A DAY at the IOWA CAUCUS - What about Electability?

[FrenchieCat]

I read a post on Friday here on DU, which summed it up for me very nicely.....

So two dumb hicks won't vote for a black man, and are too dumb to understand or care about "electability". A smarter person who likes the black guy walks in, but notices that he is outnumbered by the hicks, therefore the black guy isn't electable, so he won't vote for him either. Two smart people walk in, but notice that they are outnumbered by the three, so the black guy they like isn't electable, so they won't vote for him either. 4 smart people walk in, and outnumbered by the 5, decide they won't vote for him. 8 walk in outnumbered by the 9 and change their votes. 16 are outnumbered by the 17 and so on.

Pretty soon 50 million people, all of whom like the african american candidate, won't vote for him because he's black and therefore "unelectable", thanks to a chain reaction started by two hicks. This is the problem with "electability". The solution is to be like the hicks: go for what you want and to hell with electability.

peace.
(Click on the link below for attribution: )
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3806352&mesg_id=3806666

[FrenchieCat]

1. Of course, the candidate in his example could be replaced by

a woman, or a relatively short guy said to be totally "unelectable".

[FrenchieCat]

2. No "Word!" ???

:wow:

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. It's a good parable Frenchie

But like most parables it stretches it's point a little to get it across. If you start out assuming that there are a couple of racist hicks out there (or sexist hicks or whatever) then it stands to reason that over time some other racist or sexist hicks will also enter that room (along with some sophisticated racists and sexists) as well as the large number of people who don't feel that way themselves who this parable has entering the room later.

As a social change activist it is a difficult issue to face. I concede that racism and sexism exist in this society and that those negative forces influence elections, but what undermines those negative forces the most over the long term is facing them down head on, and proving what a hollow and stupid pack of lies they are built on. One of the most effective ways of doing that is to prove people wrong, by showing them how wrong their prejudices are when they actually see what it really is like to experience an excellent minority neighbor or female boss etc.

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in my opinion are strong enough people to shatter false barriers. No one is perfect, they each have individual vulnerabilities, but overall they also each have what it takes to potentially win.

[Frustratedlady]

3. So, are you inferring Iowa has dumb hicks?

I think you could have come up with a better description of the citizens of Iowa who participate in the caucuses. How rude.

Signed, an Iowa caucus attendee.

[FrenchieCat]

4. At least two Hicks can be found congregating anywhere,

including the Iowa Caucuses.....

So I should ask you why Iowa would be the exception? :shrug:

[Bitwit1234]

5. Don't matter what color you vote for cause Hillary Clinton will be the next president.

[Imagevision]

19. Example: Dumb Hick ---> "Hillary Clinton will be the next president" ....

[Inspired]

6. Most 'dumb hicks' wouldn't bother going to a caucus.

The usual attendees are very politically aware. I guess I don't know how you are defining 'hick' but that isn't the word I would use to describe any caucus goer.

The hicks will be staying home because they aren't knowledgeable and don't care enough to spend 2 hours going through the caucus process.

[youthere]

8. "dumb hicks" don't caucus...

at least not for Democrats.:evilgrin:

[FrenchieCat]

14. I don't believe that assertion..........

Electability has always been a factor in Iowa, most notably (if disastrously, in the end) in the 2004 out-of-nowhere victory of John Kerry. What Edwards and his team will never say, but which on some level they’re counting on, is that his status as the only white male in the top tier will factor pivotally in his favor. More broadly, they believe that electability (and experience) would prove to be decisive factors in a head-to-head race with Obama, which is another reason they are gunning for Clinton now: They believe that, if they can fatally wound her in Iowa, they will have an easier time with Obama further down the road than they would have with Hillary.
http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/40989/index2.html

According to Mudcat Saunders, the campaign isn't just aiming at poor rural whites in the South—but at poor rural whites across the country. "There's not a 50-cent difference in Bubba in Buncombe County, North Carolina, and Iowa or New Hampshire or wherever else…" There's also a largely unspoken asset to Edwards's candidacy, though it has gotten some play on the cable-news shows. In a general election, he has in his favor the simple fact that he is the white male Democrat—a safe alternative to any reservations that America—South, North, East, West—might have about a black man or a woman as president.”
http://www.iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=383

With a wink and a nod, John Edwards is talking about candidates running in a "tough place" that will be harder to win with Hillary at the top. Okay. But implying that it will also be tough for candidates down ticket to win if Obama's on the ticket, then place this analysis in the middle of Mudcat Saunders' Bubba strategy and you're going way beyond the polarizing talking point that dogs Hillary Clinton.

