Chicago Sun-Times columnist Carol Marin writes about Barack Obama’s problem with women:
A few hours after leaving the “Women for Obama” luncheon, I ran into Sarah, not her real name. I’ve known her for a few years. A single mom, she free-lances, working as many jobs as she can to support two growing boys. She dreams of a permanent gig with benefits, but it’s still just a dream.
A 37-year-old Democrat, she is also a college grad and a news junkie who has watched this campaign like a hawk. She surprised me with her anger Tuesday, saying she’s voting for McCain.
To Sarah, Barack Obama is like the organic chicken at lunch. Sleek, elegant, beautifully prepared. Too cool.
And Marin says that Sarah was a Hillary Clinton supporter, but not a PUMA-type supporter.
Of course, that is just an anecdote, but Marin goes on to look at some polling data that tends to support the idea of Obama’s weakness among women. Dick Morris — whose political analysis is not always so great, but knows how to read polling data — offers the following:
According to the latest Fox News survey, Obama is winning among women under 40 by 13 points, but McCain is winning among women aged 41-45 by four points. Among women 50 and over, McCain is three points ahead. Obama’s 48-35 lead among women under 40 is normal for a Democrat, but to trail among women in their 40s by 45-41 and by women over 50 by 38-35 is extraordinary.
***
For a Democrat to be losing among women over 40 is without precedent in the past 20 years.
***
Usually, the gender gap runs at least 10 points in each age group and, more usually, averages a 15-point differential. The lower gap in this race does not indicate any special popularity for McCain or negatives on Obama among men. Men are voting the way they usually do. It’s women who are making the big difference and keeping this race tied.
Although the weekly gallup data does not provide crosstabs, a look at the recent weekly breakdown of support for each candidate by age (where Obama’s lead comes mostly from the 18-29 demographic) and gender among whites (where Obama and McCain are tied among women) suggests the Fox data is probably in the ballpark.
FWIW, while Morris thinks some of this may be lingering disappointment over Hillary Clinton losing to Obama, he thinks part of it may be a lingering “cultural alienation” among older white women over things like Obama’s long-time association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.ÂÂ
(h/t Memeorandum.)
In a pleasantly appointed room in a large Chapaqua manse, a woman hums a happy little tune as she waxes her broom.
The tickest and itinerary for her Denver trip are in the pointy black hat hung over the broom rack by the door.
Flying monkeys gambol on the lawn. She smiles.
A.pure.hoot.
“FWIW, while Morris thinks some of this may be lingering disappointment over Hillary Clinton losing to Obama, he thinks part of it may be a lingering ‘cultural alienation’ among older white women over things like Obama’s long-time association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.”
Morris also wrote a whole book about Clinton would be facing off against Rice in the 2008 presidential election, so, you know, he’s about as reliable of a demographer as Mark Penn. It would be a shame, though, if some members of a generation that was responsible for perpetuating the legally-mandated restrictions on the right of American blacks to receive equal public accommodations find themselves “culturally alienated” by Obama’s association with a guy who appears to have felt “culturally alienated” by, you know, that stuff I just mentioned and the mentality that produced it. Everyone in the senate has had a “long-time association” with a former Klan member and a former Dixiecrat presidential contender, not to mention the recently-deceased statesman who got his start railing against the negros. Plus Trent Lott and George Allen, who thought it would be a good idea to speak in front of the CCC.
God forbid that some blacks might be just as angry about the way things played out as you guys are about some guy who wished death upon Jeff Goldstein. There are grievances, and then there are grievances.
TmjUtah
Sadly, not even (white) water will be able to stop that specimen once she gets rolling. Perhaps we can order up a falling house?
Ohhhh….kay….
Sure Barrett, grievances are powerful things and as you point out sometimes they are real. That said, if I have a grievance against the robber who stole my tv, what right do I have to go and shoot his neighbor?
Hey, I’m over 40 and I don’t dig Obama. You only need two points to discern a trend, hey?
“Sure Barrett, grievances are powerful things and as you point out sometimes they are real. That said, if I have a grievance against the robber who stole my tv, what right do I have to go and shoot his neighbor?”
None.
“Everyone in the senate has had a “long-time association†with a former Klan member and a former Dixiecrat presidential contender,”
Still do. Fellow’s from West Virginia. Never ran for president though.
Strange how you always forget him.
“…It would be a shame, though, if some members of a generation that was responsible for perpetuating the legally-mandated restrictions on the right of American blacks to receive equal public accommodations find themselves “culturally alienated†by Obama’s association with…” the Democrat party which was the stronghold of the racists that propounded the theories behind those legally mandated restrictions and the politicians who put them in place.
It would be a shame, though, if some members of a generation that was responsible for perpetuating the legally-mandated restrictions on the right of American blacks to receive equal public accommodations find themselves “culturally alienated†by Obama’s association with a guy who appears to have felt “culturally alienated†by, you know, that stuff I just mentioned and the mentality that produced it.
“a generation that was responsible” — Well, well, well. Barrett shows himself in full at last.
“by Obama’s association with a guy” — So sitting 20 years in a hate-preaching church is the same as being a member of a generation. Well, well, well.
check out
Major DNC Donor to Party Treasurer: Obama is a Bad Investment
Anecdotal and on topic but not necessarily interesting: A reliably liberal woman (50ish, white) whom I’ve known for about ten years is dating one of my co-workers. She came up to me at a dinner party two weeks ago and said, jokingly, “So I hear you’re going to vote for Obama.”
I smiled and said, “No, but I’m not sure I’m voting for McCain either. But the Big O’s gotta be your choice though, huh?”
She responded, “Oh god, no! He scares the daylight out of me!”
What’s the point of this particular sentence?
And “over 40” is not exactly what I’d say is the Jim Crow generation. Forty-year-olds were born in 1968. Even going back to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and somehow assuming everyone in favor of it came to voting age that year, we’re looking at people born in, what, 1943? I’d say you’d have to go back to generations largely dead to find those who supported Jim Crow.
Mebbe the generations that ended Jim Crow (basically, everyone alive today) tends towards the ideal of a colorblind society, and finds Wright’s racist/racialist rhetoric antithetical to their ideals.
I am over forty, and my parent’s generation knocked down those barriers. So what the fuck was that, Barrett?
Not to mention Obama never had any such barriers, ever, in his whole life.
“Still do. Fellow’s from West Virginia. Never ran for president though. Strange how you always forget him.”
I didn’t forget him. I specifically referred to him. You even quoted me referring to him. I lack the vocabulary to explain this any further.
“Well, well, well.” “Well, well, well.”
Well, well, well!
“God forbid that some blacks might be just as angry about the way things played out as you guys are about some guy who wished death upon Jeff Goldstein.”
Presumptuous little twat, aren’t you?
None.
So then you understand the problem with the likes of Rev. Wright casting a net wider than the one I described.
If this is true there may be a leverage effect as well, since people over forty are traditionally more likely to vote than people in the 18-29 demographic.
One other point worth mentioning is that to blame the Jim Crow hell on an entire generation is to forget that there were those fighting against it the whole time, and that they eventually won. It’s an American success story, recast as a never ending tragedy.
And both have the option to do something about it. I suppose it’s a bit easier to pursue the matter when you’ve been personally offended.
“It’s an American success story, recast as a never ending tragedy.”
Straight out of the Saul Alinsky playbook.
Liberal guys are more invested in Bush-hate than liberal women. This is a sports thing I think what you’re seeing. Also, Baracky is a vacuous socialist. Without a healthy Bush-hate investment, that’s sort of hard for a lot of people to just get passed.
“So then you understand the problem with the likes of Rev. Wright casting a net wider than the one I described.”
