Which of these 2016 Democratic Candidates do you support?

[Bo]

Feingold. He actually has some principles, which is pretty damn rare for a Democratic Senator.

Franken?

No. Franken is a sleazeball.

Why? He's funny and he's a good Senator.

He cheated on Frannie and was a major crackhead in the 80s. And he lost his funniness sometime in the 90s. And no, he's not a good Senator.

If you're going to say Franken cheated on his wife and used drugs, then I need some reliable sources or I'm not going to believe that. And Franken is a better Senator than Norm Coleman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Franken#Saturday_Night_Live
Maybe not cheating, but definatley drugs.

So he did use cocaine. I never knew that. Well, good thing that he stopped using it. And while I strongly disapprove of Franken doing cocaine, he wasn't the only politician who did something illegal. Obama used cocaine and smoked weed, while many politicians (Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, and possibly Bush Jr.) just smoked weed.

[Bo]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

[milhouse24]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

[Bo]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

By white ethnic groups, I didn't mean religious groups. I meant white ethnic groups such as German, Polish, French, Russian, Swedish, etc. For Jewish people, most of them would vote for any Democrat, regardless of whether that Democrat is Jewish. The non-Jewish Obama won 78% of the Jewish vote in 2008. The Kennedys do appeal to many Irish voters, but their appeal is much more broad than that. And I'm honestly not sure most Italians voted for Giuliani, at least not when he ran for President. And I doubt most Italians would really care that much about the fact that we never had an Italian-American President.

[hcallega]

Roch, I would say that a ton of politicians did blow. It was the power drug of the '80s, and was big in college in the '60s and '70. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Obama and Bush both cocaine in college. In fact I would be surprised if they didn't!

Also the entire cast of SNL was high pretty much 24/7 during the '80s.

[milhouse24]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

By white ethnic groups, I didn't mean religious groups. I meant white ethnic groups such as German, Polish, French, Russian, Swedish, etc. For Jewish people, most of them would vote for any Democrat, regardless of whether that Democrat is Jewish. The non-Jewish Obama won 78% of the Jewish vote in 2008. The Kennedys do appeal to many Irish voters, but their appeal is much more broad than that. And I'm honestly not sure most Italians voted for Giuliani, at least not when he ran for President. And I doubt most Italians would really care that much about the fact that we never had an Italian-American President.

No offense, but I don't think there are enough Jewish people as swing voters to influence a national election.  Maybe if Wall Street bankers donate to one particular candidate giving them a money advantage.  But I'm not sure what you mean by religious groups, since most Italians are Roman Catholic.  I think its kinda weird that you group all white people together and consider Jewish people separate from white people.  You need to recognize there are strong ethnic and religious factions in non-Jewish white people.  The Christian Evangelicals are a very strong group comprised mostly of Anglicans, southern whites protestants with roots in England.  German, Polish and other Northern Europeans are mostly Reformed Christians but there really aren't as many of them in the US as Italians and Irish Catholics. I believe that Italian and Irish groups were heavily segregated in the US because of their Catholic religion and has formed a formidable ethnic and religious group.  Because of this, a prominent Italian American and win swing voters back to the Democratic party.  I don't think the Republicans will ever nominate a Catholic Italian because the Evangelicals have too much power.  I think Hispanics would also be attracted to any white-Catholic candidate. Why would Italians not care about having an Italian president?  Just because the Pope lives in Italy?  I think a moderate Italian can win a lot of Italian republican voters, Pelosi is too liberal.  Giuliani lost votes because there are very few Italians in Iowa, NH, and SC.  I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the influence of ethnic immigrant groups.  Ask an Italian person if they would vote for an Italian or Roman Catholic as president?  Do you think that White Catholics are no longer an influential voter group?

[Bo]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

By white ethnic groups, I didn't mean religious groups. I meant white ethnic groups such as German, Polish, French, Russian, Swedish, etc. For Jewish people, most of them would vote for any Democrat, regardless of whether that Democrat is Jewish. The non-Jewish Obama won 78% of the Jewish vote in 2008. The Kennedys do appeal to many Irish voters, but their appeal is much more broad than that. And I'm honestly not sure most Italians voted for Giuliani, at least not when he ran for President. And I doubt most Italians would really care that much about the fact that we never had an Italian-American President.

No offense, but I don't think there are enough Jewish people as swing voters to influence a national election.  Maybe if Wall Street bankers donate to one particular candidate giving them a money advantage.  But I'm not sure what you mean by religious groups, since most Italians are Roman Catholic.  I think its kinda weird that you group all white people together and consider Jewish people separate from white people.  You need to recognize there are strong ethnic and religious factions in non-Jewish white people.  The Christian Evangelicals are a very strong group comprised mostly of Anglicans, southern whites protestants with roots in England.  German, Polish and other Northern Europeans are mostly Reformed Christians but there really aren't as many of them in the US as Italians and Irish Catholics. I believe that Italian and Irish groups were heavily segregated in the US because of their Catholic religion and has formed a formidable ethnic and religious group.  Because of this, a prominent Italian American and win swing voters back to the Democratic party.  I don't think the Republicans will ever nominate a Catholic Italian because the Evangelicals have too much power.  I think Hispanics would also be attracted to any white-Catholic candidate. Why would Italians not care about having an Italian president?  Just because the Pope lives in Italy?  I think a moderate Italian can win a lot of Italian republican voters, Pelosi is too liberal.  Giuliani lost votes because there are very few Italians in Iowa, NH, and SC.  I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the influence of ethnic immigrant groups.  Ask an Italian person if they would vote for an Italian or Roman Catholic as president?  Do you think that White Catholics are no longer an influential voter group?

I think you misunderstood my post. I said that I doubt white ethnic groups (and I never said Jews aren't white) really care that much about the ethnicity of a candidate. Many white ethnic groups have intermarried numerous times over the last 150 years, and for a lot of Americans, the only thing Italian, German, French, etc. about them are their last names. Those voters don't care about a candidate's ethnicity. They care more about a candidate's positions on the issues. And I doubt much more Catholics would vote for Cuomo than for another Democrat because we already had a Catholic President (and a Catholic VP) and thus there would nothing new to see here. Identity politics might have mattered a lot to white ethnic groups in 1900, but it sure doesn't now.

[milhouse24]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

By white ethnic groups, I didn't mean religious groups. I meant white ethnic groups such as German, Polish, French, Russian, Swedish, etc. For Jewish people, most of them would vote for any Democrat, regardless of whether that Democrat is Jewish. The non-Jewish Obama won 78% of the Jewish vote in 2008. The Kennedys do appeal to many Irish voters, but their appeal is much more broad than that. And I'm honestly not sure most Italians voted for Giuliani, at least not when he ran for President. And I doubt most Italians would really care that much about the fact that we never had an Italian-American President.

No offense, but I don't think there are enough Jewish people as swing voters to influence a national election.  Maybe if Wall Street bankers donate to one particular candidate giving them a money advantage.  But I'm not sure what you mean by religious groups, since most Italians are Roman Catholic.  I think its kinda weird that you group all white people together and consider Jewish people separate from white people.  You need to recognize there are strong ethnic and religious factions in non-Jewish white people.  The Christian Evangelicals are a very strong group comprised mostly of Anglicans, southern whites protestants with roots in England.  German, Polish and other Northern Europeans are mostly Reformed Christians but there really aren't as many of them in the US as Italians and Irish Catholics. I believe that Italian and Irish groups were heavily segregated in the US because of their Catholic religion and has formed a formidable ethnic and religious group.  Because of this, a prominent Italian American and win swing voters back to the Democratic party.  I don't think the Republicans will ever nominate a Catholic Italian because the Evangelicals have too much power.  I think Hispanics would also be attracted to any white-Catholic candidate. Why would Italians not care about having an Italian president?  Just because the Pope lives in Italy?  I think a moderate Italian can win a lot of Italian republican voters, Pelosi is too liberal.  Giuliani lost votes because there are very few Italians in Iowa, NH, and SC.  I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the influence of ethnic immigrant groups.  Ask an Italian person if they would vote for an Italian or Roman Catholic as president?  Do you think that White Catholics are no longer an influential voter group?

I think you misunderstood my post. I said that I doubt white ethnic groups (and I never said Jews aren't white) really care that much about the ethnicity of a candidate. Many white ethnic groups have intermarried numerous times over the last 150 years, and for a lot of Americans, the only thing Italian, German, French, etc. about them are their last names.