....Because what he's saying on the stump is meant to convince primary voters that he can appeal to Bubba; someone who isn't going to vote for a woman or a black man, but might cast a vote for Edwards. Let's face it, Bubba could never handle a woman with her finger on the nuclear trigger; as for a black man, forget it. It's a strategy to convince primary voters that Edwards can capture votes Clinton and Obama can't, which will lead him to the White House. Because we all know that in a "tough place" -- if you know what I mean -- somewhere, anywhere in America, there are voters who can't stand the thought of a woman or a black man leading this country. Catch my drift?
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26437

[Progress And Change]

15. convoluted, at best

Every serious candidate in both parties is arguing electability. To claim that in Edwards case, because he has a penis and light skin, there is something nefarious being implied is convulated, at best.

[FrenchieCat]

20. It has been "implied" by those who run Edwards campaign and

Edwards himself......unless you don't want to think so.

Implied is something not directly stated, but alluded to.

If you don't think that Mudcat alluded to the fact that his candidate is White, making him more electable in certain parts of the country....then we will have to agree to disagree......because I certainly read more implications into those various statements (and so do others) than you do.

Here's what a couple of Iowans had to say after going to an Edwards campaign event......(could these be the 2 hicks mentioned in the op?) :shrug:

Is Edwards' 'Electability' Argument Working in Iowa?

I asked why he and Donna were supporting Edwards in 2008. "Edwards is the most electable by a mile," he said. "The Republicans won't stop at nothing to tear down our side."

But why Edwards and not, say, Obama? "Well, you know," he said, hesitating. "Obama's drawback is obvious. Don't get me wrong. I'm gonna vote for him if the gets the nomination. But if he does, all kinds of people will crawl out from under their rocks and throw mud. Boy, it'll be ugly. And it's the same with Hillary, 'cause she's a woman. Attacks are all they have, the Republicans. That and God and the flag." He smirked for second, then got serious. "Edwards is our best shot."

Of course, the Beltway pundits are right about one thing: John Edwards can't make that argument. But folks like the Fergusons can--and are. Sure, it may raise eyebrows in Washington. But in places like Sidney, it seem to be working.
http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2007/10/24/is-edwards-s-electability-argument-working.aspx

[Inspired]

27. Most 'bubbas' will be staying home to watch the Orange Bowl. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

24. Tell that to one of the candidate........

Edwards recalled feeling like a "hick in the big city" when he left home to attend college, and he told those in the crowd that he could relate to their struggles.

"You will never have a voice unless and until the Democrats have a candidate who understands your lives -- the Democrats have a candidate who will campaign everywhere in America, who won't give up on your part of America," Edwards said. He said his campaign "will not be limited to New York and Los Angeles and Chicago."

The crowd that day was overwhelmingly white, as were those last week when Edwards led a tour of rural Western Iowa designed to showcase his small-town appeal.

Campaign aides acknowledge that the claim to be the most electable in the general election -- a routine argument from candidates trying to win a party nomination -- carries an overlay of sensitivities concerning race and gender.
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071028/NEWS08/310280075

[Apollo11]

7. Your mail is an insult to caucus-goers in Iowa

I don't think there will be any "dumb hicks" taking part in the Iowa caucuses on January 3rd.

Considering that Obama is doing great in recent polls, why would anyone assume he cannot win? :eyes:

I also think that it is legitimate to consider if a candidate will be able to win the Whitehouse.

Barack Obama has a lot of support among independents and so-called swing voters.

But there is no consensus on which candidate would be the most "electable".

[FrenchieCat]

9. There are "Dumb Hicks" everywhere, and for you not to think that

some wouldn't show up at the Democratic Iowa caucus is not a reality. There are plenty of ignorant Democrats out there, even if you don't want to believe it.

In addition, I never said that I didn't believe that Obama couldn't win, as I am pulling for him.

My point is that those who say that somehow America is "not ready for a Black President".....and "America is still a racist country" (and I have read these lines on DU many times as well as having heard this thought expressed out there in the real world) are the ones implying that Obama is not a good candidate for the general election simply because of the color of his skin.

