2008 Presidential election about race?

Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

rw wrote:
Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

I don't think that's the point which was beamed to earth from
rdean's home planet. ;-)

It's clear that race was not a significant factor in Obama's
victory. Obama didn't win because of his race he won despite
it. Look at the bottom right (how appropriate) of that graph.
Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia, South Carolina all
racist redneck states. Now the upper left (also appropriate ;-),
not a lot of blacks voting for their race in Hawaii, Vermont,
Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Wisconsin and
Iowa.

I don't know how the Obama campaign identified those voters
who were both capable of "swinging" their state and who were
going to cast their vote for Obama primarily because he's black.
But for the sake of argument let's assume the Obama campaign
was able to pull off that miracle. Only two miracles to go. ;-)
Now you've go to get them to the polls, in big numbers because
there's not a lot of them (it could be as few as one voter ;-),
so how do you do that ? Herd them, or him, up and drive him to
the polls, threaten them with violence, pay them, what ? So,
OK however they got to the polls we'll give rdean Miracle #2.
Nobody but rdean and the double secret analyzers of data on the
home planet know about any of this. No mainstream press, no
bloggers, no pundits, not even Faux News ! Just rdean and the
fellows of the foil. Sorry, that's one miracle too many.

--
Ken Fortenberry

rw wrote:
Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php


That sword cuts both ways.

Peaceful Bill wrote:
rw wrote:
Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

That sword cuts both ways.

No, actually it doesn't and claiming so is racist bull****.
There is not one state that went for Obama in which black
racism was a significant factor in the outcome.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Peaceful Bill wrote:
rw wrote:

Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php


That sword cuts both ways.

What is shows is simply this: The higher the percentage of the African
American vote in a state, the lower the percentage of the white vote
went for Obama, and dramatically so.

The sharply dipping tail of the curve represents South Carolina,
Georgia, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi.

You can interpret this any way you want, but I interpret it as meaning
that there is still strong racism in the South.

(BTW, the African American vote was never greater than about 30%, and
surely it would have gone overwhelmingly for any Democrat over any
Republican, even if the nominee's race were not a factor.)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

On Nov 14, 12:28*pm, rw wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
rw wrote:

Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

That sword cuts both ways.

What is shows is simply this: The higher the percentage of the African
American vote in a state, the lower the percentage of the white vote
went for Obama, and dramatically so.

The sharply dipping tail of the curve represents South Carolina,
Georgia, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi.

You can interpret this any way you want, but I interpret it as meaning
that there is still strong racism in the South.

You can interpret it any way you like. Just looking at the data, it
looks
like there's no correlation in 46 of the states. The four states that
are
outliers are all geographically located and in a historically
conservative
region.

Probably still a lot of racism too.
- Ken

Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
rw wrote:
Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

That sword cuts both ways.

No, actually it doesn't and claiming so is racist bull****.
There is not one state that went for Obama in which black
racism was a significant factor in the outcome.


With 96% of African Americans voting for Obama? Puhlease.

Peaceful Bill wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
rw wrote:
Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's victory
might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

That sword cuts both ways.

No, actually it doesn't and claiming so is racist bull****.
There is not one state that went for Obama in which black
racism was a significant factor in the outcome.

With 96% of African Americans voting for Obama? Puhlease.

African Americans always vote Democrat, claiming that
African Americans voted Democrat in this election because
they're racists is itself racist bull****. The facts simply
do not support such a racist bull**** interpretation. So,
puhlease yourself.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
rw wrote:
Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being about
race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's
victory might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

That sword cuts both ways.

No, actually it doesn't and claiming so is racist bull****.
There is not one state that went for Obama in which black
racism was a significant factor in the outcome.

With 96% of African Americans voting for Obama? Puhlease.

African Americans always vote Democrat, claiming that
African Americans voted Democrat in this election because
they're racists is itself racist bull****. The facts simply
do not support such a racist bull**** interpretation. So,
puhlease yourself.


African Americans typically vote 65% dem.

So take your bull**** medium rare and serve it up for you dinner.

Peaceful Bill wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote:
rw wrote:
Maybe rdean has a point about the presidential election being
about race. It appears that if it weren't for white racism Obama's
victory might have been much larger:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/white_..._in_the_st.php

That sword cuts both ways.

No, actually it doesn't and claiming so is racist bull****.
There is not one state that went for Obama in which black
racism was a significant factor in the outcome.

With 96% of African Americans voting for Obama? Puhlease.

African Americans always vote Democrat, claiming that
African Americans voted Democrat in this election because
they're racists is itself racist bull****. The facts simply
do not support such a racist bull**** interpretation. So,
puhlease yourself.


African Americans typically vote 65% dem.

So take your bull**** medium rare and serve it up for you dinner.

African Americans voted 88% for John Kerry in 2004. I am sick
and ****ing tired of ignorant morons spewing hateful racist
bull****. So take your racist bull**** and shove it where the
sun don't shine, moron.

--
Ken Fortenberry