Worst election analysis ever

[memphis]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/24/navarrette.palin.smalltown/index.html

Cause people in big cities don't love their families, have after school jobs, or pay their own way

[justfollowingtheelections]

I haven't read it yet but Navarette is a moron.  This is the same guy who said Obama should hire more latinos in his cabinet, simply because they're latinos.
Palin may be a real person (which I guess makes us big city people fake) but that doesn't make her any more knowledgeable about the issues a president has to deal with. 

[justfollowingtheelections]

I love the comments:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Iosif]

Pretty much anything J. J.'s posted in the last 12 months.

[Padfoot]

Sarah Palin opened the door on the whole "urban v. rural" words war the minute she opened her mouth as the VP nominee.  Her disdain for "big city liberals" was obvious from the very beginning.  That's not to say there hasn't been a long-standing partisan divide between urban and rural areas but Palin is the one who injected the vitriol into the presidential campaign.  Her rhetoric was hostile and combative to the point that it sometimes appeared she was rallying people for war rather than giving a campaign speech.  The emotional reactions she generated in people were downright frightening at some points.  For that reason, I view her as one of the most dangerous politicians in the country.  So I have no time for anyone who wants to sit around crying about how Sarah Palin was picked on.  The media was absolutely right to shut her down as nothing more than a bully who needs to be stopped. 

[Ebowed]

Pretty much anything J. J.'s posted in the last 12 months.

Possibly the most satisfying thing about the election was the ultimate repudiation of his annoying, consistently wrong, stubborn talking points.

That guy could spin anything.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The amusing thing is that Palin is actually governor of one of the most urban states in the country.

[Padfoot]

The amusing thing is that Palin is actually governor of one of the most urban states in the country.

LOL.  That's so true.  I totally forgot that half of Alaska lives in Anchorage.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Gag me with a spoon.

Maybe Republicans need to be talking about "suburban values" and picking on the urban+rural minority

[justfollowingtheelections]

The amusing thing is that Palin is actually governor of one of the most urban states in the country.

Alaska is also the state with the highest percentage of high-school drop-outs.  No wonder they have such an ignorant governor.

[Husker]

Actually, I know a fair number of people from small towns who found Palin quite insulting. Navarette makes a good point that there is a nostalgia with small town America and in some cases that nostalgia is proven true. However, many rural areas and small towns ( The "Real America") are economically depressed with a severe brain drain effect. I know many people from rural Nebraska who would love to go back to their hometown and raise their kids but there is nothing substantial for them in those small towns anymore. The sad thing is rural Nebraska is probably better off than most rural areas in the U.S.

It is ironic that the parts of the country that are hurting the most are the parts of the country that continue to vote for a party that seems to suppress any real help. Then again, I could argue that the democratic party hasn't fared better in these areas because they have essentially acted like these aforementioned areas don't even exist. Believe me, it's no coincidence that Obama won an EV in Nebraska as he was the first democratic candidate to campaign here since the 60's.  

[J. J.]

Pretty much anything J. J.'s posted in the last 12 months.

Possibly the most satisfying thing about the election was the ultimate repudiation of his annoying, consistently wrong, stubborn talking points.

That guy could spin anything.

No, possible not.  

The point has some traction in this regard, urban problems tend to be very specific to urban areas.  Mass transit is one such example.  In PA, it really doesn't exist outside of Philadelphia as a practical alternative (I would even argue not in Pittsburgh).  If the "urbanites" want to deal with it as a national issue, it is going to bring hostility if the "non-urbanites" are expected to pay for it.

A lot of the social issues are the same, but those cleavages have been there for decades.  We may start seeing it in other areas.  There is a difference between the mentality in a city and those of the non-city areas.

BTW, Izod, the same problems occur in Britain, and arguably has gotten worse over time.  The UK is slightly more urbanized.  

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Pretty much anything J. J.'s posted in the last 12 months.

Possibly the most satisfying thing about the election was the ultimate repudiation of his annoying, consistently wrong, stubborn talking points.

That guy could spin anything.

No, possible not.  

The point has some traction in this regard, urban problems tend to be very specific to urban areas.  Mass transit is one such example.  In PA, it really doesn't exist outside of Philadelphia as a practical alternative (I would even argue not in Pittsburgh).  If the "urbanites" want to deal with it as a national issue, it is going to bring hostility if the "non-urbanites" are expected to pay for it.