The example that I quoted from another poster (which was my op contents) illustrates that the reasoning behind this kind of thinking results in a self-fulfilling prophecy as to what "electability" is.......and the result is exactly as the Op mentions; those who might normally vote for a particular candidate (Obama) may be persuaded not to based on an argument that requires them to take into consideration the bigotry of others into the polls with them. I believe that this reasoning is poisonous to this country.

In fact, there is a Democratic candidate who has spoken about his electability....and a large portion of his veiled reasoning was based on the notion that the other top tier candidates could not campaign "everywhere" in America but that he could.

"Who can go to other parts of the country when we have swing candidates running for the Congress and the Senate? Is the candidate going to have to say, "Don't come here. Down come here and campaign with me. I can't win if you campaign with me.......I think it's just a reality that I can campaign any place in America."
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/06/18/228682.aspx

[Progress And Change]

10. all the serious candidates, as usual, have spoken about their electability

And why are you obsessed with race? Similar things have been said about Clinton because she is a woman.

[Apollo11]

11. Every candidate has at least one potential weakness or drawback

For every candidate - you can think of reasons why some people might NOT vote for him or her.

Similar things have been said about John Edwards because: southern accent / trial lawyer / blinking eyes / smooth talk / $400 haircut / huge mansion / sick wife / said Saddam was a threat and co-sponsored IWR before he changed his mind / too "aggressive" / too "progressive" (deleted parts not applicable).

Other candidates are too old, too short, too fat, whatever ....

[Apollo11]

12. Let people support whichever candidate they want

"There are plenty of ignorant Democrats out there, even if you don't want to believe it."

Really ??

I like Obama a lot. I think he might be the best choice out of the Democratic field.

But if someone wants to support Hillary or Edwards or Biden or Kucinich, I say let 'em.

I am sure everyone has good positive reasons for supporting their chosen candidate.

I don't think it helps to start calling them racists or "Dumb Hicks" or whatever ...

[FrenchieCat]

16. I believe that you are being more defensive than required in reference to

what I stated in the op......as the op clearly states there are way more "smart" people in Iowa than the two hicks mentioned. Read the op again and realize that, please.

I am sure that there are other reason one might call themselves "Electable".....but I believe that the "America is not ready for a Black President" argument is floating out there, and I'm here to suggest that this argument should not sway.

So unlike you, I believe that there are plenty of folks in Iowa and elsewhere that will make this argument in reference to "electability" and who has it.....and I'm positive that when it comes to Obama, enough will imply that "race" is a factor, even as they decry that it isn't a factor for them.

I am simply pointing this ahead of the Iowa caucus so that those who encounter this very argument can tell those who suggest it to go to hell.......

I'm not quite sure why you would have a problem when I say that this argument is nothing more than a self fufilling prophecy.

[Progress And Change]

17. obviously there are no valid reasons for obama being viewed as unelectable

It MUST be about his skin color. :sarcasm:

[FrenchieCat]

22. My point is not based on the "other" reasons for Obama being viewed as

unelectable....


I am not naive, and I would hope that you wouldn't simply close your eyes as to what I dare to bring up and discuss, or that you would not attempt to dismiss my point simply because you don't like it.

[MGKrebs]

13. Maybe it will be counteracted by people who value the political opinion

of the person they count on to define their reading list.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

18. the dumb hicks presumably are GOP?

so they won't vote for Obama anyhow

[FrenchieCat]

21. I give an example......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3816198&mesg_id=3817584


These folks are Dems, as they assert that they would "support" the eventual Democratic nominee....

[loyalsister]

25. I wonder

I wonder if there might be similar op eds in the archives of 68, 72 election coverage when Nixon's Southern Strategy was implemented.

There is no accusation of racist action here.
However, If one is to understand "electability" as a neutral concept, this should be understood as a recognized similarity between Nixon's strategy and the perceived natural advantage some claim Edward's may have.

I would submit to Edwards supporters the fact that that perceived natural advantage was once actually a strategy might be considered before enjoying it.

[FrenchieCat]

26. I submit that it is part of a strategy..........

unfortunately.


I also suggest that folks not be swayed by it when going to cast their ballots.

That is all.