THE PRESIDENT…IS A…N(*RINGING BELL*)

(Warning: post contains language that may be cause for offense. More so than usual.)

It has been a two year exercise in frustration attempting to figure out what is going on inside Barack Obama's head, and few of his decisions have been more puzzling than the one to release his "long form" birth certificate more than three years after Wingnuttia started drumming up conspiracy theories about his birthplace and citizenship status. Despite the clear legal validity of his short form birth certificate (which is all most of us have, and which in Hawaii loudly states, "This document serves as prima facie evidence of birth in any court proceeding"), a large segment of the American population remained skeptical that such a black potential secret Muslim could really have been born in the U.S. of A.

The release of the "long form" accomplishes very little for Obama with the possible exception of making Donald Trump look like a jackass (although he and his supporters are declaring "victory" for making Obama release the document, irrespective of the fact that said document proves conclusively that he and all of his supporters are all fucking morons). It accomplishes so little because Birtherism is not and never has been about Obama's birth certificate, and it certainly hasn't been about facts. "Not a natural-born citizen" is little more than gussied up Newspeak for "nigger", and there is no practical distinction between "Where's the birth certificate?" and "Go back to Africa, you black SOB."

Though he has been dead for many years, Lee Atwater offers us one of the best explanations of Birtherism in a nutshell in describing the use of coded racial language in the 1980s:

You start out in 1954 by saying, 'Nigger, nigger, nigger.' By 1968 you can’t say (that)—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

The Teabaggers and Birthers have been fighting this accusation vociferously since the moment the conspiracy theory emerged, yet the release of the long-demanded Long Form certificate provides some of the most damning evidence against their feeble claims. IF this is really about a birth certificate, then the birth certificate should bring the "controversy" to an end. Instead, we see that Birtherism has no intention of being derailed by something as trivial as the document that its supporters have been demanding for three goddamn years. It will have no effect because the underlying cause of the phenomenon remains: to paraphrase the legendary scene from Blazing Saddles, the President is a n(*DING*). But of course Birthers don't think they're racists. A dog doesn't know what a "dog whistle" is; to them, it's just a whistle (much as to people in Cleveland, it is simply called a Steamer).

Why would Obama expect this new information to have any impact on his opponents? The more mainstream, non-lunatic conservatives have already rejected the issue (Birtherism appears to embarrass them, in fact) and the lunatics will simply trot out predictable excuses – "It's fake!" or any number of similar Moving Goalposts arguments. Rather than being satisfied, they will simply demand additional "evidence" which, if received, they will similarly discount in their haste to demand even more.

World Nut Daily, which has been unofficial Birther HQ for the last two years, has taken a different approach. After receiving the birth certificate they've been demanding for all this time, they have now decided that the birth certificate is irrelevant because even if Obama was born in Hawaii, his father was not a U.S. citizen and thus he cannot be "natural born" (according to the definition of "natural born" devised by WND legal scholars like Jerome Corsi and a collection of regular commenters in Freeper forums). Check out their new "headlines", noting that the "author" repeatedly referenced is Corsi, whose books are published exclusively on WND Press.

-Obama document still doesn't answer all questions
-Authors: Even Hawaii birth won't make Obama eligible
-President still has major legal issues following release of 'birth certificate'
-Author suggests disputed presidency won't survive publication of book
-Verdict: Birthers are (mainly) right: 'Sufficient evidence to reasonably conclude' Obama probably not eligibile
-Obama's day of reckoning could end his presidency

Translation, with deference Mr. Atwater: "Despite release of certificate, Obama fails to answer allegations of negritude."

WND honcho Joseph Farah humiliates himself further in the Washington Post, telling Steve Levingston that Corsi's book Where's the Birth Certificate?, which comes out in three weeks, has been vindicated. But he's not humiliated, nor is the cause he champions really set back by the new document. Once again, none of this has anything to do with a birth certificate. It has everything to do with a black president who has a furreign-soundin' name and a father from Kenya. This is about the politics of tribalism and blood, about how he is one of Them and not one of Us.

I fail to see what Obama has to gain from addressing these claims at face value. They can say "not natural born" or "secret Muslim" all they want – they know, just as we know, exactly what they really mean. And since the real, underlying issue can never be addressed in any way that will placate Birthers, what does it accomplish to respond to the coded language they use to make their racism sound acceptable in polite society?

Be Sociable, Share!

143 Responses to “THE PRESIDENT…IS A…N(*RINGING BELL*)”

  1. John Says:

    Some folks say that even the lefties hate Obama because he's "such a radical". This is patently false. We hate him because he's a thundering idiot.

    As Ed has already covered quite well, releasing the long form had absolutely zero effect on the racist crowd (i.e. the "birthers"). It achieved nothing except validating them by saying "If you yell loud enough, someone will eventually cave". But then, caving has pretty much defined his presidency.

    If Obama wanted to release the certificate just to get people to shut up, he would have been MUCH better served to do it during the heat of the 2012 cycle. Let them gin up Trump, let him get all over the place with his "WHAR'S DA SERTIFIKATE" bullshit, and then nail him to the fucking wall, just in time for folks to go to the polls with his idiocy fresh in their minds.

    But no, like he does with everything else, Obama just bent over like a good little bitch and let the GOP ram it all the way up his ass, no lube. So now you've caved into their demands once again, and they're still yanking the football away — what now?

    As I related in another post regarding that Herman Cain anecdote: They all go to CPAC, and they shout "Barak HUSSEIN Obama", and they say "what, we're just using his middle name!". But nobody ever says "William JEFFERSON Clinton" or "George WALKER Bush". Racism is alive and well in the USA, it's just that the Klansmen have by now learned not to wear their hoods to the rallies. It fucking disgusts me that in the year 2011, we let shit like that slide.

  2. Noskilz Says:

    As you say, there isn't really much to be gained by releasing the long form birth certificate, but Obama has now basically done everything he possibly can to have put the matter to rest. It won't change the true believers minds, of course. If it makes some reporters a little less enthusiastic about pushing the "controversy" it may not be totally wasted effort, but we'll just have to see.

    I don't think it's possible for the Birthers to be embarrassed by their willful ignorance, but some of their enablers might not be as comfortable being with playing idiot with nothing left to lean on. Or maybe not – time will tell.

  3. wetcasements Says:

    "I fail to see what Obama has to gain from addressing these claims at face value."

    In political terms, it draws a line between the crazies (30% of America) and the remaining moderates who just can't bring themselves to go full wing-nut.

    Not a huge victory by any means, but a pretty clever maneuver IMO.

  4. Coises Says:

    As noted, when you give folks like the birthers the proof they request, they just double down on the crazy. That might be exactly what Obama has to gain.

    President Obama has been such a disappointment to his natural supporters that he would stand a good chance of losing to a viable Republican candidate; but does the GOP stand much chance of getting such a candidate through their primaries? The Democrats

  5. Coises Says:

    (Sorry for the double post… without a preview option, I couldn't tell the system would truncate everything following a curly apostrophe…)

    As noted, when you give folks like the birthers the proof they request, they just double down on the crazy. That might be exactly what Obama has to gain.

    President Obama has been such a disappointment to his natural supporters that he would stand a good chance of losing to a viable Republican candidate; but does the GOP stand much chance of getting such a candidate through their primaries? The Democrats' best hope is that the batshit crazy wing of the Republican party disrupts the merely cruel, unscrupulous and inhuman wing enough to result in the nomination of an unelectable whack-job. Goodness knows, there are enough of them available. Perhaps this is the right moment to fan the fires of lunacy.

  6. dimebag darrell Says:

    Haha the Atwater quote reminded me of two from Nixon's day:

    H. R. Haldeman wrote in his diary "[President Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks. The key is to devise a system that recognizes that while not appearing to."

    and then Nixon himself, to Eisenhower, on the trail of his 68 campaign

    "I have found great audience response to this [law-and-order] theme in all parts of the country, including areas like New Hampshire where there is virtually no race problem and relatively no crime."

    same shit, different bent…but this…URBAN OUTSIDER is undermining our natural entitlement by bringin his niggerdom to the white house! awh piss!

  7. punkdavid Says:

    I've got to say, this was my first reaction as well, but in the end, I disagree.

    The Birthers had ONE argument that was not completely batshit insane, and it was, "Why doesn't he just release the long-form birth certificate?" As retarded as that may sound to us, there are stupid, but well-meaning people who wondered why Obama didn't just do that to put this issue to rest once and for all. The polls that show huge percentages of Republicans believe that Obama was born out of the US, I don't think those are what pollsters would call "hard support". Despite the pessimism of some, I think we WILL see a noticeable drop in that figure in the coming week.

    But more than moving a few minds (and it will not be a ton, and they will not suddenly become Obama supporters), what this does do is show in almost blindingly obvious terms, that those who continue to hang on to this after the release of the long-form are INSANE RACISTS. There is no longer ANY semblance of reason to their arguments. They have NOTHING left, and they are naked for all to see.

    Kos made a good argument this morning: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/27/970597/-Releasing-birth-certificate-is-agoodmove

    I don't always agree with Markos, but I do believe his greatest strength is his read of the political winds, and what will play well among the general population. I think this was a good move, and I think it will be shown in time to have been well-played by Obama.

  8. Forgetful Man Says:

    I'm a regular reader and this is one of your best posts. Thank you.

  9. ChicagoJo Says:

    Perhaps reacting to Trump's call to action by finally producing his long-form certificate, he's intentionally giving Trump the idiotic glory.

    The more Trump talks, the more pressure he has to continue pretending like he's going to run for president. The more pretending he does, the more republicans put their stock in him. When he finally bows out (there's no way he'll ever agree to releasing his tax forms), the repubs will have to scramble for a representative. By then Trump will have spouted off so much trash talk that all candidates are tainted. Ta-da!

    Or, ya know, John's first comment about caving and taking it sans lube…

  10. Xynzee Says:

    Wonder if we can get a law passed that you say birther (or any derivative thereof) you'll be required to wear a pillow case on your head otherwise you won't ne allowed to vote or get cable t.v.?

  11. Prasad Says:

    Mr. Obama did very well i hope now Donald Trump will calm up i think this matter will ends with this action (Release of Obama's birth certificate).

  12. Tim H. Says:

    So, how far to the right can Obama push the GOP? How batshit can they get before red-staters notice the taste of guano?

  13. steve Says:

    The only redeeming quality of the "birthers" is that their brand of crazy seems to have eclipsed the "truthers," most of whom leaned left. Both groups are fond of moving goal posts, and are unencumbered by facts, evidence, and the principles of sound reasoning. Obama's decision is unlikely to reign in the racist kind of conspiracy crazy.

  14. Andrew C Says:

    Even a cat gets bored playing with a mouse and finally eats it.

  15. Mr. Prosser Says:

    The release at this time also drops a load on the state legislators who sponsored birther bills in their respective state houses and senates. Will they now back off their bills or keep trying to get them passed? And will governors like Jindal sign them if passed?

  16. Southern Beale Says:

    OMG did y'all see Joseph Farah on Cenk's show last night? Cenk positively eviscerated him, he looked like a babbling fool. And Tweety eviscerated Judson Phillips in the hour before.

    Did y'all know that Mitt Romney's passport says he died in Paris in 1968? Here's a conspiracy theory for you: who is this surgically-altered Manchurian (French) body double claiming to be Mitt Romney? What if he becomes president?! ZOMG! Release the records! WHY ISN'T ANYONE COVERING THIS?

    Oh right, cuz he's white. Imagine if Mitt Romney were black, there would be wesbites and books and WingNut Daily articles all probing the Great Coverup.

  17. sluggo Says:

    It isn't that he is black. It is because he is a Democrat. Sure, there is a lot of racial garbage put out there, but if the president were white, there would be other garbage put out there. It's not like Bill Clinton was adored by the the Republicans.

    The right wing of this country is not racist, they are sociopaths.

  18. The Man, The Myth Says:

    Not to sound boring, but this story never actually appealed to me. What does it show? Some on the right are bizarre beyond my capacity for understanding? I know that (I can never understand how GW Bush still had 20-30% approval by the end…). To me this is simply an antiquated place in the Constitution anyway. Similar to the United States' Immigration laws (its crazy to educate people at our Universities and then tell them they can't get work visas and to get the fuck away from us) – America is a nation of Immigrants, if someone wants to govern the United States who has nationalized why not let them become President?

  19. shouldbegradingpapers Says:

    If you head over to the WaPo link, you will find 5-6 comments, all pointing out the evidence of forgery in the long form.

    Face it. If we could put these birthers in a time machine and take them to Barack's birth, they would still find reasons to discredit what they had seen with their own eyes.

  20. acer Says:

    Dan Rather tanked his career by investing in an anti-Bush conspiracy theory. Bill Maher lost his job by going against the howling post-9/11 political winds. When this blows over and Trump's silly entertainment career continues apace, is it too much to ask of conservatives that they SHUT THE FUCK UP about the "liberal media?"

  21. doug Says:

    I agree with ChicagoJo. Trump took credit for making it happen. There are plenty of people who will see that as a positive for Trump. I think the D's are laughing all the way on this. Oman may have called it 'silliness', but then he spent time on it. Carefully planned to pump up Trump, imo. Lots of other folks called Oman out on the certificate, but he never responded like this until Trump started bleating. He has played Trump's ego perfectly. A Trump/Palin R team would be a dream ticket for the Ds.

  22. Corey Says:

    Why would the president of the USA ever jump into a mud pit and fling poo.. It diminishes the office of the president.. he should be beneath it. I am embarrased to call him president. And this isn't the first time either, he did the same stupid crap when Rush said he hopes he fails.. Why would the president continously diminish himself?

    Imagine if GWB jumped into the mud to duke it out with those crazy truthers… we would have nailed him to the wall for being petty and easily distracted.

    The president is right, the this whole issue is silliness… and immediately after that comment, he jumped on a plane to go tape a day time talk show.

  23. Robbins Mitchell Says:

    The President is a N'ding-a-ling'?…well,I can't argue with that

  24. Robbins Mitchell Says:

    Whoever wrote this article has been carrying his brains around in his skin for waaaay too long….it isn't really about race….the fact is,the white half of Barokeydoke sucks just as bad as the black half does

  25. Da Moose Says:

    Totally agree. He might as well give a press conference about how he is not black but just heavy on the melatonin.

  26. Fifth Dentist Says:

    Christmas before last my mom, who's in her 70s, was dating an old high school flame. So anyway, he is a Foxbot and virulently anti-Obama. But he let it be known that is was because of his "policies."
    So anyway, Christmas eve he's bored so I dig out some American history book to keep him occupied and hopefully silent. Somehow during this time he used the word "ni**er." Being this was in my small, Southern home town it didn't surprise me but I had never heard him use the word.
    So anyway, during Chrismas dinner the next day he uses the "n" word again.
    Sure it's not about race. Just keep telling yourselves that you racist, ignorant, teabagging, inbred douchebuckets.

  27. Steve Thomas Says:

    The first comment is typical of the ignorance of the left. The KKK was the first, and is the longest lasting Democrat Political Action Committee. It was created specifically to intimidate people into not voting for Republicans. Just as the Dems championed slavery, and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to pass civil rights legislation, modern day leftists seek to keep blacks in another sort of slavery, by virtue of dependence and handouts. Their message has always been, "You are an inferior human being, therefore I will steal from your betters to provide you with sustenance, and as long as you vote for me, I will shelter you from responsibility." The result is endemic poverty, high criminality, an entitlement mentality, and a 90% rate of illegitimacy. Of course, the left's next trick is to turn the entire nation into Detroit, their model city. Nice going jerks.

  28. acer Says:

    Must… not… feed… the…

  29. Kulkuri Says:

    The 'Southern Strategy' in '68 by Atwater and Nixon was to get the Klan and their ilk to switch parties, which they did.

    Everybody talks about Obama's father being black and Kenyan like that's a reason why he shouldn't be President. But has anyone thought about maybe what pisses off most of the birthers is that his mother was white???

  30. Erin Says:

    Steve Thomas, I'm glad you're here to let us read authentic frontier gibberish.

  31. Chris Gerrib Says:

    I think Obama released the cert for several reasons:

    1) Some percentage of the "birther" crowd is low-information people who just heard from a friend or whatever that there's a controversy. Releasing it this publicly ensures that even under-rock-dwellers get the word.

    2) Obama got to look like an adult, scolding the childish media.

    3) The birthers, including Trump, look like chumps. Remember how Ross Perot got mocked for his "giant sucking sound?"

    4) Obama really does want to talk about important stuff, not BS.

  32. Friar Says:

    The author is quite the racist ignoranus! Tax cuts are racist? You need to research the meaning and intent of the framers of the Constitution regarding "natural born citizen." According to your definition, the child of an illegal alien born in the US could be president. Do some research. But then again, I see you're a card carrying member of the dumbmasses.

  33. The Moar You Know Says:

    No document in the world can make the President white.

    Therefore, the circus shall go on.

  34. The Moar You Know Says:

    Huh, never seen the moran squad show up here like this before. You must have written something that really hit 'em where it hurts.

  35. Southern Beale Says:

    The KKK was the first, and is the longest lasting Democrat Political Action Committee.

    Not that it matters to Steve Thomas but I can't let this kind of asshattery stand unanswered. The KKK may have started as a haven for Southern Democrats back in the day but when the Democrats saw the light and embraced Civil Rights all of the racist crackers abandoned the DemocratIC Party and became Republicans. I live down here and I know. That's why the modern Republican Party is for the most part a Southern white regional political movement.

    But of course, facts have a well-known liberal bias.

  36. Andrew Says:

    I agree with Kulkuri. Nothing drives racists up the wall than the idea of black men having sex with white women. Much, though not all, racism is based on fear of the sexual prowess of black men and how once "our" women get a taste of their big penises and stamina, they'll never want to have sex with white men again. Why do you think just smiling at a white woman was a lynching "offense" in the Jim Crow days?

  37. DMB Says:

    I'll respond to this article that same way I do whenever I hear someone claiming that Obama is a victim of racism:

    White voters: 44% Obama, 54% McCainn

    Black voters: 96% Obama, 3% McCainn

    So is Obama the victim of racism, or the beneficiary? Are you honestly going to try to tell me that 96% percent of black voters were aware of and agreed with Obama's policies and that's why they voted for him?

    Also, how many black voters were first time voters strictly because they had a chance to "vote for a black man"? The truth is, Obama's race is what got him elected, not what is holding him back.

  38. Monkey Business Says:

    Ed, I agree with you on a lot, but I disagree with you on this.

    I think what Obama has done is a masterful bit of political strategy.

    The Birther movement was never about President Obama's ability to constitutionally lead this country due to his being born in another country, or the scion of a non-citizen parent. It was always about the fact that there is a large percentage of people that feel uncomfortable or angry about the idea of a black man in charge of the country.

    Unfortunately, along with being racist, there are a lot of very stupid Americans. This is the bread and butter of the Republican party. They rely on people who are mis-, un-, or ill-informed and don't have the time, energy, or capacity to engage in the political process. Their entire platform are soundbite issues, the kind of stuff you can sum up in a sentence. Liberal positions aren't so easy to sell. They need nuance, a working knowledge of government and the issue, to be effective.

    So, what does all this have to do with Birtherism, and the Presidents decision to release his Birth Certificate? He's dividing the stupid from the racist, and forcing every GOP Senator and Representative and Presidential candidate to go on the record as being either for or against Birtherism.

    Anyone that goes on the record supporting it or legislation affirming it will be branded an extremist and nuts. Anyone against it will be branded a traitor or RINO.

    Obama will divide the GOP between stupid and crazy. With any luck, he'll marginalize the crazy.

  39. DMB Says:

    "Unfortunately, along with being racist, there are a lot of very stupid Americans. This is the bread and butter of the Republican party."

    Really? Because time and time again people have proven that more Republicans than Democrats are college educated and the vast majority of business leaders are Republican. Liberals love to harp on the stereotype of redneck, trailer-park Republicans, but the ugly truth is that instances of illiteracy and other indicators of a lack of education are much higher among Democrats.

  40. Prudence Says:

    @DMB

    Link, pls.

  41. DMB Says:

    @Prudence

    Does this site allow links? Most don't, so I assumed any links would be blocked.

  42. HoosierPoli Says:

    DMB, shrieking about "reverse racism" (whatever that even means) only serves to demonstrate your total ignorance of American history.

  43. Geds Says:

    DMB: Yeah, that argument would be great except for one thing.

    88-11

    That first number is the percentage of black votes for John Kerry. The second is the percentage of black votes for GWB.

    90-9

    Al Gore and GWB

    84-12

    Clinton and Dole

    83-10

    Clinton and Bush the Elder (Perot got 7%)

    89-11

    Dukakis and Bush the Elder

    91-9

    Mondale and Reagan

    83-14

    Carter and Reagan

    83-17

    Carter and Gerald Ford

    That number never got as high as 96-3, but it was never lower than 83%. If your argument is that black people voted for Obama specifically because he was black, then you're going to have to account for the bit where better than 80% of black votes have gone to the Democratic candidate for the last 35 years in order to support your reverse-racism theory.

    And then I'd suggest doing a bit of tap dancing, as you'll probably have to explain why black people don't like voting for the party that originally freed them from slavery. I'll give you a hint: "Southern Strategy."

  44. Prudence Says:

    I think "the author is quite the racist ignoranus" has to be my favourite bit of this particular Boortzathon.

  45. DMB Says:

    I guess there are really two ways to look at it— Democrats have a slightly higher level of post-graduate degrees, but also a much higher rate of highschool drop outs. Republicans, on the other hand, have fewer post-graduate educated people but significantly higher numbers of people with lower level college education. All in all, more Republicans have received high-school degrees and gone on to college than have Democrats.

    Either way, the whole "Republicans are all dumb, in-bred racist rednecks" argument has no merit whatsoever since far more Democrats are highschool dropouts.

    Personally, I'd almost rather have highschool dropouts voting than many of the PhDs that I know. At least many highschool dropouts seem to have somewhat of an understanding of the real world.

  46. Steve Thomas Says:

    Projection has always been the most notable personality trait of those on the left (that and their ignorance of civics and economics).

  47. Prudence Says:

    @DMB: Shuffle, step. Shuffle, step.

    Ladies and gentlemen, let's give a warm hand to… Gregory Hines!

  48. DMB Says:

    @Geds

    What about the second part of my post regarding first time voters? How many more black people voted in 2008 than in those other elections? Of course the majority of black voters have been Democrat for decades, but I think you'll find that FAR more black voters showed up in 2008. COmbine that with the nearly unanimous support for Obama, and you're going to have a really hard time convincing me that Obama didn't benefit much, much more than other Democrats due to his race.

  49. DMB Says:

    @ Prudence

    How am I shuffling? My first claim was that Democrats are not more educated than Republicans. I still stand by that claim due to the fact that more Republicans have graduated highschool and gone to college and more Democrats have dropped out of highschool.

    Have you offered any evidence to the contrary?

  50. DMB Says:

    @HoosierPoli

    Please explain how I have shown my ignorance of American history.

    Also, out of curiosity, are you from Indiana? The same Indiana that is 89% white, 9% black and 2% other?

  51. Prudence Says:

    @DMB: I'd just like some evidence backing up your education claims. Links, pls.

  52. DMB Says:

    Let me give you all a little story about my experience with the 2008 election. I lived in a predominately black neighborhood Actually it was predominantly Hispanic but for some odd reason very few of them showed up to vote— it was almost as if they weren't allowed to vote or something. Strange, huh?

    But anyway, I was one of about 20 white people standing in a line of several hundred voters. For over two hours, I stood and listened to countless black people go on and on about how they were tired of standing in line, that's why they never came to vote before, they were never going to vote again, it was about time they could vote for a black man, etc. As I neared the entrance to the voting room, I watched as dozens of people were turned away because either they were at the wrong precinct or had never registered to vote, period. Many others didn't have ID, which is required in Georgia.

    These were not 18 and 19 year-olds. These were people in their 20s, 30s and 40s who had never voted in their lives and had absolutely no concept as to how the process worked. They showed up solely because a black man was on the ballot.

  53. DMB Says:

    I'm trying to find a good study that is based on Democrat versus Republican instead of Obama/McCain so that race won't be considered an issue, only party affiliation.. I'll post links as I find them.

  54. punkdavid Says:

    Nobody said Republicans weren't less educated. They said that there are a lot of stupid people in America, and that the GOP strategy of appealing to the sound-byte, slogan-based politics of fear, ignorance, and racism appeals to those stupid people.

    I know a LOT of college-educated stupid people.

  55. DMB Says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_%28United_States%29#Voter_base

    If you scroll down to the Education section, there are a couple of graphs which are helpful. Similar information can be found on the Democratic Party Wiki page. And before you say it, I realize Wiki isn't always 100% accurate, but there are plenty of sources sighted on each page to support the information.

    This data is through 2004, which would take the Obama election out of the equation. That way things like race and age of voters, which changed drastically in the 2008 election, do not come into play, only a broad view of Democrats and Republicans.

  56. Hazy Davy Says:

    What did President Obama gain?
    He just selected his opponent—the GOP candidate in 2012. Now, Donald Trump has to do more backflips to withdraw. And Donald Trump is beatable.

  57. DMB Says:

    @punkdavid

    Republicans rely on slogan-based politics?

    Change!

    Winning the Future!

    Yes, We Can!

    Yes, We Did!

    Any of those sound familiar?

  58. Prudence Says:

    Wiki? You do have a sense of humour.

    "I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it." — John Stuart Mill, March 1866.

  59. punkdavid Says:

    @DMB All politicians use slogans. The modern GOP uses them EXCLUSIVELY.

    When was the last time there was a nuanced, intelligent proposal to fix anything in America that came from the GOP? Ryan's plan? Experts have torn that to shreds and wiped their asses with it. I honestly can't think of the last one before that.

    Unfortunately, policies of making the rich richer don't sell too well without a heavy coating of lies and distractions.

  60. DMB Says:

    @ Prudence

    Did you actually bother reading my post, or just the link? I very clearly qualified that, while Wiki is not really a valid source of proof, it does offer many useful links. Would you like for me to individually copy and paste each of the sources so that you don't have to read an whole paragraph?

    And as far as your nifty little quote goes, what would you consider to be the party with more "stupid" people? The one with more highschool dropouts or fewer highschool dropouts?

    The truth is that since FDR, the Democratic Party has been the party of the majority of low-income, less-educated people because, beginning with the New Deal, that demographic has been attached to the Democratic Partiy's teat seeking their handouts.

  61. DMB Says:

    @ Geds

    Have you managed to put together any stats on the surge in the number of black voters in the 2008 election? I'm interested in seeing your results.

  62. ladiesbane Says:

    First: my hat's off to the people patiently providing information to those who are not on the same page. Walking through each step is the only way to be understood, and people (right and left) who won't do it are like math teachers who don't tell you how to do the work, but sneer at you for getting the wrong answer. Those who can't explain the fine print don't understand it themselves. But not all of us are sufficiently patient. So: thank you.

    Second: don't you think Obama hoped it would go away? And yet by acquiring the long form so late in the game, he gave the Birthers enough rope to hang themselves — though he has not capitalized on it in any meaningful way. Does he have a PR strategy guy at all? Perhaps it will cause even more fragmenting on the Right, since there will be idiots crying "Photoshop!" any minute now, but without a Carville, he'll have to luck into it.

    Third, and most importantly, race: the key line is "Dogs don't know what a dog whistle is. To them it's just a whistle." Most of the racists in this country are not sheet-wearing good ol' boys with shit on their shoes. They are people who are certain that they are not racist, because they would never do something so vulgar as use the word "nigger." There are variations on this theme which correspond to income, education, region, and other factors, but it usually amounts to ignorance in all cases. They don't have black friends. They only see black people in mugshots, music videos, and the playoffs. It would never occur to them that their children "might marry one." That "one" shows all the "otherness", and means the same thing as Trump saying, "I have a great relationship with the blacks."

    The people who don't recognize the polar opposition of an appreciated difference, and a diminutive "otherness", probably think Trump isn't a racist, either. I won't scorn them for their ignorance unless they refuse to change it. And why would anyone who thinks he isn't a racist pick up a copy of "Unlearning Racism"? To mangle the quote, only a little self-awareness is a dangerous thing.

  63. Johnny Foreigner Says:

    I'm still puzzled as to why DMB thinks there's anything at all relevent in a slight increase in black votes or first tme voters for Obama?

    Splain?

  64. DMB Says:

    @ ladiesbane Very well thought-out and written post, except for one small problem— you're entire post is based on the assumption that only white people can be racists. There is no hint whatsoever that racism can be fostered by people of other races.

    @ Johnny The author of this article is trying to argue that people who questioned Obama's legality or find other fault with him do it solely because they are racists. He claims that the birther issue is simply the newest in a long line of covert ways of calling black people "niggers".

    I responded by pointing out that there was a much more substantial racial skew in favor of Obama than there was against him in the 2008 election. How do you fail to see the significance in that?

  65. DMB Says:

    There were substantial increases both in % of blacks of voted and % of black voters who voted for Obama as opposed to previous Democratic candidates. Geds tried to dismiss those two facts (well, actually just one of them… he ignored the other) as insignificant and not based on race but rather on political affiliation.

    That's where the relevance of my posts comes from. It's called rebuttal.

  66. Prudence Says:

    @DMB: You're really rather hung-up on this degree thing, aren't you? It's not the piece of paper, it's what you do with your life. For example, Richard Branson was a high school drop-out- he got hoofed out of Stowe. As was my great uncle, who ran away from Harrow to fight the Nazis; he later went on to make a sizable wodge of cash on the Baltic Exchange. On the other hand, I have two degrees and make bugger-all. I mean, I love my job, but I won't be slapping down the deposit for a Ferrari 250 SWB anytime soon.

    Well, I have to go to bed now. G'night, all.

  67. Pat The Monkey Says:

    Sorry I'm late to the party. Two points:

    1) The "which party is more educated" is ridiculous. It actually boils down to this: not all Republicans are racist redneck dumbshits, but all racist redneck dumbshits are Republican.

    2) Racism isn't driving the batshit conspiracy theories. It's mostly the fact that he's a Democrat (and being black just gives the opposition more rhetorical tools). Anyone remember all that Vince Foster bullshit from the Clinton years? You'd think Clinton was the head of some Mafia family. Actually, back then I didn't think it could get any crazier. Was I ever wrong.

  68. RE Hayes Says:

    What an interesting rubber room you guys have here. Why is it that conservatives cannot just disagree with liberal views and everyone just accept the facts that each have differing views without resorting to name calling? Why does my belief that the President is a failure in most of his efforts to support the Republic that we all call home somehow make me racist? I do not believe in the inherent superiority of any race, but firmly believe that the President does not have a clue and it was slogans and a demagoging media of the former President that put an ill prepared man into the most powerful office in the world.

  69. DMB Says:

    @ Prudence

    You are funny to me. First you demand that I provide backup for my statement and accuse me of shuffling, and then when I do provide evidence you accuse me of being "hung up" on the issue.

    Several people suggested that the Republican Party is the party of the ignorant and uneducated. I provided evidence to the contrary. You obviously don't like the evidence I provided, so now you criticize me for being hung up on it.

    Nice.

  70. Brandon Says:

    I just want to make a quick statement on the Almighty. Ha. Anyways, on to my point, the birther thing doesn't have anything to do with race, if any of you forgot, the man is 50% white. The whole point of it is that the few people still ranting on it are the extreme side of us normal Americans who still pray everyday that this is all a bad dream, and just really don't feel like waiting until 2012 to wake up. The man is a MORON, who has no business experience, and whether or not the liberal corporate hating left like it, America was born on the idea that we should all be able to prosper to no end, and acts like he now owns the people! I absolutely have 0 doubt he is an American just like me and you, but he is by far the worst president this country has seen. I would re elect Bill Clinton before this jackass. Ok I ranted for a minute, but my point is Obamas awful, and some people, while seeming desperate, are just looking for an out.

  71. punkdavid Says:

    @ Hayes. Believing that "that the President is a failure in most of his efforts to support the Republic that we all call home" doesn't make you a racist.

    Beleiving he wasn't born in this country or is otherwise legally unqualified to be the President DOES.

    If you don't believe the latter, the top artcile wasn't about you, so you can put your defensiveness away.

  72. Johnny Foreigner Says:

    @DMB

    "I responded by pointing out that there was a much more substantial racial skew in favor of Obama than there was against him in the 2008 election."

    83, 83, 84, 88, 90, 91 being the % of black voters for previous Dems, so 96% is not all that astonishing. I think. Mountain/molehill.

    "How do you fail to see the significance in that?"

    Absolutely. Splain further?

  73. punkdavid Says:

    Since when is "business experience" a qualification to be president? The "first MBA President" destroyed the American economy. I don't want another MBA anywhere near the White House as long as I live.

  74. xynzee Says:

    @ChrisG: "3) The birthers, including Trump, look like chumps. Remember how Ross Perot got mocked for his "giant sucking sound?""

    As much as we may ridicule the short man from TX for this and many other boners, especially for throwing his hat in the ring. Sadly he was right on this one.

    I think most people voted Clinton on this one because they didn't know anything about him other than being another rich Texan, and were afraid that he would be the NAFTA in Buy Amuricun clothing. It's most likely the reason Clinton won as many Bush supporters swung his way a la Anderson/Carter.

  75. punkdavid Says:

    @ Johnny Foreigner: Agreed. And since Blacks are only about 12% of the population, and even a lower percentage of the electorate, that small increase in percentage for Obama was much less in gross than his margin of victory.

  76. Trailer Guy Says:

    A simple question: is it possible to disagree with a black person without being a racist?

  77. RE Hayes Says:

    @punkDavid…I disagree with the premise that the legal status of the Presidents citizenship, or my belief one way or the other, would make me a racist…just does not agree with the definition of racist.

    Now Robert Bird (D-WV) was a racist…David Duke –yep a racist…Louis Farrakhan — yep, a racist…Members of the Black (or New) Panthers–yep, racist; because they all believe and act as race is paramount…strictly using race in their decision processes and reaction to everyday events.

  78. Captain Obvious Says:

    @ punkdavid: "Believing that "that the President is a failure in most of his efforts to support the Republic that we all call home" doesn't make you a racist.

    Beleiving he wasn't born in this country or is otherwise legally unqualified to be the President DOES."

    Since when does believing that a person wasn't born in this country = believing that your race is superior to another? I think folks like yourself who can wait to label somebody a racist throw the word "racist" around so much that you forget the real definition of the word.

  79. ladiesbane Says:

    @DMB: thank you; but I must quibble with your point to me. The author wrote about the racism inherent in Birtherism regarding our black President, so my post was a response primarily to that phenomenon. (I would have continued with the legacy of Lee Atwater, but didn't figure anyone would keep reading.)

    While we may discuss the racial elitism of certain cultures in a general sense, that discussion is not at all relevant to specific and significant problems of minority oppression in the United States, nor the unspoken racist attitudes soaked up with mother's milk. In the U.S. we have an 80-90% white majority, a history of legal and pervasive but illegal persecution of blacks, a history of cultural contempt for non-European traditions, etc., and a willful ignorance of all these things, and what they mean to those directly affected.

    Also, saying I assume only whites can be racist is not supported by my post; moreover, if you bring that up to justify white racism by saying blacks are racist, too ("hey, everybody is racist"), the fallacy lies in thinking that black people (people of color) have the same history and shared experience of majority societal privilege that white people do. The tables can't be turned because their numbers, presence, and experiences are not equal.

    There are a couple of websites that explain this far better than I do. A good place to start is http://resistracism.wordpress.com/racism-101/, but this glossary addresses many arguments, including the Fallacious Flip and the Appeal to Melanin. Good stuff. http://www.theunapologeticmexican.org/glosario.html#fallacious

  80. Rahmie Says:

    Regardless, there's still a ni**er in The White House.

  81. Monkey Business Says:

    Let's tackle a couple of things that have been raised.

    - I don't think anyone is suggesting that all Republicans are morons. I know many intelligent conservatives who defend their political leanings very eloquently and convincingly.

    - Along with that, a college degree does not magically grant you intelligence. It merely signifies that you did enough work to pass and receive a degree. I know idiots that graduated from the Ivy League, and geniuses that never went to college.

    - Also worth noting: in low income areas, if you're a minority you're a Democrat, and if you're white you're a Republican. Frankly, you just don't see a whole lot of trailer trash Democrats, just like you don't see a lot of black Republicans.

