Will Racism Enter the 2012 Election?, page 1

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times

Topic started on 25-10-2011 @ 05:37 AM by mishigas

This is a serious question. Of course I will be accused of racism myself, or inciting a fire or whatever, but for those who analyze these issues, I think it is a valid question.

We can all agree that racism played a big part in the 2008 presidential election and the outcome. Some people wanted to be part of a historic moment -- America elects it's first black president. Some people voted for Obama because they too are black -- witness the fully 96% of blacks that voted for him. And there were others who voted for a black man simply because he was black. Black love, white-hate, whatever the reasons, Obama's skin color played a large part in his victory.

And now on the eve of the next election, we see what a terrible mistake was made by voting for skin color. Despite his packaging, the man turned out to be an abysmal failure. Corrupt and incompetent are two words which describe him best, despite his alleged Ivy League education.

Which brings us to the question: Is Herman Cain's candidacy doomed from the start? Will there be an undercurrrent of thinking that maybe a black man needs to excel to be considered average in this job? Have we been taught our lesson for a while; better not vote for 2 black men in a row? That they just can't cut it for some reason?

It's not unfounded in the world -- in professional sports it is still an issue. Remember the controversies over whether a black QB or head coach could make it in the NFL? It cost Rush Limbaugh his gig with ESPN over McNabb, for example.

Will we see backfire from Obama's failed policies, and attribute it to skin color?

Can we discuss this without being obnoxious? If not, I'd rather drop it than cause any pain. But I hope we can talk about it like I know we can.

edit on 25-10-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 05:40 AM by beezzer

reply to post by mishigas

Er. . . you might want to do a wee edit on your title. 2010?

Anyway, if we just stay on task and stick to policy, then anyone that brings in race will just be labeling themselves.

Just my humble. . .

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 05:50 AM by mishigas

reply to post by beezzer

Thanks.

So you're saying it's a dead thread?

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 06:10 AM by Lighterside

reply to post by mishigas

We can all agree that racism played a big part in the 2008 presidential election and the outcome. Some people wanted to be part of a historic moment -- America elects it's first black president. Some people voted for Obama because they too are black -- witness the fully 96% of blacks that voted for him. And there were others who voted for a black man simply because he was black. Black love, white-hate, whatever the reasons, Obama's skin color played a large part in his victory.

I'm not sure we'll all agree on this. I think race may have played a role, but not as large of a role as you are stating. Maybe you care to back it up? Some sources that would point this out, something not from a far right wing blog maybe?

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 06:14 AM by beezzer

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by beezzer

Thanks.

So you're saying it's a dead thread?

Not at all. You as well as I know racism will rear it's ugly head. When the argument looked weak for democrats, they ran to the race card so that time was spent defending against non-existant accusations and allegations rather than focusing on the issues.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 07:42 AM by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Lighterside
I'm not sure we'll all agree on this. I think race may have played a role, but not as large of a role as you are stating.

Agreed. Race played a role, but not a major one.

As regards Herman Cain, I don't think he'll ever get close to the nomination, so I would say no. Race won't play a role next year. Unless Perry is successful in reviving the Birth Certificate issue (which he is trying to do). That could get some racial tensions going as regards Obama.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 10:32 AM by mishigas

reply to post by Lighterside

I'm not sure we'll all agree on this. I think race may have played a role, but not as large of a role as you are stating. Maybe you care to back it up? Some sources that would point this out, something not from a far right wing blog maybe?

I'm pretty careful to avoid "far right wing blogs" as sources, and we won't take your reply as leading, at least not yet. Just tell me which part you disagree with and I'll try to supply sources, knowing that some are more easily verifiable than others, and keeping in mind your own apparent biases, OK?

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 10:42 AM by Fromabove

Obama was elected only because he was considered a black man. Most all the blacks will tell you this because that's why over 90% voted for him. The whites that did so was to get out from under the white guilt thing and the rest because they wanted to be the first to put a black man in the white house.

Racism will also show in this election as well. Unless Cain gets the nomination then it will be may the better black man win. Blacks will be free to vote their conscience and whites will not have to worry about guilt, and everybody will get to be cool when they pull the lever in November.

But in reality, Obama will be tossed over the side of the boat for Hillary at the end of this year. Then we will have to take into account the gender bias as well.

edit on 25-10-2011 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 10:48 AM by mishigas

reply to post by beezzer

So you're saying it's a dead thread?

Not at all. You as well as I know racism will rear it's ugly head. When the argument looked weak for democrats, they ran to the race card so that time was spent defending against non-existant accusations and allegations rather than focusing on the issues.

Yeah, I hadn't thought about the stout party members...I already see it rearing it's partisan head here...

Anyway, to the member who claimed that Cain won't get close to the nomination, well he is beating Perry in many polls (which is all we've got to go on right now) and that leaves only Romney. Of course, I suspect that some of the Cain support is coming from the left, to try to choose Obama's opponent.

But putting aside all the partisanship here, let's think nationwide. This is a difficult meter to measure, so it will take more than partisan cliches'. Not a topic for everybody. It is a metric that doesn't show up on data sheets. It will be necessary to examine the various groups, such as Indy's, to see which way they are trending. The fly-over vote is also a good indicator.

Jan. 10 is the NH Primary, which kicks things off. Hopefully the field will be narrowed a bit with candidates who have no chance, such as Huntsman, dropping out before then. Next debates are Nov. 9, 12, and 15. with further winnowing of the field.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 10:58 AM by mishigas

Here's a little bit on whether racism was a factor in 2008:

Race has become a Presidential Issue

American whites who disagreed with Senator Obama’s proposed policies found themselves hesitant about expressing that disagreement, lest they appear racist. American black’s who disagreed with Senator Obama’s proposed policies found themselves hesitant about expressing that disagreement, lest they appear disloyal. Those Americans, black or white, who agreed with Senator Obama’s stand on the issues had no issue; they may be the only demographic to whom race did not matter. Many Americans voted regardless of issues, to show support for America’s belated consideration of a black President.

Link

So it's a given that race was an issue in the past. Now for 2012; let's get this out of the way:

Should race matter?

Of course not. Those who disagree with the President’s policies have a right and a responsibility to express it, regardless of the President’s race, without having to give a second thought to being perceived a racist. Those who agree with the President’s policies also have a right and a responsibility to support those policies, and should do so no matter what the race of the President is. Nobody in America, the Land where All Men Are Created Equal, should be making a choice in leadership based on skin color. Nobody.

But will it matter, regardless of whether or not it should matter?

Will Racism Effect 2012?

Americans are very proud of themselves for electing a black president. They have convinced themselves that they are now above racism. Yet many of their votes were based on skin color, whether the vote was for or against. Will that status remain as we approach the presidential election of 2012? Will Americans vote for the black incumbent because they will feel guilty about voting for a white opponent? Will they feel they are sliding backwards if they do not support the black candidate for a second time?

Will those that are opposed to President Obama’s current policies vote against him, believing he is wrong because he is black? Will those that favor the current policies vote for President Obama based on those issues alone, or because they believe he is right because he is black? Or will they stay focused on the issues at hand?

For the rest of this analyst's opinion, visit the link. I'll be supplying others as we go along.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 11:03 AM by OLD HIPPY DUDE

Yes. TPTB have always used the technique of"divide and conquer".
Keeping us divided will never address the real issues.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 11:13 AM by jefwane

I think race will play a smaller role than religion in the primaries. I just do not see Romney as a Mormon doing to well in the mostly evangelical south. I believe Perry got in because he knew he could beat Romney in the South even with Gingrich, Paul, and Cain from the region.

Personally I'd love to see Cain win the nomination (seems unlikely at this point with all the gaffs) for no other reason than to see how viciously the establishment (ie Democratic) black leadership attacks him. And even though I don't for a second think you would see mass defections of blacks from straight party democratic voting, a Cain nomination could very easily drop black democratic support from 95% + to 75-90% in a close election that could be the difference.

Another thing that I'd possibly like to see is primary defections in open primary states. In both the states I have historically voted in (Georgia and Alabama) you walk into the poll on primary day choose your party ballot. I've at times chosen Democrat in Primaries and at times chosen Republican. Limbaugh attempted to get some chaos going in 2008 in Dem primaries, why isn't anyone on the left doing the same to GOP? Like jumping primaries to vote for Ron Paul or someone else who they think would be a weaker candidate than say Romney or Perry.

I'm not very impressed with any of the GOP candidates. I'm in the anyone but Romney camp myself. And I will admit his religion is one of the reasons I'm in that camp, if he wins the GOP nomination I will pray for a 3rd party candidate or vote Libertarian.

I don't like Perry, he reminds me of a mix of Bill Clinton and G W Bush. I don't know if I can vote for him.

I don't like Gingrich. I'm from Georgia and old enough to remember him as minority leader and Speaker in the House. He's smart as a whip though and I could vote for him against Obama.

I do like Cain. I'm concerned about his views on OWS and the general pass he's given the Banking industry over their culpabillity in our current economic situation, but I could easily vote for him against Obama, and if primaries were today I'd vote for him.

I do like Ron Paul. He is a man of prinicple, and has brought to the discussion several issues that no other candidate is willing to address. However he's been in congress a long time and aside from voting no on almost everything has done little to address the crimes of the Banksters even with his positions in committees that have oversight of the banking system.

Bachman and the others I really don't care for at all.

Personal views aside, if you want to see some really ugly racial politics, let Cain win the nomination. You will see black leaders in the Democratic party attack him ruthlessly.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 11:23 AM by masqua

In a country that asks for racial origins in their census and has MSM discuss race in the 'Special Reports', it's a no-brainer that 'racism' becomes a focus in the elections.

Of course it's going to be racist. It can't be helped and would be a factor even if every polititian looked like Roy Rogers or Dale Evans. Somebody would be digging through their histories looking for a distant relative who wasn't of 'Pure Blood' and using that information against them.

Religious backgrounds play their part as well. Just ask Mitt.

edit on 25/10/11 by masqua because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 12:11 PM by mishigas

reply to post by masqua

Religious backgrounds play their part as well. Just ask Mitt

No need to go to that length. Just look at the reply a couple above yours:

I'm in the anyone but Romney camp myself. And I will admit his religion is one of the reasons I'm in that camp, if he wins the GOP nomination I will pray for a 3rd party candidate or vote Libertarian.

How can you argue with that mindset?

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 12:17 PM by Resinveins

What was the name of that ranch Rick Perry was associated with again?

Racism in politics? Surely you jest?

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 08:58 PM by Lighterside

Originally posted by Lighterside

I'm not sure we'll all agree on this. I think race may have played a role, but not as large of a role as you are stating. Maybe you care to back it up? Some sources that would point this out, something not from a far right wing blog maybe?

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Lighterside

I'm pretty careful to avoid "far right wing blogs" as sources, and we won't take your reply as leading, at least not yet. Just tell me which part you disagree with and I'll try to supply sources, knowing that some are more easily verifiable than others, and keeping in mind your own apparent biases, OK?

Well, I'm glad you speak for everyone by declaring that "we" will not take my request for you to back up your opinion as fact as a leading question.

The part I disagree with is that you paint a pretty clear picture indicating that Obama won the elections purely based on his race. Hence... "I'm not sure we'll all agree on this".

And I apologize for your confusion, but the only "apparent bias" I have is against false information.

I will say this, your response is borderline passive aggressive as if I have offended you for requesting facts. Sounds to me like I might of stepped in some troll bait.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 09:37 PM by Southern Guardian

reply to post by mishigas

Racism will play in every election, atleast for a long while to come. I don't think it's a just a matter of the skin colour of the candidate, it's also about which party holds best interests for one singal racial group. 91% of blacks voted for Carter in the 1976 elections, 52% of blacks had supported Hillary Clinton in 2007 before she came into the primaries, Bill Clinton carried 86% of the black vote during his elections. It is about interests, and it's not just the blacks. Outside of race, 80% of gays went democratic in 2008 (although they seem to be leaning republican as of late). It is about what defines a party, what they promote. Cain's skin colour won't automatically make it a challange for Obama to court the black vote, because if you think this, you're just guilty as the black voters you accuse of being biased and generalizing in their way of thinking.

Do I think if Cain were to win the Republican nomination he'd make a difference to the black vote? No. I think he may manage to gain a piece of the vote, possibly ending up with 84% to Obama, 13% to Cain (1% other) which will not be all that significant. In the end blacks see Cain as just another republican suit and that's that. Alot of blacks tend to get harassed by other blacks for voting Republican as well, which I think is rather low and pathetic, even if some blacks may have reasons for their harassment. The 'R' still doesn't go well with the black community. Many blacks still remember that day when Goldwater defended racial segregation as a decision for the states. Many of the older blacks still do remind their children and grandchildren of what they went through.

We should start again, and give both parties an opportunity to remarket themselves for the vote, but there are still bitter individuals, children of the 50's and 60's, of the jim crow years, whom are bitter, on both sides. It's something that will take years to be rid of.

reply posted on 26-10-2011 @ 01:00 AM by mishigas

reply to post by Lighterside

Originally posted by Lighterside
I'm not sure we'll all agree on this. I think race may have played a role, but not as large of a role as you are stating. Maybe you care to back it up? Some sources that would point this out, something not from a far right wing blog maybe?

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by Lighterside
I'm pretty careful to avoid "far right wing blogs" as sources, and we won't take your reply as leading, at least not yet. Just tell me which part you disagree with and I'll try to supply sources, knowing that some are more easily verifiable than others, and keeping in mind your own apparent biases, OK?

Well, I'm glad you speak for everyone by declaring that "we" will not take my request for you to back up your opinion as fact as a leading question.

My God, can you be any more PETTY?? I use the word "we" in the vernacular, for goodness' sake. Stop acting like a third grader.

The part I disagree with is that you paint a pretty clear picture indicating that Obama won the elections purely based on his race. Hence... "I'm not sure we'll all agree on this".

So you disagree with the entire premise? Then just say so, instead of biasing your post by inserting terms like "far right wing blogs" into your response, and then pretending to be oh so innocent and surprised when you are called on it.

You're merely trolling, and I have no time for trolls.

reply posted on 26-10-2011 @ 01:05 AM by mishigas

reply to post by Resinveins

What was the name of that ranch Rick Perry was associated with again?

Racism in politics? Surely you jest?

Touche'. But do you think it could backfire on Cain as I proposed it might? I don't consider Cain racist, btw.

reply posted on 26-10-2011 @ 01:13 AM by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by mishigas
Some people voted for Obama because they too are black -- witness the fully 96% of blacks that voted for him.

You know Kerry got 88% of the black vote in 2004
Al Gore got 90% of the black vote in 2000
Bill Clinton got 84% of the black vote in 1996, and 83% in 1992.
Dukakis got 89% of the black vote in 1988
Mondale got 91% of the black vote in 1988 (and since Mondale only got 13% of the vote total, it almost looks as if only black people voted for Mondale. Weird!)
Carter got 81% of the black vote in 1980 and 83% of the black vote in 1976
Source

Blacks in America vote Democratic. Overwhelmingly. And who can blame them, when the other party is calling them racists for doing so, when the candidate shares a skin tone with some of them.

on edit: Looking at this data... McCain got 75% of the white vote in 2008. This is the highest white support for a candidate in the last 40 years. Even Reagan only pulled 66% against Mondale. Bush II only managed high 50%'s in both 2000 and 2004. Just by the numbers? While black voting habits remained pretty much the same as always for the last 40 years, there was a massive white shift towards McCain. Why? I dunno can't honestly draw an inferral just from the numbers, but, well...

edit on 26/10/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^