BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Amos
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:49 PM

However, I entirely agree with you about the degraded performance of the American media.


A

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Peace
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:25 PM

Obama will be the next president.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Amos
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:23 PM

I don't believe she has, in fact, won any such thing, Fantz.

The delegate count at present:


Barack Obama
Pledged: 1612
Superdelegates: 292
Total: 1,904

Hillary Clinton
Pledged: 1443
Superdelegates: 274
Total: 1,717

Popular Vote (w/FL)                        16,680,827        48.4%        16,381,989        47.6%                                

A

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:06 PM

According to Pew Research, 72% of the American public is against the Democratic party & MSM drive to push Clinton out of the primaries.

Of course, the Democrats have never been known to follow the will of the public, so I'm sure they'll just keep crowing for Clinton to leave.

Apparently, no one has noticed the MSM has the biggest incentive for making the horse race "divisive" and "negative" and all that crap.

It's called "the ratings".

Divisive elections make for juicy coverage.

But the arrogance of presumption involved in the MSM declaring a candidate who has won a majority of the popular vote "dead" just beggars belief.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 01:38 PM

"2) Illegal immigrants who collect a paycheck also pay payroll and Social Security taxes. They are lopsidedly too young to take advantage of Social Security. And since they are illegal they would not get Social Security anyway."


                      Not true, Ron. Most of these people work under the table for cash.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 01:37 PM

Q - I've been in the construction industry for over 40 years. There is nothing in California or Oregon that compells anyone to be a member of a union, a guild, be certified as a journeyman, or any of that stuff. Check it out.
                   Contractors have to have licenses, and bonds, and etc. but there are a lot of unlicensed contractors out there as well.

                   Re: The NYT article, they just didn't talk about the problems at emergency rooms, but you can read about them at any time in most newspapers around the country.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Q as guest
Date: 17 May 08 - 01:20 PM

More digression-
Construction labor-
In Alberta, to work as a carpenter, one must be a certified journeyman, a registered apprentice, or holds a recognized trade certificate. Casual labor can only act as helpers, etc.
The same is true for all other trades.
Apprenticeship for carpenter 4 years on the job training, and 8 weeks of technial training each year.
Is not the same demanded by the licensing boards in the States?

Anyone who builds a house with unskilled or unapproved labor is just stupid; it is doubtful that the house would pass the necessary inspections.

The letters I quoted were by the head of the California Academy of Family Physicians, and a medical student- The NY Times staff did not write them. Rig-'s assertions are nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 May 08 - 12:07 PM

To address a few of your--unsupported--points, Rig

1) Emergency rooms--many illegals are reluctant to take advantage of emergency health care, for fear of apprehension by the authorities.

2) Illegal immigrants who collect a paycheck also pay payroll and Social Security taxes. They are lopsidedly too young to take advantage of Social Security. And since they are illegal they would not get Social Security anyway.

3) You have no idea the extent to which the homebuyers are legal or illegal--or rich US- born non-Hispanic speculators, who've been flipping houses for years--and just now are getting caught.

You're good at scare tactics--as all propagandists are. A bit thin on facts.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 17 May 08 - 11:34 AM

I'm not writing McCain off. Not by a long shot. In fact, if being a Republican aligned with Bush on the war doesn't kill him off, nothing will.

And there is still a good chance nothing will, IMO.

I think there is a very real chance the American electorate will give the Dems landslide victories to take complete control back of the House and Senate, many state houses & governorships, but still deny them White House.

I think there is a very real chance of that scenario being the one we wake up to come November 5th.

But as it stands right now, the Dems, either Obama or Clinton, would beat McCain if the election were being held today.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 11:19 AM

I don't know that I'd write McCain off. When you look at how easily Obama won all of the states in the deep south, he won it with upwards of 90% of the black vote. I think he'll get the same number of votes down there in general that he got in the primary. Everybody else will either not vote for president, stay home, or go for McCain.
          Personally, I've been thinking of voting for everything on the ballet except the office of president, and just leaving that blank, or voting for the Green candidate.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:33 AM

Riginslinger, McCain has a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected as things stand right now.

