scary for the democrats

wpfox16 · Post by **wpfox16** » Tue May 27, 2008 6:41 pm

Would you categorize the overwhelming black support of Obama racism?

I've heard this a lot, even from a lot of people I really respect (Like Tex!), but I just don't see the argument. In the early polls (pre-Iowa), Hillary led for the African American vote by double digits... The fact is that damn near every African American who has ever voted in a Presidential election has voted for a white person... The "working class white" demographic that the news channels have been so focused on, especially in states where there is a great deal of competition between blacks and whites for low-paying jobs, strictly won't vote for someone who is black. These AA's who support Barack would have been some of Hillary's most loyal supporters if she had won the nomination....There is, without a doubt, a difference in those two attitudes. I think that you can chalk up the overwhelming African American support for Barack Obama to enthusiasm for FINALLY having a horse in the race. That's not racism, that's excitement. The point is moot in the general, however, as AA's offer 90+% support for Democrats as it is.

urapnes · Post by **urapnes** » Tue May 27, 2008 9:21 pm

if people voted on issues, there would be overwhelming support for democrats. unfortunately, people in the US are uninterested in politics and national news. they instead rely on catch phrases, marketing and propoganda.

issues such as port security, macroeconomics, separation of power and civil rights are complicated. gay marriage, questioning patriotism and religious wedge issues are easy.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Tue May 27, 2008 9:48 pm

I disagree that Obama has a problem with working class whites. He has a problem with working class whites who live in Appalachia. He has won states like Wisconsin, Utah, Oregon, North Dakota, Idaho etc where the African American population is small. He will also win Montana and South Dakota, not exactly population centers for African Americans.

I do think that racism in Appalachia plays a role. When reporters talk about "cultural differences", it is a kind way of saying racist attitudes.

I am an Obama precinct captain here in Austin and I was a delegate for him at the Travis County Democratic Convention. I have made phone calls for his campaign here and around the country. I am also a card carrying member of the Democratic National Committee. So I am a little biased. However, I would say this to everyone here - read his book The Audacity of Hope. He lays out his ideas on all issues, both domestic policy and foreign policy. In my opinion, I think people on both sides of the political fence would agree with much if not all of what he says. In no place in this book does he espouse radical left wing ideas. In fact, in pretty much every issue he acknowledges that those he disagrees with politically have valid points of view - a much radical difference than the simple minded "with us or against us" idiocy of the current occupant of the White House. For the first time in my political life, I am actually excited about voting FOR someone instead of against someone else.

Check out the book - I think you might like it.

I also have to say that it very nice to have a civil political discussion on this board. Politicas is a hobby of mine as both of my parents were in politics - Dad was a Democratic Executive Committee member in Wisconsin and ran Presidential campaigns in the state. He ran every campaign for Hubert Humphrey in Wisconsin. The last job Mom had before I was born was as the Executive Assistant to the Postmaster General from 1963-65. At that time it was still a Cabinet post, so Mom used to go to Cabinet meetings and sit in the back. So you could say it is in my blood.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Tue May 27, 2008 9:49 pm

if people voted on issues, there would be overwhelming support for democrats. unfortunately, people in the US are uninterested in politics and national news. they instead rely on catch phrases, marketing and propoganda.

issues such as port security, macroeconomics, separation of power and civil rights are complicated. gay marriage, questioning patriotism and religious wedge issues are easy.

Exactly! And that is the problem. Plus, those Weapons of Mass Distraction issues are what the corporate owned Mainstream Media focus on.

a1bion · Post by **a1bion** » Tue May 27, 2008 9:53 pm

^^^
yeah, that sucks too.

i know it's wrong, and i know there are many good muslims, but many would love to see me dead, so screw 'em.

Remember that time John McCain said we had to negotiate with Hamas? Good times, good times.

wpfox16 · Post by **wpfox16** » Tue May 27, 2008 10:30 pm

I disagree that Obama has a problem with working class whites. He has a problem with working class whites who live in Appalachia. He has won states like Wisconsin, Utah, Oregon, North Dakota, Idaho etc where the African American population is small. He will also win Montana and South Dakota, not exactly population centers for African Americans.

I do think that racism in Appalachia plays a role. When reporters talk about "cultural differences", it is a kind way of saying racist attitudes.

