Obama Wrong, Wrong, And Wrong As He Bitterly Clings To Discredited Sociology
A few days back we noted that a paper by Prof. Bartels debunking the "What's The Matter With Kansas" argument was sweeping the tonier districts of the lefty blogs. The gist - Obama's theory of an embittered working class turning to guns, gods, and racism out of economic frustration is not supported by actual evidence. This created an an awkward moment for the reality-based.
Today Prof. Bartels is back in the pages of the NY Times, delivering eye-burn to a whole new group of libs:
Small-town people of modest means and limited education are not fixated on cultural issues. Rather, it is affluent, college-educated people living in cities and suburbs who are most exercised by guns and religion. In contemporary American politics, social issues are the opiate of the elites.
And he has the data to show it.

Sheer, arrogant condescension.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 17, 2008 at 03:19 PM
Prof. Bartels took the words right out of my mouth. If you want to see 'bitter' go look at the comments over at Daily Kos.
Posted by: Publius | April 17, 2008 at 03:25 PM
Do not pay attention to the man behind the curtain... You are not in Kansas anymore, Toto.
Posted by: sbw | April 17, 2008 at 03:29 PM
"people of modest means and limited education are not fixated on cultural issues"
'limited education'
2004 election demographics based on education?
Kerry won hs drop outs-50-49(4% of total vote)
He also won post graduates 55-44(16% of total vote)
Bush wins hs grads-52-47(22%)
Bush wins some college-52-46(32%)
Bush wins college grads-52-46(26%)
So basically, if you have anything less than a doctorate, your education must be 'limited'.
'modest means'
How bout income?
55% of 04 voters made more than 50k(family?) bush wins 56-43.
45% made less than 50k, Kerry wins 55-45.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
The larger implication is that education has very little to do with how people vote when compared to income. Joining education and income to analyze voting trends is an absolute joke.
If democrats want to increase their base, they need American families to become poorer, more hs dropouts, and more post grads.
Posted by: paul | April 17, 2008 at 03:31 PM
"If democrats want to increase their base, they need American families to become poorer, more hs dropouts, and more post grads."
Imigrants, run the boys out of school, you-name-it studies degrees.
Looks like they agree with Paul and have implemented a plan.
BO has a bittercling problem that has tainted him.
Posted by: Huggy | April 17, 2008 at 03:37 PM
The intellectual arrogance is the reason the Democrats cannot field decent candidates.The more left wing the party gets the less chance of finding the Goldilocks Zone with "normal" candidates.
Posted by: PeterUK | April 17, 2008 at 03:42 PM
"Some Astronomers are confident they will find many suitable planets in what they call the “Goldilocks zone”, where conditions are not too hot and not too cold, but “just right” for life. However Prof Watson argues the chances of intelligent life, are low."
That sounds like the city folks view of life, if one could call it that, in the boonies.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 17, 2008 at 03:51 PM
As someone born, raised and educated in fly-over country--but for two decades a resident of Manhattan--I am never surprised, yet constantly amazed, at how much coastal and urban blue staters presume to know (that they do not) about the people and places which they would never associate or visit. The arrogance, contempt, snobbery, and yes, elitism, on display is mostly laughable, and often sad.
My experience with urban-dwellers is that they possess to a greater degree the very hidebound attitudes they attribute to small town Americans.
An anecdote: Just last night attending the Yankees game, I sat next to two recent college grads. One of them--from upstate, near Albany--told me that his (former) fellow undergrads, from St. Peter's College in Jersey City, said they considered anyone from north of Yankee Stadium in the Bronx, to be Canadians--as if foreigners from another country!
Pride of place is one thing--denigrating other Americans' home, is something else entirely.
Posted by: Forbes | April 17, 2008 at 03:54 PM
Pride of place is one thing--denigrating other Americans' home, is something else entirely.
So right, Forbes. It reminded me of how Southerners, in my experience, are generally welcoming to relocating Yankees as long as they don't insist of constantly talking about how much better it was in Detroit and Youngstown and Newark.
Just for fun: You might be a Yankee if...
Posted by: DebinNC | April 17, 2008 at 04:08 PM
Kevin Drum has more. Heh.
Posted by: ParseThis | April 17, 2008 at 04:11 PM
There are two themes that the democrats need to make up lost ground upon, but instead they offer nuance...
1. "The democratic party wants ALL americans to make more money."
(offering 'social programs' to offset financial shortcomings is far too nuanced.)
2. Iraq-
Getting out is a ridiculously popular idea. Getting out because 'we are defeated' and 'cannot win' is not.
a modest suggestion would be for the dems to come up with their own, attainable benchmarks, and use it as the reason for withdrawal. Yes, they would have to acknowledge success on the ground, but at least then they would be able to justify their arguments for withdrawal.
Sadly, the Ned Lamont's of the party are obsessed with a message that they believe in-'we are doomed', not one that is palatable to a majority of the country.
A 'staged retreat' without providing that the troops are no longer necessary is once again, too nuanced. If we are retreating, why won't either dem candiate commit to a rapid withdrawal?
McCain 54-46.
McCain in a coma? 52-48.