Yes. I am not an admirer of Rev. Wright or any of his wacky beliefs, whether they involve race-oriented self-improvement or religion-oriented eternal salvation. What I’m saying is that there are many people of far greater prominence who have cast similarly wide nets, and that several of these people are in the senate, and one (Robert Byrd) is almost universally praised in everyone’s senate farewell speeches, while Strom Thurmond, as you may recall, was blessed with plenty of praise from a certain Senate Majority Leader on his birthday.
Barrett,
Re: the Morris commentary was included with two caveats — “whose political analysis is not always so great, but knows how to read polling data,” plus a big “FWIW” before his opinion. So I was amused that you got into it upthraed withsomeone over the fact that you mentioned Byrd (in response to the observation that Dems usually don’t like to mention the former Kleagle).
As for the association, how many people in the Senate called Robert Bryd their spiritual advisor? How many went to Klan meetings for 20 years? It’s your analogy, so own it.
And yet you white-wash his racism by calling it “race-oriented self-improvement”.
(And what happened to that Senate Majority Leader?)
BB,
Just saw your latest comment. Don’t think you’ll find too many pw regulars who want to see Trent Lott as president, either.
Aren’t live-at-home computer geeks traditionally huge?
#3 There are grievances, and then there are grievances.
The speculation about white women feeling “culturally aliented” over Obama’s association with Wright came from Dick Morris, not the polling data.
Supposing for the sake of argument that Morris is right, so what? People vote on all sorts of low information signaling, vibes, and gut feelings that are irrational. You can get indignant because you think Wright is entitled to his grievances, and you think that no one should hold them against him or Obama. Are you also indignant that lots of younger women will vote for Obama because they think he’s handsome? Are you indignant because a lot of people will vote for the Democrat because they associate the Republican party with evangelical Christians who irritate them?
I’m not so sure that discomfort with Wright is irrational, though. I can be sympathetic to the fact that Rev. Wright was scarred by the segregation era racism of his youth and still not want his angry and deformed politics to affect policymaking in 2008. Nuance
“I am over forty, and my parent’s generation knocked down those barriers. So what the fuck was that, Barrett?”
I’m also over 40 and I’m so sick of the re-thread grievances being played out all over again; it’s like The Rocky Horror Picture Show “Let’s Do the Time Warp Again” over and over and over and then some going on endlessly.
I have tuned out, turned off and movedon.org the grievances crowd. They’re boring.
“One other point worth mentioning is that to blame the Jim Crow hell on an entire generation is to forget that there were those fighting against it the whole time, and that they eventually won. It’s an American success story, recast as a never ending tragedy.”
I should have been clearer about this but the coffee is getting to me. I don’t blame the entire generation for Jim Crow. Clearly, that generation includes blacks and whites who opposed such policies. But people who lived in that era should, I think, be a little less freaked out that some large black preacher might occasionally go ballistic and start screaming about the “U.S.A. of KKK.” I’ve seen equally intemperate language regarding the nature of this country’s people from both the left and right, with leftist calling you guys fascists and you guys calling the leftists socialist traitors (and also, more recently, fascists to boot, via J. Goldberg). I’m not all that temperate myself, in fact, and ascribe lots of terrible motives to the cultural conservatives whom I’m always blathering on about. So, I’m not particularly bothered by Wright wanting to join in on the fun.
What does the name Barret Brown mean anyway?
“race-oriented self-improvement or religion-oriented eteranal salvation”
Jeebus, someone get this guy on The Big O’s PR team, stat. Is there some sort of prize for euphemisms?
Racial preferences or bigotries are not always like herpes, something you are forced to carry for life. In fact, anyone who’s spent any time listening to teenage boys play XBox live needs to believe that, else we are all well and truly screwed.
“eternal”
“eteranal” is something quite different would be my guess.
It may also reflect a ‘security deficit’. Which of the two do you think will keep you and yours safe?
Ignore Barrett – he doesn’t have anything to say. He is merely trying to justify group victimology again and say a generalized greivance by members of a group over the way members of that group were treated decades ago is the same as an individual and his immediate family being directly wished harm.
Not. The. Same.
