Originally Posted By Dabob2 < The only demographic he lost, I believe, was the white mail.> You must have seen a different breakdown than I did. Mine said that Clinton won white females, but that Obama did better with white males than she did. Obama won by 28 percentage points. Any way you slice it, that's huge.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Obama won by 28 percentage points. Any way you slice it, that's huge.<< And any way you slice it, I don't think jonvn can continue to sustain this "Obama can't win because he's black" approach. I know the arguments behind it, I just don't buy them. In a national race, Obama handily beats every Republican, except possibly McCain.
Originally Posted By jonvn Yes, I can. 50% of the voters were black. 80% of them voted for Obama. Aside from that, on the wild chance he would get the nomination, he isn't going to win the election. Nominating him is handing it over to the republicans.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I agree, so vote for Obama in the primaries.... Every single racist in America will register to vote to ensure a black man is not elected President. The main reason why the polls say otherwise is people hide their racism and will not publicly admit it, but once they are inside the booth, they can secretly vote for whomever they want.... Racism exists in America still, we may not like to admit it, but it is there and will come out full forth in Nov if Obama is the Democratic nominee. Sexism still exists too, and you'll see it if Hillary is nominated...
Originally Posted By gadzuux If we extrapolate that a bit, what do we find? That if dems in general nominate him, it shows a willingness to support - and vote for - a black candidate within the democratic party. The "racism" problem only comes into play in the general election when - wait for it ... REPUBLICANS come into play. Like we're going to pander to the lowest common demoninator? We're supposed to try and find a candidate that's palatable to the least among us? The GOP is already tearing itself apart over having to choose between a mormon and a moderate republican - two candidates who won't kiss christian butt. If McCain were a democrat, they'd paint him as a treasonous traitor instead of a bonafide military hero. Some within the party are already trying to do that, saying that he "left behind" other POWs. We cannot be afraid of these small minded bitter little people. And we cannot kowtow to them and their bigotry. We as a nation should just vote our conscience, and if that means some cannot bring themselves to vote for a black man, or a mormon, or a woman, or a politically moderate republican, let them sit home. We're better off without them anyway.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 But Obama won't win if he is nominated, so in essence, the Democrats are throwing away the election..
Originally Posted By Mr X On the flip side, you could say the Democrats are making a move for civil rights and equality, win or lose. Perhaps their actions now can improve the world 50 years from now, who knows? If you go with the whole "well, they're not electable so why even try?", when will it ever change? The fact that ONE party out of two can manage to see beyond sex and color could strike a blow against racism everywhere.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 But that one party is not doing it... Notice he didn't get a majority of the white vote, he got an uber majority of the black vote. So the Democrats are not seeing beyond color....They just have more black Democrats than Black Republicans.
Originally Posted By Mr X The fact that the two front runners in the race are a black guy and a woman, for now, does speak to the future possibilities imo. That just would never have happened in the past...no way. First the pioneers have to blaze the trail...people like Ferraro, Thatcher, Rice, Powell, Albright, have made great strides towards equality I think. Thirty years ago you'd never see any of those people in such prestigious positions imo (was Thatcher 30 years ago now? Maybe so I guess).
Originally Posted By jonvn When the republicans nominate a black man, that's when one will win. Otherwise, it will not change. "The fact that the two front runners in the race are a black guy and a woman" Indicate the democrats are again not thinking very clearly. If they don't win, it doesn't matter who gets the nomination.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I suspect what the Republicans are hoping to avoid is Edwards getting the nomination. And, as long as the three of them stay in the race it is a good thing for the Repubs. With the Kennedy's coming out for Obama the DNC is about ready to implode. It will be like Bush/Gore...Bush/Kerry all over again.
Originally Posted By jonvn Edwards would definitely win. The democrats have not a lick of sense about them. This is not new. They are all wrapped up in how great it is a woman and a black are running. Meanwhile, Karl Rove is just laughing to himself because he knows the democrats are once again self-destructing. All the republicans will have to do is nominate someone who isn't totally unpalatable, and they win. McCain can win. I won't vote for him, but he could win. And he's ahead right now. If the republicans are smart, and they are smarter than the democrats about these things, then the best thing for them to do is let McCain coast to a nomination, while the democrats screw it up. Now, all bets are off if Edwards gets the nom. Then no one on the republican side has a prayer of winning. The democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Goodness, I once again agree with everything you said. I voted for McCain last week in early voting here in Florida. It wasn't a "feel good vote" as I really am not overly confident. But, Giulani is off my radar and Romney, while bright and on top of things just leaves me with mroe questions than answers. If it becomes Obama/McCain then I would really have to give my vote some thought. I would like Obama to get the nominaion simply because I would like to hear him flesh out his ideas on programs. Right now he is an empty suit. Sure, the suit is good looking but we really haven't seen what is inside it yet. If he was able to sway me then I certainly would consider giving him my vote. But, I still don't have confidence in Americans to NOT make the race about race and I suspect he would lose. Obama/Edwards would be an engaging ticket. I wonder he McCain's running mate would be. Perhaps Florida Governor Charlie Crist?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <But that one party is not doing it... Notice he didn't get a majority of the white vote, he got an uber majority of the black vote. > That was South Carolina (where he won more white males than Clinton, by the way, and also took the white under 30 vote). He won Iowa outright, which is about 3 percent black. He only lost by 3 points to Clinton in NH, which is also only 3 percent black. This idea that he can't win white votes (at least among Democrats) is false, and it's coming about because we've been so focused on SC for two weeks. I think Hill and Bill may have overplayed their hands here; not only is trying to make Obama the "black candidate" offensive to a lot of black people, it's offensive to a lot of liberal white people also, me included. I was undecided until just a few days ago, but NY has its primary in 8 days and I now intend to vote for Obama. Since Clinton is our senator she'll probably win here, but I think the Clintons' actions of the past couple of weeks will have turned off a lot of white voters. We'll see.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 He won Iowa outright, which is about 3 percent black. He only lost by 3 points to Clinton in NH, which is also only 3 percent black. This idea that he can't win white votes (at least among Democrats) is false, and it's coming about because we've been so focused on SC for two weeks. < That actually proves my point, Iowa is a public caucas, IMO he got votes from people he normally wouldn't but because it was a public setting and nobody wanted to be percieved as a "racist" they picked him... Behind a closed curtain people's true feelings come out.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Do you thing Obama is viewed as "black" or is he viewed as "Tiger black"? In other words, does he have the ability to transcend race?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 By Tiger Black, I also assume you mean Colin Powell Black, and I don't think he can transcend race. It was mentioned earlier, the first black man to be elected President will be a republican, plain and simple....
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <That actually proves my point, Iowa is a public caucas, IMO he got votes from people he normally wouldn't but because it was a public setting and nobody wanted to be percieved as a "racist" they picked him... Behind a closed curtain people's true feelings come out.> NH was a closed curtain primary, with a 3% black population. He only lost by 3 points. He got an awful lot of white people to vote for him, closed or open. And the previous black candidates never came close to winning the Iowa caucuses either.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I don't know what Colin Powell Black is, but in Tiger I see a man who has broken the racial divide wide open sheerly from his likeable public persona, talent, etc. I honestly think Obama has a better shot at winning the Presidency than does Hillary. Obama isn't running with the anchor around his neck that is Bill Clinton. I think more conservatives hate the Clintons than hate black people in general. I think more Republicans and Independents would cross over to Obama than the Clintons.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I agree. Millions of right-wingers downright HATE Hillary. Bill too, but Hillary even more. It's a visceral thing. They would come out in droves to vote against her. They might not support Obama, but I don't see him engendering downright hatred like Hillary does.
