Wall looming before Obama?

[MikeWaters]

Obama is not an extremist. Bush is an extremist.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Obama is not an extremist. Bush is an extremist.

Am I speaking to exUte now?

He has the most liberal voting record in the Senate.

He opposes gun ownership.

He wants a new bureaucracy for health insurance and wants universal health care.

He wants unilateral withdrawal from Iraq.

He is not pro-choice, but PRO ABORTION.

He has attended for 20 years a racist church which is down on America and whose pastor believes the US government created AIDS to hurt blacks. His pastor believes the brains of blacks and whites are different.

He doesn't believe taxes are high and wants loads and loads of new costly programs.

On what aspect is he NOT radical?

Bush is simply misguided and wrong-headed, and too liberal. He wanted to please everybody and ended up pleasing nobody.

[Spaz]

I'm loathe to post in the politics section, but this thread piqued my interest a bit.


-I know very few people who would vote for a person based solely on their skin color. Anyone claiming Obama will lose a significant portion of votes due to skin color is overstating the affect, IMO.

-Obama is certainly not a middle-leaning Democrat. IMO, his stances on issues appeal to few middle-right voters, and even some middle-left voters will be turned off by him.

-Black people tend to lean Left. 88% of blacks voted for Kerry in 2004. I wouldn't be surprised to see that number rise a bit for Obama. 41% of whites voted for Kerry in '04. I don't think the blacks who vote for Obama solely because he's black (and there will be some, just as there'll be whites who vote against him for that sole reason) will make a large difference in the election.


Perhaps the biggest potential difference that comes about due to Obama being black is the potential for more black voters to actually vote.

[MikeWaters]

there is a well-established phenomenon of white people when polled saying they will vote for the black candidate and then voting against the black candidate.

Why? Because they feel social pressure to not say they are against the black candidate. Why would they feel social pressure? Because they believe racism is not socially acceptable, and they are racist.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

there is a well-established phenomenon of white people when polled saying they will vote for the black candidate and then voting against the black candidate.

Why? Because they feel social pressure to not say they are against the black candidate. Why would they feel social pressure? Because they believe racism is not socially acceptable, and they are racist.

There may be some racism in their selection but you can't deny a black candidate who stays black on the issues also creates some of the problem of failing to transcend his subculture.

For a black candidate to be successful, he must transcend the stereotypes, i.e., he must not be radically liberal, he must avoid racist divisive speech, he must appeal to voters outside his base. Obama does none of this.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Am I speaking to exUte now?

He has the most liberal voting record in the Senate.

He opposes gun ownership.

He wants a new bureaucracy for health insurance and wants universal health care.

He wants unilateral withdrawal from Iraq.

He is not pro-choice, but PRO ABORTION.

He has attended for 20 years a racist church which is down on America and whose pastor believes the US government created AIDS to hurt blacks. His pastor believes the brains of blacks and whites are different.

He doesn't believe taxes are high and wants loads and loads of new costly programs.

On what aspect is he NOT radical?

Bush is simply misguided and wrong-headed, and too liberal. He wanted to please everybody and ended up pleasing nobody.

LOL, that was my first thought, ex-ute??

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Archaea

There may be some racism in their selection but you can't deny a black candidate who stays black on the issues also creates some of the problem of failing to transcend his subculture.

For a black candidate to be successful, he must transcend the stereotypes, i.e., he must not be radically liberal, he must avoid racist divisive speech, he must appeal to voters outside his base. Obama does none of this.

He was doing okay presenting himself as such until Reverand Wright crawled out of his undersea cave and reared his head (stirreed to life by Obama's enemies?). Wright struck Obama right in his Achilles heal.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

there is a well-established phenomenon of white people when polled saying they will vote for the black candidate and then voting against the black candidate.

Why? Because they feel social pressure to not say they are against the black candidate. Why would they feel social pressure? Because they believe racism is not socially acceptable, and they are racist.

Could it be they just don't like being called a racist even though they aren't. Accuse them of not having the guts to tell those who like to accuse them of being racist to F-off, but they aren't necessarily racists.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Here's the difference. Blacks have come out strong for white [Democrat] candidates.

Rural whites have never come out for a black candidate [because they are all Democrats].

Edited for clarity.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Here's the difference. Blacks have come out strong for white candidates.

Rural whites have never come out for a black candidate.

It's a shame there hasn't ever been a solid black candidate. That's why I don't vote for the Independent candidate either; because there has never been a solid option.