Just curious: do any DUers wonder about the over $100K

earners overwhelmingly who voted for Obama, while the $50Kers and less votes went for Clinton?

I just find it interesting since I don't think that DU has many of $100Kers..

Obama got the highest earners AND the lowest earners.

Who knows? Better yet, who cares?

Republican ideas....and I think that DU is very diverse with plenty of 100K+ Earners.

And are picking the candidate they think can beat the republicans. If you think most democrats are poor, you are wrong. Look at the demographics of the last election and you will see that a ton of people making more than $100K voted for Kerry.

Party stands for. .....and I am personally aware that all Democrats are not poor. .....as I said in my previous post.

I make well over 100K, and I see nothing 'rational' about Obama. So much for your theory. I did vote for Kerry, but he wasn't my first choice either.

Just out of curiousity?

Are the well-to-do not allowed to post here or something?

on DU and conducted for DU by other groups. I do not remember the links.

Everytime I fill out a card that ask for that information I always put down something goofy

If you make more, you might be more apt to keep it to yourself. Just a though.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#NHDEM

And scroll down for about half the page.

Even if you don't accept it, no doubt, the campaigns do take these data in planning their ads.

that DUers seem to not make that much money.

http://www.blogreaderproject.com/Blogs/democratic-underground

And Skinner comments with that link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1153966

Also here

http://www.quantcast.com/democraticunderground.com

GEez, I had friends read what I posted and they got it

SALARY

Why do you assume poor people post at DU

:grr:

Here is your very stupidly insultive bonehead comment

I just find it interesting since I don't think that DU has many of $100Kers..

Thanks for making DU exactly what freepers think we are


:grr:

This is where you learn to read charts and graphs.

Yes, I know for some people this is really hard.

Perhaps some of your "friends" can take a look at that chart and explain to you, real s l o w l y
that DU does not have many with family income above $100.

Sorry, I am not qualified to teach individuals with inability to understand simple math.

And.. I have no idea what freepers "think" of us and what's more I really don't care. I do not go through life wondering what others think of me.

You assume way too much

Perhaps you should meet some DUers.

%wise the pyramid is in affect for all political parties when it comes to salaries.

But you treat DUers like a bunch of poor people - I find that offensive

This isn't economics - this is assuming which as always makes an ass out of you and me.

Was this a random sample? Or was it a voluntary participation thing? Again, like LynneSin, I tend not to answer questions about my income or to give incorrect responses. I suspect many others do the same thing.

I did not participate, either

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=866377

Not the demo surveys of the candidates supporters.

It was in Atlanta, GA last year. I've seen his supporters. They came from all walks of life. Rich and poor, old and young, white and black. On one side of me I had a group of college students and on the other side a large working-class family. Everybody cheered equally loud.

Let's not forget that Obama has broken records in small donations--money coming from people giving less than $200. He beats out both Clinton and Edwards, who get much more of their money in the form of maxed-out $2300 checks.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/6014.html

I'm willing to bet that DU has a huge number of over $100k earners. My wife and I make about $160k. We're pretty much as middle class as possible.

graduates and our income is >$30K. And we still consider ourselves middle class, at least in terms of values if not in socio-economic status.

Not really, just kidding. It just seems that way some times.

Can you provide a link to support that statement about Obama and Clinton?

and, again, after NH.

Am trying to find it.

Here

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#NHDEM

And scroll down to the middle of the page

I think he probably appeals to professionals b/c he is not playing up the blue collar resentment like Edwards or the old lady coupon clippers like Hillary.

'old lady coupon clippers'? What a moronic statement. How old are you? 12? Oh, that's right. Veniceboy....not VeniceMAN.

I support Obama. He's fought in the trenches for a number of years on behalf of the poor in south side Chicago, he knows what we deal with, and he knows what needs fixing.

the Kerry and other senatorial endorsements help but the Andrew Young statement that he is not ready hurts.

Jimmy Carter is an example of a president whose heart was in the right place, got elected when the Republicans were in disarray, but couldn't achieve his vision.

