[QUOTE=xtisme]
I said it was complex. However, the fact that he is black isn’t the ONLY reason he is considered a bit of an elitist by people…and the fact that he is black isn’t the ONLY reason some don’t want to vote for him.
[/QUOTE]
He’s not considered an elitist because he is Black, but I think the reasons people peg him as an elitist are due in part to the role his race has played in his life, and the role race plays on society.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
I think that his success has more to do with what and who he is than the color of his skin, if that is what you are getting at there. I think it’s admirable that he is successful in spite of the fact that he is black.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry. My last post was awkwardly phrased. I’m not saying he did well in law school because of his race. Just that a Black guy who wants to do well (ie. President of Harvard Law Review) in a upper-crust, predominately White school must acclimate to their surroundings in a ways that can come across as elitist to some.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Certainly…guess what? It make white people palatable to other whites to. It helps hispanic people merge in (why do you think I tried so hard to lose my hispanic accent? I worked for literally years so that my spoken English sounds…well, exactly like your’s probably does, without a trace of hispanic lilt).
[/QUOTE]
Yes, but it is not the necessary prerequisite it is for minorities, and in particular, Black people, to be successful.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
To be sure…but here is the thing. He IS an elitist. The fact that he’s a black elitist puts him more under a microscope than some, but frankly most people who come across to blue collar types as elitists don’t generally do well in that crowd whether they be lilly white or black, brown or blue.
[/QUOTE]
Here’s where we disagree. By the literal definition, you are right. But, “elitism”, just like the word “liberal”, means far more in political discussion than it’s dictionary definition. Does he think he’s better than (many) other people? Probably, or else he wouldn’t be running for president. Is he an “elitist” in political terms? No. He is not “out of touch” with the public, and has a far better grasp on what normal people go though than either McCain, or Clinton. This idea that a guy who just finished paying school loans a few years ago is more out of touch than two other people who have a net worth over $100 million, and have been rich and in the public eye for decades is laughable. When was the last time Clinton went anywhere without SS protection? Hell, McCain has his own plane. The fact that these charges even stick to Obama is truly astounding.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Why do you think folks like GW and Clinton try so hard to be ‘just folks’? Billy boy is a Rhodes Scholar for gods sake…yet he comes across as hillbilly, someone who you could play pool with or have a beer with. Personally I find that folksy shit repulsive when it’s so obviously an affectation…but then I’m an elitist too. Which would be who Obama appeals to me so much, considering I like the man, respect the man, and disagree with his politics.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. But could Obama really pull that off even if he wanted to? Without unimpeachable academic credentials, he would be dismissed as an intellectual lightweight. Since he has them, he is a highbrow egghead intellectual. If he weren’t as eloquent, he would be another face in the crowd. Since he is, he’s a smooth-talking empty-suit liberal. It’s a fine line that is even finer for a Black candidate. It’s easy for Clinton to get folksy. The accent local to where she is campaigning comes out, and she starts to build good will based on their shared whiteness. Obama cannot do that, EVER. He can’t be the guy you want to have a beer with because the people we are talking about (generally) don’t have beers with many Black people, especially ones named Barack . She can blend in and posture in ways that are virtually impossible for him to do. The other day, she had rally while standing in the bed of a pickup truck. :dubious:
I actually helped canvass for Obama in PA a few weeks back. Most of the canvassing was done in a working class Italian neighborhood in Philly. There wasn’t much outright hostility, but a number of the people I spoke to made it apparent to me that I was out of place in that area; that I didn’t belong. Before I had even said a word, it was clear to them that I was an interloper. That’s probably 1% what Obama has to face before he even opens his mouth.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Did I say it has ‘little to do with race’? If so then I misspoke (though I don’t recall saying that).
[/QUOTE]
My apologies if I mischaracterized your position.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Honestly I think that the whole racial angle is a boondoggle and a way to look ahead for excuses if Obama doesn’t win (which I highly doubt myself…I still think he’s going to walk away with the thing, assuming he gets past Clinton). To my mind it’s a wash between people who are voting for Obama BECAUSE he’s black and those who won’t vote for him because he’s black. Which leave a lot of folks who are voting for him because they actually agree with his message, respect him and actually think he will make a good President. YMMV…that’s how I see it.
-XT
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know about that. I still think he will win too, but it has been well established that a Black candidate will have a much harder time being elected. I don’t know if it is particularly meaningful to attempt to quantify the numbers of people who vote based on race (one way or the other), but I think it’s an important discussion to have in general.
