DescentBB

It looks like across America, among white democrats the vote is split pretty evenly between Clinton and Obama but among black voters the trend is somewhere around 95% in favor of Obama.
Now I have no doubt that if 95% of whites were voting for Clinton we would be hearing endless discussion on how the whites are racist...

Will we hear any discussion of how Obama is getting the racists support?

I've read that in a national election Obama faces an estimated 15% handicap because he's black, some white democrats will just not show up to vote if their party's candidate is black. That is one of the Clinton campaign's unspoken, but often alluded to, arguments for her not giving up the fight.

Then there is the big ugly threat that black voters will not show up to vote for Clinton if she somehow convinces the super delegates to give her the nomination based on her electability compared to Obama's.

So we have ourselves a presidential election that might well be decided because of racial prejudice and since it isn't republican prejudice all those so called journalists are tip toeing around the big black elephant in the room trying to find something else to blame it on.

Reverend Wright doesn't know just how ironically prophetic it was when he was the one to say \"America's chickens....have come home to roost!\"

I'm an old redneck peckerwood who voted for Obama but only in the primary and I approve this message.

good point. Women voters may also be sexist.



but i thought blacks generally voted democrat anyway. Wasn't that Bush's point when he illegally got his brother to cut out all of those black voters in Floriduh? So i kinda figure black voters don't vote republican, and with that performance by the Bush boys i'd expect sane blacks to never vote republican again.

Roid, in general and traditionally they do. Back when the parties held different lines, the Dem were \"coming to the rescue\" to the Black American plight.

Both parties have changed a pretty good deal since then and I think many folks have begun rethinking alignments.

Some people are racist. About the same percentage of black people are racist as white people. Just because white people voted evenly doesn't mean that some of them aren't racist too.

Will Robinson wrote:Now I have no doubt that if 95% of whites were voting for Clinton we would be hearing endless discussion on how the whites are racist...

No we wouldn't. Just like we don't whenever there's a particularly good white person running against a black person in some other popularity contest.

I would say that it depends on WHY blacks are voting primarily for Senator Obama.

If it's because they believe that Senator Clinton is inferior because of the color of her skin, then that's a racist act. If it's because they just want to see one of their own as President regardless of what they think of Senator Clinton's ability, then that's just stupid - the same as blindly voting the party line.

It's also possible (I will leave it up to the intripid reader to figure the probability) that the majority of blacks have looked at both democratic candidates, have measured the pros and cons of each, and have determined that Senator Obama is more closely aligned with their own goals and beliefs.

Oh heck yea. African Americans are very racist and they get away with it in a very public manner, just like skin heads and all the rest. They are allowed to have African only T.V. media and African only lobbyist's etc. etc. This Country as a whole is very racist, pick a nationality, we are all guilty of it over here with the first amendment being as powerful as it is.

Hehe, I would love to se the general reaction if WET (White Entertainment Television) started broadcasting.

Then again, isn't every other channel other than the WB and BET considered part of the WET network anyway?

Dedman wrote:It's also possible (I will leave it up to the intripid reader to figure the probability) that the majority of blacks have looked at both democratic candidates, have measured the pros and cons of each, and have determined that Senator Obama is more closely aligned with their own goals and beliefs.

That's beautiful, but it's not very realistic.

If you replace "goals and beliefs" with "interests", you'd probably be closer to the truth. Maybe they want a president that can identify with them. That's realistic optimism.

I would say racism definitely plays a part, and, based on my own experience and perceptions, I would say that part is probably not insignificant.

Or perhaps some of them were looking beyond the primary, perhaps they think against the republican dinosaur it would be easier for a black man to win than it would be for a white woman.

Although the media seems to try to paint the country as not divided by race, the \"latino vote\", the \"black vote\", and the \"women vote\" tell very different stories.

I have to know: How is the race issue in Europe, any europeans got some info on that?

Dakatsu wrote:...I have to know: How is the race issue in Europe, any europeans got some info on that?

Lol! The race issue in europe is 'We scold Americans for any sign of racism they show but we don't even let our darkies get elected to dog catcher...'

They've been at it for more than a few centuries longer than we have so they have the system down to fine art!

Everybodys a racist. It makes sense to vote for those who could identify personally with you. Seems totally logical to me. The problem is not racism, the problem is Hatefulness.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Dedman wrote:It's also possible (I will leave it up to the intripid reader to figure the probability) that the majority of blacks have looked at both democratic candidates, have measured the pros and cons of each, and have determined that Senator Obama is more closely aligned with their own goals and beliefs.

That's beautiful, but it's not very realistic.

If you replace "goals and beliefs" with "interests", you'd probably be closer to the truth. Maybe they want a president that can identify with them. That's realistic optimism.

