I disagree. McCain is Perot, or at least he inherited his voters. Perot inherited the Greatest Generation and their clones, and they have now passed on to another crabby old white guy, McCain. The Perot voter was a graying white man who wanted to go home at night and watch TV and cash his check, it was his due he thought for his “service”, to whatever. I talked to a good many Perot voter and they literally could only regurgitate about a sentence and a half of political rhetoric before they repeated themselves. “Things are bad, gotta change it” being about it.
McCain has the Perot tribe support, listen to talk radio everyone calling in for him sounds like a retired Sarge. He has them and the GOP dead enders and that is about it my guess he is a 45% popular vote total max. The Reagan coalition is gone, respectable conservatism is dying quickly (and if the libs were smart they would move heaven and hell to save it), and we the weak are the inheritors of this Earth.
I get no chance to say this to a person inside our movement, but this is an excellent analysis. It is the sort of thing a senior staffer would send up to his congressman. It is a dead accurate assessment of constituencies.
As to its relevance to my analysis (Gosh it’s nice to write as if to another pro) it concentrates too specifically on the Perot voter rather than my general point. But it taught me a lot in my own field.
When I speak of “Perot” here, I am speaking of SOME voter bloc, not the 1992 voter bloc. I am saying that, after all the latest thing stuff is over, we are going to have two candidates who leave a huge portion of the electorate simply out of things, who address nothing that if really bothering people. The “Perot” mushroom I am talking about may be any group of voters.
We are facing a fault line in the electoral process which backbaygrouch expands on..
Damn good job, though, Simmons.
#1 by Simmons on 02/07/2008 - 2:19 pm
I knew that but I took liberties with it. McCain has the white grumpy check cashers (I was in the military I know them well), the “Dead Enders” and maybe a few who will buy his weak tea ideology. That he and the Dem. Dead Enders will leave that vote bloc as you said and I have to reiterate that it is the important part not where a few tube zombies land on the voting spectrum.
What I want is for the Dems to go into identity politic mode being chased by the GOP Hispandering fools. Then we can start to ask, “What role do whites play in identity politics?” A wedge has got to be started somewhere, sometime. McCain’s campaign will therefore be useful to us if he begins the chase for the “Hispanic” vote. I could be wrong.
#2 by mderpelding on 02/08/2008 - 7:00 pm
Just a thought.
When you think racially, just what is the so called ” Hispanic” vote.
Every human in the world that speaks some form of the language “spanish’ is called “Hispanic”.
The term “Hispanic” is a linguistic term. Or better yet, a language term.
A “Hispanic” in NYC is most likely from Puerto Rico or Hispaniola.
Lot’s of negro blood.
In Florida,
Cubanos and mostly white South Americans.
In the Southwest and other places,
Native Indian peasants.
Cubanos and white South Americans along with Mexican peasants are racially aware people. They can’t stand black people. They will serve white people. Or if they are a political majority, themselves.
#3 by danerebor on 02/09/2008 - 1:53 pm
That’s a good point. And it never ceases to amaze me how the PC media goes apesh*t over the Hispanic Vote. Or the Black Vote. Racial identity politics is talked about in the mainstream media DAILY. And yet the “white vote” is ignored even more than Ron Paul is. Nice clothes, Mr. Emperor!
White historians will look back at these days and ask themselves how white people could stand such blatant discrimination for so long. I think they *will* understand why things inevitably exploded though. Too many things are coming together now to avoid that.
#4 by mderpelding on 02/10/2008 - 4:29 am
With the exception of the “war on Iraq”,
he looks
like a liberal.
Liberals
aren’t going to
run on the Iraq
war.
They
will run on
the economy. That is
why the MSM
is pushing recession
and
economic disaster instead of US KIA’s. The
only group that cares about the Iraq
mess is the Ron
Paul
libertarians. The McCain
argument is as follows…
While I may be a treasonous
liberal, at least
I’m
a Republican.
#5 by Shane on 02/10/2008 - 9:20 am
Bob, How can John McCain run for president when the State Department says he is a naturalized citizen? I can’t find a answer anywhere, so I was hoping that you could impart some knowledge on the subject.
#6 by Bob on 02/10/2008 - 10:58 am
Interesting, but those areas are probably inside the United States in termsof jus soli, meaning being born INSIDE the United States. That’s why Indians used to send their pregnant women climbing over the US Embassy fence so the kid could be born on US soil.
McCain is not naturalized, he is jus sanguinus, which means a citizen because his parents were US citizins.
I have now run out of Latin.
#7 by Trager Smith on 02/13/2008 - 3:25 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_citizen will give you as good an answer are you are likely to get about McCain’s being eligible to be president. I remember the issue coming up when Goldwater ran, since Arizona didn’t become a state till 1912. I did not know that George Romney was born in Mexico. The piece cites a bunch of court cases.
I consider it ridiculously unlikely that, should McCain gain a majority of votes in the electoral college, that five or more of the nine good men and true will deny McCain the presidency. Expect some outraged leftist to suddenly discover the Constitution and bring the matter up.
Bob, you’ve been around. Will MSM ignore such a move?