Those voters don't care about a candidate's ethnicity. They care more about a candidate's positions on the issues. And I doubt much more Catholics would vote for Cuomo than for another Democrat because we already had a Catholic President (and a Catholic VP) and thus there would nothing new to see here. Identity politics might have mattered a lot to white ethnic groups in 1900, but it sure doesn't now.

Again you seem to group Catholics with Protestant Christianity and there is a huge difference between the two, just as there is a huge difference between Judaism and Roman Catholicism.  You should ask Pat Robertson if there is a difference between Southern Evangelicals and Roman Catholics.  It is true that a lot of Protestant factions have inter-married, but Jews and Catholics have continued to attend their own churches and are more recent immigrants.  It is true that Kennedy was elected in 1960 but he was killed before he finished his term, and many people disliked him and distrusted him because he was Catholic.  That was only 40 years ago, but before that Catholics were segregated and often had to attend different schools!  This may shock you but there are still plenty of families with BOTH catholic parents, Irish-Italian parents are very common.  In the South there is still relative distrust of Catholics from conservative Christians.  That is why I doubt the GOP will ever nominate a Catholic, Jewish, or Mormon as president because the Protestant Evangelicals have too much power.  I think a moderate Italian-American Democrat will be able to win back those Republican Catholics.  Remember, until Reagan, most Catholics voted for Democrats on social issues because Catholics were Union Workers who were segregated and oppressed in society since the 1920s.  If Cuomo wins the NYS Governor, he will have convinced the NYC Italian Republicans to vote for him (the ex-Giuliani voters).  I also think Italian-Catholics in Ohio and Florida will vote for someone like Cuomo for President.  We had an Irish-Catholic president but we never had an Italian-Catholic president and it would still be an interesting media story.  If white ethnic groups don't matter, then why did you say Jewish voters voted for Obama, when the GOP is more tough on Mid-east enemies and protecting Israel and has Lieberman's defection?  I know more Jewish Republicans than Jewish Democrats. 

[Bo]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

By white ethnic groups, I didn't mean religious groups. I meant white ethnic groups such as German, Polish, French, Russian, Swedish, etc. For Jewish people, most of them would vote for any Democrat, regardless of whether that Democrat is Jewish. The non-Jewish Obama won 78% of the Jewish vote in 2008. The Kennedys do appeal to many Irish voters, but their appeal is much more broad than that. And I'm honestly not sure most Italians voted for Giuliani, at least not when he ran for President. And I doubt most Italians would really care that much about the fact that we never had an Italian-American President.

No offense, but I don't think there are enough Jewish people as swing voters to influence a national election.  Maybe if Wall Street bankers donate to one particular candidate giving them a money advantage.  But I'm not sure what you mean by religious groups, since most Italians are Roman Catholic.  I think its kinda weird that you group all white people together and consider Jewish people separate from white people.  You need to recognize there are strong ethnic and religious factions in non-Jewish white people.  The Christian Evangelicals are a very strong group comprised mostly of Anglicans, southern whites protestants with roots in England.  German, Polish and other Northern Europeans are mostly Reformed Christians but there really aren't as many of them in the US as Italians and Irish Catholics. I believe that Italian and Irish groups were heavily segregated in the US because of their Catholic religion and has formed a formidable ethnic and religious group.  Because of this, a prominent Italian American and win swing voters back to the Democratic party.  I don't think the Republicans will ever nominate a Catholic Italian because the Evangelicals have too much power.  I think Hispanics would also be attracted to any white-Catholic candidate. Why would Italians not care about having an Italian president?  Just because the Pope lives in Italy?  I think a moderate Italian can win a lot of Italian republican voters, Pelosi is too liberal.  Giuliani lost votes because there are very few Italians in Iowa, NH, and SC.  I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the influence of ethnic immigrant groups.  Ask an Italian person if they would vote for an Italian or Roman Catholic as president?  Do you think that White Catholics are no longer an influential voter group?

I think you misunderstood my post. I said that I doubt white ethnic groups (and I never said Jews aren't white) really care that much about the ethnicity of a candidate. Many white ethnic groups have intermarried numerous times over the last 150 years, and for a lot of Americans, the only thing Italian, German, French, etc. about them are their last names.

Those voters don't care about a candidate's ethnicity. They care more about a candidate's positions on the issues. And I doubt much more Catholics would vote for Cuomo than for another Democrat because we already had a Catholic President (and a Catholic VP) and thus there would nothing new to see here. Identity politics might have mattered a lot to white ethnic groups in 1900, but it sure doesn't now.

Again you seem to group Catholics with Protestant Christianity and there is a huge difference between the two, just as there is a huge difference between Judaism and Roman Catholicism.  You should ask Pat Robertson if there is a difference between Southern Evangelicals and Roman Catholics.  It is true that a lot of Protestant factions have inter-married, but Jews and Catholics have continued to attend their own churches and are more recent immigrants.  It is true that Kennedy was elected in 1960 but he was killed before he finished his term, and many people disliked him and distrusted him because he was Catholic.  That was only 40 years ago, but before that Catholics were segregated and often had to attend different schools!  This may shock you but there are still plenty of families with BOTH catholic parents, Irish-Italian parents are very common.  In the South there is still relative distrust of Catholics from conservative Christians.  That is why I doubt the GOP will ever nominate a Catholic, Jewish, or Mormon as president because the Protestant Evangelicals have too much power.  I think a moderate Italian-American Democrat will be able to win back those Republican Catholics.  Remember, until Reagan, most Catholics voted for Democrats on social issues because Catholics were Union Workers who were segregated and oppressed in society since the 1920s.  If Cuomo wins the NYS Governor, he will have convinced the NYC Italian Republicans to vote for him (the ex-Giuliani voters).  I also think Italian-Catholics in Ohio and Florida will vote for someone like Cuomo for President.  We had an Irish-Catholic president but we never had an Italian-Catholic president and it would still be an interesting media story.  If white ethnic groups don't matter, then why did you say Jewish voters voted for Obama, when the GOP is more tough on Mid-east enemies and protecting Israel and has Lieberman's defection?  I know more Jewish Republicans than Jewish Democrats. 

Those are all religious groups, and religious groups in the U.S. are composed of several different ethnic groups (due to intermarriage). In my first post, I was talking about white ethnic groups, not white religious groups. Two different things.

[milhouse24]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

By white ethnic groups, I didn't mean religious groups. I meant white ethnic groups such as German, Polish, French, Russian, Swedish, etc. For Jewish people, most of them would vote for any Democrat, regardless of whether that Democrat is Jewish. The non-Jewish Obama won 78% of the Jewish vote in 2008. The Kennedys do appeal to many Irish voters, but their appeal is much more broad than that. And I'm honestly not sure most Italians voted for Giuliani, at least not when he ran for President. And I doubt most Italians would really care that much about the fact that we never had an Italian-American President.

No offense, but I don't think there are enough Jewish people as swing voters to influence a national election.  Maybe if Wall Street bankers donate to one particular candidate giving them a money advantage.  But I'm not sure what you mean by religious groups, since most Italians are Roman Catholic.  I think its kinda weird that you group all white people together and consider Jewish people separate from white people.  You need to recognize there are strong ethnic and religious factions in non-Jewish white people.  The Christian Evangelicals are a very strong group comprised mostly of Anglicans, southern whites protestants with roots in England.  German, Polish and other Northern Europeans are mostly Reformed Christians but there really aren't as many of them in the US as Italians and Irish Catholics. I believe that Italian and Irish groups were heavily segregated in the US because of their Catholic religion and has formed a formidable ethnic and religious group.  Because of this, a prominent Italian American and win swing voters back to the Democratic party.  I don't think the Republicans will ever nominate a Catholic Italian because the Evangelicals have too much power.  I think Hispanics would also be attracted to any white-Catholic candidate. Why would Italians not care about having an Italian president?  Just because the Pope lives in Italy?  I think a moderate Italian can win a lot of Italian republican voters, Pelosi is too liberal.  Giuliani lost votes because there are very few Italians in Iowa, NH, and SC.  I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the influence of ethnic immigrant groups.  Ask an Italian person if they would vote for an Italian or Roman Catholic as president?  Do you think that White Catholics are no longer an influential voter group?

