[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Earth Changes Summary - June 2025: Extreme Weather, Planetary Upheaval,

China’s Tofu-Dreg High-Speed Rail Station Ceiling Suddenly Floods, Steel Bars Snap

Russia Moves to Nationalize Country's Third Largest Gold Mining Firm

Britain must prepare for civil war | David Betz

The New MAGA Turf War Over National Intelligence

Happy fourth of july

The Empire Has Accidentally Caused The Rebirth Of Real Counterculture In The West

Workers install 'Alligator Alcatraz' sign for Florida immigration detention center

The Biggest Financial Collapse in China’s History Is Here, More Terrifying Than Evergrande!

Lightning

Cash Jordan NYC Courthouse EMPTIED... ICE Deports 'Entire Building

Trump Sparks Domestic Labor Renaissance: Native-Born Workers Surge To Record High As Foreign-Born Plunge

Mister Roberts (1965)

WE BROKE HIM!! [Early weekend BS/nonsense thread]

I'm going to send DOGE after Elon." -Trump

This is the America I grew up in. We need to bring it back

MD State Employee may get Arrested by Sheriff for reporting an Illegal Alien to ICE

RFK Jr: DTaP vaccine was found to have link to Autism

FBI Agents found that the Chinese manufactured fake driver’s licenses and shipped them to the U.S. to help Biden...

Love & Real Estate: China’s new romance scam

Huge Democrat shift against Israel stuns CNN

McCarthy Was Right. They Lied About Everything.

How Romans Built Domes

My 7 day suspension on X was lifted today.

They Just Revealed EVERYTHING... [Project 2029]

Trump ACCUSED Of MASS EXECUTING Illegals By DUMPING Them In The Ocean

The Siege (1998)

Trump Admin To BAN Pride Rainbow Crosswalks, DoT Orders ALL Distractions REMOVED

Elon Musk Backing Thomas Massie Against Trump-AIPAC Challenger

Skateboarding Dog


(s)Elections
See other (s)Elections Articles

Title: OBAMA OR HILLARY? WHITE MEN WILL DECIDE
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.newswithviews.com/Roberts/carey217.htm
Published: Mar 18, 2008
Author: Carey Roberts
Post Date: 2008-03-18 09:15:03 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 762
Comments: 71

As Barack Obama relishes his recent primary victories in Wyoming and Mississippi, let’s probe the dynamics of race and gender in this increasingly-bitter Democratic race.

Just a few months ago Hillary Clinton was a shoe-in for the Democratic presidential nomination. Now amazingly, the latest Gallup poll shows Barack Obama leading by five points.

So what prompted the turn-around? Let’s examine the Democratic primaries and caucuses where exit polling was done. Of these 29 contests, Clinton won 14 and Obama prevailed in 15.

The American electorate consists of four major voting blocks: white females, white males, blacks, and hispanics. In most Democratic primaries, white females outnumber white males by about 50%. In the South, blacks represent a sizable proportion of the electorate, while in California and the Southwest, Hispanics are a force to be reckoned with.

For white women, blacks, and Hispanics, their vote in the Democratic primaries and caucuses has been unsurprising:

- White women: This electoral group has lined up predictably behind Mrs. Clinton. The only states where Clinton lost the white female vote were Illinois, Iowa, New Mexico, and Vermont. - Blacks: African-Americans have voted overwhelmingly in favor of Obama. - Hispanics: About two-thirds of Hispanics have tipped their hat to Clinton, with telling effects on the races in Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas. So while the votes of white women, blacks, and Hispanics have been predictable, white men have been anything other than humdrum.

In 14 states -- Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Tennessee -- the white male vote went for Mrs. Clinton.

By contrast in 13 states – California, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Vermont – white men pulled the lever in favor of Mr. Obama. In Texas and Delaware they split evenly between the two candidates.

Now look at the results. When Hillary captured the white male vote, she won 9 out of 14 contests. But when the guys favored Obama, he triumphed in 9 of the 15 races. If that’s not throwing an election, I don’t know what is.

For example in Utah, Obama cornered 64% of the white male vote. In Vermont, male voters turned out in droves to support Obama by a 29-point edge. Obama easily won both of those primary battles.

In three states -- Connecticut, Georgia, and Maryland – white males joined forces with Blacks to put Obama over the top. In Connecticut, Virginia, and Wisconsin, Obama overpowered Clinton’s female advantage thanks to his strong showing among white males.

By contrast, the white female vote did not determine the outcome in any of the Obama victories. As ABC pollster Gary Langer concludes, “in states with significant but not vast numbers of black voters, and few Hispanics, white men are critical.” Despite their smaller numbers, Democratic white males, who are supporting Obama by a 60-40% margin, have emerged as the critical swing group.

So is men’s support of Barack Obama the latest example of incorrigible sexism, the dreaded patriarchy again conspiring to keep women down?

Here’s the surprising answer: Among white females, 35% say the sex of the candidate plays a major role, and these women voted for Clinton by an overwhelming 78-17% margin, according to ABC. In comparison, only 17% of white males say the candidate’s sex is important. And get this – those men also favored Clinton 54 to 35%.

So sexism clearly is a factor in the 2008 Democratic primary race. For women and men alike, that bias operates strongly in favor of candidate Hillary Clinton.

Democrats have always considered the gender gap to be a knock on conservativism, proof the Republican Party is unable to attract the female vote. But this time the Dems must face up to the disparity within their own ranks.

So why have so many liberal white men turned their backs on Hillary? Polling data reveal men are less apt to believe Clinton would be the best commander-in-chief.

And men are 17 points less likely to believe Clinton would unite the country. Having been on the receiving end of Hillary’s gender put-downs, white males wonder if Hillary’s agenda is to let them out to pasture while the pantsuits run the country. David Paul Kuhn has written in The Neglected Voter: White Men and the Democratic Dilemma, “No factor has been more instrumental in causing the Democratic decline in presidential politics than the loss of white men.” If Barack Obama ends up winning the nomination, we will add, “No factor was more responsible for the demise of Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid than her snubbing of the white male voter.”

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-31) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#32. To: HOUNDDAWG (#23)

We'd settle for someone we like and respect.

He's the first likable candidate that has gotten this far since Ron Reagan.

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   10:13:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: iconoclast (#27)

My eye witness observation (albeit, limited to one polling place) is that women of all political stripes did not sit on their butts.

As if they actually affect the ultimate outcome.

It didn't matter that I've stood in line for hours at the polls for the past 20 years, Delaware's three electoral votes went to the person I was voting against every time.

In fact Delawareans need not even bother going to the polls because the outcome would be the same if none of us voted.

The social security/Medicare/Israel/Department Of Education/military industrial complex platform is re-elected every time.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2008-03-18   10:18:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: HOUNDDAWG, lodwick (#31)

The use of the term "copout" implies that you have special insight

I don't know if it qualifies as insight, but I can offer you this.

A lifetime occupation of presenting opportunities for change and improvement in business operations revealed to me an astounding number of persons of all genders and colors with a mind boggling amount fear of and resistance to change.

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   10:23:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Cynicom (#30)

Wanna bet????

No way.

It's been straight downhill since 1963 from my perspective.

Lod  posted on  2008-03-18   10:24:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: iconoclast (#32)

He's the first likable candidate that has gotten this far since Ron Reagan.

Anyone who isn't a escaped war criminal would seem marginally likable when we're at Threat Level Hillary!

You don't believe that some white men voted for Obama in any meaningful numbers because they like him, do you?

He'd get the same votes if he does a Stepin Fetchit impression, but he would zero out if he turned native and aped Al Sharpton.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2008-03-18   10:27:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: HOUNDDAWG (#33)

As if they actually affect the ultimate outcome.

I have no idea what people of your attitude are doing on a forum of political discussion.

Wouldn't packing packing up your duds and ammo and heading for an Idaho or Montana enclave make more sense?

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   10:27:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: iconoclast (#27)

The fact that the contest has gone this far is to the everlasting shame of surrendering white men in a pout.

Since I no longer vote for anyone, for anything, I'm one white man who doesn't fit your equation. As I've told you before, for purely selfish reasons, I'd rather look at Obama & Michelle for the next 4 years, as opposed to THEM. I still think he's an unabashed socialist who will be no worse, or no better than any of the previous presidents I've had the displeasure of watching over the years. They're figure heads, nothing more.

Good luck with the horse race. I just happen to believe the Clinton's are borderline personalities, capable of anything.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-03-18   10:30:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Jethro Tull (#4)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-18   10:33:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: HOUNDDAWG (#36)

You don't believe that some white men voted for Obama in any meaningful numbers because they like him, do you?

Frankly, I do believe it, but I don't give a rat's ass if you're assumption is true.

He'd get the same votes if he does a Stepin Fetchit impression, but he would zero out if he turned native and aped Al Sharpton.

If one thing has been crystal clear from day one it is that Obama is no Jackson or Sharpton. In fact those two and large numbers of other blacks were, like you, dead set on settling for "same ole, same ole" at the onset of the contest.

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   10:38:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: ghostdogtxn (#39)

Agree all around.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-03-18   10:40:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: ghostdogtxn (#39)

I fully expect the Clintons to switch to backing McCain in the fall

They're all members of the same disgusting "single party".

Bush sees his radical, traitorous legacy being carried forward no matter which of these two get elected.

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   10:41:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: iconoclast (#34)

A lifetime occupation of presenting opportunities for change and improvement in business operations revealed to me an astounding number of persons of all genders and colors with a mind boggling amount fear of and resistance to change.

Perhaps the opportunities you present are acceptable to you because you're enamored with change for its own sake? Of course it's quite possible that you are a well of great wisdom and make the best kind of recommendations, but it is not yet their time..

In any case, if your instincts serve you well then I respect that but we use different methodologies to arrive at that which works for us.

I'm shooting from the hip here, but, if you know that people are reluctant to change (it even says so in the Declaration of Independence how folks are predisposed to suffer under that which is tolerable) then is it wise to war on human nature in pursuit of your immediate political goals?

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2008-03-18   10:45:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: ghostdogtxn (#39)

Obama's got the nomination sewn up. Hillary needed to win decisively in Ohio and Texas; she eked out a narrow win in Ohio and lost Texas in caucuses. The math says she's finished.

I hope and believe you are correct on all, dog.

But, one thing for sure ... we better keep our shit helmets buckled on tight right through to November.

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   10:46:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: iconoclast (#42)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-18   10:47:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: iconoclast (#44)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-18   10:48:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: ghostdogtxn (#45)

Yeah, and I gotta say, the fact that Obama scares the Zionazis encourages me greatly. Like he's not all the way in their pocket yet and they aren't sure of him.

Perhaps he is "useful"?????

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-18   10:49:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: iconoclast (#40)

You don't believe that some white men voted for Obama in any meaningful numbers because they like him, do you?

Frankly, I do believe it, but I don't give a rat's ass if you're assumption is true.

He'd get the same votes if he does a Stepin Fetchit impression, but he would zero out if he turned native and aped Al Sharpton.

If one thing has been crystal clear from day one it is that Obama is no Jackson or Sharpton. In fact those two and large numbers of other blacks were, like you, dead set on settling for "same ole, same ole" at the onset of the contest.

I hope you won't harm yourself because of our little chat.

You seem upset again that human nature is robbing you of the satisfaction you obviously need or want.

I didn't make the rules of the human condition and if it was up to me I'd let you re-write them, 'cause you're a really smart, handsome, friendly, popular guy and I'm sure everybody would really like what you did with human nature if only you could make us all in your image......

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2008-03-18   10:52:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: HOUNDDAWG (#43)

I'm shooting from the hip here, but, if you know that people are reluctant to change (it even says so in the Declaration of Independence how folks are predisposed to suffer under that which is tolerable) then is it wise to war on human nature in pursuit of your immediate political goals?

Is it wiser to surrender? I didn't then and I won't now, and, all in all, I enjoyed the hell out of a career of success and satisfaction as did my business clients and associates.

Hope springs eternal. ;-)

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   10:56:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: HOUNDDAWG (#48)

I didn't make the rules of the human condition and if it was up to me I'd let you re-write them, 'cause you're a really smart, handsome, friendly, popular guy and I'm sure everybody would really like what you did with human nature if only you could make us all in your image.. I didn't make the rules of the human condition and if it was up to me I'd let you re-write them, 'cause you're a really smart, handsome, friendly, popular guy and I'm sure everybody would really like what you did with human nature if only you could make us all in your image..

Damn I like that. Dawg for prez e dent...

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-18   11:09:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: Cynicom (#47)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-18   11:40:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: ghostdogtxn (#46)

And especially beyond November. I hope Obama picks a good VP, like Jim Webb, maybe. This may be a tag-team presidency.

Very true.

Men never rise, only fall on their own. Hasn't the headstrong, un-listening, recruiter of yes-men now occupying the highest political office of the land written that message large a clear?

It should be his epitaph, and it should be a legacy-lesson for the rest of American History.

Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-18   11:43:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: christine (#0)

WHITE MEN WILL DECIDE

Oh, I dunno................

JMHO -

The democrats will end up with both clinton and obama on the ticket.

The democrats will turn out well ahead of the republicans 3:2 or better.

The democrats will win every demographic across the board.

It won't be close. and.................. which ever side wins, it will be won without the vote of at least 1 WhiteGuy...........................

Resist!

WhiteGuy  posted on  2008-03-18   12:44:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: lodwick (#28)

Surely, it can't get much worse.

It can, and it will still be your fault.

Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!

Tauzero  posted on  2008-03-18   12:50:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: christine (#0)

OBAMA OR HILLARY? WHITE MEN WILL DECIDE

It's about time we get to decide something. I will take Hillary thank you.