I’m less bothered by Wright himself, because I know that race hate is a 2 way street and it exists even in places that are supposed to be houses of God. I am worried that a man who wishes to be POTUS would establish and keep such a close relationship with such a man, and then only cast that relationship aside when it was clear he had to in order to save his political skin.
But then, not being from that generation and having been raised right, I find the whole issue of race as the never ending club more than a bit tiresome.
#29: Aldo,
Gut feelings need not reflect irrationality either. See Popkin.
I should have been clearer about this but the coffee is getting to me. I don’t blame the entire generation for Jim Crow.
OK, the “casting with too wide a net” thing happens to everyone.
Clearly, that generation includes blacks and whites who opposed such policies. But people who lived in that era should, I think, be a little less freaked out that some large black preacher might occasionally go ballistic and start screaming about the “U.S.A. of KKK.â€Â
I wasn’t freaked out when I first saw the clips of ranting Wright. I already knew a sizable portion of the black population blamed the government for AIDS and crack. And I remembered a majority of blacks agreed with the OJ criminal verdict. And I was familiar with the preaching style in black churches. What freaked me was discovering Obama had been a member of that church for 20 years, had been married by Wright, had his children baptized by Wright, and apparently bought into Black Liberation Theology.
Granting that (which I don’t), should they also ignore that the fellow who wants to be president listened to that crap for 20 years?
31: BB,
The underlying merits aside, I periodically remind pw readers to remember that the sort of people who write, read and comment on blogs are not a representative sample of the electorate. What women like Sarah think probably ends up being more important to the end result than what you or I think.
“Just saw your latest comment. Don’t think you’ll find too many pw regulars who want to see Trent Lott as president, either.”
I know, and I’ve noticed that Lott has few defenders among conservatives due to a number of factors. I’m not trying to hang him around your neck or anything.
“And yet you white-wash his racism by calling it ‘race-oriented self-improvement’.”
Trust me. I live in Brooklyn. I know what the whole movement is all about. It doesn’t particularly bother me. And it’s not comparable to the sort of mentality espoused by the CCC. I also understand that if the whole ZOMG AFRICA IS TEH BEST AND WE SHOULD ALL STOP DRINKING AND START WEARING CRAZY NIGERIAN COSTUMES movement was reproduced by whites in general, it would be denounced as racism, so we don’t need to have that discussion.
At any rate, I am no more bothered by the ZOMG AFRICA movement than you are bothered by sharing a party with millions of people who firmly believe that everyone who has not accepted a certain Mediterranean messiah into one of their organs will be justly condemned to an eternity of suffering. Nor do many Democrats care all that much, either; they’ve been trying to get their hands on that sweet, sweet demographic for a couple of years, with some success.
“Aren’t live-at-home computer geeks traditionally huge?”
I will admit to living at home. And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for you meddling etc.
I appreciate the alliteration (and, hell, its got assonance, too), but He was a Joooooooooooooooooo. Lest we forget.
“and apparently bought into Black Liberation Theology”
You may have a higher opinion of Obama’s level of candor about what he actually believes than I do. It is very doubtful to me that Obama believes a word of what Wright says about religion, race, sociology, or anything else. I sincerely doubt that he is actually a Christian, for instance.
“Ignore Barrett”
I suspect that your plan to get everyone to ignore me while also talking about me is going to be a resounding failure, but, hey, I’m no psychic.
“What does the name Barret Brown mean anyway?”
It is my name, give or take a “t”.
Sorry, but you’re full of it. It’s precisely comparable. I spent two years in Detroit, and have spent most of my life watching Cincinnati descend into the same racist pit, largely at the instigation of people like Wright.
Anyway, I’ve got to roll now, but I look forward to talking to all of you again soon. Peace out, dawgs.
well, I just think that women over forty are just much less impressed by “packages” than are the younger ones.
I’m not sure how this happened, but I started to think more clearly as I got older, and I don’t think that’s an exclusively male thing. Although when I watch “Orange County Housewives”, sometimes I am not so sure.