    - Republicans have, over the last fifty years or so, make it a point to somehow demonize Democrats that win national elections. The John Birch Society. Vince Foster. Birthers. It's almost as if there is a segment of the Republican population that is so deluded, it can't believe that a Democratic President could be elected without somehow cheating or being ineligible.

    - Finally, as the majority, white people don't get to be racist. Why? Because we're the majority, and have been for two hundred some odd years. Someday, when black and brown people are the majority, we can be racist as fuck, because we'd then be the minority. But until then, yes, racism is still in effect.

  82. Johnny Foreigner Says:

    @ Punkdavid, I agree but even so, no one group of Americans (aside from Native people) have been so conspicuously and repeatedly shat on as much as the black population. Even in the last fifty years or so and despite efforts of the more liberal politicians, black people have got a raw deal so when a black candidate comes along (the first ever, afaik) I think black people would be deranged to NOT vote for him. The one candidate in history who might truly understand their issues from a first hand perspective.

    It's a double standard applied by the right (and not the first, I'd guess…) – it's okay for right wingers to vote for *their* beliefs and best interests – no gun control, less tax, smaller gummint, no affirmative action, pro life (yet pro death penalty – figure that fucker out)… ad infintum… Yet when black people vote for a black president because he's best placed to understand their issues it's fucking racism?

    It's an old deflectionary tactic and as obvious as Trump's combover, like the BNP over here (UK) calling muslims fascists. No-one is convinced, least of all the perpetrators.

  83. Rex Uranus Says:

    Now that the Birth Certificate has been revealed, anyone still whining about Obama's eligibility should be considered a total idiot or someone with a hidden agenda. HOWEVER, I find it very unfair of the author to lump in "Teabaggers" with "Birthers" – the TEA Party group has nothing to do with this bullshit, the simple coincidence of some of the same people claiming membership in both not-withstanding. That's rather like me accusing all Democrats of being Communists – there is some overlap, but to paint all Dems as Reds would be unfair and self-serving. Not all who had an interest in the truth re: Obama's birth certificate or racists either, although everyone who loudly punctuates the HUSSEIN can probably fairly be considered such. On the whole, the author's vitriol and unconcealed hatred for the Right makes this entire article lose a lot of credibility IMHO. What "ism" do we call those with an unreasoning hatred of those with a different political opinion?

  84. punkdavid Says:

    @ Hayes and Obvious.

    If, in the face of the overwhelming evidence presented that Barack Obama was born in America (even prior to yesterday), you don't believe the President was actually born in America, I have a lot of difficulty attributing that irrational belief to pure stupidity.

  85. Alan C Says:

    I understand why it took so long for Obama to "produce the birth certificate"–he's a serious person and this whole issue is BS. My only regret about how it's played out so far is that Donald Trump has no sense of shame. Of course his hair is prima facie evidence of that.

  86. RE Hayes Says:

    @Johnny F
    "Yet when black people vote for a black president because he's best placed to understand their issues it's fucking racism?"

    It's racism based on a liberal definition of racism where its being used for impact and effect vs. the actual definition.

    What it is -is just stupid to vote for someone solely because they are the same color as you! There are so many issues that must be considered by the voter…that to just vote based or race –it is such a failure on so many levels that it should not ever be allowed to be voiced by anyone without an immediate challange as being as horrible as is racism.

  87. Johnny Foreigner Says:

    @ Hayes

    "What it is -is just stupid to vote for someone solely because they are the same color as you! There are so many issues that must be considered by the voter…that to just vote based or race"

    Who says black people only voted for Obama because of his colour? The figures upthread showing previous percantages of black votes for Democrats says they don't. The few extra votes might have been that final factor that got people people turn out. There is, quite rightly, a lot of voter cynicism out there, not least because of the lack of politicians to identify and engage with.

  88. punkdavid Says:

    You know what I would call accusing black people of voting for Obama solely because he was the same color as them, despite demographic statistics to the contrary?

  89. Captain Obvious Says:

    @ punkdavid: I know what you would call somebody if they disagreed with a non-white person, regardless of how sound their argument might be.

  90. Johnny Foreigner Says:

    @ punkdavid – I think of a few words but they'd turn the internet blue if combined in one paragraph :-)

  91. RE Hayes Says:

    @punkdavid
    Honestly, I do know if he was born here or if you were born here either. I don't even know if all of my neighbors were born here. I don't really care because it does not impact me or those real concerns that I have.

    What it did was create a view of the President that he had something to hide, and in his view, it appears that it was a political decision that has likely backfired. The left demanded all kinds of service and personal records of the former President and spit and stammered because those documents did not really support what they had hoped. And then there was Cindy Sheehan and all of her demands that got so much media time and support.

    This was a turn-around play by the Republicans and the President played it poorly. I can only hope that someone will put together a political commercial that puts both sets of cartoonish behaviors of both and then maybe the electorate will begin to look at the real issues vs the soundbite and stupidity.

  92. Pete Says:

    It is so sad for you to paint with such a broad brush. I wanted the birth certificate because I want our Constitution followed. Following the Constitution also means determining what "natural born citizen" meant at the time of the writing of the Constitution – the SC will eventually have to rule on it. Finally, please put down your poison pen (keyboard) and read carefully: Just because I wanted BHO's BC does not make me a racist! I have no problem with anyone of ANY color. I do have problems with people of ANY color when their ideas are not what I believe in. The one and only time I've EVER given money to a presidential candidate, I gave $50 to the Alan Keyes campaign. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

  93. DMB Says:

    "The one candidate in history who might truly understand their issues from a first hand perspective."

    Because he was raised by white grandparents in Hawaii? Or because he was raised in Indonesia? Or because he went to an Ivy League schools?

    What part of Obama's past would lead the average black person to believe that he "understands their issues"? The only reason anyone believed that is because the media told them that Obama would understand their issues. No one bothered to actually look into his past accomplishments or experiences before they voted for him.

  94. Johnny Foreigner Says:

    Right, you all got your wish and discovered Obama is in fact a foreigner – who gained from the elaborate cover up? What did they gain? Is America where the New World Caliphate begins? Is all farnland handed over to a people's collective? What? Tell me?

    Fuxache. You people are fucking mental.

  95. DMB Says:

    I love how people like to lecture me on what it's like for black people even though I can almost promise you that I've spent my entire life in much closer relationships with black people than most of you have. Experts from afar… that's the name I'm giving some of you.

  96. Southern Beale Says:

    @DMB:

    I guarantee you, Obama understands the issues of black people far better than John McCain did or does. When he worked as the much-derided "community organizer" he wasn't organizing caddies at the country club.

  97. RT Butte Says:

    Personally, I consider myself an Afterbirther. I won't be satisfied until I see placenta, dammit!

  98. DMB Says:

    "You know what I would call accusing black people of voting for Obama solely because he was the same color as them, despite demographic statistics to the contrary?"

    What statistics would those be? The statistic that says that the largest percentage of black ever turned out to vote in the 2008 election? Or the statistic that says that the largest percentage of black voters ever voted for the Democratic candidate and that candidate just happened to be black.

    You can claim the numbers are insignificant all you want to, but they speak pretty clearly. I think we've probably beat that topic into the ground enough.

