Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
The Obama Campaign Does Not Respect You
That's the import of David Axelrod going on record devaluing the votes of white, working class men and women. While I am not white, I come from a working class family, and it is truly disturbing for the Obama campaign to be spewing such vile sentiment toward Democratic voters. His implication - don't focus on them because Republicans win that demographic anyway.
Unfortunately, not only is his statement truly elitist and degrading, but his analysis seems off. Simply because the Republicans traditionally win that demographic does not mean we don't need to try like hell to carry those voters in the general election. Also, these are voters in a Democratic primary so presumably they are inclined to support a Democrat, and it's important to get their votes.
This sort of elitist rhetoric has become an unmistakable trend of the Obama campaign and it needs to stop.










Comments (23)
Would you be willing to post and/or link to this vile spew, so I can judge for myself?
April 23, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Mike1981 is the same one who claimed that Obama had predicted he'd wrap up the race by February.
I'm afraid we're going to need a link before we believe any of this. I suspect that something was said, but that Mike1981 has completely distorted not only the words themselves, but their meaning as well.
April 23, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect that one reason the "Those people cling to religion and guns out of bitterness and frustration" and the "rubes are racists" statements were seen as a minor issue by many Obama supporters is that they share his prejudice.
Many big city dwellers and many Obamabots on this site actually believe that racism is more prevalent in small towns and rural areas and that people own guns, like to hunt and go to church as an opiate for their bitterness and frustrations about their plight in life.
Count the bitter sounding, anxiety laden, hate filled post on TPM. Who's supporters dominate these posts 10/20 to 1 or better.
April 23, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The internet is the last refuge of the coward and the scoundrel."
April 23, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your use of the term "elitist" damages, if not outright precludes, your credibility. Please define the term. Does it mean smart? Smart is good. Does it mean obscenely rich? That describes Hillary and John. Does it mean uppity? That means you have issues of racial prejudice you should confront and resolve immediately. If you are going to use the term twice in an inappropriate context, you must define the term.
April 23, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mike1981 might be talking about Axelrod's interview on Morning Edition, NPR this morning. He said that we should put less weight on the "Reagan Democrat" vote because Democrats have not been able to win that constituency going back to Bill Clinton.
Basically saying that Obama can get the votes from elsewhere. Presumably, he is talking about "Rockefella Republicans".
April 23, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Axelrod made a harmless, but dumb, statement. He said that white working class voters have voted Republican in recent Presidential races. That's all he said.
And then you shout OH NOES ELITIST!!!
Lord have mercy on us all.
April 23, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I heard an interview with Axelrod on NPR this morning and I think what was said and what you heard are different (assuming this interview was your source--again, a link would be helpful). What was said was a lot of analysis of past elections and "inside baseball" but there was none of the "devaluing" of voters you suggest.
redstateleroy - Obama's peeps (the one's I know) are about love not hate. I think you're listening to the wrong folks.
Peace, Brother
April 23, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I heard that interview, and it wasn't a lot of analysis. It was obviously perception/spin.
April 23, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correction "Rockefeller Republicans" or RINOS
April 23, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
You realize that you have zero credibility right? Where's the link? And can you point me to your outrage when Sen. Clinton dismissed activists, young voters, caucus-goers, black voters and the states she didn't win?
April 23, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Mikey, you're not earning much respect here yet. Maybe you should tackle that first before taking on this larger project of yours.
April 23, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't read it the way Mike1981 read it, but I think it could be read that way.
But more importantly, I think Axelrod's spin is incorrect. That is a voting block that Democrats need to do well with in order to win in the GE.
April 23, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I could be mistaken but I think Bill Clinton actually won that constituency.
April 23, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good day, Sir.
April 23, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. It's a bizarre phenomenon in which a supporter projects things their own candidate has done onto the opposition. Or, at the very least, faults the opposition for doing exactly that which their own candidate has done.
Remember? You can see it at about 6:30.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=HexrafhffJc
Or, Ed Rendell:
Under 30? Suicidal cult member. Unless you are under 30 and for Clinton, because then you are imbued with the wisdom of the ages.
Or, Clinton herself, referencing the working class.
Or, the now infamous Buffenbarger:
April 23, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is the quote.
April 23, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
"redstateleroy - Obama's peeps (the one's I know) are about love not hate. I think you're listening to the wrong folks."
oh yeah. I can feel the love in these posts.
April 23, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
While it is certainly an arguable point that can be debated over how the white working class has voted in recent elections, I fail to see how it qualifies as vile and degrading sentiment. And he's absolutely correct in saying they don't rely solely on those votes.
April 23, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a link:
http://thepage.time.com/2008/04/23/axelrod-democrats-dont-win-the-white-working-class/
April 23, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not earning much respect. I'm sure if my next post only said, "Obama will save the Democratic Party" with no source or analysis or anything, I'm sure I would garner a lot of "respect." Stop with your hypocritical comments. If Hillary's people had said something similar, you would have been all over it.
April 23, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can see where some people are coming from, but from my reading of the quote (I admit, I did not hear the interview on NPR) he was devaluing those votes by suggesting that Democrats don't carry their votes in the general. I think that's a valid reading noting that it's coming from the chief campaign strategist of the candidate who just lost decisively in a big state with many white, working class voters. I recall many Obama supporters up in arms when Mark Penn made a comment re: caucus states. I'm sure anyone who made a comment or a posting about his comments received plenty of "respect" from the posters here.
April 23, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
libgirl, if you're going to try to educate someone on something, possibly you should make sure you're not making an ass of yourself. Here's the term as defined in the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary:
elit·ism
Pronunciation: \ā-ˈlē-ˌti-zəm, i-, ē-\
Function: noun
Date: 1947
1: leadership or rule by an elite
2: the selectivity of the elite; especially : snobbery
3: consciousness of being or belonging to an elite
— elit·ist
April 23, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment