That's Rush Limbaugh, today, interpreting a story in the New York Times by Thomas Edsall called "The Future of the Obama Coalition."
"All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment -- professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists -- and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic."That's Edsall. Rush says:
I am not surprised that this is their coalition. I'm just stunned that they're so publicly admitting it.... [T]o come out here and have it admitted to in the New York Times is almost a matter of pride and brilliant strategy. What this means is the white working class is the Tea Party. The white working class has abandoned the Democrat Party, is what this means. This is the old Reagan Democrat coalition in part. White working class people had decided that they're voting Republican. That's who voted in the 2010 midterms.
पोस्ट्स
८२ टिप्पण्या:
So it's kind of like the white working class is this Forgotten Man. Hmmm...
How is he going to win by getting a mere 20% of the electorate?
OK, Hispanics and blacks are 1/3 of the population. But the college-trained professionals - not all of whom are Lefty Demos by any stretch of the imagination - make up how much - 5, 10%?
How do they win with that?
Especially since inflation will start eating the poor Hispanics and blacks alive in the next year.
It's starting to look as if GodZero's Black Hand of Death may claim one more victim - the Democrat Party. Granted, it had help, but Zero's gonna go down in history for this one.
The anti-southern strategy?
Just returned from the Monday Night shindig at the Oval Room. Too many hotties from WH and K-street.
Well, here is the gist of the discussion:
- The Committee to Re-elect the POTUS wants the GOP to nominate of these candidates: Perry, Gingrich, or Cain. They are begging for the ticket to be made up from these three people.
- The Committee has the ground game already planned (and sealed) across the USA.
- The first 100-days of the 2nd term are being revised each week. If you see think Health care plan was a major reform, wait till Jan. 2013 after the re-election inauguration.
My view is that GOP is like the QB who in this first play off game gets sacked, fumbled and intercepted. He has no idea. That is the GOP world...
Baghdad Bob rides again.
I think Edsall is confusing strategy (as in, something you try to cause) with facts on the ground (as in, something you have to deal with).
Nevertheless, Bill Clinton has got to be either scoffing angrily or laughing hysterically right now. Mayor Rahm, too. This coalition is no way to have a coalition.
The Democratic Party abandon the white working class decades ago. People are just now figuring out the charade.
Human Resources people, that's me!
I am very strategic.
clouds.
Who were the voters who rejected Issue 2 in Ohio? Who are the 300,000 that already signed petitions to recall Walker in Wisconsin? White working class people.
Not smart to underestimate an opponent.
The President has too much campaign money for this to be his strategy. I think this is New York Times idiocy rather than Obama idiocy. They're trying to convince themselves they don't need the people who wont be voting for them, so as to prevent panic from setting in. Otherwise they might start questioning their own actions, and it's way too late in the game for that to do any good.
Allie said...
Who were the voters who rejected Issue 2 in Ohio? Who are the 300,000 that already signed petitions to recall Walker in Wisconsin? White working class people.
Apparently, a lot more of them supported Walker and the move to exempt OH from ZeroCare.
The single-celled intelligence forgets that only the public sector unions had skin in the Walker or Kasich fights.
Allie -- Who are the ones who elected Kasisch and Walker?
Good God, you are a piss-poor arguer. What's worse, you are trite and boring.
Come on, dude. Be interesting. Show us a scintilla of cleverness. Pretend you are at a dinner party and you are trying to make the impression that you are not just a spouter of banality.
It's a simple fact and it obviously bugs you, good. Not all who are signing the recall petitions are public sector union members, nor were they in Ohio.
I'm not bugged by the fact. I'm bugged that you are so ridiculously trite and banal. What's worse is that you don't understand it. That makes it pathological.
My view is that GOP is like the QB who in this first play off game gets sacked, fumbled and intercepted. He has no idea. That is the GOP world...
So the 2010 elections were all part of the plan, huh?
When you say the first 100 days are being revised, you ain't kidding. If Obama wins, what's he gonna do when he can't campaign anymore?
If there are already 300K signatures, 200K are duplicates or fake.
Not that some official won't 'verify' them.
Seven, I think you bug yourself, do you ever just hate yourself for being such an ass? You should.
Allie said...
