# Will bigots cost Obama the presidency? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 21, 2008, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503 "2008-09-21T00:40:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![hansel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6bbea6/32.png) [@hansel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hansel)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/61 "2008-09-21T20:04:45Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > But voting for Obama simply because he’s black _is_ discriminating against someone based on their race, that someone being McCain. And I don’t know where you get ‘the watered-down definition race is a factor’ from, certainly not from my posts. I’m arguing against voting for or against someone based \*purely \*on race. You’ve yet to demonstrate that significant numbers of blacks are voting for Obama _purely_ because of his race–meaning, if Obama were white, they’d vote for McCain instead as their preferred candidate. Blacks overwhelmingly vote Democratic to start with–it shouldn’t be surprising that, for some blacks, the fact that Obama is black is a sufficient additional factor to cause them to switch their votes, yielding perhaps a somewhat higher number of black voters favoring Obama than they would a generic Democrat. You’ve created a black strawman here: the black voter for whom Obama’s race is the entirety of his reason for voting for him. Demonstrate that, if Obama weren’t black (or a white Democrat had won the nomination), the black vote would go overwhelmingly for McCain, and you might have a point of racism in voting patterns. Here’s a question: imagine a black voter who’s a Democrat, for whom Clinton and Obama are about equally preferable based on the issues and their apparent likelihood of winning the general. If that black voter casts his vote for Obama because of a secondary preference to see the first black president, is that racist? ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/62 "2008-09-21T20:13:28Z")
I think there is a short-cut in the reasoning here. If someone says “\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ are more intelligent//trustworthy/harder-working than \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ to be president, so I am voting for \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_”, that’s racist, because it’s assuming that race is an indicator of intelligence or trustworthiness or work ethic. However, if someone says “I don’t think \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ is more qualified to be president, but I think the symbolic importance of having a (black/woman/poor person/whatever) is more important than their actual qualifications”, that’s kinda stupid, but it’s not racist or bigoted, because it’s not assuming anything about the person based on their race/gender/class. You are voting for them because of their race/gender/class, not because of your assumptions of what that race/gender/class _means_. Again, I think this would be a stupid reason for a single-issue voter, but if you had two very similar candidates (which we don’t), I can see letting the symbolism be the tie-breaker, and I don’t think that would be bigoted per se. Race issues, especially, are taking a tremendous toll on this country, and if someone thinks the symbolism of a minority president would resolve those issues, I can see that as something someone could legitimately vote for. ---
**Author:** ![Plan\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Plan\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plan_B)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/63 "2008-09-21T20:16:13Z")
I think what bothers me the most about this poll is that there is no attempt to poll blacks about their attitudes. For instance, how many blacks have negative attitudes about whites? Or about blacks? How about this quote: "Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they ‘try harder.’ " What percentage of blacks agree? While we’re at it, could you name any group that would not be better off if they try harder? But if you had questions like that you could at least make some meaningful statements about differences between the groups. But as I learned in statistics, if you don’t have a control group, don’t waste the paper and other people’s time with your nonsense. The authors started out with an agenda, which they at least admitted, and proceeded from there. It’s just bullshit, and a cheap attempt to get more whites to vote for Obama because they don’t want to be called racists. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/64 "2008-09-21T20:22:35Z")
