Race WAS a factor, voters admit

[Potemkin]

So, let's try again and see if we can discuss this topic of race without being racist (or politically correct.)


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl....html?ITO=1490

Race WAS a factor, voters admit - and Sarah Palin was a turn-off as minorities put Barack Obama into the White House

By Mail Foreign Service
Last updated at 7:01 AM on 05th November 2008

Barack Obama owes his presidential victory to American women, blacks and Hispanics, exit polls have suggested.

One in five voters admitted that race was a factor in their decision - though they insisted it was not an important factor.

John McCain's choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin, on the other hand, was an important factor for four out of ten voters - with that group leaning slightly towards Obama.

The Democrat took most of the votes from women, blacks and Hispanics and siphoned off enough white support to leave John McCain with a thin majority among this group essential to a Republican victory.
Enlarge voters


Women, blacks, Hispanics and young voters were the force behind Barack Obama's election victory, exit polls show

McCain and Obama split white votes across the U.S. except in the South - where McCain got twice as many votes as Obama.

McCain's lead among white women was especially thin - roughly 5 percentage points. Overall, he was backed by just over half of white voters, a group that had favoured President George W. Bush over John Kerry by 17 percentage points in 2004.

Obama, who is one of the youngest presidents to take office at 47, was running away with the youth vote - winning the under-30 crowd by 38 percentage points, even better than Democrat Bill Clinton's 19-point advantage over Bob Dole in 1996.

McCain, 72, got support from just over half of senior citizens, coveted for their vigilance in going to the polls. Those aged 65 or older did as much voting as the under-30 bloc: Each group made up about 17 per cent of all voters.

McCain also drew strength from white, working-class voters, according to preliminary exit polls. Whites who have not finished college were giving him heavy support, but short of the 23-point margin by which Bush won their vote in 2004.

Enthusiasm clearly was on Obama's side: Almost six in 10 of his voters said they were excited about what Obama would do as president. Fewer than three in 10 McCain voters felt that way about their man.

Fear played no favourites. Among both Obama and McCain voters, about half said they were "scared" of what the candidate they opposed would do as president.

Obama drew the votes of two-thirds of Hispanic voters - heavily courted by both candidates - and nearly all blacks who went to the polls.

He seemed to inspire optimism about race in America. About 60 per cent of Obama's voters believe race relations will improve over the next few years, while about the same number of McCain voters expect relations to stay the same or deteriorate.

In both camps, about one voter out of five acknowledged that the candidates' race was a factor in their vote, but almost no one said it was the most important factor.

Women voters typically are the key to a Democratic presidential victory, and Obama was pulling well over half their votes. He held a narrower edge over McCain among men, according to the preliminary national survey.

One in five of the first-time voters was black, almost twice the proportion of blacks among voters overall. Another one in five of the new voters was Hispanic. About two-thirds of them were under 30.

A third of first-time voters this year said they were political independents; only about one in 5 was a Republican.

Twenty-six-year-old Jennifer Sunderlin, who typically votes Republican, said she did not stick with her usual party this election year.

"Don't tell my Dad, but I voted for Barack Obama," said Sunderlin, of Albany, New York. She said she was turned off by McCain's choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.

She was not alone. Four in 10 voters overall said Palin was an important factor in deciding whom to vote for, and this group leaned slightly toward Obama. But nine in 10 Republicans calling Palin's selection important were voting for McCain.

About a third of voters said the quality that mattered most to them was the candidates' ability to bring about change - the mantra of Obama's campaign - while a fifth focused on the candidates' experience, McCain's strong point.

"I don't think Obama knows what he's doing," said Craig Burnett, 55, a Republican in Hagerstown, Maryland. "He's too young and inexperienced."

More than half of voters strongly disapproved of the way Bush has handled the job, and they voted overwhelmingly for Obama.

Two-thirds of voters worried about how to pay for health care and at least as many feared terrorists will attack the U.S. again. But the economy weighed heaviest on their minds.

Six in 10 voters picked it as the most important issue facing the nation, according to preliminary polling. None of the four other issues listed by exit pollsters - energy, Iraq, terrorism and health care - was picked by more than one in 10 people.

Almost everyone agreed the economy's condition is either "poor" or "not good." And more than eight in 10 said they were worried about the economy's direction over the next year.

