Sunday, January 20, 2008
democrats - home of racism
at least that's the storyline that's getting passed around by the mmm. digby:
as digby points out, the mmm doesn't consider that the younger voters may not have even been socially mature (read: aware) of politics 10 years ago when the clintons did their notable work; that is to say, the clinton brand means far more to a 45-55 year old, who was 30 to 40 during the clinton presidency, than a 22 year old today who was 4 years old when bill clinton took office.
also, as many commenters on digby's post point out, obama's kind words for st. ronald the alzheimer would rub any democrat who was actually alive in the 80's the wrong way.
this time parameter would obviously leave out any young obama supporter under the age of 30, who, even if they were alive during reagan's presidency, were not politically cognizant to recognize the damage that king's row did to the country.
apparently, some people think so. here's a headline on cbs:
it's not all that hard to figure out that older voters would vote for the person who is running on "experience" just as it's not surprising that younger voters would vote for the man who promised "change." fergawdsake, it's obviously not racism inside the democratic party among a generation of liberal baby boomers who fought for civil rights alongside african americans.
the people who don't like blacks are in the party where there are none. to say that democrats over 45 are voting for hillary because they are racists is calumny. there's no evidence that racism is involved at all.
the real point here is that it is the multi-millionaire media that is racist and misogynist. from the beginning they have assumed that all women will vote for hillary, and all blacks will vote for obama.obama's age gap: is it race?
cbs's dick meyer says older americans have so far proven unwilling to vote for barack obama
how about young voters have so far proven unwilling to vote for an older person? is it ageism? really, this is ridiculous.cbs's dick meyer says older americans have so far proven unwilling to vote for barack obama
it's not all that hard to figure out that older voters would vote for the person who is running on "experience" just as it's not surprising that younger voters would vote for the man who promised "change." fergawdsake, it's obviously not racism inside the democratic party among a generation of liberal baby boomers who fought for civil rights alongside african americans.
the people who don't like blacks are in the party where there are none. to say that democrats over 45 are voting for hillary because they are racists is calumny. there's no evidence that racism is involved at all.
as digby points out, the mmm doesn't consider that the younger voters may not have even been socially mature (read: aware) of politics 10 years ago when the clintons did their notable work; that is to say, the clinton brand means far more to a 45-55 year old, who was 30 to 40 during the clinton presidency, than a 22 year old today who was 4 years old when bill clinton took office.
also, as many commenters on digby's post point out, obama's kind words for st. ronald the alzheimer would rub any democrat who was actually alive in the 80's the wrong way.
this time parameter would obviously leave out any young obama supporter under the age of 30, who, even if they were alive during reagan's presidency, were not politically cognizant to recognize the damage that king's row did to the country.
Labels: clinton, multi-millionaire media, obama, prez campaign, racism
posted by skippy at
8:26 PM |
4 Comments:
commented by
Anonymous, 8:58 AM PST
Anonymous, 8:58 AM PST
as a 56 yo I strongly agree with your take on why older voters may prefer HRC to BHO. Also younger voters may be more idealistic and taken by his rhetoric.
I would also like to point out Krugman's take on economic stimulus - he correctly points out that BHO is the least progressive of the big three!
On the other hand I am totally turned off by the Clinton campaign's rovian tactics. I want the Dems to fight that hard against the thugs not each other.
I prefer JRE's politics, BHO's rhetoric and HRC's fight but at the moment all three look like they really want to avoid cleaning up after Boy Blunder.
I would also like to point out Krugman's take on economic stimulus - he correctly points out that BHO is the least progressive of the big three!
On the other hand I am totally turned off by the Clinton campaign's rovian tactics. I want the Dems to fight that hard against the thugs not each other.
I prefer JRE's politics, BHO's rhetoric and HRC's fight but at the moment all three look like they really want to avoid cleaning up after Boy Blunder.
commented by , 12:49 PM PST
Clinton is sending out her buddies to make charges against Obama including his race.
I call bullshit, and I call you a plant by the people who are terrified that Obama is fucking up this race terribly.
Which is true. Which is also why the MSM is trying to drum up a horse race where there simply ain't one.
I call bullshit, and I call you a plant by the people who are terrified that Obama is fucking up this race terribly.
Which is true. Which is also why the MSM is trying to drum up a horse race where there simply ain't one.
as digby points out, the mmm doesn't consider that the younger voters may not have even been socially mature (read: aware) of politics 10 years ago when the clintons did their notable work; that is to say, the clinton brand means far more to a 45-55 year old, who was 30 to 40 during the clinton presidency, than a 22 year old today who was 4 years old when bill clinton took office.
I'm going to add one more point to this:
The effectiveness of the right wing hate campaign against Billary. It doesn't matter if you agreed with it or not when it happened. It's on your mind now, and if you weren't politically aware back in the 90s, you sure as damned hell are remembering that when your folks talked about the Clintons', it was about scandal.
I'm going to add one more point to this:
The effectiveness of the right wing hate campaign against Billary. It doesn't matter if you agreed with it or not when it happened. It's on your mind now, and if you weren't politically aware back in the 90s, you sure as damned hell are remembering that when your folks talked about the Clintons', it was about scandal.













And that guy from BET. That was sickening.
And I see a lot of it in the blogosphere. Telling me I shouldn't vote for Obama because he will be attacked for his race.
That is just pretending you are above it, while still using the race card.
You think there aren't racsist in the Democratic Party. You are living in a fairy tale.
The Clintons will use every Karl Rove including race.