So…if someone votes for Obama because he’s black then that’s cool. but if someone votes against Obama because he’s black then this is racism? I suppose then if someone votes for McCain because he’s white that this is then cool by this logic. Personally I think the small percentage of people who vote against Obama solely because of race will be balanced by people who are voting for him because of his race and the ‘historic’ nature of the election. Guess we’ll see, but I bet there are historic levels of voting this time…and I bet a higher percentage of blacks (and other minorities) vote in this election than ever before. this focus on the racist angle is, IMHO, looking to pre-empt excuses on the off chance Obama loses. -XT ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/65 "2008-09-21T20:33:09Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > So…if someone votes for Obama because he’s black then that’s cool. but if someone votes against Obama because he’s black then this is racism? I suppose then if someone votes for McCain because he’s white that this is then cool by this logic. > > Personally I think the small percentage of people who vote against Obama solely because of race will be balanced by people who are voting for him because of his race and the ‘historic’ nature of the election. Guess we’ll see, but I bet there are historic levels of voting this time…and I bet a higher percentage of blacks (and other minorities) vote in this election than ever before. > > this focus on the racist angle is, IMHO, looking to pre-empt excuses on the off chance Obama loses. > > -XT I didn’t say it was cool, I said it was stupid. I just don’t think it’s bigoted if “blackness” (or whiteness) is, in itself, the reason–bigotry is about what you think race means. I’d say the same thing if someone voted for McCain because they thought foreign leaders wouldn’t take a black man seriously, and so he couldn’t be an effective president. As long as they don’t think that race is actually an indicator of ability, I don’t think it’s bigoted. Though it may well be dumb. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/66 "2008-09-21T20:44:02Z")
> [@gaffa](#): > > I’d be interested in reading the results of a poll conducted entirely by automated calling (“Press 1 if you are a registered voter”). This is covered in the article: > [@](#): > > The AP-Yahoo poll used the unique methodology of Knowledge Networks, a Menlo Park, Calif., firm that interviews people online after randomly selecting and screening them over telephone. Numerous studies have shown that people are more likely to report embarrassing behavior and unpopular opinions when answering questions on a computer rather than talking to a stranger. Fascinating stuff. As a grad student (in computer science), I was incidentally involved in some research like this; specifically, concerning copyright and file-sharing. It turns out that people are _much_ more likely to admit to file-sharing (and cheating also, as uncovered by a related study) when taking an automated questionnaire as opposed to a human questioner. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/67 "2008-09-21T21:26:12Z")
[QUOTE=Manda JO] I didn’t say it was cool, I said it was stupid. I just don’t think it’s bigoted if “blackness” (or whiteness) is, in itself, the reason–bigotry is about what you think race means. I’d say the same thing if someone voted for McCain because they thought foreign leaders wouldn’t take a black man seriously, and so he couldn’t be an effective president. As long as they don’t think that race is actually an indicator of ability, I don’t think it’s bigoted. Though it may well be dumb. [/QUOTE] My apologies…I was actually responding more to DtC’s comments earlier in this thread (and in a few others where he made similar claims). Personally I think you are wrong however…if someone votes solely because of ‘blackness’ or ‘whiteness’ then they ARE being both bigoted and racist. I do agree with you that it’s dumb as well. -XT ---
**Author:** ![outlierrn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/outlierrn/32/3005_2.png) [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/68 "2008-09-21T21:29:15Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > You really don’t ubderstand this? > > Do you not see a difference between trying to get a minority into an all white country club and trying to keep one out? I asked you to elaborate because I didn’t understand your soundbite, which I note that you didn’t bother to do, but I think others did. So, you’re saying that if some blacks main reason to vote for Obama is to break the glass ceiling for black polititians then that’s different than voting agaist him because he’s black? Is that it? ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/69 "2008-09-21T21:32:30Z")
> [@hansel](#): > > You’ve yet to demonstrate that significant numbers of blacks are voting for Obama _purely_ because of his race–meaning, if Obama were white, they’d vote for McCain instead as their preferred candidate. I think it would be easier to demonstrate that significant numbers of black people are voting _at all_ because Obama is running. ---
**Author:** ![Death\_of\_Rats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a6a055/32.png) [@Death\_of\_Rats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Death_of_Rats)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/70 "2008-09-21T21:51:33Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > This poll nests tightly with the OP of why is the election so close when the repubs have screwed things up so badly. Many are surprised it is close but do not want to face the real reason. Clinton would be picking out new white house china if she managed to beat out Obama. Funny, she could not even get enough Democrats to support her. How would she get a bunch of Republicans to switch? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/71 "2008-09-21T22:38:04Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Once again, you’re arguing justification for racism. Nonetheless the act itself is still racist. zNo, it isn’t. Sorry. You should probably look the word up in the dictionary because you don’t know what you’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/72 "2008-09-21T22:41:52Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > So…if someone votes for Obama because he’s black then that’s cool. but if someone votes against Obama because he’s black then this is racism? Voting to keep a group outside the tent is racism, voting to get a group in is not. It’s really quite simple. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/73 "2008-09-21T22:43:47Z")
> [@outlierrn](#): > > I asked you to elaborate because I didn’t understand your soundbite, which I note that you didn’t bother to do, but I think others did. > > So, you’re saying that if some blacks main reason to vote for Obama is to break the glass ceiling for black polititians then that’s different than voting agaist him because he’s black? Is that it? Of course. Is it really so hard to understand the difference between voting for equality and voting against it? ---
**Author:** ![Plan\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Plan\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plan_B)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/74 "2008-09-21T22:52:11Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Voting to keep a group outside the tent is racism, voting to get a group in is not. It’s really quite simple. That would be true if there’s infinite room within the tent. So if you want to do outreach so that more blacks play bridge or listen to Frank Sinatra, that’s cool with me. But if there’s one seat in the tent, and you say let’s vote for the black guy, well that’s just plain denial to stop thinking about the consequences of your actions at that point. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/75 "2008-09-21T23:13:10Z")
> [@Plan\_B](#): > > That would be true if there’s infinite room within the tent. So if you want to do outreach so that more blacks play bridge or listen to Frank Sinatra, that’s cool with me. But if there’s one seat in the tent, and you say let’s vote for the black guy, well that’s just plain denial to stop thinking about the consequences of your actions at that point. There are currently 43 people in the tent. All of them are white. You’re not an oppressed minority. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/76 "2008-09-21T23:16:37Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > zNo, it isn’t. Sorry. You should probably look the word up in the dictionary because you don’t know what you’re talking about. I fear, **Diogenes** , that you’re the one with the elastic definition of racism. You clearly feel, with Humpty Dumpty, that _words mean what I wnat them to mean_. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/77 "2008-09-21T23:20:14Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > I fear, **Diogenes** , that you’re the one with the elastic definition of racism. You clearly feel, with Humpty Dumpty, that _words mean what I wnat them to mean_. Look up the definition. Seriously. ---
**Author:** ![BrainFireBob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e495f1/32.png) [@BrainFireBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainFireBob)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/78 "2008-09-21T23:24:08Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > I fear, **Diogenes** , that you’re the one with the elastic definition of racism. You clearly feel, with Humpty Dumpty, that _words mean what I wnat them to mean_. Agreed. From [Dictionary.com](http://Dictionary.com) (it was convenient) –noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others. 2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination. 3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races. Diogenes is either a) Falsely forcing #3 as the only definition, or b) Omitting “usually” from the first definition. Both are ignorant. Positive racism is still racism. So is positive racist action. EDIT: His didactic “LALALALA I can’t hear you no it’s not!” is bigotry, btw, a refusal to acknowledge, etc. ---
**Author:** ![outlierrn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/outlierrn/32/3005_2.png) [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/79 "2008-09-21T23:26:25Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Of course. Is it really so hard to understand the difference between voting for equality and voting against it? Of course not, but that’s not what you said, you said ‘there’s a difference between trying to get somebody into a tent and trying to keep them out.’ I’m sure your meaning was clear to you but it wasn’t to me. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2008, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503/80 "2008-09-21T23:39:21Z")
> [@BrainFireBob](#): > > Agreed. > > From [Dictionary.com](http://Dictionary.com) (it was convenient) > > –noun > > 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others. > 2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination. > 3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races. > > Diogenes is either a) Falsely forcing #3 as the only definition, or b) Omitting “usually” from the first definition. Both are ignorant. > > Positive racism is still racism. So is positive racist action. > > EDIT: His didactic “LALALALA I can’t hear you no it’s not!” is bigotry, btw, a refusal to acknowledge, etc. Blacks voting for Obama includes none of those motivations. I win. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bigots-cost-obama-the-presidency/464503.md?page=5)