I would say racism definitely plays a part, and, based on my own experience and perceptions, I would say that part is probably not insignificant.

I meant to imply "interests" as well. After all, we all use "interests" as a vote - no vote criteria.

Everybody is racist, the trick is not to act on it.

I also find it annoying whenever someone tries to make excuses for someones racist actions.

Dakatsu wrote:I have to know: How is the race issue in Europe, any europeans got some info on that?

For most of Europe, skin-colour racism isn't really an issue. There's a bit of racism regarding immigrants, but not blatant hatred, just more of exclusion from their social life (division of culture, in other words).
For Eastern Europe, well, they're still second-world countries, so...

I don't blame blacks at all for wanting Obama. It's the very first viable candidate for president that they have ever seen.

Dedman wrote:I meant to imply "interests" as well. After all, we all use "interests" as a vote - no vote criteria.

I was talking about more of a "this guy can relate to us" and less of a conscious analysis of the "goals and beliefs". Not to say that there aren't even many people who do approach it like that, but I think to suggest that the majority of any group linked only by ethnicity (and not linked by a great many other attributes that should cause a similarity) would be prone to such unusually refreshing objectivity and clarity of thought, and at the same time all swing in the same direction, a direction that is apparently convenient, seems really ridiculous to me. Too ridiculous to entertain.

Well maybe the dots don't connect the way some people say they do, but let's not leave some out in order to make a prettier picture.

You're suggesting that black people, as a group, be given a benefit of the doubt for a seemingly convenient position that would never be given to any group connected only by ethnicity.

Dedman wrote:I will leave it up to the intripid reader to figure the probability

I give it a 0.001%, and only that high because we're talking about the "majority" and not all.

Do you see what I'm saying? To deny any relation (in the majority) to color ("race" is an incorrect term) when color is the only constant is nonsense.

Yes, indirectly they are.

Will Robinson wrote:It looks like across America, among white democrats the vote is split pretty evenly between Clinton and Obama but among black voters the trend is somewhere around 95% in favor of Obama.
Now I have no doubt that if 95% of whites were voting for Clinton we would be hearing endless discussion on how the whites are racist...
[...]
Will we hear any discussion of how Obama is getting the racists support?
[...]
So we have ourselves a presidential election that might well be decided because of racial prejudice and since it isn't republican prejudice all those so called journalists are tip toeing around the big black elephant in the room trying to find something else to blame it on.

Oh come on, Will, this might reveal more about your own prejudices about blacks than about theirs. Think about it: in your mind, the only reason why Obama could get 95% support from blacks is because of their racial prejudices. Have none of the other possible reasons crossed your mind?

1. Some blacks might still feel underpriviliged in today's America (maybe rightly so), and hope that a black president would address this difference. Heck, they might only hope that just seeing that a black CAN be president might go a long way for making blacks more acceptable in higher up position.

2. Other blacks might not feel underprivileged generally but nevertheless realize that so far no president has ever been black. They might just want this last barrier for equality broken, so that America's highest power reflects the rest of America's society.

3. They might simply think that Obama is the better candidate.

4. They might simply be afraid that the OTHER candidates are racist and will unfairly favor whites.

So let me reverse your question. Why do YOU think that racial prejudice is the best explanation for the black's voting behavior? Why does your post not consider any of the other reasons, that, quite frankly, imply a much higher intelligence on their side?

Pandora, because:

but among black voters the trend is somewhere around 95% in favor of Obama.

I have actually asked this question to a number of blacks on the job site. I got answers ranging from \"yeah America needs a black president\" to \"I'd like to but he's wanting to raise social security taxes\".

I'm sure, that if I were black, the possibility of there being a black president in America would be exciting just in itself.

95%?? Yeah If that is true, I dunno if it is or not, then race has to be a strong factor to produce that high a number.

Yeah, but there is a difference between race being a factor and racism. I agree that at least points 1 and 2 DO imply an awareness of the race-factor in society, but not racism.

Thorne, you and I are in agreement. I meant what you said. You just said it better. Let me rephrase my original post this way.

There is a difference between NOT voting for Senator Clinton solely because she's white (racism) and voting FOR Senator Obama solely because he's black and they can identify him (not racism).

Voting for anyone , with their race being a factor, is racism.

eh? why that?

flip wrote:Voting for anyone , with their race being a factor, is racism.

I disagree. There is a (maybe not so) subtle but very distinct difference between withholding your vote from candidate A because you believe they are the inferior candidate because their skin color is different from yours and voting for candidate B because you identify with them (and feel they identify them selves with you) because you both have the same skin color.

flip wrote:Voting for anyone , with their race being a factor, is racism.

Is that bad?

flip wrote:Everybodys a racist. It makes sense to vote for those who could identify personally with you. Seems totally logical to me. The problem is not racism, the problem is Hatefulness.

