What small-town America is saying about Obama
In diners and mobile homes from New Mexico to North Carolina, I listened to working-class people try to make sense of a black president named Barack.
By Dan Hoyle
Sep. 12, 2008 | With less than two months until voting day, there are doubts hanging over Barack Obama's campaign -- and they aren't just due to Alaska's top moose-hunting hockey mom jolting the race and electrifying the Republican faithful. Although Obama has touted himself as a post-racial candidate, whether America is ready to elect a black man for president remains a vexing question for his supporters. In a tight national race, Obama continues struggling to gain wider support, particularly among white working-class voters and independents in battleground states.
But Obama has also inspired tens of millions of Americans with a powerful and historic campaign. After eight years of Bush and widespread disillusionment with Republican governance, could Obama's inability to pull away from John McCain really come down to his skin color?
For three months during this summer and early fall, I've been traveling across America, exploring the nation's small towns and rural areas and meeting the people there. From Michigan to New Mexico to North Carolina, I've conducted dozens of interviews with white working-class voters across 18 states, gauging, among other things, their thoughts and feelings about the first black man to have a serious shot at winning the White House. Beyond Obama's race, what I found was a more complicated set of concerns -- whether accurately informed or not -- about his religious faith, values and cultural and educational background. That is, many of these white rural voters expressed a discomfort that may have more to do with unfamiliarity about the type of person Barack Obama is, rather than with direct concerns about his race.
Although I encountered a scattering of openly racist views, they were among a small minority. (These voters would probably never vote for a Democrat for president anyway.) Many voters dismissed the notion that hesitancy about Obama is due to his race.
"Obama isn't even really black -- Bill Clinton is more black than Obama," said Mike Wallace, 44, of Dearborn, Mich. Wallace is a United Auto Workers pipe fitter who plans to vote for McCain, although he believes the vast majority of his co-workers at the local Chrysler plant will vote for Obama, as recommended by a UAW handout. Some voters revealed support for Obama even in blunt terms that seemed to run against their racial preferences. "I'm not a fan of the blacks," explained Dennis Rodriguez, 48, a restaurant manager from Manistique, Mich., "but I just think Obama is the right man for the job." Bob Morin, 53, a custodian and swing voter from Cubero, N.M. (a state Bush won by just 5,000 votes in 2004), told me, "I've got a few friends who say, 'There's no way I'm voting for a black guy,' but I think most people have gotten over it."
So why hasn't Obama gained better traction outside the big cities?
"He's just not someone I can personally relate to," explained Cathy Massingale, 33, of Cullowhee, N.C., a Democrat who first supported John Edwards this election, and then Hillary Clinton. "Obama just doesn't feel like someone who knows me." Massingale's husband is in the military, and she wants to see a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. But she said she remains undecided about Obama or McCain.
It may be that hesitancy about Obama stems from his being a type of black person that rural Americans are unfamiliar with. White rural Americans tend to identify two types of black Americans. They know local, churchgoing black people who like to hunt and fish, whose lives are similar to their own. On the other hand, they tend to think of urban blacks as a stereotype seen widely in pop culture (bling-wearing gangstas) or as the kind of black people they see on local TV news (often criminal suspects or convicts). Obama fits neither of these tropes, as a highly educated, upper-middle-class, self-made urban black man. (One with lighter skin and of mixed race, to boot.) He's not foreign because he's black, he's foreign because he's unknown -- especially as someone seeking a job held exclusively by white men for more than two centuries.
"Obama's like Jesse Jackson -- what does he know except a bunch of cities with lots of blacks?" asked 60-year-old construction worker Louie, in White Branch, Mich., a lifelong Democrat who said he probably won't vote for either candidate this year.
In the quaint and tidy town of Yellville, Ark., Cassie Gilley, 48, a soft-spoken school administrator, explained her view of white, rural America's evolving relationship to race. "There's a difference between racist and prejudiced," she said over sandwiches at Subway, after a service at Yellville's First Baptist Church. "A lot of people around here just haven't spent much time with black people. When they get to know a black person, it's OK. But they will bring their prejudice in at first."
