attracts young people.

The states of the Midwest are loosing their best and brightest to other states and unfortunately are on the way to being non effective in the near future.

Even things like Auto Manufacturing is heading south. Life is changing in the USA and some states are not changing yet. No parent wants their child to grow up to go undround in the coal mine, nor does any child dream of growing up to mine coal.

Life in these states is tough and these are good hard working people, the change is tough, it is not the people are bad, just they are not changing fast…..

44.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:46 pm, Mr. K said:

Leave it to the smartest and brightest region in our country…they represent “true America”…how disgusting! This is exactly why I will have will NOTHING to do with these regions of our nation!

45.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:46 pm, Obama44thpresident said:

What has Obama accomplished? start by checking out these sites for the answer:

20+ years of public service: http://www.obamapedia.org/page/Does+Barack+Obama+have+enough+experience+to+be+president%3F?t=anon

Illinois Senate and U.S. Senate record: http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/01/14/obamas_strong_record_of_accomp.php

Illinois Senate career of Barack Obama: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama

U.S. Senator Barack Obama: http://obama.senate.gov/

Obama’s Community Roots: http://www.barackobama.com/2007/04/03/obamas_community_roots.php

I’t time for REAL change in Washington, it’s time for Barack Obama for president!
http://barackobama44thpresidentofusa.blogspot.com/

46.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:46 pm, Aspen Palin said:

The slippery thing about the racism issue is that it cannot be measured, and so folks who know it’s an issue but are ashamed of it can say things like “Racism is ignorance, but unfounded accusations of racism are just as low on the scum-radar,”. Not many people will admit to being a racist even when they are one, because they know it’s something to be very ashamed of, and therefore it becomes an element in the process that can’t be measured. Being from such areas as mentioned in this article, I can say that yes, in fact racism is the BIGGEST hurdle Obama has in these states, and shamefully for them he will be unable to overcome it. Hillary will also prey on those ill-advised sympaties and make them stronger to leverage her standings in those regions. After watching the Clinton Camp in Indiana and Pennsylvania milk that card to sway all those white voters on the “race fence” I have no doubt that she’ll do it again in the remaining appalachian staes.

47.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:47 pm, bobbinn said:

We should stop thinking of Obama as African-American and start thinking of him as quintessential-American, a person of mixed ethnic heritage (like almost everyone else) who found opportunity for success in our nation and seeks to assure that others are afforded similar opportunity.

48.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:47 pm, MP Girl said:

Oh, and by the way, I do believe Obama does himself and this nation a disservice by not campaigning in WV and KY, regardless as to whether or not HRC is slated to “win big” in these states. If Obama believes that he may be the nominee, he’s running to be president of the United States, of which, WV and KY are a part. Regardless as to the ignorance of some (if not many) of these voters, he has to make an effort (even if it is a symbolic or failed one) to reach out to its citizens. By not going, he leaves it wide open for Clinton and people like her to spread their venom.

49.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:48 pm, semidi said:

A few anecdotal examples of racism in Kentucky and West Virginia are cited and the implication is that ALL people living in those states are ALSO racist? That’s like saying that every Obama supporter I’ve met has behaved like a right-wing troll/cult member, therefore ALL Obama supporters are the same.

I’m sure it never occurred to Obama’s devotees that people might actually look at the three candidates and see Obama’s lack of experience, his arrogance, his spotty record, his inability to handle the stresses of a 24/7 campaign and say, “I don’t want this guy in the White House.”

Maybe they look at Mr. Uniter and see how he and his worshipers have divided his own party and think, “This guy can’t even work with Democrats, there’s no way he can work with Republicans.”

Perhaps Obama’s ties to Rezko, Ayers, and Wright have Kentuckians and West Virginians — like roughly 50% of the 32 million-plus who’ve voted already — deciding to take a pass on him?

No, no. It MUST BE that ANYONE who doesn’t think Barack Obama walks on water is a RACIST. At least that’s the implication here.

I simply can’t take this blog seriously anymore.

50.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:51 pm, Henry said:

Here is the real tragedy: Hillary Clinton is probably a good person. But to achieve her long-standing dream of being president she will say some very strange, even destructive things. And her husband. Good lord! This is a man who received a 20-something intern on her knees, mouth open, to catch his spunk in the Oval Office pantry. That is his lasting legacy, along with a penchant for stabbing his friends in the back when it is politically expedient. Remember Lani Guanier?

51.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:54 pm, Danp said:

I’ll go out on a limb and say that Obama won’t lose in WV as badly as the polls suggest. But first, this is primarily a Dem state at least by registration. That said it is certainly not a progressive state. Once you get past labor and sometimes environment, WV dems aren’t your typical Dems. Here are some of the reasons I don’t think it will be that lopsided:
1) Obama’s supporters are mostly on campuses, but they are organized and energized. Many of Hillary supporters are also, but the demographics that favor her are largely unengaged. While they may not trust Obama, they don’t love Hillary and their default position is to not trust government. Since the media has largely portrayed the race over, expect many to stay home.
2) Other than local races, the Dem’s have no high profile contests.
3) The smallest delegate pools are Congressional Districts. Therefore, high concentrations of Obama supporters in college towns won’t hurt him as much as they would in states where delegates are decided on a precinct or countywide basis.
4) There are three Congressional Districts. Each gets 6 delegates. I believe you need over 60% to break a 3-3 tie. After that there are 7 decided based on the statewide popular vote. 4-3 is more likely than 5-2. The last three are decided by party leaders.
5) Party leaders are far more split than the overall polls suggest. I would be somewhat surprised if even Clinton supporters are going to want a blowout.
6) Reps can’t vote in the Dem primary. Inds can, but for the first time ever. In the past they could only vote in Rep primaries. My impression is that most Inds here are disgruntled Reps. Therefore, the likelihood of a Limbaugh effect will be small.
7) Politicians regularly play on people’s religion and distrust of Washington. But Hillary is not nearly as good at this as, say Sen Byrd or Gov Manchin. Sen. Rockefeller, by contrast, represents everything West Virginians should hate, if you use the Hillary metrics. He’s wealthy from inheritance. He’s Ivy League (Harvard). He’s a carpetbagger (NY), not that there’s anything wrong with that :).

I could be wrong. Hillary’s strong point here is that she is perceived as strong on economy. But I do think the race thing is overplayed.

52.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:57 pm, Linda said:

You bigots make me sick! I was born in the south and grew up in the south and thankfully I escaped and never looked back! Obama doesn’t need your votes. He’s going to win anyway so get over it.And you can’t fool me. None of you idiots would ever vote for a woman either.

53.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:58 pm, episty said:

If South Africa can elect Nelson Mandela as President, then we can elect Obama. Sure race is gonna be part of the equation, but not a deciding factor IMO. Pretoria has its Afrikaners, we have our Appalachians. Their votes will be counted, but their votes will also be overwhelmed by saner votes.

54.
On May 11th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, Henry said:

Here’s a question: She will not be president or even a candidiate. Now, given the way she, her husband, and their surrogates have approached this campaign, will NY want her back? Even with all their problems this season, a strong republican could unseat her in the next go ’round up there.

55.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:02 pm, Mark Pencil said:

“They’re convinced [Obama] is a Muslim, a terrorist, a guy who’s coming to take away their guns,” Gillies said. “It’s just sad.”

Um, really these folks should never have been allowed to have guns to begin with. That’s just scary.

56.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:04 pm, Allisio Rex said:

Obama has a secret agenda and every White is falling in its trap. I agree that,if elected President, it will not happen, he will appoint Blacks and other minorities in all the highest position of office from the Judiciary and down making Whites subservient to a third world bunch of invaders. It will be a disaster for our survival as a civilized society.

America will no longer be the same. This man is evil and with his “charm” and false promises of a better America through “changes” he is fooling millions of Whites who otherwise would have rejected him long ago.

The poor and middle class is surely suffering because of a bad economy, open border immigration and its cost in zillions of dollars and he is capitalizing on White’s frustration and their desire for a savior. Obama, who refuses to salute the U.S. Flag, first generation non-White,friend of Muslims will not be their savior.

As President, this anti-American Obama will not bring about any positive changes as his style of expression will lead to confrontation with Congress and nothing will happen. I urge my fellow compatriots to look closed at who this Obama really and I applaud my fellow Americans in Kentucky and West Virginia for being Patriots.

57.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:14 pm, MissLaura said:

Some of the comments here are truly sickening in their anti-southern bigotry. People should be ashamed of themselves for the inbreeding and ignorance jokes.

But there’s definitely a regional voting pattern here, which DHinMI has written about in some detail at Daily Kos. I think he’s working on a follow-up, but here’s the main thing he’s written on the subject.

58.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:14 pm, little bear said:

wow - who let the knuckle-draggin rex in? Makes greg, mary, and even IFP sound - well actually, sounds just like what greg, mary, and IPF proclaim - just more direct.

IFP is satire - the only excuse for these remarks is total ignorance.

Damn - we need better trolls.

59.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:16 pm, sheryl said:

It is a crying shame that people do not recognize and claim the caucasian side of Barack. Barack grew up as a White boy; was brought into this world of human beings by a White mother raised by her and her White parents; was basically raised his White grand parents, who instilled White values in him; grew up in Hawaii; went to an all-White school in Hawaii with all White friends.

For crying out loud, He is white by half of his DNA and by cultural osmosis. Barack did not want his name to be Barack for a long time. He went by the name of Barry that his grandparents and mother called him. His mother only gave him the name Barack for his father’s sake, who abandoned them when he was only one and a half years old. He was not raised up in an African culture, or an African American culture, but rather in White American culture in Kansas.

Do you realize that about 33 1/3 of all White Americans have an African ancestor? When I attended Ohio State years ago in the 1960’s to be exact, the professor of sociology (a white professor) was reading from our text book that stated that 25% of all white Americans have at least one African ancestor. He took off his glasses and stated that it was more like 33 1/3%. If that was what statistics showed in 1960, what is it now? If some of us white people would check our ancestors’ DNA we would realize that most of us are partially colored, and stop this xenophobic attitude about Black people in this country. As the poet, Rupyard Kiplping, once stated in one of his poems: For we are them, and they are we.

I guess only when the space creatures invade us will we realize that we are from the same race, the human race. Come on people, wise up! See Barack for what he really is, a descent human being, like the majority of all human beings.

Why do you think so many of us vote for him? Because there is something about him that we can relate to. Culture is stronger than race, thus, if you don’t want to claim him as one of our own, racialy speaking, admit that he is one of us culturally.

After Barack left Hawaii and came to live in the U.S. with his White mother and his White grandparents, he was pushed into a racial corner and categorized as an African American. He was then forced to choose a social life as an African American, a culture that was as foreign to him as to other Whites.

All of Europe is waiting to see what we do in this election. My daughter just came back from France with the Knights of Malta, and she stated that unlike other years, the French were so friendly to the Americans. Why do you think that is?

It is time for us to restore our credibility on the world stage, and the best way to do this is to elect Barack (Barry) Obama who represents a great part of the world stage, White (Kansas), Oriental (Indonersia and Hawaii) and African American culture (the corner that he was pushed into upon his arrival in the good ole U.S.A. I am certainly glad that the majority of Whites in this country do not think like the majority of White people that are presently contributing to this blogg on this fine Mother’s Day.

Barack’s Irish ancestors are probably turning over in their graves for what you are doing to their grandson, great grandson, great great grandson, and great great great grandson.

For shame! I woudn’t be surprised if the majority of these racist statements are coming from Whites with some African Ancestry. You just don’t know it, or maybe you do, for ye thus protesteth too loud.

60.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:17 pm, little bear said:

MissLaura - maybe the inbreeding, but ignorance is ignorance. Stoooooopid is as stoooooooopid does.

There is nothing wrong with talking or joking about things that can be empirically demonstrated, especially when the ignorance results in an objective behavior (i.e. voting) that is the underlying theme of the thread.

61.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:19 pm, RonChusid said:

Race is one issue, but there are other factors which make West Virginia more susceptible like Clinton’s conservative base than friendly towards Obama. There’s a reason why it was in West Virginia that the Republicans were successful in 2004 with mailers claiming that if elected John Kerry would take away their bibles as well as guns. I would not expect Obama to pick up many votes in West Virginia, and while he would do better if white he would still lose there. Regardless of the primary results, Clinton still would not be able to take the state going up against a Republican in the general election.

I wrote more on the Hillbillies for Hillary at Liberal Values yesterday:

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=3253

62.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:20 pm, Amazed said:

(SA4615 - Prohibition On Confiscation Of Firearms) - Hillary voted against this law to prevent government confiscation of legally owned guns from citizens. As a gun owner, I am amazed that gun owners anywhere voted for her. I am also amazed that anyone who values truth and integrity would vote for her. ‘What is past is prologue’ - WS.

63.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:22 pm, Micheline said:

On Monday, Obama will be campaining in West Virginia.

64.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:25 pm, keith said:

WV AND KY ARE CLINTON COUNTRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama said any place he goes is Obama country ,just another Obama lie……….

Clinton could win in the general election and WV and KY would vote democrat again…….

No way they will vote for Obama !!!!!!

65.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:28 pm, Brian said:

I’m conflicted by this. I’ve heard several people say that Obama can’t win because the middle of the country is far more racist than we could ever imagine, but I have to wonder, exactly how many people who would fit into this group would we get votes from anyway? West Virginia and Arkansas were two states in 2004 that received those fliers which said the liberals were going to ban the Bible. They were also states tat Bush won by double digits. I have to imagine there’s a fair amount of overlap between someone who would be swayed by that ridiculous argument and someone who wouldn’t vote for Obama because he is black. (This is not to say that all or even most of people in states like West Virginia are ignorant or racist, just that there’s probably a good chance that if you believe one stupid idea, you’ll probably believe another.) And even if the effects were solidly damaging, could they be overcome by a swarm of other voters?

66.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:28 pm, Mr. Unite Us said:

Bill Clinton agrees with Barack Obama regarding rural America?

Video
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/04/god-gays-and-gu.html

Transcript of Bill Clinton’s comments.

2004, on “God, gays, and guns”:

When I left office, about two-thirds of the people supported the general direction we had taken. The election of 2000 was 50-50 in part because they’re much more closely divided if you can the case should we cut taxes or not, instead of what are the consequences of a tax cut. And they are much more divided on the cultural issues. As my Democrat (sic) friends from Oklahoma say, “God, gays, and guns.”

2004, on southern white racism:

In the mid- to late- 70s, most of the white Southerners who were anti-civil rights had migrated by then to the Republican Party…then the religious right came up in the 70s as a potent political force…they thought they had found a permanent way of holding the White House.

2007, on link between jobs and anti-trade, anti-immigrant politics

So there’s a lot of economic anxiety, in the Republican Party it expresses itself as this sort of very hard line against immigration, in the Democratic Party it expresses itself in this very hard line against trade, but the real problem is we haven’t created enough good new jobs.

(The 2004 footage was from the June 16, 2004 premiere of The Hunting of the President in New York City’s Skirball Center for the Performing Arts on the NYU campus. 2007 footage from The Charlie Rose Show.)

Barack Obama on the Charlie Rose Show in 2004 discusing
rural America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

Do you agree with what Obama?

Transcript of Obama’s Remarks at San Francisco Fundraiser Sunday
April 11, 2008

OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it’s fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people are most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre…they’re misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to ‘white working-class don’t wanna work — don’t wanna vote for the black guy.’ That’s…there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today - kind of implies that it’s sort of a race thing.

Here’s how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long. They feel so betrayed by government that when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn’t buy it. And when it’s delivered by — it’s true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism.

But — so the questions you’re most likely to get about me, ‘Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What is the concrete thing?’ What they wanna hear is so we’ll give you talking points about what we’re proposing — to close tax loopholes, uh you know uh roll back the tax cuts for the top 1%, Obama’s gonna give tax breaks to uh middle-class folks and we’re gonna provide healthcare for every American.

But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. *And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.*

Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you’ll find is, is that people of every background — there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you’ll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I’d be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you’re doing what you’re doing.

Do you agree with Obama?
Do you think Obama was attempting to ridicule rural America on the Charlie Rose
show or in San Francisco or did the media and talk radio distort Obama’s comments to their audiences.

Most Americans were only told this.
*And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.*

67.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:29 pm, branqua said:

Why do anyone think he cannot win? Obama has WON..all you southern racists get over it.Hillary has sais=d you’re dumb and uneducated, so that’s why you’re voting for her..What an insult..

68.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:33 pm, Splitting Image said:

Some of you guys are getting it backwards.

The “racism” in Kentucky and West Virginia isn’t a given. If you look on a map, obviously Appalachia voted much more strongly for Clinton than for Obama all the way from the north of Alabama to Pennsylvania. That doesn’t make those states racist.

What heavily implies that they are racist is the fact that Clinton tailored her message to those states as if they were. The problem with Clinton is that she has been changing her message with every new state on the calendar and contradicting herself as she went along.

Before Super Tuesday she targetted New York and California, and came out as the strongest proponent of health care. Why? New York and California want health care. Other states on the calendar possibly didn’t, but she and her surrogates were happy to label them “insignificant”. She wanted the biggest pieces of the pie.

Before Ohio and Texas she came out as the strongest opponent of NAFTA, despite her previous support of it. Why? Ohio and Texas have been hurt by it.

Before Pennsylvania she came out as the strongest supporter of gun rights, despite her previous support of gun control. Why? Pennsylvania gun culture.

Now it’s the importance of the hard-working white working class. Why? Kentucky and West Virginia are next on the calendar.

I have no problem with a politician changing his or her message a bit in different parts of the country, as long as the overall framework is consistent. Clinton’s hasn’t been. If she’s the champion of the working class and the champion of health care, why not tout how her health care plan will benefit the working class?

The racism thing is a canard. There is a certain percentage of Americans who won’t vote for a black man (see comment 55), and the Obama vs. McCain matchup may help indicate how many of those people live in each state, just as the Obama vs. Clinton matchup has done to a degree. However, it has only become the story of the week because the Clinton campaign made it one. And the only reason I think it did make it one is that Clinton thought she could get more mileage out of it than from anything else.

That does not mean Kentucky and West Virginia are racist. It means Clinton thinks they are racist (which she and conventional wisdom are hopefully wrong about) and is pandering appropriately. She will then go straight over to Oregon and talk up health care again and end up in Puerto Rico touting their “unique contribution” to the US.

Pander pander pander.

69.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:36 pm, dan said:

ONE!!! One is such a simple three letter word, but is a very powerful word. It maybe hard for some people to understand that at some point we are all connected. A sports team that wins a championship never wins with just a few players it takes the whole team, and when you experience the rally of ONE nation under GOD then all of us have truly won are country. AMERICA HAS A LOT OF DIVERSITY, and that is what makes us special. HOPE!!! GOD BLESS AMERICA AND THE WORLD.

70.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:39 pm, Evarest said:

People are known by the company they keep.

Clintons’ stand for intelligence, resilience and success. America needs that now.

Mccain’s wife is kind and rich. That translates to Mccain’s goals for life. I can accept.

For Obama, he is defined by his company. Close minded wife, who decides for him, Jeremiah Wright, less said the better and ofcourse, the rats who left the Clinton’s ship for greener pastures. How can I support him? I am scared for this country in his hands.

71.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:43 pm, D said:

I was going to leave my opinion about this post. Then realized that when it comes to race, it really doesnt matter. Nothing anyone says will change a racists view on race.

Close your eyes and vote.

72.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:43 pm, Jared said:

First of all, to suggest that KY, a state with a Democratic governor, several democratic representatives, and that voted for Bill Clinton, is a “deep red state” is just wrong. KY is a complicated state. The Appalachian part (the eastern part) of the state may have some deep-seeded racism and ignorance, but the more developed parts of the state (Lexington and Louisville) have strong support for Obama. The Louisville Courier-Journal endorsed Obama, as did Ben Chandler, my representative of the fifth district (the Lexington area). It’s unfortunate that there may be some ignorant voters in KY, but did anyone accuse the populations of Pennsylvania, Ohio, or Indiana of being racist when they voted for Clinton. Obama has closed the gap in the polls every single time when it looks like he’ll get trounced. He’s beginning to campaign in KY this week. I don’t think it’s going to be a 35 point victory for Clinton. Why does everyone assume that because there are a few mountain people and farmers that harbor some racial prejudice in KY and WV that those whole states are full of potential KKK members.
There aren’t racists in New York? There aren’t racists in California? There aren’t racists in Florida?

73.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:50 pm, Former Dan said:

Evarest,
I didn’t get that memo. LOL. Nice job of projection. Like the Clintons have a lot of friends who are clean and pure. Cough Marc Rich Cough.

74.
On May 11th, 2008 at 2:58 pm, JS said:

To all of those people who think a black man has no right to be president of the US, I would ask ‘are you happy with black young men dying in Iraq for the US’.
I know of a lot of white people who would be appalled if their child was in Iraq.My feeling is that if they think they have ownership of this country they had better send their sons to fight for it.

75.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:00 pm, undisclosed angler said:

First, beware of Repub trolls. No way are people faking redneck dialect and whooping up the Appalachian stereotypes voting for a Democrat this year. They’re here only to poison the well.

Next, Democrats may not win the pres. race in either Ky or Wv but otherwise these sates are important sources of support. Ky has been Republican but it’s opening up to Dems. In 2006 John Yarmouth knocked out a Repub in a seat they had held for ten years. Last year Beshear (D) beat Fletcher (Repub) for the governorship. This year Dems hope to make Mitch McConnell fight to keep his seat and may even beat him. WVa is solid blue, excepting the 2000 and 2004 pres. votes. Dems hold majorities in the state leg; control the governorship, both US Senate seats, and 2 of 3 House seats. Bush ran a culture war and coal-pandering campaign in WV, and it worked. McCain might pull off the same victory in 2008 and he’ll use the same strategy against either Clinton or Obama, but WV will still send 4 of five of their fed officeholders to Washington as Democrats.

The problem for Obama supporters, me included, is to reconcile the Clinton wins in these states with need to win the general and unify the party. Instead of explaining the victories away as an indication of bad faith by the voters, maybe it’s better to concede that Clinton will win them, and still count the Democrats of these states as allies. Towards that end, Obama supporters can take some solace that three of these states’ elected superdelegates, Sen. Rockefeller and Congressmen Rahall (WV) and Yarmouth (Ky), have endorsed Obama. Also, from the coverage I’ve read of the Clinton speeches in WVa, they are not talking about Obama or the racial composition of the electorate. That doesn’t mean that race is absent from the vote, just that the Clintons seem to have backed away from the campaign’s Wednesday morning remarks on “hard working white Americans” as the rationale for why they will win. That sounds more like a candidate looking for a respectable finish rather than seeking to rule or ruin.

76.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:01 pm, Roddy McCorley said:

May not be entirely due to race. As a Californian, this year was the first time I got to vote in a primary where the nominee had not already been decided. Curiously, in previous years, I never voted for the nominee. Sometimes the candidate I voted for had already dropped out of the race. So why did I vote for that candidate? Well, I had this hope that every vote like mine would be a message to the nominee to pay attention to the voice and positions of that candidate.

Granted, most of the voters in Kentucky and West Virginia will not be voting like that. (I grew up in Ohio, where jokes about West Virginians were staples of what passed for humor.) But there will be a few. It may mostly have to do with race, but not entirely.

77.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:16 pm, Angelene said:

The polls will reveal the truth as everyone knows. There is no reason for Obama to be that low in the polls considering his appeal to the other 50 states in America. It is what it is, but more importantly, these states will not be democratic states come general election time, anyway.

So, we can move on to more important things like winning the presidency for Obama. One thing for sure, if he wins the presidency, he will be their president as well; I would like to see that happen, then what will they think? Will they leave this united states of America as to not have a black leader? And people cry loud when a black person states anything about racism. WOW! It is what it is….

78.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:17 pm, Richard said:

Why hasn’t the wide disparity between the number of Clinton supporters who say they’ll vote for McCain or not at all, compared with the number of Obama supporters who feel that way been reported more? Given Clinton’s base of support of whites with lower education and income, and the nearly 2-1 margins Clinton won by in the northern counties in Pennsylvania and the Indiana counties bordering Kentucky, it seems clear that race has been an issue for a long time–not just in the upcoming West Virginia and Kentucky primaries.