But as we all know, shit happens. Between now and November, lots of shit is gonna happen, and this last week is but the beginning of both sides trying to out-Machiavelli the other.

I'm not labeling that voting as machismo, but there are always efforts, including efforts by Obama himself in the "god and guns" remarks, to portray the white working class male voters they need to win, as being dumb, machismo, and reactionary.

I think the realities on the ground are far more complex than that, and that Obama already dug his own grave in terms of being able to pull in that voting bloc Clinton has so easily carried.

Which does beg the question, when Clinton and Obama's stands on the issues are virtually identical, why does this gulf remain in the Democratic party?

Answer: war veterans and their families. Veterans of WWII, Korea & Vietnam. And they vote for the candidates they feel respect them, even if they opposed the Vietnam war. So it isn't the youngsters voting for Clinton. It's the older vets & their families, whose lives were so changed by the wars they fought in, they still look to national leaders to recognize them and respect them in every single election.

Which is why we need to put an end to our military madness in this country. It is the engine that drives us everywhere we go in the world.

One more reason why I love Russ Feingold--he challenges citizens to become citizen diplomats for the US in their international travel.

I'm guessing Obama hasn't learned the importance of the aging vet vote to the national psyche at this point, largely because he and his advisors have their heads up their asses. It doesn't matter if he won't win their vote, he still needs to pander to them.

Obama should be standing alongside Iraq Veterans Against the War. He should be demanding they no longer be marginalized by Congress, and that the Winter Soldier Hearings be shown the light of day, in hearings that don't stick them in a back room, and keep their testimony out of the Congressional Record. He should be their champion, in terms of getting Congress to listen to them.

He doesn't have to change his pro-war position to do that, but if he wanted to pull a lot of those Clinton voters inside the fence, he'd start making a huge deal about their right to be heard by the very people who sent them into harm's way.

When Obama meets with vets, there is a huge cringe factor I see that is reminiscent of the Dukakis in a tank photo.

Say what you will about Clinton, she knows the importance of vets to the national "don't tread on me" psyche and how to play to them.

Obama clearly doesn't.

He is surrounded by far too many Ivy League elitists to ever "get it".

Which is one reason why McCain still poses a threat to the Dems winning the White House this year.

And the Bush/McCain machine was very savvy framing Obama for November this week.

Brilliant stroke of genius, and if I may say it, a play that has Rove writ large all over it.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 10:05 AM

Okay, I googled, whoever put that up is slimier than Edwards himself.

                I suspect the Edwards endorsement did more to hurt Obama with those voters than help. He got the steel worker's union, but all that means is he got he management of the union. If Obama is the nominee, I think the rank and file will be squarely behind McCain in November.

               I think you're misreading the voting patterns by labeling it "machismo." There is some of that amoung younger males to be sure, but I think the more experienced blue collar white is simpling looking for a square deal from his government. So far, I think Hillary is promising that. I don't think there's anything Obama could do to win them over, and I don't think it's his race as much as his history--or maybe you can't separate them.

               The point is, I don't think many of those poorer white voters think it's racism, themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 17 May 08 - 09:36 AM

Of course not, the Ivy League liberal types merely do that in private (like during fundraisers in San Francisco) and on the internet, where their faces can't be smashed in.

The crowing wing of the Democratic party that marched out in lock step last Wednesday morning and de facto accused any and all of the West Virginia voters who voted for Clinton of being racists, well...try googling "crackers for Clinton" and you'll get the gist of it.

Every bit as race and class coded speech as anything the right wing Repubs have been doing for decades.

And make no mistake about it, The shit with Obama this week--the Edwards endorsement, the Bush remarks in Israel, the McCain speech to the NRA, and the Obama "attack" on Bush & McCain--every one of those speeches was directed to one group of voters: white male working class voters and their "machismo" voting patterns.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 09:27 AM

In the above posting I was really trying to explain why I think West Virginia voters went overwhelmingly for Hillary. I wasn't trying to argue a case for or against immigration, but got caught up in attempting to address one of Ron Davies' many pointed questions.

