Author Topic: Really Iowa?  (Read 40510 times)

Stan

  • Achilles Tendon Bursitis
  • Posts: 986
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #135 on: January 12, 2008, 02:32:22 AM »

What do I win?

A solid gold hammer and sickle.

 Epic what?*










*Because I'm not going to say it.
                                 "This must be where buffcoat left his pants."

Sarah

  • Guest
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #136 on: January 12, 2008, 08:27:10 AM »


I don't know how you guys made your graphs, but if you just replace Stalin's name above with mine, you'll see where I fall. 

I must point out, however, that on the Electoral Compass site the labels are different:  replace "Authoritarian" with "Social liberalism--Progressive" and "Libertarian" with "Social conservatism--Traditional"; also, modify "Left" and "Right" with the adjective "Economic."


Jason

  • Guest
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #137 on: January 12, 2008, 09:27:43 AM »
Selectively posting articles to back up my position.

Hill's Angels - how angry women of New Hampshire saved Clinton


· Female voters enraged by coverage following Iowa rout
· Loss of composure in diner helped trigger 'perfect storm'

Suzanne Goldenberg in Portsmouth, New Hampshire
Saturday January 12, 2008
The Guardian


 

This is where the revolution began: a cafe decorated with sunflower yellow walls and botanical prints, a default lunch spot on a day for running errands. It was here, over mid-morning coffee with undecided voters, that an exhausted Hillary Clinton came close to tears, and the women of New Hampshire - or at least those old enough to remember the struggles of the 70s or even Anita Hill's Senate testimony on sexual harassment in 1991 - decided it was time to come home.

It was not just pity, though a number of women admitted their eyes misted up at the sight of Clinton close to tears. It was not just annoyance at commentators who called Clinton "shrill", or anger at the hecklers who yelled: "Iron my shirt." Women, even those who have disliked Clinton since she arrived on the national stage in 1992, felt a sense of obligation.

"What can I say? I was a woman in the 70s and here you had a woman who has the opportunity to be the first president of the United States, and I had to decide between her and other Democrats," said Kathy Walsh, a land agent who attended the coffee morning with Clinton. "But it was tough. I just couldn't get beyond all that crap about the Clintons."

The meeting with Clinton last Monday was never meant to be an all-women gathering. Last Sunday evening aides began calling around the lists of voters who had identified themselves as undecided - women and men - to invite them to meet Clinton the next morning at a local cafe.

The voters were told they would be part of a group of 40 or 50 people. But by morning a little more than a dozen had turned up, including at least two women who had not been invited - and one of those was a Republican - and just two men. The guests included business owners, a teacher, a high school graduate working as a nanny and stay-at-home mums.

If Clinton was disappointed in the poor turnout she did not let on. She spent more than an hour answering questions, responding at such length that a number of women confessed they were bored or overwhelmed by information.

Walsh had to be dragged to the event. She is friendly with the co-chair of Clinton's campaign in New Hampshire, the state speaker, Terie Norelli, and had turned down three other opportunities to see Clinton. "I was not voting for Hillary at all. I just wasn't going with that whole Clinton thing." Even now she is adamant that it was not Clinton's tears that turned her - it was her detailed responses to questions.

But it was Clinton's response to the last question from freelance photographer Marianne Pernold Young that provided the electric moment. How did Clinton keep going? "I couldn't do it if I didn't just passionately believe it was the right thing to do," Clinton began telling Young, her voice cracking. "I have so many opportunities from this country and I just don't want to see us fall backwards as a nation. This is very personal for me."

For Sally Bassett, 46 and a stay-at-home mum, the glimpse of raw emotion was the turning point. She had been impressed by Clinton, but she added: "What struck me was that she had such a deep concern about the direction the country was going in. It just struck a chord."

But as a woman who used to work in the largely male field of engineering, she was angered by the atmospherics of the campaign. "I just couldn't believe some of the things that were said and written," she said.

Clinton was getting regularly trashed by the rightwing talk show hosts who dominate the airwaves in New Hampshire, said Arnie Arnesen, a Democratic activist who has her own talk show. That built up resentment among women.

So did churlish comments from Clinton's main rivals. In the last debate before primary day, Obama curtly told Clinton: "You're likable enough." Edwards responded to reports of her emotional moment by talking about the importance of having a strong commander-in-chief.

Then, a few hours after the coffee shop moment, two men at a Clinton rally held up placards reading: "Iron my shirt." Sexism was alive and well, Clinton responded, and the audience erupted in support.

All of that came together in the popular reaction to Clinton's momentary loss of control in the cafe. "When she started reacting like that everyone felt for her. It had been all over the press that morning that she was going to lose to Barack Obama by 12 or 13 points, so I am sure she was having a tough time," said Karen Barndollar, a supporter who happened to be at the cafe. "But no one had ever seen her like that during all the trials and tribulations with her husband before, in public she was always pretty strong. This was unusual and unexpected."

Two of Barndollar's friends, who had planned to vote for Obama, switched their votes. "I felt that Hillary needed a longer chance. I didn't want to see her knocked out of the race in a one-two punch after all of her hard work," Melissa McLeod, a Portsmouth artist, wrote in an email.

"So although I am an Obama fan I thought Hillary needed my vote and I hate the way she gets dumped on for not being feminine, then being too feminine."

Many commentators recognised Clinton's frustration. Gail Collins wrote in the New York Times: "This week, Hillary was a stand-in for every woman who's overdosed on multi-tasking."

Her colleague, Maureen Dowd, wasn't buying it. She was reminded of how Clinton has turned victimhood to her political advantage in the past. "There was a whiff of Nixonian self-pity about her choking up. What was moving her so deeply was her recognition that the country was failing to grasp how much it needs her," she wrote. "In a weirdly narcissistic way, she was crying for us. But it was grimly typical of her that what finally made her break down was the prospect of losing."

Luckily for Clinton, that's not how the women of New Hampshire saw it. Some 57% of Democratic voters were women, and she won 46% of their votes. Obama took 34%. The result was a reversal of the Iowa caucuses five days earlier when women deserted Clinton for Obama - especially those less than 24. She got just 19% of their support. The only Iowan women who stayed loyal were senior citizens; 48% of women above the age of 65 voted for Clinton.

As has been the pattern since the launch of her campaign nearly a year ago, she performed best among women with lower incomes and less education. Half of women earning between $15,000 and $30,000 a year (£8,000- £15,000) voted for her, compared with 29% for Obama. She also did well among single women.

Other factors in her win had little to do with gender. "It really was a perfect storm for Hillary Clinton," said Arnesen. New Hampshire is Clinton country and, unlike in Iowa, her machine was effective. Workers got up at 4am to get people to the polls - two hours before Obama. There are also signs that Obama supporters were complacent. As Barndollar said: "I felt that because of the Iowa result that she had become the underdog. "

After her astonishing victory, Clinton goes on to the next contest in Nevada, a week from today, and then the final showdown of Super Tuesday on February 5. What remains unclear is whether she can move women again as the campaign moves to a national battleground.

The day after New Hampshire, Clinton sent out an email to supporters saying she won because "we connected with the people". Such emotional contact was good, Clinton wrote. But, she went on: "Just as surely, we won because we made more phone calls, knocked on more doors, and put more get-out-the-vote vans on the road. We've got a lot of work to do. "

That brief flash of feeling probably saved Clinton's campaign, but she was not about to put her trust in anything so unreliable as emotion in the rounds ahead.

· Madam President: Is America Ready to Send Hillary Clinton to the White House? by Suzanne Goldenberg is published in the US on Monday. It is also available from guardianbooks.co.uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/hillaryclinton/story/0,,2239617,00.html

Andy

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 6112
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #138 on: January 12, 2008, 09:58:07 AM »
words words words words words words
Breakfast- I'm havin' a time
Wheelies- I'm havin' a time
Headlocks- I'm havin' a time
Drunk Tank- not so much a time
George St.- I'm havin' a time
Brenda- I'm havin' a time
Bingo- I'm havin' a time
House Arrest- I'm still havin' a time

TL

  • Achilles Tendon Bursitis
  • Posts: 802
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #139 on: January 12, 2008, 10:39:47 AM »
Did somebody say something?

Now write me a receipt so I can tip on outta here...

Sploops

  • Achilles Tendon Bursitis
  • Posts: 757
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #140 on: January 12, 2008, 04:02:55 PM »
Huckabee is elected - I become "the immoralist"

Laurie

  • Guest
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #141 on: January 12, 2008, 05:13:40 PM »
Huckabee is elected - I become "the immoralist"

This won't happen, but you should become The Immoralist anyhow and walk around in a domino mask and cape. Chicks dig it!

Fido

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1017
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #142 on: January 13, 2008, 01:57:27 AM »


I don't know how you guys made your graphs, but if you just replace Stalin's name above with mine, you'll see where I fall. 


That's my girl. 

Fido

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1017
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #143 on: January 13, 2008, 02:10:43 AM »
I don't think America is ready for a president with four eyes and two mouths.

Honestly?  I think the really prevalent attitude is, "I'm not racist/sexist, but America is not ready for a (whatever) President."  Sure, there are racists here, but none of them are going to vote Democratic anyway.

The way racism and sexism actually play out in this country is extraordinarily complex.  I'd be willing to bet that there are plenty of well-educated, liberal Obama voters who would cross the street to avoid a black man in an urban setting, just as there are plenty of Clinton voters who, in practice, participate in old-boy networks.  Likewise, I wouldn't be surprised if there were good-ol'-boy Republicans who would be willing to pull over and help a black man with a flat tire.  Even my estranged friend the Ron Paul supporter is convinced that there is some sort of Jewish cabal, even after he bailed me out of a few scrapes that I could have avoided if (A) I had any of that Jewish banking money, or (B) I could have called upon the Elders of Zion.  So basically you never know.

Well said, Jasongrote.  I think the one safe thing I could predict about Obama as the eventual Democratic nominee (if that were to take place) is that we might be surprised.  Personally, I've decided I like the guy a lot and would heartily support him if he wins the nomination; I'd do the same for Hilary.  I'm completely ready to campaign for either of them. 

However, one thing that really has me worried about Obama is the tendency for more people to say they will support an African-American candidate when polled and then pulling the lever for somebody else in private.  Then again, it doesn't seem fair to predict that that would certainly occur if he is the nominee. 

Also, it kind of pisses me off that I'm forced to choose between what I see as an extraordinarily qualified female presidential candidate and a very promising African-American one.  You really can't have it all, can you? 

I believe that many Americans are so unwilling to acknowledge their own sexism/racism, but quick to point it out in others -- thus, the exact view that you described above.  I agree that that's a prevalent attitude and seems to be parroted by the media frequently.  "I'd vote for a woman or an African-American candidate without hesitation if he or she were the right candidate.  But is America ready?  I doubt it."  (read:  I myself may not be ready to vote for one or both such candidate(s), but I won't acknowledge that)

One final comment:  it never hurts to have the Elders of Zion on your side.  They're good guys, and you don't want to piss them off.   



Fido

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1017
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #144 on: January 13, 2008, 02:13:24 AM »
Oh, one more Sunny D tidbit. He also said, "Evolution is just a theory!" I fucking hate that. Of course it's a motherfucking theory. Did he take a single science class in high school? For that matter, MIDDLE SCHOOL? I told him that relativity is just a theory, but he didn't know what that was.  :'(

Gravity is a theory too.  Are we gonna debate that, along with evolution? 

dvdv

  • Policemans heel
  • Posts: 70
The Hillary Clinton comment on MLK Jr/LBJ deeply offended me
« Reply #145 on: January 13, 2008, 06:48:50 AM »
The quote (got it from http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2008/01/hillary-clintons-mistake-on-martin.html)
“Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act...It took a president to get it done.”

Ive never been a fan but have been mystified why/how people have such a hatred for her.  The MLK/LBJ comment was everything people (most times unfairly) accuse her of.  Still, she'll get my vote if she gets the nomination which is kinda sad.


Laurie

  • Guest
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #146 on: January 13, 2008, 10:38:53 AM »
Oh, one more Sunny D tidbit. He also said, "Evolution is just a theory!" I fucking hate that. Of course it's a motherfucking theory. Did he take a single science class in high school? For that matter, MIDDLE SCHOOL? I told him that relativity is just a theory, but he didn't know what that was.  :'(

Gravity is a theory too.  Are we gonna debate that, along with evolution? 

Yeah, I told him that, too. I asked him if I should throw an apple in the air and see if it just goes into orbit in space.

buffcoat

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 6214
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #147 on: January 13, 2008, 04:55:32 PM »



There are no world leaders in my quadrant, which is not a surprise given that essentially I want to take most of the government's powers away.  Very few people would run for office on a platform of "give me less power, please."

Stay out of my wallet, stay out of my personal life.

The government that governs best, governs least.


That said, I'm voting Democratic again.  I've never voted for a Republican because of the corporate types' insistence on aligning themselves with the, uh, nutty types.

Oh yeah, and you should remember that Northeastern Republican = Southeastern Democrat.  You all have no politicians up there that match up to a North Carolina Republican.
I really don't appreciate your sarcastic, anti-comedy tone, Bro!

Tim K in DC

  • Achilles Tendon Bursitis
  • Posts: 519
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #148 on: January 14, 2008, 12:55:33 AM »
- Killing FOT threads dead since July 24, 2006 -

Fido

  • Space Champion!
  • Posts: 1017
Re: Really Iowa?
« Reply #149 on: January 14, 2008, 05:06:03 AM »


The person whose politics mine most closely resemble is the Dalai Lama?!?


http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-4.75&soc=-7.85