I think you misunderstood my post. I said that I doubt white ethnic groups (and I never said Jews aren't white) really care that much about the ethnicity of a candidate. Many white ethnic groups have intermarried numerous times over the last 150 years, and for a lot of Americans, the only thing Italian, German, French, etc. about them are their last names.

Those voters don't care about a candidate's ethnicity. They care more about a candidate's positions on the issues. And I doubt much more Catholics would vote for Cuomo than for another Democrat because we already had a Catholic President (and a Catholic VP) and thus there would nothing new to see here. Identity politics might have mattered a lot to white ethnic groups in 1900, but it sure doesn't now.

Again you seem to group Catholics with Protestant Christianity and there is a huge difference between the two, just as there is a huge difference between Judaism and Roman Catholicism.  You should ask Pat Robertson if there is a difference between Southern Evangelicals and Roman Catholics.  It is true that a lot of Protestant factions have inter-married, but Jews and Catholics have continued to attend their own churches and are more recent immigrants.  It is true that Kennedy was elected in 1960 but he was killed before he finished his term, and many people disliked him and distrusted him because he was Catholic.  That was only 40 years ago, but before that Catholics were segregated and often had to attend different schools!  This may shock you but there are still plenty of families with BOTH catholic parents, Irish-Italian parents are very common.  In the South there is still relative distrust of Catholics from conservative Christians.  That is why I doubt the GOP will ever nominate a Catholic, Jewish, or Mormon as president because the Protestant Evangelicals have too much power.  I think a moderate Italian-American Democrat will be able to win back those Republican Catholics.  Remember, until Reagan, most Catholics voted for Democrats on social issues because Catholics were Union Workers who were segregated and oppressed in society since the 1920s.  If Cuomo wins the NYS Governor, he will have convinced the NYC Italian Republicans to vote for him (the ex-Giuliani voters).  I also think Italian-Catholics in Ohio and Florida will vote for someone like Cuomo for President.  We had an Irish-Catholic president but we never had an Italian-Catholic president and it would still be an interesting media story.  If white ethnic groups don't matter, then why did you say Jewish voters voted for Obama, when the GOP is more tough on Mid-east enemies and protecting Israel and has Lieberman's defection?  I know more Jewish Republicans than Jewish Democrats. 

Those are all religious groups, and religious groups in the U.S. are composed of several different ethnic groups (due to intermarriage). In my first post, I was talking about white ethnic groups, not white religious groups. Two different things.

Most Italian-Americans ARE also Italian-Catholics and at least my personal experience a lot of Italian-Americans with BOTH Italian Parents.  Most white Catholics have parents that are either Italian, Irish, or Latino.  That doesn't really qualify as a whole lot of intermarriage with white protestants.  The Italian-American Roman Catholic churches are still very influential and there are lots of Little Italy towns and Parades, so I sincerely doubt that Italian-Americans have fully mixed with other white protestants.  I'm specifically talking about Roman Catholics and most Italian-Americans are Roman Catholics.  Sure some wasps have converted to Catholicism like Newt and Brownback.  But for the most part, Roman Catholics are Irish, Italian, and Hispanics.  That is why I think a moderate Italian-American candidate can rally Italian-Americans to the Democratic Party as swing voters.  Even voters who are half-Italian maybe inclined to vote for Cuomo than the GOP nominee.  Italian-Americans clearly make up a strong ethnic group if they decide to side with Cuomo.  Italian-Americans are clearly a different ethnic group than white-protestants/evangelicals.

[Bo]

Cuomo would be the first Italian American president!  That will bring all the Italian swing voters back to the Democrats.

Italians (and for that matter, most white ethnic groups) really don't care much for identity politics, so I doubt Cuomo would have that kind of impact.

I think most white ethnic groups have strong tendencies to ethnic national candidates.
The Irish will vote for a Kennedy
Mormons will vote for Romney
Jewish people will vote for Lieberman
Italians voted for Giuliani but there aren't as many in Iowa or SC
Evangelical Protestants vote for Dubya

For anyone that lives in the northeast, there are a lot of Italians so its surprising that there's never been an Italian as president but then again, there's only been one Roman Catholic president and 2 nominees (Kerry).  Ferrarro was Italian but she was known more for being a woman.

By white ethnic groups, I didn't mean religious groups. I meant white ethnic groups such as German, Polish, French, Russian, Swedish, etc. For Jewish people, most of them would vote for any Democrat, regardless of whether that Democrat is Jewish. The non-Jewish Obama won 78% of the Jewish vote in 2008. The Kennedys do appeal to many Irish voters, but their appeal is much more broad than that. And I'm honestly not sure most Italians voted for Giuliani, at least not when he ran for President. And I doubt most Italians would really care that much about the fact that we never had an Italian-American President.

No offense, but I don't think there are enough Jewish people as swing voters to influence a national election.  Maybe if Wall Street bankers donate to one particular candidate giving them a money advantage.  But I'm not sure what you mean by religious groups, since most Italians are Roman Catholic.  I think its kinda weird that you group all white people together and consider Jewish people separate from white people.  You need to recognize there are strong ethnic and religious factions in non-Jewish white people.  The Christian Evangelicals are a very strong group comprised mostly of Anglicans, southern whites protestants with roots in England.  German, Polish and other Northern Europeans are mostly Reformed Christians but there really aren't as many of them in the US as Italians and Irish Catholics. I believe that Italian and Irish groups were heavily segregated in the US because of their Catholic religion and has formed a formidable ethnic and religious group.  Because of this, a prominent Italian American and win swing voters back to the Democratic party.  I don't think the Republicans will ever nominate a Catholic Italian because the Evangelicals have too much power.  I think Hispanics would also be attracted to any white-Catholic candidate. Why would Italians not care about having an Italian president?  Just because the Pope lives in Italy?  I think a moderate Italian can win a lot of Italian republican voters, Pelosi is too liberal.  Giuliani lost votes because there are very few Italians in Iowa, NH, and SC.  I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the influence of ethnic immigrant groups.  Ask an Italian person if they would vote for an Italian or Roman Catholic as president?  Do you think that White Catholics are no longer an influential voter group?

I think you misunderstood my post. I said that I doubt white ethnic groups (and I never said Jews aren't white) really care that much about the ethnicity of a candidate. Many white ethnic groups have intermarried numerous times over the last 150 years, and for a lot of Americans, the only thing Italian, German, French, etc. about them are their last names.

Those voters don't care about a candidate's ethnicity. They care more about a candidate's positions on the issues. And I doubt much more Catholics would vote for Cuomo than for another Democrat because we already had a Catholic President (and a Catholic VP) and thus there would nothing new to see here. Identity politics might have mattered a lot to white ethnic groups in 1900, but it sure doesn't now.

Again you seem to group Catholics with Protestant Christianity and there is a huge difference between the two, just as there is a huge difference between Judaism and Roman Catholicism.  You should ask Pat Robertson if there is a difference between Southern Evangelicals and Roman Catholics.  It is true that a lot of Protestant factions have inter-married, but Jews and Catholics have continued to attend their own churches and are more recent immigrants.  It is true that Kennedy was elected in 1960 but he was killed before he finished his term, and many people disliked him and distrusted him because he was Catholic.  That was only 40 years ago, but before that Catholics were segregated and often had to attend different schools!  This may shock you but there are still plenty of families with BOTH catholic parents, Irish-Italian parents are very common.  In the South there is still relative distrust of Catholics from conservative Christians.  That is why I doubt the GOP will ever nominate a Catholic, Jewish, or Mormon as president because the Protestant Evangelicals have too much power.  I think a moderate Italian-American Democrat will be able to win back those Republican Catholics.  Remember, until Reagan, most Catholics voted for Democrats on social issues because Catholics were Union Workers who were segregated and oppressed in society since the 1920s.  If Cuomo wins the NYS Governor, he will have convinced the NYC Italian Republicans to vote for him (the ex-Giuliani voters).  I also think Italian-Catholics in Ohio and Florida will vote for someone like Cuomo for President.  We had an Irish-Catholic president but we never had an Italian-Catholic president and it would still be an interesting media story.  If white ethnic groups don't matter, then why did you say Jewish voters voted for Obama, when the GOP is more tough on Mid-east enemies and protecting Israel and has Lieberman's defection?  I know more Jewish Republicans than Jewish Democrats. 

