Religion and Guns in small-town America

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kidicious
It's not elitists! You are just saying that because Obama is educated and better off than them. He doesn't look down on them. He just believes differently. He's just honest enough to shoot it to them straight unlike Clinton acting like she just came from the gun range and calling other people in her party elitists.

Obama is a very smug politician. If he doesn't look down on small town America, he certain seems like he does. I mean, Kerry acted elitist too. I'm not sure if he meant to be, but that's entirely how it came across.

[Kuciwalker]

Some poor people react to adverse economic conditions by becoming protectionists, some by supporting increases in the minimum wage. Both are equally stupid. So what's Obama's problem?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I don't think he isn't popular with white working class people because they "cling to" religion. I thought Obama was supposed to be a very religious man. So why would that be the matter? Guns, I can understand... Clinton is probably better for gun owners than Obama. Anti-trade sentiment? No candidate (of a major party) better encapsulates that than Obama.

And I don't see how economic frustrations make these people "cling" to religion and guns and that makes them not vote for Obama.

He isn't popular with certain whites who are resentfull of people who are doing better than they are and are different. Maybe you haven't been around enough poor people to know the kind of person I'm talking about. He's percieved as elitists simply because he's different and better off. I wouldn't be percieved that way because I'm a poor white, even though I believe the same way.

So I think Hilary is very wrong to expoit that, and she's only damaging the party. But we all know she only cares about being elected, right?

I live in Oklahoma. I'm telling you what the stupid poor people think. I don't have any numbers. I can tell you though, that it's very common among a certain type of person. I can't tell you if they actually think of him as a muslim or not, but they definitely think of him as different.

So... you were making it up when you said they think he's a Muslim? You can say they think of his as different, but you are basically calling them ignorant (Hell, you called the "stupid poor people", and you wonder why Democrats have problems getting votes in certain areas).

They say he's a muslim. Hell, do they really think the gobmint is trying to take all their guns so that they can make an athiest totalitarian hell? They say that, I'm not sure if they actually believe it, but yea they say it, just like they say Obama is a muslim.

Which is why them being mad at free trade deals or illegal immigration makes sense... that's related to economic conditions. I don't think they hate Muslims because they don't have jobs.

Whoever said they made sense?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Obama is a very smug politician. If he doesn't look down on small town America, he certain seems like he does. I mean, Kerry acted elitist too. I'm not sure if he meant to be, but that's entirely how it came across.

He is not smug. In fact, he's very warm and charismatic. He has the right idea about why he isn't getting votes from some whites. He just can't communicate that right now. If he can do that I thinik he can recover from this.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kidicious
He isn't popular with certain whites who are resentfull of people who are doing better than they are and are different. Maybe you haven't been around enough poor people to know the kind of person I'm talking about. He's percieved as elitists simply because he's different and better off. I wouldn't be percieved that way because I'm a poor white, even though I believe the same way.

So I think Hilary is very wrong to expoit that, and she's only damaging the party. But we all know she only cares about being elected, right?

So, Hillary Clinton is NOT doing better than they are and is NOT different than them? You will have to do better than that.

They say he's a muslim. Hell, do they really think the gobmint is trying to take all their guns so that they can make an athiest totalitarian hell? They say that, I'm not sure if they actually believe it, but yea they say it, just like they say Obama is a muslim.

So you think they say things, but don't really mean them? And in your neck of the woods people are actually saying that he's a Muslim? Like I said, I'd like to see hard numbers on people thinking Obama is a muslim.

Whoever said they made sense?

So, your kneejerk response is that they are just treading in nonsense? Perhaps they are, perhaps they aren't, but attitudes like that are why Democrats don't get far in these small towns in America.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So, Hillary Clinton is NOT doing better than they are and is NOT different than them? You will have to do better than that.

Newsflash! She's white. Also, she sure tries to make herself look like she is one of them. That's going to be a little harder for Obama, but the point is that he shouldn't be judged for not being like them. Also, Hillary is just reinforcing their stupidity.

So you think they say things, but don't really mean them? And in your neck of the woods people are actually saying that he's a Muslim? Like I said, I'd like to see hard numbers on people thinking Obama is a muslim.

I said I don't know what they really mean or think. They are nuts. Haven't I said that. CAn you really say that someone who still thinks or just says he is a muslim isn't nuts?

So, your kneejerk response is that they are just treading in nonsense? Perhaps they are, perhaps they aren't, but attitudes like that are why Democrats don't get far in these small towns in America.

The Democrats don't need to change. The crazy people need to change. How is that every going to happen with politicians like Hillary exploiting their stupidity.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Newsflash! She's white. Also, she sure tries to make herself look like she is one of them. That's going to be a little harder for Obama, but the point is that he shouldn't be judged for not being like them. Also, Hillary is just reinforcing their stupidity.

Having known Hillary Clinton all these years, you really think that most small town folk think she's "one of them"? Really? Where have you been living.

I said I don't know what they really mean or think. They are nuts. Haven't I said that. CAn you really say that someone who still thinks or just says he is a muslim isn't nuts?

So they are now "nuts". I don't even know how many "just says" he is a Muslim either, because there are no polls or numbers, just your seemingly anecdotal evidence.

