Break: U.S. News & WR today announces Popular Vote

Today's special report by Michael Barone for U.S. News & World Report finally acknowledges the change in the Popular vote. ( see link  below)

But let me just bitch about the failure to report relevant Latino related politics.

The one thing that bothers me as a Hispanic is the " Failure"
of the mainstream media like US News, CNN or USA today to report the last two multi-state polls done by two large Hispanic Polling organizations both done in the last 30 days.

It was widely published in Hispanic Print media by many if most Latino local community papers. I cannot understand why the AP or some of these news outlets don't report in to All Americans.

Anyway, two polls were conducted by two different Orgs. One was for 8 states with the largest Latino voters while the other was more expanded because it covered the 10 states with the largest number of Latino voters.

Both polling orgs came up with pretty much very similar numbers & conclusions.

GOP John McCain is poised to be the first GOP Presidential candidate to win the Latino vote in November. He is leading Obama 52%-43% for the 8 states polled. ( against Clinton, Clinton carried a whopping 76% of Latino voters vs. Mccain)

While the 10 state polling had GOP McCain beating Obama in November at 50%-43% ( Clinton carried 79% of Latino voters in these 10 state poll against McCain)

No Republican has ever carried the Latino vote for the Presidency.

George Bush was the highest GOP vote getter ever in 2004 when he got 44% of latino votes against 53% for Democrat
Kerry.

In 2000, Al Gore got 62% of Latino votes against just 35% for Bush.

The highest Democrat to ever win the Latino vote was Bill Clinton. He won 78% of Latinos in 1996 & 72% in 1992.

Hispanic bloggers should email & demand news orgs to start publishing these polls.

As I wrote on my diary about two months ago, Obama will need to carry at least 70% of Latino votes in order to offset the expected loss of White voters. ( According to Obama's Hispanic Liason consultants in their lectures to dem Latino activists)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article s/2008/04/popular_vote_gives_clinton_an. html



Display:


Re: Break: U.S. News & WR to (none / 0)

Hey do you have a link to these polls of Latino's you are talking about ?


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:47:05 PM EST

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR to (none / 0)

Sorry Lori, it was only in Print Media newspaper

Tried to search google but did not find anything.

I believe one was sponsored by an outfit called "Latino Business Roundtable" while the other was by an org called MANA or MANE ( its an Latina national org )Not sure what the acronym stands for.

One poll was done in March, other in april.

It was in the weekly Hispano americano papers


by latinfighter on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:53:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR to (none / 0)

No problems, once Clinton goes all out in her support of Obama as the nominee (as she has promised over and over again, hopefully she at least keeps that promise huh?), Latinos and others who currently support Clinton over Obama will move over to Obama.


by RussTC3 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:33:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR to (2.00 / 1)

Just as AA's and idealistic kids will support Clinton once Obama throws his support for her when he likewise keeps his promise to back her after she wins.


by wasanyonehurt on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:18:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR to (none / 0)

1) She can't win enough pledged delegates and the supers won't overturn the vote of the public.  The nominee is chosen by the delegates so whoever is in the lead is the nominee.
2) If she somehow manages to pass up Obama among the popular vote (with Michigan NOT included), then you have an argument.

And by the way, yeah, if she wins the popular vote, I will support her if she ends up becoming the nominee.  You know why?  Because she's better than McCain.


by RussTC3 on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 02:03:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR to (none / 0)

That would be true if there were any chance whe could actually win...


NJ Hussein Independent
by NJIndependent on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 09:45:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

True (2.00 / 1)

The Hispanic vote is something that will obviously play an important role in the fall, and I agree that Obama has a lot of catching up to do. Michael Barone, however has been pushing the popular vote metric for a while now -- and as far as I've seen, he's been a lonely voice in this call.

The problem that so many people are not really buying this pop. vote argument is that it always includes Michigan, and this just doesn't make sense. We can't use these numbers simply because of the two candidates left one candidate was not on the ballot.


"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."
by VAAlex on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:48:21 PM EST

Re: Break: U.S. News (2.00 / 1)

Lose Latinos, lose the election...