Half of voters said they are very worried the current economic crisis will harm their families, and another third were somewhat worried about that. One reason: about two-thirds of voters have stock market investments, such as retirement funds.

Yet there was room for optimism - nearly half predict the economy will get better over the next year.

The results were from exit polling by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for The Associated Press and television networks conducted in 300 precincts nationally.

The preliminary data was based on 10,065 voters, including telephone polling of 2,407 people who voted early, and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 1 percentage point for the entire sample, smaller for subgroups.

[Dutchy]

Of course "race" was a factor, and it should be. A democracy should reflect what is in the minds of the people?

Actually from a biological or genetic point of view, there is only one human race, skin color is only a minor genetic variation, other variations are more important.
"Race" doesn't exist, what exists are cultural traditions, sets of ideas on the world and on other people, including people with another color or their skin.

You can try to deny history, but what happened in the past, has its importance for today.
My ancestors did their part to trade slaves from Africa to the New World. Immigrants from many countries went to the USA. People who lived there already - first nations - were wiped away.

Everything that happened brought with it new ideas, including ideas about other "races", or Italians, or Hispanics, or Jews, or Arabs, or whatever.
Those ideas still exist, "racial" discrimination still exists, "african american culture" exists. It is all about participation in society, acces to education, to jobs, to healthcare and acces to power.

Obama was doing community development in Chicago, and that will be a big part of his job in the future for the nation.

He is black and white and like the majority of the Americans of all colors, his mindset seems to be conservative. He seems to be the right man at the right place at the right time, to appeal to many .

[ukmum]

He seems to be the right man at the right place at the right time, to appeal to many .

He also appealed to the young voters, ignoring policies, lets face it even if people agreed with McCain message he came across as staid and past it
Obama came across as vibrant, on the ball and dynamic.

[Lucky1]

It's human nature for people to gravitate to those they perceive as like themselves, in whatever aspects, be it beliefs, race, wealth, status, etc.

[A.T. Hagan]

Race was always a factor. There were those who would not vote for him because he is black and there were those who voted for him just because he is black.

.....Alan.

[Renegade]

Originally Posted by A.T. Hagan

Race was always a factor. There were those who would not vote for him because he is black and there were those who voted for him just because he is black.

You left out the group that even though they voted against him due to his ideologies, they are perceived as racist simply because he is black.

[Dutchy]

Obama would have collected many, many more votes, if he was white.

[BirdGuano]

Originally Posted by Dutchy

Obama would have collected many, many more votes, if he was white.

And you base this assertion on what empirical evidence exactly ?

The skinhead vote ? Well i'll give you that....

[Ought Six]

D:

"Obama would have collected many, many more votes, if he was white."

I think that precisely the opposite is true. White guilt and the desire to 'overcome racism in America' won him far more votes than racism cost him. If he had been White, he would have been just another White liberal politician, which are a dime a dozen in this country. It was the combination of intellegence, charisma and minority race that made him uniquely appealing to so many.

[Aleph Null]

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Voting For is Not the Same as Voting Against

One of the standard responses from the right-wing knuckle-dragging crowd to assertions that Obama will be hurt by racists who refuse to support a black candidate is to look at the high percentage of his support by blacks and say that this is racist in the same manner, because these blacks are voting for Obama because he's black.

It is not the same, and the reason comes down to attitude -- whether the decision is made on the basis of a positive or negative orientation.

First of all, we must recognize that the vast majority of blacks have voted Democrat for decades. Second, the Republicans and McCain have run a campaign that has nothing in it to appeal to urban or black voters, further emphasizing a shift to Obama on their part. And third, there has been overt racism on the part of the right. But my point goes beyond that.

In an ideal world, people would choose candidates solely on the basis of their policies and character, not other attributes, but we don't live in an ideal world. Many people will give preference to a candidate because they identify more with him or her, or because they perceive a natural link based on background or geography.

Choosing someone for these sorts of reasons may not be the way I'd like it to be, but at least it is being made out of a positive association. There's a big difference in choosing someone because you are excited about supporting someone like yourself, and voting against someone because they are different than yourself.

