Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Obama did 11 points better among white men and 4 points better among white women than Kerry…

… therefore, PUMA is a political force to be reckoned with.

No, really. You’ll forgive me for not linking to the Den of Cognitive Dissonance, but our good friends at PUMA PAC found a “brilliant” article from Dick Morris to justify this incredible flight of fancy. You remember Dick Morris, right? The guy who posited, three weeks before the election, that the electoral college map looked like this:

Sadly, I can’t find the one from September 18th, where he suggested Iowa was “Strong McCain”, Pennsylvania and Michigan as “Lean McCain”, and New Jersey and Washington as “tossup”, leaving McCain with 290 electoral votes to Obama’s 172. Nonetheless, of course, in a desperate attempt to claim some sort of relevance, the PUMA folks are claiming they had the power to change the election:

Bottom line: Puma Democrats really DID vote in numbers large enough to change the outcome. If not for ACORN and the Race Card and BAD gotv by the Republican Party, we would have won. Stupid thing to say, I know – “we would have won.” Yeah, we would have won if we hadn’t LOST, but it’s not so stupid as it might sound (seriously). Because the numbers tell an instructive story. The DONC played the Race Card to get their Chosen One in office. Let’s not forget that while the CRACKLE meisters furiously re-write history. White women feel politcially HOMELESS in LARGE numbers. And the GOP needs an ACORN of their own. Well, good luck to them on that. That’s their problem. But numbers one and two are OUR problem, or opportunity as I like to put it.

Ahh, if only, right? Of course, that’s ignoring the demographic numbers for Obama. But then again, statistics have a well-known Obama bias. To wit:

– Obama increased his share of the female vote over Kerry from 51% to 56%, which is an increase of 9.8%.

– Obama increased his share of the male vote, from 44% Kerry to 49% Obama, for an extra 11.3%.

– Obama increased his share of the white male vote, from 37% Kerry to 41% Obama, for a difference of 10.8% (noting that a 41% voting rate from white men is 4% points higher than the rate Bill Clinton got from white males in his 1996 re-election campaign!)

– For voters making more than 100k, the figure is 42% Kerry, 48% Obama, an increase of 14%.

– For those making more than 50k, the numbers are 43% Kerry to 49% Obama, for a 13.9% increase.

– Most impressive is the figures for Latino voters, which Obama increased from 53% Kerry to 67% Obama, for a staggering 26% increase over Kerry’s already impressive numers. Remember, of course, the adomishment of the PUMAs during the primaries suggested Latinos wouldn’t vote for anyone but Senator Clinton; looks like they fell into the same race-first trap that so many others have…

– And I almost forgot- among African-American voters, Obama’s numbers only increase from 88% Kerry to 95% Obama, which represents a 7.9% gain- the worst gain among any of these demographics.

But wait! This belies all the reasoning the PUMAs put down! And we all know they’re a force to be reckoned with- their reasoning and judgement are sound! They weren’t a myth perpetuated by the Obama campaign to force McCain into a perfectly-executed trap, no, sir!

Only one thing to say to that:


Categories: Uncategorized.

/ 39 Comments

39 comments

  3. anna shane

    one, no one linked John to George more than Sarah, who is George, incurious, reckless, proud to be uninformed, prone to choose only her closest friends, full of revenge.  

    two, all the pug voter intimidation in the past drew a slew of watchers and press about those long lines, contested votes, and lawyers. Since they were going to lose anyway, seems quite a few just stayed home.

    Barack’s performance in the real campaign, in particular his calmness in the face of the meltdown and his caution in first consulting with experts before speaking.  What had been in the primary a liability, seen as excessive coolness, became balm when he faced a real crisis and didn’t break into a cold sweat or over anxious blathering.

    I’ll add that the long primary and gossip he was able to shrug off long before November made a lot of people feel they knew him, and Bill Clinton’s stumping for him showed Barack’s not a grudge holder or someone who can’t appreciate help and talent.

    They could have won only if Bush hadn’t broken government and John hadn’t shown that he was on that page.  Could have isn’t would have.  

  5. Kysen

    I just don’t see the purpose in kicking dead (rotting, bloated, maggot ridden) horses.

    At this point, even articles/diaries completely debunking the validity of the group (especially FP’d) ‘sends a thrill up the leg’ of PUMAz because at least it keeps their name out there.

    I say let the group die the ignoble death it deserves.

    Let them have a pauper’s grave…Potters Field for them…not one discussed seriously and eulogized by the saner minds in the blogosphere.

    I don’t even see them as a footnote worthy of discussion.

    Irrelevant Pre-Election, even more so (if possible) post-Election….in my (not so) humble opinion.

  6. rfahey22

    they should form a third party so that they can really show what a force they are.

    I’m in general agreement that this group should die a quiet death, but one more sendup is probably ok, because they are just so damn irrational.

    What seems strange to me is all of the people who have come out of the woodwork to criticize every little detail that has emerged re: Obama’s transition.  Some are the usual serial malcontents, but sites like OpenLeft seem to have devolved into non-stop whinefests about how the likely candidate for the fourth-most senior position at the USDA or some-such isn’t sufficiently progressive enough for their liking.  I don’t know if success has gone to people’s heads or whether they were always so insufferable, but it is annoying.

  7. Peter Jukes

    Just prior to the election, I posted a now deleted diary which didn’t mention a candidate, but merely posited the idea that voting republican wouldn’t help progressive causes. I didn’t engage in any flaming, and along with Anna Shane, tried to understand the position of those who were voting McCain.

    Perhaps Anna will agree, but political logic or electoral calculation had little to do with it. Emotion and resentment seemed to rule the day. Of those emotions, one of the strongest seemed to be that somehow the priorities of fighting racism had stolen the power of fighting sexism (as if you couldn’t be against both). The biggest resentment seemed to be that Obama only won because the black vote turned out “for its own reasons” (I can cite the diary if anyone wants).

    Every conversation turned back to race and the feeling that ‘white guilt’ had been exploited. The last fact in Rage’s diary needs to be remembered and reiterated again and again

    And I almost forgot- among African-American voters, Obama’s numbers only increase from 88% Kerry to 95% Obama, which represents a 7.9% gain- the worst gain among any of these demographics.

  8. Chris Blask

    It is nice to see it laid out, we’ve all heard to death the “well, Obama got 95% of the black vote” and not “Kerry got 88%”.

    Talking to my boss the other night (part of the 5% of AA vote that McCain got) I pined a little bit for the day that we stop talking about “The Historic Election”…  I mean, it is very cool, great to “break that ceiling”, socioculturally important,  MLK and Rev. Lutze rejoice, dont-want-to-downplay it: but setting that precedent is the least among the things that I like about Obama.  The guy is just incredibly talented, capable and appropriately gifted for the needs of our troubled times – it will be nice when this moves on to the point where that is the story.

    *That* will be a win for post-racialism…

Comments are closed.