Operation Anti-Chaos: The Narrative on "White Voters" Is Fiction
I turn on the TV, read the political columnists (and a significant number of analytically-challenged bloggers, too) and all I hear is a bunch of white folk prattling on about their favorite narrative: "Obama's losing white voters!"
They've swallowed the Clinton racially-obsessed spin, hook, line and sinker. Some, because they are gullible, haven't an original idea in their little pea brains, and follow the pack of what everybody else is talking about. Others, because they like to toss around knowing falsehoods. Nary a superdelegate can go on Fox News without being berated by an anchorperson screeching (this is pretty close to an exact quote): "But your duty as a superdelegate is to select the most electable and that's Hillary Clinton!" That these anchorpersons are Republican partisans openly cheering for Senator Clinton is our first clue of the game afoot. One of the major successes of Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos is that it has got all the right-wing pundits and reporters marching lockstep behind the effort to give Clinton enough oxygen to keep slashing away at Senator Obama, who remains the prohibitive likely Democratic nominee.
And when Clinton wins state primaries that, because of demographics, she was always going to win - last week, Pennsylvania and next week, Indiana - they then wave that event up like a blood-soaked flag as proof of their narrative: See? See? We told you so! White people won't vote for Obama!
So imagine my pleasant surprise this morning to see a New York Times columnist, Charles Blow, who did what none of these chattering lunkheads have done. He looked at the hard data of how voters, white and black, view the two Democratic candidates - favorably or negatively? - and how those views have progressed over time. The data is based on multiple CBS-New York Times polls (among the most respected survey outfits among competing pollsters) over two years and more. Check it out:
Nobody - not blogger, nor superdelegate, nor cable news anchor - should open their mouths with another word about this contest until they've studied those graphs and the numbers upon which they are based. Blow explains:
Since January, the Clintons have pummeled Barack Obama with racially tinged comments and questions about his character...The question is this: Have white Democrats soured on Obama? Apparently not. Although his unfavorable rating from the group is up five percentage points since last summer in polls conducted by The New York Times and CBS News, his favorable rating is up just as much.
Wait. The numbers show that the cynical effort to turn the 2008 campaign into a race riot has hurt the popularity of one candidate among an important demographic, and it's not Barack Obama:
On the other hand, black Democrats' opinion of Hillary Clinton has deteriorated substantially (her favorable rating among them is down 36 percentage points over the same period).
So, to sum up: Look at the damn graphs. You can see that Clinton is in a staggering free-fall among African-American voters, her favorability is down 36 points while 17 percent view her more negatively than before, while Obama's favorable and negative ratings among whites have paired at five point increases. You can even see the small dip - about two percentage points - in his popularity among whites that can be attributed to the news cycles about his ex-pastor, and see that it has leveled out and is now on a straight horizontal line (meanwhile, Clinton's numbers among blacks continue on an extreme downward precipice). The greater context is that even including Obama's slight dip, he's more popular today among white voters than he ever was prior to February.
Not since Ronald Reagan has an American presidential candidate withstood such an assault in the media and seen his popularity not hurt by it, but, rather, galvanized by it. That's what is meant, in politics, by the term "Teflon."
Those facts won't stop many media (and Internet) talking heads from continuing - whether out of gullibility or intentional dishonesty - to prop up the "white voters" narrative, but it ought to inoculate you, kind reader, from believing it.
Don't let yourself get upset when some idiot repeats the false media narrative. Don't plead with them to tell the truth (they won't; remember, they're either stupid or dishonest). Mock them. Ridicule them. Expose them as the lightweights they are showing themselves to be, with all the confidence that understanding the hard data ought to provide you.
Let Operation Anti-Chaos begin!
Follow Al Giordano on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AlGiordano
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Please help me understand why Obama is always refered to as a black man when the truth is he is 1/2 black and 1/2 white! He is both races and who better to understand and bring the healing to the racial devides than Obama!
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Please enlighten me, father of Pete:
How does a biracial man quack?
This writer on other occasions have stated that racism was "specifically designed" to cause collateral damage to a deluded "conduit group". Racism is not about race, but power!
http://www
amber09 wrote:
"Please help me understand why Obama is always refered to as a black man when the truth is he is 1/2 black and 1/2 white! He is both races and who better to understand and bring the healing to the racial devides than Obama!"
Because, white America wisdom tells us, it only takes a single drop of non-caucasion blood to taint the gene-pool. It;s blatent racism.
would you prefer the term, mulatto messiah?
No.
BTW, only Hillary has cast herself as savior...I
to all you kooks out there who want to talk about how the blacks are just voting for obama because he's black - I ask you -
did jesse jackson get the number of votes that obama is getting when he ran for pres? did al sharpton?
the "because he's black" is bullshit. people are voting for him because he's a good candidate, as far as mainstream candidates go.
He won in Utah. 'Nuff said.
Like that'll happen in November..
-MS
If Hillary had more positions in line with black voters than Obama, then it'd be hard to explain their 90% support leve. But Obama and Hillary are not too far apart on issues. It's hard to fault black voters for voting for someone they identify with. I find no more fault in this than I do women voters siding with Hillary. When candidates are similar in policy, personal affinity will be a factor and there's nothing wrong with that.
Can't we all just get along?
As a black man, I love chicken, basketball and watermelon, but just because I love these things doesn't give someone a right to paint me as racist because I'm supporting Obama. I'm not going to lie, part of the reason I support Obama is because he is a black man that is equally or more qualified than the other candidates, but my decision is not based solely on race. If I were to give a percentage it would be 20% because he is black. The remaining 80% he has earned through his speeches and his work to date.
I love his foreign policy strategy, the fact that he is willing to sit down with our enemies is highly commendable and I love his message of Change and Hope. I actually do love the Clintons for what they have previously done , but I can clearly see, even with his flaws, Obama is the better choice....
I like his ability to stay cool and speak with clarity and without reading from a script. When I look into his eyes, I see an honest person with no malice. (I see meanness and mendacity in Bush's eyes.) He's also a good dancer.
when you look into his eyes, do you want to kiss him, too? jesus...
JC, you make a good point. I would be pleased to vote for an African American candidate. I have voted for many in my years, mostly in Mayoral races. Race is not material to my decision for whom to vote. I think evidence that whites will vote for black is apparent. However, when we see 90% of African Americans vote for black candidates, it troubles me. Personally, I feel Senator Obama is not yet experienced enough to be President of the US. He needs more seasoning. I could vote for him in 4-8 years. I could vote for Colin Powell immediately. Obama should have been a vice presidental candidate. I could go for that.
Being the wife of the president doesn't make you vice president. Obama has just as much experience if not more practical experience as Hillary. What experience does Hillary have- sniper fire in Bosnia, oh my husband got impeached for lying, Oh I'm currently under indictment for campaign contributions fraud- I tried to get universal health care but my husband wanted Nafta so that's what I wanted. NAFTA - Please what a joke.
You're right that's the kind of experience we need- which is more of the same- which is why we are where we are in history right now.
Colin Powell is not running- Obama a man of honor and integrity is. A man who has worked to help the most unfortunate of us- the poor, the elderly. I want a man for president who can sit down with a welfare mother and discuss her difficulties and find solutions just as well as he can sit down with any leader of any country and find solutions to the problems that we and the world are facing.
I understand how that looks to white people, when 90% of blacks vote for Obama.
He is a good candidate and his race probably does give blacks something and someone that they can truly connect to. I mean, this is a first, its kind of like if it doesn't happen now what are the odds it will happen in our lifetime? I truly don't believe they are racist, they are just standing by a candidate that for their personal reasons, they believe in. Look at the Catholics.
Did he run for President a little early? I think he did. I think four more years would have helped ease the American people, but at the same time you have to give him credit for not waiting and the people have seemed to agree. He was assertive and it is paying off. People chose him over several other experienced candidates
When I first laid eyes on Obama, I said to myself, "There is a young Prince Bismarck" who was probably one of the wisest leaders in recent world history. He made the Second Reich great; he brought the German workers the equivalent of social security, accident and health insurance. He used the American protectionist system devised by Hamilton and Clay. Both Germany and the United States crushed England and France in terms of economic power during the 19th century. As for Hillary, there is nothing noble about her. She is a politician.
There are women who want a female president and blacks who want a black president - there are some women who think Hillary's politics are better and some blacks who think Obama's politics are better - the media brought gender, race and religion into the campaign and Hillary failed to reject it - as Obama gave a speech on race, Hillary should have given a speech on gender and religion, but she chose not to - she chose to capitalize on the gender, religious and "bitter" issues thus, we are at this horrible point - Women, Whites and Blacks are angry - so I guess we all lose in November - a house divided will not prevail -
Hey Al,
These graphs are as of . . . . April 2, 2008? Before the return of Wright? Are you kidding?
for frust... FYI the wright thing has been going on since jan of 07- I think that's more than enough time for most people to find that the coverage is more than old and not the most important thing that's going on. And most of us don't care. because if we did we would also have to care all the criminal cases that Billary has found themselves on the wrong side of.
I implore you to do a little reseach and find the truth. Billary are very dishonest people. I know how well most of us was in the 90's but that time has come and gone and we are in a very different time in history now.
The war is draining 10 billion a month- this is money I would gladly use to make are schools more competitive in the world, gladly use to sure up our infrastructure, gladly use to give credits so more Americans can stay in their homes, gladly use to give credits to Americans so they can afford to buy solar panels and convert there diesel cars to run on used veggie oils- I would gladly use to build wind farms all over the nation.
America has many things that need to be fixed and that's going to take the support of the American people to accomplish- and the first step is getting a POTUS that cares about us- has integrity and wants more for us and our children.
Actually the wright thing was quelched in January at a time when Obama was getting very little scrutiny by the MSM who had annointed him as the darling one. And in February and in March. If the Wright crap had come out then, things might have been different. Edwards, for example, may have stayed in the race. As much as I think the Wright thing is nothing but a race-baiting red herring, it will still get play. And as Frustratedinohio says, the Graphs in this article are polls that are prior to this mess, and thus lose much of their relevance.
Nerd.
"Don't let yourself get upset when some idiot repeats the false media narrative. Don't plead with them to tell the truth"
JUST TURN THEM OFF. It's only fair, because they turn me off.
If I were you, I would check my facts on the "elitist" statement as well. Are you repeating what you've heard? What is your basis for the statement besides the misinformation about the Gas Tax relaxation?
One more thing, hate is born when a person thinks s/he is a victim then finds someone else to blame for the condition.
You can't tell me that this isn't about race when 90% of blacks vote for the black candidate. Many (not all) blacks are voting for Obama because he is black (which isn't considered racist by the way). While there are probably many whites, obviously not 90%, who are voting for Clinton, some of which (again not all) are voting for her because she is white (which if you are voting for Clinton because she is white, that is considered racist).
I am not voting for Obama, now or in November because he just doesn't get it. He says the $30 a month saved on the gas tax holiday won't help the average family. Well when you are struggling every week to pay the bills and put food on the table, $30 is alot. It may not be alot to the man who lives in DC's NW, and went to an Ivy league school. But to those of us who don't, it is alot. I don't want to hear how is mother was a single mother, and had food stamps at one time. That makes it worse, that he forgot where he came from. If his family had to struggle like that he knows what $30 a month can do.
If this is such a small amount, then it won't hurt the budget too much. I guarantee that the amount saved by the average family is a larger percentage of their monthly budget than the loss in the governments budget.
That's not $30 a month. That's $30 the WHOLE SUMMER. About $10 a month. Let's break it down more. $2.50 a week. You can't even buy an extra gallon of gas a week with all of your "savings". In the meantime 30,000 road construction jobs go down the toilet for lack of funding. And don't talk about windfall profits tax, Bush is still president, and if you think he'll sign THAT into law, I have some oceanfront property in Kansas you might be interested in.
It's $30 for 3 months dear. That's $10 a month.
Giving you a whole $10 a month means you can drive your $4 a gallon car to the movies and get a free movie ticket once a month.
You need to stop drinking the Clinton Kool-aid.
It's not $30.00 a month you truth challenged person, it is $30.00 after 3 months! And being a single mom with a child in college, I find it an insult that Hillary Clinton would think that my vote coulod come so cheap. She is not offering help to even the poorest people of this country, because an extra $10.00 is not helping, it is once again insulting the intelligence of her constituency. Just because you ,make less than $50K a year live in rural areas, drink beer and bowl does not make you an idiot. And that is exactly what Hillary is implying.
He gets it. Illinois did the same tax free gimic and the gas companies immediately raised the price of gas to make up the difference. Net result: consumers got nothing, more money for the gas companies and poorer roads because of lack of tax funding.
Additionally, if you actually think this going to pass Congress, like any of Clinton's other policies/proposals, if she were to become president, then you don't know how Washington works and no wonder 10 per month for 3 months is sufficient and pleasurable to you for your vote.
Thank you.
From a voter that is addicted to truth. The media is horrible. They willfully and with purpose feed racism in this nation. Too many obvious examples to mention here. Too many.
I am grateful that a new generation of Americans have turned away from TV for information. They don't even know that the NYT or the Wash Po exists. Thank God.
Obama has shown the way and in doing so has shown the nation what it has for 'media'. Ghouls.
