PDA

View Full Version : Dem Nom Fave Hillary Clinton Leads McCain in New Poll by a Convincing 9 Points


CrossCourt~Rally
Apr 29th, 2008, 04:38 AM
WASHINGTON (April 28) - Hillary Rodham Clinton now leads John McCain by 9 points in a head-to-head presidential matchup, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable than Democratic rival Barack Obama.

Obama and Republican McCain are running about even.

The survey released Monday gives the New York senator and former first lady a fresh talking point as she works to raise much-needed campaign cash and persuade pivotal undecided superdelegates to side with her in the drawn-out Democratic primary fight.

Helped by independents, young people and seniors, Clinton gained ground this month in a hypothetical match with Sen. McCain, the GOP nominee-in-waiting. She now leads McCain, 50 percent to 41 percent, while Obama remains virtually tied with McCain, 46 percent to 44 percent.

Both Democrats were roughly even with McCain in the previous poll about three weeks ago.

Since then, Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary, raising questions anew about whether Obama can attract broad swaths of voters needed to triumph in such big states come the fall when the Democratic nominee will go up against McCain. At the same time, Obama was thrown on the defensive by his comment that residents of small-town America were bitter. The Illinois senator also continued to deal with the controversial remarks of his longtime Chicago pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

"I don't think there's any question that over the last three weeks her stature has improved," said Harrison Hickman, a Democratic pollster unaligned in the primary. He attributed Clinton's gains to people moving from the "infatuation stage" of choosing the candidate they like the most to a "decision-making stage" where they determine who would make the best president.

Added Steve Lombardo, a GOP pollster: "This just reinforces the sentiment that a lot of Republican strategists are having right now — that Clinton might actually be the more formidable fall candidate for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that Obama can't seem to get his footing back."


The AP-Ipsos poll found Clinton and Obama about even in the race for the Democratic nomination. Underscoring deep divisions within the Democratic Party — and a potentially negative longer-term impact — 30 percent of Clinton supporters and 21 percent of Obama supporters said they would vote for McCain in November if their preferred candidate didn't win the nomination.

Obama leads Clinton in pledged delegates, but she has the advantage among superdelegates with about a third yet to make up their minds.

Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean said Monday that one of the two must drop out of the race after the primary season wraps up in June so Democrats can unite before the late-summer convention and the fall campaign.

He also urged undecided superdelegates — members of the Democratic National Committee as well as Democratic governors and members of Congress — to side with either Clinton or Obama before the August convention so the party can come together to take on McCain. The Arizona senator clinched the GOP nomination last month and has been campaigning freely since.

Nearly half the people in the AP-Ipsos poll said the protracted Democratic primary will hurt their party's chances in November; more Obama supporters than Clinton backers said they had that fear.

Overall, people said they trusted Clinton and Obama about the same to handle Iraq and the economy; McCain got similar ratings on Iraq but trailed both Democrats on the economy. And while roughly the same percentage of people said they trusted both Democrats to understand their problems, fewer trusted McCain.

When pitted against McCain, Clinton now wins among independents, 50 percent to 34 percent, when just a few weeks ago she ran about even with him with this crucial group of voters. Clinton also now does better among independents than Obama does in a matchup with McCain.
Clinton has a newfound edge among seniors, too, 51 percent to 39 percent; McCain had previously had the advantage. And, Clinton has improved her margin over McCain among people under age 30; two-thirds of them now side with her. McCain leads Obama among seniors, while Obama leads McCain among those under 30 but by a smaller margin than Clinton does.

She also now leads among Catholics, always an important swing voting group in a general election, and improved her standing in the South as well as in cities and among families making under $25,000 a year. But she lost ground among families making between $50,000 and $100,000; they narrowly support McCain.

The poll, taken April 23-27, questioned 1,001 adults nationally, with a margin of error of 3.1 percent. Included were interviews with 457 Democratic voters and people leaning Democratic, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.6 points, and 346 Republicans or GOP-leaning voters, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.3 points.

kittyking
Apr 29th, 2008, 04:42 AM
The whole popular vote thing doesn't matter all that much in America, its about who will win the battle states. Ohio is still shaping up to be the biggest prize on offer, if Obama wins the nomination (which he probably will) then you can pretty much hand Florida to McCain. Also if Obama wins then Pennsylvania and Michigan could turn into big battleground states :eek:

doni1212
Apr 29th, 2008, 05:19 AM
And why create a new thread? :rolleyes:
It's already in your Hillary support thread.
Desperate much? :lol:

Sam L
Apr 29th, 2008, 05:31 AM
Hillary is meant to be down and out already but it's amazing how she just keeps coming back and coming back. I wouldn't be surprised at all if she's the next President. She has perseverance.

G1Player2
Apr 29th, 2008, 05:32 AM
Hillary is meant to be down and out already but it's amazing how she just keeps coming back and coming back. I wouldn't be surprised at all if she's the next President. She has perseverance.

Sam L. I thought you were more intelligent than this? :lol:

dementieva's fan
Apr 29th, 2008, 05:41 AM
Hillary is meant to be down and out already but it's amazing how she just keeps coming back and coming back. I wouldn't be surprised at all if she's the next President. She has perseverance.
:lol: The monster in the movie Cloverfield also just kept coming back and coming back even after it was meant to be down and out after the military kept bombing the shit out of it.

Williamsser
Apr 29th, 2008, 08:38 AM
If Obama loses to McCain in November, then Hillary should run again in 2012.

kittyking
Apr 29th, 2008, 09:44 AM
:lol: The monster in the movie Cloverfield also just kept coming back and coming back even after it was meant to be down and out after the military kept bombing the shit out of it.

Did you just call Hillary a monster?

Glad you've switched teams :worship:

pav
Apr 29th, 2008, 10:29 AM
Don't trust that bugger Obama,wouldn't buy a second hand Hilux off him,can't believe how many people are infatuated with him!sooner vote for Richard Williams:)

Pureracket
Apr 29th, 2008, 10:37 AM
If Obama loses to McCain in November, then Hillary should run again in 2012.Some people said that HRC started running for president of '12 right after Super Tuesday.:tape:

Donny
Apr 29th, 2008, 12:04 PM
The pledged delegate leader is going to win. That this hasn't already sunken in is pretty sad.

Philbo
Apr 29th, 2008, 01:45 PM
The pledged delegate leader is going to win. That this hasn't already sunken in is pretty sad.

You would bet everything you own on this would you? You seem pretty certain....

Philbo
Apr 29th, 2008, 01:45 PM
Hillary is meant to be down and out already but it's amazing how she just keeps coming back and coming back. I wouldn't be surprised at all if she's the next President. She has perseverance.

Yep.. agreed...

Ryan
Apr 29th, 2008, 02:13 PM
And why create a new thread? :rolleyes:
It's already in your Hillary support thread.
Desperate much? :lol:



Are you KIDDING me? There are at least 10 times more pro-Obama threads posted by his supporters then by Clinton ones, so get off your high horse. Not that Obama's supporters don't all read the Clinton support thread - desperate much? :lol: :rolleyes:

Andrew Laeddis
Apr 29th, 2008, 03:08 PM
The pledged delegate leader is going to win. That this hasn't already sunken in is pretty sad.

Agreed. But you have to love the fact that Hillary dont want the voters of Florida to be denied their say but she certainly wouldnt give a damn if she got some of the delegates from states which the votes wanted Obama as their democratic nom. Hypocrisy isnt becoming.

samsung101
Apr 29th, 2008, 03:24 PM
The 'pledge' of the delegates is nothing more than a handshake.

Any delegate, from the states per the votes or caucus, or the super
delegates, can vote any way they choose to at the convention in Denver.

Nothing is set in stone.

That's what Hillary is banking on. A mistake, gaffe, scandal, something
that makes Obama have to bow out, or delegates demand he get out, or he's
just outvoted by those with buyers remorse from January and February votes.

All of which will mean a huge mess in Denver, calls of racism, and favoritism,
and the Democrats cannot have that happen.

Obama will get the nomination.
The DNC cannot afford not to have him get it now.


However, any poll which shows any candidate leading another right now, means
as much as those polls a year ago that said Rudy and Hillary were runaway
party nominees for 2008.


True though, Obama is facing some tests now. Finally. The media gave him way
too many passes early on, and he's facing questions that were around in December
and January and February -but, the mainstream media ignored all of it. Wright
and Rezko and Ayers and his liberal record, were all there, being questioned on
conservative outlets...but, the networks and main cable stations didn't ask.

Would he have won Iowa and earlier states if Wright, Rezko, Ayers, Michelle's
comments were publicized as much in January, as they are now?

plantman
Apr 29th, 2008, 03:25 PM
The pledged delegate leader is going to win. That this hasn't already sunken in is pretty sad.

superdelegates are not bound by previous candidate preference or primary election results. I believe that a pledged one can be changed even up to the convention itself! Am I correct?

ptkten
Apr 29th, 2008, 03:34 PM
None of this stuff matters. The consensus is that most of the undecided supers are leaning towards choosing Obama but are waiting until this thing plays out. They're not going to overturn the will of the voters.

Regardless of who you support, it is 99 % certain Obama is going to get the nomination, it's just a matter of when.

CrossCourt~Rally
Apr 30th, 2008, 02:12 AM
superdelegates are not bound by previous candidate preference or primary election results. I believe that a pledged one can be changed even up to the convention itself! Am I correct?

Yes, you are correct. :)

tequila
Apr 30th, 2008, 02:24 AM
If Barack wins or Hillary wins, both wins will be decided by superdelegates, since neither have enough pledged delegates to win. Hillary can't win without superdelegates and neither can Barack. It's up to the superdelegates either way.

kittyking
Apr 30th, 2008, 02:54 AM
None of this stuff matters. The consensus is that most of the undecided supers are leaning towards choosing Obama but are waiting until this thing plays out. They're not going to overturn the will of the voters.

Regardless of who you support, it is 99 % certain Obama is going to get the nomination, it's just a matter of when.

Correct, because if they do overturn the will of the voters then a large amount of black voters will stay at home and then suddenly the Republicans are heavy favourites to win.

In The Zone
Apr 30th, 2008, 02:58 AM
Correct, because if they do overturn the will of the voters then a large amount of black voters will stay at home and then suddenly the Republicans are heavy favourites to win.

They won't overturn the will of the voters. :)

Donny
Apr 30th, 2008, 03:02 AM
superdelegates are not bound by previous candidate preference or primary election results. I believe that a pledged one can be changed even up to the convention itself! Am I correct?

Yes. And the delegates for the electoral college are also allowed to vote for whoever they want to be president. Some things just don't happen in reality.

plantman
Apr 30th, 2008, 04:29 AM
Yes. And the delegates for the electoral college are also allowed to vote for whoever they want to be president. Some things just don't happen in reality.

Nothing in this contest has been the norm....anythings possible!

Olórin
Apr 30th, 2008, 01:19 PM
Correct, because if they do overturn the will of the voters then a large amount of black voters will stay at home and then suddenly the Republicans are heavy favourites to win.

The will of the voters is split by less than a percentage point. It's worth bearing that in mind.

mykarma
Apr 30th, 2008, 04:52 PM
WASHINGTON (April 28) - Hillary Rodham Clinton now leads John McCain by 9 points in a head-to-head presidential matchup, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable than Democratic rival Barack Obama.

Obama and Republican McCain are running about even.

The survey released Monday gives the New York senator and former first lady a fresh talking point as she works to raise much-needed campaign cash and persuade pivotal undecided superdelegates to side with her in the drawn-out Democratic primary fight.

Helped by independents, young people and seniors, Clinton gained ground this month in a hypothetical match with Sen. McCain, the GOP nominee-in-waiting. She now leads McCain, 50 percent to 41 percent, while Obama remains virtually tied with McCain, 46 percent to 44 percent.

Both Democrats were roughly even with McCain in the previous poll about three weeks ago.

Since then, Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary, raising questions anew about whether Obama can attract broad swaths of voters needed to triumph in such big states come the fall when the Democratic nominee will go up against McCain. At the same time, Obama was thrown on the defensive by his comment that residents of small-town America were bitter. The Illinois senator also continued to deal with the controversial remarks of his longtime Chicago pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

"I don't think there's any question that over the last three weeks her stature has improved," said Harrison Hickman, a Democratic pollster unaligned in the primary. He attributed Clinton's gains to people moving from the "infatuation stage" of choosing the candidate they like the most to a "decision-making stage" where they determine who would make the best president.

Added Steve Lombardo, a GOP pollster: "This just reinforces the sentiment that a lot of Republican strategists are having right now — that Clinton might actually be the more formidable fall candidate for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that Obama can't seem to get his footing back."


The AP-Ipsos poll found Clinton and Obama about even in the race for the Democratic nomination. Underscoring deep divisions within the Democratic Party — and a potentially negative longer-term impact — 30 percent of Clinton supporters and 21 percent of Obama supporters said they would vote for McCain in November if their preferred candidate didn't win the nomination.

Obama leads Clinton in pledged delegates, but she has the advantage among superdelegates with about a third yet to make up their minds.

Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean said Monday that one of the two must drop out of the race after the primary season wraps up in June so Democrats can unite before the late-summer convention and the fall campaign.

He also urged undecided superdelegates — members of the Democratic National Committee as well as Democratic governors and members of Congress — to side with either Clinton or Obama before the August convention so the party can come together to take on McCain. The Arizona senator clinched the GOP nomination last month and has been campaigning freely since.

Nearly half the people in the AP-Ipsos poll said the protracted Democratic primary will hurt their party's chances in November; more Obama supporters than Clinton backers said they had that fear.

Overall, people said they trusted Clinton and Obama about the same to handle Iraq and the economy; McCain got similar ratings on Iraq but trailed both Democrats on the economy. And while roughly the same percentage of people said they trusted both Democrats to understand their problems, fewer trusted McCain.

When pitted against McCain, Clinton now wins among independents, 50 percent to 34 percent, when just a few weeks ago she ran about even with him with this crucial group of voters. Clinton also now does better among independents than Obama does in a matchup with McCain.
Clinton has a newfound edge among seniors, too, 51 percent to 39 percent; McCain had previously had the advantage. And, Clinton has improved her margin over McCain among people under age 30; two-thirds of them now side with her. McCain leads Obama among seniors, while Obama leads McCain among those under 30 but by a smaller margin than Clinton does.

She also now leads among Catholics, always an important swing voting group in a general election, and improved her standing in the South as well as in cities and among families making under $25,000 a year. But she lost ground among families making between $50,000 and $100,000; they narrowly support McCain.

The poll, taken April 23-27, questioned 1,001 adults nationally, with a margin of error of 3.1 percent. Included were interviews with 457 Democratic voters and people leaning Democratic, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.6 points, and 346 Republicans or GOP-leaning voters, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5.3 points.
Hillary supporters don't believe in polls.

jenny161185
Apr 30th, 2008, 05:47 PM
I like Obama but I want Hilary to win, For some reason she keeps on sticking it out - now shes in a third set tie breaker in the us open finals and shes 5-0 down in the tie break? that about right? haha!!!

Expat
Apr 30th, 2008, 06:00 PM
obama has this nomination in the bag
the superdelegates wont risk alienating the black vote by nominating hillary
they cant be seen as racist

good news for mccain because he can easily beat obama
the only chance obama has of winning is somehow rallying the latino vote for him
hillary will be running again in 2012 after she ensures obama's defeat in this election but will 2012 be too late?

mykarma
Apr 30th, 2008, 07:06 PM
obama has this nomination in the bag
the superdelegates wont risk alienating the black vote by nominating hillary
they cant be seen as racist

good news for mccain because he can easily beat obama
the only chance obama has of winning is somehow rallying the latino vote for him
hillary will be running again in 2012 after she ensures obama's defeat in this election but will 2012 be too late?
If it were only black voters that would be alienated they would do it but to some surprise the majority of people that have voted for Barack are white.

Ryan
Apr 30th, 2008, 07:35 PM
If it were only black voters that would be alienated they would do it but to some surprise the majority of people that have voted for Barack are white.


Because there are more white people than black people, silly.

Pureracket
Apr 30th, 2008, 07:38 PM
Because there are more white people than black people, silly.
:haha: The logic of a warped mind.

mykarma
Apr 30th, 2008, 07:39 PM
Because there are more white people than black people, silly.
duh :shrug:

Expat
Apr 30th, 2008, 07:43 PM
If it were only black voters that would be alienated they would do it but to some surprise the majority of people that have voted for Barack are white.
the ones most offended by this would be the african american community
youths and independents though angry will not carry a grudge into the next elections against the democrats
however the solid voting block of african americans can then be longer counted as democratic if obama loses the nomination at the hands of the superdelegates
that is something the superdelegates are not willing to risk for just one election or hillary
even hillary knows it and she is in it just to ensure that obama doesnt win the november election if she loses the primary

mykarma
Apr 30th, 2008, 07:53 PM
the ones most offended by this would be the african american community
youths and independents though angry will not carry a grudge into the next elections against the democrats
however the solid voting block of african americans can then be longer counted as democratic if obama loses the nomination at the hands of the superdelegates
that is something the superdelegates are not willing to risk for just one election or hillary
even hillary knows it and she is in it just to ensure that obama doesnt win the november election if she loses the primary
Good post but I think it will also lose a lot of first time voters and leave a bad taste in many independents. I also agree with your post about Hillary and this is the main reason that I'll never vote for her again even if Barack becomes the next President.

If the repubs. were smart and stop being so anal and hateful, a lot of black dems. would flock to them because we're sick and tired of being used by the dems. and getting nothing in return.

In The Zone
Apr 30th, 2008, 08:01 PM
Good post but I think it will also lose a lot of first time voters and leave a bad taste in many independents. I also agree with your post about Hillary and this is the main reason that I'll never vote for her again even if Barack becomes the next President.

If the repubs. were smart and stop being so anal and hateful, a lot of black dems. would flock to them because we're sick and tired of being used by the dems. and getting nothing in return.

The nomination will not be unfairly wrestled. If they leave, then it's because they're overwhelmingly stubborn. What would happen if a black candidate got 95% of the black vote and 0 votes from any other group? Because one group is solely going to one person, this does not mean it is reason enough to hand the nomination to one person.

If Hillary has the popular vote along with recent events, then that's ample reason for the nomination and for the best interests of the party in November. I'm sorry but your candidate not winning is not a good reason to run away. Isn't that why many of the Hillary supporters on this board were assailed for saying similar sentiments?

The nomination will not be handed over UNJUSTLY. The superdelegates have the duty to decide the best interest of the party. If Clinton does not have the popular vote, she will not get the nomination. Despite what the media and her camp may say. If she does, however, it's a tough argument to fight.

With this theory that simply Obama is leading, what would happen if tomorrow is turned out he was a terrorist? Or in July? Shouldn't the superdelegates act in the best interest of the party? It shouldn't just be handed over and it won't be handed over to either unfairly.

Expat
Apr 30th, 2008, 08:05 PM
If the repubs. were smart and stop being so anal and hateful, a lot of black dems. would flock to them because we're sick and tired of being used by the dems. and getting nothing in return.
sorry wont happen
the republicans wont turn pro taxes and pro welfare
all said and done hillary is the better candidate for the african american community
they may sit out this election or even vote for the repubs just this one time but they wont change from democrat to repub
just like the religious right has no option but to back mccain
they wont vote democrat just because they are angry with mccain

Pureracket
Apr 30th, 2008, 08:11 PM
sorry wont happen
the republicans wont turn pro taxes and pro welfare
Common fallacy a person has about race and welfare(especially for someone who is visiting from abroad). Poor whites benefit more from welfare than any other group. That's based on percentage AND sheer numbers.

The platform for Republicans won't be "pro taxes," but raising the taxes is going to be the only way to get us out of the recession.

In The Zone
Apr 30th, 2008, 08:13 PM
Common fallacy a person has about race and welfare(especially for someone who is visiting from abroad). Poor whites benefit more from welfare than any other group. That's based on percentage AND sheer numbers.

The platform for Republicans won't be "pro taxes," but raising the taxes is going to be the only way to get us out of the recession.

Yes. But based on the percentage of the race and the group, are whites still a larger number?

Ideology and policy won't drive them to the other side. Perhaps a temporary absence in November's election but I highly doubt they would go from an anti-war candidate to a warmonger.

Expat
Apr 30th, 2008, 08:39 PM
Common fallacy a person has about race and welfare(especially for someone who is visiting from abroad). Poor whites benefit more from welfare than any other group. That's based on percentage AND sheer numbers.

The platform for Republicans won't be "pro taxes," but raising the taxes is going to be the only way to get us out of the recession.
this is surprising if true
wonder what percentage of my community (asians) are dependent on welfare
has anybody got the figures ???

CrossCourt~Rally
Apr 30th, 2008, 08:51 PM
I like Obama but I want Hilary to win, For some reason she keeps on sticking it out - now shes in a third set tie breaker in the us open finals and shes 5-0 down in the tie break? that about right? haha!!!


:haha: Great analogy! :worship:

Expat
Apr 30th, 2008, 10:13 PM
Common fallacy a person has about race and welfare(especially for someone who is visiting from abroad). Poor whites benefit more from welfare than any other group. That's based on percentage AND sheer numbers.

The platform for Republicans won't be "pro taxes," but raising the taxes is going to be the only way to get us out of the recession.
heres what i got from the government site
http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/statbriefs/sb2-95.html

The chances of receiving AFDC payments differ by race and Hispanic origin, but not the nativity of the mother.

* Race: About 1 in 4 Black mothers of childbearing ages (1.5 million) were AFDC recipients, higher than the 7 percent of corresponding White mothers (2.1 million). Despite these differences in recipiency rates, Black AFDC mothers did not have significantly more children than their White counterparts.
* Hispanic origin: Nearly 1 in 5 Hispanic mothers (784,000) aged 15 to 44 were on AFDC. By comparison, about 1 in 10 (3.0 million) non-Hispanic mothers were AFDC recipents. Although both Hispanic and non-Hispanic mothers on AFDC were an average of 20 years old when they had their first child, Hispanic women had almost 0.7 more children than non-Hispanic women. About 3 in 10 Hispanic mothers on AFDC were born outside the United States.
* Nativity: About 9 percent (392,000) of the Nation's 4.2 million foreign-born mothers aged 15-44 were on AFDC, not statistically different from the 11 percent (3.4 million) of U.S.-born mothers who were AFDC recipients. Native- and foreign-born mothers on AFDC each had higher fertility rates than their counterparts who were not AFDC participants. Incidentally, about three-quarters of all foreign-born mothers on AFDC were not citizens of the United States.

