Stan Greenberg’s conclusions don’t add up. And Carville? You should know better.
Tue, Oct 20, 2009
The recent Carville-Greenberg study of the teabagger Republican base had two big headlines. The first is that the Republican base lives in a bizarro world of paranoia.
The report concludes that the extreme GOP voters are not simply at the far end of a standard political continuum that runs left-center-right, but rather they stand fully apart.
The basic belief is that Obama — a former community organizer who seemingly came from nowhere — must have been propelled by some secret forces. This is no small segment of the population and represents almost one-in-five voters and nearly two-of-three self identified Republicans.
The second headline is that this paranoia has nothing to do with race.
“Race just wasn’t brought up,” said a surprised Greenberg on a conference call with reporters Friday. He said that the focus groups were given as much time to talk about race as they could possibly need.
“If there was any kind of a racial element, we thought we’d pick it up. We didn’t,” said James Carville, who also worked on the report.
Hey Stan – of course “race just wasn’t brought up”. Did you really think it would get brought up? Surely Jim Carville, who grew up in the south, knows how well white racists have learned to bury their bigotry under a load of hooey. I would have been shocked if race HAD been explicitly brought up by your subjects, Stan. Go ahead, give them “as much time to talk about race as they could possibly need” and it wouldn’t come up if you waited until hell froze over.
What they did “bring up” was the claim that the first African American president in US history simply MUST have had some power other than his own abilities and appeal to voters to propel him into the presidency. This didn’t set off alarm bells? Did you guys think to ask why these people think this black man wouldn’t be in a high position absent some powerful outside secret force? Do you have to have a sledgehammer hit you over the head with it?
I really think this study needs to continue along those lines, Stan. Dig deeper. The conclusion you make about race in your study is totally undercut by your bigger conclusion about the paranoia. It doesn’t add up.
Tags: barack obama, james carville, racism, stan greenberg, teabaggers
October 20th, 2009 at 6:36 am
I would not be surprised if people don’t think or even realize the extent to which their paranoia might be about race. Plus being considered racists would illegitimate those beliefs. Xenophobia on the other hand they’re more comfortable with and will own up to willingly.
October 20th, 2009 at 8:50 am
The slightest critisism towards this current President is all being categorized as racist. This is the lame, out of touch tactic of the liberals to defend a man who had NO political experience at all. What easier way to deflect a leaders critisism than to say…Oh well people who disagree with him must be racist! It’s crazy…
I am curious as to what the centrist Democrats are going to be called as they are bailing out on Obama! These are people who actually voted for the man. What are the hardliners in the party going to label them as they continue to recognize that members of their own party feel they made a HUGE mistake! Are they racist now?
What pathetic arguements will you guys offer when the Republicans
have a Negro (is that a politically incorrect word now or am I just a racist?) who is TRULY qualified and 100% African American! That arguement will never be able to be made again! So I guess you’re going to have to milk this for all it’s worth.
October 22nd, 2009 at 5:27 am
Here comes Obama… as foretold over two-hundred years ago..
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses, over loose fiscal policy, followed by a dictatorship.”
Alexander Tytler, Scottish Professor (1776).
Our thanks to the idiots who supported this new-style Sugar-Daddy-of-the-left.
P.S. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that this Blog is being funded accordingly, by taxpayer dough. Seem to recall in a previous post that the host is “pennieless” and asking for donations.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:29 am
How come when I voted for Blackwell – I was a dumb conservative, but when I voted against Obama — I became a racist?
Or does this mean everyone, like many reading this blog, who voted against Blackwell were also racist?
Or do you guys pick and choose what black candidates are allowed to be voted for and voted against?