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:48:46 PM EST

Re: Break: U.S. News (2.00 / 3)

Uhh, what's with all these metrics that you come up with- lose X, lose the election- that are bunk considering we're in the primary season, and not the general election.

Clinton has incredible deficits in the African-American bloc, as well as independent voters. Those are huge, huge votings blocs that are just as much a problem for her. If you're going to claim Obama can't improve before November, and therefore is unelectable, Clinton suffers from the exact same detriment.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:04:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR (1.00 / 7)

Barone also said that Michigan and Florida do not count in the popular vote if you will the whole article.  The Clintonistas will do anything to spend a win for Hillary.  The Clintons have lost but queen Hillary will not admit it.  Poor Bill must be pulling his hair out right now.  Hillary is probably screaming at him every minute of the day.


by Spanky on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:50:10 PM EST

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR (none / 0)

HR'ed. Not nessesary to use the words you did or come up with a personal attack against the Clintons.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 09:51:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR (none / 0)

I notice somebody mojo'd that comment after you hide-rated it. I'd agree with you it was inappropriate, but you've drive-by mojo'd things when it was obviously an inappropriate comment, simply because it was a Clinton/Obama situation, so I'll just notate that fact and move on.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:02:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR (none / 0)

Try reading the MyDD guidlines for TR'ing. Personal attacks on candidates are acceptable.


by Mystylplx on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:12:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR (none / 0)

Problem is you are still talking about how Obama is the apparent primary winner

Many of us are already looking at the ugly November with Obama as the nominee.

Any Non-Partisan Super Delegate who is not scared to be labeled a "racist" by Black leaders will come to a non-bias conclusion for November.

Without "solid" support from two groups.

white democrats & latino democrats...

it would be virtually impossible for Obama to win in november. Impossible.

Kerry won the Hispanic vote by 10 points & still lost to Bush.

In 2008, unless some miracle happens, Obama will perform much worse than Kerry among both Whites & Latinos.

How in Santo Nino's sake can he possibly win the electoral college ?

I agree with Russert & CNN's Bill S.

The popular vote will not be a blowout in November due to heavy Inner city turnout for Obama.

But the electoral college count is a whole different story. It may be Very Ugly for Obama. depending on how millions of white blue collar voters & millions of latinos decide to vote.

If I was a betting person, right now, McCain can very possibly match the 400 electoral college numbers that Bush Sr. in 1988 captured against Mike Dukakis.

Its already a trend. As voting day gets closer( like OH,TX & PA) white voters break against Obama. While Latinos are never really on his side.

McCain carries even just PA,MI,NJ combined with FL,OH,MO - we are talking about massive electoral losses !

and these polls show latinos picking McCain in worrisome numbers over Obama


by latinfighter on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:05:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR (2.00 / 1)

You might as well argue his astrological chart proves he can't win among white males and latinos as argue current polling proves that. A couple weeks ago he was doing better against McCain than she was and that meant nothing also.


by Mystylplx on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:14:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Eh. (none / 0)

Once again: Obama polls better than McCain. If Latinos desert the Democrats, fine, we can change our policies to reflect their new and untoward allegiances.

But something tells me they won't do that.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:00:24 PM EST

Re: Eh. (2.00 / 4)

You sound like a fairy god mother with some magic wand who can just make all latinos disappear. lol

This is not a game of checkers were we can re-position the pieces & keep playing until you win.


by latinfighter on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:10:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'd be a little bit (none / 0)

more careful with the fairy part. I'm gay, and I've heard that before; watch it with the inappropriate language, buddy.

That said, as I note below, first of all, we're not going to be blackmailed as Democrats. You want to defect, fine, go right ahead.

Second, with the youth vote tilting heavily our way - and with Obama's track record of getting them to actually show up - your threats ring hollow. Latinos have been drifting to Democrats since 1994; they'll get there, and meanwhile, we can win this election, if you folks really want to throw your support to Tom Tancredo's party, without you.

