- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

Candidates battle for working-class whites

Published: Sat, September 8, 2012 @ 12:00 a.m.

Candidates battle for working-class whites

Associated Press


President Barack Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney are working feverishly for an increasingly smaller but crucial slice of the electorate — white, working-class voters.

These clock-punching voters — from Iowa’s tiny manufacturing cities to Virginia coal country to pockets of Ohio reliant on the auto industry — are considered the potential tipping point in battleground states that will decide the winner Nov. 6. These voters also are critical to turning less- competitive states such as Michigan into swing states in the final stretch.

Romney is trying to expand what polls show is an advantage for the Republican while Obama hopes to narrow the gap. Both candidates are trying to pit these voters against their opponent by stoking a sense of economic and social unfairness and also by calling on surrogates with stronger ties to these voters. It’s why Romney has seized on Obama’s decision to give states greater flexibility on welfare work requirements and why Obama turned to former President Bill Clinton, long popular with working-class voters, to make the case for his second-term bid.

“In the richest country in the history of the world, this Obama economy has crushed the middle class,” Romney said in accepting the Republican presidential nomination.

Obama counters that Romney’s opposition to a federal bailout of U.S. automakers hurts his chances with working-class whites.

These voters are a hodge-podge of union households and gun-rights advocates, often from rural areas and smaller cities. They are found in a handful of competitive states where neither candidate has an appreciable advantage, including northern Florida and northwest and southeast Ohio. They also are found in key counties in states that have voted Democratic in presidential elections since the 1980s but are seen as more competitive this year. Those include areas outside Madison and Milwaukee in southern Wisconsin, mixed-income suburbs outside Detroit and rural parts of western Pennsylvania.

Neither Romney nor Obama has a natural connection with them.

Both are Harvard- educated and wealthy. But Obama, an African- American raised politically in Chicago’s Democratic network, has struggled with these voters.

Romney, the son of a former governor and car-company president, made a fortune as a private-equity firm executive before serving a term as Massachusetts governor.


1southsidedave(5117 comments)posted 2 years, 11 months ago

White, working-class voters...the "new" minority.

Suggest removal:

276Ytown(1318 comments)posted 2 years, 11 months ago

President Obama has many times quoted (actually misquoted) Lincoln, a Republican. Why doesn't he use this one?

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.

Abraham Lincoln

Suggest removal:

3NoBS(2267 comments)posted 2 years, 11 months ago

Romney actually blamed Obama for "crushing the middle class"??? That's a teabagger dream, not a Democrat dream. Our governor - Kasich - used similar words - he wanted to crush those teachers and other public employees. Look how well that's turned out for him. He's a pariah, even within his own party.

If that's the best Romney can come up with to try to lure "swing voters" to his side, he's in trouble.

Suggest removal:

4franc004(71 comments)posted 2 years, 11 months ago

76: Lincoln didn't say that William Boeckter did but it's a good quote. Also, how come no one ever talks about the Republican class warfare that pits working class private employees against working class public, black against white, gay against straight, and the list goes on...

Suggest removal:

576Ytown(1318 comments)posted 2 years, 11 months ago

franc: I stand corrected. According to snopes, it's also been attributed to Lincoln by many, including Reagan.

In 1942, a leaflet entitled "Lincoln on Limitation." was published. On one side was a Lincoln quote. On the other, Boetcker's. Later printings somehow omitted his byline.

Thanks to Boetcker for words of wisdom as pertinent today as they were in his day!

Suggest removal:

6DSquared(1515 comments)posted 2 years, 11 months ago

franc, Becaust Public employees receive OUR money. That's why! The Dems always play the race card when they lose on the facts; and if you want to be homosexual than go right ahead, but don't you dare teach my kids in school that it is "Normal".

Suggest removal:

7jojuggie(1608 comments)posted 2 years, 11 months ago

The most important event at either national convention was the "vote" taken by the Democratic delegates on a last-minute resolution to reinsert the words "God" and "Jerusalem" into the Democratic Party platform.

Regarding God, since Karl Marx, the aim of the left, everywhere on Earth, has been a godless society. And the Democratic Party has evolved over the last half century from a liberal party into a leftist one -- so much so that it is now indistinguishable from any of the leftist parties in Western Europe.

Yes, Franklin D. Roosevelt was a left-wing president -- as concerned the size of the state and its role in the economy. That is of great importance, of course. But an ever-expanding state is only half of the left's agenda.

A thoroughly secular society is the other half. And in that regard, Franklin Roosevelt was no man of the Left. He regularly spoke of the need to defend and preserve "Christian civilization" and of the centrality of the Bible and religion to American life.

Here are three representative statements by FDR:
"On this day -- this American holiday -- we are celebrating the rights of free laboring men and women. The preservation of these rights is vitally important now, not only to us who enjoy them but to the whole future of Christian civilization" (Labor Day, September 1, 1941).

"We guard against the forces of anti-Christian aggression . . ." (Madison Square Garden, Oct. 28, 1940).
"The world is too small to provide adequate "living room" for both Hitler and God. In proof of that, the Nazis have now announced their plan for enforcing their new German, pagan religion all over the world -- a plan by which the Holy Bible and the Cross of Mercy would be displaced by Mein Kampf and the swastika and the naked sword" (State of the Union Address, January 6, 1942).

However, by the mid-1960s, to speak of militantly atheistic Communism's threat to Judeo-Christian civilization the way Roosevelt spoke of the Nazi threat to it was to invite left-wing mockery. "Godless communism" was dismissed as laughable.

So, it is not surprising that whereas previous Democratic Party platforms all contained references to God, the 2012 party platform committee voted to remove any such reference.

The 2008 Democratic Party platforms had included this sentence:
"We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential."

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2015 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes