Will Clinton's "paint him black" strategy work?

Great Debates
41

[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
Obama would have had to gone out of his way not to paraphrase Malcolm X in that sentence. The relevant quote, via Spike Lee, is: “You’ve been had. You’ve been took. You’ve been hoodwinked. Bamboozled. Led astray. Run amok.”

Malcolm X also frequently referred to “the big con” and “foul tricks.”

So here’s what’s out:
Bamboozle
Hoodwink
Lead Astray
Had
Took
Conned
Tricked

Anybody else have an informal way to say “mislead”? Duped maybe? Can anyone check and see if Malcolm X ever used the word “duped”? :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]

Who uses bamboozled or hoodwinked?

42

[QUOTE=Anduril]
Who uses bamboozled or hoodwinked?
[/QUOTE]

Gosh, only black people, according to you.

43

[QUOTE=spoke-]
Gosh, only black people, according to you.
[/QUOTE]

According to me? I didn’t say anything remotely like that. But I’ll clarify.

Who uses it in succeeding sentences? Only politicians who want to evoke Malcolm X. Doesn’t have to be black. Obama is in the habit of evoking civil rights leaders in his campaign so that’s ok.

44

[QUOTE=Anduril]
Who uses it in succeeding sentences? Only politicians who want to evoke Malcolm X.
[/QUOTE]

Or people who just like the sound of that particular quote, or those particular words, because they are effective and catchy, regardless of who said them?

Reading the whole Malcolm X quote, I get a tiny stir of recognition in the back of my brain, but not much (been way too long since I’ve read anything by or about Malcolm X).

I would also say that even if Obama is making a big deal out of his blackness, there’s a huge difference between him saying he’s black and someone else trying to scaremonger with it. Just as there’s a huge difference between Mitt Romney saying he’s Mormon and Mike Huckabee trying to scaremonger with it.

45

[QUOTE=RTFirefly]

  1. There’ve been such a run of similar statements by top Clinton surrogates before now, that it’s hard for me to see it as not deliberate.
    [/QUOTE]
    Of course it’s deliberate. They’ve intentionally taken their cues from Karl Rove, and make no bones about it.

[QUOTE=Hippy Hollow]

It’s going to force White Americans, who have an irrational dislike for Jackson, though I think he’s done more good than harm for this country despite never holding elected office - to reconcile how they feel about him with how they feel about Obama.
[/QUOTE]
That’s just absurd. They’re two different people!

46

Question 1) Yes
Question 2) I have no clue. I am no good at predicting that stuff.

47

[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
I would also say that even if Obama is making a big deal out of his blackness, there’s a huge difference between him saying he’s black and someone else trying to scaremonger with it.
[/QUOTE]

Exactly. So what if Obama sometimes speaks in a way that correlates with a black cultural affiliation? I fail to see how that is the same thing as trying to use race to diminish an opponent’s popularity.

48

After thinking about this overnight, I’m a little more aggravated.

It seems some people want Obama to have all of the negatives (politically) of being black and none of the positives. Admittedly, I want it to be the other way around since I think all of the negatives are asinine and vicious.

49

[QUOTE=Anduril]

  1. I don’t see it as exploiting race or racism more than setting the expectations. If he can show that Jesse Jackson more or less performed as well as Obama, he can show that there’s nothing groundbreaking in what Obama has accomplished so far - “much ado about nothing”, in short. If there’s anyone who exploited race and race-baiting, it’s the Obama camp.

  2. Racists will not vote for Obama no matter what.
    [/QUOTE]

From what I can tell, you are calling Obama “the race baiter” because some campaign staffer creates a list that points out all the Clinton instances of race baiting and because some Black politicians (who have NOTHING to do with the Obama) criticize the Clinton for deminishing MLK and race baiting.

Do you have anything else, because if you don’t, then i think there is good reason for all the flak the Clintons have been catching on this issue.

50

[QUOTE=Anduril]
According to me? I didn’t say anything remotely like that. But I’ll clarify.

Who uses it in succeeding sentences? Only politicians who want to evoke Malcolm X. Doesn’t have to be black. Obama is in the habit of evoking civil rights leaders in his campaign so that’s ok.
[/QUOTE]

I think the real problem with Hillary is that she has no shame and will do whatever it takes to win. That includes subtle race baiting and spin, a whole lot of spin. The reason it doesn’t bother you is that you have drunk the cool aid, you have been Bamboozled, Hoodwinked, Led Astray, Had, Took, Conned, Tricked

51

It is the same old okey-doke*.

I actually can’t help but wonder- is Bill a closet Obama supporter? Perhaps he is trying to sabotage Hillary’s campaign from the inside down? Doubt it, but I still think he is and the entire Dem party have thought and are still a few steps ahead…

I think they figured it was inevitably going to get tossed Obama’s way at some point, if not now, then most definitely against the Rovian side of the GOP. Maybe the Dems(Clintons and all) were colluding to cut the Reps off at the pass of this tactic?
Look at the two ways it could have unfolded for them:

A)If it did play to the Clintons’ benefit, then so be, it they continue on their way to the nomination. Cold and cut throat, no doubt, but hey, to some folks a win’s a win. Fortunately it didn’t work out this way.

or

B)The way it did play out- Obama comes out looking like a lot stronger candidate having fought “the establishment” and won by going above the dirty politics; as well, it brought light to the issue and raised the voice of the rest of America declaring that policies, not race is what drives their votes. With the media saturation, people have either, quickly burned out on the race issue or have rallied against it(nothing seems to indicate they fell for it). Plus, it sets up the momentum and the stage for the wave of endorsements going into Nov.5th. On top of it all, and perhaps most importantly, it takes one of the biggest cards out of the hand of the GOP against the most electable candidate in the entire election.

The Clinton’s meanwhile, figure they have enough rep in the party and with the people to absorb the blow and make the gamble, or sacrifice, depending what you believe their motives to be.

In the end I think it was(is) inevitable, with the view most Americans(left and right alike) seem to have of Hillary, that Obama would be the nomination and I think he only comes out stronger because of all of this. For this I am grateful.

*Okey-doke a hiphop derived synonym for being conned. Honestly I do hesitate bring it up. I was surprised when I heard him use it, but contrary to Anduril, I was pleased that he did. I find it endearing, as it was used properly, naturally, and not merely pandering to the “x-treme, dude”.I think it helps the younger generation(of any color) to connect, to “get it” and allows them to better connect. Besides, what ever the terms used, they do not make his point any less true. Using synonyms to breath some life into a speech and connect with an audience is not even remotely comparable to the path Billary went down. I’m a 25yo white male “hiphop head”, so take this all for whatever the hell it’s worth.

52

Wow, clean up aisle 51. I see more than a few errors in there, but I really butchered that fourth sentence. To clarify:

Doubt it, but I still think he, and maybe even the entire Dem party, have thought things through and are still a few steps ahead of the game…
I now return you master debaters back to the games at hand.

53

[QUOTE=Damuri Ajashi]
I think the real problem with Hillary is that she has no shame and will do whatever it takes to win. That includes subtle race baiting and spin, a whole lot of spin. The reason it doesn’t bother you is that you have drunk the cool aid, you have been Bamboozled, Hoodwinked, Led Astray, Had, Took, Conned, Tricked
[/QUOTE]

Give me a factual example. What was racist about Bill Clinton’s comment? It was clear from the context that he was merely trying to show that there’s nothing groundbreaking in Obama’s performance in South Carolina. Now, you may disagree with that, but that doesn’t make it racist. It’s very typical of Obama supporters to frame every issue this way - it is disgusting. Bill Clinton’s fairy tale comment or Hillary’s LBJ comment were not racist. It’s the reaction to the statements that IS definitely racist. (Framing everything as racist is a way to halt any criticism). Very effective in the US, because everyone there is so plagued with White Guilt. I’m not white and I’m not in America. And I can call a spade a spade. Race-baiting? The Obama camp mastered the art.

54

But why did he bring up the subject of Jesse Jackson? What did Jesse have to do with Obama? Actually, they are very different. The Rev. Jackson’s success in Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana and Mississippi primaries in 1984 came as a somewhat last minute surprise. Mondale was the front runner from the beginning and never lost that position. John Glenn was second for a long time and then faded when Gary Hart came on the scene. Jackson had the support of many whites and blacks, but he was never given much of a chance of winning.

His run in 1988 was viewed by many to be for the purpose of making certain that concerns of the black community were considered in the Democratic platform. It was, I think, Super Tuesday before Jackson won any states.

Unlike Jackson, Obama has been considered a serious threat since he decided to run. (Actually, I think he has been Hillary’s worst nightmare since he gave that spectacular address at the Democratic Convention. Yes, he uses some of the same techniques that Malcolm X used. Jack Kennedy used them. Winston Churchill used them.) Obama’s successes began early and his endorsements are beginning to get interesting. To compare Obama to Jesse Jackson at this point in terms of their actual accomplishments is to bring Obama down.

I am not speaking ill of Jesse Jackson to say that. I’m just looking at the numbers. They don’t compare. So why mention Jesse?

What way? Every issue? I live here and I haven’t had enough exposure to Obama supporters to know what’s “typical.” Almost everyone I know is still undecided. If you don’t believe me, just ask the typical Doper.

55

[QUOTE=Anduril]
Give me a factual example. What was racist about Bill Clinton’s comment? It was clear from the context that he was merely trying to show that there’s nothing groundbreaking in Obama’s performance in South Carolina. Now, you may disagree with that, but that doesn’t make it racist. It’s very typical of Obama supporters to frame every issue this way - it is disgusting. Bill Clinton’s fairy tale comment or Hillary’s LBJ comment were not racist. It’s the reaction to the statements that IS definitely racist. (Framing everything as racist is a way to halt any criticism). Very effective in the US, because everyone there is so plagued with White Guilt. I’m not white and I’m not in America. And I can call a spade a spade. Race-baiting? The Obama camp mastered the art.
[/QUOTE]
If he simply wanted to handwave Billary’s loss in South Carolina without bringing up race, John Edwards would’ve been a fun name to mention. Instead he went right to Jackson.

And as far as the Obama camps race baiting, your claims are just as specious. Barack used the word “bamboozled,” mirroring the word usage of Malcolm X. To me, that’s just as solid as Bill’s choosing of Jackson over Edwards. Do you have any more?

56

[QUOTE=Anduril]
Give me a factual example. What was racist about Bill Clinton’s comment? It was clear from the context that he was merely trying to show that there’s nothing groundbreaking in Obama’s performance in South Carolina. Now, you may disagree with that, but that doesn’t make it racist. It’s very typical of Obama supporters to frame every issue this way - it is disgusting. Bill Clinton’s fairy tale comment or Hillary’s LBJ comment were not racist. It’s the reaction to the statements that IS definitely racist. (Framing everything as racist is a way to halt any criticism). Very effective in the US, because everyone there is so plagued with White Guilt. I’m not white and I’m not in America. And I can call a spade a spade. Race-baiting? The Obama camp mastered the art.
[/QUOTE]

Why wasn’t it groundbreaking? Because Obama is black and Jesse jackson was black? I said it was subtle.

You make such a big deal of the use of words and phrases used by Malcolm X (which I don’t think I would have recognized unless Obama said “By Any Means Necessary”) as some sort of shorthand that Obama is using to remind people he is black. Why isn’t the use of the phrase “fairy tale” reminiscent of the doubt many African Americans feel about the electability of a black man to the presidency? You seem to be using two measuring sticks to measure spin and subtle use of language, one for Obama and a different one for Hillary.

Obama had little to do with Hilary’s dimunition of Marin Luther King Jr. Hillary shot her own foot in an attempt to distinguish inspiration from perspiration. She was soundly criticized by people who were not even remotely connected to Obama’s campaign because she shoved her foot so far down her throat she could kick her own ass.

57

[QUOTE=Harborwolf]
If he simply wanted to handwave Billary’s loss in South Carolina without bringing up race, John Edwards would’ve been a fun name to mention. Instead he went right to Jackson.

And as far as the Obama camps race baiting, your claims are just as specious. Barack used the word “bamboozled,” mirroring the word usage of Malcolm X. To me, that’s just as solid as Bill’s choosing of Jackson over Edwards. Do you have any more?
[/QUOTE]

I will probably still vote for Hillary if she wins the primary but I am getting closer and closer to the point where I might just stay at home on election night if she wins. It is already at the point where I might be holding my nose to vote for Hillary.

58

[QUOTE=Harborwolf]
If he simply wanted to handwave Billary’s loss in South Carolina without bringing up race, John Edwards would’ve been a fun name to mention. Instead he went right to Jackson.
[/QUOTE]

What’s wrong with bringing up race, though? Is it so horrible to say that being black helped Obama win South Carolina, or that blacks are more likely to vote for a black candidate, like Obama (or Jackson)?

59

[QUOTE=Captain Amazing]
What’s wrong with bringing up race, though? Is it so horrible to say that being black helped Obama win South Carolina, or that blacks are more likely to vote for a black candidate, like Obama (or Jackson)?
[/QUOTE]
That’s where I’m hung up on as well. Doesn’t quite seem racist. Greasy, but not quite racist. IIRC, Obama did nearly or just as well with white voters as Hillary did so dismissing the victory as a matter of race is certainly inaccurate, overly dismissive, and a sure sign that the Clintons are taking the black voting block for granted should they win the nomination.

60

Why didn’t he just say, “Obama only got votes because he’s black.”

Diminish his victory as well as belittle the people who voted for him. Yeah, that may not be racist. But the jerkishness is still there (especially since it’s an answer to an unasked question).

When Obama says “Hilary only won fill-in-the-blank state because she’s a woman”, maybe I’ll start hating him too.