Why the hell are we talking endlessly about "the white vote"

This is insane, aren't we progressives? Are we really OK with just taking it for granted that there are large numbers of DEMOCRATS who are basically racist?

Can't we try to undermine that way of looking at things just a little?

Obama will be lucky if can do as good as Kerry. Obama will rather do as bad as Dukakis - losing in landslide

I've had it with Factinistas like you, Singer.

I would rather not white knuckle it out with a candidate who is doing "as well as Kerry".  We need a decisive and clear victory in November.  The Republicans have had 7 years to solidify their base and they are not going to go without a huge fight.

What? Clinton's arguments have no basis in fact?!?

in Obama's unique weaknesses.  

Well this news is just kinda "eh". I want to see what happens when we actually start going after McCain!

Two posts back to back emphazing the same point. Who are you trying to convince here? Nobody is going to change their opinion of Obama.

Last time I checked, Kerry lost the GE in 2004. Running even with Kerry is a terrible goal for the Democratic nominee.

National, he may be even with voters right now, but I believe that as the year goes own, it will be McCain who will pick up momentum, not Obama.

And there is more about Obama that Wright and Rezko, it just hasn't been put out there yet.  With all the love the MSM has been giving Obama, you'd think he would be doing better in these groups, but he's not.

As time goes on, I don't see it getting better.

if you think the MSM has been giving Obama "love."

<boldquote>BIG LIE</boldquote>

You can not compare Obama's primary numbers to Kerry's GE numbers. This is Apples, Oranges comparison. It makes no sense. Kerry's numbers in GE include Republican numbers where as Obama's include only Democrats.  

will not help Obama if and when he becomes the nominee.  They will turn on him in a heartbeat and start singing the praises of McCain.  Everyone knows this.  They are just having their little fun with our party because it is such great drama.  

I am becoming less and less optimistic about our chances in November every day.  The Republican party is filled with idealogues who would vote for McCain no matter what he does.  Our only hope was to shake off a few disillusioned Repubs and attract the independents.  If Obama is the nominee I think we will lose more of our own base than we can afford to lose.  It's really a tragedy.

one obvious point: when Kerry ran against Bush, Bush's poll numbers were about 50%.

Nowadays, Bush's poll numbers are about 30%, the poll numbers for the Republican Party are abysmal as well, and the best that Obama can do is to roughly match Kerry's exit poll numbers among white voters (who are of course the only swing voters, since AAs always vote Democratic)?

In other words, Obama has the simply stupendous advantage of NOT being associated with the Republican Party and its failure, and the best he can do is match the numbers of a Democrat who FAILED?

And this is supposed to make people feel that Obama doesn't have a problem with white voters?

Look, Obama might possibly win in the general. But if he does so, it will NOT be because of who he is, it will be despite who he is. He will have been able to ride the Democratic brand -- which he will have had no hand in building up -- to success. And he himself, as these very numbers make clear, is nothing but a drag on that brand, depressing his own performance as a Democrat by who he is as a particular politician. He should, by rights, be up by double digit margins, and he is not.

Obama doesn't even do as well as Kerry at the same point? Many Clinton supporters have argued that 2008 will be a close general election and that Hillary Clinton is in a better position to win a hard-fought election given her base within the Democratic primaries. The argument from Obama supporters was that he can "change the map" and win new states.

Now even Obama supporters have given up that fantasy, we know that the competitive states will be roughly the same as 2004. Obama may do better in some Western swing states, NM, CO, NV, Clinton does better in big Eastern and Central swing states like FL, PA and OH. Obama is weaker among working class voters who are not black. Given Obama's geographic and demographic weaknesses, where he can't even match Kerry, it looks like he has his work cut out for him if he intends to win the general.

Kerry lost the "white vote" and oh yes...the general election.

But as you know Brazile mentioned a brand new democratic base that doesn't necessarily include working white voters...so there.

Gallup is joining in the MSM's fluffing of Obama.

Their own figures show he's running FOUR POINTS BEHIND Kerry v Bush?  At a time when he hasn't even faced the GOP's attack machine??

Wait til they get ahold of him:  He will not win a single state in the South, including Florida, will lose Ohio and PA, as well as the New West and even places like New Jersey and Michigan will be in play Election night.

That prick Axelrod says he has a "New Electoral Map"??

Yeah, right.

We're in trouble, boys and girls.  Hillary is still our best bet.

First, Kerry LOST.

Second, Obama has not yet been hit with attacks from the GOP that will weaken his support further from middle class voters.  I know it's an Obama talking point to say that Hillary Clinton has thrown the kitchen sink at him so there is nothing new for the GOP to say.  

Well try this...

"Barack Obama thinks you can afford the largest tax increase in human history - $2 trillion.  He will raise your income tax, he will raise your Social Security tax, he will raise your capital gains tax.  He will do this to fund government run health care."

Hillary Clinton has not made any such arguments or run any similar ads.  Those will be brand new hits for Obama on his middle class to lower middle class support.  

Now, don't get me wrong.  I support those policy choices Obama wants to make regarding taxes and health care.  And I know he can attempt to say the tax increases will fall mainly on the rich.  

But to pretend that there aren't additional POLICY arguments out there - ones that have proven devastating in the past to Democratic candidates - is wishful thinking.

white support?

Doesn't it make a lot more sense to compare Obama to someone who actually won the presidency?

Bill Clinton was in a 3 man race so the numbers need to be adjusted accordingly.

Obama's coalition is made up of eggheads and blacks. That is the George McGovern coalition and he got killed by Nixon.

Democrats had a chance to elect someone who could have easily won the election but instead went with a rookie who doesn't have a solid chance. Yes, Hillary's negatives are high right now, but guess what? They were off-the-wall high in PA and she still easily won despite being out spent. She would put an African American on the ticket, probably Obama and she would have sailed to victory. It was a no-brainer choice. But we blew it...AGAIN!!!

Now, people will be sending Obama money, working hard for his election, and all for a cause that is already a long-shot. When will Democrats learn what it takes to win?

For starters, candidates perceived to be liberal elitists can't win. Rookies can't win when we're at war. The contests should consist of primaries with the winner-take-all delegates just like the general election. The system that we have now is not very democratic and it doesn't result in the best candidate to run against the Republicans.

But no, we have to have this ridiculous system where a candidate with very little chance of winning (even in this Democratic year).