             Illegal immigration (or the lack of enforcing the rules), schools crowded with illegals--preventing native children from advancing, affirmative action, minority set-asides for business, and other public programs for minorities are some of the things that make white working class voters vote for Hillary over Obama.

             I don't think they see themselves as racist at all. They would see the Ku Klux Klan, Neo-Nazi's, and Skinheads as racist. But the programs that were put into place by the folks they call "elites," for the purpose of helping minorities had no negative effect on wealthy white citizens (if you got bumped off the list for enrollment at UC Berkley, your parents could simply buy you a spot at a private school, like Harvard, Princeton, or Yale).
             The people who really paid for the programs to help minorities--and they paid through the nose--are the working class whites who are now voting for Hillary.

             They see Obama as a product of the programs for minorities that were put into place by the wealthy elites, and that's why if Obama is the nominee in November, they will probably vote for McCain.

             Frankly, I don't see anything Obama or any of his supporters can do about it.

             As far as calling these people "crackers," that's up to you, but I don't think it would be smart to call them crackers to their face.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 May 08 - 09:03 AM

"Don't construction jobs require licensed and bonded labor?"
      
          Q - Contractors sometimes - labor never.



    "Most shortages in the health care industry are the result of inadequate funding, lack of funding for medical education, and poor wages for medical personnel."

                   Not in this case. It's just simply overwhelming demand from clients who nobody anticipated being there.



                  "No blame is attached to illegal immigrants. NY Times, April 13, 2008."

             That's because the NY Times, and their elite readership, is part of the problem. And also because, in this case, they were really talking about a different aspect of health care.
             I would agree with your other observations on health care.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 17 May 08 - 07:26 AM

And last night on Washington Week, a bigoted MSM jerk put an even finer point on "white working class" by referring to "them" as "Scots Irish".

And anyone who can remember ANY media hack using that term to refer to voters in the last 30 odd years or so, has a far better memory than me.

Why not just refer to them as the cracker vote?

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Q as guest
Date: 17 May 08 - 12:20 AM

Don't construction jobs require licensed and bonded labor? They certainly do here in Alberta.
The mortgage problem certainly is not the result of illegal immigrants buying houses, this is a fabrication.

Most shortages in the health care industry are the result of inadequate funding, lack of funding for medical education, and poor wages for medical personnel.
This complaint by a Boston area medical student is typical-
Yearly tuition at Boston Univ. School Medicine- $42734, Fees $2914, Room and board $11933, Books and supplies, $2843. Only about 30% of students obtain any grant aid. Debt after graduation astronomical!

In California, some eight million people live in officially designated primary care shortage areas. An a letter to the NY Times, Carla Kakutani, President of the California Academy of Family Physicians writes:
"In California, nearly eight million people live in officially designated primary care shortage areas. Millions more seriously ill patients must wait several weeks for appointments or seek care in emergency rooms, which drives up health care costs and leaves patients without essential follow-up care.
Family physicians in California support universal coverage and comprehensive health care reform that addresses the primary care doctor shortage. Ignoring this problem would derail any attempt to provide universal health care."
And more to the letter, but that is enough. No blame is attached to illegal immigrants. NY Times, April 13, 2008.

Are conditions any better here in Canada? Not in wealthy Alberta, home of the tar sands and supplier of much of the petroleum going to the United States.
Medical education suffers from the same lack of funds. Hospitals are inadequate in size and facilities; patients wait on cots in hallways and one may spend hours in waiting rooms. Family physicians are booked solid, and take few new patients, although the population is growing since the economy is booming. Specialist attention requires weeks, if not months, on a wait list. The oil millions-er billions- are not spent to allieviate the problem. Health care wages are low, much of the staff is immigrant, people with their first jobs in their new homeland.

Medicine is too expensive a career choice, and it requires long hours if one is compassionate; much better to go into engineering, geology, management, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 08 - 11:36 PM

Ron,

         I don't know how much time you have, but I'll start with this:

         First, we need to distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. People coming into the country on visas to do specific things in the light of day are not the ones causing blue collar workers so much trouble.