I am an Obama precinct captain here in Austin and I was a delegate for him at the Travis County Democratic Convention. I have made phone calls for his campaign here and around the country. I am also a card carrying member of the Democratic National Committee. So I am a little biased. However, I would say this to everyone here - read his book The Audacity of Hope. He lays out his ideas on all issues, both domestic policy and foreign policy. In my opinion, I think people on both sides of the political fence would agree with much if not all of what he says. In no place in this book does he espouse radical left wing ideas. In fact, in pretty much every issue he acknowledges that those he disagrees with politically have valid points of view - a much radical difference than the simple minded "with us or against us" idiocy of the current occupant of the White House. For the first time in my political life, I am actually excited about voting FOR someone instead of against someone else.

Check out the book - I think you might like it.

I also have to say that it very nice to have a civil political discussion on this board. Politicas is a hobby of mine as both of my parents were in politics - Dad was a Democratic Executive Committee member in Wisconsin and ran Presidential campaigns in the state. He ran every campaign for Hubert Humphrey in Wisconsin. The last job Mom had before I was born was as the Executive Assistant to the Postmaster General from 1963-65. At that time it was still a Cabinet post, so Mom used to go to Cabinet meetings and sit in the back. So you could say it is in my blood.

My sister lives in Austin and she has mentioned wanting to get involved in the Obama campaign... What advice would you give her? She just quit her job as the head research epidemiologist for the Texas cancer registry, so time isn't an issue...

Also, I agree with your point that Obama has a problem with working class whites. As I mentioned, a lot of the vitriol comes from places (like Appalachia and poor regions in the South) where competition has existed for generations among poor whites and blacks. The discussion of politics is also a hobby of mine, and hopefully my profession in a few years... Good to see we have some other lefties in the BA! [img]{SMILIES_PATH}/ninja.gif[/img]

IHateUGAlyDawgs · Post by **IHateUGAlyDawgs** » Wed May 28, 2008 9:02 am

if people voted on issues, there would be overwhelming support for democrats. unfortunately, people in the US are uninterested in politics and national news. they instead rely on catch phrases, marketing and propoganda.

issues such as port security, macroeconomics, separation of power and civil rights are complicated. gay marriage, questioning patriotism and religious wedge issues are easy.

you must be kidding.

Why is it then, that Democrats typically do better when there is a larger voter turnout? Those who do pay attention to the issues are your core group of voters...the people who still vote in a low turnout...republicans/conservatives do better. Yet, as more people show up, the more ignorants who vote, the better the democrats do.

Yet, I suppose you're right.

wpfox16 · Post by **wpfox16** » Wed May 28, 2008 9:17 am

if people voted on issues, there would be overwhelming support for democrats. unfortunately, people in the US are uninterested in politics and national news. they instead rely on catch phrases, marketing and propoganda.

issues such as port security, macroeconomics, separation of power and civil rights are complicated. gay marriage, questioning patriotism and religious wedge issues are easy.
you must be kidding.

Why is it then, that Democrats typically do better when there is a larger voter turnout? Those who do pay attention to the issues are your core group of voters...the people who still vote in a low turnout...republicans/conservatives do better. Yet, as more people show up, the more ignorants who vote, the better the democrats do.

Yet, I suppose you're right.

The fact of the matter is that working class voters who vote simply on self interest should to vote democrat. I'm not sure you can even debate the other side with a straight face (In fact, many conservatives use this fact as a key talking point, read: welfare/entitlements/et al). I can understand your objection to Urap's statement, as he's defining issues in his terms (which I happen to agree with, but I can understand those who don't). Some people, as crazy as it seems to me, REALLY care about gay marriage, and other wedge issues. These issues are so effective that, when employed by a very sharp political mind like Karl Rove, can drastically alter election results. The timing of the debate to add a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage was a brilliant political move... disgusting to me, but effective.

The democratic party is an interesting animal. They rely on voters making decisions in their own self-interest (poor, working class) and voters making a seemingly altruistic decision that flies in the face of what's best for them (Goddamn Liberal Elites!). I suppose the same an be said for Republicans, but the other way around... They rely on people voting in their self interest (High income Americans). At the same time, they rely on voters making decisions that fly in the face of their own economic self interest (Working class voters voting on cultural issues)

Both Parties have their share of "ignorants." The key to many elections is which party can set the terms of the debate. Will they vote on economic self interest, or to legislate their cultural beliefs?