A lot of the social issues are the same, but those cleavages have been there for decades.  We may start seeing it in other areas.  There is a difference between the mentality in a city and those of the non-city areas.

BTW, Izod, the same problems occur in Britain, and arguably has gotten worse over time.  The UK is slightly more urbanized.  

That wasn't the point. Rather it was your absolutely horrid track record for your often beyond moronic predictions. See my sig.

[J. J.]

Pretty much anything J. J.'s posted in the last 12 months.

Possibly the most satisfying thing about the election was the ultimate repudiation of his annoying, consistently wrong, stubborn talking points.

That guy could spin anything.

No, possible not.  

The point has some traction in this regard, urban problems tend to be very specific to urban areas.  Mass transit is one such example.  In PA, it really doesn't exist outside of Philadelphia as a practical alternative (I would even argue not in Pittsburgh).  If the "urbanites" want to deal with it as a national issue, it is going to bring hostility if the "non-urbanites" are expected to pay for it.

A lot of the social issues are the same, but those cleavages have been there for decades.  We may start seeing it in other areas.  There is a difference between the mentality in a city and those of the non-city areas.

BTW, Izod, the same problems occur in Britain, and arguably has gotten worse over time.  The UK is slightly more urbanized.  

That wasn't the point. Rather it was your absolutely horrid track record for your often beyond moronic predictions. See my sig.

That was a problem when I posted it.  Obama (and the faltering economy) solved that problem.

My point is that there can be a lot of cleavages that Palin (or some other candidate) can exploit.  One of them is running an anti-urban campaign. 

I should add that posts like this one are quite typical of the "elite, big city liberal" type of thing that someone could run against (fairly or not).

[ChrisFromNJ]

"Poor, sweet Sarah Palin. Why are they picking on her?"

Another FAIL prediction from J.J.

[Alcon]

That was a problem when I posted it.  Obama (and the faltering economy) solved that problem.

No, actually, when you posted that, Obama was creaming among white Democrats by a margin of at least 4-to-1.  You ignored this number repeatedly, while claiming that Palin could take up to half of white Democratic women or something.  Everyone else was telling you that you'd be painfully wrong.  You insisted.  You were painfully wrong.

My point is that there can be a lot of cleavages that Palin (or some other candidate) can exploit.

giggle.

One of them is running an anti-urban campaign. 

That seems to have caused suburban backlash this time, and contributed to Obama's strengths among a suburban population sympathetic to him.  Lame strategy.  Worked in 2004, didn't in 2008.  What's your point?

[Matt Damon™]

'Real America' is the home of meth labs, poverty, crime and young men joining the army to escape from dying communities.

[J. J.]

That was a problem when I posted it.  Obama (and the faltering economy) solved that problem.

No, actually, when you posted that, Obama was creaming among white Democrats by a margin of at least 4-to-1.  You ignored this number repeatedly, while claiming that Palin could take up to half of white Democratic women or something.  Everyone else was telling you that you'd be painfully wrong.  You insisted.  You were painfully wrong.

My point is that there can be a lot of cleavages that Palin (or some other candidate) can exploit.

giggle.

One of them is running an anti-urban campaign. 

That seems to have caused suburban backlash this time, and contributed to Obama's strengths among a suburban population sympathetic to him.  Lame strategy.  Worked in 2004, didn't in 2008.  What's your point?

It worked in 2004, to some extent.  I've heard the same the same thing before, about how Reagan was out of it and great it would be for the Democrats if he'd be nominated the next time.  That was 1976.  Reagan didn't change; the country did.  

Now, will it in 2012?  Maybe.  I can see Palin's appeal in some circumstances.

I cautioned JSojourner not to count Obama out after the debate at Rick Warren's church; I'd caution you in the same way about Palin or even Huckabee.  (I think you know my feelings about Huckabee.)

[Alcon]

I didn't really say anything conclusive about Palin, that's a totally separate issue to your complete botching of the white Democratic vote.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Pretty much anything J. J.'s posted in the last 12 months.

Possibly the most satisfying thing about the election was the ultimate repudiation of his annoying, consistently wrong, stubborn talking points.

That guy could spin anything.

No, possible not.  

The point has some traction in this regard, urban problems tend to be very specific to urban areas.  Mass transit is one such example.  In PA, it really doesn't exist outside of Philadelphia as a practical alternative (I would even argue not in Pittsburgh).  If the "urbanites" want to deal with it as a national issue, it is going to bring hostility if the "non-urbanites" are expected to pay for it.

