pbca
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:01 PM
Original message |
Working Class White Voters |
|
whenever I hear about this I can only think it comes down to racism. I remember the Clinton years and try as I might I can't think of what Clinton did for whorking class voters (of any color) in his 8 years. I mean sure he failed to do anything on health care, and yes he passed NAFTA and GATT, sure he created more latch-key kids by forcing their moms off welfare and into minimum wage jobs, he subsidized companies that sent jobs to Mexico and China but besides that - where does this loyalty from 'Working Class White Voters' come from if it's not just about race?
|
hill_win_2008
(146 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:03 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Just asking, so don't get pissed and call me a troll, etc.
Why is it ok for Obama to say that he is getting 90% of the black vote and not be "racist", but if Hillary says she is getting the white vote it is racist?
|
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Black folks have a long history of voting for white folks. Duh. |
|
Edited on Thu May-15-08 12:06 PM by BlooInBloo
EDIT: And they didn't vote heavily for Sharpton or Keyes.
Sorry - this is all on white folks, as much as you want to lie and pretend that it isn't.
|
kwenu
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
25. Great point. Keyes is the quintessential Republican but they refuse to vote for him. |
|
It's just shameful to see this in our own party. Truth is, Black people did NOT support either Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton in the manner they have supported Obama. In fact, it is conveniently forgotten that when the primaries began, Blacks were squarely in Hillary's corner not Obama. Whites are going to have to rise above the racism and address it honestly instead of trying to deflect the issue.
|
pbca
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. I'm not asking about the Candidates statements |
|
I'm asking why it is that 'Working Class White 'voters feel any loyalty to the Clinton's if it's not about race? As far as I can tell, in 8 years in office Bill did nothing for the working class (except toss them the occasional bone so they'd forget he just kicked them in the ass again.) Hillary is more right wing than Bill so what to working class whites think that the Clinton's are going to do for them or are they willing to vote against their best interests for the sake of keeping a black man out of the white house?
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
14. Are you saying white working class voters are hypocritical or |
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
18. Just the typical "reverse racism" squawking. |
Marrah_G
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:08 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I am a working class white woman who voted for Hillary |
|
Are you accusing me of being racist?
I am supporting Hillary because I believe out of the two people left she is the better one for the job. I don't buy the product Axelrod is selling. I think Hillary is tougher, smarter and more driven. Obama may be a great guy, but at best I think he will be a mediocre President, if he wins the GE at all.
It is that simple.
I respect your choice and don't suggest you hate women because you chose Obama. All I ask is the same in return.
|
pbca
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
since 'working class whites' overwhelmingly vote for Clinton - what is it they think she is going to do for them. In his 8 years in office Bill did nothing positive for the working class, in fact he did a great deal of harm to the working class, Hillary is more right wing than Bill so what do 'working class whites' think Hillary is going to do for them? And if the answer is nothing (which is obviously what they'll get) then why do they stick by her?
|
hill_win_2008
(146 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. Asked and answered n/t |
Romulox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. This demographic can be won by anyone (including McCain) that gives them attention |
|
Obama supporters need to come to grips with the fact that Barack Obama has not, to this point, offered a populist economic message of any sort. You will blame these voters for "not voting their economic self interests" if they go for McCain in November, but you will be simultaneously hard-pressed to tell me what substantive economic policy difference regarding the economy lies between he and Senator Obama.
|
Marrah_G
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
11. Then ask that without the additional "it has to be about race" or "keeping a black man out of office |
|
Because that doesn't further any discussions.
I find Hillary to be as I said, tough, smart and driven. She has taken everything thrown at her and has not let them drag her down. I admire her. Hillary is not Bill and Hillary's choices would, I feel, be different then Bill's. I do not find Hillary to be "more right wing then Bill".
You and I have a fundamentally different view of Hillary and I don't have alot of hope that we can come to any common ground on it. Which is fine. I don't expect others to see things as I do. HOWEVER, I do expect to be allowed to make my own choices without being painted as a racist.
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
20. Suggesting that Obama is merely a "product" |
|
being sold by Axelrod, is ridiculous. You certainly have every right to believe Hillary is the superior candidate. Just as you think Obama would be a mediocre candidate, I have reason to believe that Hillary would take an agressive foreign policy stance- she's aligned herself with Bushco on several vital issues.
And it's difficult to see how you respect any Obama supporter's choice when you contemptuously refer to Obama as a product being peddled by Axelrod.
|
Marrah_G
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
22. His message is the product. Same as with all politicians in a race. |
|
Edited on Thu May-15-08 01:07 PM by Marrah_G
Hillary's as well.
The campaigns sell the message. They sell us a look. They use PR and they use marketing. They want us to see what they want us to see. They take polls, they use focus groups. They are indeed selling us a product.
Perhaps a bad choice in words, but when it comes down to it, that's what it is.
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
23. I'll take it simply as a bad choice of words. |
Romulox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:11 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Working class = racists is a Right Wing attack dressed up in the vocabulary of the left |
|
It's Triangulation at its very worst.
|
pbca
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
Everyone is misreading the question and reacting in a very knee jerk fashion. The majority of 'Working Class Whites' are obviously supporting Clinton - the polls and primaries to date confirm this. What I'm asking is why.
Quoting myself from above I'm asking why it is that 'Working Class White 'voters feel any loyalty to the Clinton's if it's not about race? As far as I can tell, in 8 years in office Bill did nothing for the working class (except toss them the occasional bone so they'd forget he just kicked them in the ass again.) Hillary is more right wing than Bill so what to working class whites think that the Clinton's are going to do for them or are they willing to vote against their best interests for the sake of keeping a black man out of the white house?
|
Romulox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
10. It's the lack of a populist economic message on the part of Obama. nt |
lumberjack_jeff
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
iamjoy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:19 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Uh - Clinton Did Help The Working Class |
|
shall we start with his first few months in office when he signed FMLA - the bill 41 vetoed?
You know FMLA - the Family Medical Leave Act - which prevents companies from firing workers who take time off to deal with a health issue.
Clinton helped get HIPAA passed - the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. That's the law that (among other things) states that if you change employer health plans, the new plan can't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions (or there are limitations on it)
Remember that for 6 of his 8 years in office Clinton was dealing with a Republican congress who was more than willing to shut down the government rather than fund programs to help the most needy.
And thanks to Clinton we have at least two sensible Supreme Court justices - imagine what Bush (41) or Dole would have done.
Clinton made a lot of mistakes, but to say he failed to do anything on health care or to help the middle class is a gross mistatement.
Oh, and I prefer Obama to Hillary.
|
pbca
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
15. I remember all of those years |
|
He tossed the working class the occasional bone, but for the most part he screwed the working class. Pretending otherwise is just partisan fantasy.
|
Romulox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
16. Clinton sold out workers. The REAL question is: What will Obama do about it? |
|
Edited on Thu May-15-08 12:24 PM by Romulox
It's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other between he and Clinton regarding the economy.
Which one of them lied about NAFTA first (they both support it, as well as increasing H1Bs and continued "most favored nation" status for China)? Where's the contrast??? :shrug:
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
17. Middle class isn't working class. And, do most working class |
|
workers benefit from either act? They might if they belong to a union but those jobs aren't as plentiful as they once were, which brings us back to trade agreements. In other words, if you don't have insurance at work, you don't benefit. If no one enforces FMLA, it's a nice gesture but you get no relief.
To answer the OP, though, I think a lot of people remember the Clinton years as good years -- and mostly because the real consequences of Clinton economic policies didn't hit the working class until that frat boy stole the White House.
|
Arkansas Granny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message |
19. This is just a label to group the people they have been polling. They have |
|
split the voters by age, race, gender, income, education and who knows how many other groups. You haven't heard the same discussion on the demographics for black voters because 90% of them are voting for the same candidate.
|
ShortnFiery
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 12:56 PM
Response to Original message |
21. You got that right. It wasn't NAFTA nor welfare reform. eom |
WA98070
(782 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 01:12 PM
Response to Original message |
24. I get to pee in a bottle at work thanks to Bill. It may seem unimportant but once you... |
|
start destroying civil liberties where do you stop.
I believe in reasonable searches not random or arbitrary.
|
Spangle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 01:37 PM
Response to Original message |
26. oh, I remember alot of things. |
|
But I'm sure you don't want to really hear them.
Boy, I remember way back when... folks use to say that the resons we had Mexicans coming over the board, was because they didn't have jobs down there and we didn't buy stuff from them. The old thinking was to keep Mexicans poor and uneducated and they couldn't come after us. That was way old school thinking.
NAFTA didn't just come out of thin area. It was in the works for a long time.
Women historically have been stuck in the 'minimum wage' job fields, because they are the ones that have to be at home raising children. Such jobs are the 'start jobs.' Men take them too. But then they go on over time to get paid more, as their skills increase.
A womwan staying home raising her children, her skills are not increasing. Might even be decreasing. When it is time to go back to work, she is at a minimum wage job.. and less likely to be advanced cause she is 'older.' Her children see her only in such low paying job.
However, for those women who are able to work and have children, many of them have the same options as the men. With skill increases and pay raises. The children see a parent they can respect.
If it was a man who was alone, no one would expect him to stay at home with his children and draw a 'check.' They would expect him to pay for child care and go to work. <wink> It is the same with a women. But sadly, she generally isn't paid as much as a man and can't afford the child care.
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-15-08 03:47 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 01st 2024, 04:55 AM
Response to Original message |