elvis
Rookie
- Sep 15, 2008
- 25,881
- 4,472
- 0
- Banned
- #41
I'm going to have to see some hard numbers before this conversation continues.
Obama Wave Stuns Clinton's Black Supporters
Here's some numbers. I will work to get more states.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
I'm going to have to see some hard numbers before this conversation continues.
I'm going to have to see some hard numbers before this conversation continues.
Outside of Missouri and maybe Delaware, staying competitive among black voters wouldn't have tipped any states for Clinton from the losing to winning column. But had she improved her performance to just 20 percent, she would have significantly reduced, if not eliminated entirely, her national popular-vote deficit (even without the disputed Florida and Michigan returns). And because the formula for assigning delegates favors the candidate who wins delegate-rich urban areas, Clinton could have limited the lopsided delegate-per-vote ratio Obama enjoyed in states ranging from Alabama to Maryland to Wisconsin.
Here's what I think:
I think there were a lot of people who didn't want to see Hillary get the Democratic nomination. They didn't like her supposed inevitability and she represented more of the same ... Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton and the voters rejected her. They were left with Obama or Richardson because Edwards was already a national loser and Biden a lifelong Senator neither of which represented change. I understand Obama picked Biden as VP but Biden is clearly competent and that what's you want in a VP not another perceived "outsider." They chose Obama. The funny thing is that if they picked Richardson I bet we'd be hearing about Latins voting for him because he's Latin and that illegals were voting for him, etc.
third paragraph
From your link:
Not enough to make or break the election which goes against what you have proposed.
So again ...
You're correct. It didn't cost her the nomination, but it did cost her the popular vote. It is the delegates that matter. Still, I think a 90-10 advantage is staggering and sad.
So can we now agree that Barack the candidate, not Barack the black guy, won the nomination and presidency?
John Kerry had 88% of the black vote. The majority of blacks will support democrats regardless of color. They supported Clinton,Gore,Kerry, and now Obama.
We were talking about the primaries, you idiot.
Well you were proven wrong, idiot!!
This is untrue.
I already made the point that Sharpton and Jackson didn't get anywhere near the level of support that Obama did from the African American community.
Right.... I wonder why? Could it be that they had an African American man running on the Democratic ticket???
Who ever thought that the cottage industry that exists under the bumper sticker "United States is Racist" would go away just because the majority had no compunction in voting for a black man as our president.
Here' the ole left wing AP stirring up the pot with a handful of anectodals, including "a large subset of white people in this country...."
How about Charles Ogletree, Harvard professor, candidate for attorney general, saying the election doesn't count in race relations because Obama is only half black?
Victim, victim, victim... It never ends.