         Second, as far as illegal workers are concerned, people who say we should be going after the employers are 100% right. I think the board of directors of Tyson Foods ought to be in jail. Lou Dobbs would agree with that, I'm not sure Tom Tancredo would. So there are differences here.

         When I lived in California, the illegal aliens moved in with huge families--6 to 12 children per family in some cases. The schools were quickly overwhelmed, and the people who suffered were the kids who were the legally, and could not get an education.
         Now, they've become so desperate they're laying teachers off in an effort to meet expeneses, and this is a perfect example of what overpopulation does.

          Emergency rooms at hospitals have had to shut down. Hospitals have had to shut down, because they simply could not keep up with the huge demands brought about by illegals flooding into their facilities.

          Wages have been driven into the cellar. Illegal aliens have flooded into construction sites and have taken jobs at wages that are below what American workers can make on unemployment benefits. That has driven the unemployment programs into financial ruin.

         The wages for construction workers continually going down, has driven the value of houses down, which has exacerbated falling housing prices and the mortgage crisis.

         Illegal aliens bought houses. They would not have qualified for loans under normal circumstances, and should not have been taking out mortagages, but they were. Once in default, all they have to do is to go back to Mexico and there's nothing the lending institutions can do to recover what they consider to be "their money." This makes the entire situation much worse, and the empty houses are dragging down the value of the houses around them. To complicat the situation, knowing no one can come after them, they often "strip" the house of anything of value before they head south. This is why the central valley of California is considered to be the "foreclosure capital of America."

            Now I'm back in Oregon. Retired people are flocking here each day to get away from the illegal aliens in California. The problems that have been generated here as a result of the runaway immigration in California is a whole 'nother chapter. I'll fo on with that in book II. But it all stems from illegal immigration and the American government's failure to confront it.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 May 08 - 10:39 PM

Gee, that tends to support the allegation in some quarters that your allegation is total drivel.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 08 - 10:34 PM

They're in agony. They can't talk right now.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 May 08 - 10:19 PM

Rig--

If illegal immigration hurts everyone you know, let's have some details. Exactly how does it hurt them?

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 08 - 04:21 PM

Illegal immigration hurts everyone I know, but maybe those are the only ones.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Q as guest
Date: 16 May 08 - 03:54 PM

'Illegal immigration' does not hurt anyone; the numbers are small and a threat only in the minds of bigots, or ranters like Lew Dobbs. Without them fruit and perishable vegetables would go unpicked and washrooms would not get cleaned- the 'blue collar' so-called will not take these jobs. Because the immigrants often work together, they not only subsist on low wages but are able to send a little back 'home.' They are a worldwide phenomenon, the impact is much greater in western Europe than in the United States.

Affirmative action had good intentions, but it put one group of disadvantaged above another- both groups need the chance at education and jobs. The United States and Canada are falling behind in educating the population for the workplace.
China is expected to have more 'middle class' people than the United States in the next census, and India is not far behind. (Of course, large numbers are still mired in third-world conditions, but in the cities the demand for education and the quality of the schools is amazing).

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 May 08 - 12:40 PM

Q - I agree with everything you say above. I'm still a little puzzled about why those displcaced people flock to Hillary.

                   I have one observation. These are the people who have been hurt the most by illegal immigration, affirmative action, and minority set-aside programs. But when they voice their opposition to these things, the media happily labels the "racist."

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Guest is Q
Date: 16 May 08 - 12:20 AM

Blue collar labor is becoming hard to define, since government figures include both skilled and unskilled workers. Manufacturing jobs are decreasing- moving offshore or increasingly automated, requiring technical expertise in computers and machines. Growing, and now often defined as blue collar, are in communications, law enforcement, transportation and crafts. U. S. government figures show that 32% of craft workers have some college experience, or have graduated. Many in communications, commerce, law enforcement, computers, etc., have attended schools like DeVry, Phoenix and dozens of state institutions.
Plumbers, electricians, mechanics, gas and steam fitters and construction workers require licenses in order to practice, and technical school training is required for many of these jobs. Installation, maintenance and repair work is increasingly more technical.
Immigrants, legal or illegal, do the cleaning, fruit picking, etc. There are still some jobs 'working for the city' but even these require knowledge of equipment, etc., in many cases.

