Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Morning Digest: 7/8 (243 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Romney would be no weaker in Virginia (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    I live here, and someone like Romney plays better these days than Perry.

    I've commented here before that a good state-level parallel to Perry is Jerry Kilgore, the GOPer for VA-Gov 2005.  Kilgore was a hick who played poorly culturally in the rapidly-changing urban crescent.

    Perry would have much the same problem.

    The urban crescent dominates Virginia politics now, and they're much more amenable to a generic American like Romney than a cowboy or redneck who brings up the specter of secession.

    North Carolina is moving in the same direction, but is a half-step behind Virginia in changing.  I don't know that Romney would perform better than Perry there, but I bet he'd perform about the same.

    43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

    by DCCyclone on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 07:12:08 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grover, MichaelNY

      I may not agree with Perry politically. I may not like Perry as a person.  However, as a Texan, I resent you calling Perry a hick. He is emphatically NOT a hick.

      Hick ≠ Cowboy.
      Hillbilly ≠ Cowboy.
      Any other epithet which does not apply to Perry ≠ Cowboy.

      21, Nice Calm Burkean Post-Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Childhood), TX-23 (School), TX-10 (Home); SSP: wmayes

      by wwmiv on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 07:54:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        grover, MichaelNY

        If you'd hear me talk, you'd think I was a hick too. The shtick is wearing thin, really. As much as a detest Perry's politics, calling him a hick is like calling all Texans hicks.

        I am not a hick. Perry is not a hick. Bush wasn't even a hick.

        21, Nice Calm Burkean Post-Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Childhood), TX-23 (School), TX-10 (Home); SSP: wmayes

        by wwmiv on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 07:57:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Pick your own adjective, then (0+ / 0-)

          You've complained about every term I've used, the fact is he comes off as something along the lines of a hick/redneck/hillbilly or pick something else.  "Cowboy" alone doesn't cut it, that can be someone from Wyoming or Colorado and doesn't capture Perry's Bible Belt fundamentalism and typical Southern embrace of racist dog whistles.

          I've seen him on TV, he's an immediate "no way" for President for suburban swing voters outside the South.  Culturally they want a generic American.  Romney is that, Bachmann is closer to it than Perry in spite of being identically batshit crazy hard right, and Bush was closer to it than Perry because he came from a patrician Northern family and had his father's name, even if Dubya himself was a Texan with a Southern accent.

          By the way, I did some research on this in the midst of a twitter exchange with Nathan Gonzalez not too long ago, and the GOP has never nominated a Southerner except for Bush 41 and Bush 43...and Bush 41 wasn't really a Southerner, and Bush 43 was viable only because he had his father's name.  Obviously this in significant part comes from the South having been solidly Democratic for so many generations until Nixon picked the lock and Reagan soon after blew the door wide open.  But it's still striking that a party with an overwhelmingly Southern base has not produced a Southern Presidential nominee in all these recent decades.  There is a cultural barrier there that will affect Perry, and that doesn't affect Southern Democrats.

          43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 08:23:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Perry (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            tietack, James Allen, grover, MichaelNY

            Is simply a rancher cowboy. He isn't a hick, a redneck, or a hillbilly. He isn't even a Southerner, so what you've said really doesn't apply to him (even though the appearance to the rest of America is that he's Southern by virtue of being Governor of a partially Southern state).

            Hick: An unsophisticated provincial person

            Perry is much more sophisticated than you give him credit for, though provincial does describe him quite well.

            Redneck: a white member of the Southern rural laboring class

            Perry is not Southern, nor of the laboring class. He's a Westerner (anything west of Fort Worth in Texas is Western, not Southern) and his family was rancher overlord material.

            Hillbilly: a person from a backwoods area.

            The panhandle is not backwoods.

            21, Nice Calm Burkean Post-Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Childhood), TX-23 (School), TX-10 (Home); SSP: wmayes

            by wwmiv on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 09:06:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Also, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            You are just plain wrong. Eisenhower was from Texas and was southern (He was from Denison).

            21, Nice Calm Burkean Post-Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Childhood), TX-23 (School), TX-10 (Home); SSP: wmayes

            by wwmiv on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 11:33:25 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Eisenhower was from Kansas, not Texas (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              HoosierD42, MichaelNY

              He was born in Texas and his family left when he was 2, too young to have any memory at all.

