"White men narrowly backed Clinton Clinton in her 2008 race for president, but they are resisting her candidacy this time around, in major battleground states, rattling some Democrats about her general election strategy.
While Mrs. Clinton swept the five major primaries on Tuesday, she lost white men in all of them, and by double-digit margins in Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio, exit polls showed--a sharp turnabout from 2008, when she won double-digit victories among white male voters in all three states."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/us/politics/as-hillary-clinton-sweeps-states-one-group-resists-white-men.html?_r=0
15 comments:
It's pretty simple: It's always sexism or racism with us white guys. In 2008 we voted for the white candidate over the the half-white. Now with them both white, we be hating the womens, so we vote for the white guy.
Also, maybe you don't remember, but way back in 2008, Hillary was younger and incredibly hot - like super model hot.
It's wimmenz you big, over-sexed lug.
"O Oysters,' said the Carpenter,
You've had a pleasant run!"
Clinton ticket to rich-ville is to stay in power as long as possible. How on earth will Bill and Hillary influence pedal if they don't hold any influence or power? Won't you please pity her?
I am tired of hearing all these break-downs between gender and skin color. Whatever. She's still a criminal, and if you support her, I don't care what is between your legs or what tinge your skin-tone is, you support a criminal.
It comes down to who has the bigger hands.
Welfare queens who stay home and watch Ellen vote Hillary. Not PC? Tough.
She's having trouble with any demographic you want to name - blacks, Hispanics, kids, and even women.
She's the anti-Smalley.
Bagoh20 said... "Also, maybe you don't remember, but way back in 2008, Hillary was younger and incredibly hot - like super model hot."
Bags, wow, I'm concerned for you. Go down to Venice Pier during lunch and recalibrate your standards.
She's repulsive. She's repulsive mentally and physically. Is that sexist? Perhaps. But if Trump were to get creative and go outside the very limited world of professional politicians to pick his Veep and picked Michelle Malkin it would be a brilliant stroke that would strengthen his appeal to women AND men. Why? Malkin's attractive mentally and physically and she's also a lot more conservative than Ted.
Hmmm. the Left suddenly has doubts about Queen Cacklepants.
And now she seems to have lost people a lot more important than the FBI. Looks like the NSA says she's got some 'splainin' to do.
So if Hillary self-destructs into legal problems that make her virtually a non-candidate and hands the election to Trump, who is gonna get the blame for giving us a Trump Presidency - the Dems or the Repubs?
We better hope she self-destructs becuase no poll shows Trump beating her and if she wins we have seriously screwed the pooch.
Example:
chelsea_clinton_reveals_her_mom_thinks_it_is_important_to_extend_obamacare_to_illegal_aliens
Drudge insisted that Sanders will win D-nomination. Before that, it was certain to be Martin O Malley.
Then Drudge said - look! Trump will beat hillary in New York! But none of that is true. None of that is reality.
Reality: Trump losing to Hillary in NY by 17 points.
She reminds us of a wife or girlfriend who lied to us through her fucking teeth.
I think we're getting this weird identity politics vibe where one group (in this case, whites) are better positioned to understand the ways in which a candidate from that group is full of shit.
We get her. We know her.
We've dumped someone like her before.
These poor shvartzes and Spaniards don't have a fucking clue.
Post a Comment