In other words, the old 'blue collar' worker who worked on an assembly line or in the mills is disappearing. In Pennsylvania, about 22% of workers are classed as blue collar, and this now includes many with training, and a spread in wages.

Improved education is a must- Unfortuntely, the number who graduate even at high school level is only around 50% in many large city schools. The people who drop out have few chances at middle class life.

The candidates have not addressed the problems. Speeches do not revive obsolete jobs. "No child left behind" is empty rhetoric in too many cases.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 08 - 10:52 PM

And by the way, I stereotype nobody. But I have run across some classic remarks by WV voters--such as the observation that the voter in question could not vote for Obama since he was a Moslem and his wife was an atheist. Other variations have included the objection that he did not salute the flag and that he agreed with Rev. Wright's outlandish remarks--despite his clear rejection of them on more than one occasion.

And Hillary was kind enough to assure the WV voters that she realized white workers were important. Now why do you suppose she had to mention the workers were white?

You might be aware that if you try hard enough you can always find a reason other than the real one to vote against somebody.

And as I've pointed out, many people, including many blue-collar workers in WV, just don't know him well enough--an omission he can easily remedy by November.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 08 - 10:38 PM

Gee, Janet, sounds like you still haven't found that stronger tranquilizer you need. Please keep looking--for your own sake, not for ours. We still appreciate your entertainment value, I can assure you.

It's also fascinating that for all your foaming at the mouth, you haven't managed to even begin to address any of the arguments I brought up as to why McCain has problems.

One might think you're bankrupt of ideas--though foul language comes easily to you. Some say that's the surest sign of mental bankruptcy.

But I'm sure that's not the case for you.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Peace
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:50 PM

"Not to worry, I'm sure all of Ron Davies best middle class elitist friends are black."

I'm one of Ron's friends and last I looked I'm a kinda pale skinned guy.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Bill D
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:37 PM

"I'm sure all of Ron Davies best middle class elitist friends are black."

Funny, I don't look black. And I know a couple dozen of Ron's 'elitist' friends who aren't either.

Hey Fanta...are you FOR anyone or anything? Or just get off throwing stones at everyone else's ideas?

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Peace
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:28 PM

Betcha can't say the word gullible ten times fast . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:24 PM

He's not really formulating that opinion, Brucie... It is the PR thing that the Mc 'n Mc camps are putting out... So it is parroting...

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:23 PM

Weak candidate!
Weak candidate!
Weak candidate!
Weak...

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Peace
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:04 PM

"Yeah, Obama is shaping up to be a pretty weak candidatet."

Keep sayin' that often enough, Rig, and you'll start believing it.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Q as guest
Date: 15 May 08 - 03:17 PM

Voting outside of major urban centers in Missouri as well as West Virginia show that the 'working class' vote for Clinton included the small shopkeeper, business man and the average farmer as well as what used to be known as 'working class' 50 or more years ago.
The reasons for Clinton support are complex, understandable for women, but the lukewarm support from men is just another signal that many of them will vote for the certainties of McCain come the Fall election.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 15 May 08 - 08:59 AM

Not to worry, I'm sure all of Ron Davies best middle class elitist friends are black.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 May 08 - 08:43 AM

"And your pig headed, bigoted stereotyping of the white working class is a perfect example of how to lose the election for Obama."


             And the same charge has been leveled at Hispanics. We've seen blacks in the south vote enmasse, but why would we expect Hispanics to do that? I don't think they will. They haven't in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 15 May 08 - 08:38 AM

And your pig headed, bigoted stereotyping of the white working class is a perfect example of how to lose the election for Obama.

Or have you forgotten, the white working class doesn't control the MSM?

And they've been the race baiting scapegoats this election cycle far more than Rev Wright has.

But don't hide your contempt for the working class folks, Ron. Tell us how your white elitist ass truly feels about them.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 May 08 - 08:28 AM

As I've said elsewhere, WV proves nothing except that racism still exists and that Obama has to repeat ad nauseam that he is in fact a patriotic Christian -- not a Moslem-- who rejects Wright's outlandish remarks. And that his wife is also not an atheist but a patriotic American Christian who does the same.

Eminently do-able between now and November.



McCain has 3 serious problems--any of which can cost him the election.

1) Sour mood of the US--throw the bums out. And as you note in the recent special elections, it's Republicans who are being tossed out---in Republican districts.

2) He's tied to GWB--instant revulsion in many quarters

3) He has to reach beyond his base to win--especially independents. But whenever he does, his base threatens to revolt

a) illegal immigration--Tancredo fire-eaters will alienate Hispanics and other thinking beings.
b) climate change--WSJ came out yesterday against his cap-and-trade idea.
c) health reform--base will not allow it unless "market based"--a bandaid for a gaping wound

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:59 AM

What about "the sheer nastiness of a certain percentage of Obama's opponents"?

We even have a few of them here in Mudcat...

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 15 May 08 - 07:54 AM

Don't think you'll find many people in Mudcat to talk about West Virginia with, because the majority here support Obama. If it is bad news for Obama, they either ignore it or shout down the messengers and villify them.

That is the "Yes We Can" strategy, it seems, at least on the ground.

What should worry a lot of folks is the sheer nastiness of a certain percentage of Obama's supporters. The hate mongers who are the mirror image of the Rove Republicans.

We even have a few of them here in Mudcat.

Those folks are already causing problems, because they keep alienating the very voters they need to attract for Obama to win in November.

He can't win without the white working class voters. He doesn't need to win all of them, of course. Just the vast majority of them.

And he isn't doing really well with that group, as the WV landslide victory for Clinton just demonstrated.

And a victory like that after Obama's supposed "come back" in North Carolina, is pretty ominous for the general election trends.

They don't all have to switch to McCain for Obama to lose. Just enough of them, while the rest stay home & sit this election out.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Q as guest
Date: 15 May 08 - 12:31 AM

Yes, we will see. Nothing I have seen suggests a sweep for the Obamites.
A few comments on Ron Davies free-wheeling digressions- I'll make a few myself.
I said nothing about fighting Al Qaeda. They are a small group who flourish in troubled areas; they are not representative of any of the Muslim nations. Cooperative efforts towards solving problems would be the be the best way to minimize them. This means cooperation with Syrians, Iranians, et al.; not one of the candidates has said anything helpful in this regard- and why should only Israel have nuclear capabilities in the Middle east?

I did say in other words that current American ideas that the Taliban is a group that can be fought in the same way as Al Qaeda is laughable; they are the 'young Turks' of the Pashtun people, a conservative cultural group of many millions in Afganistan and Pakistan. They will control Afganistan fully again.

Have you written that speech for Obama in which he comes out strongly for that citizenship path for all illegal immigrants? Hmmm, I just might support him if he ever did that. A steal from Bush, of course. And wasn't Bush pushing for it but Congress turned him back?

I have also suggested that Congress will remain strongly divided after the election; the extravagant and childish claims that humungous change will prevail will fizzle. Hope for a few improvements in health care, a considered and careful withdrawal from the mess we made in the Middle East, and a few baby steps towards sustainable, varied energy sources that can supplant some of the current oil-coal base.

Now back to West Virginia- or is that now just old news, with no lessons to be learned from it?

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 May 08 - 10:15 PM

"path to citizenship"

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 May 08 - 10:13 PM

Q--

You haven't learned any more as a Guest, it seems. McCain could easily take Obama down? We'll see.

Doesn't look good for McCain at this point.

1) Polls already about even--and that's before Obama's bounce when Hillary finally bows out.

2) The US--including Republicans---is thoroughly sick of Bush. Obama's theme will be: Do you want a Bush 3rd term? And it's a winning theme.

3) The US mood is more sour than it's been in a long time. "Throw the bums out" always starts with the president's party.

4) There are huge numbers of new Democrats,   including young people and black people--who joined because of Obama. Added to this are large numbers of independents--including, for sure, anybody who wants to end the Iraq war, and that includes some Republicans.

As I recall, you subscribe to the rather dubious notion that "we have to fight al-Qaeda there or they will follow us home", totally disregarding the fact that Iraqi Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds hate al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda will have its hands full surviving in Iraq--not exactly in posture to take over Iraq, despite your delusions.

5) Many women now say they want Hillary or nobody. But many more realize that they must keep McCain from having a chance to name a Supreme Court justice if they want to preserve Roe v Wade. So they must vote for the Democratic nominee--whoever that person is.   And it will be Obama. The first group will be persuading the second group.

6) Then there's the Hispanic vote. Obama will be coming out strongly for a path to ciizenship for all illegal immigrants. As I've noted elsewhere, this puts McCain in a box.

Either he also supports this idea--and loses the Tancredo true believers--or he opposes it--and his portion of the Hispanic vote plunges from the 40% GWB got in 2004--which more than made the difference in a very close election.

It looks as if McCain will be left with the racists and the under-educated. That's not a majority.

If I didn't know better, I'd think your prediction is based on frustrated schadenfreude--since so far all your predictions have come to nothing, to put it mildly.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 May 08 - 06:14 PM

The only evil figure I've seen in the whole thing is Reverend Jeremiah Wright, at least so far.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 14 May 08 - 02:40 PM

I don't think at all he has stirred the racism pot. It is there, it is steaming underneath the surface, and can easily be brought to a boil, which is exactly what creepy Hillary is doing. She is trying to tap right into that, which is something decent people would not do. She is evil, plain and simple. In the long run, it might be best to get more out in the open, but of course it will affect the election, but hopefully people who believe in civil rights etc. will prevail. mg

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: GUEST,Guest is Q
Date: 14 May 08 - 12:56 PM

Missouri was also a wake-up call to the Democrats. Although the vote was split almost 50-50, a look at the map shows that Obama carried only the cities of St. Louis, Kansas City and Jefferson City. The entire state outside of these cities was solidly for Clinton. Only 5 of 141 counties showed a majority for Obama. One may duplicate the results across the country.
Much of the Obama 'lead' was engineered in the caucus votes, which never attract 'middle' Americans because they appear to them as elite closed circles.

I have just about reached the point of putting my money on McCain, although I fear nothing innovative will come from his leadership.
Of course, a Democratic president in the White House can only accomplish so much in a divided Congress, which is a certainty.
A moderate advance in health care, legislation encouraging development of nuclear and other energy sources, possible legislation leading to a partial solution of immigration problems, and a gradual realization that the Middle East conflicts cannot be resolved by the American military or by thwarting legitimate Middle East aspirations or ignoring their complex demographics and cultures, are perhaps the best we can hope for.
'Change' will come slowly regardless of the outcome.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Bobert
Date: 14 May 08 - 12:29 PM

yeah, but it didn'y have to happen like this... The Clinton's thought they were ***entitled*** to another 8 years... When they found themselves behind in the 4th quarter it was "Hail Mary" time, which meant playing the race card and play it they have...

... and the media has jumped right in, as well...

Hey, Rev. Wright is a friggin Boy Scout compared to some of the skelatons rattlin' 'round the Clinton closets but the media doesn't seem to bothered with diggin' 'round in there...

Like I have said... McMedia doesn't want a black man in the "White" House...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 14 May 08 - 11:30 AM

"The divisiveness in the Dem campaign has entirely stemmed from the media making a huge horse race out of it."

Finally, Amos got something right.

It's all about colour now and that lies squarely on the shoulders of the media.

Blacks for Obama, Whites for Clinton.

Like many onlookers, I have turned away in disgust.

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Amos
Date: 14 May 08 - 09:59 AM

It seems to me the Obama campaign has racially polarized Democrats in a way they haven't been since 1968

This is just selective myopia in play, Fantz. The divisiveness in the Dem campaign has entirely stemmed from the media making a huge horserace out of it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: How is West Virginia doing in elect.?
From: Bobert
Date: 14 May 08 - 09:36 AM

Well, one thing is for sure anmd that is the Mc/Mc/Mc spinster are up to their usual bag ot tricks this morning...

Obama has won 3 states by more than 60% of the vote... Does that make McClinton look like a weak candidiate..

This is pure racism in disguise...

B~