mykarma
Apr 30th, 2008, 11:07 PM
sorry wont happen
the republicans wont turn pro taxes and pro welfare
all said and done hillary is the better candidate for the african american community
they may sit out this election or even vote for the repubs just this one time but they wont change from democrat to repub
just like the religious right has no option but to back mccain
they wont vote democrat just because they are angry with mccain
So you're saying that blacks vote democratic because they are pro welfare and pro taxes
Nuff said. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Expat
Apr 30th, 2008, 11:40 PM
So you're saying that blacks vote democratic because they are pro welfare and pro taxes
Nuff said. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
ok so would you enlighten me
the rough defintion of republican vs democrat in my opinion
: the older and the richer you get the more republican you are

also doesnt a voter vote according to his own self interests

Donny
May 1st, 2008, 12:13 AM
ok so would you enlighten me
the rough defintion of republican vs democrat in my opinion
: the older and the richer you get the more republican you are

Also doesnt a voter vote according to his own self interests

Blacks are reliably Dem because of racial issues- THe GOP has been the the party of the Jim Crow defenders and bigots since the 60's.

mykarma
May 1st, 2008, 04:02 AM
ok so would you enlighten me
the rough defintion of republican vs democrat in my opinion
: the older and the richer you get the more republican you are

also doesnt a voter vote according to his own self interests
If black interest in voting democratic is so they can get welfare, then what is white democratic self interest? :shrug:


Q:
When did blacks start voting Democratic?

I've had a question for a long time and haven't yet found what I consider to be an unbiased source, or the raw data to do my own analysis.

For how long have the Democrats garnered the black vote? Certainly there was a point during the last century when a majority of blacks started supporting the Democrats rather than Republicans. What has been the voting pattern and what happened to change that pattern?




A:
There was a big move to Democratic voting in Franklin D. Roosevelt's administration, and another in Lyndon B. Johnson's.


Blacks mostly voted Republican from after the Civil War and through the early part of the 20th century. That's not surprising when one considers that Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president, and the white, segregationist politicians who governed Southern states in those days were Democrats. The Democratic Party didn't welcome blacks then, and it wasn't until 1924 that blacks were even permitted to attend Democratic conventions in any official capacity. Most blacks lived in the South, where they were mostly prevented from voting at all.
http://www.factcheck.org/demos/factcheck/imagefiles/Image/Ask%20FactCheck%20Images/Black%20Vote/Black_Vote_Pres.jpg

The election of Roosevelt in 1932 marked the beginning of a change. He got 71 percent of the black vote for president in 1936 and did nearly that well in the next two elections, according to historical figures kept by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. But even then, the number of blacks identifying themselves as Republicans was about the same as the number who thought of themselves as Democrats.


It wasn't until Harry Truman garnered 77 percent of the black vote in 1948 that a majority of blacks reported that they thought of themselves as Democrats. Earlier that year Truman had issued an order desegregating the armed services and an executive order setting up regulations against racial bias in federal employment.


http://www.factcheck.org/demos/factcheck/imagefiles/Image/Ask%20FactCheck%20Images/Black%20Vote/Black_Party_ID%287%29.jpg

Even after that, Republican nominees continued to get a large slice of the black vote for several elections. Dwight D. Eisenhower got 39 percent in 1956, and Richard Nixon got 32 percent in his narrow loss to John F. Kennedy in 1960.


But then President Lyndon B. Johnson pushed through the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 (outlawing segregation in public places) and his eventual Republican opponent, Sen. Barry Goldwater, opposed it. Johnson got 94 percent of the black vote that year, still a record for any presidential election.


The following year Johnson signed the 1965 Voting Rights Act. No Republican presidential candidate has gotten more than 15 percent of the black vote since.


Footnote: Younger African American voters have been edging away from the Democratic Party in recent years. David Bositis of the Joint Center notes "a fairly long-term pattern of decreasing identification with the Democrats by younger African Americans." Of course, it remains to be seen what the 2008 campaign will bring.

-Brooks Jackson

Hope this was helpful because I really don't think you realized what your statement implied.

mykarma
May 1st, 2008, 04:10 AM
This is what I'd like to see happen some day and I think with a president like Barack and how he wants to bring the parties together for the good of the American people can being this process.

