The Reverse Bradley Effect, those who told their country club chums that they were going to vote for McCain, but who then voted for Obama. Clearly, there were a very great deal of them.
But does this only refer to Warren Buffett? No, it refers at least as much to people in the tradition once represented in Congress by his father, the late Howard Buffett: morally and socially conservative, strictly realist in foreign policy, and as opposed as any black American (yes, as opposed as that) to illegal immigration, to excessive legal immigration, or to any reduction in the status of the English language. (Blacks, of course, are also overwhelmingly moral and social conservatives, and foreign policy realists.)
They have put Obama in.
And they can just as easily put him back out again in 2012.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is about the fifth time in recent days you have posted dire warnings about how Obama is so dependent upon all of these social and economic conservatives for re-election.
ReplyDeleteBut you also kept telling us that Obama was like this as well (leaving aside his imeccably liberal voting record in the Senate). So why the need for these warnings? Are you afraid that actually he might not turn out to be what you assume he would be?
Social conservatives, not economic "conservatives". You can't be both, just as you can't be either and a foreign policy hawk.
ReplyDeleteI said that Obama would be, as he now is, electorally dependent on them, not that he himself is one. He has his moments, though.
And where did that magical 60% in the Senate go, that was so confidently predicted?
ReplyDeleteAsk the Republican leaders in the Senate. They were the ones expecting it.
ReplyDeleteIt pretty much exists now anyway. Several Republican Senators who held on are among those who regularly vote with the Democrats.