The Democrats don't need to change. The crazy people need to change. How is that every going to happen with politicians like Hillary exploiting their stupidity.

Ah... so the people are wrong and "they have to change". You do realize in a Democratic Republic this type of attitude will NEVER get you far. This is also why Bill Clinton was successful. He didn't think the people needed to change. He, instead, changed the Democratic Party.

[Arrian]

Christ. This is one of those things you simply do not say if you're trying to win a Presidential election.

Boo.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Having known Hillary Clinton all these years, you really think that most small town folk think she's "one of them"? Really? Where have you been living.

In their minds she is more like them than Obama.

I said I don't know what they really mean or think. They are nuts. Haven't I said that. CAn you really say that someone who still thinks or just says he is a muslim isn't nuts?

Ah... so the people are wrong and "they have to change". You do realize in a Democratic Republic this type of attitude will NEVER get you far. This is also why Bill Clinton was successful. He didn't think the people needed to change. He, instead, changed the Democratic Party.

I'm not running for office. I'm just arguing on the internet. But I think that politicians need to take more effort in trying to change things instead of trying to fit in with a bunch of idiots.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kidicious
In their minds she is more like them than Obama.

But she is NOT "one of them".

I'm not running for office. I'm just arguing on the internet. But I think that politicians need to take more effort in trying to change things instead of trying to fit in with a bunch of idiots.

No, you aren't running for office, but when Democrats seem to say similar type of things, it hurts them.

Here is a very good editorial on the NY Times today:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/bitter-fruit/index.html?ref=opinion

“Fumble” and “gaffe” have specific connotations, ones that likely seem inappropriate to those (and by “those,” I mean Slate’s Mickey Kaus) who have long been alarmed by Obama’s tendency to ascribe economic motivations for some voters’ social beliefs.

Lost amid the talk about racial and religious conciliation in Obama’s March 17 speech in Philadelphia was his argument that “anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition” and that “these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze — a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed.”

Kaus’s response at the time was sharp: “It’s hard to believe we’re about to nominate a Democrat who doesn’t acknowledge the lesson of the 1990s — that voters are worried about issues like welfare because they are worried about welfare, not because ‘welfare’ is a surrogate for ‘lack of national health insurance.‘ ” [emphasis by Kaus]

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
But she is NOT "one of them".

So?

No, you aren't running for office, but when Democrats seem to say similar type of things, it hurts them.

That's too bad, but you know you already didn't have much of the poor white vote anyway. I've already acknowledge that it hurt him. We are arguing about whether what he said had some truth to it or not.

Here is a very good editorial on the NY Times today:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/bitter-fruit/index.html?ref=opinion

“Fumble” and “gaffe” have specific connotations, ones that likely seem inappropriate to those (and by “those,” I mean Slate’s Mickey Kaus) who have long been alarmed by Obama’s tendency to ascribe economic motivations for some voters’ social beliefs.

Lost amid the talk about racial and religious conciliation in Obama’s March 17 speech in Philadelphia was his argument that “anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition” and that “these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze — a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed.”

Kaus’s response at the time was sharp: “It’s hard to believe we’re about to nominate a Democrat who doesn’t acknowledge the lesson of the 1990s — that voters are worried about issues like welfare because they are worried about welfare, not because ‘welfare’ is a surrogate for ‘lack of national health insurance.‘ ” [emphasis by Kaus]

Huh? The reason poor white's or working class whites got upset at him saying they were "bitter" out or economic frustration is because they resent him for doing well and being black. It's similar reason for being against immigration.

[Kidlicious]

Also, where do you get these blogs at anyway. So now democrats are suppose to be against welfare to get more white votes?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Kidicious

Huh? The reason poor white's or working class whites got upset at him saying they were "bitter" out or economic frustration is because they resent him for doing well and being black. It's similar reason for being against immigration.

Do you not pay attention? People aren't upset that they were called bitter due to economics, its because he linked bitterness to their interest in guns and religion. Do you not see that? He is demeaning (they perceive) two aspects of rural america by linking them to GW and Iraq and all that is wrong with society in 2008 when in reality they are core values of the people.

Don't you see why that can be considered insulting? I go to church because I'm bitter about the economy? I go hunting because I'm bitter about my stock portfolio? Pfff

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


Do you not pay attention? People aren't upset that they were called bitter due to economics, its because he linked bitterness to their interest in guns and religion. Do you not see that? He is demeaning (they perceive) two aspects of rural america by linking them to GW and Iraq and all that is wrong with society in 2008 when in reality they are core values of the people.

Don't you see why that can be considered insulting? I go to church because I'm bitter about the economy? I go hunting because I'm bitter about my stock portfolio? Pfff

The issue of guns and religion made it worse. The way they probably perceived it he was saying "you are bitter becasue you aer poorer than me adn that has made you have stupid beliefs about guns adn religion." That of course is not what he was trying to say.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Kidicious


The issue of guns and religion made it worse. The way they probably perceived it he was saying "you are bitter becasue you aer poorer than me adn that has made you have stupid beliefs about guns adn religion." That of course is not what he was trying to say.

If you put yourself in the shoes of a rural american churchgoer/hunter, don't you think his statement would be just a wee bit condescending?