In overcoming that formidable hurdle, the many lingering rumors, myths and paranoid fears that dog Obama's campaign make the task especially challenging.
Just outside of Cranks, Ky., in Harlan County, Mack Middleton is a retired coal miner and a die-hard union man -- a United Mine Workers bumper sticker adorns his Dodge van -- but he is also a swing voter who voted both for Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. This year, Middleton, 62, and his wife, Janice, 57, aren't sure if they are going to vote at all.
"Obama, he's not our kind of people," said Middleton in a gruff, bitten-off speaking style, taking a break from canning green beans at the couple's double-wide mobile home. "He don't believe in the hereafter, and the Lord, the way I look at it ... he's Muslim."
Several people, from Michigan to Alabama, referred to an insidious picture circulating on the Internet of Obama wearing a white head-wrap and a robe next to a photo of Osama bin Laden in similar dress, with the caption, "What's the difference between Osama and Obama? Just a little B.S." According to a survey in July by the Pew Research Center, 12 percent of Americans still believed Obama was a Muslim -- even after the long Democratic primary battle that was covered heavily in the national media. Among rural Americans, 19 percent still believed he was a Muslim.
In Logan, W.Va., abandoned brick storefronts haunt downtown while the Fountain Plaza mall, anchored by a Wal-Mart Supercenter, gleams on the hill above town. Logan County was one of a few counties that voted for John Kerry in 2004 (George W. Bush won West Virginia overall), and, given a struggling economy, would seem primed to swing Democratic again. But Scott, 26, a former trucker currently unemployed, isn't going to vote for Obama. "I know it sounds stupid," he says taking a long drag from his Maverick cigarette, "but Barack Hussein Obama? And if he gets in, somebody'll take him out real quick," he said, referring to potential assassination, which was a surprisingly common theme along rural back roads.
The seemingly endless list of falsehoods about Obama -- that he took his oath of office on the Quran, that he doesn't salute the flag, that he refuses to wear an American flag lapel pin -- could be interpreted as excuses for being uncomfortable with his race.
But class matters too, in regions like Appalachia, where Obama had a particularly tough time winning votes in the Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton.
Inez, Ky., is a town that epitomizes the Democratic Party's decline from its peak of power in the 1960s. President Lyndon Johnson once stood on a porch in the impoverished town in the heart of Appalachia and declared a War on Poverty. Today in Inez, population 600, consumption of pain pills is a popular pastime, and the poverty rate hovers around 37 percent, three times the national average. In April of this year John McCain gave a speech in Inez, detailing the failures of welfare, to a receptive audience. In 2004, Martin County, of which Inez is the seat, voted for George W. Bush by a 2-to-1 ratio. The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Robert Duncan, lives in Inez.
Gary Ball, a former coal miner and editor of the firebrand Mountain Citizen newspaper that is published in Inez, points to an authenticity gap for Obama. "People around here see Obama as being privileged," he said. Never mind McCain -- with his seven houses -- or recent blue blood candidates George W. Bush, John Kerry and Al Gore. "We know Obama's plenty book-smart ... but I liked Harry Truman, the last president to have a simple high school education."
While George W. Bush received the same Harvard benediction as Obama, Bush never identified as an intellectual. Obama's modest, single-mom upbringing does not overcome his evident intellectualism, according to Ball; for rural whites, he says, Obama remains on the losing end of this authenticity test.
Sarah Palin's biography, of course, raises the stakes. Touting her moose-hunting, snowmobile-riding, small-town sensibility, Palin turned a convention of restless delegates into an explosion of camp revival energy, shifting the momentum of the race John McCain's way. It is obvious that rural, working-class whites are more comfortable with the conservative small-town Palin, to whom they can relate.
Beyond the necessity of connecting with rural America, the Obama campaign is hoping to gain ground by winning over suburban independents in battleground states. In Columbus, Ohio, I encountered several white, upper-middle-class swing voters who said they would support Obama. But Terry Daniels, 53, a black man who runs a clothing store in downtown Columbus catering to the city's suburbanites, was skeptical that would happen. "Everyone likes to think they're progressive," Daniels said, "but when it comes down to it, they're not going to vote that way."
