Romney vs. Obama

[BlueStar]

But wait! Thanks to the union, they got their jobs back!
http://articles.cour...usan-r-meredith

Good for the union, as the investigation found the guys reinstated didn't commit intentional fraud. Shows how important it is for workers to be unionised.

 

[Hanafuda]

You're really saying most black voters are only voting for Obama because he's black?

The title of the article was, "Do Black People Support Obama Because He's Black.", not do they vote for him because he's black. There is a difference between asking whether Obama gets more support from blacks vs. just their reasons for voting for him. And it's stated in a nutshell in the article:

In 2011, as black unemployment continued to rise, the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus said that if Clinton was still president, "we probably would be still marching on the White House . (but) nobody wants to do anything that would empower the people who hate the president."

So, Obama gets a pass from the Congressional Black Caucus where a white president would not. They admit it. Does this also extend to the black community at large? It's possible. Would blacks who voted for Obama in 2008 be satisfied with the current high employment for blacks, high gas prices, etc., not to mention the promises of "Hope" and "Change" back then, if he were white??? Heck, would any Democrat really be satisfied with how he's done if he were white? His administration deports illegal aliens like they're mad about it, they ignored his promise to leave states with med marijuana alone, the whole 'gun walking' thing of supplying drug cartels weapons that were then used for murder, plus the mess in Afghanistan, the drone wars in Yemen and Pakistan, bailing out bankers instead of the poor --- I don't think the democrat base would be real satisfied if, for example, this had been Kerry as president doing these things.

 

[BlueStar]

You're really saying most black voters are only voting for Obama because he's black?

The title of the article was, "Do Black People Support Obama Because He's Black.", not do they vote for him because he's black. There is a difference between asking whether Obama gets more support from blacks vs. just their reasons for voting for him. And it's stated in a nutshell in the article:

In 2011, as black unemployment continued to rise, the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus said that if Clinton was still president, "we probably would be still marching on the White House . (but) nobody wants to do anything that would empower the people who hate the president."

So, Obama gets a pass from the Congressional Black Caucus where a white president would not. They admit it. Does this also extend to the black community at large? It's possible. Would blacks who voted for Obama in 2008 be satisfied with the current high employment for blacks, high gas prices, etc., not to mention the promises of "Hope" and "Change" back then, if he were white??? Heck, would any Democrat really be satisfied with how he's done if he were white? His administration deports illegal aliens like they're mad about it, they ignored his promise to leave states with med marijuana alone, the whole 'gun walking' thing of supplying drug cartels weapons that were then used for murder, plus the mess in Afghanistan, the drone wars in Yemen and Pakistan, bailing out bankers instead of the poor --- I don't think the democrat base would be real satisfied if, for example, this had been Kerry as president doing these things.

Rubbish, if he was white we'd have exactly the same situation, we'd have Democrats of all colours saying he was doing well and Republicans saying he'd done terribly.

Would Bush have been re-elected half way through his fuck up if he'd been black? Or would he have lost all the white vote?

I don't get why you're trying to play semantics as if there's a difference over who you 'support' and who you vote for either. Obama is the Democratic candidate, the black population has overwhelmingly supported the Democratic candidate for decades. It's trying to see discrimination where none exists due to some people having a whiney victim complex that would be described as politically correct if it was coming from anyone but white people.

Anyway, you've managed to work out that most black people support Obama because he's black, what percentage of white people support Romney because he's white?

 

[Hanafuda]

But wait! Thanks to the union, they got their jobs back!
http://articles.cour...usan-r-meredith

Good for the union, as the investigation found the guys reinstated didn't commit intentional fraud. Shows how important it is for workers to be unionised.

Or maybe it shows how important it is to have the 'independent arbitrator' in your pocket. Who knows. Politics is politics.

 

[BlueStar]

But wait! Thanks to the union, they got their jobs back!
http://articles.cour...usan-r-meredith

Good for the union, as the investigation found the guys reinstated didn't commit intentional fraud. Shows how important it is for workers to be unionised.

Or maybe it shows how important it is to have the 'independent arbitrator' in your pocket. Who knows. Politics is politics.

Maybe the independent arbitrator was in the pocket of the company and actually all the workers should have been reinstated? Who knows.

 

[Hanafuda]

You're really saying most black voters are only voting for Obama because he's black?

The title of the article was, "Do Black People Support Obama Because He's Black.", not do they vote for him because he's black. There is a difference between asking whether Obama gets more support from blacks vs. just their reasons for voting for him. And it's stated in a nutshell in the article:

In 2011, as black unemployment continued to rise, the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus said that if Clinton was still president, "we probably would be still marching on the White House . (but) nobody wants to do anything that would empower the people who hate the president."

So, Obama gets a pass from the Congressional Black Caucus where a white president would not. They admit it. Does this also extend to the black community at large? It's possible. Would blacks who voted for Obama in 2008 be satisfied with the current high employment for blacks, high gas prices, etc., not to mention the promises of "Hope" and "Change" back then, if he were white??? Heck, would any Democrat really be satisfied with how he's done if he were white? His administration deports illegal aliens like they're mad about it, they ignored his promise to leave states with med marijuana alone, the whole 'gun walking' thing of supplying drug cartels weapons that were then used for murder, plus the mess in Afghanistan, the drone wars in Yemen and Pakistan, bailing out bankers instead of the poor --- I don't think the democrat base would be real satisfied if, for example, this had been Kerry as president doing these things.

Rubbish, if he was white we'd have exactly the same situation, we'd have Democrats of all colours saying he was doing well and Republicans saying he'd done terribly.

I don't think so. Jimmy Carter was abandoned by Democrats in the 1980 election, because the economy tanked, he reacted poorly to terrorist actions against American interests, and he just generally was not an effective leader. The electoral vote count was 489 Reagan, 49 Carter.

 

[BlueStar]

You're really saying most black voters are only voting for Obama because he's black?

The title of the article was, "Do Black People Support Obama Because He's Black.", not do they vote for him because he's black. There is a difference between asking whether Obama gets more support from blacks vs. just their reasons for voting for him. And it's stated in a nutshell in the article:

In 2011, as black unemployment continued to rise, the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus said that if Clinton was still president, "we probably would be still marching on the White House . (but) nobody wants to do anything that would empower the people who hate the president."

So, Obama gets a pass from the Congressional Black Caucus where a white president would not. They admit it. Does this also extend to the black community at large? It's possible. Would blacks who voted for Obama in 2008 be satisfied with the current high employment for blacks, high gas prices, etc., not to mention the promises of "Hope" and "Change" back then, if he were white??? Heck, would any Democrat really be satisfied with how he's done if he were white? His administration deports illegal aliens like they're mad about it, they ignored his promise to leave states with med marijuana alone, the whole 'gun walking' thing of supplying drug cartels weapons that were then used for murder, plus the mess in Afghanistan, the drone wars in Yemen and Pakistan, bailing out bankers instead of the poor --- I don't think the democrat base would be real satisfied if, for example, this had been Kerry as president doing these things.

Rubbish, if he was white we'd have exactly the same situation, we'd have Democrats of all colours saying he was doing well and Republicans saying he'd done terribly.

I don't think so. Jimmy Carter was abandoned by Democrats in the 1980 election, because the economy tanked, he reacted poorly to terrorist actions against American interests, and he just generally was not an effective leader. The electoral vote count was 489 Reagan, 49 Carter.

But this isn't Jimmy Carter. We've had the same on both sides for years, through Bush and Clinton one side was sure the incumbent was absolutely RUINING the county how could people NOT SEE IT! It's just exactly the same, except now you think the only reason the other side can't see your point of view is because the president is black.

 

[Lacius]

It should also be noted that you're claiming that this article that includes a few interviews and Tweets from celebrities, etc. is evidence that black people predominantly vote skin color.

Interestingly enough, she is the cousin of Gwenn Ifill, one of the debate moderators in the 2008 election who denied any conflict of interest in moderating the debate while her book, "The Breakthrough : Politics and Race in the Age of Obama" was written, printed, and waiting to be released on Obama's inauguration day. Sherilynn Ifill has also published a book called, "The Relevance of Nooses and Lynching in the Age of Obama."

So what?

That black people would want to see the first black president get re-elected, regardless of his record or competence, is completely understandable.

That's far from being able to say African-Americans are voting for Obama despite hypothetical opposing political views or just because he's black. What you're arguing is analogous to saying Hispanic voters vote for Hispanic Democrats solely because of race and not because of, for example, policy positions on immigration, so this entire conversation seems silly and unnecessarily divisive to me.

The root of the emotion for feeling that way isn't much different than that guy with the "white" house t-shirt, but I think it's just a truth of human nature we're not going to evolve beyond for a long, long time. Why do you think gangs tend to assemble along racial lines? It's an issue of trust.

Did you just compare black people rallying behind the President to black people amalgamating into gangs? Classy.

There are a lot of people who are receiving food stamps now who are lying to qualify, and nothing is done to check or stop it.

Even if we were to agree that 1% of food stamps benefits is a lot (which I don't), that's far from being able to say that "nothing is done to check or stop it." It's also far from being able to warrant, in my opinion, Paul Ryan's plan to kick 8-10 million people off the program. It's not a good idea to cut $134 billion from food stamps immediately after a recession, both for moral reasons and economic reasons.

In 2011, as black unemployment continued to rise, the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus said that if Clinton was still president, "we probably would be still marching on the White House . (but) nobody wants to do anything that would empower the people who hate the president."

So, Obama gets a pass from the Congressional Black Caucus where a white president would not. They admit it. Does this also extend to the black community at large? It's possible. Would blacks who voted for Obama in 2008 be satisfied with the current high employment for blacks, high gas prices, etc., not to mention the promises of "Hope" and "Change" back then, if he were white??? Heck, would any Democrat really be satisfied with how he's done if he were white? His administration deports illegal aliens like they're mad about it, they ignored his promise to leave states with med marijuana alone, the whole 'gun walking' thing of supplying drug cartels weapons that were then used for murder, plus the mess in Afghanistan, the drone wars in Yemen and Pakistan, bailing out bankers instead of the poor --- I don't think the democrat base would be real satisfied if, for example, this had been Kerry as president doing these things.

Yeah, because none of this is baseless conjecture at all.

I don't think so. Jimmy Carter was abandoned by Democrats in the 1980 election, because the economy tanked, he reacted poorly to terrorist actions against American interests, and he just generally was not an effective leader. The electoral vote count was 489 Reagan, 49 Carter.

I know how bad you conservatives want it to be so, but Barack Obama is not Jimmy Carter.

 

[Hanafuda]

But this isn't Jimmy Carter. We've had the same on both sides for years, through Bush and Clinton one side was sure the incumbent was absolutely RUINING the county how could people NOT SEE IT! It's just exactly the same, except now you think the only reason the other side can't see your point of view is because the president is black.

Read that quote again from the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. They see the problems just fine. They're just not acting on them like they would if the president were white. That's exactly what he said.

 

[Lacius]

Read that quote again from the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. They see the problems just fine. They're just not acting on them like they would if the president were white. That's exactly what he said.

You do realize that the chairman says the main reason for hypothetically not treating Obama poorly is because he doesn't want to empower the people who hate the president, yes? The entire point of the statement you keep citing is to say that they're rallying behind the President due to the animosity (which may or may not be race-related) on the right. Didn't I say this a long time ago? Wow.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Just put Morgan Freeman into office like in the movies, then everyone will be happy.

Remember when Romney made a comment about Big Bird? Who can forget? Wanna know something else? Obama's ad producers (with Obama's approval) are using Big Bird (or clips of him) in their ads against Romney....without permission from the Sesame Workshop. They have since requested the ad be removed, as they do not participate in such campaigns.

 

[BlueStar]

But this isn't Jimmy Carter. We've had the same on both sides for years, through Bush and Clinton one side was sure the incumbent was absolutely RUINING the county how could people NOT SEE IT! It's just exactly the same, except now you think the only reason the other side can't see your point of view is because the president is black.

Read that quote again from the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. They see the problems just fine. They're just not acting on them like they would if the president were white. That's exactly what he said.

If he is implying that (and its not EXACTLY what he's saying) he's exactly wrong. It's politics, it's a way of trying to stop a candidate taking your voter block for granted. The NRA etc come out with the same type of stuff when a Republican is in office. Carter, by the way, got 86% of the black vote in 1980.

 

[Hanafuda]

Did you just compare black people rallying behind the President to black people amalgamating into gangs? Classy.

No I didn't. Because it's not just blacks who "amalgamate" along racial/ethnic lines as gangs. Step into any prison and you'll soon become acquainted with the social arrangement of things, and not picking a side is not an option. And out on the street it's the same - white gangs (bikers, usually), black gangs, mexican gangs, vietnamese gangs. It goes back a long way ... italian mafia, KKK, etc. They do this because of some base and misguided instinct humans have of trusting "our own" more than "the others."

I would appreciate if you would refrain from attempting to be Chris Matthews, suggesting secret racist implications in the words of others in an attempt to score a few points. I'm trying to neutrally and honestly discuss race to the extent it may be a factor in influencing the extent to which people may be willing to 'look the other way' for Obama. It was being discussed in this thread already, and I ran across an article that was on-point and current, so I linked it. I also noted that it appeared to me the substantive content in the article did indeed support the conclusion that Obama being black does have an effect on the black community's level of support for him. The opinion content at the end of the article seems intended to defuse that.

Among black people I know, some friends some not, most have no more interest in politics than anyone else. But Obama can do no wrong. As I stated above, I think this is perfectly fine, and I do not judge this negatively as I see it as a normal thing that humans do. The problem is, it seems to be verboten to acknowledge that people are the way they are.

 

[BlueStar]

Is it not doublethink, by the way, for Romney and his supporters to be complaining about unemployment in one breath and then call the unemployed moochers in the next?

 

[Hanafuda]

Read that quote again from the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. They see the problems just fine. They're just not acting on them like they would if the president were white. That's exactly what he said.

You do realize that the chairman says the main reason for hypothetically not treating Obama poorly is because he doesn't want to empower the people who hate the president, yes? The entire point of the statement you keep citing is to say that they're rallying behind the President due to the animosity (which may or may not be race-related) on the right. Didn't I say this a long time ago? Wow.

Exactly, He's admitting they're shielding Obama (doesn't want to empower people who hate the president) where they would not have shielded Clinton but instead would have been "marching on the White House." You think the republicans didn't have animosity for Clinton? What is the reason the Congressional Black Caucus is willing to look the other way to shield Obama and not empower those who hate him, but would not have been willing to refrain similarly for Clinton's sake? What is the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus admitting is the distinction between Obama and Clinton that matters to the CBC?

---

 

[BlueStar]

Read that quote again from the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. They see the problems just fine. They're just not acting on them like they would if the president were white. That's exactly what he said.

You do realize that the chairman says the main reason for hypothetically not treating Obama poorly is because he doesn't want to empower the people who hate the president, yes? The entire point of the statement you keep citing is to say that they're rallying behind the President due to the animosity (which may or may not be race-related) on the right. Didn't I say this a long time ago? Wow.

Exactly, He's admitting they're shielding Obama (doesn't want to empower people who hate the president) where they would not have shielded Clinton but instead would have been "marching on the White House." You think the republicans didn't have animosity for Clinton? What is the reason the Congressional Black Caucus is willing to look the other way to shield Obama and not empower those who hate him, but would not have been willing to refrain similarly for Clinton's sake? What is the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus admitting is the distinction between Obama and Clinton that matters to the CBC?

---

 

[Hanafuda]

The answer to both questions may be the same number.

'Most'?

No, it's a joke - the numerical answer to both questions is the same ----



How many Romney voters do you think are voting for him because he's white?

43,697

How many Mormon voters are voting for him because he's Mormon?

43,697


I dunno, it seemed kind of funny when I thought of it. Mormons, LOL.

 

[zuron7]

 

[Lacius]

No I didn't. Because it's not just blacks who "amalgamate" along racial/ethnic lines as gangs. Step into any prison and you'll soon become acquainted with the social arrangement of things, and not picking a side is not an option. And out on the street it's the same - white gangs (bikers, usually), black gangs, mexican gangs, vietnamese gangs. It goes back a long way ... italian mafia, KKK, etc. They do this because of some base and misguided instinct humans have of trusting "our own" more than "the others."

I would appreciate if you would refrain from attempting to be Chris Matthews, suggesting secret racist implications in the words of others in an attempt to score a few points. I'm trying to neutrally and honestly discuss race to the extent it may be a factor in influencing the extent to which people may be willing to 'look the other way' for Obama. It was being discussed in this thread already, and I ran across an article that was on-point and current, so I linked it. I also noted that it appeared to me the substantive content in the article did indeed support the conclusion that Obama being black does have an effect on the black community's level of support for him. The opinion content at the end of the article seems intended to defuse that.

I'm not stooping down to an ad hominem attack by calling you racist; however, you did say that black people rally behind Obama in the same way "gangs tend to assemble along racial lines." It was a very poor choice of words on your part and was, at the very least, inconsiderate (ignoring for a second that you have no evidence that your claim is accurate).

Exactly, He's admitting they're shielding Obama (doesn't want to empower people who hate the president) where they would not have shielded Clinton but instead would have been "marching on the White House." You think the republicans didn't have animosity for Clinton? What is the reason the Congressional Black Caucus is willing to look the other way to shield Obama and not empower those who hate him, but would not have been willing to refrain similarly for Clinton's sake? What is the Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus admitting is the distinction between Obama and Clinton that matters to the CBC?

You apparently weren't able to understand the point I had to say about this statement by the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, so I'll clarify. He wasn't citing Obama's race as reason for why he would hypothetically rally behind Obama and not a hypothetical whiter president; he was citing the unprecedented animosity on the other side that many perceive to have racist undertones. To further clarify, he's not saying he's rallying behind Obama solely because he's black; he's rallying behind Obama because the other side allegedly hates him in part because he's black. Neither scenario exists in a hypothetical universe with a white president. Again, it's hard to argue that efforts to paint Obama as a Muslim Kenyan aren't racist.

All of this is ignoring the fact that what you're citing is baseless conjecture from one or two people who, as far as I know, are unable to hop universes to look at alternate realities. Your entire point is also moot in that both Al Gore and John Kerry received ~93-95% of the African-American vote, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say policy is a major factor.

 

[Hanafuda]

No I didn't. Because it's not just blacks who "amalgamate" along racial/ethnic lines as gangs. Step into any prison and you'll soon become acquainted with the social arrangement of things, and not picking a side is not an option. And out on the street it's the same - white gangs (bikers, usually), black gangs, mexican gangs, vietnamese gangs. It goes back a long way ... italian mafia, KKK, etc. They do this because of some base and misguided instinct humans have of trusting "our own" more than "the others."

I would appreciate if you would refrain from attempting to be Chris Matthews, suggesting secret racist implications in the words of others in an attempt to score a few points. I'm trying to neutrally and honestly discuss race to the extent it may be a factor in influencing the extent to which people may be willing to 'look the other way' for Obama. It was being discussed in this thread already, and I ran across an article that was on-point and current, so I linked it. I also noted that it appeared to me the substantive content in the article did indeed support the conclusion that Obama being black does have an effect on the black community's level of support for him. The opinion content at the end of the article seems intended to defuse that.

I'm not stooping down to an ad hominem attack by calling you racist; however, you did say that black people rally behind Obama in the same way "gangs tend to assemble along racial lines." It was a very poor choice of words on your part and was, at the very least, inconsiderate (ignoring for a second that you have no evidence that your claim is accurate).

Bullshit. This is what I said:

I just think political correctness has hurt our ability to be honest with ourselves. That black people would want to see the first black president get re-elected, regardless of his record or competence, is completely understandable. The root of the emotion for feeling that way isn't much different than that guy with the "white" house t-shirt, but I think it's just a truth of human nature we're not going to evolve beyond for a long, long time. Why do you think gangs tend to assemble along racial lines? It's an issue of trust.

If "gang" = black to you, then it's you that has the problem, just the same as with Chris Matthews, for whom "food stamps" for some reason also = black. My quote above attributes a certain level of 'latent racism' to ALL human beings, all races. I'm speaking of something that operates on our psyche at an almost instinctive level, and motivates our social behavior in all activities. This trait, though undesirable, is better if acknowledged openly than swept under the rug of denial. I am not, however, equating blacks who support Obama with street gangs (of any race), and you know it. The racial affiliation of street gangs is a more base, negative expression of this trait, grounded in fear. On the other hand, the tendency for the majority of blacks to support Obama more fervently than white democratic politicians (and that's the issue, not just who they vote for) is more akin to the same reason that the majority of all Americans still marry within their own race.