I didn't realize so many old white Republicans supported Obama.....

I tried to find a good source as to how many registered repubs vs dems, still looking.

57-43 Repubs in their house

Both US Senators repubs

Gov Repub

Yes, they did vote for Obama

and the partisan split is

Republican
32.0-31.1(d)[19]

So more dems than I thought, though lots of independents who mostly vote repub I bet.

92% of the pop is white - so given the word mostly can mean a majority, the only question is how old are they

ps.s my point is still very valid...under NO circumstances should Iowa be making ANY decision that might sway other voting

Like my family, but they don't matter.... I guess?


BTW Iowa supported Obama twice, Clinton twice, and Gore. Kansas it is not. It was also one of the first states to allow gay marriage and was instrumental in offering freedom to escape slaves. Iowa has a progressive history but I guess prejudice is allowed toward people in flyover states....If you think you're going to take the white house with only California and New England you're mistaken.

I apologize to Iowans, not about them but the inappropriateness of Iowa

holding this much power over our elections.

And it is a sort of power and influence.

But I am sure I would love Iowan's, my apologies.

The US Senate and House of Reps; ignorant, gullible voters.

That's my opinion.

Bern on!

before it started. As it is, it's normally over before California gets to have a say. Used to live there. But I agree. This is warped and warping.

of electoral influence and make them first!" I guess this was a way for these two states to feel important.

I've said before many times that even if Hillary loses Iowa and NH, I don't think it will have much impact if any at all. In fact, I've always found the open mouthed screaming done here over Sanders' strong showing in NH to incredibly and hilariously pointless.

I believe it's his to lose.

South Carolina - is Clinton's state. 29/30% black and only 1 Republican who was elected by white Republican voters - right? Sorry for the assery but well - there is basically only one black Republican in SC and the rest is all Democratic.


That's the litmus test state for black American voters - not the tiny numbers of uber liberal black folks in Iowa and NH without the ancestry surrounding them every single day of America's stain.

The only reason it was different for Obama was that black folks were lining up behind Hillary absolutely CONVINCED that white folks wouldn't go for him. When he won in lily white, rural assed freaking IOWA that changed alot of black people's minds.

Hillary won Iowa and my interest level in Iowa was still at only about 10%. My interest in NH is half that.

I predict that the young will carry tonight for Bernie.

holding this much power over our elections.

And it is a sort of power and influence.

But I am sure I would love Iowan's, my apologies.

Same sex marriage long ago. I'm sure you knew that.

Our primary is not until June. We loved 2008 here!

However - in the GE - we rule. NY, CA, MA, TX, FL, PA etc etc. We see the candidates near the GE. At the end - the large states are the king/queen makers. That's why the excitement when the call FL, TX, OH - last election I was all over PA's results - could have cared less about Iowa and NH.

or their hotel room, look in the mirror, and say "Holy shit, I didn't expect to do THIS well!"

I think Trump has no intention of doing the work of president and Bernie is floored when he sees what is happening.

I have been reading one of our members here in AA arguing with the lecturers about why Black folk, or that Black folk, wont vote for Bernie, and the response is ugly and horrible.

Those "religious, older, white" folk went 38% for Barack Obama, 30% for John Edwards and 29% for Hillary Clinton.

You are poking the bear - not necessarily at randy -


But kwassa, J17, Empower, etc stc- tonight you need to not be in the Group based upon your "oh horrors segregation" (it's not and you know it) stunt in GD yesterday.


Folks come back here to get away from that nonsense.

The jab wasn't necessary and don't you dare pretend it wasn't a jab. You are no wide eyed innocent.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/118738080

I am so getting tired of their attitude and superiority towards us

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-jarvis/post_10578_b_9131098.html

<snip>

This election, as we've all heard, is dominated by angry white people.

That is because the primary system is fundamentally racist. The first two presidential contests occur in states whose populations are 92% and 94% white, respectively. They are the only primaries that media pay attention to for months beforehand, nevermind that states that look much more like America than episodes of Petticoat Junction -- with cities and African-American and Latino populations -- will soon follow. No, the tide of this election and our future is set by these two racially, demographically, politically, and perhaps emotionally anomalous homelands of the peeved.

Thus the people who have a four-hundred-year birthright to anger are completely disenfranchised from the primary process thus far. And the people who are being attacked as outsiders because they know how to speak another language have no voice in it.

This is how we get Donald Trump: because media are paying attention only to angry white people and because media love the show he gives them. He is media's self-fulfilling news story.

At Davos, Edelman presented its sixteenth annual Trust Barometer and as I've written before, I was shocked by the extent of the worldwide growth in mistrust and anger toward institutions, particularly government, among certain segments of the population. Edelman contrasts the attitudes of the informed elite (the 15% of the population who earn in the top 25% in their countries, are college-educated, and use news often) versus the other 85% -- the rest, the mass.

Edelman found an accelerating disparity in trust of institutions between these two groups. The largest gap occurs in the U.S. with 19 percentage points separating the elite from the mass. There boils the dark and angry cauldron that has produced Trump, Cruz, and -- yes -- Sanders. In the U.K the gap is 17 percentage points. France, India, Australia, Mexico, and nine other nations in Edelman's survey show double-digit gaps.

</snip>

How many black faces did we see in any of them?

All I saw was white folks talking about what they were so pissed off about - mostly the black President.

Pick two small states to go first, one after the other, and then vote in regional Super Tuesdays a month apart.

It seems that from all of the available data, black and Latino voters in Des Moines were a decisive factor in Hillary Clinton's razor-thin winning margin...which I had talked about here for a couple of months.

So even in lily-white Iowa, ignore the POC vote at your own risk.