Those are all religious groups, and religious groups in the U.S. are composed of several different ethnic groups (due to intermarriage). In my first post, I was talking about white ethnic groups, not white religious groups. Two different things.

Most Italian-Americans ARE also Italian-Catholics and at least my personal experience a lot of Italian-Americans with BOTH Italian Parents.  Most white Catholics have parents that are either Italian, Irish, or Latino.  That doesn't really qualify as a whole lot of intermarriage with white protestants.  The Italian-American Roman Catholic churches are still very influential and there are lots of Little Italy towns and Parades, so I sincerely doubt that Italian-Americans have fully mixed with other white protestants.  I'm specifically talking about Roman Catholics and most Italian-Americans are Roman Catholics.  Sure some wasps have converted to Catholicism like Newt and Brownback.  But for the most part, Roman Catholics are Irish, Italian, and Hispanics.  That is why I think a moderate Italian-American candidate can rally Italian-Americans to the Democratic Party as swing voters.  Even voters who are half-Italian maybe inclined to vote for Cuomo than the GOP nominee.  Italian-Americans clearly make up a strong ethnic group if they decide to side with Cuomo.  Italian-Americans are clearly a different ethnic group than white-protestants/evangelicals.

Most Catholics in the U.S. have many different ethnic backgrounds. Most of them probably have some German, English, French, Swedish, and other ancestors as well. Most of the people I know who are Catholic don't care about whether a particular candidate is Catholic or not or about the ethnic origin of a particular candidate. They just look at the issues and at a candidate's charisma. Just because someone self-identifies as Italian-American doesn't mean they don't have other ancestries and doesn't mean that they will vote for a candidate just because that candidate is Italian/Catholic. Heck, Joe Biden is our first Catholic VP, but I doubt Obama did much better among Catholics than Gore or Kerry did relative to the national average. Most Catholics just didn't really care that much about electing our first Catholic VP. Even electing a Catholic President is nothing new. And the U.S. is a much different and more tolerant place now than it was in 1960. Thus, I doubt Cuomo would do much better with Catholics and Italian-Americans than Obama did relative to the national average. And again, White Protestants and Evangelicals are not ethnic groups--they are religious groups composed of several different ethnic groups.

[milhouse24]

I'm not sure why you continue to think that Italian-Americans don't exist in present day as an ethnic group, with dual Italian parents. Andrew Cuomo has both Italian parents and he was married to an Irish Catholic Kennedy.  The largest Catholic groups in America are Italians, Irish, and Hispanics.  Most French and Polish immigrants are Catholic as well.  
My point is that in a close election, every vote counts and Italian-Americans are large enough ethnic group to sway the election in Ohio and Florida.  You are Simply Wrong that the Catholic vote doesn't matter.  The Catholic vote is a significant swing vote and it helped GWB win the election primary because Bush was pro-life and anti-Gay marriage.  Here are some stats I found.
"Bush won Catholics 52%-47% in 2004, while Al Gore carried them 50%-46% in 2000".  
That's a big change and Kerry was seen as a very liberal pro-choice denounced catholic.
"In Ohio, Bush got 55% of the Catholic vote in 2004 compared to just under 50% of them in 2000. That means a shift of 172,000 votes into the Republican column. Bush won the state by just 136,000 votes this year."
"Obama won Catholics at 54 percent versus 45 percent for McCain"
The problem that Cuomo would face would be against the Catholic church which would denounce him as pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, so maybe being Catholic is a liability because it will highlight the social issues of abortion and divide catholic voters, while also alienating evangelical southerners.  But Cuomo could win Ohio which has a large Italian-American population.
As I said before most Italians are not white-protestants.  Most ethnic Italians, Irish, and Hispanics are not white-protestants.  White Protestants are english, german, and northern europeans.

[Bo]

I'm not sure why you continue to think that Italian-Americans don't exist in present day as an ethnic group, with dual Italian parents. Andrew Cuomo has both Italian parents and he was married to an Irish Catholic Kennedy.  The largest Catholic groups in America are Italians, Irish, and Hispanics.  Most French and Polish immigrants are Catholic as well.  
My point is that in a close election, every vote counts and Italian-Americans are large enough ethnic group to sway the election in Ohio and Florida.  You are Simply Wrong that the Catholic vote doesn't matter.  The Catholic vote is a significant swing vote and it helped GWB win the election primary because Bush was pro-life and anti-Gay marriage.  Here are some stats I found.
"Bush won Catholics 52%-47% in 2004, while Al Gore carried them 50%-46% in 2000".  
That's a big change and Kerry was seen as a very liberal pro-choice denounced catholic.
"In Ohio, Bush got 55% of the Catholic vote in 2004 compared to just under 50% of them in 2000. That means a shift of 172,000 votes into the Republican column. Bush won the state by just 136,000 votes this year."
"Obama won Catholics at 54 percent versus 45 percent for McCain"
The problem that Cuomo would face would be against the Catholic church which would denounce him as pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, so maybe being Catholic is a liability because it will highlight the social issues of abortion and divide catholic voters, while also alienating evangelical southerners.  But Cuomo could win Ohio which has a large Italian-American population.
As I said before most Italians are not white-protestants.  Most ethnic Italians, Irish, and Hispanics are not white-protestants.  White Protestants are english, german, and northern europeans.

I never said Italian-Americans aren't a unique ethnic group. I just said identity politics among them isn't nearly as strong as it once was. Just because someone's parents are Italian doesn't mean he/she is more likely to vote for an Italian-American candidate. And in regards to your statistics, Bush got 3% more nationwide in 2004 than in 2000. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 3% in his direction between 2000 and 2004. That's not much. Also, Obama got 5% more nationwide in 2008 than Kerry got in 2004. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 2% in his direction between 2004 and 2008. That's not much either, and that was when the Democrats nominated the first Catholic VP. (Also, Biden's position on abortion doesn't appear to have alienated any Catholics.) Keep in mind that there is a difference between a swing and a trend. Since we already elected a Catholic President, I doubt nominating another Catholic would cause a huge trend in the Catholic vote in favor of the Catholic candidate. Just like I doubt that another black candidate would get 90+% of the black vote in the Democratic primaries if he ran for President. Since we have already elected a black (and a Catholic) President, there is nothing new to see here and people aren't going to be as enthusiastic about electing one as they were the first time around.

[milhouse24]

I'm not sure why you continue to think that Italian-Americans don't exist in present day as an ethnic group, with dual Italian parents. Andrew Cuomo has both Italian parents and he was married to an Irish Catholic Kennedy.  The largest Catholic groups in America are Italians, Irish, and Hispanics.  Most French and Polish immigrants are Catholic as well.  
My point is that in a close election, every vote counts and Italian-Americans are large enough ethnic group to sway the election in Ohio and Florida.  You are Simply Wrong that the Catholic vote doesn't matter.  The Catholic vote is a significant swing vote and it helped GWB win the election primary because Bush was pro-life and anti-Gay marriage.  Here are some stats I found.
"Bush won Catholics 52%-47% in 2004, while Al Gore carried them 50%-46% in 2000".  
That's a big change and Kerry was seen as a very liberal pro-choice denounced catholic.
"In Ohio, Bush got 55% of the Catholic vote in 2004 compared to just under 50% of them in 2000. That means a shift of 172,000 votes into the Republican column. Bush won the state by just 136,000 votes this year."
"Obama won Catholics at 54 percent versus 45 percent for McCain"
The problem that Cuomo would face would be against the Catholic church which would denounce him as pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, so maybe being Catholic is a liability because it will highlight the social issues of abortion and divide catholic voters, while also alienating evangelical southerners.  But Cuomo could win Ohio which has a large Italian-American population.
As I said before most Italians are not white-protestants.  Most ethnic Italians, Irish, and Hispanics are not white-protestants.  White Protestants are english, german, and northern europeans.

