Posted on 05/16/2012 12:23:08 PM PDT by JOHN ADAMS
bored at work, I decided to wander over to the New York Times website to see how they're viewing the world today, insofar as one can see that from looking at things on their website accessible for free, as I (obviously) refuse to give them any of my money. I happened across this ridiculosity, which I post here for the amusement of my fellow freepers. It's one of a series of essays about what Obama can do to improve his vote-getting ability. My favorite paragraph:
Older, rural, white men, especially in the South, are probably out of reach for the president because race is likely a factor with them. So he has to focus on better educated, more tolerant, moderately upscale suburban men – Soccer Dads. Both men and women find Obama equally likeable but they dramatically split on whether he shares their values, according to a recent CNN/ORC International poll.
but by all means read the whole thing (though wait til after you've fully digested your lunch).
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
With IQ’s less than their age
Soccer Dads?Why don’t they just say it,metrosexuals.
When the time comes to identify the useless eaters among the population, the NYT subscriber list would be a handy guide.
Exactly
LOL. Bathhouse Barry lost the soccer moms with his homo love fest. Being a misogynist he didn’t realize that the institution of marriage is a pretty big deal with married women. Messing with 1,000’s of years of marriage tradition and calling everyone who disagrees with you a bigot is a sure loser.
As a long time youth soccer coach and Dad, I wouldn’t let Obama anywhere near an unsupervised group of six year old boys.
The man is a phony, and the NYT a fish rag.
If race were a factor with them, then Obama wouldn't have won in 2008.
Hey, I think you summed up the liberal self congratulation cult pretty well.
Yeah, those educated “Soccer dads” don’t see race at all do they? I’ve got several as friends and trust me, they see it. Some as a “plus” (that “unity” bs from 2008) and others as a negative. So this stereotypical biased notion that only “rural, Southern, older” nonsense is just that.
BTW my liberal friends are “angry, white males” They bitch to High Heaven about Republicans/Conservatives, etc. but run for the hills to the safety of the R/C neighborhoods and send their kids to those conservative schools or to parochial ones. Hypocrites, you bet.
Fags works for me.
Soccer is the “sport” of the metro-sexual.
translation: p____whipped suburban husbands whose feminist careerist wives have kowtowed them into both driving the kids to nightly soccer practice AND voting for Democrats.
I chuckle when anyone suggests that conservatives don’t support 0bama because he’s black.
Like we’d support his Marxist policies if he were white,
or wouldn’t support Herman Cain, Thomas Sowell, or Clarence Thomas because they’re black.
The thing is ... I don’t think they mean “metrosexuals”. Metrosexuals are urban girly-men. They already have the urban metrosexual vote.
They seem to think they actually have a shot getting votes of white SUBURBAN men. Regular educated middle-class Joes in the suburbs, with wives at home, kids in school, and a white collar job.
They’re deluding themselves. Not a lot of Obama voters in Katy, TX. Not a lot of metrosexuals there either.
SnakeDoc
When people think, they pick Romney.
When people feel, they pick Obama.
I hope Romney picks a veep that is actually, moderately well liked.
So giant wussy's...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.