jerseyhoya wrote:I like how I'm the asshat for pointing out that Democratic primary voters are breaking down along racial lines.

A quote to chew on as I call it a night...

"I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks." - Howard Dean

jerseyhoya wrote:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:B) Whether or not we make implicit appeals to racism, will that make Obama any more or less black?

Otherwise, it seems like you're saying that people are explicitly or implicitly racist, so it's only sound tactics for the Republicans to play that up. ("After all, he *is* black, and it helps us win, and we like to win.")

I hope that isn't the case, and that you're not implying all the ugly things one could see in what you wrote here.

I was just saying that some people are racist and won't vote for a black guy. It's not a huge chunk of people, thankfully, but it's real.

Unlike the Mormon thing or something that the ignorant can't tell at first glance this particular bit of bigotry doesn't really need to be exploited or played up. Since they'll probably be able to figure it out all on their own.

jerseyhoya wrote:There's definitely a yawning racial gap there. I'm not calling people racist any more than I'm calling women who vote for Hillary sexist. It's just the way things go. I'd vote for someone from New Jersey. Am I Jerseyist? I dunno, I think it's sort of natural to support someone who is like yourself, especially if you're from a disrespected group.

jerseyhoya wrote:We lost an election in Louisiana in 2003 because our candidate's skin was brown.

TenuredVulture wrote:I also think the Romney Mormon thing is overblown, in part because I suspect that a good proportion of the people who said they won't vote for a Mormon are liberals who are turned off by that denomination's conservatism and longstanding association with the Republican party.

dajafi wrote:Obama with a narrow lead in early returns from Maine.

CNN link

Very cool but not necessarily reliable Google link

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:We lost an election in Louisiana in 2003 because our candidate's skin was brown.

That guy did manage to win in 2007, pretty handily.

I think at least some of his struggles in 2003 had to do with his youth, and the amount he achieved at such a young age. Heck, even I felt a bit of resentment.

jerseyhoya wrote:

dajafi wrote:Obama with a narrow lead in early returns from Maine.

CNN link

Very cool but not necessarily reliable Google link

He's pulling away.

jerseyhoya wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:We lost an election in Louisiana in 2003 because our candidate's skin was brown.

That guy did manage to win in 2007, pretty handily.

I think at least some of his struggles in 2003 had to do with his youth, and the amount he achieved at such a young age. Heck, even I felt a bit of resentment.

This is going from memory, and I can't figure out how to find the damn archived elections on LA's SoS website. They stop before this for some reason.

Anyway, I recall Terrell running way ahead of Jindal when you lined up their numbers in the northern part of the state and Jindal cleaning up in metro New Orleans. Obviously there were a lot of other factors going into that, but I'm comfortable making the unfounded assertion that racism played a significant, and probably decisive role, when you look at the 2002 and 2003 numbers next to each other.

Edit: And going back to one of your earlier comments on what Obama might lose compared to Kerry...I guess the slippage is probably worse for GOPers when we run minorities because more often than not these voters who make such decisions to vote like that are more often than not going to vote for the Republican.

Edit part 2:

2002 Terrell Landrieu

2003 Jindal Blanco

Check out like Ouachita...Yeah, I'm just making this up, but I think there's something to it.

Macho Row wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

dajafi wrote:Obama with a narrow lead in early returns from Maine.

CNN link

Very cool but not necessarily reliable Google link

He's pulling away.

This is interesting. Maine was thought of as a state that Clinton should win. I wonder how they would spin a 10+ point loss to Obama there.

In spite of his record as a maverick, John McCain has become the presumptive nominee by running a classic Republican campaign, emphasizing strength abroad and limited government at home, with nods to his pro-life record. His opponents in the conservative movement, by contrast, have behaved like caricatures of liberals, emphasizing a host of small-bore litmus tests that matter more to Beltway insiders than to the right-winger on the street.

Republican primary voters who turned to Mr. Limbaugh for their marching orders were asked to believe that Mr. McCain’s consistently hawkish record — on Iraq, Iran, the size of the military and any other issue you care to name — mattered less to his standing as a conservative than his views on waterboarding. Or that his extensive record as a free-trader, a tax-cutter and an opponent of pork-barrel spending wasn’t sufficient to qualify him as an economic conservative, because he had opposed a particular set of upper-bracket tax cuts in 2001.

Similarly, religious conservatives who listened to James Dobson were asked to believe that Mr. McCain’s consistent pro-life voting record was less important than the impact his campaign-finance bill had on the National Right to Life Committee’s ability to purchase issue ads on television 60 days before an election. Or that his consistent support for conservative judicial nominees, and his pledge to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of John Roberts and Sam Alito, mattered less than his involvement in the “Gang of 14” compromise on judicial filibusters.

dajafi wrote:Meanwhile, curious what alter ego thinks of this one:

The Republican Reformation

In spite of his record as a maverick, John McCain has become the presumptive nominee by running a classic Republican campaign, emphasizing strength abroad and limited government at home, with nods to his pro-life record. His opponents in the conservative movement, by contrast, have behaved like caricatures of liberals, emphasizing a host of small-bore litmus tests that matter more to Beltway insiders than to the right-winger on the street.