              He grew up in Kansas.

              He's not "from" Texas anymore than my wife, who unequivocally says she is from Virginia, is "from" Tennessee for having been born in Nashville, or "from" Philadelphia for having lived there briefly as a toddler when her dad was in graduate school.

              43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 10:03:14 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  You're looking at it backwards (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Perry won't lose crazy loon wingers that Romney will.

      They won't flip to Obama obviously, so it won't be a swing of two votes, but one less vote for Romney from some nutloaf voting third party will matter (in comparison to what Perry could do, not necessarily who wins the state in the general).

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/13/21516/201/804/660248

      by tommypaine on Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 11:54:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wrong, crazy loon wingers will vote for Romney (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        NMLib

        They showed up to vote for McCain despite despising him, and they'll do the same for Romney.

        Partisans are never stupid enough to stay home.  Once in awhile they're stupid enough to vote for a 3rd wheel like lefties for Nader in 2000, but they don't stay home.

        The Presidency is always a huge deal, and the crazies want to beat Obama enough to show up for almost anyone.  They want to win much more badly than they wanted to win in 2008, and in 2008 they all showed up.  Little acknowledged is the fact that McCain won almost a million more votes than Kerry 4 years earlier, and Kerry was acknowledged to have enjoyed sky-high turnout in his favor (but still less than Dubya).  So no one on the right stayed home in 2008, and they won't stay home next year.

        Perry gains nothing on the right over Romney, but loses a bunch in the middle.

        43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 10:11:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Didn't some hard right-wingers (0+ / 0-)

          stay home in 2008? You really think NONE of them did?

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 12:42:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Only trivial numbers of people stayed home (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            NMLib, MichaelNY

            Again, this can't be emphasized enough, McCain won the 3rd-largest vote total for President in American history.  He was behind only Obama '08 and Bush '04.  He beat Kerry '04 by almost a million votes, and everyone agreed that Kerry '04 had fantastic turnout (but Dubya stunned everyone with even more fantastic turnout that blew through what everyone thought would be his ceiling).

            Now, "no one" is an exaggeration.  Of course there were scattered pockets of people and individuals everywhere who stayed home because of McCain.  But their numbers were trivial in the electorate.  Just like there were scattered pockets of people and individuals everywhere who refused to vote for Obama after always having voted for Democrats for President their entire lives...they, too, were trivial, as Obama blew through Dubya's '04 vote total for a stunning 69.5 million votes.

            43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

            by DCCyclone on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 04:47:08 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  A lot of Republicans stayed home in (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          2008.  I was just doing numbers for top of hte ticket in Oregon in some precincts for 04, 08, and 10, and in some precincts the Republican candidate for gov in 2010 got more votes than McCain in 2008.  That shouldn't happen.

          "every time we start a pie fight a wingnut gets his wings"- MinistryofTruth -6.38, -4.15

          by James Allen on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 02:37:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oregon had the highest... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Voter turnout last year, IIRC. It only had something like the fifth-highest turnout in 2008.

            Independent, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

            by SaoMagnifico on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 04:05:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Some variance is going to happen (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, DCCyclone

            But despite Dudley being a lot closer than McCain, McCain still had more votes statewide than Dudley, and remember, McCain didn't compete for Oregon.

            Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 24 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

            by NMLib on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 04:12:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  But it still shouldn't happen (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              in a midterm election compared to a presidential election.  And this is in the area around McCain's Oregon HQ.

              "every time we start a pie fight a wingnut gets his wings"- MinistryofTruth -6.38, -4.15

              by James Allen on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 06:33:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  So what? (0+ / 0-)

                How big were these precincts anyways? Were they large Portland districts, or were they small rural precincts with maybe a few hundred people. And were these precincts in an area where Dudley was just uncommonly strong compared to McCain?

                A few precincts is nothing, there were plenty of precincts in Texas, for example, where White got more votes than Obama did, but then again, those were also precincts where Obama did pretty abysmally anyways.

                Since you're looking, how did Dudley do compared to Gordon Smith in those precincts, did he outperform him there?

                Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 24 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

                by NMLib on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 02:06:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I wasn't looking at how Smith did there. (0+ / 0-)

                  I was looking at some suburbs of Portland.

                  "every time we start a pie fight a wingnut gets his wings"- MinistryofTruth -6.38, -4.15

                  by James Allen on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 03:46:56 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Dudley is from that area (0+ / 0-)

                    He lives in Lake Oswego, just south of Portland, so it's not terribly surprising that Dudley got more votes than McCain.

                    Incidentally, what were the percentage numbers and the total votes?

                    Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 24 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

                    by NMLib on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 04:14:56 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I wasn't looking at Lake Oswego, (0+ / 0-)

                      I was looking at some of the peripheral suburbs and exurbs in Clackamas County, and if you know anything about the people there, you know that they resent people who live in Lake Oswego.

                      This is the district:
                      Photobucket

                      Precinct 568, which is in the Oregon City area, cast 280 votes for Obama, but only 176 for Kitzhaber, and 293 for McCain, but 307 for Dudley.

                      Compare it to Estacada's precinct 361, where Obama got 279 to Kitzhabers 171, and McCain got 366 to Dudley's 228, a much more typical change for a midterm election from a presidential one.

                      Also note that in this new district, in 2004 overall more votes were cast.  Obama got about 2,000 more votes than Kerry had, but McCain fell short of Bush's total by about 5,000.

                      "every time we start a pie fight a wingnut gets his wings"- MinistryofTruth -6.38, -4.15

                      by James Allen on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 04:32:09 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  That strikes me just as an unusual precinct (0+ / 0-)

                        Plus, it's one where Dudley really outperformed McCain percentage-wise (McCain won approximately 51% of the vote there, Dudley won approximately 60%.

                        Actually, it strikes me as similar to the Austin area (particularly the suburbs, Obama did a lot better in those areas than Democrats normally did)

                        Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 24 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

                        by NMLib on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 05:35:30 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  considering (0+ / 0-)

                          Obama won 56-40 statewide, while Kitzhaber barely won, there are a lot of precincts where Dudley overperformed McCain, and even a few, like this one, where he actually got more votes, because in 2008 Republican turnout was so low.

                          "every time we start a pie fight a wingnut gets his wings"- MinistryofTruth -6.38, -4.15

                          by James Allen on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 07:18:36 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

        •  Nonsense (0+ / 0-)

          Really, let's get serious here.

          Do you know any harcore eveangelical Christians?  If you do, ask them, would you vote for a heretic to be President?

          You think of "crazies" as primarily political people.  Sad to say, like the rest of the world, most of our "crazies" are religous fanatics.  The tea partiers will vote for the Republican, because they are motivated by economics.  Many of the extreme evangelicals will not vote for Romney because God has told them they can't.

          I have yet to meet a hardcore evangelical who would vote for Romney.

          http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/13/21516/201/804/660248

          by tommypaine on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 04:35:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh please... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, DCCyclone

            This sounds like the phantom Jews who won't back Obama, it's lovely, but there's no real polling evidence suggesting that they won't vote for Romney against Obama.

            What's even more interesting is your condescending attitude, based only on limited interactions, it's like deducing that liberals won't vote for Obama because you read Open Left's comments section...

            Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 24 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

            by NMLib on Sat Jul 09, 2011 at 05:57:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Actually there is polling (0+ / 0-)

              Read PPP's bible belt polling.

              As for anecdotal eveidence, sure that's what it is, but pretending there are zero others in the US who won't vote for a Mormon is completely laughable.  

              http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/13/21516/201/804/660248

              by tommypaine on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 12:21:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Their polling doesn't support your point (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                NMLib, MichaelNY

                PPP has never had polling reveal evangelicals or anyone else refusing to vote for Romney over Obama.  On the contrary, Romney posts the same numbers in trial heats vs. Obama that any Republican can be expected to get.

                That shows whatever their dislike of Romney or his faith, they'll hold their noses and vote for him.

                We are not going to be able to count on anyone refusing to vote for Romney because of his religion.  I'm glad for that, it's sickening to win that way.  We have to beat him straight up.

                That is, if he's the nominee.  Even as weak as his competition is, he's still a weak frontrunner.  His fundraising underscores that point, even despite his $12 million superpac haul.

                43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

                by DCCyclone on Sun Jul 10, 2011 at 04:51:11 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site