Anything for a story
CNN is so lame. Everyone knew that Clinton was going to slaughter Obama in West Virginia because of the “tailor-made demographic” for Clinton there (i.e., older, poorer, whiter, more female, and more undereducated — not exactly a demographic I’d be proud of). And yet, in absence of suspense, they need to create a story around how this overwhelming loss creates doubts about Obama’s “electability.” Irrelevant, or is CNN implying that the majority of Americans are older, poorer, whiter, more female, and more undereducated? Maybe so, but in head-to-head polls with McMaverick, both Dems lose West Virginia. To me that means in W.V. a white women is just a little less unappealing as president than a black man Supporting this theory is the fact that John Edwards (white man from the South) is taking in 4-5% of the vote and he’s not even in the race (so to speak) anymore!
West Virginia will not matter in the G.E. And all this emphasis on the race factor is so misleading. It’s not a black-or-white issue. In fact, I don’t think that race per se has been the determining factor — after all, how does one explain Obama’s overwhelming wins in states like Idaho (79% to 17%), haven for white supremacists? Oh yeah, it’s a caucus state and they don’t matter because caucuses bring out the loony activists who actually care about politics and thus inform themselves and work actively in electing their candidate. But according to the Clinton campaign, they don’t matter. God forbid that we have American voters who actually educate themselves on the issues and show passion and commitment to the process. Sorry, I’m ranting again (surprise!), but what this whole long Democratic primary process has brought out is how utterly undemocratic the primary process is. That’s the real story, CNN — do a piece on that.