Republican primary voters who turned to Mr. Limbaugh for their marching orders were asked to believe that Mr. McCain’s consistently hawkish record — on Iraq, Iran, the size of the military and any other issue you care to name — mattered less to his standing as a conservative than his views on waterboarding. Or that his extensive record as a free-trader, a tax-cutter and an opponent of pork-barrel spending wasn’t sufficient to qualify him as an economic conservative, because he had opposed a particular set of upper-bracket tax cuts in 2001.

Similarly, religious conservatives who listened to James Dobson were asked to believe that Mr. McCain’s consistent pro-life voting record was less important than the impact his campaign-finance bill had on the National Right to Life Committee’s ability to purchase issue ads on television 60 days before an election. Or that his consistent support for conservative judicial nominees, and his pledge to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of John Roberts and Sam Alito, mattered less than his involvement in the “Gang of 14” compromise on judicial filibusters.

As previously noted, Douthat's my favorite conservative pundit both because he's super-smart, and (more) because it's just such a good name for a principled conservative. They're all about the doubting that. And a Republican return to the reality-based community after the Bush years would be good news for everyone.

dajafi wrote:I didn't check that one. Meant to, but I'm spacing today. Sorry.

And no, I'm not sure how his name is pronounced. But I'm developing a narrative here.

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:We lost an election in Louisiana in 2003 because our candidate's skin was brown.

That guy did manage to win in 2007, pretty handily.

I think at least some of his struggles in 2003 had to do with his youth, and the amount he achieved at such a young age. Heck, even I felt a bit of resentment.

This is going from memory, and I can't figure out how to find the damn archived elections on LA's SoS website. They stop before this for some reason.

Anyway, I recall Terrell running way ahead of Jindal when you lined up their numbers in the northern part of the state and Jindal cleaning up in metro New Orleans. Obviously there were a lot of other factors going into that, but I'm comfortable making the unfounded assertion that racism played a significant, and probably decisive role, when you look at the 2002 and 2003 numbers next to each other.

Edit: And going back to one of your earlier comments on what Obama might lose compared to Kerry...I guess the slippage is probably worse for GOPers when we run minorities because more often than not these voters who make such decisions to vote like that are more often than not going to vote for the Republican.

Edit part 2:

2002 Terrell Landrieu

2003 Jindal Blanco

Check out like Ouachita...Yeah, I'm just making this up, but I think there's something to it.

Race is of course factor in LA politics, but it isn't the only factor. The gulf between N. and S. is big too. Name matters a lot, and remember, Terrell may have run better than Jindal, but both lost. Yes, Jindal did not carry some key Republican districts, and his ethnicity didn't help. But neither did his Rhodes Scholarship, nor his Catholicism, nor the fact that he was from Baton Rouge.

To me, the problem in 2003 was that he wasn't a good ol' boy. In 2007, many Louisianans realized good ol' boys (or girls) didn't make good governors.

jerseyhoya wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:We lost an election in Louisiana in 2003 because our candidate's skin was brown.

That guy did manage to win in 2007, pretty handily.

I think at least some of his struggles in 2003 had to do with his youth, and the amount he achieved at such a young age. Heck, even I felt a bit of resentment.

This is going from memory, and I can't figure out how to find the damn archived elections on LA's SoS website. They stop before this for some reason.

Anyway, I recall Terrell running way ahead of Jindal when you lined up their numbers in the northern part of the state and Jindal cleaning up in metro New Orleans. Obviously there were a lot of other factors going into that, but I'm comfortable making the unfounded assertion that racism played a significant, and probably decisive role, when you look at the 2002 and 2003 numbers next to each other.

Edit: And going back to one of your earlier comments on what Obama might lose compared to Kerry...I guess the slippage is probably worse for GOPers when we run minorities because more often than not these voters who make such decisions to vote like that are more often than not going to vote for the Republican.

Edit part 2:

2002 Terrell Landrieu

2003 Jindal Blanco

Check out like Ouachita...Yeah, I'm just making this up, but I think there's something to it.

Race is of course factor in LA politics, but it isn't the only factor. The gulf between N. and S. is big too. Name matters a lot, and remember, Terrell may have run better than Jindal, but both lost. Yes, Jindal did not carry some key Republican districts, and his ethnicity didn't help. But neither did his Rhodes Scholarship, nor his Catholicism, nor the fact that he was from Baton Rouge.

To me, the problem in 2003 was that he wasn't a good ol' boy. In 2007, many Louisianans realized good ol' boys (or girls) didn't make good governors.

My point is that both lost 52-48% statewide, but Jindal did much better in the New Orleans metro area, Baton Rouge and Shreveport, while Terrell did a lot better in the rest of the northern part of the state, and Cajun country (of course that's where Blanco is from, so that's more understandable). I guess just when I look at the counties along the Mississippi in the northern half of the state, I like blaming ignorance, because it's more fun than thinking people rejected conservatism.