This happens all the time in politics and nobody even pays attention to it. For example, one of the "conventional wisdoms" in picking a VP has always been to choose someone who can "help carry a state". Why should this even be a factor? Because people like to vote for a "local boy/girl". So we saw a big spike in McCain's polling in Alaska when Palin was chosen (some don't realize that Obama had been competitive there up to that point, not that it mattered much.) This is done because of local pride and identification reasons. It may not be entirely rational but it's nothing nefarious.

We see similar things in other respects as well. For example, people were urging McCain to choose Lieberman as his running mate in part because his religion would appeal to Jewish voters in the swing state of Florida. We've also seen VPs chosen because of their age -- the Biden choice is arguably partially in this camp. And of course, there's the appeal to women angle of choosing a woman VP like Palin, or some of the support Hillary Clinton had.

Voting against a candidate on the basis of these factors is an entirely different matter, because it is based not on positive feelings such as pride or excitement but rather on fear, hatred and resentment. Voting for a candidate because he comes from your home state is not the same as voting against a candidate because he comes from a state you don't like. Voting for a woman because you are excited about a woman being elected is not the same as voting against a woman
because you don't want a woman elected. And voting for someone because you feel association with his race is not the same as voting against him because of race.

Are some black supporters of Obama racist? Almost certainly true. I would imagine that part of the increase in turnout to support him consists of blacks who would vote for a black candidate but not a white one. But I believe this is a very small number. Remember that blacks have, ever since they were granted the right to vote, had no choice in this regard -- they have always voted for white candidates. I can understand them being excited about the chance to support oine of their own for a change.

http://aabw.blogspot.com/2008/10/vot...as-voting.html

[Fiddlerdave]

Originally Posted by Ought Six

D:I think that precisely the opposite is true. White guilt and the desire to 'overcome racism in America' won him far more votes than racism cost him. If he had been White, he would have been just another White liberal politician, which are a dime a dozen in this country. It was the combination of intellegence, charisma and minority race that made him uniquely appealing to so many.

OH gee, "intellegence"[sic], charisma AND minority race just happens so seldom, whites couldn't resist, eh?

And for some whites who likened Obama to the dumb, wide-eyed, shaking kneed "Feets, do yo stuff!" black charictature comedians of the 1930's (the only allowable kind), Obama's "Feets" DID their thing. Those feet turned out to be wearing boots, and walked right over them.

[Ought Six]

Fd:

"OH gee, "intellegence"[sic], charisma AND minority race just happens so seldom, whites couldn't resist, eh?"

Name all the candidates with the intelligence and charisma who have run for Prez in the last couple decades. Now name all the minority candidates that have run for Prez in the last couple decades. Now name all the candidates that have had both sets of qualities. If you answer honestly, does the term 'rare' apply? Is being honest about this automatically racist?

How about it, Dave. Do you have the intestinal fortitude to actually address and answer the questions put to you for once? Or would honest answers be a bit too uncomfortable to your political correctness? Maybe just playing the cheapshot race card is soooo much easier, hmm?

[Fiddlerdave]

Originally Posted by Ought Six

Fd:Name all the candidates with the intelligence and charisma who have run for Prez in the last couple decades. Now name all the minority candidates that have run for Prez in the last couple decades. Now name all the candidates that have had both sets of qualities. If you answer honestly, does the term 'rare' apply? Is being honest about this automatically racist?

How about it, Dave. Do you have the intestinal fortitude to actually address and answer the questions put to you for once? Or would honest answers be a bit too uncomfortable to your political correctness? Maybe just playing the cheapshot race card is soooo much easier, hmm?

You are a sad case. Even Obama was considered "unelectable" AFTER he beat Hillary, because he was black.

This rather restricts the pool from whom we get to choose when entrants to the race are blocked because they "can't win".

[BirdGuano]

http://www.cir-usa.org/articles/156.html

The age of white guilt: and the disappearance of the black individual

Essay
By Shelby Steele
Harper's Magazine, November 30, 1999

[doc_jake]

Got to hand it to you colonials’ you certainty know how to produce an entertaining election. It’s even causing some fun over here.

Mr Phillips told the Times: "If Barack Obama had lived here I would be very surprised if even somebody as brilliant as him would have been able to break through the institutional stranglehold that there is on power within the Labour Party."
Mr Philips is chairman of the Equality and human rights commission. You can read his full story at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7717149.stm

To be honest I feel sorry for Obama, I would prefer to be remembered for my failures rather than because of my colour or religion.