Meanwhile, if we're dumb enough to nominate Clinton, welose the opportunity for a real generational realignment. Democrats aren't going to pass up that chance.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:04:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd be a little bit (none / 0)

I understand what you mean, but I don't think that s/he meant anything by "fairy godmother"--to me it was a clear reference to the character from Cinderella.


by OrangeFur on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:23:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd be a little bit (2.00 / 2)

i dont agree with you at all... so it's alright to loose a huge demographic because we are keeping the youth vote that always tends to go dem? Talk about burning bridges.... "we can win this election... without you?" I was under the impression the democratic party was about bringing in a variety of people and being inclusive. So then you undervalue a huge demographic?

and then this "if we are dumb enough to nominate Clinton..." talk about your disrespect for Clinton supporters.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:34:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd be a little bit (1.66 / 3)

Oh, shut up, there was nothing offensive about her fairy godmother comment.  And for you to talk about inappropriate language is a fucking joke.  You lost any credibilty after the comments you made about Hillary's supporters in Feb.  Let's take a look at some of those sickening comments (Why the hell aren't you banned again!?):

...you Clinton droids suck ass in the worst possible way. No, seriously: you're an embarrassment to the human species. You're not Democrats, either - you're vermin sucking at the teat of the rightwing DLC that hijacked our party.

Thank God that Barack Obama is going to be our nominee, so that all of you can go ahead and join John McCain, just as you planned all along. You little whiny-ass titty babies had this whole election served up to you on a silver platter, and what happened? Because you're all, from Mark Penn on down, so disgustingly stupid that you couldn't pee a hole in the fucking snow, you blew it.

That's where diaries like this come from: your own anger at your staggering, cavernous stupidity. You couldn't win the general election if McCain got fucked by livestock on live national television. You're really that ignorant. The righties will eat you for lunch, just like Obama already has done. That's right: you're lunch. You're weak.

So yeah, fuck you. You're going to lose, and you're going to weep bitter tears over it, you clueless DLC hero-worshippers. The rest of us will laugh at you, as we take back our party from the hacks.

It'll be a beautiful day when Barack Obama is sworn in as the 44th President. Not for you Clintoncrats, of course; but for us Democrats, it'll be awesome. I can't wait. Neither can the country, the country that's so over you it wants to puke at your feet.

The Clinton/DLC/triangulation era is over. Deal with it.

Obama 08 - Because at some point, you grow weary of the lies.
by MBNYC on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 09:23:31 PM EST


by musicpvm on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 01:01:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hahaha! (none / 0)

Yup, I wrote that out of sheer disgust and anger when I first discovered what MyDD had turned into in my absence. Pure shock on my part.

Of course, what's also shocking is what led to that comment. Stuff I'd never expect to find on a supposedly Democratic blog. Such as, for instance, you:

I really believe his connections with Islam, and there are plenty, will be his downfall.

by musicpvm on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 11:08:07 PM EST
[ Reply to This | ]

Sweet little rightwing smear you have going on there.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 10:50:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hahaha! (none / 0)

I'm laughing out loud.  To compare my comment with the vile hatred that you spout is ridiculous.
And how is that I was smearing Obama?  I was just stating what the disgusting right wing of this country will do.  I have never said I believe Obama is a Muslim, but he does have connections with the religion, which I have no problem with, but the right will make it into an issue in the general election.  That's all I was stating by that comment.  But I must admit now that they've got Jeremiah Wright, his bitter/cling comment, Ayers, etc they may not even have to stoop to that level.
by musicpvm on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 05:51:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Uh hum. (none / 0)

I totally agree, you're not smearing Obama. Just animated by a deep sense of concern, that's all. I mean, he has Muslims in his family, even if he himself isn't one and never has been, and even though, you know, someone's religion shouldn't really be a factor among Progressives or decent people generally, but yes, some mean people might make an issue of that, so let me spread my concern as far as I can.

Disingenuous.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 08:07:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Eh. (2.00 / 4)

Who do you propose we bring in to just "replace" the Latinos? Anti-immigration fundies?

Latinos are poised to become the biggest minority voting bloc in 2008, more than AA's now, and one of the largest reasons that both Gore and Kerry lost was because of the drop in Latino support after the Clinton presidency. You can notice the trend in exit polling, Clinton pulled 72%, won, Gore pulled around 63%, lost, and Kerry pulled in around 53% and lost.