These low income people would rather vote for a multi-millionaire with whom they have little in common, than for a Black man whose economic background more closely parallels their own. There’s a reason for this: race. And it’s hardly being discussed.

79.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:19 pm, Ministerbruce said:

Why, no one will say in response to the “closed deal” meme? Why hasn’t Hillary closed the deal? With groups she has not won and if Hillary had ALL of the White vote she’d be in the lead and would have won this race going away, now she just contemplating going away.

It’s really, really sad, not everyone living in Kentucky and West. Virginia is/are racist, but it will appear that way to the whole world. When Obama won in the Carolina’s, that was with out the leadership of the State, but these two states are making it plain from leaders down to the man on the dirt road, those in and out of power are bigoted and racist and are speaking up for the whole of both states.

Please someone have the guts to stand opposed, this is a Bible loving people in these two states, nowhere dose it say you believe or think this about any man, or color of man, let it not be so.

The biggest mistake in the Press and media, is they have not ask, Black leadership, or black people from the black atheist to the black Baptist, the Black Catholics and Black Lutherans and Methodist, are you voting for Obama, solely on his gender, color of skin.

Conversely, no one ask, are you voting for Hillary, solely on her color of skin, or her gender and this should be ask of all surrogates, and supporters, clear the air before listening to their spiel.

80.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:32 pm, Wayne T said:

Race outweighs politics, every time. I was born and raised in KY.

Kentucky has NEVER elected any black politicians to statewide or federal office.

There are not enough western KY black voters to outweigh the eastern KY race voters. Every rumor they hear that can support their fears becomes fact, no matter how outlandish.

They live insular lives up in those mountains. They fear “the other” - and a black man named Obama is the living embodiment of “the other”.

There is no other legitimate explanation for the ridiculously large polling differences.

81.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:42 pm, janus said:

WV and Kentucky have had racial tendencies and for those of us who are politically aware this was a known certainty. Now the nation knows. It’s something they can proud of or something they can learn from and change. I was once told that you cant teach an old dog new tricks…but I’ve seen otherwise. It’s all up to the person really. Look at how far America has come along. There are certainly some folks out that way that would never vote for a black man because he is black. Imagine that? This type of thinking still exists in America. I thought this was a discontinued model. Oh well…they’ll always be welcomed with open arms.

82.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:44 pm, TheNumantine said:

Yes, race will have some impact on the WV/KY races. Poor/low middle income whites in border areas of the South whose ancestors never owned slaves and who live in predominately white States/Regions have gut reactions to affirmative action and “special” rights given to blacks and other minorities. Obama pointed this out in his speech on Race in America in Philadelphia, but I guess they weren’t listening.

Ignore the popular vote.

WV (94.9% white)–Obama will take 11-12 delagates; Clinton 16-17. Hardly a landslide.

KY (90.2% white)–Look for Obama 21-22; Clinton 29-30. Net from both States–Clinton 12-14.

OR (my State is 90.5% white)–Obama 30-32; Clinton 20-22. Obama net 8-12.

Worst case scenario for Obama? Obama 62; Clinton 69. Last I checked she is 167.5 delegates behind him. A seven delegate pick up by May 20th isn’t going to be enough. Especially with the steady “drip” of superdelegates going Obama’s way.

83.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:46 pm, Ministerbruce said:

Wow, I’ve heard Jesse Jackson talk about the disparity in Appalachia, but I never knew they were that removed from America, but still in America.

I’ am now trying to learn why, these two states are so removed. I just want to know how could any body be that disconnected, even hate groups are more informed that this.

This is a whole new self contained hate, it sound like, bredded hatred for hatred sack, like religion.

84.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:50 pm, TR said:

I simply can’t take this blog seriously anymore.

So says someone I’ve never seen post before.

Sorry if your thirty-minute visit wasn’t satisfactory. We’ll all miss you so much.

85.
On May 11th, 2008 at 3:57 pm, Keith said:

“The states are lacking in some of Obama’s most reliable constituencies, but so are states like Nebraska, South Dakota, Idaho, Wyoming, and Alaska, but Obama won each of those contests easily.”

Wrong read on these states. Obama won these because he knew they would be easy with little effort (Democrats don’t even show up on the radar in these states.) and his campaign targeted them specifically to create a splash. Reality is these states will vote Republican even if George Washington himself was running on the Democratic ticket. These wins mean absolutely nothing in terms of the general election.

86.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:12 pm, Rushay said:

I am a Kentuckian, and have been for 65 yrs. Kentucky people are pure 100% racists, and have always been! I am for Barack Obama, but I believe that I’m the only one, other than my wife, in thislittle community that is!! The reason so many kentuckians are racists & bigots is because we rate at the bottom in education, jobs, high school graduates & income–probably that way w/ WV!! In essense, we are ignorant & not well read, and there is no GRAY, it’s either black or white!!

But, I say, GO BARACK, you don’t need these two racists states anyway!!

87.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:23 pm, Rainy said:

It’s regional and racial. Face the facts. Watch Oregon, South Dakota and Montana. Same demographics, but Obama has no problem with white voters out there. He’s won most of the West by 10-20 points. He only has problems in states that have high populations of old people who are stuck in their old ways.

88.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:28 pm, kmb08 said:

Well…many of Obama’s supporters, especially the young, are voting for him because, as one voter said, “he’s hip and cool”. This person, and many AA who are voting for the first time, but have absolutely no idea how Washington works, should also stay home. They’re informed meter is running low as well.

The main things I have against Obama’s campaign are their using a justified and innocent comment by Bill C., and convincing AA community that Bill was injecting race. For God’s sake…when Bill said Obama’s Iraq position was a fairy tale because of all the contradictory comments Obama has said about Iraq, particularly his contradictory remarks on the MTP with T. Russert, this was a completely justified remark. However, when Obama’s campaign got through spinning the comment, they were saying BC stated Obama’s campaign was a fairy tale, which was completely false. It didn’t matter at that point…AA would believe what they wanted to believe, whether it was true or not. As much as BC and Hillary have fought for civil rights and education rights for all, and as much money as the Clinton Foundation gives to Africa, one would have to be a total idiot to think these two people are racists, but again…AA believe what someone tells them to believe.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: He’s disingenuous and misleads his supporters about not having ties to special interests. He’s run thousands of tv ads claiming not taking money from corps and lobbyists. According to factcheck.org, Obama has taken more money from oil co. execs than hrc, he’s taken more money from drug co.s than hrc, he has former registered lobbyists working on his campaign as we speak, he takes money from friends of lobbyists and firms that hire lobbyists, and he’s paid the superdelegates(yes, this is legal) more money to date than hrc. Hillary takes this money as well…difference being…she doesn’t lie to us supporters about it.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: Most prophetic speakers such as himself, e.g., Deval Patrick, for instance, talk a might fine lofty rhetoric on the big stage, but in practice, they’re often very ineffective at the nuts and bolts of getting things done. DP has been quite an ineffective Gov. of Mass, although he inspired the masses just as Obama is doing. I also remember Bill thinking he could go to Wash., and change how things work. It doesn’t work that way, and those of us old enough to know this, aren’t as naive about these things. Sen. Ted Stevens was quoted as saying, “Obama folded like a cheap suit when time to take a stand”. He appears like a weak liberal. Why else do you think the Republicans were behind some of the big fundraisers he had before the campaign ever started. They don’t think he can beat McCain. That’s right..the Republicans bankrolled much of Obama’s war chest.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: Hypocrisy is one reason I would normally not vote for a Republican. However, Obama has accused Hillary’s campaign, and now he’s accusing McCain’s campaign of using negative campaigning against him. This campaign has been softball. Hillary has been forced to be nice to Obama. The Republicans won’t be restricted in the same way. There is a difference in negative campaigning, and revealing truths that happen to be negative. I never saw anything Hillary did that seemed negative. OTOH, Obama, because of the money advantage, ran misleading ad after misleading ad, as confirmed by factcheck.org, misleading about special intersts ties, as well as character assassination of Hillary, assisted by the MSM. To accuse another campaign of negative campaigning, pretending to be above such tactics, all the while using subliminally negative campaigning oneself, is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: E. Jones allowed Obama to have his name placed on many pieces of legislation while in the IL Senate although Obama didn’t actually do legwork on these bills. EJ wanted to help pad Obama’s resume’ for his future ambitions. Also, while in the Il Sen., Obama earned the reputation, according to a colleague in the Senate, of being “gutless” and “absent” when it came time to make the tough votes. This explains so many “present” votes. My research has revealed to me…Obama likes the titles, he likes winning, but he doesn’t particularly like doing the work. No Thanks..! Hillary works her heart out, and she would do this in the WH as well.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: The media went a full year of bashing Hillary before ever asking Obama any tough questions. It took phone calls, polls, and angry emails to finally get the MSM to even air any of the negative baggage on Obama. I decided when this campaign began, after seeing how the media(which is owned by a few large corporations) were employing a concerted effort to oust Hillary, they would not pick my choice for me. The more research I did on Hillary, the more I admired her. The more research I did on Obama, the less I was impressed.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: Again, hypocrisy rears its’ ugly head. He calls himself the unifier, but unifying also means working across party lines in the Senate. According to C. Roberts, the journalist, and many Republicans, Hillary demonstrated a keen ability of working across party lines, but Obama had very little interest in doing this. He’s selling a self-aggrandizement argument that is phony. I’m not buying…

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: There are many more close relationships Obama has that are being covered up by the MSM. This really angers me to see him protected this way. I do think having close ties to terrorist groups is something to be concerned about, and something we should know more about.

How does Obama feel about reparations? The media won’t ask him. I know Rev. Wright and Farrakhan, who both endorsed Obama, believe reparations should be forthcoming. Most of America think reparations would tear this country apart. I guess that’s why the MSM is afraid to ask Obama.

Finally…The reasons I staunchly support Hillary : She knows how Washington works, and yes, this is highly important. She has an insatiable appetite for policy. She is honest, humorous, intelligent, compassionate, she really listens to her supporters and their concerns, she knows the world and the world’s leaders, she could easily assemble an excellent economic team, and mostly, she works her heart out!! I admire her more today than I ever did before. Also, just knowing the Republicans bankrolled some of Obama’s early fundraisers, and knowing the MSM tried to oust Hillary, makes me support her and nobody else. Obama will not get this Hillary supporter. It won’t be so bad to have McCain in office, afterall, we’ll have more of a majority in the House/Senate, so McCain will have a checks/balances system in place that will prevent him from being as loose as Bush has been.

Give ‘em hell Hillary !!!

89.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:28 pm, Aldfonso said:

The most intelligent people of West Virginia and the other remaining five states of these democrat primaries will vote for the virtual winner that is Barack Obama.
This action will give strong voice of needed change and political power in Washington D. C. to find solutions to solve the economic crisis that had driven this nation and the rest of the world the actual Republican administration of Mr. Bush and Dick Chenney, in fact, the only thing they have well done is to fill up their own pockets and their friends, with companies like Halliburton , Dyncorp, Blackwater, K.B.& R. among others by making a endless war in Iraq (non- authorized by the Security Council of the United Nations) with a lot of oil and the highest gas prices in history and still climbing, leaving a trail of blood, devastation and deaths of thousands of U. S. soldiers and hundred of thousand innocent Iraqis civilians among other more palpable domestic consequences we are feeling more than ever now and tht had been warned before by Senator Obama.

Let forget the issue of race and do not use it as a weapon of mass distraction and let us refocusing the real issues that affect us that energy, economic and education.

Winners vote for winners not for second place contestants.

90.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:31 pm, Ella said:

I spent a few (unfortunate) years in Arkansas, a long time ago. “coon hunting” meant going after Black people. So what exactly is this Coon Hunters Association in WVa??

91.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:31 pm, kasa said:

Iam not an American but I follow your presidential politics with interest.Iam bit saddened by people interviewed to suggest race as a factor in not voting for Obama in the upcoming primaries.I think this is sad and is a step back in the progress made in race relations in US. But Iam also glad that the rest of the country is not like that,thats why Obama has a real chance of getting elected as the next President.
Iam also sure that there will be white voters in WVA and Kentucky who will vote for Obama,This will show courage and conviction about their choices made based on issues rather than race.Though small it maybe, the obama campaign will value your vote,so will the rest of America and the world.

