If Obama actually Does win this Election...

.. what do you predict the Hillbillies in the South will do?

 

I think the US is screwed if he does.

I think that includes the Hillbillies.

It'll be an uprising!

 

Go to bed, wake up the next morning, take a shower, and go to work?

What do you think will happen?

 

I don't think it would be as Earth-shaking an event as you'd imagine.

After all, to get elected, he would have to have a pretty broad popular support, even in the South. And it's more than a little insulting to presume that everyone in the South who doesn't vote for him would be racist and, moreover, so racist that there would actually be some kind of widespread rioting.

 

Deal with the pain, and use the next four years to get our shit together and find some kick-ass Republicans.
Basically, pull ourselves up by our political bootstraps and learn from our mistakes.

Of course all this hinges on us actually surviving the next four years.

 

Propane and propane accessories will continue to be sold at reasonable prices...

 

kill him.

You think I'm kidding?

 

Nothing in particular....the White Supremacist types will probably have spasams but they are all over, not just among "hillbillies in the south"

 

Hopefully..yes!

 

Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria!

 

Honestly? I don't know what the Clintons will do.

 

beware of teh HillBilly

 

False.

He could win without any substantial support in the South if he wins all the blue states and a couple of the Midwestern states like Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio that Democrats have had a tough time winning the last couple elections.

If he's the nominee, I'd guess that he would probably lose all the Southern states that Gore and Kerry lost.

No more insulting or accurate than to presume that if he loses or doesn't do everything blacks want him to do that there will be some sort of widespread rioting, as people here at WF and elsewhere have done.

 

Losing a state doesn't mean you didn't have support there. Even in Massachusetts, Bush got a third of the vote; even in Texas, Kerry got a third of it.

He's as liberal (or more) than either of them so that wouldn't surprise me.

One groupwide slander deserves another, eh?

 

The last "kick-ass" Republican was Dubya. Yeah, we want 8 more years of that!

 

Look everyone, it's Chelsea at 50!!!!

 

Yep...Kerry was just an Ohio away from winning the election without carrying a single southern state.

And that was the wet blanket that is Kerry. This time it's likely to be The Obama.

 

None of which proves that Obama (or anyone to be elected) would have to have "pretty broad support" among the South.

Hypothetically, he could be elected without winning a single popular vote in the South.

Realistically, though, he probably would get the same percentage as recent Democrats.

No, I was clearly saying that neither slander was accurate or merited.

 

This whole election is a slap in the face for Hillary. Her husband "Billy Boy" won BOTH elections when he was in office with over 90% of the black vote. Now the same people that they relied on so much at the polls back then are all turning away from them now.


I'll bet neither one of them (Hilly or Billy) never saw this coming.

 

...?

Where are getting this? If Barak Obama wins the nomination, I'd be very surprised if there weren't record voting in the Black community. I'm sure there are many blacks (and other minorities, to a degree) still alive who remember having to go through hoops and hurdles to have the chance to vote at all.

 

Really? I've been hearing about Obama as a contender since '04, and I live in Canada.

 

Hearing about him possibly running is one thing. Him doing well enough to the point where he stands an excellent chance of actually being the nominee is another.

 

True. They still should have expected him to endanger their traditional share of the black vote, though.

 

The Democratic Party would try to keep him from running if he wouldn't have broad support. There are, after all, congressional and local elections that are on the line, too. The Democrats wouldn't want someone at the top of the ticket that might keep voters away.

It's hypothetically possible that a flipped coin will land on its edge, too. But it's not very likely.

Maybe even more owing to his popularity among young people and the demographic shift toward the South that's going on in this country.

Okay, then.

 

Sure, the Clintons might have thought that Obama would get black votes in Iowa and New Hampshire. But those states are pretty white.

I don't think anyone could have predicted that Obama would be as good as if not better than Clinton when it came to fundraising and thus able to stay in the race longer than most.

I think you need to define "broad support."

It's one thing to not attract a large percentage of voters. It's another to be actively turning voters off.

Also, I don't think that the Democratic Party could do anything if Obama won the majority of delegates.

The bottom line is that he need not have many Southern votes to win, or however you might define "broad support."

The Democrats can all but write the South off and be victorious.

 

It's funny watching people get hysterical about a possible Obama presidency. I can't imagine how anyone could look back at the last seven years and say, "Yes, I want more of that!"

 

I make Obama with every state north of the Mason-Dixon except Indiana, plaus every state the Dems won last time west of the Mississippi plus N.M Iowa and Nevada.


that's 289 EC votes (269 to win) to 249.

Throw in the possibility of Florida (which I doubt but it's a variable) and you get 316-222.

OTOH, flip Ohio and you have a TIE. And frankly, having the rest of the map shake out as I suggested except with Ohio staying Red is a not inconsiderable possibility.

If I am the GOP, I pour a TON of resources into Florida and Ohio and I pick the more favorable of Nevada, Iowa and NM for a tie-breaker and work hard there too.

The Dems need to do likewise except they have to work to get ALL of Iowa NM and NV.


If it's Hillary, i could see them losing their grip on (at most) Minnesota, Wisconsin, and NH. with Pennsylvania playing the role of Florida as the difference in a close election and a beating.

That would be 310-228, or 331-207.

But the focal point still remains this: if Hillary is the nominee all the GOP has to do is hold the states they won in 2004, so the strategy is still to work hard in the swing states of Ohio, Florida, and maybe Missouri. If they can be confident in those, only then do they make a play for the upper Midwest and dabble in PA.

 

I find it a little odd how mostpeople here feel that racism no longer exist on a widescale... Certainly not enough to justify the existence of Affirmative Action...

Yet most people in this thread seem to believe that the election of Obama will encite someone enough to attempt to murder him.

How can we have it both ways?

 

Arguably, one could think that 99 percent of people are at this point non-racist, but that 1 percent of that still are racist would include people who would turn violent at the notion of a black president.

 

And another 1 percent of the nation will turn violent if Obama is not elected. "The Man" steals a third election, and the Dem that loses is half-black? I wouldn't want to be in the wrong neighborhood on Election Day.