An Obama -Hillary ticket would embody all the fears in one. Could Americans vote for a black or a woman. Are we ever joining the future .Most democracies have had woman leaders. We have never even faced the possibility. A black would be a huge move. How ugly would the politics get.
Discussing whether articulate is a color word,proves that we have questions to be answered.
It makes me think of Chris Rock’s riff on people “complimenting” Colin Powell by saying he’s well-spoken.
(not a 100% accurate quote)
*
What do you mean, “He’s so well-spoken! Oh, he speaks so well!” That ain’t no kind of compliment! That’s the kind of thing you say about a retarded person who learned to talk! “He speaks so well!” What, did he just have a stroke last week? He’s a fuckin’ educated man! What did you expect him to talk like?*
I don’t think they invented the word for just black people.
Purposefully abstaining from describing any black person as being articulate is still paying heed to the stereotype that blacks aren’t articulate, and thus perpetuates it. It’s not like articulate is an assumed state for most people (and “articulate” usually means “especially articulate”). Obama is especially articulate - it’s not insensitive or insulting to mention that.
I’m white, I live in the South, and I’ve voted for the Republican candidate in every presidential election since 1988. Oh, and I’m a man. And I am seriously impressed with Obama so far.
But… I don’t really consider myself a Southerner, or a Republican. So I see what you mean.
Well, Jim Brown is really articulate, but I sure woulldn’t describe him as “talking white.”
I think anyone who’s watched the speechifying done by most members of Congress would have to agree that Obama is several cuts above.
I think it would be a really good thing for him to test the waters, and maybe pave the way him later becoming the first legitimate black candidate for the office (yeah, Jesse, I’m looking at you). I think he’s a little too inexperienced, though, and I’d hate to see him torpedo his future chances by making some minor gaffe that the jokers we laughingly call “the press” will jump on like it’s some big deal. Not that that’s ever happened.
“I invented the internet,” anyone? :rolleyes:
I’d never heard of him untill I was watching the DNConvention coverage for the '04 election, and saw his address. I sat there godsmacked when Kevbabe came in the room and asked what was so interesting. “You’re looking at the first black president of the United States” said I. I’d love the opportunity to vote for him, and I think '08 would be better than waiting.
When I read DMark’s use of the word articulate my first thought was "*that * will not be well received " , because I know about the backhanded compliment that it sometimes is. But then it struck me that after listening to our current leader, hearing someone who is well spoken and thoughtful is such a refreshing change as to be especially noteworthy. I can’t comment since I haven’t really listened to him yet, but he *is * handsome. That still counts, right?
You mean like writing a book where he admitted to doing drugs, including cocaine? Already happened. However, it was long enough ago (and he’s good enough) that I think he could get away with that.
I would vote for Barak in a heartbeat…and it looks like most of the folks here would too.
But I REALLY fear nasty race-related problems. I fear the rest of America.
Is America grown up enough to not assassinate a black president? Heck, is it even grown up enough to elect a black president?
To me, Obama isn’t just articulate. He’s eloquent. Like someone made for public speaking. Anyone who watched him speak at the Dem convention should know what I’m talking about. He delivers speeches with the natural grace of someone like MLK. For one thing, he doesn’t sound like a politician. You don’t feel like a hopelessly gullible moron for believing that he might actually believe the words coming out of his mouth. He doesn’t affect good ol boy colloquiolisms or gestures in order to connect with his audience. For another thing, he doesn’t sound like he is regurgitating a memorized speech or a whole bunch of party lines. And because of that, he forces you to pay attention. That was the main thing that stood out to me about his convention speech. It completely lacked the ready-made feel to it that so many other speeches have, and yet you know something like that had to have been prepared beforehand.
One can be articulate and still be an ineffective communicator. If you bore your audience to tears, they won’t listen to you, no matter how crisp your diction is. It’s not that Obama “speaks so well!”. Plenty of folks speak well. But few have the ability to speak in a way that commands attention and respect like Obama does.
Chris Rock had a point about Powell, though.
If anything, he sounds more sincere and less affected then MLK to me. I don’t doubt that King really was sincere, but his vocal delivery was 100% Baptist preacher. That’s moving and powerful, but feels as if you’re watching and hearing a great acting performance.
All MHO.
Well, personally I’d vote for this a heartbeat. He’s my favorite candidate and I may even donate money to his campaign; if so, it would be the first time I ever gave a politician money.
Personally I think that the race angle would work in his favor during the election, and (if he won) during his administration. The reason being that the Repubs and their smear machine would withhold some of their normal venom for fear of appearing racist.
If it’s the time for him to run (and I agree with the poster who said it looks like it just might be), I fear….honestly *fear * the kinds of emails that I’ll end up having forwarded to me from my father and others like him regarding Obama.
I’d vote for the man if he does run (Still pulling a bit for Feingold myself, but whatever) and hope that one of the lasting marks of his presidency would be the very last we’d hear in this country about black/white race relations, sort of like when Kennedy became president and people stopped telling “Irish” jokes.
Barack Obama is to the Democrats like a surefire, can’t miss quarterback who’s just been taken number one over all in the draft but is, for now, still an unseasoned rookie. Conventional wisdom is that he needs time to learn the playbook, watch from the bench, work with the second team, and hopefully be ready to start in his second year. That’s conventional wisdom.
But…
He’s been drafted by a lousy team that hasn’t won anything in years and really has no good starting QB right now. Sure they have a couple of veterans. A couple of guys who have been to the Superbowl and lost as well as a career backup who for years has been speculated to be the QB of the future but who also has a considerable potential for downside and who may not bring the best chemistry to the lockeroom.
On a team like that, sometimes it’s better just to go against conventional wisdom and throw the kid into the game. He’s young, he’s healthy, he’s got a cannon for an arm and he appears to be a smart kid who’s not going to be reckless with the ball or give the game away. It’s a risky decision. Sometimes it can really backfire. A kid can go in there and get roughed up, throw a bunch of picks and his confidence can get irreparably damaged. On the other hand, sometimes you also get a Ben Roethlisberger or a Tom Brady who bring a veteran-like poise into the huddle even as rookies.
If we give Obama the protection he needs, not ask him to do too much, give him a good running game and pick our spots for the big plays downfield, I think he might be able to finally get us that ring. He has a lot of upside and he hasn’t been banged up yet. He might have to learn on the fly but he might also be the best shot this loser team has got.
Oh for Og’s sake. I can call a white man articulate, but not a black man? I’m sorry, but this linguistic stepping on eggs to avoid offending someone has gone too far.
Yes, bigotry is a terrible thing.
It sure is.
Let’s say rather he has good ideas and values, and lays them out effectively. You can be educated and intelligent, but still lack that last quality.
I hear this a lot. I think there are several major flaws in this analysis, any of which are enough to make this a mistaken or irrelevant concern. I’ll mention two here.
First, let’s assume that you are correct with your premise, that there are lots of Southern Republican white men who won’t vote for Mr. Obama because of his race. (I’m not saying I agree, just that I’m conceding it for the sake of further discussion.)
-
It’s irrelevant. White Republicans aren’t likely to vote for any Democrat, race aside. (This is like saying that John McCain shouldn’t run because Northern Democratic black women aren’t likely to vote for him. True, but they aren’t likely to vote for any Republican.)
-
No non-Southern Democrat has any real chance to win this election in the South. It’s all about the electoral votes. See map here:
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2004&off=0&elect=0&f=0
(Note that you can jump back to maps for any prior elections.)
Bush easily won every Southern state in 2004 (even Florida wasn’t really close), and swept the South in 2000 against a quasi-Southern senator. In 2000, only Florida was close. Bill Clinton lost most of the South, in elections that otherwise were electoral blowouts. And Clinton was a moderate Southerner with great political talents who had the benefit of running against against weak opposition (Dole) or an opponent who was blamed for a poor economy who also ran a poor campaign (Bush I).
Said in a slightly different way: If any non-Southern Democrat wins significant electoral votes in the South, he doesn’t need them, because he’s blown out the Republican in the rest of the country.
The Dems have to follow one of four strategies to win the 2008 Presidential election:
(one of two, really, unless they are morons)
-
Nominate a popular Southerner, who can appeal (or at least can talk a good game) to Southern white non-Republican males on issues like religion, family and gun control, and who is not perceived as overly liberal on other issues. Obviously, Obama will not fit with this strategy.
-
Nominate a popular moderate non-Southerner, thereby conceding the South (except maybe Florida) and pick up Ohio, Missouri, Colorado and maybe New Mexico or Nevada. Key here will be moderate suburban non-aligned voters. Obama might be the right guy for this.
-
Do the same old thing and pray the Republicans screw up by choosing an extremely poor candidate.
-
Do the same old thing and hope the economy tanks.
Few, actually. Far from most.