Posted by: paul | April 17, 2008 at 04:15 PM
Something the "nouveau riche" left will never understand, you cannot buy class no matter how large your bankroll. You are either born with it or not, elitist educations and big money jobs are no guarantee you will ever be anything but trash.
Posted by: Sara | April 17, 2008 at 04:30 PM
The guy who came up with the Goldilocks Zone must have seen the cartoon I saw about 25 years ago captioned "Temperatures in Our Solar System." It was a crude drawing of the sun and nine planets. There was an arrow pointing to Mercury labelled "hotter than hell." An arrow pointing to Pluto said "colder than shit." A third arrow pointed to Earth saying "just about right."
Seemed pretty profound at the time...
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 17, 2008 at 04:53 PM
Barry and Michelle's self-induced hyper-remoteness from American Whiteness leads them to act completely shocked when questioned about the insane ravings of that asshole WRight or the sunken chested mewlings of Bill Ayers.
They really don't understand consveratism, moreso than most idiot liberals.
Posted by: E Buzz Miller, Rev Dr | April 17, 2008 at 05:10 PM
Wow. Barack gives Hillary the finger - no, not that finger - the birdy finger and the crowd cheers at a town hall meeting.
What a classless jerk.
Link to video clip in my name.
Posted by: centralcal | April 17, 2008 at 05:34 PM
Holy cow, centralcal! Hard to tell for sure whether it was deliberate, but in combination with his tone of voice it sure looked like it to me. The audience certainly thought it was.
If he did it on purpose, that was a seriously stupid move.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 17, 2008 at 05:40 PM
That was dumb. Betcha he sees that one again.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 17, 2008 at 05:41 PM
"If he did it on purpose..."
Oh, he did it on purpose alright! We all know how agile he is with his ET finger on both his right and his left hand. It is perpetually at the ready for any stray itch that might arise.
No, no, no - this non-ET finger scratching his cheek was well thought out and quite deliberate, I think.
Posted by: centralcal | April 17, 2008 at 05:55 PM
You know he felt better after he did it.
God bless Dick Cheney.
Posted by: ParseThis | April 17, 2008 at 06:10 PM
Cent,
Thanks for that link. I have to agree, after watching the video several times, that was sooo deliberate. You cracked me up with your agile ET finger analogy.
Posted by: Ann | April 17, 2008 at 06:11 PM
betterbitterPosted by: ParseThis | April 17, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Ann, I woke up this morning singing OH HAPPY DAY, partly because of the Pope's visit, but largely because of last night's wonderful debate.
Today, Barry is just making me sing louder than ever! Pope Benedict's entire message is one of hope. Boy's message of "hope" just pales in comparison.
Posted by: centralcal | April 17, 2008 at 06:21 PM
not supported by actual evidence.
Like that's ever bothered anyone on the left before.
Posted by: Pofarmer | April 17, 2008 at 06:47 PM
Yes, Pope Benedict praised God and American Exceptionalism.
Quite a contrast from last night's debate between Boy and Girl picking scabs.
On another note, I received a campaign request from McCain and I returned it with a comment and no money. I wrote: Make Mitt Romney your V.P. and I will send money.
Posted by: Ann | April 17, 2008 at 06:56 PM
"If democrats want to increase their base",
The easiest way for Democrats to increase their base, would be to stop supporting every two~bit terrorist that claims to hate America.
If they don't want to defend this great nation , they could at least keep from running down the ones who are willing to defend it.
Posted by: pagar | April 17, 2008 at 06:59 PM
Ann, I get a call every other night and the mailings - note cards, memo pads, etc. from RNC, Laura Bush, George Bush, et al. I am like you. I do not intend to send one penny until I know who the VP candidate is. I, too, would very much like it to be Mitt.
Posted by: centralcal | April 17, 2008 at 07:03 PM
I don't think he was giving the finger. And I think the audience reaction was to his saying that Hillary was "in her element." Don't get me wrong: I don't think the man has an ounce of class in his bones.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 17, 2008 at 07:15 PM
Centralcal is singing, Clarice is assigning lyric tasks, so I herewith present Ob-am-i, Ob-am-a:
Barack was the president of law review
Michelle was a lawyer in a firm
Barack says to Michelle "I want to marry you"
And Michelle says this as she frets about her perm
Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard
Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard
Barack writes a book and gives a keynote speech
pays the college debts they had incurred
Never listened closely to his Reverend preach
nor to Michelle as she most adamantly purred
Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard
Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard, yeah
In a couple of years they had bought
A home sweet home
With a couple of kids running in the yard
That Rezko and Auchi owned
Unhappy with the climate he finds in DC
Barack seeks higher office he can gain
Michelle campaigns a lot among the bourgeoisie
and on the trail often speaks about her pain
Yes, Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard
Hey, Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard
In a couple of years they had bought
A home sweet home
With a couple of kids running in the yard
That Rezko and Auchi owned
Yeah, unhappy with the way Barack has run his race
Michelle seeks out an office she can gain
Barack stays off the hustings but he does fundraise
and on the trail she still speaks about her pain
Yeah, Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard
Yeah, Ob-am-i Ob-am-a life is hard wah
Ob-am-a how life is hard
And if you don't like guns
vote Ob-am-i Ob-am-a
Posted by: Elliott | April 17, 2008 at 07:15 PM
"Yes, Pope Benedict praised God and American Exceptionalism."
and Michelle Obama?
