"David R. Birch" wrote in message
...
On 7/10/2011 12:00 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

That's a pretty paranoid response to what he actually said, Goat.

The fact is that polls have shown consistently, from late 2008 on, that
negative attitudes toward blacks amounted to somewhere between 4% to 20%
of
the anti-Obama vote. That's more than a reasonable margin for winning or
losing an election. The fact that they lost tends to obscure the fact,
but
Iggy is quite right -- the Republicans now require negative racial
attitudes
on the part of some Republican voters in order to win an election. To put
it
another way, they now depend on the racists for political power.

Of course, you'll deny this, but that's only because you won't let
yourself
believe the facts. And you'll assume that Iggy is painting the entire
Republican party with the same brush, because you're well-trained in
being a
victim.

But the facts are on his side, for the basic point that he's making:
Without
racists in their midst, Republicans can't win an election now. That
doesn't
mean that all Republicans are racists. On the whole, and according to
polls,
they appear to have about the same overall racial attitudes as the
population at large. But the racist contingent is largely voting on their
side. I'm sure that the distinction isn't too hard for you, but accepting
the fact of it probably is.

Is it racist to vote against Obama because he's not the same race you are?

If that's your reason for not voting for him, I'd say it is.

Is it racist to vote for Obama because he's the same race you are?

It might be, but it's a lot less likely. To NOT vote for him because of his
race presumes racial inferiority on his part. To vote for him because of his
race may, and probably did for the majority of black voters, presume a
greater awareness of the racial discriminations the black voter faces. That
is not racism in any reasonable sense. That's more a matter of identity
politics.

Do you think many black voters, many of whom had never voted before,
carefully examined his record before voting for him?

I doubt it.

Do you think a white candidate with similar background and personality as
Obama's would have been elected or even nominated?

Yup. With his speaking ability and obvious intelligence, a white Obama would
have absolutely creamed McCain, more than Obama did.


I was very disappointed to see that the first major party black candidate
was not only just another empty suit, but worse yet, from Chicago, where
corrupt politician is redundant.

I don't care where he's from, and he seems less affected by Chicago
political style than most Chicago politicians (if you want to see a
candidate who will blow your mind with corrupt regional politics, elect
Chris Christie).

What disappoints me about Obama is that he took so long to realize the
nature of the political resistance he would get from Republicans in
Congress. He's much too optimistic about people. More experience would have
cured him of that, I think.


OTOH, Soupy Sales could have beaten McCain. And Soupy's dead...

No, McCain wasn't that bad of a candidate.

--
Ed Huntress



David