  99. DMB Says:

    @ Southern Beale

    All his experience as a "Community Organizer" taught him was how to use lower-income, urban minority groups to benefit his agenda. I agree with you that McCain probably doesn't understand anybody's issue, much less those of black people. But I would venture to say that Bill Clinton was FAR more in touch with the life of the average black person than Obama is. Clinton grew up fatherless in Arkansas, raised by his grandparents while his mother put herself through college. His grandparents were often ostracized because they sold goods to both black people and white people from their general store. Doesn't that sound more like the upbringing of the average black person in America than growing up in Hawaii and Indonesia?

    But the black voter turnouts were much lower for Clinton than they were for Obama. Why?

  100. Johnny Foreigner Says:

    @ DMB

    "What statistics would those be? The statistic that says that the largest percentage of black ever turned out to vote in the 2008 election? Or the statistic that says that the largest percentage of black voters ever voted for the Democratic candidate and that candidate just happened to be black."

    So you're not buying the explanations why that might be -that black people might have found a candidate they could identify with and who could understand their problems better- despite saying "I agree with you that McCain probably doesn't understand anybody's issue, much less those of black people."?

    You're tying yourself in knots.

    And whatever Clinton's background, he is not black. That's kind of a major flaw in your argument.

  101. Geds Says:

    Since DMB refused to fucking shut up about it…

    In 2004, a grand total of 121,069,054 votes were cast in the Presidential election. Of those, 11% were cast by black voters at an 88% rate in favor of John Kerry. In 2008, a grand total of 129,391,711 votes were cast in the Presidential election. Of those, 13% were cast by black voters at a 95% rate in favor of Barack Obama.

    By my back-of-the-envelope calculations, that means that 16,820,920 votes were cast by black voters in 2008, of which 15,979,874 went to Obama. If we reduce those percentages to 2004 levels, it means that 14,233,090 votes would have been cast, with 12,525,119 going to Barack Obama. That means a net loss of 3,454,755 votes for Barack Obama.

    This means that Obama's margin of victory would have slid from 9,522,083 to 6,067,328. So, in other words, your anecdote is not the same as data and your assertion does not hold water.

  102. Geds Says:

    For the record, if you want to see the key demographic shifts:

    2004 for Kerry:

    56% of Hispanic voters
    54% of Asian voters
    51% of women
    54% of voters between 18 and 29

    2008 for Obama:

    67% of Hispanic voters
    62% of Asian voters
    56% of women
    66% of voters between 18 and 29

    As a voting bloc all of those groups held roughly the same from 2004 to 2008. So if you really want to blame some non-whites, I can make a suggestion. Or you can blame women. Or you can blame the damn kids who just won't get off your lawn. Have fun.

  103. RE Hayes Says:

    @ Johnny F and others
    Additionally, I am not making assumptition of why they voted for the President, I have heard many black voters make the statement that they did and would even go so far as to shun a black that would not vote for a black man. The sad part is that it has been by far a majority of those that have expressed why that voted for the President vs his stance on a particular issue.

    As for the numbers game, just remember that the stats are wrong 50% of the time, it's the probability that we must understand.

  104. Geds Says:

    As for the numbers game, just remember that the stats are wrong 50% of the time, it's the probability that we must understand.

    Funny how stats are only wrong when they prove a pet theory false…

  105. RE Hayes Says:

    No, not at all…the fact is that unless you understand what you are measuring, the stats are just numbers. It is the probability of the action or outcome that you must understand…That is the beauty of statistics.

    And I have no pet theories, only pet dogs and peeves.

  106. Geds Says:

    the fact is that unless you understand what you are measuring, the stats are just numbers

    True enough.

    I was just skimming after my original post, so I didn't really know who was saying what. The line about statistics being wrong just looked like a sour grapes shot after being presented with actual statistics that disproved a theory. Sorry.

  107. jwm Says:

    I wrote a long email to some friends who were saying the same things. I'll try to summarize.

    Obama has ignored this stuff for some time.

    Now the presidential election is about to kick off. Candidates are positioning themselves for a run. Trump is kind of a joke, but Obama is far from safe. His base is disaffected and disillusioned by the man of hope and peace's reign of war and a shattered economy.

    Then Trump said he would go independent if he didn't win Republican nomination and started in with the birther stuff. As a rich, white, asshole with a reality show, Trump is basically a more traditional Palin like figure to the crazified tea party base of the Republican party.

    So what does Obama do? Respond to Trump directly, producing his birth certificate. Why? Its almost like Obama is trying to inflate Trump's viability as an outside candidate to split the conservative vote. Ross Perot ring any bells?

  108. RE Hayes Says:

    @ jmw

    "Then Trump said he would go independent if he didn't win Republican nomination"

    I am sure you got this from some leading, authoritative source. But I listened to Trump say quite clearly in an interview that there is no way that he would run as an Independent…That defeating the President was paramount and he would not split the party vote under any circumstance.

  109. jwm Says:

    Hayes
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/04/11/trump-will-probably-run-as-independent-if-he-doesnt-win-gop-nomination/

    Regardless, its not unheard of for someone to backtrack on a promise not to run.

  110. jwm Says:

    Here is the authoritative source for the link lazy.
    "“I am very conservative,” said Mr. Trump. “The concern is if I don’t win [the GOP primary] will I run as an independent, and I think the answer is probably yes.” Mr. Trump said he thought he “could possibly win as an independent,” adding, “I’m not doing it for any other reason. I like winning.”"

  111. RE Hayes Says:

    That is too bad…He was asked in an interview with Hannity on 4/25 (i believe), 2 weeks after the link you provided.
    So now we have conflicting information as to what his position really is. Kinda like Obama and too many others inside the loop where common sense lays cold, limp, and lifeless — if their lips are moving, the probability is high that they are telling the current crowd what they want to hear or what they need to say for the next sound bite.

  112. jwm Says:

    If Trump becomes a hero to the base though, he could well win the Republican nomination. The more likely scenario is he bombs out of the primaries, because his campaign is almost certainly going to be amateur hour compared to the experienced pros like Romney. But if he bombs out with enough support from the crazy base, then he may go ahead with an independent run if he thinks he has a chance.

    I could be wrong, but its obvious that Obama responded to Trump the way he did, after ignoring the Gingrichs and all the other high and low profile public figures for three years right as the election cycle heats up, because of a careful political calculation. Remember how smartly he ran his nomination campaign, outmaneuvering and outsmarting what was at the time considered the well oiled machine of Hillary Clinton's campaign. I may be wrong about what I think the reason Obama did what he did is, but there is no way I am wrong that this was just something he did for the hell of it, or something that accomplishes very little for him. Trump may still bomb out, but Obama has made him look far more credible now than he was on his own.

    The Rove led campaign in 2004 performed a similar tactic, selecting Kerry as the weak horse in the Democrats field and responding to him as though he was a strong one, thereby influencing the public perception of him and helping him win the nomination and lose the general.

  113. Geds Says:

    I could be wrong, but its obvious that Obama responded to Trump the way he did, after ignoring the Gingrichs and all the other high and low profile public figures for three years right as the election cycle heats up, because of a careful political calculation.

    My belief on this one is that the political calculus is really quite simple:

    Trump is, ultimately, not a serious candidate. But he is a blowhard with a massive PR machine and the willingness to spend copious amounts of money on really, really stupid things. So the longer Trump stays in and appears to be a viable candidate, the more money the rest of the field has to spend simply to get face time. That, then, is money they won't have in the general.

    And if Trump stays in long enough and gets his ego inflated enough but doesn't actually win the nomination he may well go the independent route. It looks, at least early on, like Trump's standing with the Tea Party is high enough that he could make Perot's spoiler look like a statistical aberration.

  114. bb in GA Says:

    Applying Statistical Process Control to the Process of Black Americans voting for Democratic Presidential Candidates with the data as given above:

    The data since 1976 thru 2004

    83 83 91 89 83 84 90 88

    Xbar = 86.4 Rbar = 3.6

    Upper Control Limit = Xbar + [ 3 * (Rbar/ D2) D2 = 1.128 (applicable constant)

    UCL = 86.4 + [ 3 * (3.6/1.128))

    UCL = 96

    Recalculating this while respecting the precision of the original data (2 significant figures) does not change the result.

    The 'run' rules say that if you have a single datapoint greater than the UCL (or less than the LCL) then the process is "unstable" or "out of control."

    Mr Obama's percentage in 2008 was 96

    We are mighty close…

    If he gets a greater than 96% in 2012 that would indicate "out of control.".

    The next run rule that would come into play is that if you have two out of three consecutive datapoints that exceed two sigma (which in this case is about 93%) then the process would be unstable.

    If President Obama gets more than 93% in 2012, we can declare the process "out of control." There can't be a third consecutive datapoint because of Constitutional constraints so if he falls below 93% we will never know.

    So speculating that the 96% Black vote for President O is unusual has some reational basis.

    Obviously the data can't give us the reason the process may go out of control.

    //bb

  115. Trailer Trash Says:

    Facts about Trailer Trash (me):
    1. I live in a double-wide in California.
    2. I have multiple graduate degrees.
    3. I am left-wing.
    4. I always sort of wince when reading all of the derogatory things about trailer inhabitants on this site…

  116. Major Kong Says:

    “I’m not doing it for any other reason. I like winning.”

    Nice to see you're so committed to the welfare of the Republic, Mr. Trump.

  117. leftwingforester Says:

    @ Hayes

    "What it is -is just stupid to vote for someone solely because they are the same color as you! There are so many issues that must be considered by the voter…that to just vote based or race"

    Change "race" to "woman" and tell me McCain didn't cynically nominate Palin to pull off the pissed off Hilary supporters.

  118. RE Hayes Says:

    @ leftwing
    Regardless of what McCain did or did not do it does not change the fact that to vote for skin color, or gender, or height, or hair color, etc… is still stupid.

  119. RE Hayes Says:

    @jwm

    Trump has some good ideas and some from the past that are not so good. But he certainly forces the conversation…and i think that is a good thing. But those comments attributed to him on 4/11 leave me wondering if it was some tongue-in-cheek or other silliness. But he should have never uttered those words that he may consider running as an Ind.

  120. acer Says:

    0/10 on the trolling today. Really obvious stawmen followed by backpedaling and whiny faux-folksiness.

    Way to disgrace Boortz.

  121. RT Butte Says:

    @Trailer Trash:

    There's a difference between living in a trailer and being trailer trash. I live in rural Louisiana, so it's mostly the latter around here, but occasionally you meet people who live in trailers without being trailer trash.

  122. A.B.A.B.D Says:

    Does the fact that so many poor to middle class white people identify with and vote Republican–a party whose "free market uber alles" policies over the past 30 years have wreaked so much havoc in their lives–have any relevance to this whole "Republicans are smarter than Democrats" issue?

    Nah, I didn't think so…

  123. Mike Says:

    @DMG: I'm sorry, but if you think it was "reverse racist" for African-Americans to be excited about being able to vote for the first African-American presidential candidate (of a major party) in 218 years … then you are very naive about America.

  124. Mike Says:

    Also: I don't think Obama was trying to convince the birthers. It's not like they would ever support him any way.

    I think he was trying (a) to shame the media into doing their fucking jobs [unlikely to work] and (b) put a wedge between the GOP nutjobs and low-information "moderate" (non-crazy) voters. Because now the birthers are reduced to muttering about forgeries and/or making up new rules about "native born" citizens, which apparently means "no Kenyan fathers."

  125. Dogsbody Says:

    @DMB: Regarding your comment at 11:40 am, I feel quite comfortable in saying "Bullshit, you are a liar."

  126. Shane Says:

    Trailer Trash wins my award for best comment of the day. Though to be fair, your trailer in CA could very likely have cost much more than a nice house in most other parts of the country. I remember briefly looking at housing in the Monterey area in 2007 and the cheapest place we could find was a single wide in a trailer park….listed for $600,000.

  127. Screamin' Demon Says:

    "I can almost promise you that I've spent my entire life in much closer relationships with black people than most of you have"

    Yeah. And some of my friends are black. Dude, when you gotta go to such length to try to convince people you're not a racist…you're a fuckin' racist.

  128. FC Says:

    Wow, people making distasteful remarks about other people that do not agree with them with a VERY Nazi like background picture. Makes sense to me

  129. FC Says:

    A.B.A.B.D,

    When you start to make sense, others will listen to you. Unfortunately, most here do not know the difference between being intelligent and smart.

  130. Scott Says:

    @FC – It's a very Soviet background, not a Nazi background. It makes sense to me that someone Boortz sent here wouldn't know the difference.

    Crack a book and think for yourself once in a while. You'll be amazed at the results.

  131. eau Says:

    Well, if Obama's aim IS to split the crazies from the stupids, and it works… genius. If not, I am just as bemused as ed. Why acknowledge this bullshit? Why now?

    And as for the Right calling Clinton and Obama names… Well, what can we expect after all these years of calling Nixon a shameless crook, Regan a doddering, clueless puppet and Dubya a draft-dodging, coke-snorting moron?

    And don't go pointing to evidence of any of these claims (typical Lefty shim-shamery!). As has been pointed out above, facts have a pronounced liberal bias and figures are mostly meaningless when they disagree with right wing talking points.

  132. Josh Rosen Says:

    Yeah, the president IS a N(*RINGING BELL*)…and it got him into Yale. You don't hear him complaining about it, do you?

  133. Arslan Amirkhanov Says:

    "FC Says:
    April 29th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
    Wow, people making distasteful remarks about other people that do not agree with them with a VERY Nazi like background picture. Makes sense to me"

    Congratulations, you arre the dumbest motherfucker on the planet for the time being.

    Then again, liberals ought to think twice before they get upset about conservatives conflating Nazism and Communism. After all, the modern concept of totalitarianism, so handy for severing Nazism from capitalism and excusing crimes of liberal "democratic" states, was developed by a wannabe Marxist of the Frankfurt school. If one deliberately tries to lump two very different systems together it is only natural before some ignorant folks like FC here to think they were the same.

  134. David R Says:

    Guess I'm shuffling in a little late. I read the whole thread, because I rearely see this blog get so many posts so quickly, and I had to see what it was about. I have this to add:

    @DMG— Both the Democratic voter base and Republican voter base articles on Wikipedia claim that each respective party has the most support form educated professionals. The articles contradict each other.

    Is this why, when you had to choose one article to link, you chose the Republican article? Either way, could we see a better external source than wikipedia, since this is one case where Wikipedia is obviously very inadequate?

  135. David Gurney Says:

    What an idiot you are;The idea is to get rid of Sotomayor and Kagan.Obama's laws can be repealed,but they can't.

  136. David Gurney Says:

    NEWS FLASH-The former Gov.of California has just announced that he is also a love child,the product of an Austrian hooker an american GI,making him a natural born citizen.

    This story has just as much credibility as does Obama's.

Leave a Reply