He knows that the amount of progressive changes he can make will be dependent on how many people support him, and not how many legislative tricks and triangulation he can perform, or how many republican politicians he attacks. He knows leadership is dependent upon empowering those being led. This is something I don't think Clinton gets, especially with her "MLKjr was great and all, but it took a president to pass civil rights act" statement.

It's the simple difference between "I will fight for you" and "We will fight together". Obama gets it, and he's spent nearly his adult life practicing it.

Your statement about Johnson puzzles me. He was a disaster re Vietnam War but he actively turned the civil rights dream into civil rights law over the active opposition of his former senate colleagues and knowing it would split the Democratic party coalition with the Dixiecrats and end the Democratic party hegemony in the South. He was the nuts and bolts insider who made it happen.

Revolutions are multifaceted.

Have you heard any African American leader from that era say otherwise. Are they denoucing Clinton's statement?

We got a reprieve with Jimmy Carter because of Nixon but the south steadily turned Republican year after year.

Have you ever wondered why the Republicans don't praise Eisenhower-hero general who led US to victory in WW11 as their great president? He sent federal troops into Arkansas to integrate the schools. He used the power of his office enforce a Supreme Court decision to allow integration. Instead they praise Reagan who kicked off his first campaign in Philadelphia Mississippi where civil rights workers were murdered. He wasn't there to praise them, he was there to let the south know that the Republican party was on their side--and they voted accordingly.

Your statement about Clinton is not a direct quote but a mischaracterization. Ask Obama what she said and see if he will back you up.

Your statement about Johnson puzzles me. He was a disaster re Vietnam War but he actively turned the civil rights dream into civil rights law over the active opposition of his former senate colleagues and knowing it would split the Democratic party coalition with the Dixiecrats and end the Democratic party hegemony in the South. He was the nuts and bolts insider who made it happen.

Revolutions are multifaceted.

Have you heard any African American leader from that era say otherwise. Are they denoucing Clinton's statement?

We got a reprieve with Jimmy Carter because of Nixon but the south steadily turned Republican year after year.

Have you ever wondered why the Republicans don't praise Eisenhower-hero general who led US to victory in WW11 as their great president? He sent federal troops into Arkansas to integrate the schools. He used the power of his office enforce a Supreme Court decision to allow integration. Instead they praise Reagan who kicked off his first campaign in Philadelphia Mississippi where civil rights workers were murdered. He wasn't there to praise them, he was there to let the south know that the Republican party was on their side--and they voted accordingly.

Your statement about Clinton is not a direct quote but a mischaracterization. Ask Obama what she said and see if he will back you up.

Also college students who attend Dartmouth may come from some very well to do familes.

The $50 000 and less households may include a lot of struggling people and are more apt to be looking for some concrete changes in their lives so specifics would have an appeal.

I think the hope message is attractive, and many people would like to vote for an African American candidate to make a statement about America those things but may be a luxury is you are on thin ice and looking for the rescue squad.

They do things their own way, the way they believe in, and ignore the status quo. Basically I believe they tend to be more independent thinkers who believe in him. In a way that makes sense because I think Obama is the least likely to try to push his political beliefs on others.

Correlations with income, education, or age alone won't tell you much if you're trying to use that info to explain/interpret voter behavior.

Have fun setting up that multivariable poll ;)

I am on retirement income. have a college ed. and am an old women and have just been for this guy since he got into the race. Fact I did not think he could win NH as I have been hearing for weeks how far ahead Clinton was. Obama just seemed to come from out of the trees. I felt it would be wonderful if the polls were right the last day. I had friends that made a trip to see Clinton and they said it was a mob inside and out.All that family voted for her. Saying no one was interested in Clinton was not what I heard at all. Frankly it is hard to put us voters in to a slot of any type, even if polls are always trying to do it.

And their kids.

raise their expectations of candidates anr turn to the problem solvers and fighters.

Hillary has a base of support in the traditional Democratic coalition.

That would be my guess.

to anyone watching the return, which is why I am puzzled by the violent reaction here.

Oh well.

I will have to find your post.