ExiledInIllinois Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 How can one say she is the stronger candidate when she isn't even the leader in her own party. Because right now the AA block is voting. They won't vote (as they do now) if Hillary gets the nomination. On the same note if Obama gets the nomination, the Hillary Dems will VOTE McCain. She is weak and strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede316 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Black voters are not voting for Obama just because he's black. Obama gets votes based on more than race.Huh? 90-10 suggests otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Huh? 90-10 suggests otherwise. I agree, but I don't think its a big deal. People have always voted for politicians that look like them. As an example, there is not a single elected black Republican at the federal level right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Because right now the AA block is voting. They won't vote (as they do now) if Hillary gets the nomination. On the same note if Obama gets the nomination, the Hillary Dems will VOTE McCain. She is weak and strong. Not buying the Hillary Dems voting for McCain. Won't happen. No Dem wants McCain aka Bush Light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Just imagine if Obama was Roman Catholic, white, and Irish... Most would be annoiting him as the next JFK... Even if he had a Rev. Wright type ties to say radical IRA. If Obama was white, he would have been out of the race a long time ago. The majority of the black vote would have backed Clinton and/or Edwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 If Obama was white, he would have been out of the race a long time ago. The majority of the black vote would have backed Clinton and/or Edwards. IMO, FALSE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 IMO, FALSE! You're delusional if you think he's getting 90+% of the black vote because of his views on issues. People can vote for whatever reason they want, but at least admit the obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 You're delusional if you think he's getting 90+% of the black vote because of his views on issues. People can vote for whatever reason they want, but at least admit the obvious. Clinton had her advantages too, name recognition, "experience" etc, so whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Clinton had her advantages too, name recognition, "experience" etc, so whatever. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Clinton had her advantages too, name recognition, "experience" etc, so whatever. Race trumps any of those more generic advantages in the primaries. She also had more baggage and negative impressions from being scrutinized and vetted over the past 2 decades, so it works both ways. Obama's race advantage in the primaries will turn into a disadvantage in the general election, especially since we know alot more about his attitudes and associations than we did when the primaries started and the media gave him a pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Race trumps any of those more generic advantages in the primaries. She also had more baggage and negative impressions from being scrutinized and vetted over the past 2 decades, so it works both ways. Obama's race advantage in the primaries will turn into a disadvantage in the general election, especially since we know alot more about his attitudes and associations than we did when the primaries started and the media gave him a pass. Oh come on... now she has baggage. The strongest Democratic candidate has baggage. Back to her advantages with women. You do realize that women were voting for her simply because she was a woman right? In many states she would carry the female vote... bad thing for her was that number wasn't as high as the black vote. How can a race voting for a candidate be a bad thing in the general election. That vote is primarily democratic but does not always show up at the polls. This year they will unless Hillary steals the nomination. His attitudes and associations... should we go back to Hillary's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Oh come on... now she has baggage. The strongest Democratic candidate has baggage. Back to her advantages with women. You do realize that women were voting for her simply because she was a woman right? In many states she would carry the female vote... bad thing for her was that number wasn't as high as the black vote. How can a race voting for a candidate be a bad thing in the general election. That vote is primarily democratic but does not always show up at the polls. This year they will unless Hillary steals the nomination. His attitudes and associations... should we go back to Hillary's? You're suprised that she has political baggage, where have you been? Women are voting for her because they believe she will best promote policies on the issues they care about; universal healthcare, the economy, education, and a strong and sound foreign policy. What policies does Obama offer that are so much better for blacks than what Hillary offers that would convince 90+% to vote for him? I never said an ethnic group voting in the general election is a bad thing, what's going to hurt him is his association with Rev Wright and his extreme views, which he only repudiated after it became a political liablity, but too late to dismiss in a general election where it will be exploited by the Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 No, I am not surprised at all. She has a ton of baggage which why the GOP would love to face her instead of Barack. What's the worst part of Barack? Experience and his former minister. Women are also voting for her because she is a woman. And do you believe that the black vote is mainly because he's black? What about universal healthcare, the economy, education, and a strong and sound foreign policy? Maybe people, not just blacks can relate to him better. He has much more of an attractive, interesting history than Hillary. Single mother, at one point on Welfare, etc., etc. People, especially in this economy can relate. His former minister is not going to hurt him in the general election. Hell even Huckabee WITH McCain at his side stated that people sitting and listening to his sermons don't always believe everything he says. That ship has sailed. There are bigger issues at hand than someone's foolish comments from the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Actually, the worst part about Barack is his stigma that he is extremely far left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 What's the worst part of Barack? He is the most liberal member of congress. He is a socialist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Socialist and extremely far left.... anything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 He is the most liberal member of congress. He is a socialist. See what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 You're suprised that she has political baggage, where have you been? Women are voting for her because they believe she will best promote policies on the issues they care about; universal healthcare, the economy, education, and a strong and sound foreign policy. What policies does Obama offer that are so much better for blacks than what Hillary offers that would convince 90+% to vote for him? I never said an ethnic group voting in the general election is a bad thing, what's going to hurt him is his association with Rev Wright and his extreme views, which he only repudiated after it became a political liablity, but too late to dismiss in a general election where it will be exploited by the Republicans. Wow. A guy gets a disenfranchised voting block that the Clintons covet and have tried to energize for 16 years to come out--and it's somehow a bad thing now BECAUSE THEY AREN'T VOTING FOR CLINTON. You will take any stance to make race an issue with Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Wow. A guy gets a disenfranchised voting block that the Clintons covet and have tried to energize for 16 years to come out--and it's somehow a bad thing now BECAUSE THEY AREN'T VOTING FOR CLINTON. You will take any stance to make race an issue with Obama. He might as well. That's what Hillary is doing, when she isn't killing a duck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 And do you believe that the black vote is mainly because he's black? Yes. What about universal healthcare He's not for universal healthcare, Hillary and Edwards are. Maybe people, not just blacks can relate to him better. He has much more of an attractive, interesting history than Hillary. Now we vote based on who's more interesting? What's Sanjaya doing, maybe you could vote for him. Single mother, at one point on Welfare, etc., etc. People, especially in this economy can relate. Yeah, because only people from poor backgrounds can help other poor. Good thing Roosevelt only had 4 terms, that rich snob did nothing for the poor and unemployed. His former minister is not going to hurt him in the general election. This is the most laughable statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts