Analysis: White Males May Prove Pivotal In Democratic Race

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

I'm kind over ANY news story saying one segment is "pivotal" in the Democratic Race.

First it was the single women who were voting one way, then the African Americans, then the Latinos.... seriously. Let's just say all the different segments are important in some way, but it's doubtful any one will be the most important in the race

Well, whites make up like 58% of the US population - so I think winning the white vote would be "pivotal" to be quite honest.

That's, coincidentally, why I think this article is retarded.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Well, whites make up like 58% of the US population - so I think winning the white vote would be "pivotal" to be quite honest.

That's, coincidentally, why I think this article is retarded.

Exactly.

(I think whites are still more than 58% of the population, including Hispanic or Latino whites.)

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

(I think whites are still more than 58% of the population, including Hispanic or Latino whites.)

Yeah, I was trying to account for Hispanic/Latino by doing a silly back-of-envelope thing (I thought "70% white - 10%ish self-reporting as latino, then guess a random number") - I just looked it up, it's more like 74% report as white, and about half of the 14% that reports as latino is white/latino, so more like 67%ish. So yeah - you're way right here (which reinforces the point of how retarded this article is).

This is why we hire someone to handle demo balancing for me.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Yeah, I was trying to account for Hispanic/Latino by doing a silly back-of-envelope thing (I thought "70% white - 10%ish self-reporting as latino, then guess a random number") - I just looked it up, it's more like 74% report as white, and about half of the 14% that reports as latino is white/latino, so more like 67%ish. So yeah - you're way right here (which reinforces the point of how retarded this article is).

This is why we hire someone to handle demo balancing for me.

The 74% is more like it. I thought I had missed some huge demographic shift. Whites used to comprise 80-or-so% of the total population.

The % that reports as Hispanic and Latino does not reduce the % of white. Hispanic and Latino origin and race are distinct concepts and the Census adopted this method in 2000 (http://www.census.gov/popest/race.html). This means the 74% is correct.

So yeah the article is like announcing that water is wet, especially considering the size of the white male population and the fact that their vote has always mattered a whole lot, in general. However, the article also addresses how white males who plan on voting Democrat are, for the first time, choosing between racial and gender minorities. This is the first time the white male Democrat vote will not be used for a white male and that's where they may feel like they are under a microscope (i.e. "let's see who white men are gonna vote for THIS time") and as if their votes are a tie-breaker of sorts.

[SWTXBelle]

What if at least some white males voted for the candidate they felt was best qualified, regardless of sex or race??? Wouldn't that skew their little census??

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

What if at least some white males voted for the candidate they felt was best qualified, regardless of sex or race??? Wouldn't that skew their little census??

How would it?

FYI: My other post about voters changing their minds isn't in response to this one. I read this post after I posted.

[SWTXBelle]

They keep discussing the male vote in terms of sex and race - seemingly ignoring the fact that there is more to the candidates than whether or not they have a penis or the color of their skin. To assume otherwise is really sexist or racist. That's all I was saying.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by 33girl

RUN RALPH RUN!!!!

Oh Zeus and Hera, no! The man's as nuttier than Ron Paul.

Originally Posted by PhiGam

This white male will not be voting for president in november.

Yeah. That's something to be proud of.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by SECdomination

I'm two inches from joining you.

IF (because I'm still hoping and praying it doesn't happen) McCain gets the nomination, he will win. So why is anyone even worried about what's going on with Hillary and Obama voters?

Just out of curiousity, who would you guys rather have than McCain? Romney?

[AGDee]

Most of the people I've known who wouldn't vote for a woman for President are equally sure that they wouldn't vote for an African American either (or probably anybody of color). But, I don't think any of them have ever voted for a Democrat either. Anecdotal, yes.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by SECdomination

I'm two inches from joining you.

IF (because I'm still hoping and praying it doesn't happen) McCain gets the nomination, he will win. So why is anyone even worried about what's going on with Hillary and Obama voters?

SEC and PhiGam


you know what...don't vote...and while you are at it....you may want to pick up a paer or 2 and read about the violence going on in Kenya because ofthose that exercised their right to vote....

If that is not enough to make yo to put a foot out the door to exercise something that you don't have to worry about dying to do then do me this one favor:

When November rolls around and the person you would have picked (but you dididn't abstained from voting) please do the following

a. Abstain from whining and bitching in administarive policy
b. take up arms and protest
c. get mad and any changes or reforms
d, In the case a riot on the scale of Kenya just happens to take place, as the mob passes your house, please refrain from picking up any torches and pitchforks and joining in.

I know that I have fams that fought, been beaten (and one was denied actually) and got jailed to get the right to vote in this country so I will be there regardless of who the nominee is...there is such a thing as a write in!