Exactly the point I was hoping to bring out in this thread!
I don't fault blacks for voting for Obama and I don't think for one minute that most of them that vote for him do so merely because he's black, there are a lot of blacks that wouldn't get 95% of their vote.
It's natural as can be for people to gravitate towards others that look like themselves, that is hard wired into the DNA of every creature. White people tend to hire white people, black people tend to hire black people, white people tend to marry white people, black people tend to marry black people, etc. etc. those tendancies transend economic, educational, religious backgrounds.

My point is to illustrate the hypocrisy of the media because all it takes is white people having that natural tendancy to paint them as racist but black people have to do more than show those natural tendancies they need to show the hate before the media will condemn them, that is if they aren't too busy trying to make excuses for the hate instead. That disparity in the way we judge the two groups is not helping race relations at all! That was my main reason for the post.

As for my analysis:

It is precisely because so many white people think electing a black man/woman to the presidency will release the racial monkey off their backs that Obama gets the unnatural momentum he's enjoyed. He earned the opportunity by being an inspiring speaker but that one asset would never have launched him into super stardom.

It is obvious to anyone who thinks it through that Obama wouldn't have even made it to the first stage if he was white. Just look at his resume, he's a nobody, a lightweight. He's never even had to campaign to get his two previous positions because of the circumstances he was basically given the jobs.

Another side to all this is if he gets elected all those guilty white voters who think electing him to the job will do so much for racial relations are in for a rude awakening. No president goes without receiving extreme criticisms and unwarranted blame.
When the U.S., which is predominantly white, starts to tear him down, as they will, it will be the white people doing it to a black man...

We're entering some seriously trying times so it looks like he's in for some serious blame to be dumped on his shoulders.
The democrats are going to nominate a gesture as their candidate, not that Obama the man doesn't have any substance, intellect or good intentions but as a presidental candidate he's nothing special at all...except that he's black.

The guilty-conscious white voters who elect him are really just offering black americans a token, much like the old 40 acres and a mule. I suspect it will be an equally ineffective attempt too.

As for me showing my prejudices, I don't think so, I voted for him. Primarily to give Hillary the finger because at the time we had our primary here he wasn't winning, but also because I found him to be inspiring, especially as a relative outsider it gave me hope but now that he's been under the microscope a bit I find him to be failing misarably. He's more of a lightwieght democrat than he is a statesman, I should have known better. The difference between me and many others is I'm not afraid to say it out loud.

No I don't think it's bad. Just reality. It's still racism. Look at this scenario. 2 People apply for a job. They are both equally qualified. One is white and one is black. If you choose the employee based only on their race it's racism. I don't see why that's so hard a concept to grasp.

It makes sense even. Here your going to have a day to day relationship with someone. Though you have no animosity towards either, you pick the one that you more closely identify. The one from your own race. Racism.....

flip wrote:No I don't think it's bad. Just reality. It's still racism. Look at this scenario. 2 People apply for a job. They are both equally qualified. One is white and one is black. If you choose the employee based only on their race it's racism. I don't see why that's so hard a concept to grasp.

It makes sense even. Here your going to have a day to day relationship with someone. Though you have no animosity towards either, you pick the one that you more closely identify. The one from your own race. Racism.....

I don't see that as racism. To me racism means (and every dictionary I have looked at backs me up on this) that that you do have animosity towards the person whose skin color is different from your own. It means one believes a person to be inferior in some way because of the color of their skin. The job scenario you gave is just what Will said. We tend to gravitate towards our own.

But (correct me if I'm wrong) isn't voting for someone who is the same colour as you because you relate more to them and think they will be better for you racist?

If a white/coloured person never votes for a person who is not white/coloured, (even though the other person is better suited for the job) being racist?

Lol. Ok,then what about this. A white man and a black man interview for a job by a white employer. The black man is more qualified than the white man, and although the employer has no animosity towards the black man, he had rather hire the white man because he feels more comfortable hiring someone from his own race.

Is that racism? This is no different scenario than every other one stated here, except roles have been reversed.

flip wrote:Lol. Ok,then what about this. A white man and a black man interview for a job by a white employer. The black man is more qualified than the white man, and although the employer has no animosity towards the black man, he had rather hire the white man because he feels more comfortable hiring someone from his own race.

Is that racism? This is no different scenario than every other one stated here, except roles have been reversed.

I know all about this and yes it is racism(or descrimination based on colour etc). Where I work, people who are coloured, handicapped and have breasts are hired before any other. I've seen this happen as I've been overlooked for some Gov't jobs because I'm male and white.

I knew this thread was going to become annoying, I have seen it a thousand times. Why don’t people make excuses for white people who make decisions based on race? They call “that” racism no matter how benign the action may be, but blacks are always given the pass.

