Comments on: Obama and Clinton: The Day After North Carolina and Indiana http://www.politicallore.com/politics/election-2008/obama-and-clinton-the-day-after-north-carolina-and-indiana/273 Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:28:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: SMS http://www.politicallore.com/politics/election-2008/obama-and-clinton-the-day-after-north-carolina-and-indiana/273/comment-page-1#comment-8352 SMS Thu, 08 May 2008 20:43:02 +0000 http://www.politicallore.com/?p=273#comment-8352 So let's see what Clinton is claiming again -- that "Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me." Obama's support among whites is actually increasing compared to Ohio, Mississippi and Pennsylvania. She lied about that. Obama's support among "hard working Americans", which is code for poorer Americans, has also increased over those in previous contests, save for Mississippi, where the under-$50K vote was overwhelmingly black. Obama's numbers among college grads is static to increasing. We don't have exit poll breakdowns for education by race, and we can assume North Carolina's huge numbers with "no college" are due to the large African American percentages in the state. But what about Indiana, a state that is whiter (83.9%) than Pennsylvania (82.1%), Ohio (82.9%) and Texas (48.3%)? Despite the demographic disadvantage, Obama actually increased his support among voters with no college degrees. So how can Clinton be so wrong? Because she's citing an AP-Yahoo News poll from back on May 3rd. Rather than cite actual voter data, she is basing her claims on an old poll taken before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries. Yup. That's what Hillary Clinton has been reduced to. Ignoring actual votes and cherry picking polls. Which really, shouldn't surprise anyone. She's already ignored and belittled every state and voter demographic that doesn't support her. So it only follows that since in her world, the only things that are important are things that support her, she'd ignore election results in favor of the one (outdated) poll that confirms her manufactured reality. So let’s see what Clinton is claiming again — that “Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

Obama’s support among whites is actually increasing compared to Ohio, Mississippi and Pennsylvania. She lied about that.

Obama’s support among “hard working Americans”, which is code for poorer Americans, has also increased over those in previous contests, save for Mississippi, where the under-$50K vote was overwhelmingly black.

Obama’s numbers among college grads is static to increasing. We don’t have exit poll breakdowns for education by race, and we can assume North Carolina’s huge numbers with “no college” are due to the large African American percentages in the state. But what about Indiana, a state that is whiter (83.9%) than Pennsylvania (82.1%), Ohio (82.9%) and Texas (48.3%)? Despite the demographic disadvantage, Obama actually increased his support among voters with no college degrees.
So how can Clinton be so wrong? Because she’s citing an AP-Yahoo News poll from back on May 3rd. Rather than cite actual voter data, she is basing her claims on an old poll taken before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries.

Yup. That’s what Hillary Clinton has been reduced to. Ignoring actual votes and cherry picking polls.

Which really, shouldn’t surprise anyone. She’s already ignored and belittled every state and voter demographic that doesn’t support her. So it only follows that since in her world, the only things that are important are things that support her, she’d ignore election results in favor of the one (outdated) poll that confirms her manufactured reality.

]]>