The election of Roosevelt in 1932 marked the beginning of a change. He got 71 percent of the black vote for president in 1936 and did nearly that well in the next two elections, according to historical figures kept by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. But even then, the number of blacks identifying themselves as Republicans was about the same as the number who thought of themselves as Democrats.

Expat
May 1st, 2008, 04:11 AM
if thats the case the african american community is shooting itself in the foot
a swing voter is far more likely to make gains than someone beholden to the same party
notice the crucial role latinos play in several swing states or reagan democrats

its 40 years already

mykarma
May 1st, 2008, 04:15 AM
if thats the case the african american community is shooting itself in the foot
a swing voter is far more likely to make gains than someone beholden to the same party
notice the crucial role latinos play in several swing states or reagan democrats

its 40 years already
If what's the case and what big strides have Latinos gained:confused:

Expat
May 1st, 2008, 04:23 AM
If black interest in voting democratic is so they can get welfare, then what is white democratic self interest? :shrug:



Q:


Hope this was helpful because I really don't think you realized what your statement implied.



while it is helpful understanding the past i hope the future doesnt be like this for the sake of the african american community
theres more that can be achieved by being a swing constituency
obviously this time around it makes sense to back obama but you got to be tactical

thats what we try to organize with asians with the 80:20 factor

my understanding of white democrats is limited to 2 constituencies
1) liberal urban youth /students
2) unionized workers ( edwards supporters)

the real swing voters are the unionized or small town workers apart from latinos

the reason hillary is even able to suggest that blacks votes are not crucial are that they are not swing voters

you dont expect them to vote for republicans if they are angry at clinton

otoh if obama is able to say that independents are more likely to be switched off by hillary he will make a strong case

Expat
May 1st, 2008, 04:26 AM
If what's the case and what big strides have Latinos gained:confused:
the reason for african americans being solidly behind the democratic party


latinos --> no party can afford to alienate them
illegal immigration is turned a blind eye upon
by being a swing voter they are in play for republican candidates
who ensure that the anti immigration wing of the party is kept at bay












]

mykarma
May 1st, 2008, 04:47 AM
while it is helpful understanding the past i hope the future doesnt be like this for the sake of the african american community
theres more that can be achieved by being a swing constituency
obviously this time around it makes sense to back obama but you got to be tactical

thats what we try to organize with asians with the 80:20 factor

my understanding of white democrats is limited to 2 constituencies
1) liberal urban youth /students
2) unionized workers ( edwards supporters)

the real swing voters are the unionized or small town workers apart from latinos

the reason hillary is even able to suggest that blacks votes are not crucial are that they are not swing voters

you dont expect them to vote for republicans if they are angry at clinton

otoh if obama is able to say that independents are more likely to be switched off by hillary he will make a strong case
Excuse me but I thought you really wanted to know why we thought your post was ignorant but it's obvious that wasn't the case. I'll make sure that I let all of my black friends know that you have the solution to all of our problems and that black votes don't make a difference in this country. :help: Perhaps since you don't know what you're talking about it'd be best if you left this topic alone.
:tape: :bigwave:

Good night.

Williamsser
May 1st, 2008, 07:37 AM
Republicans are steadfastly against affirmative action and for the death penalty. Most African Americans are for affirmative action and against the death penalty.

Expat
May 1st, 2008, 12:17 PM
Republicans are steadfastly against affirmative action and for the death penalty. Most African Americans are for affirmative action and against the death penalty.

thanks this seems to be a really good reason
as for mykarma
the reason i am asking is because
in my experiences living in multiple countries across the world and traveling in many others
i have found america to be the least racist
i have never faced any discrimination here
in spite of being
1) a racial minority
2) a religious minority
3) a sexual orientation minority
4) an immigrant

you do not agree with me but i do think being a swing constituency leads to more attention
theres a reason why maximum campaigning happens in swing states