There is only one constant…White Racism, and Black Victim.

And this is exactly why there can never be a true dialogue on race in this country.

Spidey wrote:And this is exactly why there can never be a true dialogue on race in this country.

I think there can be.

However, we have to come to an agreement on the definition of racism. It's a very emotionally charged word that means different things to different people.

That is why I always go back to the dictionary definition of a word. It helps take the emotion out of the discussion.

Don't let jeff catch you doing that...

Anyway I don't agree.

However, we have to come to an agreement on the definition of racism. It's a very emotionally charged word that means different things to different people.

Exactly Dedman. That is the whole reason I keep pushing that point. Merlin's use of (discrimination based on color) is about as accurate as you can get, but I would stand by the belief that that is summed up in the one word: Racism. I can't think of another.

It does seem to me, that nowadays the race card is overplayed. First let me say this. I believe in God.

1 John 1:5: This is the message which we have heard from him and announce to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

Now if you take pure white light and run it through a prism, it breaks down into all the different colors. So to me, all the other races show the greatness and diversity of God himself. So...you can't believe in God and think of any other of MAN as inferior to yourself. I am not a racist in that sense of the word.

I do believe there is a double standard among men nowadays though. You see, I'm also an American. I believe in the right to believe whatever you want and not have anyone force their own beliefs down your throat. If someone wants to be a Racist in the bad sense, then that is their right also (Free Speech)

I take Don Imus and Dog The Bounty Hunter for example. While I don't agree with their beliefs I respect their right to have them. I hear , see and watch blacks ridiculing whites all the time. Portraying them as nerdy, weak and foolish. If it's not acceptable for Don Imus to simply say \"nappy headed hoes\", then why is the shaming of the white man acceptable?

Wow. I figured this thread would eventually hit the \"white folk are discriminated against even worse!\" mark. I just didn't think it would be so soon.

Talk about \"playing the race card\", lol. Every time the topic racism comes up, it's not long before I hear the caucasians cry foul.

I'm sorry, but that's a complete crock.

Sure, there's 'majority racism' against caucasians. I've seen it happen, myself... once. It simply pales in comparison to what minorites face.

Yeah, I'm white. I used to think it was horrible how my race was 'unfairly overlooked because of PC attitudes' or whatever. Yeah, I used to think that I was in touch with issues of race, because some of my friends were black, and I went to a church with a number of black people.

That is, until I became a teacher in a low-income urban minority school. Let me tell you guys the best way I can: if racism against caucasians is difficult, then racism against minorities is hell. There's no comparison.

Sorry but I see no where anyone said \"white folks are discriminated against even worse\". My only point is that blacks and whites are very similar in those respects. If it's wrong for someone white to make racist remarks against blacks, then it is also wrong for blacks to do the same.

I also think that the keyword in your post is \"low income\". Thats the biggest problem we have here in this country. I know just as many whites that dont have a pot to piss in either. When will we realize thats the whole reason the media keeps these things stirred up. The biggest difference in this country is not white, black or hispanics. It's the difference between the rich and the poor.

You totally misinterpreted the meaning of my post. Hope this helps clear things up for you.

Foil wrote:Wow. I figured this thread would eventually hit the "white folk are discriminated against even worse!" mark. I just didn't think it would be so soon. .....

If there is no excuse for racial discrimination then there is no excuse for racial discrimination...
Blacks aren't the only race therefore they aren't the only ones capable of suffering unwarranted discrimination.
So any solution or reaction to any racial discrimination must be uniform in it's application. If it even looks like revenge has becomes part of the solution then it isn't a solution at all and it polarizes the people.
If anyone thinks there is a some unwritten tally that shows blacks have suffered more so therefore they should get a free pass when they engage in racial discrimination then both sides become entrenched in defensive posture instead of standing together on common ground and the battle will rage on.

It has to be a No Excuses policy to work and instead we have the left wing of our political make up pandering to the victim class, and we have people motivated by an adopted guilty conscious who want to make excuses.

I'm really sorry that the whites bought black slaves and post emancipation descendants of the slaves have suffered a long hard road to get their rights and status as fellow humans restored but if they are ever going to be free they need to cast off the last vestige of shackles and that is the victim status that is exploited and perpetuated by politicians and civil rights pimps. The long hard road hasn't come to an end it has come to a big endless loop and many blacks are being led around and around the circle by the nose.

We have the laws in place, we have the general consensus that racial discrimination is wrong well established, we have the end in sight, now we just need to acknowledge and accept what we have created and act like we belong here.
We can't change history but we can all stand up and make no excuses.

Before we all go off on a limb, the 95% figure is based on black democrats. In a national election between McCain and Hussein I wonder what the black breakdown will be when black Republicans are factored in.