next »

[crazybatlady]

A guest on NPR tonight said that the reason the white majority is unwilling to vote for a black presidential candidate is because they are afraid a non-white President will "give away" the benefits of white privilege.

Some questions: do you think we won't have a black President soon?  Do you think that's because of racism or because of a fear of losing white privilege? (although of course these things are intertwined).  Don't most whites believe that they don't have privilege at all and just assume they are "better" because they just "work harder"?

This same show stated that a woman President is unlikely because of the "tough guy" image we expect of our Presidents. 

Thoughts?

cbl

[larryc]

I think we are ready for a black president right now, if the right candidate should come along.  Obama's book was flying off the table at the Kansas City Costco last week.  And six years ago many Republicans were begging Colin Powell to run. A black president is distinctly possible.

[crazybatlady]

Bocky is convinced that Obama and Clinton will split the vote and McCain will win.

There's terror in the bat household and the election crap hasn't even really started yet....

[menotti]

I read something that suggested (and had some data) Americans were more ready to accept a female president than a black one.  That surprised me. 

People are willing to be pretty explicit about sexism ("I don't think a woman can handle the stress."  "Women aren't tough enough to handle military decisions.") but a lot less explicit about racism. But it's a secret ballot, so who knows?

[arterie]

Obama will probably be like Dean, with a lot out of the box but will probably fizzle. He needs more experience - he has no executive experience at all.  He's a good speaker, but there is got to be something to back it up. As far as racism, I have to say that I have never seen any group more anti-black-candidate than Democrats when a black Republican runs.  Michael Steele in MD (when running for Lt. Gov & Senator) was called every name in the derogatory name in the book by "progressives" who otherwise would say its time for a black candidate for higher office. The same would be true if Condi Rice ran. This is certain, as it already started to happen to her over the past few years.

[prytania3]

I think it's much more likely that a black Republican or female Rebublican would get elected. I think Colin Powell would have stood a very good chance of winning. Who knows? Maybe we will get a black woman. Maybe her name will be Condaleeza Rice. Oh joy.

I think Obama will end up running as a VP candidate, primarily due to his age. I would rather see Mark Warner get the ticket than Hillary. She is no Bill and really too conservative and wishy washy for my tastes.

I don't think McCain will win (or even necessarily win the primary--they could go with Guiliani). I think the warmongering is over, though. Look for JEB Bush's son to make a play, however, not this term, but the next.

[scientiffikk]

1.  Some questions: do you think we won't have a black President soon? 

2.  Do you think that's because of racism or because of a fear of losing white privilege? (although of course these things are intertwined). 

3.  Don't most whites believe that they don't have privilege at all and just assume they are "better" because they just "work harder"?

4.  This same show stated that a woman President is unlikely because of the "tough guy" image we expect of our Presidents. 

Thoughts?

cbl

I numbered the questions in the quote box for ease of response.

1.  We might in 2008.  I hope so.

2.  The wording of this question assumes that I think we won't have a black president.  Which is not true.  So I will reword it:  Do you think racism or fear of loss of white privilege will keep a black person from being elected president?

Answer is I don't know.  For racism, I don't know racist people (that I know of) so I can't really estimate it's prevelance, especially among voters.  Also see 3.

3.  This question is loaded and implies that all whites think they are better than black people.  I don't think this is true.  For the first part of the question, yes, I agree most whites don't think they are priviliged.

4.  I don't know about this.  I think there will soon be a backlash against these tough guy politicians.

[brunhilde]

I think we are more likely to elect a Black man than a woman. Especially if we are still at war. Women have to walk a very fine line between tough but not a b*****. I think the country could elect a Black man in 2008, if he was the right man. I'm not sure Obama is, just because he lacks a lot of experience. I also think we could elect a Hispanic or Latino man, or Asian man.

[prytania3]

I think we are more likely to elect a Black man than a woman. Especially if we are still at war. Women have to walk a very fine line between tough but not a b*****. I think the country could elect a Black man in 2008, if he was the right man. I'm not sure Obama is, just because he lacks a lot of experience. I also think we could elect a Hispanic or Latino man, or Asian man.

Martin Sheen should run. He's actually Latino.

[trabb]

NPR also reported last week the results of a survey rating the acceptability/unacceptability of various traits of candidates.  A majority said that being black was an acceptable trait in a candidate.  A majority said that being a woman was acceptable.  A significant majority said that being Mormon was unacceptable.  However, the one that really stands out to me - of all the characteristics listed, the one that was most consistently rated "unacceptable" was "being a member of the Bush cabinet."  Apparently we'd rather have a black, Mormon woman than Michael Chertoff or Alberto Gonzalez.  For my money, that's a positive trend...

[ablewasi]

I think we are more likely to elect a Black man than a woman. Especially if we are still at war. Women have to walk a very fine line between tough but not a b*****. I think the country could elect a Black man in 2008, if he was the right man. I'm not sure Obama is, just because he lacks a lot of experience. I also think we could elect a Hispanic or Latino man, or Asian man.

Martin Sheen should run. He's actually Latino.

The Lation most likely to make it deep into the primaries is Bill Richardson.  He hasn't been run through the press meat grinder, yet, so who knows what skeletons await.  But he has excellent Democratic credentials and a base in the mountain West.



a

[ablewasi]

I am so happy to be getting started early on 2008.  I am a political geek and proud of it!  If you thought 2006 was a watershed year, you ain't seen nothin', yet.

Oh boy!!


a

[busyslinky]

We academics are a liberal lot and are very willing to accept a black or woman candidate.

But, if the democratic party puts up a woman or black candidate, it will lose and lose miserably.

I know a significant amount of people who will vote against skin color and will vote against gender.  Red states will be burning red if this occurs and blue states will be more purple (mixed in with red).  We academics have to really expand our world to see how vehemently supportive of the traditional heterosexual, male dominated, white principles that still exist within the U.S.

At this point speaking about Hillary or Obama is good talk in the media, but when it comes to people voting in that booth, reality will show a very different story.

I just don't want the Democrats to lose and if they do this, they will lose.

I thought the same with Dean and Kerry. 

I hope I am wrong.

[prytania3]

We academics are a liberal lot and are very willing to accept a black or woman candidate.

But, if the democratic party puts up a woman or black candidate, it will lose and lose miserably.

I know a significant amount of people who will vote against skin color and will vote against gender.  Red states will be burning red if this occurs and blue states will be more purple (mixed in with red).  We academics have to really expand our world to see how vehemently supportive of the traditional heterosexual, male dominated, white principles that still exist within the U.S.

At this point speaking about Hillary or Obama is good talk in the media, but when it comes to people voting in that booth, reality will show a very different story.

I just don't want the Democrats to lose and if they do this, they will lose.

I thought the same with Dean and Kerry. 

I hope I am wrong.

I think you're right, Busyslinky. That's why I would like to see a  Warner/Obama ticket.  I'm mulling over Richardson/Obama. He might could pull it off because Latinos have become a huge swing vote. What's more, the bulk of Latinos are in states with a lot of electoral votes: NY, CA, FL, IL, TX. Also, when motivated, Latinos can really get the voters out. Plus you'd have the black vote.

The question then becomes can a president win with its primary constituency being black and Latino voters, and academics.

[crazybatlady]

I'm glad to see that other folks are contemplating these issues, but here's my questions again: 

WHY won't the people in those red/purple states vote for a black person? 

Do you agree with the NPR guest that those people who wouldn't vote for a black person wouldn't do so because they are afraid to lose their white privilege, or is it more overt racism that keeps them from voting for a black person?