Wahoo, such insight. But I think you’ve missed some of the point here- what is annoying some people here is that she isn’t talking about his support from black voters. She’s saying there are only two reasons people are voting for him: he’s black and they’re sexist. That’s not about black voters, it’s about all voters.
But there’s just no evidence of this.
If Obama weren’t black, the calculus would change - no one is naive enough to doubt that - but you have no way of knowing in what direction it would change. I am absolutely certain that there are people who have given their primary votes to Hilary Clinton because they are convinced that America will not elect a black man President. These people may even consider Obama a better candidate, but a less electable candidate. There is no way to quantify the role Obama’s race has played in his current lead, and your (and Ferraro’s) attempt to state as bald fact what is completely unverifiable opinion is irrational.
You were right the first time.
(OK, cheap shot. But someone had to take it. 
)
Geraldine Ferraro is a monster.
Two motifs are present in the Clinton offensive playbook: race and charm. Diminish Obama by attributing his success to those superficial, merit-less things, that’s the game plan.
I find Ferraro’s comments disappointing not because I think they are racist. I just find her argument so very typical of the persecuted mindset that thinks there is a thing called “black privilege” that constantly victimizes white people–both men and women. So we’re supposed to believe that Hillary’s gender confers no advantage, no pluses, only hardship and discrimination. But apparently Obama is smooth sailing because everyone loves black people and is always giving them a helping hand, giving them jobs and other things that they don’t earn. It’s the same idea that is floated in discussions about Affirmative Action. I harp on this, yes, but it’s true: the scrutiny always turns disproportionately to black people.
Ferraro is giving credence to the notion that a black person can’t attain a high-status position without their race overshadowing their qualifications. She is giving a nod to the whole “he only got the job because he’s black” prejudice that she and others should be decrying, if they want to attract the black voters that left Hillary back when Bill opened his silly mouth. It’s one thing to give up on getting black people to vote for her. But to go out of your way to alienate them just so you can appeal to the voters who feel that the darkies get everything handed to them? Whose side is that really helping? Makes you wonder.
Meant to also say that we’re supposed to believe that Hillary’s gender and race confer no advantage…because it’s clear in Ferraro’s statement that she believes being black trumps being white and being female.
And if Hillary hadn’t been married to Bill, she’d be in the position she is now? Ha! She is the epitome of the privileged candidate, just like GW Bush. I can see that maybe she’d be in the Senate-- someone like Boxer or Feinstein. A well regarded Senator in Democratic circles, but not Presidential material. She gets that mostly from Bill.
Exactly! Hillary Clinton’s only excuse for losing this nomination is her own inferiority when compared side-by-side to her opponent. She not only had the war chest, the name recognition and the connections (one of whom is a former President!!!), but she had a clear and commanding lead of at least 30 points nationwide just a few short months ago. If Barack Obama were only beating her because he is black, he’d have been way closer to her in the polls from the very beginning.
But what’s obvious to anyone who isn’t a racist asshole, is that Barack Obama has built his lead slowly, over time, by working his ass off, talking to voters, getting his message out and earning their trust and their vote, taking many of them away from Hillary Clinton, who they supported in much larger numbers from the beginning.
Notice I added the part about her fucking it up. 
Bingo, once again. This is another perfect example as to why, when Hillary’s supporters reduce Barack Obama down to nothing but his race, they look like utter morons.
Which also brings up another good point – black voters are overwhelmingly Democrats, so one way or another, the likelihood is that they’re going to vote for one of the Democrats in the primaries – even if they are all white candidates. So this just illustrates another reason why Ferraro’s contention that Obama wouldn’t be in this position if he were white, is utterly without foundation. They’d have to pick one of them, so what makes her so damn sure they’d be picking Hillary Clinton over a white Barack Obama with all the same messages, campaign style and savvy, and platforms?
Oh bullshit. I’ve posted exactly one other thread about Hillary Clinton; the one I linked to right above in this very thread, asking her supporters to give me even one goddamn thing that woman has done in her entire career that makes her qualified to be President of the United States of America, exactly the same way the Obama supporters have been called on to do the same in multiple threads, time after time after time. And funny that, not one single direct answer. Wonder why that is.
