I just saw this and was going to post it. Good news!
So relax Republicans, don’t get excited, don’t go to the polls, everything’s going to be fine.
Liberalism/socialism/Marxism increases in intensity as you move closer to the largest buildings in any city...
If remotely accurate (and I think it is), this is pretty bad news for the Obamessiah.
Code translation:
rural= poor white
suburban=rich white
One must factor in dead voters from urban cemeteries and urban voter fraud.
Yet again this another city vs. rural election. And how many of those city votes will be because of fraud? How many dead Democrats will vote for Barry?
If this is true, McCain will win.
Politico.com today said the election will be won in the Suburbs. These lefties must have written this before these numbers came out
Obama losing among ‘bitter clingers’? Surprise, surprise.
Obama’s campaign is a ‘city-centric’ campaign. At first I thought the angst expressed by the African-American community towards Obama (highlighted by Jesse J’s desire to castrate Sen. Obama) was simply astroturfing by Axeldud, but I’m not so sure. Obama seems to be ignoring poor rural blacks, with the hope perhaps that they will simply show up because this is their first chance to vote for a black president.
But when you look at the style of the campaign (other than the fascist overtones), you see a campaign geared towards city life. That is, the city life of those who can afford to live somewhere other than on the bad side of town. It’s an urbane take on a national campaign, complete with his ‘bitter clingers’ speech in San Fran, as if he was an anthropologist or dashing explorer fresh from an encounter with the natives of a distant land and delivering a lecture on the peoples of Pennsylvania.
It may be that the current political climate, with an unpopular president of his opponent’s party and economic uncertainty enough for him to overcome his lack of a connection with suburban and rural voters.
In a strange twist, the angst over the Wall Street bailout may ding Obama some simply because rural and suburban voters will be more attuned to avoiding anyone who seems “elite” or otherwise out of sync with their lifestyle and more in sync with a post-religious, urbane, effete lifestyle.
I don’t think it’s Obama’s skin color that’s his greatest problem in this campaign, I think it’s his lifestyle. Anyone who worries about the price of arugula down at the local Whole Foods isn’t going to connect with all us hillbillies out here.
I wish people understood how this information, concerning this one election, demonstrates the wisdom of the Electoral College.
So, i will digress to that subject with my standard rant on it.
A nation is not simply a summary headcount of “the people”.
People have identities and values rooted in their lives and their lives rooted in where they live.
A nation, most appropriately understood, is not the sum of individuals, it is the sum of communities.
I went through the data of the last six presidential elections, and what the electoral college winner won in every one of those elections was a majority in a majority of counties across the nation. It is in that type of framework that a candidate winning the Electoral College majority wins a truer majority of “the nation” than could be ascribed to any mere national popular vote.
If U.S. demographics continue their present course, a very few coastal and southern states could, independently, elect a President that majorities in all the other states (an overwhelming majority of states) in the broad middle of the country rejected - if there were no Electoral College.
Some states are passing laws to automatically void their own states “popular vote”, denying its Electoral College mandate and change their state’s Electoral College delegation to that which represents whichever candidate wins the national popular vote.
It is not enough that that effort may meet, and fail, a U.S. Supreme Court challenge. The ignorance of how the Electoral College helps preserve the Republic is spread by this “national popular vote” myth and those who seek to empower it.
A “National Popular Vote” basis for electing the President will speed the deterioration of the Republic, as a republic and as a federal republic, just as did the Constitutional change that mandated electing federal Senators by popular vote instead of, as it was originally, by the state legislatures.
Pure “popular democracy” deteriorates into dictatorship - always. The Electoral College actually helps hold the nation together because “majorities” must be collected across the country and in states both big and small. It represents a larger collection of interests than the popular vote and thus keeps those interests positively engaged in the national process. Squash that broad cross section of interests from coming together, and checking, a mere bi-coastal popular majority and the nation will pull itself apart, if a dictator does not first try to command its unity on their own.
I need some context. How do these numbers compare to 2004 and 2000? How reputable is this poll? Are other polls making similar findings. Etc., etc.
Nice news, but these college polls are small. It does, however, line up with an Ohio poll of just rural voters showing McCain up 55/36.
Again, this is nice news.
bmflr