Even though the economy purports to be a top issue for voters, the 2008 race has been as much of a contest of personalities as any in recent memory. (Even before Palin entered the picture.) Obama's fate in November may in part depend on his ability to better familiarize the more insular segments of white America with an under-reported but growing post-civil rights demographic: the well-educated black urban middle class. Obama's story is a historic example of this achievement, but it remains to be seen if America is ready to celebrate it by granting him the nation's highest office.
Obama cannot win this voting bloc and shouldn't even try. In my opinion these folks do not know what to make of people like Barack and Michelle Obama, Deval Patrick, Cory Booker, Kenneth Chenault or any other successful middle to upper class Black-identified person.
In addition, "race" aside, Obama is the classic highly educated and wonkish liberal. He is a "smarty pants" that these people cannot relate to. Only integration, education, travel and social mobility would change their minds short of an economic meltdown that would send masses flocking to the Dems in the hopes of a Great Society bailout (again, my opinion). The fact is that people like Barack Obama do not exist in this alternate American universe.
Personally I can understand completely. There are candidates that I deeply mistrust and probably could not be persuaded to vote for them because I believe that they do not share my values.
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1449 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Mon 15 Sep 2008 17:57 Post subject:
Quote:
Obama cannot win this voting bloc and shouldn't even try. In my opinion these folks do not know what to make of people like Barack and Michelle Obama, Deval Patrick, Cory Booker, Kenneth Chenault or any other successful middle to upper class Black-identified person.
In addition, "race" aside, Obama is the classic highly educated and wonkish liberal. He is a "smarty pants" that these people cannot relate to. Only integration, education, travel and social mobility would change their minds short of an economic meltdown that would send masses flocking to the Dems in the hopes of a Great Society bailout (again, my opinion). The fact is that people like Barack Obama do not exist in this alternate American universe.
So basically, is what you're saying is that these people are uneducated rednecks??? Seems so to me, correct me if I am wrong. I think Obama could have connected with these types of people, hell, really, half of him is one of them. But in doing so, he would have alienated the Black American identifed people, an identity in which he espouses. I don't think this has so much to do with race though. The people referred to in the article had the same perceptions about John Kerry.
I mean, I am educated (though some might have suspicions about that since I am not "progressive"), traveled somewhat extensively (North America, Europe, Japan), from a solid middle class background (on my fathers side, 4 generations of solid middle class), yet I cannot relate to Obama philosophically. I can probably relate to him in that we are the same age and grew up during the '70s and all that, but that's about it. Rest assured, if he wasn't "Black", Hillary would be the nominee. And many of those same people would have the same reservations about Hillary as they do Obama.
Obama cannot win this voting bloc and shouldn't even try. In my opinion these folks do not know what to make of people like Barack and Michelle Obama, Deval Patrick, Cory Booker, Kenneth Chenault or any other successful middle to upper class Black-identified person.
In addition, "race" aside, Obama is the classic highly educated and wonkish liberal. He is a "smarty pants" that these people cannot relate to. Only integration, education, travel and social mobility would change their minds short of an economic meltdown that would send masses flocking to the Dems in the hopes of a Great Society bailout (again, my opinion). The fact is that people like Barack Obama do not exist in this alternate American universe.
So basically, is what you're saying is that these people are uneducated rednecks??? Seems so to me, correct me if I am wrong. I think Obama could have connected with these types of people, hell, really, half of him is one of them. But in doing so, he would have alienated the Black American identifed people, an identity in which he espouses. I don't think this has so much to do with race though. The people referred to in the article had the same perceptions about John Kerry.
I mean, I am educated (though some might have suspicions about that since I am not "progressive"), traveled somewhat extensively (North America, Europe, Japan), from a solid middle class background (on my fathers side, 4 generations of solid middle class), yet I cannot relate to Obama philosophically. I can probably relate to him in that we are the same age and grew up during the '70s and all that, but that's about it. Rest assured, if he wasn't "Black", Hillary would be the nominee. And many of those same people would have the same reservations about Hillary as they do Obama.
No you are incorrect. I know from uneducated rednecks and would have no problem calling a spade a spade.
Obama has tried to connect to "people like this," if you mean people from small towns like his maternal grandparents, and has done so successfully (i.e, Iowa). I do not mean that he shouldn't bother to connect with people from small towns who are open minded. I do mean to imply that it is a waste of time to connect with small-minded White people who are incredulous at the sight of a brown person who can string two multisyllabic words together and continue to insist that one is something one isn't. It is a waste of time to convince people who choose to close their minds to you that they should give you a chance. Your actions or circumstances will either make them come around on their own or they won't.
I do believe that only a broader perspective changes this kind of ignorance, and one can only obtain a broader perspective through some kind of knowledge and growth. Yes, I do believe that travel, education and integration bring about growth. Yes, I do believe that it is harder for a person whose world remains extremely small to develop in this way. I also believe that some people make a conscious choice not to change no matter how much new information they take in and no matter where they have been.
I know a lot of Whites from small towns whose eyes were opened in the military. They may be conservative and they may vote Republican, but they don't see non-Whites as "foreign" and "unlike them" simply because of how they look or speak. They don't perceive Blacks who are successful as "uppity."
Obama won the nomination despite his ethnicity, not because of it. The Black-identified faction of the Democratic party could not and did not get him elected. He won over the "intellectual elite," the youth vote and many of the moderates. He also dominated the independent vote in the primaries. He did that, I believe, due to his "post-racial" appeal not because he is "Black."
Do you think these folks (these specific people I am describing) would like someone like Michael Steele? I don't. Would they like someone like Alan Keyes if he could be more folksy and less cerebral? Maybe but I wouldn't bet on it.
It is undeniable to me that if Obama had chosen to distance himself from Blacks as a group that he would probably have been rejected by many of the Blacks who support him now. They might have interpreted his avowal of a multiracial identity as a rejection. They might believe he isn't religious enough, that he speaks "too White" or that he is too critical of African Americans. He had to win Black support - Hillary had it until South Carolina. But he had a fighting chance with that demographic. I doubt that he does with this one barring a severe economic crisis.
It is undeniable to me that if Obama had chosen to distance himself from Blacks as a group that he would probably have been rejected by many of the Blacks who support him now. They might have interpreted his avowal of a multiracial identity as a rejection. They might believe he isn't religious enough, that he speaks "too White" or that he is too critical of African Americans.
I agree. But it is equally undeniable that, had he done that, he would have won more support among non-Blacks, to whom Wright and Sharpton are dangerous buffoons. There are lots more educated Hispanic and other non-Black votes out there than there are Black ones. I fear that Obama has discarded a quarter in order to pick up a nickel.
My White grandfather (Midwest) considers Obama to be not the same as African-Americans. In that: although Obama is Black, "we [White Americans] don't owe him like we do the Blacks in America".
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 394 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Mon 15 Sep 2008 20:46 Post subject:
DChapman wrote:
Rest assured, if he wasn't "Black", Hillary would be the nominee.
And if Hillary had won, then Obama supporters could easily have said that if she weren't a woman, Obama would have won. In all honesty, it's a back and forth argument not worth getting into.
Overall, the article doesn't make sense - white folks saying that they don't understand, because he's not a "Wutcho name eel?" country type, nor is he an urban hip-hop type - as if they would RATHER vote for black person who fits either of those stereotypes? These are simply excuses - they're hiding behind their prejudices.
As for blacks who don't want to vote for Obama, I think my wife exhibits this herself: I think that many blacks and multircial people of African decent who are not supporting Obama fall under two categories:
a. Those are well intentioned in not voting for him simply because he's black - and it gets taken so far that his blackness is making them more reluctant to vote for him.
b. Those who are trying their damndest to be "unniggerlike"
Last edited by Richard Miller on Mon 15 Sep 2008 20:52; edited 1 time in total
The <5% of AAs who participate in politics would have scheduled a 'high-tech lynching' if Obama would have even remotely suggested he had anything other than an African/AA/Black identity.
The <5% of AAs who participate in politics would have scheduled a 'high-tech lynching' if Obama would have even remotely suggested he had anything other than an African/AA/Black identity.
I agree. All I am saying is that they command negligible votes compared to the many votes that he alienated.
Rest assured, if he wasn't "Black", Hillary would be the nominee.
And if Hillary had won, then Obama supporters could easily have said that if she weren't a woman, Obama would have won. In all honesty, it's a back and forth argument not worth getting into.
Overall, the article doesn't make sense - white folks saying that they don't understand, because he's not a "Wutcho name eel?" country type, nor is he an urban hip-hop type - as if they would RATHER vote for black person who fits either of those stereotypes? These are simply excuses - they're hiding behind their prejudices.
As for blacks who don't want to vote for Obama, I think my wife exhibits this herself: I think that many blacks and multircial people of African decent who are not supporting Obama fall under two categories:
a. Those are well intentioned in not voting for him simply because he's black - and it gets taken so far that his blackness is making them more reluctant to vote for him.
b. Those who trying their damndest to be "unniggerlike"
Hey, you forgot these:
c. Black Republicans/Values voters
d. Swing Voters and Independents
e. Those who fear he's Muslim/extremist/Manchurian/etc
f. Those who fear for his life
g. Those who are afraid to believe he has a real chance to win
h. Those who have a problem with his record (195+ votes @ Present)
i. Those who have a problem with his inner circle/consultants (Soros, etc)
It is undeniable to me that if Obama had chosen to distance himself from Blacks as a group that he would probably have been rejected by many of the Blacks who support him now. They might have interpreted his avowal of a multiracial identity as a rejection. They might believe he isn't religious enough, that he speaks "too White" or that he is too critical of African Americans.
I agree. But it is equally undeniable that, had he done that, he would have won more support among non-Blacks, to whom Wright and Sharpton are dangerous buffoons. There are lots more educated Hispanic and other non-Black votes out there than there are Black ones. I fear that Obama has discarded a quarter in order to pick up a nickel.
I agree if you are talking about "city folk" or suburbanites who are more familiar with Black political issues and the Jackson/Sharpton minstrel show. I think that Obama has maintained enough distance from that, and only his Wright association lingers. But I don't know about people who do not know enough about Blacks as a group to discern or care what kind of Black person they are considering. These are the people, I suspect, who are more apt to believe in the separating "the races" as well as the ODR and see Obama as a racial "outsider" no matter that he has a White mother.
Sometimes I wonder whether it would make a difference if Obama's mom was still alive and could physically stand next to him and campaign with him.
Also interesting: Apparently Obama has the Hispanic (Mexican American) vote 2 to 1 in New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona. I think McCain's flip flop on immigration is a big reason for that.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 394 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Mon 15 Sep 2008 21:02 Post subject:
Melani23 wrote:
Hey, you forgot these:
c. Black Republicans/Values voters
d. Swing Voters and Independents
e. Those who fear he's Muslim/extremist/Manchurian/etc
f. Those who fear for his life
g. Those who are afraid to believe he has a real chance to win
h. Those who have a problem with his record (195+ votes @ Present)
i. Those who have a problem with his inner circle/consultants (Soros, etc)
I can list more ya know......
With the exception of "f" and possibly "g", everone you mentioned falls under "b".
But I don't know about people who do not know enough about Blacks as a group to discern or care what kind of Black person they are considering. These are the people, I suspect, who are more apt to believe in the separating "the races" as well as the ODR and see Obama as a racial "outsider" no matter that he has a White mother.
True, but there is no way that he could have gotten those votes anyway. You have to forget about those votes because no Obama position or policy could ever have affected them. I am interested only in the tradeoff between voting blocs that he had a shot at getting. It is precisely because there are so few Black racists out there compared to White ones that I think his courting the Black vote may have been misguided.
sagascend wrote:
Apparently Obama has the Hispanic (Mexican American) vote 2 to 1 in New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona. I think McCain's flip flop on immigration is a big reason for that.
That is interesting. I wonder how many voters there are in that demographic (compared, say, to Caribbean Hispanics who could care less what happens to the Mexicans).
Do not lose sight that Obama's goal conflicts with the goal of many "Black leaders." Their best-case scenario is seeing Obama shot down in glorious flames, proving once again that all non-Blacks are Black-hating racists. His best-case scenario is to become president.
True, but there is no way that he could have gotten those votes anyway. You have to forget about those votes because no Obama position or policy could ever have affected them. I am interested only in the tradeoff between voting blocs that he had a shot at getting. It is precisely because there are so few Black racists out there compared to White ones that I think his courting the Black vote may have been misguided.
LOL this is exactly the segment of the small town American vote that I am talking about. It is not a large leap from someone who hates Blacks to someone who believes that all Blacks are ghetto or country bumpkins. The more insular and remote the community the easier it is for these views to go unchallenged. Of course the suburbs and certain city enclaves are are often just as insular, but not in the workplace.
Obama could not have won the Democratic nomination without the coalition he put together, and I suspect that the only reason he won the "elite liberal" vote is because they wanted to stick it to the Clintons. I will say that a Republican of African descent could win the presidency with the overt strategy of alienating Blacks and courting Whites. I don't know about a Democrat though. Obama can't even bring up valid issues like fatherhood without getting skewered by you know who.
I can't even think of a centrist Democrat of African descent who has won using a strategy of cultivating non-Blacks and discouraging Blacks (not even in Florida, unless they had the Carribean vote). Harold Ford is a conservative Democrat with a virtually White appearance and a White fiance' who carries around the 10 Commandments and he still didn't win in Tennessee.
fwsweet wrote:
That is interesting. I wonder how many voters there are in that demographic (compared, say, to Caribbean Hispanics who could care less what happens to the Mexicans).
My best friend is Mexican American and insists that Obama will carry the Hispanic vote (which to her is equivalent to the M-A vote). I would bet zero dollars that Obama would get more than 30% of the Cuban vote and no more than half of the Puerto Rican vote (and that only the the northeast. I am not sure about other Latino groups.
Rest assured, if he wasn't "Black", Hillary would be the nominee.
And if Hillary had won, then Obama supporters could easily have said that if she weren't a woman, Obama would have won. In all honesty, it's a back and forth argument not worth getting into.
Overall, the article doesn't make sense - white folks saying that they don't understand, because he's not a "Wutcho name eel?" country type, nor is he an urban hip-hop type - as if they would RATHER vote for black person who fits either of those stereotypes? These are simply excuses - they're hiding behind their prejudices.
As for blacks who don't want to vote for Obama, I think my wife exhibits this herself: I think that many blacks and multircial people of African decent who are not supporting Obama fall under two categories:
a. Those are well intentioned in not voting for him simply because he's black - and it gets taken so far that his blackness is making them more reluctant to vote for him.
b. Those who trying their damndest to be "unniggerlike"
Hey, you forgot these:
c. Black Republicans/Values voters
d. Swing Voters and Independents
e. Those who fear he's Muslim/extremist/Manchurian/etc
f. Those who fear for his life
g. Those who are afraid to believe he has a real chance to win
h. Those who have a problem with his record (195+ votes @ Present)
i. Those who have a problem with his inner circle/consultants (Soros, etc)
c. Black Republicans/Values voters
d. Swing Voters and Independents
e. Those who fear he's Muslim/extremist/Manchurian/etc
f. Those who fear for his life
g. Those who are afraid to believe he has a real chance to win
h. Those who have a problem with his record (195+ votes @ Present)
i. Those who have a problem with his inner circle/consultants (Soros, etc)
I can list more ya know......
With the exception of "f" and possibly "g", everone you mentioned falls under "b".
Whoa! Would you like to clarify that? Or perhaps rescind it altogether!?
Richard Miller wrote:
b. Those who are trying their damndest to be "unniggerlike"
So, because I have Republican values, this means I am trying to be "unniggerlike"? And, what exactly does that mean? Also, are you saying that Black and mixed folks who ARE voting for Obama are being whatever your definition of "niggerlike" is? Yes, some clarification would be most beneficial.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 394 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Mon 15 Sep 2008 23:19 Post subject:
OTHER wrote:
So, because I have Republican values, this means I am trying to be "unniggerlike"?
Not necessarily, but can you tell me why it seems like it's black and mixed folks who are not Obama supporters who are the most vocal about their non-support? Sounds to me like they have something to prove.
OTHER wrote:
And, what exactly does that mean? Also, are you saying that Black and mixed folks who ARE voting for Obama are being whatever your definition of "niggerlike" is? Yes, some clarification would be most beneficial.
I didn't coin "niggerlike" - that word has been thrown around on mulatto.org and youtube plenty of time, and I'm using it in the same context in which I saw it being used. If I define it here (in the manner in which I understood it), it's going to give me an image that I don't want. However, I'll comply with your orders as a mod if you ask again.
But to answer the other question, no. I don't have a fear that voting for Obama is going to make look like "the rest of them" unlike the people I described in "b."
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1449 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Tue 16 Sep 2008 01:08 Post subject:
fwsweet wrote:
sagascend wrote:
It is undeniable to me that if Obama had chosen to distance himself from Blacks as a group that he would probably have been rejected by many of the Blacks who support him now. They might have interpreted his avowal of a multiracial identity as a rejection. They might believe he isn't religious enough, that he speaks "too White" or that he is too critical of African Americans.
I agree. But it is equally undeniable that, had he done that, he would have won more support among non-Blacks, to whom Wright and Sharpton are dangerous buffoons. There are lots more educated Hispanic and other non-Black votes out there than there are Black ones. I fear that Obama has discarded a quarter in order to pick up a nickel.
That's exactly what I have been trying to say. I think he could have more affectively used his multi-racial ancestry to really position himself as a post racial candidate. He would have alienated many Black identified people, but I think they would have eventually came his way. He would have had the best of all worlds. Of course being a part of an church whom espouses Black Liberation Theology hurt him quite a bit and will continue to do so.
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1449 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Tue 16 Sep 2008 12:52 Post subject:
Richard Miller wrote:
Not necessarily, but can you tell me why it seems like it's black and mixed folks who are not Obama supporters who are the most vocal about their non-support? Sounds to me like they have something to prove.
So I have something to prove??? Which is what???
I would oppose the liberal Democrat no matter who it is. If Hillary were the nominee, I would be on the warpath.
My objective is to get the information out that folks whom would otherwise not be exposed to if they obtain their information from the traditional media sources and to expose the same traditional media on the way they report on the candidates.
As for blacks who don't want to vote for Obama, I think my wife exhibits this herself: I think that many blacks and multircial people of African decent who are not supporting Obama fall under two categories:
a. Those are well intentioned in not voting for him simply because he's black - and it gets taken so far that his blackness is making them more reluctant to vote for him.
b. Those who are trying their damndest to be "unniggerlike"
The number of categories is too limited. There are many blacks who don't support Obama because they simply don't agree with his policies and positions. His blackness isn't the issue. These people can be of any political persuasion. Indeed some are leftist and see Obama as not leftist enough.
We can just as easily claim that whites who don't support Obama necessarily fall within a very limited number of categories because there are whites who don't support him who fit a certain profile. Therefore all whites who don't support him must fall within these categories. However, the reality is more complicated than that.
I remain immune to Obama's "magic" simply because I'm generally wary of charismatic politicians in general and because he really isn't anything new. He's basically a big government liberal. I don't fit into either of these two categories of yours, and I know many people who don't support Obama who are black who don't either. I'm neither a Republican nor a McCain supporter, and Obama's blackness has no influence on me.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
Would you like to clarify that? Or perhaps rescind it altogether!?
Yes, some clarification would be most beneficial.