92.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:38 pm, kmb08 said:

Well…many of Obama’s supporters, especially the young, are voting for him because, as one voter said, “he’s hip and cool”. This person, and many AA who are voting for the first time, but have absolutely no idea how Washington works, should also stay home. They’re informed meter is running low as well.

The main things I have against Obama’s campaign are their using a justified and innocent comment by Bill C., and convincing AA community that Bill was injecting race. For God’s sake…when Bill said Obama’s Iraq position was a fairy tale because of all the contradictory comments Obama has said about Iraq, particularly his contradictory remarks on the MTP with T. Russert, this was a completely justified remark. However, when Obama’s campaign got through spinning the comment, they were saying BC stated Obama’s campaign was a fairy tale, which was completely false. It didn’t matter at that point…AA would believe what they wanted to believe, whether it was true or not. As much as BC and Hillary have fought for civil rights and education rights for all, and as much money as the Clinton Foundation gives to Africa, one would have to be a total idiot to think these two people are racists, but again…AA believe what someone tells them to believe.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: He’s disingenuous and misleads his supporters about not having ties to special interests. He’s run thousands of tv ads claiming not taking money from corps and lobbyists. According to factcheck.org, Obama has taken more money from oil co. execs than hrc, he’s taken more money from drug co.s than hrc, he has former registered lobbyists working on his campaign as we speak, he takes money from friends of lobbyists and firms that hire lobbyists, and he’s paid the superdelegates(yes, this is legal) more money to date than hrc. Hillary takes this money as well…difference being…she doesn’t lie to us supporters about it.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: Most prophetic speakers such as himself, e.g., Deval Patrick, for instance, talk a mighty fine lofty rhetoric on the big stage, but in practice, they’re often very ineffective at the nuts and bolts of getting things done. DP has been quite an ineffective Gov. of Mass, although he inspired the masses just as Obama is doing. I also remember Bill thinking he could go to Wash., and change how things work. It doesn’t work that way, and those of us old enough to know this, aren’t as naive about these things. Sen. Ted Stevens was quoted as saying, “Obama folded like a cheap suit when time to take a stand”. He appears like a weak liberal. Why else do you think the Republicans were behind some of the big fundraisers he had before the campaign ever started. They don’t think he can beat McCain. That’s right..the Republicans bankrolled much of Obama’s war chest.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: Hypocrisy is one reason I would normally not vote for a Republican. However, Obama has accused Hillary’s campaign, and now he’s accusing McCain’s campaign of using negative campaigning against him. This campaign has been softball. Hillary has been forced to be nice to Obama. The Republicans won’t be restricted in the same way. There is a difference in negative campaigning, and revealing truths that happen to be negative. I never saw anything Hillary did that seemed unduly negative. OTOH, Obama, because of the money advantage, ran misleading ad after misleading ad, as confirmed by factcheck.org, misleading about special interests’ ties, as well as character assassination of Hillary, assisted by the MSM. To accuse another campaign of negative campaigning, pretending to be above such tactics, all the while using subliminally negative campaigning oneself, is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: E. Jones allowed Obama to have his name placed on many pieces of legislation while in the IL Senate although Obama didn’t actually do legwork on these bills. EJ wanted to help pad Obama’s resume’ for his future ambitions. Also, while in the Il Sen., Obama earned the reputation, according to a colleague in the Senate, of being “gutless” and “absent” when it came time to make the tough votes. This explains so many “present” votes. My research has revealed to me…Obama likes the titles, he likes winning, but he doesn’t particularly like doing the work. No Thanks..! Hillary works her heart out, and she would do this in the WH as well.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: The media went a full year of bashing Hillary before ever asking Obama any tough questions. It took phone calls, polls, and angry emails to finally get the MSM to even air any of the negative baggage on Obama. I decided when this campaign began, after seeing how the media(which is owned by a few large corporations) were employing a concerted effort to oust Hillary, they would not pick my choice for me. The more research I did on Hillary, the more I admired her. The more research I did on Obama, the less I was impressed.

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: Again, hypocrisy rears its’ ugly head. He calls himself the unifier, but unifying also means working across party lines in the Senate. According to C. Roberts, the journalist, and many Republicans, Hillary demonstrated a keen ability of working across party lines, but Obama had very little interest in doing this. He’s selling a self-aggrandizement argument that is phony. I’m not buying…

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama: There are many more close relationships Obama has that are being covered up by the MSM. This really angers me to see him protected this way. I do think having close ties to terrorist groups is something to be concerned about, and something we should know more about.

How does Obama feel about reparations? The media won’t ask him. I know Rev. Wright and Farrakhan, who both endorsed Obama, believe reparations should be forthcoming. Most of America think reparations would tear this country apart. I guess that’s why the MSM is afraid to ask Obama.

Finally…The reasons I staunchly support Hillary : She knows how Washington works, and yes, this is highly important. She has an insatiable appetite for policy. She is honest, humorous, intelligent, compassionate, she really listens to her supporters and their concerns, she knows the world and the world’s leaders, she could easily assemble an excellent economic team, and mostly, she works her heart out!! I admire her more today than I ever did before. Also, just knowing the Republicans bankrolled some of Obama’s early fundraisers, and knowing the MSM tried to oust Hillary, makes me support her and nobody else. Obama will not get this Hillary supporter. It won’t be so bad to have McCain in office, afterall, we’ll have more of a majority in the House/Senate, so McCain will have a checks/balances system in place that will prevent him from being as loose as Bush has been.

Hillary also has set a goal of eradicating breast caner within our lifetimes. She intends to prioritize women’s health issues that have been marginalized for too long. I can’t believe AA women are voting against what’s in the best interest of their health and their daughters, mothers, sisters’ health. A woman will quite simply bring a different perspective to these priorities, as well as children’s issues. Hillary was clearly the best choice, but once again, the Democratic party gets it wrong. I’m very sad about this.

Give ‘em hell Hillary !!!

93.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:47 pm, Brownell said:

When the 2008 election is examined in hindsight, as history, I believe the thing that will jump out at future observers will not be that race was an issue with rural, white working class voters. No one could claim that there is NO element of race in deciding who to vote for, but the early contests showed that many people with the same demographic profiles were willing to vote for Senator Obama. It was the stuff that came later that cooked Senator Obama’s goose with people who care about the economy and who value their own cultural and economic place in the world. Clinton earned their respect and Obama did not - so they voted for her. I don’t see the problem there.

The salient feature that is entirely missing contemporary published opinion is the racism, and sexism, of Obama supporters. Narrow puritanical absolutists of all ilks show the same profile - get rid of the “others” who do not agree with your superior right thinking. The opinions of some Obanation fanatics (not all Obama supporters) in the corporate media and on the internet agree that, under Obama, the Democratic party will shed its old, encrusted base of the old, the poor, the female and those without college diplomas. Instead, we will be led into a brighter, purer future by the young, the educated - the elite. And if Clinton supporters reasonably point out that this is “elitist” thinking (by definition), then there is no level of viciousness that is unjustfied. She and her ilk must be driven out, to make room for their betters.

Most of the vicious invective, I believe, can be traced back more to simple power politics than to ideological racism and sexism. The “progressive” bloggers who have thrown in with the likes of David Axelrod,Tom Daschle, Ted Kennedy and Donna Brazile hold themselves holier and better than Terry McAuliffe, Mark Penn, Geraldine Ferraro and Charlie Rangle. Huh? This is about principle? Not likely. I’m thinking that grabbing a chance to take sides in the ancient party divisions and gain greater power within the party than their organizing efforts would merit is a better explanation for the Obama militance among the “progressives.”

But “progressive” idealists who stoop to power politics cannot acknowledge it. They must frame their actions in absolutist terms of right and wrong. Hillary Clinton is a sleazy “old” politician; Barack Obama stands for “change” because he says so, and is therefore above criticism. The facts do not support this view. A modest effort to research Senator Obama’s career, his past actions and positions, shows him to be - an ambitious politician. In the two years he has spent pursuing the presidency he has never managed to explain what kind of change he stands for, except for taking money from lobbyists. His campaign, with the support of media and “progressive” bloggers, has replicated classic Republican techniques of negative definition, invidious framing of “the math” and character assassination. The standard old-fashioned Democratic tactics the Clinton campaign has employed seem clean and sweet-smelling by comparison. I do not consider Senator Obama to be more evil than Satan - in fact I place most of the outright evil on the self-styled leftists - but I cannot look away from the plain fact that the Obama campaign and the Obama phenomenon and the Obama “movement” are built on lies - the mirror image of plain truth.

So, I get to racism from plain old deductive reasoning. What would make an ambitious, center-right politician the idol of so-called left wing Democrats? As the polls show, they are the college-educated “creative class.” Why would they not check him out as I did? What is so hard about looking up Senator Obama’s real record, or checking out Pastor Jeremiah Wright, who has been there from the beginning? Why would active community organizers not be interested in finding out the specific details when Senator Obama introduced himself as “I started out as a community organizer”? I look at these contradictions and conclude that something big is missing here.

The point is often made that, in denigrating Senator Clinton, the locker-room boys at MSNBC are compensating for their insecure little manhood. The same reasoning applies to the creative-class lefties. Flocking to Obama must prove that they’re not racists, right? Letting our woman-hate hang out is not a problem. It’s racism that we must stamp out of our psyches. But, here’s the thing, boyz. Sanctifying a less-qualified, self-serving African American politician over a better-qualified white candidate is racist. It’s called the bigotry of low expectations. No amount of sexist invective changes that. And that is the subtext that future observers will see, starkly obvous, and they will marvel that all the searching for working-class racism never went near the larger racism of Obama’s own supporters.

94.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:49 pm, Bryan said:

Well…many of Obama’s supporters, especially the young, are voting for him because, as one voter said, “he’s hip and cool”. This person, and many AA who are voting for the first time, but have absolutely no idea how Washington works, should also stay home. They’re informed meter is running low as well.

I worked for 12 years as a legislative assistant on the Hill and Obama has my full confidence and my full support. I know how Washington works better than most, and I’m convinced he has what it takes to shake things up there and get progressive change accomplished.

Obama also has the support of more congressmen than Hillary does, in both the House and the Senate. Funny, the people who work alongside him and Hillary seem to think he’s the better choice. How’s their — sorry, “they’re” — informed meter compared to your own?

95.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:51 pm, Bryan said:

The opinions of some Obanation fanatics (not all Obama supporters) in the corporate media and on the internet agree that, under Obama, the Democratic party will shed its old, encrusted base of the old, the poor, the female and those without college diplomas.

What are you talking about? I have never seen this argument advanced. Never.

Provide some links for your bizarre strawman, please.

96.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:52 pm, Keith said:

Ya know, this whole blog sounds very much like a bunch of non-empathetic people playing the race card. Remember, the very foundation of America is on diversity - no one is less an American for any belief they hold. There is plenty of racism, sexism, elitism, you name your bias - but that’s all part of America.

Sexism is every bit as potent a bigotry as racism and affects even more of the population. But Clinton has avoided having her candidacy defined by it. Obama is not doing as well. Which is not good. If he frames the election in a us-against-them contest, he will lose. If he’s really as inclusive as he portends, he needs to get really, really, busy.

By the way, what’s up with his dissing his own family with the racist comment “she is a typical white person”? I don’t care how you slice or dice that, that’s a racist comment pure and simple. Substitute “black” for “white” if you have any doubt. Obama doesn’t get it – you need to be able to relate to individual Americans. For go the convenience of stereotyped groups which self impressed people often resort to. His rhetoric of inclusion is exposed as wishful thinking, an acknowledgement of his personal shortcomings and explains the ease with which the label of elitist is attached to him.
Or more simply, you can’t fight racism with racism !!

97.
On May 11th, 2008 at 4:54 pm, TR said:

So, I get to racism from plain old deductive reasoning.

You can get to racism however you want, but there’s no “reasoning” in your argument. Just the insane voices in your head.

98.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:01 pm, arthur a allen said:

when obama is elected president of the united states of america and the huff and puff is over, the elected representatives of kentucky, west virginia and any other anti obama enclaves will be standing in line for federal pork just like the pro obama states. and i will wager that obama’s administration will treat them fairly.

99.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:04 pm, TR said:

Sexism is every bit as potent a bigotry as racism and affects even more of the population. But Clinton has avoided having her candidacy defined by it.

Are you talking about the part where she cried? Or the part where she and her husband complained about the “big boys picking on the girl”? Or the part where she made her campaign the crusade against all glass ceilings?

I’m not sure you know what “avoided” means.

100.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:05 pm, kmb08 said:

Bryan…

So, you caught me in a grammatical error..ooops. I typed it all pretty quickly. Actually, their informed meter is quite low evidently. Hip and Cool isn’t a commendable prerequisite for President.

Actually, Obama and Hillary have the same number of house/senators supporting them. Hillary has more women, Obama has more of the first term members, and they both share some of the more seasoned members. Hillary had many more until Obama gained the lead in delegates from the mostly red states. Obviously, the congressional members want to be on the winning side. Also, like I said, Obama has paid more money to the superdelegates..check opensecrets.org. Paying members to side with you is legal. Bribery at its’ highest form. Sen. Dodd, for example, said early on, he was very concerned about Obama’s qualifications, but he later endorsed him…go figure!

Give ‘em hell Hillary !!!!

101.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:07 pm, Obsiye said:

If the most likely reasons that Obama will be defeated in these two states because of his Race, then this legitimize the arguement Rev. Wright, makes that our society is a racist society which will rather elect a dead white person over Black person. I hope this not the case.

102.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:13 pm, Keith said:

… and I’m convinced he has what it takes to shake things up there and get progressive change accomplished.
Obama also has the support of more congressmen than Hillary does…

What kind of crazy thinking is this !!! Not surprising from a 12 yr. gov. employee!

Let’s see - I’m going to shake things up - and everyone there likes me. Why would people who you are going to shake up - like you? Could it be that they figure that a person with Obama’s inexperience will be manipulated like a puppet on strings? Could they fear Clinton because they know she can cut through the BS? And knows how to accomplish real results?

103.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:28 pm, Keith said:

…Are you talking about the part where she cried? …
I’m not sure you know what “avoided” means…

“Avoided” means that when she has won, or lost, it hasn’t been headlined as a result of her being a woman. This entire blog is based on discounting Obama’s loss in KY and WV as being based on him having half black blood.

BTW, Obama would do well by getting off the pedestal and showing some personal, real emotion - and lay off his grandmother!

104.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:28 pm, cate said:

Simple reason Obama does not appeal to voters (WV, KY) is his newcomer status, his cultural isolation and limited history of public service.

Cultural rich southern states (like latinos) are family/community oriented and will go with the familiar and proven quantity. No surprise that the Obama ’spin’ people focused on the ‘Koon-Hunter’ and made him appear stupid. But, we’ve come to expect this of the Obama camp.

There are cultural differences across this country. Obama understands the Africaner culture and his inner circle and goes no further.

Pity.
A President is ‘of the people’.

105.
On May 11th, 2008 at 5:41 pm, kmb08 said:

The “elitism” label does apply more aptly to Obama than Hillary. Elitism is not “financial”, it is a “mindset”. Whether you want to believe it or not, Hillary really does “listen” to her voters. Watch her as she works the people lines. She clearly listens intently to their concerns. Obama has himself to blame for this label.

Three examples: In NH, Obama was listening, or pretending to listen, to a woman as she cried telling him of her dire economic situation. Obama never showed any expression change, he simply continued telling the woman how he was able to acquire his house in Illinois.

#2 Obama mentioned the high price of “arugula”. He didn’t even realize when he said this how out of touch it sounded.

#3 Obama, in a closed door fundraiser in San Francisco(of all places), mentions why he isn’t able to get blue collar voters to vote for him in large enough numbers. This is how the whole bitter, clinging to guns, religion, thing got started.

106.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:06 pm, TR said:

“Avoided” means that when she has won, or lost, it hasn’t been headlined as a result of her being a woman.

You mean like these headlines from her New Hampshire win?

Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House? (Dowd column, admittedly)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/09/opinion/08dowd.html

Did Hillary Win NH Crying Game?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080110/NATION/586530873/1001

No Tears in New Hampshire
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-usdems0109,0,7986325.story

Women responded to Hillary’s emotion
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/01/10/2008-01-10_women_responded_to_hillarys_emotion-1.html

Hillary Clinton: my teary moment won me New Hampshire
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3160177.ece

Female Clinton Supporters in N.H. Relish Her Win
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17970221

Yeah, no mention of emotional appeals or the women vote in any of those headlines. None at all.

107.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:09 pm, Rev.St.Huck said:

If this suprises you then you are naive enough to have thought OJ was innocent.

108.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:10 pm, Jacob said:

it should be no surprise that the people of WV, who voted in a former KKK member into the senate, and re-elect him every year, are not supporting Obama. Even though hillary is on her deathbed these po’ folk are trying to revive her. Too bad, it is sad that these people are so set in their ways.

109.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:10 pm, BillDemo said:

Here’s a thought. Maybe all these people are unhappy with Obama as a candidate because he is a member of a racist anti-white church and he surrounds himself with anti-americans, terrorists and corrupt politicians. Another reason could be that he is the least experienced politician ever to run for the white house.

Have any of those reasons ever occurred to you?

110.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:11 pm, TR said:

Could it be that they figure that a person with Obama’s inexperience will be manipulated like a puppet on strings? Could they fear Clinton because they know she can cut through the BS? And knows how to accomplish real results?

Could Keith be an utter moron? All signs point to yes.

You mocked other Obama voters for not being informed about Washington, and along comes someone with more than a decade of experience in the Capitol saying he thinks Obama is best by your own standard and, what’s more, the actual Democratic congressmen seem to agree too.

But you ridicule all this, and argue instead that a former First Lady with deep ties to the DLC establishment is going to shake things up?

111.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:15 pm, Voice of reason said:

@Kmb08:

When have you met a poor homeless person who is an elitist??? Think before you post! You are just proving the polls are right that Hilary has the dumb ass vote.

112.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:17 pm, TR said:

Obviously, the congressional members want to be on the winning side. Also, like I said, Obama has paid more money to the superdelegates..check opensecrets.org.

So the congressmen and political insiders know that Obama does better across the country than Hillary and he’s proven himself to be a better fundraiser than Hillary … and that’s somehow a bad thing? That’s a reason he’ll be less effective in the general election? Because he’s more popular and better funded?

What’s the weather like on your planet? Does it rain green there?

113.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:21 pm, barbara tate said:

It’s all about Appalacia. Any state in Appalacia is not likely to vote for a black candidate any time soon. They have been voting Republican since the 70’s for a very good reason: racism. They left the Democratic Party for that reason. I say that Democrats don’t need Kentucky and West Virginia or any other state in this region. We can win with the newly arising blue states in the West. Don’t blame this on Obama; blame it instead on what it really is. This is a region that hasn’t caught up with the rest of America and probably never will. I know about such a region because I live in the South. Believe me, The Republicans will hang on to these Dixiecrat states and will soon be irrelevant in the rest of the county. Our country is changing slowly but surely and the tolerant people are winning this fight.

114.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:22 pm, Ministerbruce said:

Another reason I won’t vote for Obama.

You recited many fact and used Factcheck.org, but never sited any FACTCHECK.org facts about your Hillary, you spun everything as he said he didn’t have Lobbyist, contributing to his campaign, those contributors are not contributing in the companies name and yes they work for the company, as Hillary dose, you didn’t states that fact.

You did heavily say; Obama had more ads, more money, just about more everything, as if his funds and campaigning advantages were some how illegal, never did you conclude Hillary, miss-calculated, bad planning, heinous leadership and ran a horrible campaign, never once have you taken credit for the failing of your candidate, not once, she was one step short of sainthood, as you describer Hillary.

You hated how Obama Illinois legislature worked and did not state voting absent is how 85% of Independents, Republicans and Democrats work in their state Politics and you conveniently left out all the legislation, worked out and passed, crossing the lines in Illinois, over 12 years, that history was discounted, in comparison to Hillary.

You claim the MSM, hadn’t vetted Obama early, that same MSM, didn’t and hasn’t fully vetted Hillary yet and hadn’t during your supposed love affair period early by MSM with Obama, they did report her continued claims, MSM hadn’t looked closely, that was all the MSM did.

I’ am so glad you won’t vote for Obama and I’ am glad you will vote for Hillary, but she won’t be on the General Ballot, so you’ll have a choice, vote your interest as many in America have for centuries, of all ethnicities, or vote your PREDUJICES.

I won’t place Obama on a pedestal, he’s man, flawed and so is McCain and Hillary and Bill and Bush and I will remember my churches teachings of the little, inexperienced King David, not comparing but talking note of not having experience and having little to hang his leadership on, King Saul was far more experienced than David and David, ran from Saul and would not attack Saul, the Lords leader at the time, I see many parallels in Obama, it’s his behavior, but I will not put him, or her above me, they are human beings, prone to fail and make mistakes.

I’ve voted for the best man for decades and now I vote for the best person for my country and that person is Barack H. Obama, the NEXT PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, I love that one word, UNITED.

115.
On May 11th, 2008 at 6:33 pm, Limbaugh'sDiabetes said:

I was born and raised in Louisville, Kentucky. I can tell you from first hand experience that folks there are *very* racist. Most often it’s simply ignorance and a lack of exposure to African Americans. The neighborhood I grew up in had *no* black people living there - or even anywhere nearby. Even the “big city” of Louisville is very segregated. There was one mixed race guy in my high school class - and that was it for the class. I talked to my mother the other day (she still lives there) and she’s all about Hillary. Her fear of Obama seems to stem from the idea that if a black man becomes president, the black people in this country will become powerful and corrupt. My response to that was: “You mean like the white people?”

I often wonder how in the world even a small percentage of people can come out of that kind of environment *not* racist. For me it helped to be gay. Once you are yourself a victim of ignorance and hatred, it pulls the wool from your eyes and helps you to recognize the plight of others.

To me, the fact that Hillary could win Kentucky and West Virginia is a sign that she should *not* be President of these United States. I, for one, have no interest in being led by Kentucky.

116.
On May 11th, 2008 at 7:40 pm, Mary said:

I would accept that this election is a referendum on racism if Obama were as qualified as Clinton. He is not. You have to close your eyes to that to even consider voting for him. Some people see a positive good in electing someone African American, just to oppose racism, but I can’t see doing that when it frustrates the legitimate aspirations of another underrepresented group (women). That is far from racism — unless you reduce racism to voting against any African American in a race against a white opponent, as many here seem to be doing.

The percentage of people who are estimated to be racist above does not add up to the margins of victory projected for Clinton. Further, states equally racist have not produced the same margins for her, so there must be more to the story. Part of it is that there are smaller percentages of race-based African American voters to offset the white race-based vote. Part of it is also the higher percentages of rural, older, working class and less educated voters, all groups where Clinton does better. Unless you equate being a member of those groups with being racist, there is an obvious alternative explanation for her margins. Further, these states are gun-oriented (remember Obama’s anti-gun comment), religious (remember Obama’s comment about clinging to God) and are largely an “honor culture” which means they value family support, independence and self-reliance, even in the face of economic hardship, something Obama neither understands nor exemplifies. Imagine how his comment about his white granny played in WV and KY! The Sergeant York mentality is a stereotype with some truth to it, so the accusation of lack of patriotism and the perception of an unwillingness to support the military hurts Obama. Their view is that you fight out of duty even when you oppose war and they are fundamentally isolationist.

There are lots of reasons why voters in KY and WV wouldn’t vote for Obama without going for the easiest one — racism.

I can understand the Obamabot pinheads here going for the knee-jerk explanation but I thought better of Steve Benen. Unless his inability to understand why these states would produce huge Hillary margins is disingenous, he really doesn’t know as much about politics (or American history) as I thought. If the point of his post was to excuse a couple of Obama defeats, then it is no longer about information and discussion but about propagandizing for Obama — that makes it useless. The next step is to start censoring the comments (as Atrios does) or disable them entirely (TPM & Digby’s approach). My list of must-read blogs has changed considerably over the past 6 months. I suspect that has been true for many people.

117.
On May 11th, 2008 at 7:52 pm, The Commander Guy said:

I see Hillary’s Trolls and some of the play along wingnut allies have found the Board 2nite.

Hillary ran as hard as see could. She lost.

EOM

118.
On May 11th, 2008 at 7:56 pm, Mary said:

Limbaugh’sDiabetes — don’t forget that Hillary won MA, NY, CA, OH, PA, and NJ, all places with educated, supposedly non-racist voters. The idea that only people overtly racist are racist is false. You can feel superior to the people who openly say bigoted things, but racism is spread all over the country. That makes it hard to use as a local explanation for KY & WV. You are also ignoring the various analyses showing that sexism trumps racism in this election, percentage-wise. No one argues that there are more or less sexist states because that would be ridiculous, but somehow with race it makes sense because we have a history of vilifying the South while engaging in covert racism elsewhere. Since Clinton does better with the groups adhering to more traditional sex roles, there’s evidence that well-educated elites are more sexist than so-called “low information” voters. (The well-educated professions have been the last to open doors to women, for example, and women are still way under-represented as professors on campuses where Obama is the darling.) Clearly, people here feel it is worse to be racist than sexist, but the derogatory language here daily reeks of sexism. If I were to bet which prejudice has undermined this election, I would blame an alliance between the small-minded openly sexist conservatives who have always hated Clinton and the covertly sexist Obama supporters who use race as an excuse to hate the country’s first viable female candidate. I’d bet money that several of those posting here under female names are not women but use female names as cover for their venom.

119.
On May 11th, 2008 at 7:58 pm, Michael7843853 said:

If Obama is elected, West Virginia will join The Confederacy.

120.
On May 11th, 2008 at 8:00 pm, Linda in Oregon said:

To jacksmith (whose post looks like a WalMart ad)
No, we’re not idiots - but I have to say anyone who swallows the stupid talking points you use as “fact” just might be……………

Obama probably won’t win in my county in Oregon (very red - and we’re all rural white) but he’s expected to take the state. That’s just the way it is, and let’s admit it - Those folks probably woundn’t vote for a dem in the general anyway.

He’s a great candidate, will make a great president, and since he respects the intelligence of the American people, will have no problem getting a majority of votes in enough states to win.

121.
On May 11th, 2008 at 8:22 pm, The Commander Guy said:

Michael

WV actually seceded from the Confederacy in order to rejoin the Union.

122.
On May 11th, 2008 at 8:33 pm, TR said:

I can understand the Obamabot pinheads here going for the knee-jerk explanation but I thought better of Steve Benen.

I’m sure Steve will be crushed that a psychotic with paranoid tendencies, an allergy to the truth, and laughable delusions of being a college professor isn’t impressed with him. It’ll absolutely crush him.

123.
On May 11th, 2008 at 8:58 pm, Michael7843853 said:

Commandante, I knew that. The joke was based on the premise that WV people don’t realize the confederacy hasn’t existed for ~1.43 centuries. I suppose I could have said rejoin but if the populace of WV was coerced into participation in the illegal? secession, were they any more than hostages.

124.
On May 11th, 2008 at 9:01 pm, Steve said:

I said it the other day; I’ll say it again. This isn’t about race. It’s about status quo. West Virginia is heavily addicted to the status quo—and Obama, whether anyone wants to admit it or not, is a direct threat to the continuation of the status-quo cash umbilical that West Virginia has been attached to for decades and decades. The Union was a direct threat to their status quo in 1861; they seceded in protest. Two years later the Confederacy was, to an even greater degree, a threat to their status quo, so in 1863 they seceded a second time.

Some people will make light of the fact that no one can win the WH without W-VA. I’ll expand on that a bit, and say that W-VA won’t agree with anyone unless they’re willing to buy that agreement….

125.
On May 11th, 2008 at 9:02 pm, JANE said:

i am sad to see so many racist. it is your right to discriminate. that is to reject someone for a reason but racism and prejudice have no rational. it cannot be considered or addressed in this election. the clintons know that and started early with the race card. it is very sad because obama does not have one drop of american negro blood. he did not fight in your civil war. his mother and grandparents are white. all of you so called blue collar hard working white people have blue babies born in your family since slavery. black people know who you are. if a dna test was done on each of you and you had to prove you are white before you could vote, many of you could not vote, klan and supreamist included. you even know that in some parts of arkansas, the folks have their doults about who is the real baby daddy. with all of the terrorist and folks who don’t like us, we better hang tight together. the clintons have lied to you. give someone else a chance to change things. west virginia and kentucky have some of the worst poverty in this country. hillary claims 32 years of experience. what has she or he ever done for you? nothing before when he was president, nothing during her time as senator and you can bet your hound dog the best you will get if she wins is a shot and a beer that she will not pay for. take your vote seriously and look for a better world for your children. don’t be afraid of a smart person of color. after all, if he wins, he is still outnumbered and advised by all white people.

126.
On May 11th, 2008 at 10:33 pm, The Commander Guy said:

Michael

Ya I got the joke. Should added a few lines to tie that down.

127.
On May 11th, 2008 at 10:54 pm, Jay said:

Clinton said they were racist. That was her whole point. White Democrats are too racist to vote for a black man so he’ll lose to McSame.

128.
On May 11th, 2008 at 11:18 pm, Megalomania said:

This is a comment about Hillary and the so called racist statement she made about the AP press. And a comment that Obama made in his book. Plus an MSNBC comment.
We have a totally monumental racist statement made on MSNBC telecast which you will likely never hear or see but I did, and, here a Black commentator said…Black and White parenting produce pretty babies rather than Black and Black parenting produce ugly babies. Yikes that had to be about “the” racist statement of the new millennium. Or should we say ruckus statement. And Brian Williams did not know what to say. Actually everyone was stunned.

Hillary Clinton saying statistics about voters is racist? Well folks those first lines Journalist have been reporting Black White statistics for years. Now on Chris Mathews and CNN Sanchez shows Hillary is accused of saying racist statements quoting from the Associated Press article. Talk about dumb, and Black commentators are jumping on the ideal that it is racist. If Americans believe that, they are dumb. Here, Hillary is reading copy from an article and Black commentators are saying what she said is racist for doing that. I can not believe how stupid Blacks are accepting the time to argue the point were Hillary is reading statistics off of a news article plus supporting the news anchor Journalist that Hillary is a racist. That’s why America has a problem with race and total proof is in your face every day 24X7 cable news MSNBC, CNN, Fox and hate radio.

Barack Hussein Obama in his book “Audacity of Hope” actually screams out with a racist statement. Here in his book at the end of the first chapter Obama refers to White Southern men that talk to their son’s nigger this and nigger that. Yes, he wrote and published it in a national publication. And really what supports a racist element his wife said, this book was the best thing that ever happened to them. It was like hitting the lotto. Here is the kicker that turns me off about Obama and this nigger statement. He imagines it. Are you with me, Obama is saying he did not hear any White man talking to his son saying nigger this and nigger that. He, Obama imagines it. I think I will start to imagine things about niggers and write stories and see if I could hit the publishing lotto.

This is tough and is what Hillary will be facing after win of the presidency. This cable news system is going to pound Hillary or Obama. Likely Obama even though he is getting support through what appears as pledged delegates. All this needs to be validated to go to the convention. Me personally all those delegates can say what they want but need to cast their vote and show their cards. Or is that going to be secret?

A personal question from me is who Obama would pick as Vice President. That is very important because chances are likely the media will (O.J.) Obama to drive out of office and resign. The other facts are who will be Attorney General, A Black in charge of the Attorney General Office, yikes the neo-con’s will go ape shit. Let alone a Black opening up the National Security Secrets with connections to Farrakhan. McCain and the swift boaters are flipping over this one “Wright” now.

129.
On May 11th, 2008 at 11:37 pm, Ugh said:

kmb08 (who sounds awfully familiar) said: Actually, Obama and Hillary have the same number of house/senators supporting them

Reps–Clinton 80, Obama 85
Senators–Clinton 13, Obama 18

So much for touting your own highly informed status.

kmb08 said: Sen. Dodd, for example, said early on, he was very concerned about Obama’s qualifications, but he later endorsed him…go figure!

Go figure that when someone with concerns about one candidate’s qualifications still prefers him to another, that doesn’t speak well of the second candidate.

Mary said: I’d bet money that several of those posting here under female names are not women but use female names

Could be. You got caught using male names at some other blogs, I hear. Weren’t you also busted several times pretending to be black?

Mary said: The next step is to start censoring the comments (as Atrios does) or disable them entirely (TPM & Digby’s approach). My list of must-read blogs has changed considerably over the past 6 months.

The “next step”? Produce a shred of evidence that Benen has ever even considered doing so if you don’t wish to be branded as a paranoid hysteric. Wait, too late. Why not add TCR to your list of must-not-post-while-fucking-nuts blogs?

130.
On May 11th, 2008 at 11:47 pm, Evarest said:

Obama will be the president of hopeful Neo Democracks. Hillary should run independently.

131.
On May 12th, 2008 at 12:18 am, Ann said:

While the rest of the USA has moved on, it is really very sad that the people of West Virginia and Kentucky remain such racists. They don’t realize that in some sense they are rejecting themselves, because Obama is half white. His mom was white and his ancestors came from Ireland and England.

132.
On May 12th, 2008 at 12:31 am, Seth said:

Why is everyone surprised that people in Kentucky and West Virginia are a bunch of poor, inbred racists. I mean, no offense, but when people are uneducated and isolated its easier to convince them of things like that Obama is a Muslim or that Rev Wright speaks directly for him (both things are contradictory after tall). I am originally from Alaska and I can say that we gave him that state because he has common sense and he isn’t part of a political dynasty. We would never vote against anyone based solely on race because AK has a history of race -mixing and tolerance for all. West Virginia and Kentucky, on the other hand, are like America’s states lost to a different time. All the decent and educated people move to real states and leave the losers and ignoramuses behind. Sorry guys, but showing the whole country how racist you are isn’t going to score Hillary any points with the superdelegates. Who wants people from the KKK and Nazi youth representing them, even if they don’t wear the uniforms in public?

133.
On May 12th, 2008 at 12:43 am, Seth said:

Belonging to a black church doesn’t make u a racist just like going to Catholic church doesn’t make you a pedophile. My grandfather is a 82-year-old black man who moved to Alaska from Texas in the 40’s. He married a Indian/Hispanic woman and their kids went on to marry white and Asian people, ending in my generation of non-classifiable children. My grandfather, who hasn’t experienced direct racism in 50-odd years, is still scarred by what happened to him and his family in Texas as a child and he still blames a lot of America’s problems on white people. Does that mean I’m a racist or that my Dad is a racist because we don’t turn him out on the streets or make him take sensitivity-to-white-people classes? NO! And for people to say that because Barack went to Rev Wright’s church that that makes him a racist, screw that too! I learned about saving money, personal respect, my work ethic and a lot of my ideals on how to live my life from from grandfather but I don’t take everything he says to heart, especially that which i know comes from his hardships during his youth. And he definitely doesn’t speak for me!

134.
On May 12th, 2008 at 12:56 am, Tom Cleaver said:

Someone is surprised that a bunch of sixth-generation-inbred dumbass southern-fried hillbillies are, well, dumbass soputhern-fried hillbillies?

As Tom Schaller has pointed out in his book, we don’t need them - let them get drunk on moonshine sitting in the rusting hulk on cinderblock out front of the sagging doublewide.

135.
On May 12th, 2008 at 1:10 am, nicole said:

I wonder why he won Idaho so handily? That’s about as all white as you can get.

136.
On May 12th, 2008 at 2:04 am, Anthony said:

The ignorance of so many voters in this country is very sad. 49% of the vote going to Bush in 2000, 51% going to Bush in 2004. We’ve had such a terrible president for the last 7 1/2 years, and still so many idiots are going to vote for McCain this fall for another 4 years of the same old crap. The only people who benefit from a Republican president are the very rich (less than 5 percent of the population), yet about half of the population still cast their votes for them based on the stupidest reasons (”he’s a born again Christian!” “at least he won’t take away my guns!” “he has a short, easy-to-pronounce name!” “he talks like a cowboy!” “he’s a likeable, everyday guy, just like me!” “he supports ALL wars, so he’s a tough guy!”…). People talk of Obama’s “lack of experience”. So good ole George Dubya’s experience has made him a good president? Here’s a guy who kisses the asses of CEOs and big business and screws the ordinary citizen at every opportunity he gets, and the rednecks of WV and KY love him. Why? They never get information from the source, and instead rely on Rush Limbaugh to tell them what to believe because they’re too dumb to decide for themselves. Obviously, these are the same voters who will choose a white woman over a black man, but it still bothers them to put any woman in a position of power. They would much rather have a white man in power, so they will stupidly and predictably support McCain in the fall. WV and KY should become garbage dumps of America…a just dessert for supporting garbage.

