Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Kentucky and Oregon Both Have "Hard Working White Americans"

dear hillary,
oregon also has "hard working white americans," but most of them aren't racist. your "hard working white american" supporters on the other hand, are. so why don't you call them out for what they are.
racism is more than a presidential campaign issue. it's a despicable mark on society and these people need to change their ways-- not for the general election because we don't need them-- but for the betterment of our society.
you could do so much to change their attitude when you decide the race is over. why don't you give your own race speech. tell your bigoted supporters that it's wrong. tell them that even if obama was muslim, there would be nothing wrong with that. tell them the advantages of not having a racist heart.

just wishful thinking on my part.
it's late but it's here, more good reading on this issue, finally, by the mainstream media:

nytimes: Consider the media shorthand for both Kentucky and West Virginia, where Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by huge margins. These are hard-working, real Americans, the Clinton camp says, and a Democrat can’t win without them.
In fact, both West Virginia and Kentucky have gone against the national tide of the last 8 years and have been trending Republican. Also – and this needs to be said – a significant percentage of the voters in both those states have now indicated that they may not vote for a fellow Democrat simply because he’s black.
Pollsters know that people lie about race; voters rarely come out and say they will not vote for someone because he’s black. Instead, they say things like we’re hearing from West Virginia and Kentucky – that “race is a factor.”
In Kentucky, over 25 percent of Clinton supporters said race was a factor in their vote – about five times the national average for such a question. Clinton, if she really wanted to do something lasting, could ask her supporters why the color of a fellow Democrat’s skin is so important to their vote.
Now, consider the argument that a Democrat needs these states. In 2000, George Bush won West Virginia 52 to 46 percent. Four years later, he’d increased his margin to 56-43.
On to Oregon, where Obama won by double digits. A bunch of chai tea sipping elitists, with zero body fat, living in hip lofts while working at Nike, yes? No. Well, they do like running, and tea. Oregon is one of the nation’s whitest states – just under 2 percent of residents are black – but rich it is not. The state is below the national average in both per capita income and median household income.
This suggests that Obama doesn’t have a white working class problem so much as a regional problem, in a place where Democrats won’t win anyway.
In Oregon, voters’ surveys show Obama essentially tied Clinton for the blue collar vote while running up a big victory.
And Oregon, unlike West Virginia and Kentucky, may actually be in play for the general election. Al Gore won it by barely 7,000 votes in 2000, a margin that went up to 60,000 votes in 2004. McCain’s advisers say he’s a perfect fit for the state – independent, somewhat maverick.
So, from a purely strategic point of view, the ability to win white blue-collar voters in an open-minded swing state is certainly more important than a solid red state. I would include Pennsylvania in that equation. Just weeks after all the talk of Obama’s problems in the Keystone state, most polls now show him beating McCain in the general election. more