Race vs. Gender (a USA political thread) - by ChickenMcOwnage
ZymeAddict on 6/2/2008 at 05:19
Quote Posted by ChickenMcOwnage
All in all, I've never been so excited about an election ever.
Why? Just because the two Democratic candidates have the novelty factor in the their favor this time around? Last I checked, having a black or a woman as president solely because they are a black or woman isn't really the most pressing need for our country at the moment.
Quote Posted by heretic
That's interesting, I've never felt quite so apathetic.
I think race and sex are such an issue this time around because the candidates are all so similiar across the board that race, sex and to a far lesser extant religion are all that make anybody really stand out.
I would never vote for nor against anyone for any of those factors though so in the end they do next to nothing as far as actually making any of them interesting IMO.
QFT
ercles on 6/2/2008 at 06:14
Quote Posted by Queue
I don't see color--I see only people! But now, I'm being reminded that I can't do that.
I dunno, I find it hard to believe that anyone could honestly not be slightly racist to a degree. Although I certainly am actively trying to change I accept the fact,I do admit to having undelying mistrusts and mild dislikes of certain races. I don't know if it's simply part of human nature (I know that it is certainly part of human nature to devalue other peoples' suffering, refusing to accept that they've had it that much harder than us).
I honestly can't say I've ever met somebody who wasn't racist, and although I'm still quite young I have gotten to know a fairly decent variety of backgrounds to the extent where I can rule out simply us middle class white guys being the only racists in the building.
Although this is certainly a difficult thing to accept, I think it is a much more necessary response to say "well yeah, I am racist, but why?", rather than trying to ignore it. Perhaps actually taking meaningful strides to identify sources of racist sentiments in community (I guess poor education and irresponsible media are two obvious culprits) would allow us to try and fix what is a generally horrible state of race relations on a grand scale.
Sypha Nadon on 6/2/2008 at 06:47
I think one problem I have with Obama is he tries to pander to too many people, be all things to everyone. Like that whole gospel concert tour he did awhile back. On one hand he had a gay pastor as part of it. But on the other, it also had Donnie McClurkin. What kind of mixed message is that? (and don't even get me started on his friendship with Rev. James Meeks, his "spiritual advisor").
Of course, he's still preferable to any of the Republican candidates, and I'd still vote for him... but some of his comments on establishing a "Kingdom right here on Earth" make me a little wary. Though the cynic in me can't help but ponder if his whole religious side is nothing more than a dog and pony show to get the rubes in the tent, as it were. He's certainly not as bad as Huckabee in that regard.
37637598 on 6/2/2008 at 08:27
Quote Posted by Queue
I never once thought of him as a black man--never.
Now this is just a downright lie! No-one in the United States of America can honestly say it didn't once cross their mind that this is the FIRST dark-skin man running for presidential election in US history! Otherwise the only sense I can make of your post is that you don't see him as a stereotypical black man and instantly consider him a threat to the formal and on-going status of American leadership, in which case, you would be making a biased judgment based on racial profiling.
Niether candidates are very impressive over the other in my opinion considering they both have made very stupid mistakes, and have used their race/gender to try and win people over. It's sick that this is what American elections have come to. I think they are both scum, and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the White House, unless it's for jantorial work, or as a tour guide.
With that said, I vote for Scots! He thinks rationally!
ChickenMcOwnage on 6/2/2008 at 08:42
Quote Posted by ZymeAddict
Why?
I'm excited because for the first time in, what, 30 years there are not one but several strong democrat candidates. I'm excited because Bush's 8 years is almost over and, even better, we might even have a decent president for a change. I don't know, maybe I'm just being naive, but I'm feeling pretty optimistic for a change.
Thirith on 6/2/2008 at 08:57
Quote Posted by 37637598
Niether candidates are very impressive over the other in my opinion considering they both have made very stupid mistakes, and have used their race/gender to try and win people over. It's sick that this is what American elections have come to. I think they are both scum, and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the White House, unless it's for jantorial work, or as a tour guide.
Scum? I'm glad you're not going totally overboard with your emotional response there...
Let's be honest - a campaign that is based only on rational argument would be doomed to fail pretty soon. By and large, people are so set in their ideology and so cynical about politics that rationality would be dismissed as phony and/or biased crap.
And, quite honestly, I think that the people who are smugly cynical about politics should consider that on the whole, the people elected in a democracy (let's ignore the 2000 election for the moment) reflect what We The People(tm) seem to want. GWB being re-elected says more about the electorate than about GWB.
Rogue Keeper on 6/2/2008 at 13:18
Quote Posted by ChickenMcOwnage
we might even have a decent president for a change.
No president is totally decent at the end of his term. Except for one, two perhaps. But they were shot. Actually, that makes them indecent too.
BrokenArts on 6/2/2008 at 14:05
The US is not ready for a black president, or a female president. I just don't see it happening. Too many good ol boys don't want no black man or no woman in the White House. Just not gonna happen. I'm placing bets on John McCain. Maybe someday things will change, just not right now.
Hier on 6/2/2008 at 14:06
Heh, you guys are gonna love this write-up by CNN.
(
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/05/super.issues/index.html)
So it's talking about the results, in a series of questions. Here are the questions CNN asks regarding the Democrat race. IN THIS ORDER.
How did the overall female vote play out?
How did African-Americans vote?
How did the Latino vote go?
How did white voters vote?
Is Obama still dominant among young voters?
Health care, Iraq and the economy: Still the same?
Which candidate's key quality was more important?
*Hier clears throat*
Memo to CNN:
I don't care how the women, African-Americans, Latinos, whites, or one-legged Romanian fire-eating midgets voted. I really, really don't. TELL ME WHO WON. Tell me where the candidates stand on the issues. Tell me which issues were considered more important to the voters.
Oh look, you asked a couple of the right questions. Down at the bottom. Once you read through the sensationalist crap.
"OMG LIKE AMERICA COULD TOTALLY ELECT A WOMAN!!! OMG OR A BLACK MAN!! OMG!! NEWS AT 11, MORE DETAILS ON HOW AMERICA COULD ELECT A WOMAN OR BLACK MAN COMING UP AFTER THESE COMMERCIALS."
SD on 6/2/2008 at 16:41
Quote Posted by BrokenArts
The US is not ready for a black president, or a female president. Too many good ol boys don't want no black man or no woman in the White House.
By and large, the people who wouldn't elect a bro or a ho to the presidency are going to be the people who wouldn't vote Democrat in the first place.
Still, I can't disagree with your summation that we're going to get a President McCain (and my money is already on that). If he was up against Obama, maybe it wouldn't be so cut and dried, but Billary - his likely opponent - hasn't got a chance.