It's a simple fact and it obviously bugs you, good. Not all who are signing the recall petitions are public sector union members, nor were they in Ohio.
The only simple fact is that unemployment is hitting the white working class harder than anyone else. GodZero has only helped the moneyed classes and there aren't enough of them to make a difference.
Besides, the working stiffs, and the out-of-working stiffs, were one the side opposite the Occupiers. That's who Zero loves.
Potential white middle class Obama voter to Obama:
Where's my check, bitch?
How is he going to win by getting a mere 20% of the electorate?
He sees dead people.
And they vote.
Wow, its just going to be brutal for the dems next year if the NYT is already floating this "I wasn't dumped, I dumped her" crap. So the democrats really don't need the white vote? I guess this makes it easier to stop campaigning in the south and southwest.
From the op-ed:
"In the United States, Teixeira noted, “the Republican Party has become the party of the white working class,” while in Europe, many working-class voters who had been the core of Social Democratic parties have moved over to far right parties, especially those with anti-immigration platforms."
This trend has been evident for some time, as noted by others, to Reagan in '80, but also to Nixon in '68 and '72. The problem has been, and might continue to be, these voters have generally voted for Republican executives on cultural and foreign policy and defense issues, and Democrat legislators on economic and entitlement issues.
The question moving forward is, are they smart enough to recognize the extreme risk sovereign debt, driven by unfunded entitlements, poses to the overall economy?
We know the center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment -- professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists -- and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic" are willing captives to the Democrats, no matter what. If the white working class voters are smarter than these poseurs and leeches, then Obama, and the Democrats, are done.
I'm not so confident they are smarter, but I desperately hope I'm wrong.
both currently advocate a revised Democratic alliance in which whites without college degrees are effectively replaced by well-educated socially liberal whites...
I wonder what percentage of those "well-educated" white people who voted for Obama in 2008 are unemployed in 2012?
Maybe "well-educated" means "well-indoctrinated." And of course the problem with indoctrinating people in liberal ideology is that reality is a bitch.
One more constituency they're counting on: city, county, state, and federal public employees. Big time.
And it is really weird how we still divide people into racial groups in the 21st century.
"White people," oh yeah, that clarifies things. There are only a billion of us on the planet.
It's glib and stupid to think this way. It really is. What does skin color tell you? Why is the New York Times prattling about pigmentation? Who cares about pigment levels? Other than C-4 and the New York Times?
Aren't you at least slightly embarrassed to be making this massive generalizations about millions of people whom you've never met, on the grounds of their skin color? How is this not racist?
Stalin had white skin. Washington had white skin. I have white skin. What does white skin tell you?
People who talk this way should be mocked without mercy.
I grant that you might want to see how white people are voting, if you have government policies that discriminate against white people. For instance, the Obama administration might want to calibrate how abandoning affirmative action might increase support in the white working class, and measure that against loss of support in black and hispanic communities.
But really I think the New York Times, and elites in general, are quite comfortable with racial generalizations--no matter how glib or stupid--because that is exactly how elites think about ordinary people. We're just numbers to them. It's all about ideology. They dehumanize us anyway. The racial rhetoric just makes it more obvious. Assholes.
Human Resources people, that's me!
Shocking that you admit to this.
@ America's Politico
I can't tell if you are being satirical, or merely trolling, either way that's some funny shit you're spoutin'.
@ Allie
I can't tell if you're a man or a woman, either way that's some funny shit you're...well, actually no, it's not funny, or even germaine to the thread. I think Seven pegged you (Hah) with banal.
The angry sock monkey has a good chance of winning much as I hate to say it. Just do the math. He's not going to loose the minority vote period. Too many are indoctrinated into hating Republicans because. That's they're reason, just because.
He's gonna have the MSM hanging off his sack just as always, not to mention Hollyweird, and Academia. And he's gonna have the big money donors he's been pandering to, like GE, GM, Wall Street, and every crony capitalist he went to bed with, for, however you say it. Not to mention the Union/communists. And the general just left wing nut jobs that seem to pop up when ever the Earth, or a cop killer is threatened.
Stack them all up against, sane people.
