I’m sure in NYC the numbers are lower, too. And you’re right, they’re not going at night, but they’re still physically carrying cash to the bank.
And I’m sure you’re not going to rob someone taking money to the bank. But if you’re carrying money to the bank, is someone going to rob you?
Your call. I’m just saying, while things have gotten better, things happen. People have guns, even in the City. Where I worked, I saw all sorts of interesting things.
(Substance abuse rehabilitation centers, now, AIDS treatment programs, previously.) Not the best neighborhoods, but where people needed help.
I think that Obama’s appeal lies in his ability to create a broader vision for America that includes all races, cultural backgrounds, etc. He embodies that in his bi-ethnic background, having been raised outside the US, and so forth. Edward’s message is far narrower, and is aimed at the losses suffered by the poor and working-class Americans in the past 30 or more years. While this is a potent message, its appeal is more narrow and although he is very articulate, his very polished image is anything but working-class. Obama is a rare individual, who came up from a very average background and got scholarships to Harvard, but did not make a huge fortune as a torte lawyer. He stayed on the south side of Chicago, married locally, wrote a couple books and got into Illinois politics. While Edwards is undoubtedly sincere (and I supported Edwards until he withdrew), Obama would do more to change the image of the US abroad. He not only talks the part, but embodies it. But without a strong Democratic majority in both houses of Congress, not Democratic president can do that much. We also should remember that LBJ accomnplished a great deal, but made the fatal mistake of getting us bogged down in VietNam, destroying the credibility of the Democrats until Watergate made the Republicans seem even worse.
If the Tubenets had been around in 1984, you could have found exactly the same kinds of things being said about Mario Cuomo, and for exactly the same reason. If Edwards had taken elocution lessons, or hired a better speechwriter, perhaps the OP wouldn’t be wondering about him.
As we’ve seen in the recent primaries, though, at some point articulateness’ effectiveness does wear off. People get used to hearing it, remember that they’re picking a President and not a preacher, and start looking for substance. The “bitter” start sooner, even up front, and many of the rest of us follow. DSeid, to claim that, despite the wide acceptance of affirmative action in this society, not one single white person has felt it appropriate to extend that concept to the Presidency is foolish. Here’s Michelle Obama on that point:
Not even the woman candidate could do that, apparently.
“Your honor, members of the jury, this case has many layers to it, as I’ve outlined previously. The defendant’s final act was just the iciding on the cake. The facts here speak for themselves and the charge rises to a level that calls for nothing less that a gulity verdict. I rest my cake, I mean my case.”
Beautiful! I chose not to comment, but you did it perfectly.
Of course, Edwards’ success is all the more amazing when you realize there’s a high turnover among torte lawyers. It’s not exactly a creampuff of a job.
Not like Obama can. The Clinton family is as white as all the previous First Families have been. Michelle wasn’t just talking about the president.
I’ll now point out the real obvious: the Clinton family has already stood on that stage on inaguration day. To many people (me included), there’s a greater sense of deja vu in that image than dramatic, jaw-dropping change.
In comparison to what Hillary herself has been doing with gender, Michelle’s comment makes me yawn. So I’m not really wondering you’re getting at?
I think some whites may be disposed to helping the black guy win. At the same time, I think some men may be disposed to helping the woman win. In terms of which side is doing more wooing for the AA vote, I have to say the Clinton camp is. I say this not only because I’ve seen Hillary talk about being a woman and representing women much more than I’ve seen Obama do so with respect to being black. But read Hillary’s quote above and imagine Obama saying something like this about being the first black president. He’s too political astute to write something like that.
If the Dem nomination is indeed already decided, this election is, among many other things, a black vs. a white. If both candidates are willing to appeal to race, even implicitly, then let’s not pretend otherwise.
I still don’t understand your point, though. Do you think the two candidates have used race the same way, to the same degree? I think appealing to the AA vote is a little different than appealing to the racist vote, but perhaps that debatable.
I personally hate the proliferation of guns. I think it is horrible that we have so many gun deaths and armed robberies. I think we would be a lot better off if they were not everywhere.
But ,that ship has sailed. they have been all over America for over a century. They are not going anywhere and I know it. I spend no time thinking about taking guns away. So do not think all the anti guns are actually plotting on confiscation. Many realize it is not happening and not worth long debate. Gun lovers get all panicky if a politician says he does not love guns. Guns are not going anywhere and pols know it.