Proud2BAmurkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:12 PM
Original message |
The male vote for Obama against McCain will be worse than Clinton against McCain |
|
And Obama won't have the strong female vote to make up for it.
By the end of the race Obama would be successfully painted as an "anti war" weak candidate who is a question mark on the economy.
Men vote their wallet, national security, and lastly for the less feminine candidate. Most white men will also consider race and the older they are the more likely that is.
There would be a slight advantage with men for McCain against Clinton but a HUGE one against Obama and Obama won't have the female voters turning out to make up for it.
|
peoli
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |
1. McCain - weak with Republicans, strong with America? |
ingac70
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. Get to making that bumpersticker now! |
ingac70
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Yeah, all those females will vote McCain or stay home... |
Proud2BAmurkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. Obama would have a slight advantage with females but not a big one. Older ones will go McCain |
VolcanoJen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:15 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Waitin' on the Proud2Be DU Rule! |
countingbluecars
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
VolcanoJen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
... and, Lee? Is that a jar of pickles in your pants or are you just happy to see us?
|
The Velveteen Ocelot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:16 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I thought by this time you'd pulled everything out of your ass you could possibly have in there. I do have to admire your facility for totally making up completely unattributed, unsupported shit, though.
|
polichick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:16 PM
Response to Original message |
6. I don't think they're paying you enough. :) |
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
7. bwahahahah. poor, poor, pitiful, murkymuck |
|
I do so love your despair. It's delicious. Yum yum.
:rofl:
|
JimGinPA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:23 PM
Response to Original message |
|
On the top of your head I mean. Why do I keep opening your assinine threads?
:banghead:
|
The Velveteen Ocelot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
14. Probably the same reason I do... |
|
because we can't help staring at a nasty car wreck, even though we don't want to look.
|
loveangelc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |
12. oh please. you want to tell yourself that, go ahead. |
|
the fact is, hillary does not get the male vote, and women will show up for either hillary or obama. not to mention independents go all to mccain, while obama gets a higher percentage of independents if he's the nominee.
facts are a bitch, right?
|
Proud2BAmurkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
15. I believe the idea that McCain will get independents is misguided and also |
|
older voters, the most reliable, are just not going to show up for Obama, especially men.
|
thevoiceofreason
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:25 PM
Response to Original message |
13. C'mon, thread limits! |
Quixote1818
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
18. I know, I keep kicking that thread limits poll. |
|
When will that go into effect?
|
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:26 PM
Response to Original message |
16. So are you now speaking for all white men? I am a white man, and I don't fit your sterotype? |
|
My feeling is that most Americans want change. They have seen the Clintons and mccains long enough, and it is time to give someone else a chance
That is just MY feeling, I am not projecting that anyone else feels that way as you do
The race issue is NOT an issue. Anyone who wouldn't vote for Barack because of race, wouldn't vote for Hillary either
|
Proud2BAmurkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
20. No I would bet men under 35 will go with Obama but over 60's won't and it's not all racism |
|
Men don't like question marks especially on the economy and national security. Risk taking with money is easier for a younger person so he might do ok there.
|
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
23. You're probably right /nt |
Unsane
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:26 PM
Response to Original message |
17. Thanks. Now go play with your blocks. |
ShadowLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Obama polls 5% better then Hillary against McCain in CNN's new polling |
|
Your argument doesn't hold up under the facts.
|
Proud2BAmurkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
21. Those don't mean anything right now. The GOP "national security" machine hasn't kicked in |
rateyes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-10-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message |
22. Haven't you gotten rid of your crabs yet, Murkin? |
|
Keep up the good work. You make Clinton look worse all the time.
|
NMMNG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:01 AM
Response to Original message |
24. To the Ignore list you go |
|
Since they haven't seen fit to TS you yet. You must be contributing a hell of a lot $$$$.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 01st 2024, 09:04 AM
Response to Original message |