Enough is enough. Time to shut down the politics of division and hate and time to shit down the corporate media as we know it.
Time to prove Americans can think and reason and do whats right and good for its self.
Obama 2008
I'm struck by the frequency with which the Clinton campaign throws the word elitist around. Imho, those words are designed to elicit a knee jerk reaction with lower income voters. She uses them in obvious pandering for the black vote. These numbers indicate to me that the black community has decided to reject Clinton's hypocrisy and support the candidate that will do most to benefit this country.
These are the indications I've been looking for. People are actually OPENING THEIR EYES! Hooray!!!!
If this campaign doesn't give everyone a clear focus of where we are when it comes to race relations then you just don't want to see what is going on. The rank and file of the media want you to think Obama is weak because he doesn't attack. How would black Obama look if he were aggressive to white Clinton? Today the media is still painting Obama as an elitist because he is saying that $30.00 a month is not a significant savings to Americans for this so called gas holiday which neither Clinton or McCain can do a damn thing about this summer. When Clinton says Obama is not electable she is really reminding people that Obama is a black guy. In closing how many candidates have every had to campaign against a former President and First Lady and maintain a lead?
Actuallly, it would be $30 for 3 months : )
Thanks!!
GunnyJ,
You are absolutely right! I mean you misstated the $30/month-it is actually $28-30 over the course of the entire 3-month summer which works out to about $9+ per month savings (or the cost of about 300,000 construction jobs). And, as I travel through Indiana often, that would be a lot of jobs lost in their state alone because they seem to (annoyingly) ALWAYS be rebuilding or resurfacing their highways. Anyway, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT when you state that Obama is running against TWO Dems! One being the most popular Democratic president in recent memory! If that is not a David and Goliath story, I don't know what is! It is remarkable to me that he has been able to make this much traction, and I marvel at it every day. The fact that the Clintons JUST figured out, at this TOO LATE stage in the campaign, how to really pummel Obama (in the press and with pandering to voters) speaks volumes about how deft the Obama campaign has been.
Thanks for the correction!!
How many polls were taken since July 2007 that helped create those nice smooth lines? Were there any contradictory polls taken during the same period being left out of this? Even at one per month, that's ten or eleven samples of maybe one to two-thousand folks at a time? This is HARDLY a comprehensive debate killer. The extremely limited information you are using could be made to form any conclusion with minor tweaking and probably already does somewhere. The only thing that is assured by acknowledging an inappropriate distraction from what is important is more distraction from what is important.
??What??
Contradictory polls? The point of these polls is to generate favorable/
Second, you admit to not knowing the frequency of polling and then you assume an artificially low frequency, which you then use to toss out any meaning from the sample. This flies in the face of polling by substituting assumptions for data.
thank you for this wounderful pice of reporting of the truth, this do nothing but keep the races apart
and the said thing is the news media all of them are doing it but they love america but the lie to us every day about this subject this seems to me that another from o of mind control thats playing on people fears what a bunch of nuts.
Excellent article, and thank you for the information! You give me hope that journalism is not completely dead.
Thanks for the TRUTH. I shall sleep well tonight...
There is talk of Senate Majority Leader should she lose the primaries. Senator Clinton will not be re-elected to the Senate as I have said weeks ago, someone in New York is video taping, copying EVERY statement of Senator Clinton's for their run for her Senate seat. She can't WIN again without the black vote.They Bill and Hillary are toast with the African American electorate. There will be no repeat of Cotton Comes to Harlem for the Clinton's.
If she were to some how steal the nomination not WIN, how many African Americans are going to support her? Zip, we have survived Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, Nixon. Four more years of Republican rule, will not kill us, but the next time a Democrat get's that guaranteed 90% black vote, the White House will be painted BLUE.
If in November white blue collar, less educated voters can abandon the Democratic Party over Obama, you can guess what's the buzz in the African American community.
Not only the African American community, Passthewords. A lot of us are just as disgusted with them and we won't be changing our minds.
"Cotton Comes to Harlem for the Clinton's"
LMAO
We're racist if we don't support Obama, right? Bull$h!t !!! I have voted for black politicians when it was the correct choice (David Dinkins comes to mind as mayor of NYC). But I do not like Junior Hussein Obama, and I do not see that he has enough experience -- maybe in 2016, but then he'd have to stop marginalizing people my age (57) and our experiences (politics of the past - HUH!) . And, I'd need to hear more specifics of what he proposes politically.
For now: Clinton '08!!!
-MS
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