I never said Italian-Americans aren't a unique ethnic group. I just said identity politics among them isn't nearly as strong as it once was. Just because someone's parents are Italian doesn't mean he/she is more likely to vote for an Italian-American candidate. And in regards to your statistics, Bush got 3% more nationwide in 2004 than in 2000. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 3% in his direction between 2000 and 2004. That's not much. Also, Obama got 5% more nationwide in 2008 than Kerry got in 2004. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 2% in his direction between 2004 and 2008. That's not much either, and that was when the Democrats nominated the first Catholic VP. (Also, Biden's position on abortion doesn't appear to have alienated any Catholics.) Keep in mind that there is a difference between a swing and a trend. Since we already elected a Catholic President, I doubt nominating another Catholic would cause a huge trend in the Catholic vote in favor of the Catholic candidate. Just like I doubt that another black candidate would get 90+% of the black vote in the Democratic primaries if he ran for President. Since we have already elected a black (and a Catholic) President, there is nothing new to see here and people aren't going to be as enthusiastic about electing one as they were the first time around.

You doubt the Catholic vote matters yet Gore lost by 100 votes and Kerry barely lost Ohio.  I say every vote counts, and while you think Biden was ineffective, I think he was very effective at keeping Irish Catholic union swing voters (which HIllary won by large margins against Obama and they would have possibly defected to McCain).  I also think America has a strong Italian neighborhood culture and strong Roman Catholic church groups, so having the first Italian-American president would excite these Swing groups.  Kennedy was Irish but Cuomo is Italian.  That is a huge ethnic difference. If it is a close election, it would be a beneficial issue.

[Bo]

I'm not sure why you continue to think that Italian-Americans don't exist in present day as an ethnic group, with dual Italian parents. Andrew Cuomo has both Italian parents and he was married to an Irish Catholic Kennedy.  The largest Catholic groups in America are Italians, Irish, and Hispanics.  Most French and Polish immigrants are Catholic as well.  
My point is that in a close election, every vote counts and Italian-Americans are large enough ethnic group to sway the election in Ohio and Florida.  You are Simply Wrong that the Catholic vote doesn't matter.  The Catholic vote is a significant swing vote and it helped GWB win the election primary because Bush was pro-life and anti-Gay marriage.  Here are some stats I found.
"Bush won Catholics 52%-47% in 2004, while Al Gore carried them 50%-46% in 2000".  
That's a big change and Kerry was seen as a very liberal pro-choice denounced catholic.
"In Ohio, Bush got 55% of the Catholic vote in 2004 compared to just under 50% of them in 2000. That means a shift of 172,000 votes into the Republican column. Bush won the state by just 136,000 votes this year."
"Obama won Catholics at 54 percent versus 45 percent for McCain"
The problem that Cuomo would face would be against the Catholic church which would denounce him as pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, so maybe being Catholic is a liability because it will highlight the social issues of abortion and divide catholic voters, while also alienating evangelical southerners.  But Cuomo could win Ohio which has a large Italian-American population.
As I said before most Italians are not white-protestants.  Most ethnic Italians, Irish, and Hispanics are not white-protestants.  White Protestants are english, german, and northern europeans.

I never said Italian-Americans aren't a unique ethnic group. I just said identity politics among them isn't nearly as strong as it once was. Just because someone's parents are Italian doesn't mean he/she is more likely to vote for an Italian-American candidate. And in regards to your statistics, Bush got 3% more nationwide in 2004 than in 2000. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 3% in his direction between 2000 and 2004. That's not much. Also, Obama got 5% more nationwide in 2008 than Kerry got in 2004. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 2% in his direction between 2004 and 2008. That's not much either, and that was when the Democrats nominated the first Catholic VP. (Also, Biden's position on abortion doesn't appear to have alienated any Catholics.) Keep in mind that there is a difference between a swing and a trend. Since we already elected a Catholic President, I doubt nominating another Catholic would cause a huge trend in the Catholic vote in favor of the Catholic candidate. Just like I doubt that another black candidate would get 90+% of the black vote in the Democratic primaries if he ran for President. Since we have already elected a black (and a Catholic) President, there is nothing new to see here and people aren't going to be as enthusiastic about electing one as they were the first time around.

You doubt the Catholic vote matters yet Gore lost by 100 votes and Kerry barely lost Ohio.  I say every vote counts, and while you think Biden was ineffective, I think he was very effective at keeping Irish Catholic union swing voters (which HIllary won by large margins against Obama and they would have possibly defected to McCain).  I also think America has a strong Italian neighborhood culture and strong Roman Catholic church groups, so having the first Italian-American president would excite these Swing groups.  Kennedy was Irish but Cuomo is Italian.  That is a huge ethnic difference. If it is a close election, it would be a beneficial issue.

I never said the Catholic vote doesn't matter. I just don't think Catholics are as susceptible to identity politics as other groups are. The main reason that Gore and Kerry lost wasn't due to the Catholic vote. It was because they were poor candidates and didn't really do that well nationwide. And since Catholics only trended 2% in 2008, I doubt Biden helped Obama much with Catholics. Most Hillary supporters went to Obama anyway, and I doubt Biden was the reason for that. McCain and Palin just discredited themselves to the extent that most Hillary supporters saw Obama as the best option. I don't know anyone Italian who really cares that much about having an Italian-American President. Outside of Little Italy in NYC, I doubt most voters are going to care about that. And since we already had a Catholic President, electing another one isn't going to be a huge deal to anyone. My original post was that most Italian-Americans don't care much about identity politics, and I stand by that statement.

[milhouse24]

I'm not sure why you continue to think that Italian-Americans don't exist in present day as an ethnic group, with dual Italian parents. Andrew Cuomo has both Italian parents and he was married to an Irish Catholic Kennedy.  The largest Catholic groups in America are Italians, Irish, and Hispanics.  Most French and Polish immigrants are Catholic as well.  
My point is that in a close election, every vote counts and Italian-Americans are large enough ethnic group to sway the election in Ohio and Florida.  You are Simply Wrong that the Catholic vote doesn't matter.  The Catholic vote is a significant swing vote and it helped GWB win the election primary because Bush was pro-life and anti-Gay marriage.  Here are some stats I found.
"Bush won Catholics 52%-47% in 2004, while Al Gore carried them 50%-46% in 2000".  
That's a big change and Kerry was seen as a very liberal pro-choice denounced catholic.
"In Ohio, Bush got 55% of the Catholic vote in 2004 compared to just under 50% of them in 2000. That means a shift of 172,000 votes into the Republican column. Bush won the state by just 136,000 votes this year."
"Obama won Catholics at 54 percent versus 45 percent for McCain"
The problem that Cuomo would face would be against the Catholic church which would denounce him as pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, so maybe being Catholic is a liability because it will highlight the social issues of abortion and divide catholic voters, while also alienating evangelical southerners.  But Cuomo could win Ohio which has a large Italian-American population.
As I said before most Italians are not white-protestants.  Most ethnic Italians, Irish, and Hispanics are not white-protestants.  White Protestants are english, german, and northern europeans.

I never said Italian-Americans aren't a unique ethnic group. I just said identity politics among them isn't nearly as strong as it once was. Just because someone's parents are Italian doesn't mean he/she is more likely to vote for an Italian-American candidate. And in regards to your statistics, Bush got 3% more nationwide in 2004 than in 2000. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 3% in his direction between 2000 and 2004. That's not much. Also, Obama got 5% more nationwide in 2008 than Kerry got in 2004. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 2% in his direction between 2004 and 2008. That's not much either, and that was when the Democrats nominated the first Catholic VP. (Also, Biden's position on abortion doesn't appear to have alienated any Catholics.) Keep in mind that there is a difference between a swing and a trend. Since we already elected a Catholic President, I doubt nominating another Catholic would cause a huge trend in the Catholic vote in favor of the Catholic candidate. Just like I doubt that another black candidate would get 90+% of the black vote in the Democratic primaries if he ran for President. Since we have already elected a black (and a Catholic) President, there is nothing new to see here and people aren't going to be as enthusiastic about electing one as they were the first time around.

You doubt the Catholic vote matters yet Gore lost by 100 votes and Kerry barely lost Ohio.  I say every vote counts, and while you think Biden was ineffective, I think he was very effective at keeping Irish Catholic union swing voters (which HIllary won by large margins against Obama and they would have possibly defected to McCain).  I also think America has a strong Italian neighborhood culture and strong Roman Catholic church groups, so having the first Italian-American president would excite these Swing groups.  Kennedy was Irish but Cuomo is Italian.  That is a huge ethnic difference. If it is a close election, it would be a beneficial issue.

