1. Yeah, people want “things” like basic health care, control over their own bodies, the right to marry whoever we choose, freedom to select our religion (or none), fewer wars, decent education for children, and a safety net for our weakest neighbors. Those “things” are kind of nice.

  2. I find it funny that he suggests Obama would have lost to an “establishment candidate like Mitt Romney” 20 years ago. Does he remember the 1992 election? The incumbent “establishment” President lost, largely thanks to a politically inexperienced outsider who rambled in and shook up the establishment. Also, echoing Miss Cellania’s comments above, I think the American public does demand something from their government, and that thing is equality of opportunity. Gay marriage, affordable healthcare, decent education, and a society that serves all citizens equally, not one that favors a graying, mostly Anglo, aristocracy.

  3. Holy shit, I can’t believe he’d say something like that on TV. Not about people wanting “things” (I believe that’s more true than many like to think), but implying that the ones who are the “thing wanting” voters are all minorities. Maybe he doesn’t realize it because it’s broken up over several sentences, but that totally destroys any credibility his statement might have originally had.

    1. At its heart, I think it’s really old white guys bitching that — because of social changes brought about by the Civil Rights and womens liberation movements — their automatic claim to “I’m better than you” is no longer valid. They resent having to compete against groups they formerly held as beneath them.

      Welcome to the real world, honey. We all gotta compete.

  4. I think he meant to say that the whites are a minority in America again. It took a few hundred years to come around, but y’know, a land full of immigrants can’t complain too loudly.

  5. This is a common narrative I’ve seen among Republicans. Here’s the problem with the story: it’s pure speculation and it’s contradicted by the facts. If you look at the states that receive more federal aid than pay in taxes – it’s states that traditionally vote republicans. If you look at the county level, you find the same thing – the counties that take more government aid (in welfare, social security, unemployment, etc) also tend to take more money from the government than they pay back in taxes. They just don’t realize it. The great thing about this narrative is that Republicans get to pretend that they’re the righteous, hardworking people that keep America going, while democrats are the hand-handout, vote-buying, selfish, non-productive side of America. It gives them a self-congratulatory fantasy that they’re the good guys fighting the good fight against the bad guys.

    Here’s an article to backup my claims:
    “Trace a map highlighting government dependency and those most reliant on benefits live in Republican states and often Republican counties. In Floyd county in Eastern Kentucky, 40% of the income comes from the government. In 2008 Floyd, where almost 20% live below the poverty line and the median income is almost 20% lower than the country, voted for McCain – a 27 point swing against the Democrats and the first victory for Republicans in living memory… Of the 10 states with the lowest median household income 9 backed John McCain.”

    (Note to clarify: Poor white people tend to vote Republican. Poor minority voters tend to vote Democrat. Poor white people, depending on government benefits, are an asset for Republicans. This isn’t as simple as “poor people vote for democrats to get stuff”.)

Comments are closed.