MinGator · Post by **MinGator** » Wed May 28, 2008 10:11 am

if people voted on issues, there would be overwhelming support for democrats.

really? lay out the issues and i'm fairly certain you won't find "overwhelming" support on either side. hence the reason politics is such a hot button in this country. line item the issues and i'm fairly certain i would not support the democratic position on most of them. that is not due to politics but due to my core beliefs in what the government is supposed to provide for this country and what is up to the individual. that is not to say that the republican leadership has held true to many of my core beliefs lately either.

urapnes · Post by **urapnes** » Wed May 28, 2008 10:33 am

i see the problem with the republican party is that it is talking about the republican philosiphies that made them a great party.....small government, state rights, fiscal responsibility of govt, govt oversight, personal responsibility, etc. however, since regan, the party has not practiced fiscal responsibility, oversight has gone away, small government has been replaced by campagning on legislating morality. the republicans like to call themselves conservative, but there is very little conservative about today's republican party.

TTBHG · Post by **TTBHG** » Wed May 28, 2008 1:22 pm

I am surprised that you folks are so split down party lines.

texgator · Post by **texgator** » Wed May 28, 2008 1:58 pm

i see the problem with the republican party is that it is talking about the republican philosiphies that made them a great party.....small government, state rights, fiscal responsibility of govt, govt oversight, personal responsibility, etc. however, since regan, the party has not practiced fiscal responsibility, oversight has gone away, small government has been replaced by campagning on legislating morality. the republicans like to call themselves conservative, but there is very little conservative about today's republican party.

Which is why I'm a libertarian.

a1bion · Post by **a1bion** » Wed May 28, 2008 2:15 pm

I am surprised that you folks are so split down party lines.

President Ralph Wiggum will bring the country together again!!!

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Wed May 28, 2008 2:34 pm

Anybody else registered NPA? Didn't think so.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Wed May 28, 2008 2:54 pm

Anybody else registered NPA? Didn't think so.

National Pigeon Association?

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Wed May 28, 2008 2:57 pm

[img]{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_lmao.gif[/img]

No Party Affiliation

TTBHG · Post by **TTBHG** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:03 pm

:lmao:

No Party Affiliation

I am a registered independent.

urapnes · Post by **urapnes** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:24 pm

i'm sure you will all be shocked to know i'm a proud registered Democrat.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:25 pm

*Gasp*

Weegie · Post by **Weegie** » Wed May 28, 2008 4:14 pm

:lmao:

No Party Affiliation

I am a registered independent.

Me, too.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Wed May 28, 2008 6:39 pm

Nice!

TheTodd · Post by **TheTodd** » Wed May 28, 2008 7:27 pm

i see the problem with the republican party is that it is talking about the republican philosiphies that made them a great party.....small government, state rights, fiscal responsibility of govt, govt oversight, personal responsibility, etc. however, since regan, the party has not practiced fiscal responsibility, oversight has gone away, small government has been replaced by campagning on legislating morality. the republicans like to call themselves conservative, but there is very little conservative about today's republican party.

The "moral majority" is to blame for that shift urap. I've stuck with the party because I believe in the things that are/were the core values of the party but I am by no means it's biggest supporter at this time. I am registered as that party so I can vote in the primary elections. If I was an indepenent I wouldn't be able to do so.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Wed May 28, 2008 10:44 pm

I went out and bought Ron Paul's new book, The Revolution: A Manifesto this afternoon. It's only 167 pages and I'm about a third of the way through. It's about what you'd expect but I appreciate reading his points of view, especially the historical context he presents, given that he was basically silenced in the debates so the other candidates could argue over trivial differences.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Thu May 29, 2008 7:21 am

The "moral majority" is to blame for that shift urap. I've stuck with the party because I believe in the things that are/were the core values of the party but I am by no means it's biggest supporter at this time. I am registered as that party so I can vote in the primary elections. If I was an indepenent I wouldn't be able to do so.

I'm with you.

I blame the Reagan Revolution. While he courted the religious right to his side, I don't think he would have approved of the amount of influence they now have over the Republican Party.

The Republicans really need to get their shit together if they want to attract swing voters and moderates.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Thu May 29, 2008 8:15 am

The Old Right is where it's at, to be sure. I'm right there too in many ways.