I think the fact that he DID grow up in Indonesia and in Hawaii when it was a young state gives him a much more worldly perspective on things. America being unaware of most of the rest of the world has gotten it into trouble countless times over the past 50 years.
I doubt our current president could find Indonesia on a map.
True, but that has nothing at all to do with who will and will not vote for him as president. I have to respectfully disagree with the folks here who say Obama’s race won’t be an issue and won’t directly influence his ability to win in the general election. It’s now been two days since Iowa. The irrational vitriol against Obama has ratcheted up significantly. If you think freepers have a corner on this you’re sadly mistaken. If you think it’s only republicans you’re just as mistaken.
Do I “know” that most progressives won’t vote for Obama in November? Of course not. However, I can tell you what folks are saying locally and, even if I discount the boneheads who have no qualms about proudly exhibiting their redneckery, there are those who are clearly uncomfortable with the prospect of an Obama win, reflected in comments that are obfuscatory and rife with parsing…also sad.
If it is not an issue, then explain the huge difference between blacks and whites at the OJ verdict. That was a clear demonstration that blacks and whites are not on the same wavelength. I am not sure Obama is electable and I think it is shameful.
As for the main point here, were I a Democrat, I’d vote for him. As it is, there are only two Republicans (Guiliani and Thompson) I can ethically vote for at this point, and no Democrats. As far as Obama goes, I admire him and his force of personality, but I also am unsure of what his actual stances are. He’s changed them an awful lot. That wouldn’t be a big deal were it a long, spread out deal (I’m not voting for who he was ten years ago when he started in the Senate, but who he is now), but he’s switched messges enough that I’m just not really sure what he’d actually do. And that’s the big barrier.
:dubious:
I confused as to how this even applies. The people on Simpson’s jury were largely urban women (8 of the 12), and they lived in rough neighborhoods and had a high tolerance for violence. But mostly, Clark failed to do a good job of presenting the evidence. Yes, the juror’s pre-existing opinions affected their judgements. But I extremely disagree that this was inevitable or unavoidable, and a good prosecutor could have done better.
I am continually mystified by people bringing up O. J. Simpson. The trial was 14 years ago, and handled terribly to boot. How is it particularly relevant when the environment is completely different?
I disagree, I’ve only looked into Obama’s backround since Iowa, but the diversity of his backround is a solid plus me. True it’s unlikely to effect my POTUS vote, but in the primary (california) it’s a real factor. I like the diversity of his message, and think a lot of people won’t be worried about a ‘‘too black’’ agenda, like I was, franky, when Jesse Jackson ran.
I can agree it isn’t the only thing. I do not think it is “low.” We’ve spent little time discussing candidates’ culture, common interests, and education, for instance. Let me preface by saying yes, great progress has been made in how Americans interact interracially from a generation or two ago. I think most middle-class Americans work and go to college at least with a diverse bunch. I also think it’s by no means a lot of exposure, but I think it’s a rare bird who doesn’t have a Black, Asian, or Latino co-worker or associate. I do not think that people live in integrated neighborhoods or attend integrated schools as much as you might believe. The Civil Rights Project at UCLA discusses how segregated neighborhoods and schools are by race and socioeconomic status, and that trend is increasing.
The problem with this is that you’re not discussing dichotomous variables. Culture and personality may interact quite a bit with race. Family dynamics, the role of religion, and how people socialize are interrelating factors. We could easily draw up tendencies about how members of ethnic and racial groups view meeting new people, attending a cookout, or even relating to members of the opposite sex. The default “socially accepted” behaviors tend to be those embraced by the White middle class. While there’s a lot of overlap between that default, there are differences - enough that it’s very common to see how the differences could be misconstrued as being “unfriendly,” “passive,” “quiet,” or “aloof.”
Case in point: I have three neighbors. One is an interracial couple (White wife/Latino husband), one is East Asian, and one is South Asian - Indian. I have the most interaction with the interracial couple, in particular the wife, who will walk over and say hi. The East Asian couple wave and say hello, but we have had exactly one conversation in the past six months. The Indian family - I talk to the husband quite a bit, but I have never spoken to his wife; in fact, I rarely see her outside. None of these behaviors surprise me - in my own experiences and professionally as a social scientist, the way we all interact fits precisely into social norms for the ethnic and racial groups. (Of course there is a great deal of variance, so let’s not go down the path of saying that you can find people who behave quite differently.)
If I didn’t have that knowledge, I might assume that the interracial family is friendly, the East Asian family is aloof, and the Indian family is patriarchal, and the wife is somehow repressed. And a lot of people do this.
Well, take my experience as a data point. I am tall, slim, and I don’t speak with an AAVE accent. I have two Ivy League degrees and work as a professor at a major university. I’m about as nonthreatening as they come. However, I experience situations such as being ignored by customer service people - like while waiting for a table at a fancy restaurant, or excessive attention in stores, as if I’m being monitored. Or people doubting that I actually have the degrees I have, or have the job I have. (I discussed this recently with a White male colleague, and he’s never had that happen to him.) I have colleagues - larger, athletic, darker Black professors who do speak with AAVE who tell me of challenges they have at work - things like other professors assuming that they are students or custodial staff, although they’ve been on the faculty for several years. Or the example that a White male professor shared with me of eating at a popular eatery near campus in Boston - he regularly went there and ate alone and with friends, but at least twice, when he went to eat with Black female and Asian female colleagues, the service was not at the same level.
Now there are multiple factors that might color (no pun intended) the perceptions of these events. But just as it might be extreme to attribute these issues to racial bias, it’s extreme to dismiss racial bias as a factor as well. And I suspect people of color have a good gauge for discerning bad customer service because the employees are incompetent or stretched too thin. I do have friends that go to the bad service=racism complaint way too quickly, in my opinion, but if you consider the fact that my friends and colleagues tend to think deeply about these issues, I tend to believe their situations. In fact, it seems that most of us go through great lengths to eliminate every other potential explanation before saying, “I think I was treated poorly because of my race/ethnicity/gender/ability status/sexual orientation.”
I would say as a condition of living in his nation most of my life - and comparing it to my experience living outside of the US - color is quite relevant in our lives, though we don’t like to talk about it very much. One of my professors has a line of research about this - she calls it “colormuteness”. As I’ve said in other threads, the more traction that Obama’s candidacy gains, the more we’ll hear concerns about any number of issues or shortcomings he has. And to be fair, many are legitimate. Obama is not my #1 choice, though I would support him if he is the eventual nominee. Would those doubts be raised with the intensity if he were, say, John Edwards? We can’t know for sure, which is the insane beauty of racism.
Maybe. But if you’re arguing that Dems will rally behind him and vote for him, I think you’re right. It is hard for me to imagine a registered Dem like myself doing anything but that. But the undecided and independents will have to support him in numbers as well. And when you’ve got people trying to decide between Obama and McCain - I shit you not, I saw a woman on CNN who was trying to decide between the two - that’s the sort of doubt that would creep into the subconscious, and my WAG is that it won’t be “he’s Black, I can’t vote for him,” but some other doubt that is subconsciously fueled by the fear of electing a Black president.
Wow. I just said “Black men on the corner in rough neighborhoods,” and you draw the conclusion that they’re thugs?
I have a friend who works an urban ministry. He hangs out on those corners. As do guys who don’t have the cash or a local watering hole nearby. And yes, some are thugs. But to take “Black men on corners in rough neighborhoods” and derive that they’re thugs? Come on.
I think if the OJ verdict were today, the reaction and racial split would be the same.
I also believe the closer it gets to election time, more and more dumbasses will hear the Muslim UL, and all the others, and it will get in their heads and it will have an effect. Unless I’m wrong and he sweeps all the cauci, Democrats should be concerned about pitting him vs Huckabee, someone with no ties to Dubya or the current regime. Never understimate the number of ID types out there.
…sorry and how many non-Black Panther black Americans are still not comfortable with their daughter dating a white guy?
Can there be a Romney/Obama ticket (or vice-versa)? Black and Mormon…now that’s inclusion.
Thank you for such a thoughtful and thought-provoling reply. I agree with much of it. I wrote one reply and it apparently disappeared…I’m not sure I can rewrite everything.
I agree that segregation exists and that it tends to fall along racial lines. But my observation is that it’s actually the non-racial characteristics I listed above that defines those groups. I’d say the Huckstables and Huckabees are more likely to find themselves hanging out than the Huckstables and the Sanfords. When it comes right down to it class, financial position, etc etc are more defining for modern “clans” than race and color. Obviously the heritage of the past–good and bad–leaves intact relationships based on race and ethnicity.
I’m not in a position to judge what it’s like to be a person of color in this society. But I do live in the business world, and in those circles, for every slight toward a black individual, there is an occasion of deference. A deferred criticism of an opinion in a meeting perhaps, or a diminished sanction for incompetence. If the glasses you wear only see the slights, I’m sure the world will seem as stilted as it is for the bigots who only see the “advantages” of being from the wrong clan.
And the bigots don’t reserve their prejudices for race. Again, class or dress or appearance or accent or any one of a number of other factors are enough for a bigoted individual to exercise their bias in all of the subtle ways that say, “You are not one of Us.” My point is that race and color are not high on that list past the initial interaction.
I think the country will react to Mr Obama the same way. But time will tell, and the media, ever anxious for a story, will promote “the race angle” with every bigot they can find and every publicity-seeking “leader” weighing in as well. For myself, I’ll know we’ve arrived when I can call President Obama an ass and not have anyone wondering if I’m just a bigot.
Believe it or not, some of the Stormfronters are saying they would rather have Obama for POTUS than Clinton.
Link (broken, because of Board policy against linking to hate sites):
http:// www. stormfront.org /forum/showthread.php/obama-sweep-iowa-victories-449533.html
Ron Paul is far and away their most popular candidate, however.
I already told you in your other thread that Mr Clinton is blacker than Mr Obama. 
I meant they would rather have Obama than Hillary Clinton – or even most of the Pubs. (On their planet, the war is all about protecting Israel and anyone who supports it is the Zionists’ puppet.)
I don’t think it’s much of an issue. The kind of people who would refuse to vote for Obama because he’s black are people who would never vote for any other Democrat anyway, and especially not Hillary.
It is absolutely not different. Not a thing has changed. It is mostly the whites who believe that story. The reaction to the verdict was the point. The blacks and whites revealed fundamental differences in the OJ case. The differences between the black and white experience in America is never addressed.
I heard the same mantra about the strides the blacks have made for decades. It just is not so.
Bummer, I would have really liked to have heard all you had to say… thanks for trying to recreate it!
In some respects, perhaps. But most Huxtables that I know have family members who are Sanfords, and there’s a recognition of that in how they see the world. I have the ability to create a fiction for myself that I’m a “self-made” person, that every advantage I’ve ever had in life has been through my own brilliance and effort, and so forth… but I refuse. Many of my conservative-leaning White friends think this is their story and they either can’t, or refuse to see how privilege and connections have helped them in their lives. Hell, some of my Black friends see the world that way as well.
To continue your analogy, I would think that the Huxtables and the Sanfords worship in a much more similar way than the Huckabees. 
I’m in academia, and in a field that values collaboration with government and business. I’ve even been involved in research projects and consulting with some pretty heavy hitters in the business world. I can tell you that I’ve yet to encounter the senior leader in an organization who feels that the playing field is level enough. They ask me and my colleagues how to recruit and retain more people of color and more women.
The deference you describe is more in my opinion “the subtle bigotry of low expectations.” If someone had taken Jayson Blair aside and taught him how to report the news ethically instead of kicking him upstairs, that would have done more for him and the African-American community than what ultimately happened. I think what I’d hope for is fair treatment: if an idea is bad, or performance is poor, deal with it in a fair manner. Don’t let someone think they’re successful by not giving authentic and truthful feedback.
Again, I tend to disagree because these issues are often correlated with race and ethnicity. They’re not as dichotomous as you make them out to be.
And that’s exactly the issue. I think he’s a wonderful speaker and has terrific potential, but he’s sorely lacking in experience. But a lot of well-meaning people are fixated on Obama’s charisma and not so well versed in what the reality would be for a political neophyte to take on leadership of this nation. Because analysts and journalists don’t want to be perceived as racist, I believe he’s received a huge pass on specifics about his stand on issues, and hopefully, as he assumes the role of serious contender/front runner, that scrutiny will come.
Honestly, if Obama went to the Senate, kicked some ass and got his hands dirty, any of the Dem candidates would beat his door down to ask him to be their running mate. He would then gain the experience and vision necessary to lead. And if he did a good job, which I think he would, I would be first in line to pin on my Obama '12 or '16 button.
Some people are repulsed by Hillary referencing her years as First Lady, but as being part of Clinton’s inner circle on policy and leading a number of initiatives, including health care, means a ton to me. I’m not buying the idea that you go to Washington to be an inspiration and “bring people together.” It’s a dirty business and you better know how to play. McCain knows how to play. I think Hillary does, and so does Bill Richardson. Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani? No way in hell could they crack heads in Washington. I think Obama could do it, but he’s about 4 or 8 years short in the experience department.
Well, if you insist on using that reasoning, it does matter because you could then say that those kind of people by which I assume you mean evil, racist Republicans, will make sure to vote against him (as opposed to staying home).
Either way its an unrealistic oversimplification. Not all Republicans are Neo-Nazis and not all Dems are diversity-loving hippies…
No, but Nixon’s Southern Strategy and its aftermath did succeed in driving most unreconstructed white racists out of the Democratic Party and into the Republican – in many cases, by way of Wallace’s short-lived American Independent Party, but the Pubs is where they ultimately wound up. You can (but, I am sure, never will) read the whole sordid story in Up From Conservatism, by Michael Lind, Chapter 5: “Whistling Dixie: The Southernization of the American Right.”
So, the point remains valid: At this stage in history, most Americans who would not vote for Obama because he is black are people would not vote for a Dem of any color in any case – not even for HRC, whom right-wingers persist in mischaracterizing as “socialist” even though she’s the most conservative Dem in the field. :rolleyes:
I’m not saying that all or most conservatives are nazis, I’m just saying that people who are nazis don’t tend to vote Democratic.