It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Poll: Racial views steer some white Dems away from Obama

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Sublime620
 


no offense but do you ever watch Penn & Teller?





posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fathom
this is completely irresponsible reporting!


Exposing massive racism isn't irresponsible reporting.
You are welcome to your opinion that it is - but I disagree.
I think this was a very bold and brave poll to take.

I'd like to see more polls taken - not just of white democrats.
How do black democrats feel about white candidates?
How do asian democrats feel about black and/orwhite candidates?

Heck - most folks discuss this world as if it's black and white.
But there are asians and islanders and native american indians and
a whole slew of other ethnic and cultural groups out there.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 07:18 AM
link   
yes that is true, but the political divide that seperates african americans from... not whites but everyone else is what the real issue actaually is.

Latinos, Islanders, Asians... I don't see any difference in the politics of most of thes epeople than my own, (not saying my individual views) just the conservative liberal breakdown

The African American population is probably the only ethnic group in America that Embraces fully socialism.

This is the real divide...



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Fathom
 


Yes, but I don't follow.


reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Excellent post. There is still an under current of racism that divides this country. It has much less pull than it used to, and I believe it is fading on all sides, but it still remains.

It would be interested to see how blacks feel about white candidates and whites in general.

[edit on 21-9-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I find myself agreeing with both sides of this issue. At least FF and I are on the same page.
Or 1/2 page.


It's responsible to take these polls and report on them, but it does seem to me that the media has taken this poll and ADDED conclusions of their own to it and turned it into an "Oh! Obama should be worried" issue. And they are reporting on it a lot. Almost as if they're trying to skew something...

But I also agree with mm that neither side should be counting chickens just yet. And from past experience, I'd say that no chickens should be counted until late on Nov. 4th.

The other side of this concern is that there is a number of Republicans who will vocally support McCain until the election, but secretly vote for Obama. And they will be even more secrecy on that side. If there's anything worse than being racist, it's deserting the GOP. So that just throws another wrench into the works. PLUS the high possibility of "caging" that may be done by both parties... All these issues make the polls pretty useless.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

The other side of this concern is that there is a number of Republicans who will vocally support McCain until the election, but secretly vote for Obama. And they will be even more secrecy on that side. If there's anything worse than being racist, it's deserting the GOP.

I disagree, those Repubs that were p'oed at McCain came back because of Palin and forgave him.
If those extreme repubs out there that weren't swayd because of Palin and are still angry will not vote for McCain they surely will not vote for Obama, they will just stay home and drink a beer.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by mental modulator

FROM 538... THESE guys are the statistical nerds - a different take on things.




4. One should be very careful not to confuse a study like this with the Bradley Effect. Of course some people are racist, and will vote against Obama because he is black -- I have met some of them. But the Bradley Effect concerns something different -- whether such people are likely to lie about their behavior to pollsters. There is simply no empirical evidence that the Bradley Effect exists any longer. It did not exist in the primaries, and it did not exist in the 2006 Senate race in Tennessee, which was perhaps the most racially-tinged contest of the past decade (in fact, Harold Ford slightly outperformed the late polls).


www.fivethirtyeight.com...


The Bradley Effect doesn't exist any longer? What happened to Obama against Hillary in the California Primaries?

www.realclearpolitics.com...


But the way Obama lost California raises the specter of the dreaded Bradley Effect.



In California's primary last Tuesday, Obama lost by a landslide 10 percentage points after a late survey showed him ahead by 13 points and other polls gave him a smaller lead.


The article states there may be other reasons, but to me this is classic Bradley Effect.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Why does it have to boil down to racism? I keep hearing it more and more, and instead of actually thinking that everyones turning into a racist, I think it's just becoming an easy scapegoat, something to use, as a defense, instead of actually just admitting you're not cut out for whatever it is you were vying for.

Why can't it be, that white voters won't vote for Obama because he doesn't cut it? Why does it have to be that white voters are hating on him because he's black?

I'm sorry if I'm rambling on, but this is just getting ridiculous.

I hear Obama say change this and change that... But that's all I hear him saying. And if I were American, I wouldn't vote for him either. Chanting "change" doesn't mean diddly squat. Show me some plans of attack, how to make this change happen, and I'll vote for you. (If I was American.)

But hey, I'm sure there are tons of white voters out there, who won't vote for Obama because of one thing; Skin color. Just like how some blacks vote for him just because of skin color.

In a perfect world, we wouldn't have to worry about such things. But unfortunately, we're far from perfect.

Again, just my own 0.2 cents. Not meant to be offending or anything else.



Peace,
FK



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   
As much as some people like to pretend racism does not exist in america they are wrong because it does. Blacks dislike whites and vice versa.

Without giving a lecture on american history and explaing the whys which most people already know I think race will definitely play a factor in the election process. For the life of me I can't think of one good reason to vote republican after 8 years of mistakes and corruption.

If hillary was running against McCain we would be up 10-15 points by now. The fact Obama is already trailing by a point proves racism is alive and well.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by mopusvindictus
 


I must disagree with that.

Polling, while not perfect, does have science to it. They do take samples from those areas and they are accounted for.

Trust me, people get paid a lot of money to account for issues like that.


Reality polls are just a form of manipulation I can ask you questions you can be against my views but I could make you sound like you agree with me. You could be against public assistance on illegal immigrants. I could ask you if there injured in a traffic accident do you think we should allow hospitals to treat them. Most people would say yes and now your for public assistance.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blueracer
People can be ignorant. But they have a right to be. Some people hold color against white people too.


And I wonder how many conservative Republicans there are out there that would never vote for a ticket with a woman in either position on it?

We should also see some polls being done on that, because it will obviously also have an effect on the election.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

If hillary was running against McCain we would be up 10-15 points by now. The fact Obama is already trailing by a point proves racism is alive and well.


No, it only proves that democrats will use racism as an excuse for losing (this time) when their real problem has always been the candidates they choose. Gore and Kerry and Obama, oh my!

And I'm sure these same people would be complaining about "gender issues" if it was Hillary instead of Obama. Wait, that would be hypocritical, though, since the Republicans also have a woman on the ticket!

[edit on 9/22/2008 by centurion1211]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


The funny thing is race is only brought up by Democrats and Obama himself. Republicans never talk about it. Race is only being brought up now because Obama has a very good chance of losing this thing. The Democrat Party doesn't lose on their own merits, they lose for certain reasons.

In 2000 they lost because Bush cheated and because of the Supreme Court.


In 2004 they lost because Bush cheated again, and because of the Swiftboaters.


In 2008 they will lose because America is racist.


NOTE: This is NOT Political Trolling...This is a critique of the Democrat Party...NOT of people who consider themselves Democrats.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
And I'm sure these same people would be complaining about "gender issues" if it was Hillary instead of Obama. Wait, that would be hypocritical, though, since the Republicans also have a woman on the ticket!


And they cry "sexist"! every chance they get!



Originally posted by RRconservative
The funny thing is race is only brought up by Democrats and Obama himself. Republicans never talk about it.


Um... I call BS.


Did a democrat start this thread?
And what about these?

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Everyone is talking about race and gender this election because, for the first time, we have either a woman or a black person going into the White House. There's nothing wrong with talking about race and gender. But to think that only one party brings it up is just incorrect.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

If hillary was running against McCain we would be up 10-15 points by now. The fact Obama is already trailing by a point proves racism is alive and well.


No, it only proves that democrats will use racism as an excuse for losing (this time) when their real problem has always been the candidates they choose. Gore and Kerry and Obama, oh my!

And I'm sure these same people would be complaining about "gender issues" if it was Hillary instead of Obama. Wait, that would be hypocritical, though, since the Republicans also have a woman on the ticket!

[edit on 9/22/2008 by centurion1211]


It's not an excuse, it's reality!

The republicans under the Bush administration have made a ton of mistakes and corruption is extremely rampant as even mild to moderate conservatives have admitted. How can we ignore this fact?

Yet Obama is on the verge of losing simply because of racial issues. Trust me in that I dislike hillary more than McCain on a personal basis after her poor conduct in the primaries but that doesn't change the fact that she is/was more capable of getting the vote in.

I'd rather have the devil running heaven than god running hell. Thats what it boils down to in the end!



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   
What? No reply or concern from the left (or right) on my other assertion that having a woman on the ticket will actually cost the Republicans some votes?



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Yet Obama is on the verge of losing simply because of racial issues.


There is no proof of this too often made, but still unproven claim. The best you can come up with are some polls, but dems say they don't believe the polls that don't agree with their positions, so what does that tell you. One term for this is called "cherry picking". Or is just a case of already working on who to blame when Obama loses?
That shows a lot of faith in your candidates.


Trust me in that I dislike hillary more than McCain on a personal basis after her poor conduct in the primaries but that doesn't change the fact that she is/was more capable of getting the vote in.


So, you are saying getting the vote out for a candidate you don't like is better than having one you say you like better win?



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
centurion1211, Are you talking about losing votes to Obama or losing votes because men won't vote.

What you say seem pretty plausible but if it does I see the men not voting. Some of the men that have this thing about not seeing women in an authority position are also likely to be judgmental of minorities, I would imagine.

I could see him losing votes but I don't think it would be many. A poll on this would be interesting to see.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Yet Obama is on the verge of losing simply because of racial issues.


There is no proof of this too often made, but still unproven claim. The best you can come up with are some polls, but dems say they don't believe the polls that don't agree with their positions, so what does that tell you. One term for this is called "cherry picking". Or is just a case of already working on who to blame when Obama loses?
That shows a lot of faith in your candidates.


I have plenty of faith in Obama as he is by far the most suitable candidate out of all the other candidates combined. However, I don't have much faith in the voting populace as the polls have demonstrated that many people are still putting race above everything else.


Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Trust me in that I dislike hillary more than McCain on a personal basis after her poor conduct in the primaries but that doesn't change the fact that she is/was more capable of getting the vote in.


So, you are saying getting the vote out for a candidate you don't like is better than having one you say you like better win?


I am saying I rather have a democratic president over a republican president regardless of who is running for each party.

[edit on 22-9-2008 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic



Originally posted by RRconservative
The funny thing is race is only brought up by Democrats and Obama himself. Republicans never talk about it.


Um... I call BS.


Did a democrat start this thread?
And what about these?

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



I look at these threads and not a single one was started by an elected Republican official.

Obama quotes on race.

"I ceased to advertise my mother's race at age 12" from his book

We know what kind of campaign they're going to run. They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. They're going to say you know what, "He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. Did I mention he's black?"

This is Obama talking about Republicans inferring what they might say...even though no one is saying it. Classic Race baiting.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join