I think he'll loose in the end. After all, he won against one of the worst candidates the Reps ever ran. McCain made Bob Dole look downright presidential. Even with McCain flying back to DC so he could stick his foot in his mouth one more time, McCain was leading in the polls. Truth tell, I thought that was McCains' "YEEHAWWW!" moment ala Howard Dean. If you make a big production of flying into Washington to do something presidential, you'd better effing do something presidential, not punt on third down.
PS. Fast and Furious was all fun and games till an American Border agent was killed... now its just games.
PPS. Much like "Occupy Black Friday", expect "Occupy the Vote" You heard it here first.
Agree to some extent with Rush, but not entirely.
One thing that he leaves out is that the Dems still have the support of the union bosses, and, thus, get their money and their muscle. And, some of their membership vote as they traditionally have - much less so in the private sector than with some government union members, who are much more in on the looting. But, then, we saw what happened to union membership and contributions in WI when Walker got his way - a lot of the teachers dropped out.
But, I would take issue with the claim that whites are taking the brunt of the Obama recession. Rather, Blacks seem to be hit worse, and esp. hard with the younger ones. Which is why, while Obama may get most of their votes, as a percentage, many fewer are expecting to vote (i.e. they won't vote against him, but they won't vote for him either, so they aren't going to vote). Now this may change, if they can be shown that there is a real racial conspiracy against them...
The other part of the coalition that seems to be fairly soft right now are the Jews - for good reason. Obama has not supported Israel, but rather, has supported its enemies. The more devout the Jew, the closer his or her connection to Israel, the less enthusiastic they are for Obama. This isn't going to be that many votes, but could involve a decent amount of money, which is why the Jews, despite their relatively few numbers, have always had a seat at the Dems table, since the time of FDR. Of course, it appears that Obama's campaign has already turned off credit card verification, so they can get a jump on the illegal contributions, and this may compensate for the money lost by insulting Jews and Israel.
@ America's Politico
I can't tell if you are being satirical, or merely trolling, either way that's some funny shit you're spoutin'.
My bet is trolling. He never goes out of character, and never fails to dump the same sort of stuff here, and, presumably elsewhere. But, we rarely get a second post in one thread from him, or if we do, it is 100 comments later.
Because he never stays around to debate his claims, I figure that he is a drive by troller. And, I quit reading his posts months ago for that reason.
PS. Fast and Furious was all fun and games till an American Border agent was killed... now its just games.
I think that this, along with the other Obama scandals, such as Solyndra and the other "Green Energy" payoffs are going to help sink Obama's chance at a second term. He ran as a clean, transparent, candidate, and turns out to have the most corrupt Administration of most of our lifetimes. And, he keeps pushing "Green Jobs" and "infrastructure" in his new "jobs" bill, despite the fact that these are code words for shoveling massive amounts of money to his cronies.
These scandals, no matter how hard the Dems and the MSM try to bury them, are starting to enter the consciousness of the average American voter. And, that isn't going to help him get reelected.
Guys -- America's Politico is high satire. It's hilarious. Think of it as a comedy routine of what Democrats are telling themselves.
Now you all take it easy on Allie, she earned her banality being in a locked ward all her life. Only question is she a 'Nurse Crachit' concerned only with movements, bowel or otherwise, [in which case Titus would fall in love] or a 'nice' psych nurse--the kind that gives a 'needy' guy 'special attention'. Those were my favorites, kinky as hell and lustily enjoyed providing sexual mental health therapy. God--I miss them!!
The Republicans are the stupid party.
The Democrats are the crooked party.
We are so screwed.
"He ran as a clean, transparent, candidate, and turns out to have the most corrupt Administration of most of our lifetimes."
The Chicago Way.
Look, people aren't going to know how awful Chicago pols really are until they get to see the way they work. Obama is doing exactly what is done every single day in Chicago. In Chicago, this style barely holds the city together. The system is only sustained with a very strong suburban structure.
It's glib and stupid to think this way. It really is. What does skin color tell you? Why is the New York Times prattling about pigmentation? Who cares about pigment levels? Other than C-4 and the New York Times?
I do, but all us gingers do, obsessively. And before you frame your retort, just remember that ginger is our word.
voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment -- professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists -- and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic
So, assume Obama gets 75% of the vote from each of these groups.