Yes, actually, you would.
What evidence? What deviation? Black democrats are voting for a DEMOCRAT. That’s not deviating from the general voting trend of democrats! You really are dumber than a box of hair, aren’t you?
I’m not at all convinced that the calculus would change. All other things being equal, given that the same black voters would have the same two candidates, with the same messages, the same campaign tactics, the same Legislative histories and so on, I still think he would be drawing the same voters he’s drawing now. He’s the more qualified candidate, with the the better run campaign and the more hopeful message. Why wouldn’t they?
Yep. That comment just feeds right into this mentality and only serves to cause more anger and resentment towards blacks in general, but especially those who are high achievers. It’s despicable.
Brain bleach! Brain bleach!
I tried to imagine that. Now my head hurts.
Sweet Jaysus, do you ever stop screaming? Cork it!
Hillary has disagreed with the comments made by Ferarro.
What more do you want, for her walk on her hands and knees through broken glass?
Can you supply a cite? I’m interested to see the tenor and extent of the expressed “disagreement” and all I found was:
[
Another Clinton supporter who’s an Amazing Kreskin. Wonder of wonderment, you can actually hear the volume of my voice through your computer screen? You’re awesome!
As I said at the very beginning of that post, NO.
What I want from her is not one single thing less than what she demanded of Barack Obama when he said he renounced the nice words said about him by Louis Farrakhan. That wasn’t good enough for her. She had the cojones to stand up and reject the anti-Semitic group who offered their support in her NY Senate campaign, so he should have at least as strong a response to Farrakhan. As if rejecting was oh so much firmer a stand than mere renouncing. :rolleyes: So he renounced and rejected Louis Farrakhan’s words, which was all he had offered, not support, not fund raising, not campaigning; praise.
Well if rejecting support when it comes from someone who makes hateful remarks is so goddamned important to Hillary Clinton, I fully expect her to reject the support of Geraldine Ferarro. Nothing less will do. Nothing. Those are her terms, so I damn well expect her to abide by them. Simple as that.
God you sound shrill. If you settle down, you might be able to comprehend I specified 20% of blacks deviated from the general voting trend of democrats. If they didn’t, Hillary would have at least Obama’s present lead in the popular vote.
We can argue about the motivation of the 20% of blacks as much as we can argue about where Ferarro is coming from, but the fact remains that on the surface Ferarro’s comment is correct.
And Shayna, if you would change your mind about whether Ferarro’s comment is true or not, I would gladly present the evidence that 20% of blacks deviated from the norm in voting for Obama, and if these 20% where more reflective of non black democrats, and 80% of black democrats, it would completely reverse the standings in the popular vote as it now exists.
Oh, and I can’t take credit for this because I found it in the comments section of the CNN article on this subject, but Ferraro was partly right, but not in the way she was implying. Barack Obama might very well not be in the position he’s in now if he were white – he’d be in a better position!
Feel better now Shayna?
Oh that’s rich, you talking about reading for comprehension. Listen up, there is no evidence that 20% of blacks deviated from the general voting trend of democrats. They have 2 democrats to choose from, and they’re choosing Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton. Since there are PLENTY of reasons why ANY voter would make this choice, you cannot attribute it to race, let alone call it a deviation.
Reading comprehension, dear. Reading comprehension. You have been disabused of that false notion throughout this thread, but you flat out refuse to acknowledge any of the cogent points that don’t support your wrong assumptions.
OMG, that’s hilarious. Look, either put up or shut up. You either have the evidence or you don’t. Your presenting it should have nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of conditions you set for me, let alone that I abandon logic and reason to agree with you.
No you dumbass, that’s not what she was implying! She was implying that Barack Obama is only in as good a position as he is because he’s black, and that if he were white, those votes would be going to Hillary, not him.
Seriously, are you really this dense?
As somebody who is much less emotionally invested in this than Shayna is (no offense intended), I would go to bed with a smile on my face if the Obama campaign asked Clinton’s people to “both reject and denounce” Ferraro’s remarks. I hate when candidates play the denouncing game, but I’d make an exception in this case.
Shayna I was implying that a differnet source playing the race card in your favour seemed to have settled you down.