Sunday, February 10, 2008
The answer:Kevin Drum wonders why Obama does so well in state caucuses. But it's been established already that Clinton voters are "low information" by inclination, or for socio-economic reasons. So you'd expect them to have a smaller presence at a caucus.
posted by Quiddity at 2/10/2008 06:11:00 AM
3 comments
It's funny that you would call Clinton voters "low information" when Obama may well be the most "low information" candidate in history. The one thing in common with every Obama supporter I have ever spoken to is that none of them, and I mean none of them can explain any of Obama's policy positions on any issue.
I attended the Washington state Democratic caucus yesterday (and even got roped into being a delegate at the county convention in April!) I voted for Obama.
When I asked Hillary partisans at my precinct table why they supported her, they all chanted "experience" like some sort of mantra. When I asked what experience they were referring to, one of them exclaimed, "She's been in the Senate four years longer than Obama!"
Seriously.
And two tables over was a loud, obnoxious flamer dressed head to toe in Hillary paraphernalia whom I overheard tell the Obama people at his table: "Did you know in Illinois, if a baby is born premature, they kill it? That's Obama!"
Seriously.
"Low information" Clinton voters? How about "No information" Clinton voters?
Here's some Clinton facts:
She is an unorincipled, poll and focus group driven twister of truth. She supported the war in Iraq and will continue to do so as president. She voted to give the cowboy carte blanche with Iran. If you don't want her to be president her supporters scream "sexist".
Rather than guarantee health care for everyone, she wants to force us all to write big fat checks to the insurance companies. I could go on.
|