Want to guess what that translates to in a national popular vote percentage?
I thought it was the other way around, Hagar.
Allie said...
Who are the 300,000 that already signed petitions to recall Walker in Wisconsin? White working class people.
Um, teachers are not "working class people" by any stretch of the imagination.
Um, teachers are not "working class people" by any stretch of the imagination.
My brother is a teacher. Please explain your point.
"America is a classless society. Furthermore, everybody belongs to the middle class."
I think he means that, while teaching is not necessarily easy, it pales in comparison to the actual "working class" that does physical labor.
The hardest job I ever had was not Marine Corps infantry, it was working on the UPS mail line. 3am start time. 3 trucks to load. The type of job that requires both physical and mental rigor the entire shift. I came home so mentally and physically exhausted that I would crash on the couch, waking up just in time to make my next shift. I lasted 4 weeks.
So say whatever you want, but I doubt most teachers could handle an actual working class job like construction or manufacturing. Of the teachers you know, do you think any could be a coal miner in West VA or pour hot metal in Pittsburgh?
Who are the 300,000 that already signed petitions to recall Walker in Wisconsin? White working class people.
But we already know thats simply not true. Like the OWS "working class" crowd that included trust fund babies and perpetual students majoring in Hemp Studies...
The only simple fact is that unemployment is hitting the white working class harder than anyone else.
This statement is simply a lie with no basis in fact.
I love how you (and many others on this site) just make up facts to suit your world view.
These "class" classifications tend to be pretty stupid.
However, I can remember when the NEA insisted it was not a "union," but a "professional association," and it was all for the children, no way did their members have any selfish motivations!
That changed rather quickly when Al Shanker et al. formed the AFT and began seriously cutting into the NEA membership dues collection.
White collar employment never seemed like "working class" to me.
I always thought "working class" involved far more manual labor through skilled employment with knowledge derived from on the job training or through trade schools.
Accountant = not working class.
Waste hauler = working class.
Teacher = not working class.
Truck driver = working class
This statement is simply a lie with no basis in fact.
You should simply ask for more information about the statement before dismissing it as a lie.
If we're talking percentages, just based on memory, I'd venture the male black population is probably the highest. If we're talking purely in terms of numbers, I could easily see white working class having the lion's share of the unemployed.
RASCIST!!!
There, now the thread is complete.
Scott M said...
My brother is a teacher. Please explain your point.
Working class = skilled or unskilled labor not requiring a college degree.
The left loves to pretend they are for the "working class" (who conveniently get their salaries from the government) but it is a silly lie.
I'm sorry. I'm still stuck on 'editors' as one of the significant members of a voting block. Certainly it's not because if their numbers. Then what could it be? Hmmm.....
both currently advocate a revised Democratic alliance in which whites without college degrees are effectively replaced by well-educated socially liberal whites...
How well educated? Because my bachelors degree, good job 30 something cousins are about to vote republican for the first time. Strategy fail!
The left loves to pretend they are for the "working class" (who conveniently get their salaries from the government) but it is a silly lie.
And how exactly is the right for the "working class". The current Republican party wants to increase the tax burden on the working class while they reduce the burden on the rich. They also want to destroy all the protections (health, safety, and environmental regs) that have improved the working and living conditions of the working classes.
The current Republican party wants to increase the tax burden on the working class while they reduce the burden on the rich.
Laugh out loud funny.
I look forward to all the "evidence" you can produce to back up this absurd assertion.
They also want to destroy all the protections (health, safety, and environmental regs) that have improved the working and living conditions of the working classes.
Laugh out loud funny.
I look forward to all the "evidence" you can produce to back up this absurd assertion.
They also want to destroy all the protections (health, safety, and environmental regs) that have improved the working and living conditions of the working classes.
By the way idiot, thank you for proving my point.
You're all for the "working class" doncha know!!!
Hilarious.
By the way, this was great:
Freder Frederson said...
I love how you (and many others on this site) just make up facts to suit your world view.
Followed by:
The current Republican party wants to increase the tax burden on the working class while they reduce the burden on the rich.
Why it is almost as if you're projecting or something, silly girl.