I never said the Catholic vote doesn't matter. I just don't think Catholics are as susceptible to identity politics as other groups are. The main reason that Gore and Kerry lost wasn't due to the Catholic vote. It was because they were poor candidates and didn't really do that well nationwide. And since Catholics only trended 2% in 2008, I doubt Biden helped Obama much with Catholics. Most Hillary supporters went to Obama anyway, and I doubt Biden was the reason for that. McCain and Palin just discredited themselves to the extent that most Hillary supporters saw Obama as the best option. I don't know anyone Italian who really cares that much about having an Italian-American President. Outside of Little Italy in NYC, I doubt most voters are going to care about that. And since we already had a Catholic President, electing another one isn't going to be a huge deal to anyone. My original post was that most Italian-Americans don't care much about identity politics, and I stand by that statement.

So Dubya was a good candidate cuz he beat Gore by 100 votes in Florida?  Dubya won the Catholic vote on abortion issue.  If Obama picked Bayh, and McCain picked someone else, Blue Collar Union Catholics would have gone to McCain.  You can have your doubts, but if Cuomo is on the ticket, Hispanic Catholics will also vote for him, and put him over the top.  There has been no top Italian candidate, except for Giuliani and HE WAS ON TOP of the polls so someone out there said they would vote for him.  I'm sure no one will tell you they Need an Italian president, but if its a moderate Italian on the ticket like Cuomo, he will get the Italian vote, guaranteed.  Someone like Pelosi is seen as too liberal.

[Bo]

I'm not sure why you continue to think that Italian-Americans don't exist in present day as an ethnic group, with dual Italian parents. Andrew Cuomo has both Italian parents and he was married to an Irish Catholic Kennedy.  The largest Catholic groups in America are Italians, Irish, and Hispanics.  Most French and Polish immigrants are Catholic as well.  
My point is that in a close election, every vote counts and Italian-Americans are large enough ethnic group to sway the election in Ohio and Florida.  You are Simply Wrong that the Catholic vote doesn't matter.  The Catholic vote is a significant swing vote and it helped GWB win the election primary because Bush was pro-life and anti-Gay marriage.  Here are some stats I found.
"Bush won Catholics 52%-47% in 2004, while Al Gore carried them 50%-46% in 2000".  
That's a big change and Kerry was seen as a very liberal pro-choice denounced catholic.
"In Ohio, Bush got 55% of the Catholic vote in 2004 compared to just under 50% of them in 2000. That means a shift of 172,000 votes into the Republican column. Bush won the state by just 136,000 votes this year."
"Obama won Catholics at 54 percent versus 45 percent for McCain"
The problem that Cuomo would face would be against the Catholic church which would denounce him as pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, so maybe being Catholic is a liability because it will highlight the social issues of abortion and divide catholic voters, while also alienating evangelical southerners.  But Cuomo could win Ohio which has a large Italian-American population.
As I said before most Italians are not white-protestants.  Most ethnic Italians, Irish, and Hispanics are not white-protestants.  White Protestants are english, german, and northern europeans.

I never said Italian-Americans aren't a unique ethnic group. I just said identity politics among them isn't nearly as strong as it once was. Just because someone's parents are Italian doesn't mean he/she is more likely to vote for an Italian-American candidate. And in regards to your statistics, Bush got 3% more nationwide in 2004 than in 2000. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 3% in his direction between 2000 and 2004. That's not much. Also, Obama got 5% more nationwide in 2008 than Kerry got in 2004. Thus, the Catholic vote only trended 2% in his direction between 2004 and 2008. That's not much either, and that was when the Democrats nominated the first Catholic VP. (Also, Biden's position on abortion doesn't appear to have alienated any Catholics.) Keep in mind that there is a difference between a swing and a trend. Since we already elected a Catholic President, I doubt nominating another Catholic would cause a huge trend in the Catholic vote in favor of the Catholic candidate. Just like I doubt that another black candidate would get 90+% of the black vote in the Democratic primaries if he ran for President. Since we have already elected a black (and a Catholic) President, there is nothing new to see here and people aren't going to be as enthusiastic about electing one as they were the first time around.

You doubt the Catholic vote matters yet Gore lost by 100 votes and Kerry barely lost Ohio.  I say every vote counts, and while you think Biden was ineffective, I think he was very effective at keeping Irish Catholic union swing voters (which HIllary won by large margins against Obama and they would have possibly defected to McCain).  I also think America has a strong Italian neighborhood culture and strong Roman Catholic church groups, so having the first Italian-American president would excite these Swing groups.  Kennedy was Irish but Cuomo is Italian.  That is a huge ethnic difference. If it is a close election, it would be a beneficial issue.

I never said the Catholic vote doesn't matter. I just don't think Catholics are as susceptible to identity politics as other groups are. The main reason that Gore and Kerry lost wasn't due to the Catholic vote. It was because they were poor candidates and didn't really do that well nationwide. And since Catholics only trended 2% in 2008, I doubt Biden helped Obama much with Catholics. Most Hillary supporters went to Obama anyway, and I doubt Biden was the reason for that. McCain and Palin just discredited themselves to the extent that most Hillary supporters saw Obama as the best option. I don't know anyone Italian who really cares that much about having an Italian-American President. Outside of Little Italy in NYC, I doubt most voters are going to care about that. And since we already had a Catholic President, electing another one isn't going to be a huge deal to anyone. My original post was that most Italian-Americans don't care much about identity politics, and I stand by that statement.

So Dubya was a good candidate cuz he beat Gore by 100 votes in Florida?  Dubya won the Catholic vote on abortion issue.  If Obama picked Bayh, and McCain picked someone else, Blue Collar Union Catholics would have gone to McCain.  You can have your doubts, but if Cuomo is on the ticket, Hispanic Catholics will also vote for him, and put him over the top.  There has been no top Italian candidate, except for Giuliani and HE WAS ON TOP of the polls so someone out there said they would vote for him.  I'm sure no one will tell you they Need an Italian president, but if its a moderate Italian on the ticket like Cuomo, he will get the Italian vote, guaranteed.  Someone like Pelosi is seen as too liberal.

Actually Gore won the Catholic vote in 2000. If Gore would have opposed abortion, he would have lost most of the pro-abortion Catholics (as well as the Democratic base) which voted for him, without gaining many voters that went for Bush. From these exit polls, it appears that about half of Catholics support abortion. And I never said Bush was a good candidate. I just said Gore was a bad one because all the issues in 2000 favored him and yet he still lost. I seriously doubt Catholics would have voted for McCain if Obama would have picked a different VP. Latino Catholics already vote for the Democrats (including non-Catholic Democrats), so having them vote for Cuomo won't be anything new. Giuliani overwhelmingly lost in the end and the reason he was leading in some polls wasn't because he was Italian--it was because a lot of people still remembered him for 9/11. And Cuomo could just as easily get painted as too liberal--I mean, Republicans try to portray all Democrats as too liberal. And if you said Bush won Catholics due to the abortion issue, don't that mean Cuomo is going to lose Catholics due to the abortion issue as well? I mean, Kerry was also Catholic, just like Cuomo is. And thus, I still think that Cuomo won't do much better with Catholics relative to the national average than Obama did in 2008. I guess we'll see whether I'm right if Cuomo ever runs for President and wins the Democratic nomination.

[milhouse24]

Actually Gore won the Catholic vote in 2000. If Gore would have opposed abortion, he would have lost most of the pro-abortion Catholics (as well as the Democratic base) which voted for him, without gaining many voters that went for Bush. From these exit polls, it appears that about half of Catholics support abortion. And I never said Bush was a good candidate. I just said Gore was a bad one because all the issues in 2000 favored him and yet he still lost. I seriously doubt Catholics would have voted for McCain if Obama would have picked a different VP.

Latino Catholics already vote for the Democrats (including non-Catholic Democrats), so having them vote for Cuomo won't be anything new. Giuliani overwhelmingly lost in the end and the reason he was leading in some polls wasn't because he was Italian--it was because a lot of people still remembered him for 9/11.

And Cuomo could just as easily get painted as too liberal--I mean, Republicans try to portray all Democrats as too liberal. And if you said Bush won Catholics due to the abortion issue, don't that mean Cuomo is going to lose Catholics due to the abortion issue as well?