God is always good!

RickyJ  posted on  2008-03-18   12:52:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: Jethro Tull (#38)

I just happen to believe the Clinton's are borderline personalities, capable of anything.

They are capable of anything, but that doesn't mean they can do anything.

He's getting a blank check. If they oppose Obama too hard, the whole multicult comes crashing down.

She has to win *before* that happens.

Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!

Tauzero  posted on  2008-03-18   12:55:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: ghostdogtxn (#51)

It's like they aren't sure what to make of him, so they want to get rid of him.

What truly gives them the willies is that which they can't understand.

Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!

Tauzero  posted on  2008-03-18   13:00:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: Tauzero (#57)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-18   13:12:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: RickyJ (#55)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-18   13:12:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: Jethro Tull, iconoclast (#38)

I'd rather look at Obama & Michelle for the next 4 years, as opposed to THEM.

Roger that!

If we have no say in who gets elected but we can decide who gets RE-elected, then the last thing we should ever do is encourage them by letting them get back in office.

All things being equal (both candidates are NWO-approved) we should replace the president every four years. And, since none are more obnoxious than the Clintons, we should never, EVER let those slimy, corrupt, murdering, shape-shifting lizards back into The White House.

In fact, the one form of protest left to us (if only Americans weren't so greedy and stupid) is we could effectively abolish re-elections by replacing every politician in every election!

Imagine editorial writers trying to spin that into "with the consent of the governed".

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2008-03-19   3:01:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: ghostdogtxn, RickyJ, All (#59)

On 2008-03-18 13:12:55, ghostdogtxn wrote:

To: RickyJ

It's about time we get to decide something. I will take Hillary thank you.

I'll take Obama.

I've been real busy since the fall and have not been on here nearly as much. I finally came on here to read tonight after being away for a couple months.

Reading this thread is so eye opening, and this post above has just made me stop and freeze, to see these words. It's just unbelieveable what this election has come to.

This will be the first election since I've been old enough to vote that I will not vote in a presidential election. I can't with good conscience vote in this election, all three candidates are horrific.

Diana  posted on  2008-03-19   4:29:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: HOUNDDAWG (#60)

In fact, the one form of protest left to us (if only Americans weren't so greedy and stupid) is we could effectively abolish re-elections by replacing every politician in every election!

Excellent idea to win back American, Hounddawg, but I suspect the ruling elites would find a way around it. Something like the French Revolution would do the job, but then another Napoleon would come along and give the lemmings a new hero.

Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think.

Zoroaster  posted on  2008-03-19   4:38:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: Zoroaster (#62)

Yeah, if the incumbent promises the larger increase in social security and Medicare bennies then she/he is a shoe-in.

If Americans were principled enough to abolish reelections then we wouldn't be in this mess.

I'm just skipping along and wishin' out loud in my own Pollanna way.

Yes it's a big wide world we live in,

but I can't believe it's true;

Out of everyone in this whole wide world

I fell in love with you….

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2008-03-19   5:22:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: Diana (#61)

I meant I would take Hillary over Obama. I don't like either of them and am voting for the Constitution party candidate. Also I know we really don't get to decide anything anyway. At least not at the voting booth.

God is always good!

RickyJ  posted on  2008-03-19   5:24:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: Diana (#61)

This will be the first election since I've been old enough to vote that I will not vote in a presidential election. I can't with good conscience vote in this election, all three candidates are horrific.

I'm done, too.

If Ron Paul is on the ticket I'll vote, otherwise I'm finished.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2008-03-19   5:25:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: Jethro Tull (#8)

How very white of you.

Steve Sailer says it should be, "How very whiter of you."

The stupider people are the more surprised they are when you kill them.

YertleTurtle  posted on  2008-03-19   6:03:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: Diana (#61)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-19   9:46:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: ghostdogtxn (#67)

When I had cancer my doctor said I could either have a radical nephrectomy, which might kill me, or don't have one, in which case the cancer might kill me. I didn't get to choose not to have cancer. Understand? We have to make our choices within the range of options we are given, not the ones we would like.

Which one did you choose?

God is always good!

RickyJ  posted on  2008-03-19   19:39:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: ghostdogtxn (#67)

I'm very very very sorry that we don't get to pick Ron Paul.

I'm not. He wasn't and isn't serious anyway. I am voting for someone who is actually running, not Dem or Repub, but the Constitution party candidate.

God is always good!

RickyJ  posted on  2008-03-19   19:40:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: RickyJ (#68)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-20   9:34:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: RickyJ (#69)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-20   9:34:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]