A lot of the social issues are the same, but those cleavages have been there for decades.  We may start seeing it in other areas.  There is a difference between the mentality in a city and those of the non-city areas.

BTW, Izod, the same problems occur in Britain, and arguably has gotten worse over time.  The UK is slightly more urbanized.  

That wasn't the point. Rather it was your absolutely horrid track record for your often beyond moronic predictions. See my sig.

That was a problem when I posted it.  Obama (and the faltering economy) solved that problem.

This would be like me saying "Obama can win Utah" and coming up with some excuse when he didn't. UTAH WAS CLOSER THAN THE WHITE DEMOCRATIC VOTE. And considering that even McGovern had to have won the white Democratic vote...

[Alcon]

By the way, just for the heck of it, let's say Obama did lose the white Democratic vote, 51-49.

We'll mock it up as follows:

White Democrats (23%): 51-49 Republican
White Independents (23%): 63-37 Republican (generous in such a scenario)
White Republicans (29%): 94-6 Republican (ditto)
All Others (26%): 70-30 Democratic (ditto)

The result?  McCain would win, 61%-39%.  He'd win white voters (assuming he wouldn't win white indys over 2-to-1 like he obviously would in such a scenario) 71%-29%.

Were there any indications, in any polls ever, that McCain might win with over 60%?  Or that he'd carry white voters by over 40 points?

No!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

See like I said, worse than McGovern. Should've been obvious to anyone who can do math, which J. Joke is not included in granted.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Sarah Palin opened the door on the whole "urban v. rural" words war the minute she opened her mouth as the VP nominee.  Her disdain for "big city liberals" was obvious from the very beginning.  That's not to say there hasn't been a long-standing partisan divide between urban and rural areas but Palin is the one who injected the vitriol into the presidential campaign.  Her rhetoric was hostile and combative to the point that it sometimes appeared she was rallying people for war rather than giving a campaign speech.  The emotional reactions she generated in people were downright frightening at some points.  For that reason, I view her as one of the most dangerous politicians in the country.  So I have no time for anyone who wants to sit around crying about how Sarah Palin was picked on.  The media was absolutely right to shut her down as nothing more than a bully who needs to be stopped. 

she brought it on herself though: telling half the country they don't live in the "Real America" is a stupid, stupid campaign strategy.

[memphis]

Sarah Palin opened the door on the whole "urban v. rural" words war the minute she opened her mouth as the VP nominee.  Her disdain for "big city liberals" was obvious from the very beginning.  That's not to say there hasn't been a long-standing partisan divide between urban and rural areas but Palin is the one who injected the vitriol into the presidential campaign.  Her rhetoric was hostile and combative to the point that it sometimes appeared she was rallying people for war rather than giving a campaign speech.  The emotional reactions she generated in people were downright frightening at some points.  For that reason, I view her as one of the most dangerous politicians in the country.  So I have no time for anyone who wants to sit around crying about how Sarah Palin was picked on.  The media was absolutely right to shut her down as nothing more than a bully who needs to be stopped. 

she brought it on herself though: telling half better than three-fourths the country they don't live in the "Real America" is a stupid, stupid campaign strategy.

[Verily]

One of them is running an anti-urban campaign. 

That seems to have caused suburban backlash this time, and contributed to Obama's strengths among a suburban population sympathetic to him.  Lame strategy.  Worked in 2004, didn't in 2008.  What's your point?

It didn't happen in 2004, either. 2004 was mostly about emphasizing rural roots and rural values, but it never made any overt attacks against big cities as I recall. (The GOP convention was, of course, in New York City, so attacking cities was pretty much impossible with the whole 9/11 bit the Republicans pulled.) That's pretty typical politics; Bill Clinton spent a lot of effort talking rural roots in 1992 and 1996; Bush played it up as much in 2000 as in 2004.

Attacking urban areas and thereby opening the wound of the urban-rural divide is not smart politics, however; it's stupid politics. The suburbs will side with whichever side is being attacked--of late, cities almost to exclusion. And so suburban white voters swung, very hard in some areas.

Of course, it doesn't help that the culture is shifting from the rural/exurban ideal, of vast open spaces and huge lots of land in massive exurbia, to the urban ideal, of close-knit urban communities and apartment complexes, especially among the young. That alone is a long-term trend (more economic than cultural really, although the revival of New York City over the lifetime of new voters has a lot to do with it) which will make polemically siding with the rural end of the urban-rural divide much worse politics in the future.