BB said
You may have a higher opinion of Obama’s level of candor about what he actually believes than I do. It is very doubtful to me that Obama believes a word of what Wright says about religion, race, sociology, or anything else. I sincerely doubt that he is actually a Christian, for instance.
I love how Obama supporters will discount everything the guy has done, said, or taken part in, in favor of what they BELIEVE he means, thinks, or will take part in, once in office.
I am sure I missed some punctuation there, sue me.
Oh. And BTW.
“Housewives of NYC” is downrightterrifying!
Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrr……..
Dawgs? It’s Gators all the way down around here man. no peace
And, once again, BB saves his ire for the right and excuses the equivalent on the left, all the while holding himself out as “above the fray”.
Rob I think that is the same mentallity as someone who labels themselves as a moderate at the same time being reliably left of center. IMHO
I thought I was a moderate until I went to college. There I found out I was teh Evil Reich Wing.
I don’t think it has to do with Rev. Wright. A good number of women over 40 have raised kids, they have no illusions. I know that I woke up on my 40th and the first thought I had was, “I’m finally an adult, I can make my own decisions, I don’t have to take grief off anyone anymore.” I figure it was hearing my Mother say over and over that “life begins at 40.” I just know that I felt different and I no longer cared what others thought, I became my own woman who no longer felt I had to take a back seat to parents, teachers, bosses, etc.
I long passed the days when a pretty face or a good butt makes me go gaga over some guy. I am far better equipped to spot the bullshit since I’ve heard it over and over since I was a teenager. I’m more relaxed, more sure of my own core values, my own self.
Obama, to me, seems like he is running for the “most popular” tag in the high school yearbook. Boringly immature.
Dick Morris also thinks that picking Romney as VP would be a death knell to McCain’s chances and thinks that Mac should pick Colin Powell.
I thought I was a liberal Democrat until I met real ones at college.
*shudder*
“Ignore Barrettâ€Â
I suspect that your plan to get everyone to ignore me while also talking about me is going to be a resounding failure, but, hey, I’m no psychic.
I’m poor at taking my own good advice, but i note how you focused on the ‘ignore’ part and not on the ‘why ignore’ part.
You’re just an empty commenter.
And Obama is just an empty candidate for President, one who will be his own undoing. Such tasty Hegelian irony.
The One just isn’t nearly as good as Bubba at being a lipsucking painfeeler. Toss in the wholly unearned arrogance, the caved chest, the stooped shoulders supporting arms which end in E.T.s bony fingers and the jugears and his Q among women over 35 (the slide actually begins with women over 30) isn’t going anywhere soon. I don’t think there’s a shade of lipstick available which will garner a Blue Ribbon for this Poland China – he’s much too Kerryesque.
I think Hillary’s defeat went over like a slap in the face to women over 40 and theyre way more pissed about it than they’re letting on…
Women over 40? Lets put this a bit more completely: People who most consistently and are most likely to vote just aren’t into Obama. People who are followers, who love the celebrity circuit, who decide what to do and wear based on what’s cool love Obama. But they just don’t vote much.
Ok, maybe I’m just “pigeon commenting” (fly in from nowhere, squawk and make a lot of noise, shit over everything and fly off), but I don’t see Barrett Brown making a lot of crazy talk in this thread.
In a fairly odd and tenuous way, it sounds to me like he’s saying that Rev. Wright is a silly blowhard, and the association ain’t that big a thing. Whether or not he is may vary and to each their own. The way I see it isn’t so much that he’s a particularly dangerous guy, by himself, but either Obama really does buy into his schtick, or, alternately, he doesn’t but just runs around saying that I’ve hung with the guy for two decades, he’s a close adviser to me, etc.
The other thing that strikes me as interesting about Obama in the 40+ female demographic is something I noticed a while ago. Obama is like the smooth talker at the bar who says all the right things to get a gal into bed. And that kind of stuff works better on younger women than older women.
The younger women see a glowing hopey changitude, while the older women who have a bit clearer understanding of the world realize that while Obama may make you ecstatic for an evening of passion, he sure isn’t going to call tomorrow, no matter how much he says he really respects you for your intellect.
BRD
Not sure how accurate that is. From my own anecdotal experience, the over 40s are the biggest swooning fools for Obama.
I suppose these women are culled from that ever mythical and overly fetishized “heartland” demographic.
Now there’s a meme for TV ads.
Obama, the candidate who just wants to get in your pants.
Sweet.
BB, I’m gonna take your word for it that you were talking about Byrd and Thurmond, and not just Thurmond. I don’t see the references, but hey, its your comment. Intentionalism and all that.
“Trust me. I live in Brooklyn. I know what the whole movement is all about. It doesn’t particularly bother me. And it’s not comparable to the sort of mentality espoused by the CCC. I also understand that if the whole ZOMG AFRICA IS TEH BEST AND WE SHOULD ALL STOP DRINKING AND START WEARING CRAZY NIGERIAN COSTUMES movement was reproduced by whites in general, it would be denounced as racism, so we don’t need to have that discussion.
At any rate, I am no more bothered by the ZOMG AFRICA movement than you are bothered by sharing a party with millions of people who firmly believe that everyone who has not accepted a certain Mediterranean messiah into one of their organs will be justly condemned to an eternity of suffering.”
Coupla things:
1. If you concede that ZOMG AFRICA would be called racism if done by whites, do you think it actually is racism? Can only whites be racist, or if not, is only white racism a bad thing? Because the left seems pretty committed to answering all of the above in the affirmative.
2. Is conflating racism and religion really the argument you want to be making? Are you actually committing yourself to the notion that a Megachurch is the same as a Klan rally (or, to use what you actually said, a BLT rally damning America and such)? Again, is racism a bad thing or not? Religion may be daffy, it may be wrong on facts, it may even be dangerous in the hands of bloodthirsty zealouts, but is the salvation promise of Christianity really to be considered as foul as emotive tracts on the foulness of darkies or the perfidy of whitey?
3. What part of Brooklyn?
Obama, the candidate who just wants to get in your pants pockets.
Oh, Dicky.
So are women. Say it, you conniving little pussy.
I know it’s not in the interests of Democrats to admit — and they’ve long been laying the groundwork to conceal it with “Jesusland”/”unteachable ignorance”-style base-hype if this election is swung to McCain by the Hillary demographic — but anyone who’s taken a nonideological look at the socio-/psycho-/politico-/etc. literature (e.g., Morris) knows this: Men aren’t racist; women are. And their voting patterns — outside their baseline support for Democrats — are largely determined by race- and sex-identification with specific candidates.
Hillary owned these women; Obama can’t. McCain can’t, either. But maybe he can divvy them up just right and squeak this out…if they’re racist enough. The apparent age split isn’t significant, once you remember that those young women who say they’re for Obama aren’t going to vote. Why? They’re young. And racist.
(And yes, I think of Obama as a white guy. They don’t, or they’d vote for him.)
BRD – Barrett isn’t rude, he just threadjacks into irrelevancy. What does greivances of African-Americans have to do with polls showing women aged 40+ years may not be solidly behind Sen. Obama’s campaign? Zero. And if there is a connection, he doesn’t make it.
That act is so old it has whiskers.
Interesting take, psycho.
I think it may be a ‘security deficit’ affect. At age 40+ mortality is much more real to a person than in younger years, and not just personal mortality, but that of friends and family members. Hope and Change is well and good, but security concerns are also present in all its forms.
Grey whiskers, no less.
Dawgs? It’s Gators all the way down around here man. no peace
Like Hell! I can hear the band warming up in Sanford Stadium from my back porch, dude.
And yes, I think of Obama as a white guy.
You are not alone. I am convinced the only reason he went to Trinity was to learn to act black.
Heh.
Women over 40 are just not that into Obama.
Life is like a box of chocolates. Here I am thinking I had virtually nothing in common with Obama.