I mean, Kerry was also Catholic, just like Cuomo is. And thus, I still think that Cuomo won't do much better with Catholics relative to the national average than Obama did in 2008. I guess we'll see whether I'm right if Cuomo ever runs for President and wins the Democratic nomination.

Biden was chosen because he appealed to working class Irish/Italian Union Catholics, who had also voted for HIllary in the primaries.  If McCain picked a Catholic VP like Santorum, he might have picked up PA.  Bush won a fair share of Hispanics in 2000 and 2004.  Giuliani may have been perceived as liberal, but he did top polls because blue state catholics answered the polls.  But why would a catholic in Iowa, NH or SC vote for Huckabee, McCain, or Thompson because none of those 3 are appealing to a republican catholic.  Huckabee is a pro-life evangelica and raised taxes, McCain is a military war hero with no economic experience, and Thompson was a lazy country grandpa.  Who was answering the polls and why did they not vote for Giuliani?  Cuomo DOES risk losing catholic voters, but he is hoping that Italians will still support him based on ethnicity over religious dogma, because after all, Giuliani was pro-choice and all the Catholic republicans in NYC voted for him.  Sure some CAtholics may be concerned on abortion, but if a candidate is a Moderate on the Economy, Cuomo can keep those Fiscally minded Catholics.  Also, since most Blue Collar Union Catholics voted for HIllary in the Primary, they will also likely vote for Cuomo in the primary giving him the Nomination, most likely.  As for Kerry, he was neither Italian or Irish, so he never had a core ethnic voter group to appeal to.  Kerry's father is a converted Roman Catholic Jewish man and his mother was a Blue-blood.  Kerry spoke french and had a snobbier childhood than Dubya, so Kerry never connected very well with Blue-collar catholics in a way that the Irish Kennedy could. But my point is that Political STrategists try to appeal to ethnic and religious groups because it can help their Candidate get votes.  Sure, it is good to focus on issues, but Campaigns want to focus on the heart and forming a familial bond with the candidate and this is done through religion, ethnicity, geography, so voters can welcome the Candidate as if they were part of their extended family.  They want the candidate to connect on a very personal level to maintain and sustain the votes.

[Bo]

Actually Gore won the Catholic vote in 2000. If Gore would have opposed abortion, he would have lost most of the pro-abortion Catholics (as well as the Democratic base) which voted for him, without gaining many voters that went for Bush. From these exit polls, it appears that about half of Catholics support abortion. And I never said Bush was a good candidate. I just said Gore was a bad one because all the issues in 2000 favored him and yet he still lost. I seriously doubt Catholics would have voted for McCain if Obama would have picked a different VP.

Latino Catholics already vote for the Democrats (including non-Catholic Democrats), so having them vote for Cuomo won't be anything new. Giuliani overwhelmingly lost in the end and the reason he was leading in some polls wasn't because he was Italian--it was because a lot of people still remembered him for 9/11.

And Cuomo could just as easily get painted as too liberal--I mean, Republicans try to portray all Democrats as too liberal. And if you said Bush won Catholics due to the abortion issue, don't that mean Cuomo is going to lose Catholics due to the abortion issue as well?

I mean, Kerry was also Catholic, just like Cuomo is. And thus, I still think that Cuomo won't do much better with Catholics relative to the national average than Obama did in 2008. I guess we'll see whether I'm right if Cuomo ever runs for President and wins the Democratic nomination.

Biden was chosen because he appealed to working class Irish/Italian Union Catholics, who had also voted for HIllary in the primaries.  If McCain picked a Catholic VP like Santorum, he might have picked up PA.  Bush won a fair share of Hispanics in 2000 and 2004.  Giuliani may have been perceived as liberal, but he did top polls because blue state catholics answered the polls.  But why would a catholic in Iowa, NH or SC vote for Huckabee, McCain, or Thompson because none of those 3 are appealing to a republican catholic.  Huckabee is a pro-life evangelica and raised taxes, McCain is a military war hero with no economic experience, and Thompson was a lazy country grandpa.  Who was answering the polls and why did they not vote for Giuliani?  Cuomo DOES risk losing catholic voters, but he is hoping that Italians will still support him based on ethnicity over religious dogma, because after all, Giuliani was pro-choice and all the Catholic republicans in NYC voted for him.  Sure some CAtholics may be concerned on abortion, but if a candidate is a Moderate on the Economy, Cuomo can keep those Fiscally minded Catholics.  Also, since most Blue Collar Union Catholics voted for HIllary in the Primary, they will also likely vote for Cuomo in the primary giving him the Nomination, most likely.  As for Kerry, he was neither Italian or Irish, so he never had a core ethnic voter group to appeal to.  Kerry's father is a converted Roman Catholic Jewish man and his mother was a Blue-blood.  Kerry spoke french and had a snobbier childhood than Dubya, so Kerry never connected very well with Blue-collar catholics in a way that the Irish Kennedy could. But my point is that Political STrategists try to appeal to ethnic and religious groups because it can help their Candidate get votes.  Sure, it is good to focus on issues, but Campaigns want to focus on the heart and forming a familial bond with the candidate and this is done through religion, ethnicity, geography, so voters can welcome the Candidate as if they were part of their extended family.  They want the candidate to connect on a very personal level to maintain and sustain the votes.

No, Biden was primarily picked to counter claims that Obama was inexperienced. I clearly remember the 2008 campaign, so I know. This is the same reason for why Cheney was picked in 2000. McCain would not have won PA no matter who he picked for VP. Obama won the state by double-digits and Santorum was voted out in a landslide in 2006. Bush wasn't Catholic, so what's your point about him winning some Latinos? You're making a lot of assumptions about how blue-collar Catholics vote. They didn't vote for Biden in the 2008 Democratic primaries. Why would they necessarily vote for Cuomo? Catholics don't subscribe to identity politics, as evidenced in 2004. No one cared what Kerry's ethnicity or religion was. I didn't hear anyone complaining that Kerry wasn't Irish or Italian, or about the fact that his dad was Jewish and his mom was French. Kerry did worse than Gore among Catholics despite the fact that he was Catholic and Gore was not. JFK was also a spoiled rich kid, maybe even to a greater extent than Kerry was. The reason he did a better job appealing to Catholics than Kerry did was because Catholics were excited to elect the first Catholic President, but since electing Kerry would have been nothing new, his religion wasn't a big deal among Catholics. And again, if candidates are going to talk about race, religion, and ethnicity too much, then they risk dividing and alienating many voters. I know appealing to certain ethnic and religious groups is important, but not all ethnic and religious groups subscribe to identity politics nowadays, and thus that is not the best way to appeal to them.

[milhouse24]

Well, Evan Bayh had more Senate and Executive experience than Obama as well, so why was Biden chosen then?  JFK appealed to Irish Catholics primarily but I'm sure Italians also voted for him.  I actually think Kerry lost votes because people thought he was a French-speaking liberal European socialist, and not a true American Christian Texan like Bush.  Dubya's ethnicity of a Wasp helped him secure more votes from the Christian Conservative voters.

No, Biden was primarily picked to counter claims that Obama was inexperienced. I clearly remember the 2008 campaign, so I know. This is the same reason for why Cheney was picked in 2000. McCain would not have won PA no matter who he picked for VP. Obama won the state by double-digits and Santorum was voted out in a landslide in 2006. Bush wasn't Catholic, so what's your point about him winning some Latinos? You're making a lot of assumptions about how blue-collar Catholics vote. They didn't vote for Biden in the 2008 Democratic primaries. Why would they necessarily vote for Cuomo?

Catholics don't subscribe to identity politics, as evidenced in 2004. No one cared what Kerry's ethnicity or religion was. I didn't hear anyone complaining that Kerry wasn't Irish or Italian, or about the fact that his dad was Jewish and his mom was French. Kerry did worse than Gore among Catholics despite the fact that he was Catholic and Gore was not. JFK was also a spoiled rich kid, maybe even to a greater extent than Kerry was. The reason he did a better job appealing to Catholics than Kerry did was because Catholics were excited to elect the first Catholic President, but since electing Kerry would have been nothing new, his religion wasn't a big deal among Catholics. And again, if candidates are going to talk about race, religion, and ethnicity too much, then they risk dividing and alienating many voters. I know appealing to certain ethnic and religious groups is important, but not all ethnic and religious groups subscribe to identity politics nowadays, and thus that is not the best way to appeal to them.

