So there is a Racial edge, just not the one we were looking at
Now this makes sense, but it sure is ugly when you get down near the end of this story.
Playing minority against minority. With plenty of room for plausible deniability. More and more, I’m sickened to admit being a Democrat, but what good does becoming an Independent do?
If Edwards gets knocked out of this race, I can’t stop caring. But I can decide that American politics has become bereft of any answers. It’s apparently a shell game played by dirty people using dirty games. I’m not naive, I wasn’t looking for saints, but I don’t cotton to devil games.
Dejected? Depressed? Absolutely. Tens of thousands are dying for no damn good reason, and one of the supposedly groundbreaker candidates is reverting to racial politics.
Moral leadership? Not in this country. Not enough to convince a majority. Our democracy is a corrupt relic like all the other ones became. It’s not just the politicians. Too many have succumbed to the notion that we have to accept things this way.
We don’t. I ain’t buying. And I’ll go broke and homeless before selling my soul to the players of these deadly games.
January 12th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Interesting hypothesis, but the result of New Hampshire’s primary reminds me there are rarely cut-and-dried motivations where people are involved. Why it turned out the way that it turned out is a largely speculative exercise. All we have to go on are theories and while there are many interesting ones out there, none that answers anything for certain.
January 12th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
You apparently missed the divide being played out between Blacks and Latinos that the Clinton team’s willing to exploit. When I read that, the lightbulb went on. Theory? Not when a Clinton pollster is quoted.
I’m a skeptic about Lizza’s theories but a direct quote sustained by a swirl of circumstantial evidence all week long? It’s ugly and I’m guessing few liberals even want to discuss it. Not if it means being a suspected misogynist.
Could be a reason Richardson’s team may have been siding with Obama in Iowa. Campaigns are about winning. But stooping to certain levels is and never should be acceptable
January 12th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
The first time I tried to see what kind of support the candidates had in California, I was surprised to see such a strong Clinton camp among Latinos, but it’s very strong. Knowing of the Black/Hispanic rift I wasn’t so surprised at Obama’s comparably lower numbers, or really even the true liberal, Edwards since his demographic just being from the eastern seaboard is foreign there. But when I saw Richardson barely making a nudge there when I thought he could count on Southern California being Hispanic and in a neighboring State, it didn’t make sense.
If race were really in play, California would have been Richardson’s firewall, not Hillary’s. Richardson never even registered in California’s polls. That being the case, I dismissed racial affinity as a factor. But that doesn’t mean an anti-black bias might not be a factor, only that it isn’t offset by being able to count on one’s own people.
January 12th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
You can’t judge the rest by CA as the Hollywood megaphone is loud on celebrity and kewlness. And wealth.