I started out really liking Obama. I really really did. The first thing he said in the Dem debates that really bothered me was the “You’re likable enough, Hillary” thing. It isn’t that I think Hillary is likable, it was just so….not generous. It made me realize all of his talk about new politics was really just talk, because his instinct was to go for the underhanded remark.
Oddly, my own Dem husband never really bought any of that stuff, although he’ll vote for Obama.
Finally, Obama just isn’t handsome even though people try to pretend he is. He is too slight and he has smoker’s skin.
Wheeew! I thought you were gonna say something ’bout his ears!
I am more concerned about the hubris.
This is from the WaPo’s ‘The Trail’ on Obama’s symbolic importance (via Brothers Judd):
The 200,000 souls who thronged to his speech in Berlin came not just for him, he told the enthralled audience of congressional representatives. “I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions,” he said, according to the source.
Suddenly,
One People,
One Nation,
One Leader.
Obama!
isn’t quite so funny anymore.
You are not alone. I am convinced the only reason he went to Trinity was to learn to act black.
I think there is a lot to that. He wasn’t black enough for his district so he had to earn some cred.
TmjUtah: “In a pleasantly appointed room…”
My laptop keyboard may never be the same, ever again…
Oh, yeah. There is a certain relevancy here. I have heard similar complaints about Obama from liberal women. Since I am ‘older’ the women I know tend to be too.
One, whispered to my g/f, “He is one of that generation, the ‘entitled ones'”. They’re school teachers and they know the difference in generations. The 70s and 80s coming of age bunch are the ones “Looking out for Number One’s”. Into Black sports cars. Coolness. Smoking was ‘cool’ too. And it sucks b.t. He’ll have to deal with it. Give the left of center Jake Taper credit for keeping us informed about O’s hiding that rightfully despised habit. But Obama is obviously much smarter than McCain. Read the latest Nytimes Obama article about his law school teaching.
Bill Clinton was just an outlier, but his mindset ruled in the later 70s. Hippies were disdained as being too weird and concerned about the environment. Reagan was cool due to his polished stage prescence ignoring his policies. Coolness was it. Michael Jackson was actually revered by the Cool Generation. Yikes.
Obama’s ok due to his smarts. But there is unease. Besides, he might just be a fake hetero. Like in the closet. That was my g/f’s first impression of him.
Finally, Obama just isn’t handsome even though people try to pretend he is. He is too slight and he has smoker’s skin.
He’ll get my vote as his economic policies can’t be worse than McCain’s. McCain’s endorsement of Phil Gramm’s mishandling of everything economic is a killer for me. Otherwise, I am just watching this election, not participating other than voting and striking down any and all local Republicans just due to their economic policies that have wreaked havoc on my family’s and friend’s livelihoods. But maybe I’ll give Nixon credit for all the cheap Chinese stuff that at least is much cheaper due to the Communist regime’s keeping labor costs low there. Oh, yay, for Walmart.
One other point worth mentioning is that to blame the Jim Crow hell on an entire generation is to forget that there were those fighting against it the whole time, and that they eventually won. It’s an American success story, recast as a never ending tragedy.
Too bad you’re on the losing side of that battle. You and William Fuck Buckley. Some of us “Liberals” got beat up for taking sides against the Repugs in that battle. Barry Goldwater, eh? what side was he on? The stars and bars. That was when the Demos’ cleansed themselves of the horrid historical fact about themselves…sadly they’ve been trying to back South ever since McGovern lost a big one…but then he was the better man in that regard. Instead, we got too Southern light weights initialed ‘C’.
He’ll get my vote as his economic policies can’t be worse than McCain’s.
Sure they can. And McCain won’t have a willing and sycophantic congress to help him do it either. I advise voting for neither.
Oh, yay, for Walmart.
Are you truly so ignorant that you think Walmart is the only store in America that sells Chinese goods?
Nevermind the change in Chinese lives and future. Nothing to see there.
So bic/dd thinks we should still be fighting the battles that were won forty years ago?
Talk about conservative!
just being historical and ‘conservative’. Actually I am often esp. concerning borrowing money.