[Fiddlerdave]

To be honest I feel sorry for Obama, I would prefer to be remembered for my failures rather than because of my colour or religion.

Indeed, there is is a temendous amount of brilliance in what Obama accomplished. His skills at management and organization were amazing to see, aside from showing true statesmanship on many occasions. And articulate and charismatic.

But what we hear about is the voters who voted for him "because he was black." :sigh:

And the rarified academic world the essay author lives in, the schools have a CURRENT issue because their admission of "legacy students" continues to perpetuate the racism of our recent history, since the practice of admitting white children of the white students of whites-only days significantly impacts who gets to rise to the top of the society. In the real world, it remains that if you send out identical resumes with white-sounding name or black-sounding names, the white names get a higher response. Send out attractive actors with identical resumes and the white one willget more jobs and a much more friendly and encouraging response even if not hired. These things make a difference in success rates, but we are supposed to pretend they do not in this faux "meritocracy".

[Aleph Null]

White guilt and the desire to 'overcome racism in America' won him far more votes than racism cost him.

Of course nobody has ever presented any credible evidence to back up this assertion. While it may seem intuitive, it is also intuitively obvious that anyone suffering from "white guilt" would be most likely to be on the left side of the scale and would have voted Dem anyway.

If he had been White, he would have been just another White liberal politician, which are a dime a dozen in this country.

This assumes that his race is the only factor that differentiated Obama from "just another white liberal politician", which is nonsense.

And as Dave said, many people said back in June that Obama would lose because of race issues, the Dems were idiots to pick him, they'd regret not going with Clinton, etc.

[Ought Six]

A0:

"Of course nobody has ever presented any credible evidence to back up this assertion. While it may seem intuitive, it is also intuitively obvious that anyone suffering from "white guilt" would be most likely to be on the left side of the scale and would have voted Dem anyway."

FWIW, I have spoken with people who consider themselves independents who said that they voted for Obama in large part because they thought 'the time had come for a Black man to be President'. I asked these folks if they thought that they would feel the same about him if he was White, considering his uberliberal record and lack of experience. A couple of them said 'no', and the rest got a rather troubled look on their face and quickly changed the subject. And as we know, independents decided the election.

You are correct that we can never really know the motives of the majority of voters, and thus virtually everything said on this thread is speculative. But my views are backed up by more than just intuition. My sample size is small enough to be labelled anecdotal, but I suspect that it is indicative of attitudes in a fair number of people.
----------

"This assumes that his race is the only factor that differentiated Obama from "just another white liberal politician", which is nonsense."

He ran against Hillary, who seems to have convinced a lot of people that she is quite intellegent. So did Kerry, Dukakis, and a number of other liberal candidates. So intellegence does not, in and of itself, seem to be a huge distinguishing factor.

The other one is charisma. I think that this was a huge factor, as it was for Bill Clinton. People just automatically like and trust the guy. He got about three-quarters of women voters, and I think his friendly, easygoing, charismatic personality had a lot to do with that. So I will certainly give you that one.

But his charisma was balanced by his inexperience. This gave pause to a lot of people during the campaign. So did his refusal to give specifics on any of his platform planks. His lying about his level of association with figures from his past also tarnished his carefully crafted reputation of honesty. I still see race as one of the primary factors that put him over the top. That, and the Repubs being associated with the failing economy.
----------

"And as Dave said, many people said back in June that Obama would lose because of race issues, the Dems were idiots to pick him, they'd regret not going with Clinton, etc."

Absolutely. We were all guessing back then about the effects of race on the election. I was one of the people who thought it would be a net negative for him. Clearly, I was mistaken. I do not see how wrong predictions of what we could not know then change what we can directly observe now.

[southerncross]

I give it to him on Charisma, for me race doesn't come into it albeit he gained a lot of votes due to the colour of his skin, He is still half white right?
He Talked the Talk and did it very well with moving speeches that touched people where it mattered, Now we will see if he can walk the Talk.

[Dutchy]

Poll: Racial views steer some white Dems away from Obama

By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON, Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON (AP) — Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent," responsible for their own troubles.

more: http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-...lse-obama-race