Hillary will bring Latinos and Latinas back into the party in massive numbers. Losing the Latino bloc to McCain could be a disaster, because it could mean losing them to the GOP permanantly. And then we're really in trouble.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:24:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Excellent response. n/t (none / 0)


by linc on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:34:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Here's the problem with that. (none / 0)

First of all, the national polls indicate that both of our candidates, with a slight edge toward Obama, poll better than McCain, so this entire discussion is somewhat specious. There are far more young voters than Latino voters, for example, whom Barack carries 70% to 30% - are we supposed to spite an entire generation in politics?

Second, believe it or not, but the well-nigh constant concern tripe, viewed against the background of polls showing him winning, does wear thin. I'm simply not willing to be blackmailed any more. If Latinos or whomever want to vote for McCain, they're quite welcome to do so. I kind of doubt that they will, because the GOP can't quite stop reflexively hating immigrants and brown people, but like I said, blackmail isn't going to work.

Like I said, young people by 70% to 30%. There's your lasting majority right there.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:57:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem with that. (2.00 / 1)

And there are far more "white working class" than there are young voters, of which 31% who voted for Clinton said on exit polls will not vote for Obama as compared to the inverse of 20%.

I certainly hope it's different with the youngsters but I temper those feelings as we've hung ourselves numerous times on the petard of relying on young voters.  A hot game of Halo III could cost us the election.


by wasanyonehurt on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:41:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

"A hot game of Halo III" (none / 0)

No, what could cost us the election are stupid and condescending comments like yours. If you want to know why young people vote for Obama in such overwhelming numbers, there's your answer right there.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 10:55:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton leads popular vote (2.00 / 1)

Thanks, latinfighter! Your frustration with the MSM is very understandable since they aren't reporting much of anything important these days.

As for counting MI, that's simple. Count the uncommitted votes, a known quantity.

Hillary is polling better than McCain these days, while Obama fares worse. Look at the MyDD homepage and you see that Hillary is way ahead in EVs vs. McCain while Obama trails.

Count the votes fairly and it's plain to see that Hillary is ahead. Trends show she is more likely to be our nominee.


by Nobama on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:07:43 PM EST

Latinos and war (2.00 / 2)

If Latinos, and I am one, are stupid enough to vote for McSame, then they deserve what they get from a Repug. Presidency. A border fence and more wars. Wars that have huge casualty rates for latinos.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:12:04 PM EST

Curious (none / 0)

Why does Obama do so badly with the Latino community (or why does John McCain do well with them)?  Please don't get ugly with your answers. :)


by bobbank on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:13:25 PM EST

Re: Curious (2.00 / 2)

Because Hillary is a strong candidate that appeals to Latino's? Obviously you can't explain the primary numbers away as racial tensions between Latino's and AA's.  The gap is too big for that.

I think Obama will do ok with them in the GE, maybe getting upwards of 40% of the Latino vote or higher depending on his VP nominee.

Dems are lucky to get a 55/45 split on the Latino vote in a GE.  Bush got that split in 2004 and I imagine the same will hold true for McCain.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:24:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (2.00 / 0)

To clarify, I'm saying Obama will get in the upper 40's in the GE, and that Dems usually take 50-60%.  Obviously he'll need to do better than normal in other demographics, pick a VP nominee with vast appeal to Hispanics, improve his outreach to that group, or some combination of the three.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:26:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (2.00 / 2)

Bobbank,

I cannot speak for all latinos.

But in my personal opinion.

McCain- One, Latinos like McCain because of the wide coverage he got on standing-up on Immigration against the Powerful GOP conservative wing.

Remember, very few prominent republicans took the position McCain did. Limbaugh, Hannity were all attacking Mccain 24/7 on Immigration.

Two, he really has done a very good job of reaching out to Southwest Hispanics in Arizona, New Mexico, NV & CO. He's been in office for so long that he has built cross party latino relationships.

As for Obama's weakness with Latinos.

Personally, I hear three things a lot.

One, many latinos truly believe he is " Not Ready, Not Qualified" to be President. ( you hear even comments that Latino Richardson is much more qualified than Obama to be president)

Two, some racial/ethnic bias. I hate to bring this up & acknowledge it since majority of Latinos have no problems with the black community.

But I would be dishonest if I did not admit that there is a significant enough number of Latinos who has racial issues.

I would compare the Latino racial issues with blacks as very similar to Asian-american issues with african-americans. ( as reported on AsianWeek & discussed by asian activists)

This is widely discussed in among Asian activists since Clinton defeated Obama by 4 to 1 in CA, NY,NJ & MA among Asians. That's 8 out of 10 asians voting for Clinton. Almost as close as 9 out 10 blacks voting for obama.

Just like there are some white voters who have racial issues with african-Americans.

unfortunately is out there.

Pretending it does not exists does nothing for anyone.

three, some anger towards Obama due to the heated race with Clinton.

the problem here is Latinos are swing voters.

They really have never been a solid, democratic block. If they are pissed-off at Obama, there would be no hesistation to vote for McCain.

If they voted for Jeb Bush, George Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger & Mccain while a senator in Arizona.

Watch out for Puerto Rico.

Clinton will win BIG in PR.


by latinfighter on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:33:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (2.00 / 2)

That's a good question.

I don't think that it hurts that Hillary has history with Latinos with some of her work earlier in her life. The Bill connection also doesn't hurt either, as Latinos absoutley adored Bill. But from what I saw in El Paso, the Latino population really does love Hillary and trust her to run the country. I think that for the most part (risking a stereotype here), Latinos and Latinas are very much into the family type traditions, and go with the proven result. That's why they trust Hillary, and not Obama.

It just seems like alot of the Obama reach out to Latinos has seemed fake to me as well, and he's really busted his butt to get that vote too, sending out A-level surrogates, massive ad buys, and hasn't been able to make one single dent. It's a distrust that I think alot in the Latino community, especally the older Latinos, seen in a flashy newcomer with no proven results and no track record of involvement with the Latino community, and Hillary does have that trackrecord.

Since Obama does not have that trackrecord or that trust with the community I think they go to McCain next because of his fairly liberal stance on immigration policy; and also because many Latinos identify strongly with the social politics of the Republican Party. Alot of older Latinos are fairly socially conservative and this contributed alot to their switch to Bush in 2004 and their potential switch to the GOP if Obama is the nominee in 08.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (2.00 / 3)

Excellent post.

See, you have to earn a community's respect thru your track record.

The Clinton family has earned that over many years.

It would be very very hard for Obama to just earn that by November.

Same with the black community. lets face it, if Obama was not running, Clinton would be winning 70% or even higher of Black votes.
Again because their is a proven years of track record.

That's why Clinton has nothing to worry about if she is the nominee. She has done nothing but good things for the black community.

Its Obama who has big challenges winning Latino, Asians, & White voters by November.

There is simple No track record to speak of.


by latinfighter on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:41:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (2.00 / 1)

i think respect has a lot do with her success with the Hispanic/ Latino community.

I think many in the H/L community view Obama as disrespectful because the H/L community traditionally believe in climbing up the ladder to success; thats how they live their lives, working from the bottom up. many view Obama's run as trying to side step that system.

I definitely agree with you when it has a lot to do with earning the community's respect, and frankly Obama hasn't done a lot to earn that respect.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:55:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

I agree that the Clintons have been supporters of the AA community by and large for the bulk of their public careers.  Can you not see, however, that a large hunk of AA's literally despise Hillary for the racial undertones they believe have come from her campaign? Whether their perception is fair or not, it is real and will present a substantial obstacle for Hillary to secure the most loyal Democratic voting demographic of all.  The animosity will be exacerbated if AA's percieve Hillary stealing the election from Obama by overturning his lead in pledged delegates with SD's.  Many AA's may not vote for McCain, but try getting them to vote for our candidate if they think that she unfairly sabotaged the chances of the first viable AA candidate, even if what she did was technically within the rules.


by DreamsOfABlueNation on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:16:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

And it's safe to say that if Obama was running against someone other than Clinton (i.e. not a woman) he would be getting the majority of the women vote.

Your point?


by RussTC3 on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 02:10:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

hmmm I am thinking of two possibilities:

   1. Latinos/Hispanics are hugely loyal to the
       Clintons, (over 40,000 once gathered at an
       airport to just see Bill wave to them; i
       was there!) meaning they might feel  
       betrayed if Obama wins the nom. much like
       how black people would feel if Hillary won.
       As well as this kind of disrespect Obama's  
       campaign has for Bill...

   2. Obama has done a shitty job of reaching out
       to the H/L community. Maybe he wrote them
       off knowing they went 2:1 for Clinton.

Why does John McCain do so well?

 -I think some people would call the H/L community racist, but I seriously doubt that  
reason.I am part of that community and while I
cant speak for everyone, the H/L is hugely diverse, meaning that we tend to respect other's cultures.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:43:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

"meaning they might feel betrayed if Obama wins the nom. much like how black people would feel if Hillary won."

No doubt many H/L will be disappointed, but I hardly think it will rise to the level of animosity that many AA's will feel if the first viable candidate of their race is denied the nomination-- despite winning pledged delegates-- because party elites chose to give the nod to one of their own through the obscure procedural technicality known as the SD.


by DreamsOfABlueNation on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:21:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (2.00 / 1)

hmmm. no i dont agree. are you saying that black people feel more emotional about their candidate than the H/L community because of their race connection w/ Obama?

it is possible for people other than black people feel emotionally and deeply about their candidate. Just because Hillary isn't Hispanic/Latino shouldn't disqualify her from that connection with the H/L community.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:38:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

Fair enough.  I respect your opinion, but in my mind it just seems logical that H/L will not have the same sense of pride in seeing Hillary elected as AA's will in seeing Obama elevated to CiC.  I admit its possible that some in the H/L community are as passionate about Hillary as the most passionate AA Obama supporter, but given that Obama has made more inroads (in terms of voting percentages) with H/L's than Hillary has with AA's, for me, it stands to reason that the passion of H/L's, generally speaking, does not rise to the same level on Hillary's side as the passion of AA's does on Obama's.


by DreamsOfABlueNation on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:52:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

yeh i guess it's just best to agree to disagree.

Honestly, i feel that some people are capable to vote without the basis of race interfering and i think you would be surprised to note the overwhelming majority of the H/L community respects the Clintons and thus explains their loyalty towards them.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 01:05:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

No doubt.  I have an enormous amount of respect for the Clintons as well--and I'm white : ).  If it weren't for Bill we would have probably lost in 92 and the Supreme Court would have been conservative for a generation.  It doesn't mean that we can't reach for better, however, and in my mind Obama gives us the opportunity to do so.  I respect that you disagree, but I hope we will be fighting on the same side in Nov.--this country is too important to allow small family disputes like this get in the way of progressive ideals.


by DreamsOfABlueNation on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 01:11:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

I certainly can't speak for the Latino community, but I'd guess that McCain would do better than other Republicans because of this stance on the immigration bill.

Oddly enough, he and George W. Bush were the only two prominent Republicans who were on the better side of this issue.


by OrangeFur on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:27:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

I think you see Obama doing poorly among latinos in polls and in primaries.  I do not see it as him doing poorly in the GE.  I think to judge the performance of a candidate in a election six months hence based on polls is to base your life on astrology.  I see little likelihood that a majority of latinos will vote for McCain when they find out that he has abandoned his previous positions.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:42:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Just thanking everyone (2.00 / 1)

Just wanted to thank everyone for being civil in response to my question.

I knew why many latinos and latinas favor Hillary over Barack - she just has very very deep roots with the community.  But I was perplexed why so many would apparently switch Repub if Barack is nominated.

The thing about liking McCain because he took heavy political hits to stand up on the immigration issue makes sense.  Indeed that may have been a calculated move on his part.


by bobbank on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:42:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

R today announces Popu (none / 0)

Wow, I missed those polls. Any links?


by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:47:04 PM EST

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR pu (none / 0)

Also, Newsweek poll today has Obama at 38% of the white vote-- ain't gonna cut it-- against McCain.


by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 10:48:23 PM EST

The same poll has (none / 0)

Hillary at 42%, and McCain taking 52% against both. The main difference is that Obama has more undecideds.

Meanwhile, 47% of non-white voters might go for her, versus 60% for Obama. How she's going to make up an eight-point gap with those numbers, nobody knows.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:08:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The same poll has (none / 0)

Shhh, that fact doesn't favor Clinton so it was omitted.


by RussTC3 on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 02:12:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR pu (none / 0)

And polls mean..........what?


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:13:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Break: U.S. News & WR pu (none / 0)

The difference between Clinton and Obama is within the margin of error. If Obama's performance with white voters isn't going to cut it, Clinton's isn't either.

It is also to sleazy to cherry pick a subset where Obama does worse than Clinton, when Obama did better than Clinton against McCain over all in this specific poll.

But you know all this, and no one should have to point it out to you.


by alephnul on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:22:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hill's black vote (2.00 / 0)

If Hill is only able to get seventy percent of the black vote, she's due to lose Michigan and fall short in her ability to claim Missouri and Arkansas.  The seventy percent number is not the only problem; turnout will likely be slightly depressed.

Kerry won Michigan by three percentage points in 2004 mainly because blacks consisted of thirteen percent of the total vote; he won ninety percent of the black vote.  Let's assume that the Michigan vote consists of ten percent of the total vote this year, instead of thirteen percent and that she only wins seventy percent of the vote.  Under this scenario, she loses 4.7% of the vote that Kerry won in 2004, meaning that Michigan's seventeen electoral votes go red.  Losing Michigan would practically wipe out the twenty electoral votes she gains from Ohio, meaning that Florida is all she would have left to make up the fourteen remaining electoral college votes she would need to tie McCain, assuming that McCain did not take any other states from her.

One way out of this quandary is Clinton/Obama.  Party leaders such as Pelosi are crazy to believe that there are adequate substitutes for either of them.


by Blazers Edge on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:01:30 PM EST

Except Obama will win the nomination. (none / 0)

Never heard of the winner saying 'I think I'd like to be VP and have someone else as Pres.'

So your C/O ticket is never going to happen.


Swish. Nothing but net.
by GFORD on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 11:35:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hill's black vote (none / 0)

Well, actually on topic to this post, Bill Richardson seems like a VP pick who might be able to make some inroads for Obama with the Hispanic vote.


by alephnul on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:25:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hill's black vote (none / 0)

no i dont think that Richardson would make much difference.

--This shouldn't be about race. We are going to put a Hispanic up there just to entice them to the party? I think its a no go. While he is highly qualified, i dont think that his influence over the H/L community is that great and i honestly dont think that the H/L community is really moved by race (speaking for my own community: our mayor is white, our sheriff is white, we have a ton of AAs in office).Is it so hard to imagine a community that isn't driven to seat administrative positions by race or ethnicity?  I live right next door to NM and I personally dont really care for Richardson.


--++++Stay Gold, Ponyboy!++++--
by amde on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 12:50:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hill's black vote (none / 0)

That seems reasonable. I don't know how highly or heavily regarded Richardson is in the various Hispanic communities. I do think that picking VPs based in part on shoring up a presidential candidate's appeal to a portion of the electorate is a long standing and reasonable practice (although historically for regionalist reasons, rather than for ethnicity or race), so I wouldn't have a problem with Obama picking a VP who is highly regarded by Hispanic voters (or by Catholic voters, among whom Obama also does poorly).

Richardson is my favorite for Obama's VP based on his fantastic foreign policy credentials and his executive experience. Before I knew enough about his views on tax policy and his tendency to use right wing frames, and his general weakness as a campaigner, he was my favorite of the Democratic presidential candidates.


by alephnul on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 01:13:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Barone's Math (none / 0)

There are some great comments on RCP in response to Barone's flawed math.

This one is my favorite:

It is like saying a football team who lost by five touchdowns really had the most touchdowns if you count the six touchdowns overturned due to penalties.


by jdusek on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 02:02:58 AM EST

Obama would lose CA (none / 0)

He would put CA in play and lose it if he is the nominee.


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Sun Apr 27, 2008 at 07:42:03 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.