Yet MORE sloppy analysis on "white working people".

First off, by no means is this a unified/united demographic in anyone's minds other than the tea-leaf readers in the press. Secondly, Obama's had no problem at all garnering overwhelming support from "white working people" in states like Wisconsin, Kansas, Idaho, Colorado, etc. What is required here is more subtle:

"Obama has a problem with working class whites who are the progeny of industrial workers in the Rustbelt and/or the underclass of Appalachia, who tend to be less educated and among whom there has been generations of racism/racial tensions due in part to the economics and demographics of these regions."

Granted this is not a pithily summarized demographic, but at least it has some accuracy. Further, Edwards speaks a fantastic populist message, and looks the part with his drawl and rolled up sleeves (while campaigning, that is). But I question whether he has traction among "working people" in the same way: wasn't it this column (among others) who suggested Edwards was a "phony" and that people saw that on the campaign trail? So which is it?

Honestly, you get paid for a living to shovel out this "analysis"? I can get far better on any number of blogs, who have actually done something called "research" that requires more than glancing at exit polls, and most of those people work for free.