137.
On May 12th, 2008 at 2:58 am, Amelia said:

Insightful analysis by Brownell, #93.

For a nanosecond I had thought that the Obama people had sent out a memo to stop pissing off Clinton voters, but I guess that nanosecond has passed.

Add to the demographic groups who reject Obama by large margins–Catholic, Jewish, Asian, Latino, older, gay, blue-collar, less educated–add also the demographic of people sick and tired of hearing that a Clinton vote is a racist vote.

Once you’re done purging the party of the ever-growing list of enemy undesirables you’ll have no one left but the image in the mirror.

138.
On May 12th, 2008 at 4:48 am, M High said:

ThNumantine said: “Worst case scenario for Obama? Obama 62; Clinton 69. Last I checked she is 167.5 delegates behind him. A seven delegate pick up by May 20th isn’t going to be enough. Especially with the steady “drip” of superdelegates going Obama’s way.”

Your estimates are probably a bit Obama-optimistic, but your point is still valid…to a point. Checking with what some other delegate-knowledgable bloggers have estimated on other websites, West Virginia could go 20-8 Clinton to Obama in delegates, Kentucky could go 36-15 Clinton to Obama, and Oregon could go 29-23 Obama to Clinton…and those are Clinton-optimistic estimates. (Obama will probably out-perform these estimates, by 1-3 more delegates in each state, but only time will tell). Using these Clinton-optimistic estimates, Obama adds 63, Clinton adds 78, for a net gain of 15 for Clinton out the next 3 contests.

And then there’s the wildcard of Puerto Rico after that, which is expected to be another Clinton blowout. Another optimistic estimate would be Clinton gains 37 delegates to 18 for Obama there; and two days later, Montana and South Dakota, which favor Obama, he would gain 17 delegates from those states to Clinton’s 14.

So, out of all six remaining primary contests (ending 6/3), this Clinton-friendly scenario would give Clinton 129 more pledged delegates, to Obama’s 88. If you add that to the current delegate total, that would put Obama at about 1954 to Clinton’s 1826 - a difference of 128 in Obama’s favor.

The Clinton campaign has already conceded that it is virtually impossible for them to catch up to Obama in the pledge delegate count, even when you add in the self-disenfranchised Florida and Michigan tallies. McAuliffe admitted this point blank on Sunday morning. Their goal, instead, is to come within “about 100″ pledged delegates, and essentially claim it’s a tie.

Then, the second part of their ‘path to victory’ is to claim that the popular vote total is more important, and use that wedge to try and convince enough superdelegates to go their way. Right now, Clinton is around 800,000 votes behind Obama in the total popular vote count…but with strong enough turnouts in WV, KY and PR that could be narrowed to a near-tie. And then add in the invalidated MI and FL votes to put them ‘over the top’, and they can cause trouble. This is why Clinton has refused to accept some of the compromise deals on the improper MI and FL votes so far — even though the proposals have been in Clinton’s favor delegate-wise, they want the popular votes in those states to count. In fact, McAuliffe earlier today on camera said he would accept MI and FL delegates counting as only half-delegates, as long as the popular votes ‘counted’.

So, yes, when you look at the delegate math, Clinton’s path to victory is nearly impossible at this point - there’s no way to catch up. Even with 30%, 40%, even 50% margins of victory in WV, KY and PR — PLUS the best delegate agreement possible for her from MI and FL — she still falls way short. That’s why their campaign has been talking up this whole popular vote fantasy scenario. And be careful not to underestimate the power of such an argument — it may not work with the intelligent or informed voters, but we all know that there’s a massive chunk of the electorate that is less intelligent and ill-informed. Which is why Clinton is still in this race (all you need to do is read through the waterheaded scrawlings of the Clinton supporters in this thread to see a prime example of that).

139.
On May 12th, 2008 at 4:54 am, Laura W said:

Racism and race cut both ways. If it’s fair game to raise race as an issue in WV, KY, and IN, it’s fair game to raise it in NC, SC, MS, LA. But we just seem totally unwilling and unable to say that race is a factor in Obama’s favor, just as it is a factor that works against him. And frankly, I think he and his campaign surrogates have been absolutely masterful in turning racism back onto the Clintons, almost from the get-go. It will never be reported accurately or honestly because nobody who supports Barack Obama wants to believe that he is just a politician who knows exactly what buttons to push to get what he wants.

So, I think race is fair game. But let’s be clear: if it’s good for the goose, it’s also good for the gander.

140.
On May 12th, 2008 at 5:03 am, Laura W said:

@ 138:

And be careful not to underestimate the power of such an argument — it may not work with the intelligent or informed voters, but we all know that there’s a massive chunk of the electorate that is less intelligent and ill-informed. Which is why Clinton is still in this race (all you need to do is read through the waterheaded scrawlings of the Clinton supporters in this thread to see a prime example of that).

And you’re a moron. You might have an education (Hey! So do I!), but you seem to lack in anything resembling empathy, reality or common decency. Who the hell do you think you are to make such outrageous comments about “uneducated” voters. This is just a pathetic comment from a pisant.

Grow up and start treating others like they have a right to belong here - with or without an education.

JHC: Individuals like you give me — and a lot of other Clinton supporters — the creeps because of your judgmental, derisive attitude toward anybody who doesn’t meet your educational standards.

141.
On May 12th, 2008 at 5:23 am, Laura W said:

I’m curious: just how many of the so-called educated posters here even know what it’s like to live in predominantly Black communities - and poor to boot! Or to work in some of the worst neighborhoods in cities that are plagued by crime, drugs, gang warfare, prostitution.

It’s grand to hang with the upscale liberal whites in populous urban homogenous chic urban areas — Seattle, Atlanta, Portland, San Francisco, LA, Chicago, New York City — and tut tut about all those poor white inbred racists in Appalachia. I’d lay money down that 90% of you have never spent more than a day in anything resembling poverty, or in areas filled with crime and crack houses.

And if you ever had to, you wouldn’t know how to act. The fear would be so strong you’d probably p*** your pants just getting out of the area. Then you could head on back to those safe, chic, yuppy ‘hoods and do some more tut-tut-ing about all those poor angry Blacks with guns, doin’ drugs on the corner.

You are what you despise.

142.
On May 12th, 2008 at 6:36 am, Steve said:

I’m curious: just how many of the so-called educated posters here even know what it’s like to live in predominantly Black communities - and poor to boot! Or to work in some of the worst neighborhoods in cities that are plagued by crime, drugs, gang warfare, prostitution.

Been there, done that, Laura; Grand Avenue, Akron Ohio. South of Exchange Street.

And your point is…???

143.
On May 12th, 2008 at 7:27 am, ChillRock said:

According to Hillary Clinton, her supporters are all gun toting, uneducated, ” hard working” blue-collar white folks that live in their perpetual bubble. Well does the majority of this country realize that there are many “hard working blue collar minorities in this country? Me being one of them. Do people understand that Hillary Clinton at one time had 60% of the black vote? This was until Bill shot his mouth of in South Carolina. I’m insulted these people have the audacity to insinuate that the only “hard working” blue collar workers are white. This election became a racial issue when mainstream white America pulled the race card. If anything, I realize just how divided this country is. PS, I’m a black, college educated,”hard working” blue collar worker that owns guns. Barack was right, I am bitter!!!

144.
On May 12th, 2008 at 8:28 am, Jwash said:

It’s a shame that in a country so great as this one is..That we have so many uneducated, and ignorant people in this country…We have a man that is trying to bring this country together, a man who was raised by a single Mother,(white Mother) just paid off his student loans, is more like a normal person than any of the candidates..And you still have these
3rd grade educated people (no offense to the real 3rd graders, who are probably more
smarter) open their stupid mouths with the most rediculous things I have ever heard..
Steve 10 I’m surprised that you are even on the internet…Did someone type that for you?

145.
On May 12th, 2008 at 9:07 am, Candy Fontalbert said:

Being a West Virginian, I know that race is an issue with some of our constituency, mostly the less educated and less informed. I apologize that this is true. I have fought this all of my life, but with some people that I know, to no avail.

I know that Barack will make an exceptional President, that he will work hard for all Americans, even those in our state, regardless of their bigotry; that he will bring our troops home; that he will restore our stature in the world; that he will promote a global economy that is fair to all; that he will work diligently for peace in the Middle East; that he will fight poverty, not only here but around the world; that he will work to make our educational system what it should be and more….

Barack Obama is one of those rare visonaries who can inspire us to be better than we ever thought we could be; who believes that the individual has worth but that the individual working within the community can achieve whatever goals it sets.

Barack Obama - a leader for the 21st century.

146.
On May 12th, 2008 at 11:03 am, SickofBushClintonBush said:

“The evidence is entirely anecdotal, but an analysis of the race in West Virginia produced similar results.”

…and what do we have to say about anecdotal evidence?

phhhhhht bullspit I say.

147.
On May 12th, 2008 at 11:16 am, Mary said:

“Could be. You got caught using male names at some other blogs, I hear. Weren’t you also busted several times pretending to be black?”

No.

Smear the person, ignore the message. Typical.

148.
On May 12th, 2008 at 11:57 am, Utah SEO said:

it doesn’t matter if Hillary wins these two primaries by a land slide… wherever and whenever Obama has won it has been a landslide victory for him i mean usually the diffrence in votes have been at least 10%

149.
On May 12th, 2008 at 12:00 pm, Ugh said:

Mary said: No. Smear the person, ignore the message. Typical.

Oh, you only pretended to be male, then, while indignantly accusing women who disagree with you of being men. Thanks for the clarification. (Crossing eyes and making circles with index finger next to temple.)

150.
On May 12th, 2008 at 1:32 pm, Arizona Man said:

I hear Hillary supporters all the time saying “Look what Bill did” or “Bill Clinton was a great leader” etc.

Stop trying to bring him into this election. If she won SHE would be president not him. There is no use anymore having Clinton and Obama supporters debating and arguing. Everyone has made up their mind and it’s too late in the game to change them. If you hate Obama, you probably always will no matter what great things he may do for this country. The same goes for Hillary. I don’t personally like Hillary but on the issues at hand Obama and Clinton are very similiar. I don’t want to listen to her talk for another 4 years because she is extremely annoying to listen to. But you know what, IF she happens to win the primary nomination, I will support her.

All you democratic supporters out there need to stop the hate speeches and fighting. Go out vote, make your voice heard, and if your preferred candidate doesn’t win, then oh well. McCain will win in November if this BS keeps up. If all Obama supporters vowed to support Hillary if she won, and vice versa, then McCain wouldn’t stand a chance in hell against the Dem party.

151.
On May 12th, 2008 at 1:52 pm, AL said:

I was reading that jacksmith gave Hillary 35 years of experience, Where did he get the information? This is a false statement.

For years this country has educated us and our children falsely, most of the information in our school books were and still are false. However, a lot of us did not believe what was being taught so we went out and did research to find the truth. If you attended U.S. schools that means 180 days of the year you listen to someone telling you falsity about history and other things, multiply that times 12 years.

Why are some of you so willing to forget the atrocities that the Clinton’s did with Whitewater, remember the people who lost their lives over the financial and political greed of Hillary.

It does not matter the race of a person. I am tired of all of the political rhetoric, if you put Clinton or McCain in the White House you will get the same thing and that is the bottom line. For those who think that Obama will only give minorities positions you are not to smart, look at most of his ontorage and his political advisers, he is going to put the best people around him and I can guarantee you it won’t all be minorities.

Still 45 years later after the speech by Martin Luther King were he stated “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin (or by their name) but by the content of their character”

When will this dream become a reality?

152.
On May 12th, 2008 at 3:18 pm, Frank said:

Why don’t you guys just ignore jacksmith? People who are at the level of intellect to come up with an argument like that really can’t be reasoned with. Spend your time on the reasonable non-complete partisans. Or find some creationists if you’re really bored…

The whole race issue is frustrating. Accusing non-obama voters of racism is counter productive so we just have to deal with it. No one said it was going to be easy, but if we push this through the country will be a different place come January!

153.
On May 12th, 2008 at 3:50 pm, June said:

Obama did not actually ‘win’ Nebraska!!!! A caucas was held here and less than 4,000 people were able to participate out of 250,000 plus democrats! The elderly, sick, those without cars, and those who had to work, those who could not stand in the cold for hours, etc. were left out. I was part of the aformentioned group. Information about a caucas being held was not advertising well and few people even understood why it was being held.

Obama does not stand a snowball chance in the Nebraska’s summer sun of winning Nebraska in a regular election. Even those I know who were able to go to the caucas (two people) said this.

154.
On May 12th, 2008 at 4:01 pm, TCG said:

June

Caucuses Rock.

And ya he has a chance in NE.

NE awards electoral votes by congressional district.

155.
On May 12th, 2008 at 5:03 pm, Evarest said:

I do not see WV, KY voting for him in November. Stopping the election process, so that no one knows how the rest of the country votes, is an ultimate insult (hoping democrats can be steered to brain washed mentality, that God Obama is the one to be worshipped). Sounds like polygamist’s view of world.

Empty words, offensive techniques will carry him so far. I am sure Obama is a fine human being but sold out to K Mart (Kennedy, Kerry). If he partners with Hillary, I see a healing process. Otherwise a division has been brought on to himself.

His arrogance in trying to buy out Hillary’s subservience makes me LOL.

156.
On May 12th, 2008 at 5:51 pm, Lisa said:

When whites vote overwhelmingly Clinton, they are uneducated.

How about blacks who vote 95 percent OBama, are they uneducated?

157.
On May 12th, 2008 at 7:20 pm, biko24601 said:

JACKSMITH:

If you think Bill Clinton is running for president — again — then YOU MIGHT NOT ONLY BE A REDNECK, BUT A TOTAL IDIOT.

So, Jacksmith please, again, explain to me how Hillary Clinton as a 7 year Senator from New York — with not much legislative knock your socks off bills passed, at least not any more than any other junior senator on the Dems side — has all of this great experience??? So, being First Lady AND failing horribly at tackling health care (regardless of how many old ladies the guy you think is still running for president yells down from the stage — with his secret service agents standing nearby) this makes those voting for Sen. Obama — having spent 8 years as a legislator in Illinois and 4 years in the U.S. Senate — less experienced?

Or is it that people from West Virginia and Kentucky are just smarter than the rest of the country?

You’re right, anyone who votes for Obama is an idiot, Jacksmith, and those who vote for Bill Clinton — I mean, Hillary Clinton are geniuses!

I’ll never counter you again.

And EVAREST: Although I agree with you — I’m not a fan of either Kerry or any Kennedy this side of RFK– Barack Obama has no intention of pushing her out of the race. He’s never said a word about her dropping out. Yet another example of a candidate being blamed for the actions, thoughts, desires and words of another.

Just like JackSmith, who still thinks Bill Clinton is running for president, it’s less like polygamy (and as a Christian, I find your refering to Obama — who is also a Christian and not a Muslim just to be clear to those of us idiots - thanks JackSmith for clearing all that up - as God highly offensive and completely idiotic) and more like an identity crisis.

Nobody knows who their enemy is any more. When the Clintons pit black voters against white voters — you know something has gone terribly, terribly wrong.

ARIZONAMAN: Couldn’t have said it better myself. Democrats — listen to him. He makes a lot of sense! (I so agree with you, I cringe thinking of having to listen to Hillary Clinton for 4 years — the same way I feel about George Bush. He speaks like an idiot — she speaks like a condescending fourth grade school teacher who thinks everyone else is an idiot but her — and JackSmith — on top of being shrill and phony. At least McCain tells you what he thinks, shaken and not stirred… although he has no idea who the Shiite and Sunnis are;-).

Finally to LISA: Anyone who doesn’t vote on substantive issues or for that individual they feel will represent us best in the eyes of the rest of the world and votes based on race, gender, age, political party or religion — is uneducated!

Signed,
An Italian-American, Moderate, Registered “Independent”, Centrist New Yorker voting for Sen. Barack Obama

158.
On May 12th, 2008 at 7:44 pm, bill said:

The Republican Party will bounce Obama off the wall and the Democrats will lose an election the Republicans had all but given up 9 months ago……. it cant believe its luck over Obama and now thinks its in a candy store its got so much shit on him to throw, starting with Rezko………..

you people are so naive, it hurts

159.
On May 12th, 2008 at 8:07 pm, biko24601 said:

Bill:

Rezko? Really? No Keating 5? No 100 year war in Iraq? No Bush Administration destroying the love affair the nation has with the Republican Party? Really, bounce off the walls? Really? So much shit on him to throw? Really? You know this, how? Really, Bill? Really?

Is this Bill O’Reilly?

Which people are so naive, Bill? How much does it hurt, because really… I think you hurt for reasons that can’t be mentioned on this web page.

160.
On May 12th, 2008 at 8:50 pm, Rosie said:

If you thought that L.A. Times article was painful, check it out this from the Financial Times: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2a50425a-1f86-11dd-9216-000077b07658,s01=1.html

161.
On May 12th, 2008 at 11:33 pm, joseph said:

About fifteen years ago, a college classmate and I were trekking through Wheeling, WV, when we stopped at the local Dairy Queen near the main downtown intersection. When she got out of the car, she literally stopped traffic (that had the green light) as the locals put their cars in park and stared at her, and then some started yelling insults.

It was because she was Chinese.

That left a deep impression of the state.

162.
On May 13th, 2008 at 3:43 pm, katie said:

What is to be expected from these two states? They are what they are and there they will remain. Does anyone really expect anything different?

Someone is voting for Obama and apparently in certain states it is not all people of color, because they don’t live there. it’s interesting to listen to the standards that are being set for him when this country overwhelmingly voted in the current administration for another fun four years.

If you don’t like him for what ever reason then don’t vote for him, if Hillary is your cup of tea for what ever reason cast your vote her way or if neither is vote for McCain. What is the guarantee that who ever is voted in will do what is “best” for all of us? It has become a ridiculous campaign about race, association and other foolishness that has little to do with what will effect our lives over the next four years (who ever and where ever you live in this country) and believing what ever you want to believe on TV, on Yahoo, on everyone’s got one blog.

Some people believe it or not are NOT impressed by any of these presidential candidates and it has nothing to do with ageism, racism or sexism.

163.
On May 13th, 2008 at 6:42 pm, ck said:

Obama has been a Senator since 1996. Clinton has been a senator since 2000.

He is an attorney and expert on Constitutional Law.

Oh…and he tells the truth. Both Clintons seem to have some problem with that…they admit.

164.
On May 13th, 2008 at 10:08 pm, Barton said:

Dumb hicks.

165.
On May 13th, 2008 at 11:22 pm, Gary said:

people, thanks for you inflammatory comments. It’s sad about half of your comments are 95% inaccurate. But thanks again for conducting your appalachia smear campaign. Actually being a WV obama supporter i’m kinda hurt by your comments. I’m sure they are a coon hunting organization in every state. But as always the media likes to pick on the working class people.

166.
On May 14th, 2008 at 9:35 pm, Brandon said:

It is really sad to see all of the terrible things said about Kentuckians and West Virginians on this forum by people claiming to be something better. Would prejudice against a black person be any different than your prejudice against a poor rural southerner? I can’t see that it would. In fact, if you were reared to know better than that then it is far worse on your behalf.

Anyone who would willingly attend the church of Jeremiah Wright and listen to his ravings on a regular basis must be terribly racist against whites or completely mentally disabled. If Obama isn’t a racist then he must be an idiot - therefore has no business leading our country!

Oh, and by the way - Obama’s white ancestors once lived in Kentucky and even owned slaves! Now - that must really trouble you far left nut jobs. Who will you vote for now?

167.
On May 15th, 2008 at 4:51 pm, Dorthy said:

I totally agree with Brandon. Seems like there are many who are prejudiced against West Virginians so they are no better than any other bigot. I happen to live in West Virginia in a very cultural, college town. We are home to one of the finest medical centers in the world. We are well educated and, maybe to the surprise of many of you, we have money—-and lots of it. We are not poor, dumb country folk. Most people have no clue what West Virginia or its people are like. They just make the assumption that we’re hillbillies and ignorant. Not true. Sure, we have our share of ignorant people in WV but, in ratio to other places in this country, we’re even with the rest of you. We are not privvy to more idiots than anyone else despite our location. It’s a sad statement about this country to hear the unfounded opinions of Americans when they are bashing fellow Americans.

168.
On May 20th, 2008 at 10:34 pm, Gary said:

Kentucky is the mecca of inbred hick farmers

169.
On May 21st, 2008 at 3:05 pm, Arizona Man said:

Really Brandon? John McCain is also a decendant of slave owners. And do you really want to try and argue based on some minimally documents history from over a hundred or so years ago? Based on that arguement if my great great grandfather did something horrible, I’d never be able to run for office?

Why is everyone so intent on bashing the other candidates so much? People truly get offended these days when you insult the person they want to be president.

I’m not going to change your mind on anything Brandon, and you probably won’t change my mind on issues either. We’ve already made up our minds, and that’s fine that we don’t see eye to eye. It is your right to be able to vote for whomever you feel you want to support. That’s what is great about this country. Yeah, Obama is black, Hillary is a woman, and McCain is old. So what. None of those characteristics should have ANY bearing whatsoever on an election.

Unfortunately there is prejudice all over the world. It’s a bunch of crap. I live in Arizona and others tend to think we’re either all cowboys, or rednecks. Everywhere has a bad stigma of some kind. It’s ok if you hate Obama, It’s ok if you hate Hillary or McCain. You don’t have to like them them all. Find the one that you do like (if there are any) and vote.

Let’s just bring down the hostility a bit, and vote with our minds, and quit insulting each other.

Quoted from

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/04/obama_ancestors_owned_slaves_a_researcher_finds/

The same records show that one of Obama’s great-great-great-great-great-grandmothers, Mary Duvall, also owned two black slaves.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the senator’s ancestors “are representative of America.”

“While a relative owned slaves, another fought for the Union in the Civil War,” Burton said. “And it is a true measure of progress that the descendant of a slave owner would come to marry a student from Kenya and produce a son who would grow up to be a candidate for president of the United States.”

Reitwiesner found that two other presidential candidates were descendants of slave owners: Republican John McCain”

170.
On May 21st, 2008 at 6:43 pm, jeff said:

Why Obama didn’t campaign in West Virginia and Kentucky? It’s because his volunteers feared for there life when they went door to door. I would leave to if people cursed at you, sick dogs on you and threatened your life. If you bring those Obama signs in there neighborhod they said they will shoot you and I would get the hell out of there too. Which was not covered by the news media. Then again America is not prejudice right!!!

171.
On May 21st, 2008 at 8:04 pm, pat said:

There absolutely are negatives about Barack Obama, but the only problem is that these racist people are not educated enough to be able to state a single one. Each candidate offers positives and negatives, and although the Democrats are the better side, they will lose the election because of racists and bigots. Hilary and Barack are united on about 90% of the issues, as they have both stated. John McCain is much less similar in his views, being a Republican. If you still support Hilary although she has already lost, than you have NO NO NO leg to stand on in a debate about why you’d vote for McCain over Obama.

172.
On June 9th, 2008 at 8:18 pm, Rex said:

Articles of this ilk are pathetic. It’s not about race, it’s about class.

I challenge the author to travel to the coalfields of eastern Kentucky, where you will find blacks living among whites, AMONG, not separate from, as in many places. The parents and grandparents of the whites and blacks there worked in the mines together, and respect each other.

One of the reasons Obama lost in WV and KY is because he DID NOT CAMPAIGN THERE. What kind of message does that send to a constituency? Maybe….you don’t matter to me; maybe you’re not worth the effort…

Obama and his supporters are race baiters.