Posted by: PeterUK | April 17, 2008 at 07:20 PM
Very good, Elliott!
Posted by: Porchlight | April 17, 2008 at 07:27 PM
Oh, and meant to add, great choice of song. Because what happens to Desmond and Molly Jones in the original? Nothing! They stay "happy ever after in the marketplace." They most assuredly do not get elected President and First Lady.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 17, 2008 at 07:33 PM
Thanks, Porchlight. It wasn't really a conscious choice, the "Ob-am-i Ob-am-a" has been playing in my head for a while and then a few days ago I thought of the aptness of the kids playing in the yard.
Posted by: Elliott | April 17, 2008 at 08:00 PM
Elliott - we are such a muscial group! Love it!
Obamee
Obameye
La la la la la Life goes on.
Posted by: centralcal | April 17, 2008 at 08:03 PM
Third Beatles reference in one day. Okay, I made one of the other two, but it's still good. ;)
Posted by: Porchlight | April 17, 2008 at 08:11 PM
Survey USA has McCain within 2% of Obama in MA. I wonder what the Superdelegages will do when they realize that nominating Obama puts Mass. in play?
Posted by: Ranger | April 17, 2008 at 08:25 PM
DebinNC:
So right, Forbes. It reminded me of how Southerners, in my experience, are generally welcoming to relocating Yankees as long as they don't insist of constantly talking about how much better it was in Detroit and Youngstown and Newark
OK, yes, I have a problem with the damn yankees moving down here.
Actually, to be honest, they make great neighbors.
But once the Giants won the Super Bowl, they've been insufferable.
At least there are no friggin Red Sox fans in the neighborhood.
Posted by: hit and run | April 17, 2008 at 08:28 PM
Hey! I'm in the virtual neighborhood. Be careful!
Posted by: Jane | April 17, 2008 at 08:45 PM
The only good thing about the Giants winning?
Putting Patriots fans in there place.
Especially the bandwagon fans.
What? Oh, carp Jane is here.
I'm just kidding. Just kidding. All I'm doing is trying to stir the pot. I love Bahstun....more than NYC, that's for sure.
Posted by: hit and run | April 17, 2008 at 08:55 PM
Come visit Hit, bring the family. I live in a place with historic significance. You would love it!
Posted by: Jane | April 17, 2008 at 08:57 PM
You are incorrigible*, Hit and Run.
_________________
*Under no circumstances consider this a recommendation that you become corrigible.
Posted by: Elliott | April 17, 2008 at 09:04 PM
I've been to Boston a couple times and loved it. I stayed in a hotel close enough to Fenway to walk there...so I did...and there was a vendor unloading something from outside left fied, so there was a gate open. I got to go stand on the warning track, ever so briefly, under the green monster.
That really was a lifelong dream of mine.
If the oppotunity presents itself again, I would come back in a heartbeat.
Posted by: hit and run | April 17, 2008 at 09:09 PM
Elliott, that was fantastic.
Yahoo has the front-page question, "last night's debate 'the worst ever'?" I can only hope debates between McCain and whoever survives Denver make them feel even worse.
Posted by: bgates | April 17, 2008 at 09:09 PM
Holy cow! The Pope shows up and delivers Christmas eight months early. Can it get any better? Sorry I asked.
Posted by: Chris | April 17, 2008 at 09:22 PM
"and whoever survives Denver"
Will there be a survivor from Denver? Stay tuned for the news direct from the trenches.
Posted by: pagar | April 17, 2008 at 09:26 PM
Headline of the International Herald Tribune:
Obama questions Democratic debate's relevance.
My guess is that later he will suggest there’s no point in an election, either.
Posted by: MarkO | April 17, 2008 at 09:28 PM
You can add race to the list of issues with which bitter, urban, soi-disant elites are obsessed. (They call it "diversity.")
Posted by: chris | April 17, 2008 at 09:54 PM
The only good thing about the Giants winning?
Putting Patriots fans in there place.
Especially the bandwagon fans.
What? Oh, carp Jane is here
Dear hit..What about the colts fans?
Hey bro.. hope you had a great day on the golf course..what was your score?
Posted by: HoosierHoops | April 17, 2008 at 10:11 PM
But there is solid statistical proof that 'liberals' strongly UNDERPEFORM economically, compared to normal people.
Why does everyone think the typical liberal is rich? They typical liberal is certainly poorer than the typical conservative.
Posted by: Trovos | April 17, 2008 at 10:13 PM
Most likely because so many rich famous people are liberal. But if you actually sit down and think about it, it makes sense that in the real world liberals tend to be less well-off; why else would they scream so loudly for the social welfare programs to keep being funded while blasting rich people simply for being rich?
Posted by: hM | April 17, 2008 at 10:29 PM
Oh, and for not forking that money over so the poor can continue to be enabled in their laziness.
Posted by: hM | April 17, 2008 at 10:30 PM