Good times:
Obama's approval rating has decreased among all six partisan/ideology groups Gallup tracks on a regular basis since January, but it has dropped the most -- 10 percentage points, from 40% to 30% -- among pure independents. These are the roughly 14% of national adults who neither identify with one of the two major parties nor indicate a leaning. Obama's approval rating has declined by nearly as much -- eight points -- among moderate/liberal Republicans, from 29% to 21%.
He can like totally afford to give up on a portion of the electorate...
I look forward to all the "evidence" you can produce to back up this absurd assertion.
Who do you think are the 50 odd percent who pay no income tax that it is fashionable for so many Republicans to deride and insist should pay their "fair share"? Who do you think would end up paying up much more under Cain's 9-9-9 plans or any of the so-called flat tax proposals (every one of which also completely eliminates taxes on capital gains, which the working class has almost none of). It is certainly not the upper middle class or the rich.
What was that previous thread a few minutes ago about--- reasoned debate, argument, rhetoric, yada yada yada?
Everything Rush's PT Barnum's schtick isn't. Rush-Tee Barnum, pal of the working man.
‘Sorepaw’ said, “Good luck explaining to the poorer members of the Democratic coalition why they should keep supporting, say, the environmental suppressive measures favored by the wealthy, well-connected members of the same coalition”
Good luck explaining to the urban poor why they must tolerate non-functional schools just so the Democrat party can retain the support of teachers unions.
Goodl luck explaining to those trying to get a toehold on bottom rungs of the labor market why uncontrolled illegal immigration is in their interest.
Of course, what they’re really abandoning are the remaining private-sector unions. Membership in these unions will continue to decline as it’s all too obvious that they can survive only in protected parts of the private economy (e.g., regulated utilities). Further political investment here may not be not cost-effective.
And so, the Democrat Party’s daffynition of “working class” has become, “over-compensated government employee.”
Who do you think are the 50 odd percent who pay no income tax that it is fashionable for so many Republicans to deride and insist should pay their "fair share"?
Um, you can't name a single elected Republican who has done this.
Not one.
So you failed there, stupid.
Who do you think would end up paying up much more under Cain's 9-9-9 plans or any of the so-called flat tax proposals
Not "the working class" you clown.
You have zero, no evidence to back up your idiotic assertions.
You still believe them though.
"voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment -- professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists"
These are people who are upset with uncredentialed Gov. Walker because he had the temerity to sleight their perceived social status they grant themselves due to their credentials. That is a graver sin in their minds than pinching their paychecks. If Walker had a wall full of parchments and did the same thing, they would still be pissed, but they would not have internalized it as a personal assault like they currently have.
sorry for the repeats. Blogger kept saying I didn't WV right when, actually, I had.
Um, you can't name a single elected Republican who has done this.
Um its a standard line of Michele Bachmann's stump speech.
You have zero, no evidence to back up your idiotic assertions.
I have plenty of evidence
You really should do a little internet research before you make yourself look like an uninformed idiot.
Um its a standard line of Michele Bachmann's stump speech.
Hysterical.
The number of times Bachmann is quoted as saying those who pay no federal income taxes should pay more (or as you asserted their fair share) remains at zero.
In other words, you linked to something that didn't say what you said it did.
You silly little liar.
I have plenty of evidence
No, no you do not.
From the article:
Depending on how you do the math, people now paying zero or negative taxes might be faced with a 27 percent tax on income.
In other words, you linked to something that didn't say what you said it did.
You silly little liar.
You have zero, no evidence to back up your idiotic assertions.
You still believe them though.
You really should do a little internet research before you make yourself look like an uninformed idiot.
You should familairze yourself with the real actual meaning of words, before linking to articles claiming they say things they do not say.
Dumbass.
Who do you think are the 50 odd percent who pay no income tax that it is fashionable for so many Republicans to deride
And of course there are no examples of Repulicans deriding anyone.
Of course in your mind these are all "facts" even though there is no actual evidence of them.
The current Republican party wants to increase the tax burden on the working class while they reduce the burden on the rich.
Coming from someone who wants the Bush tax cuts, which removed tens of millions of filers from federal income tax liability, to expire no less.
Depending on how you do the math, people now paying zero or negative taxes might be faced with a 27 percent tax on income.
How does this constitute the article contending "something that didn't say what you said it did."
I thought the quote you cited explicitly supports the contention I was making;that those paying no, or even negative taxes--through the EITC--would potentially be faced with a 27% tax.
Who exactly do you think gets the EITC?
Freder, regardless of whether Republicans do or don't want to increase taxes on the working class, the current policies of the countries democratic leadership make this inevitable. The amount of money the government could get by increasing taxes on the rich is tiny as compared to the actual debt and deficits. The reality is that if the federal government continues down the path it is going, taxes will have to be massively increased across all incomes, including the working class.
Who were the voters who rejected Issue 2 in Ohio?
Middletown, OH likely will be laying off firefighters next month because the city cannot afford state-mandated retirement payments for fire fighters.
Maybe next time, Ohio citizens will vote sensibly. When the money runs out, it runs out.
I thought the quote you cited explicitly supports the contention I was making;that those paying no, or even negative taxes--through the EITC--would potentially be faced with a 27% tax.
The only way that I can see getting to 27% is if you include tax rebates. And, that wouldn't be a 27% tax increase, because a tax rebate is not a negative tax, but rather, a transfer payment. And, somehow, in your view, those getting such transfer payments are owed such.
Heck, I would be happy to see a flat tax, or, even a slightly progressive one. I am just not a fan of giving people free money. So, let's just start by eliminating transfer payments, excluding those that have been mostly earned (i.e. Social Security retirement and Medicare).
The moral difficulty in transfer payments, in the form of refundable tax credits or the like, is that those with a zero or negative tax income tax liability have no incentive for the government to economize, and every incentive to vote themselves more largess from the public treasury.
One problem with Freder's suggestion that all these white working class voters are going to vote their pocket books, and that means voting for more transfer payments from the wealth creators to the government dependents, is that working class, at least in the last 50 years or so, has not been that poor. Rather, their labor can best be described as brawn instead of brain. For much of the last half of the 20th Century, they made out quite well, esp. in industrial unions.
Another problem is that maybe the heartland of white working class is what has been termed the Jacksonian belt, initially Scots-Irish, across what is now the rust belt. This is the demographic that gave Hillary! so much support, and where Obama failed miserably, until the general election, where he got their grudging support, despite being tarred as clinging to their guns and religion.
They reside in, and are likely the swing vote, in a number of the traditional swing states - OH, PA, MI, VA, WV, etc. And, were some of the strongest supporters of the Tea Party movement.
Calling them Jacksonians gives away a bit of why Obama and the Dems have alienated this part of the White working class. They have long (and long here means most of 2 centuries) viewed politicians, and esp. politicians in D.C., as inherently corrupt. Obama and the Dems throwing hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money to their cronies, friends, and families, is just one more extreme example of all that they hate in politics.
I thought the quote you cited explicitly supports the contention I was making;that those paying no, or even negative taxes--through the EITC--would potentially be faced with a 27% tax.
Hilarious.
Except you never said "potentially"
You said this:
Freder Frederson said...
And how exactly is the right for the "working class". The current Republican party wants to increase the tax burden on the working class while they reduce the burden on the rich.
Note the absences of the word "potentially" there.
As I said, you should familairze yourself with the real actual meaning of words, before commenting further.
So in sum we have:
Freeder assertion:
Freder Frederson said...
And how exactly is the right for the "working class". The current Republican party wants to increase the tax burden on the working class while they reduce the burden on the rich.
Freeder link:
Depending on how you do the math, people now paying zero or negative taxes might be faced with a 27 percent tax on income.
Freeder not comprehening the words "depending on how you do the math" and "might" by concluding:
I thought the quote you cited explicitly supports the contention I was making;that those paying no, or even negative taxes--through the EITC--would potentially be faced with a 27% tax
High comedy, indeed.
So, Freder, the Dems are gonna protect us working stiffs from injury on the jobs by making sure we have no jobs on which to be injured?
The Occupiers had the support of the media and all the groups Obama is basing his new coalition on; the tea party did not. But who really influenced election outcomes? The Tea Party. And who disintegrated into anarchy, ie dirt and disease and crime? The Occupiers- the posterchild of the new Obama coalition.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा