[QUOTE=John Mace]
Hillary has been declared dead by too many of the pundits already.
[/QUOTE]
Just setting up their headline stories for tomorrow about her amazing comeback. It’s easy to pontificate when you know weeks ahead what’s going to happen.
They gotta say something, you know - air time to fill.
The thing that’s really beginning to bother me is the way they all avoid the elephant of white racism in these kinds of states. They always talk about Obama “having trouble reaching working class whites,” or Hillary having their “support.” Hillary does not have their support. Hillary is just benefiting from from white trash racism. They are not going to vote for her in the GE. I also hate the suggestion that it’s a failing on Obama’s part that racists won’t vote for him. I wish that, just once, they’d at least acknowledge the racist element, especially when voters themselves are freely admitting to it.
That’s a whole lot of broad assertion there, Dio. Not atypical for you, certainly not on this subject, but not to be left unquestioned either.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
The thing that’s really beginning to bother me is the way they all avoid the elephant of white racism in these kinds of states. They always talk about Obama “having trouble reaching working class whites,” or Hillary having their “support.” Hillary does not have their support. Hillary is just benefiting from from white trash racism. They are not going to vote for her in the GE. I also hate the suggestion that it’s a failing on Obama’s part that racists won’t vote for him. I wish that, just once, they’d at least acknowledge the racist element, especially when voters themselves are freely admitting to it.
[/QUOTE]
Diogenes the Cynic , I think I understand where you’re coming from, but how do you take a campaign where 70% of the white voters go for Clinton and 90% of the black voters go for Obama and make the issue white racism? Clearly there’s a racial component to this, but racial<>racist.
Are the 90% of black voters casting their votes for Senator Obama also racist?
[QUOTE=Death of Rats]
and as an added bonus, his previous political experience pretty much makes Hillary assassination-proof.
snip
[/QUOTE]
Speaking of which, I think that’s the only compelling reason Obama would have for making HRC his VP. At least the wingnuts won’t be as itchy to cap him then.
[QUOTE=Bricker]
Are the 90% of black voters casting their votes for Senator Obama also racist?
[/QUOTE]
Black voters have proven their willingness to vote for white people time and again and again. They finally get a chance, after 200 years, to vote for a viable black candidate, what the hell do you think they’re going to do? This is a bullshit equivalency and you should be embarrassed for even trying it.
By the way, those same black voters voting for Obama would not do the same for most black Republicans. It’s not just that he’s black, but that he’s politically in accord statistically with how most blacks alway vote anyway.
Also, they aren’t voting for him because Hillary’s white. Blacks have voted for whites for a long time. However, Hillary’s white redneck supporters are voting for her specifically because Obama’s black. The exit polls are saying this.
So way to go Appalachia! Proudly holding on to everything that is wrong with America! Personally I’m glad that it’s being put in the spotlight so the rest of us can see just how fucked up this place is.
Yes, I’m sure they’re all very proud they’ve overcome their sexism and are now willing to strongly support a woman, as they have so solidly shown in all the Appalachia elections. That’s what the results show, don’t they? :dubious:
Or maybe the only conceivable reason to prefer Clinton *is * mere racism, after all. That’s been the implication of way too many posts even on this board in recent months (and any at all is *too * many, of course.
[QUOTE=An Arky]
Speaking of which, I think that’s the only compelling reason Obama would have for making HRC his VP. At least the wingnuts won’t be as itchy to cap him then.
[/QUOTE]
Well, if a nutcase gets an itchy finger, there’ll be a strong, intelligent woman ready to take over.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Black voters have proven their willingness to vote for white people time and again and again. They finally get a chance, after 200 years, to vote for a viable black candidate, what the hell do you think they’re going to do? This is a bullshit equivalency and you should be embarrassed for even trying it.
[/QUOTE]
You’re so full of shit I can smell you from here . . .
. . . they’ve only been able to vote for 138 years 
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
Yes, I’m sure they’re all very proud they’ve overcome their sexism and are now willing to strongly support a woman, as they have so solidly shown in all the Appalachia elections. That’s what the results show, don’t they? :dubious:
Or maybe the only conceivable reason to prefer Clinton *is * mere racism, after all. That’s been the implication of way too many posts even on this board in recent months (and any at all is *too * many, of course.
[/QUOTE]
Chip on shoulder, much?
:rolleyes:
I think the most important point is that the West Virginia decision will determine the outcome in 2012 rather than this election. We have already learned that from the media. H-Rod is a good term because it represents something like A-Rod in baseball. He is also a notorious prick but does a good job when he sets his mind to it. If she can pick up a $100+ million signing bonus, I think she is a lock for a championship Democratic team during the next series.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Black voters have proven their willingness to vote for white people time and again and again. They finally get a chance, after 200 years, to vote for a viable black candidate, what the hell do you think they’re going to do? This is a bullshit equivalency and you should be embarrassed for even trying it.
By the way, those same black voters voting for Obama would not do the same for most black Republicans. It’s not just that he’s black, but that he’s politically in accord statistically with how most blacks alway vote anyway.
[/QUOTE]
So is Senator Clinton.
Sorry, you can’t just call this a “bullshit equivalency” and shelve it. If it’s racist to choose a candidate on the basis of race, then those voters are racist. Pure and simple.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Black voters have proven their willingness to vote for white people time and again and again. They finally get a chance, after 200 years, to vote for a viable black candidate, what the hell do you think they’re going to do? This is a bullshit equivalency and you should be embarrassed for even trying it.
By the way, those same black voters voting for Obama would not do the same for most black Republicans. It’s not just that he’s black, but that he’s politically in accord statistically with how most blacks alway vote anyway.
[/QUOTE]
Hey, any black voters who’ve been trying to vote since 1619 get a free pass from me. Hell, I’ll go so far as to say that if you’ve ever been denied a chance to vote because you were black you can vote for anyone you want without me calling shenanigans because you selected a candidate based on race. But if you’re black and reached your majority after 1968 I’m going to insist you vote based on qualifications and not race, just like everybody else. Fair’s fair. If white people are dicks for voting based on race the same applies for black people. And I voted for Barack Obama once, and plan to do it again, probably twice counting 2012.
[QUOTE=Bricker]
So is Senator Clinton.
Sorry, you can’t just call this a “bullshit equivalency” and shelve it. If it’s racist to choose a candidate on the basis of race, then those voters are racist. Pure and simple.
[/QUOTE]
Those black voters would vote for Hillary if she were the nominee. 20% of the white voters are admitting their vote is racially motivated inthe exit pllls and saying they would never vore for Obama in the General. Black voters are not refusing to vote for a white candidate. It’s a bullshit equivalency.
[QUOTE=Bill Door]
Hey, any black voters who’ve been trying to vote since 1619 get a free pass from me. Hell, I’ll go so far as to say that if you’ve ever been denied a chance to vote because you were black you can vote for anyone you want without me calling shenanigans because you selected a candidate based on race. But if you’re black and reached your majority after 1968 I’m going to insist you vote based on qualifications and not race, just like everybody else. Fair’s fair. If white people are dicks for voting based on race the same applies for black people. And I voted for Barack Obama once, and plan to do it again, probably twice counting 2012.
[/QUOTE]
It’s a bullshit equivalency. Blacks are not refusing to vote for a white candidate, and the history behind this stuff make almost all these kinds of equivalencies completely illegitimate.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
It’s a bullshit equivalency. Blacks are not refusing to vote for a white candidate, and the history behind this stuff make almost all these kinds of equivalencies completely illegitimate.
[/QUOTE]
The white folks aren’t refusing to vote for a black candidate either. Put Colin Powell and Barack Obama in the race and you’ll see millions of people you claim won’t vote for a black person voting for a black person. They probably won’t vote for the black person you want them to vote for but I guarantee they’ll vote.
Honestly here’s what’s going on, Bricker
Essentially black people are voting for him because he’s black.
Some white people vote against him because he’s black.
Is it a bad thing to vote for someone because they are of your group?
We don’t condemn people from Illinois for voting Obama because that’s where they’re from.
It’s expected that you vote for your own kind when they come up. We don’t say that people from Illinois are being regionalists.
What if someone from San Francisco ran? They’d get a lot of people voting against them because they are from a “librul city” That’d be prejudiced in my opinion. But would it also be prejudice on the part of the San Franciscans who vote for him by a large margin?
Racism is the judging people based on race. But do we call someone who identifies positively with someone because of that as being racist? It’s a trickier subject when it’s a positive sentiment involved.
Similar with Hillary. I don’t begrudge the women that support her. I think it’s expected. But her benefiting from the racism of WVirginians does make me sick. I say this as someone who is firmly in the Obama camp, of course. But I have no problem with her greater share of women. It is especially true of women who identify with her.
Blacks aren’t voting against Hillary because she’s white. They’re voting for Obama because he’s black (among other reasons but let’s face it. It’s there).
Finally, voting for Obama as a black man is seen by a lot of black folks as a huge step for Civil Rights. You know, we still have a long way to go there. I think African Americans are justified in wanting to see a black President. It would be a 43:1 ratio if he won. The black vote is more likely to support Obama because it’s long overdue that they have representation in the White House for once. It’s an important event in a still very unequal nation. Hillary’s white voters in WV are simply voting against Obama because he’s black. They’ve said as much in the exit polls. It’s not because they identify with Hillary.
How can you compare a struggling minority’s efforts to have one of their own for President for the first time, as being similar to a majority’s attempt to close out the minority? It’s a huge difference. Has there ever been a black person elected to any office ever in West Virginia? I doubt it. People there are racist. The polls prove it. The blacks in other states have obviously voted for white people before. Bill Clinton, to name one.
PS. Travis Childers won in MS-01. This is a Republican 10+ district, (McCain) my dear friends (/McCain). This spells big trouble for the Republicans in August. It’s a huge vindication for Howard Dean because he’s the one who came up with the 50 state strategy. Good for him! People don’t realize that if there were no Dean, there’d be no Obama today. Obama is building off of Dean’s groundwork 4 years ago.
[QUOTE=Knorf]
Chip on shoulder, much?
:rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
Argument, much? :dubious: Or at all, for that matter?
You do know what a “comparison” is, I trust. If not, ask your English teacher to explain it to you. That will help you understand more advancec concepts, like “rationalization”.