Hillary Courts The Racist Vote
Posted on May 8th, 2008 in Uncategorized | 12 Comments »
Her lust for power knows no bounds, no decency: Hillary Clinton is now arguing that she should be the Democratic nominee for president because white people like her better than they do Barack Obama.
“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”
“There’s a pattern emerging here,” she said.
The pattern is that of Hillary trying desperately to increase her power by dividing the country; and Obama, yes, trying to increase his power, but uniting the country to solve problems and reconcile past differences.
When will the Clintons go away and leave this country to build a future without them?
12 Responses
5/8/2024 2:18 pm
It’s a classic Mike Kinsey gaffe. Because unfortunately it’s actually true. It is increasingly clear that Obama (at this point at least) has very little chance of beating McCain in the general election. But, oh well. At least we got the Clintons to go away!
5/8/2024 2:44 pm
I can’t agree with that, TT. As I’ve argued before, it’s no surprise that Hillary will attract many of those voters; that doesn’t mean that McCain will. At the moment, polls show both Obama and Hillary beating McCain, though Obama by a larger margin. You take those with a grain of salt, of course. But I just don’t believe that any large numbers of Dem voters are going to defect to McCain. And I do think that a considerable number of independents and even some Republicans will vote for Obama.
5/8/2024 3:23 pm
Let’s ignore for a moment national polls, and take a look at the electoral college (which unfortunately is all that matters). Even if what you say about where independents go is true, the electoral college map still looks better for Hillary then it does for Obama. Most notably, look at Florida, which poll after poll has shown leans McCain, but Hillary does much better than Obama. If Florida is not in play, then, Obama HAS to win Ohio, and not lose any purple states. He has to win New Mexico, which might be very tough given a large hispanic population and McCain might have an edge there. He has to win Pennsylvania, although I think he has a very good chance there. He needs to win Colorado, also tough. He has very little chance in states Bill Clinton won but no Democrat has won since (Tennessee, West Virginia and of course Arkansas). And on and on. Perhaps I’m missing something, and I hope I’m wrong, but I just don’t see a purple state that he really competes in. And no, not North Carolina, or any southern state, for that matter. Which is why, what Hillary said is unfortunately correct.
So, and I say this with sadness because I want more than anything for him to beat John McCain, who I think is like an American Rudyard Kipling, obsessed with honor and empire — the worst thing for the country right now. But even though he may lead McCain in polls now, and even though this is a very good year for Democrats overall, it is going to be a very hard, uphill climb for Obama.
By the way, you may have noticed that I’m a little sensitive when you trash the Clintons. Yes, I worked on the 92 campaign, and in the White House from 1993-97, so I take it personally. But I just simply do not believe the Clintons are the source of all evil people like you make them out to be. Their time may have passed, but the source of our woes in this country right now are purely and simply Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, etc.
5/8/2024 3:35 pm
Also, it is worth noting that national polls actually show Hillary now doing better nationally against McCain than Obama. According to Real Clear Politics, Hillary is +3.9, Obama is +2.6.
5/8/2024 4:17 pm
What an awful, awful thing to say… Please go away and never come back.
Hard-working…
5/8/2024 4:37 pm
Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but it’s especially awful because it can be read as equating “hard-working Americans” with “white Americans.” I’m sure she didn’t mean it that way, but I think a lot of people will hear it that way. Saying “hard-working white Americans” would have made a big difference. It’s still racial pandering, but it’s not nearly as offensive.
5/8/2024 5:09 pm
TT,
In the online betting markets, the Democratic candidate is given a roughly 60% chance of winning the general election, so your statement that Obama has little chance of beating McCain isn’t supported by the betting public.
5/9/2024 12:30 am
Richard, discussing demographics in elections is not racist. Your over the top Clinton bashing is getting old.
5/9/2024 8:50 am
In today’s New York Times, that noted racist Paul Krugman counts the same way Hilary does. Richard, get a grip on your language, or at least throw in some original thinking.
5/9/2024 11:02 am
“Cheap Shots in the Dark”?
H.C.
5/9/2024 11:33 am
Maybe someone in West Virginia can give her a tour of some deep, dark - ideally dangerous - coal mine…
5/9/2024 3:02 pm
Krugman has been strongly partisan on this race. Today’s op-ed in the same NYTimes issue seems closer to RB:
‘But we believe just as strongly that Mrs. Clinton will be making a terrible mistake — for herself, her party and for the nation — if she continues to press her candidacy through negative campaigning with disturbing racial undertones.’
And later:
‘We endorsed Mrs. Clinton, and we know that she has a major contribution to make. But instead of discussing her strong ideas, Mrs. Clinton claimed in an interview with USA Today that she would be the better nominee because a recent poll showed that “Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again.” She added: “There’s a pattern emerging here.”
Yes, there is a pattern — a familiar and unpleasant one. It is up to Mrs. Clinton to change it if she hopes to have any shot at winning the nomination or preserving her integrity and her influence if she loses.’