[Bo]

Well, Evan Bayh had more Senate and Executive experience than Obama as well, so why was Biden chosen then?  JFK appealed to Irish Catholics primarily but I'm sure Italians also voted for him.  I actually think Kerry lost votes because people thought he was a French-speaking liberal European socialist, and not a true American Christian Texan like Bush.  Dubya's ethnicity of a Wasp helped him secure more votes from the Christian Conservative voters.

No, Biden was primarily picked to counter claims that Obama was inexperienced. I clearly remember the 2008 campaign, so I know. This is the same reason for why Cheney was picked in 2000. McCain would not have won PA no matter who he picked for VP. Obama won the state by double-digits and Santorum was voted out in a landslide in 2006. Bush wasn't Catholic, so what's your point about him winning some Latinos? You're making a lot of assumptions about how blue-collar Catholics vote. They didn't vote for Biden in the 2008 Democratic primaries. Why would they necessarily vote for Cuomo?

Catholics don't subscribe to identity politics, as evidenced in 2004. No one cared what Kerry's ethnicity or religion was. I didn't hear anyone complaining that Kerry wasn't Irish or Italian, or about the fact that his dad was Jewish and his mom was French. Kerry did worse than Gore among Catholics despite the fact that he was Catholic and Gore was not. JFK was also a spoiled rich kid, maybe even to a greater extent than Kerry was. The reason he did a better job appealing to Catholics than Kerry did was because Catholics were excited to elect the first Catholic President, but since electing Kerry would have been nothing new, his religion wasn't a big deal among Catholics. And again, if candidates are going to talk about race, religion, and ethnicity too much, then they risk dividing and alienating many voters. I know appealing to certain ethnic and religious groups is important, but not all ethnic and religious groups subscribe to identity politics nowadays, and thus that is not the best way to appeal to them.

Obama picked Biden over Bayh because picking Bayh would have meant losing a Senate seat (which would have made it harder for Obama to push through his agenda) and also because the Democratic base was less happy with Bayh because he was more conservative than Biden.    I agree that Kerry lost votes due to perceptions of him being an elitist, but this just strengthens my point that identity politics don't work as well with Catholics as it used to. Also, this proves my point that I doubt Cuomo will do significantly better than Obama did with Catholics relative to the national average if the Democrats nominate him.

[milhouse24]

Well, Evan Bayh had more Senate and Executive experience than Obama as well, so why was Biden chosen then?  JFK appealed to Irish Catholics primarily but I'm sure Italians also voted for him.  I actually think Kerry lost votes because people thought he was a French-speaking liberal European socialist, and not a true American Christian Texan like Bush.  Dubya's ethnicity of a Wasp helped him secure more votes from the Christian Conservative voters.

No, Biden was primarily picked to counter claims that Obama was inexperienced. I clearly remember the 2008 campaign, so I know. This is the same reason for why Cheney was picked in 2000. McCain would not have won PA no matter who he picked for VP. Obama won the state by double-digits and Santorum was voted out in a landslide in 2006. Bush wasn't Catholic, so what's your point about him winning some Latinos? You're making a lot of assumptions about how blue-collar Catholics vote. They didn't vote for Biden in the 2008 Democratic primaries. Why would they necessarily vote for Cuomo?

Catholics don't subscribe to identity politics, as evidenced in 2004. No one cared what Kerry's ethnicity or religion was. I didn't hear anyone complaining that Kerry wasn't Irish or Italian, or about the fact that his dad was Jewish and his mom was French. Kerry did worse than Gore among Catholics despite the fact that he was Catholic and Gore was not. JFK was also a spoiled rich kid, maybe even to a greater extent than Kerry was. The reason he did a better job appealing to Catholics than Kerry did was because Catholics were excited to elect the first Catholic President, but since electing Kerry would have been nothing new, his religion wasn't a big deal among Catholics. And again, if candidates are going to talk about race, religion, and ethnicity too much, then they risk dividing and alienating many voters. I know appealing to certain ethnic and religious groups is important, but not all ethnic and religious groups subscribe to identity politics nowadays, and thus that is not the best way to appeal to them.

Obama picked Biden over Bayh because picking Bayh would have meant losing a Senate seat (which would have made it harder for Obama to push through his agenda) and also because the Democratic base was less happy with Bayh because he was more conservative than Biden.    I agree that Kerry lost votes due to perceptions of him being an elitist, but this just strengthens my point that identity politics don't work as well with Catholics as it used to. Also, this proves my point that I doubt Cuomo will do significantly better than Obama did with Catholics relative to the national average if the Democrats nominate him.

Again you seem to be grouping Italian-Catholics with Irish-Catholics.  There was an Irish President, but there has not been an Italian president.  There may also someday be an HIspanic-Catholic president.  Kerry was neither Irish or Italian.  Bush won because he won Christian Conservatives, so identity politics helped him in that instance.  Also, Dodd or Richardson could have been picked over Biden as well.

[Fuzzybigfoot]

Senator Russ Feingold or Andrew Cuomo.  I think Andrew Cuomo would run the strongest, since his family has so much name recognition.   

[Bo]

Well, Evan Bayh had more Senate and Executive experience than Obama as well, so why was Biden chosen then?  JFK appealed to Irish Catholics primarily but I'm sure Italians also voted for him.  I actually think Kerry lost votes because people thought he was a French-speaking liberal European socialist, and not a true American Christian Texan like Bush.  Dubya's ethnicity of a Wasp helped him secure more votes from the Christian Conservative voters.

No, Biden was primarily picked to counter claims that Obama was inexperienced. I clearly remember the 2008 campaign, so I know. This is the same reason for why Cheney was picked in 2000. McCain would not have won PA no matter who he picked for VP. Obama won the state by double-digits and Santorum was voted out in a landslide in 2006. Bush wasn't Catholic, so what's your point about him winning some Latinos? You're making a lot of assumptions about how blue-collar Catholics vote. They didn't vote for Biden in the 2008 Democratic primaries. Why would they necessarily vote for Cuomo?

Catholics don't subscribe to identity politics, as evidenced in 2004. No one cared what Kerry's ethnicity or religion was. I didn't hear anyone complaining that Kerry wasn't Irish or Italian, or about the fact that his dad was Jewish and his mom was French. Kerry did worse than Gore among Catholics despite the fact that he was Catholic and Gore was not. JFK was also a spoiled rich kid, maybe even to a greater extent than Kerry was. The reason he did a better job appealing to Catholics than Kerry did was because Catholics were excited to elect the first Catholic President, but since electing Kerry would have been nothing new, his religion wasn't a big deal among Catholics. And again, if candidates are going to talk about race, religion, and ethnicity too much, then they risk dividing and alienating many voters. I know appealing to certain ethnic and religious groups is important, but not all ethnic and religious groups subscribe to identity politics nowadays, and thus that is not the best way to appeal to them.

Obama picked Biden over Bayh because picking Bayh would have meant losing a Senate seat (which would have made it harder for Obama to push through his agenda) and also because the Democratic base was less happy with Bayh because he was more conservative than Biden.    I agree that Kerry lost votes due to perceptions of him being an elitist, but this just strengthens my point that identity politics don't work as well with Catholics as it used to. Also, this proves my point that I doubt Cuomo will do significantly better than Obama did with Catholics relative to the national average if the Democrats nominate him.

Again you seem to be grouping Italian-Catholics with Irish-Catholics.  There was an Irish President, but there has not been an Italian president.  There may also someday be an HIspanic-Catholic president.  Kerry was neither Irish or Italian.  Bush won because he won Christian Conservatives, so identity politics helped him in that instance.  Also, Dodd or Richardson could have been picked over Biden as well.

I seriously doubt any Irish-American or Italian-American voters voted against Kerry because he wasn't Irish or Italian. This isn't 1900. An Irish or Italian candidate with the same record, personality, and campaign as Kerry would have still lost by about the same margin to Bush. I never said anything about Evangelicals, so that's irrelevant. Chris Dodd was a bad VP pick because he was too closely tied to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Richardson was considered a bad VP pick because he had some corruption allegations and also because Obama's campaign feared that having a black and a Latino on the same ticket might be too much for many voters.

[Хahar 🤔]

Kerry was neither Irish or Italian.

Basically nobody knew this. He's a Catholic from Boston named Kerry. It's reasonable to assume he's Irish.