Race vs. Gender (a USA political thread) - by ChickenMcOwnage
Spaztick on 7/2/2008 at 10:37
Oh god, that encapsulates the entire election.
Stitch on 7/2/2008 at 20:13
Quote Posted by heretic
This isn't anything new, candidates that might truly bring about change one way or the other do not stand a chance. That's why folks like Kucinich and Paul are so far out there, not planting themselves in issues that have been, and shall remain tied up in congress for decades.
The fact that the clown car candidates don't have a chance doesn't dismiss the sheer power of what's going on right now. Both the Democratic and Republican races at the moment are massive detours off the beaten path, the path that was previously cynically accepted as the only way our two party system functions.
You should be paying more attention.
Quote Posted by BrokenArts
The US is not ready for a black president, or a female president.
A very 2007 mindset, thankfully outdated. So far the Bradley effect hasn't touched Obama, although it remains to be seen how this would play out in a national election.
With Romney out this is shaping up to be a fascinating race, as McCain was the only Republican candidate who can possibly go toe to toe with Obama on a national level. If the old Democratic faithful refuse to yield to new party youth and independents and Hillary gets the nom, they will be saddled with a divisive candidate that doesn't stand a chance (due mostly to opportunistic political wind-surfing, bitter 90's baggage, and resentment of her nasty campaign tactics).
Also, in the interest of full disclosure: I have contributed to the Obama campaign both in time and money. I will spend the next few weeks making phone calls and canvassing my state. I speak from a biased perspective.
Aerothorn on 7/2/2008 at 20:40
Quote Posted by SD
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.
This is the traditional wisdom on my campus. Personally, I don't buy it -and if Clinton does get the nomination, I hope to make some money off it, as all the (young) people I know are completely sure that McCain will win, and they're lining up to bet me some cash. So sure, you can all laugh at me when I lose some money over it - but on the flipside, if I'm right, I beat Stitch for once :D
Swiss Mercenary on 7/2/2008 at 21:06
Hillary's the worst thing that could happen to the Democratic campaign... She's a female McCain, with a less solid track record (LUL UNCERTAINTY). She really doesn't deliver anything that he couldn't, and is a wonderful example of how the Democrats are trying their best to look just like Republicans.
Obama, on the other hand, is unlikely to get the latino vote... Which could cost him California on the presidential elections. And if he loses California, he's done.
heretic on 7/2/2008 at 22:46
Quote Posted by Stitch
The fact that the clown car candidates don't have a chance doesn't dismiss the sheer power of what's going on right now. Both the Democratic and Republican races at the moment are massive detours off the beaten path, the path that was previously cynically accepted as the only way our two party system functions.
You should be paying more attention.
The path whose traditionally right and left branches are edging dangerously towards eachother, inching us ever closer to a
one party system in all but party affiliation.
This bizzaro world political atmosphere that provides for Republicrat Mccain to vociferously refuse to deny claims that he is strongly considering Democan Lieberman as VP is not clue enough even when his support from conservatives is allready minimal?
There is a well documented pattern of less Americans voting in every subsequent presidential election. If you don't think that this is due to a large degree by the apathy brought on by this very problem than it's you who should be paying closer attention.
I grant you that the appointing of judges is still left, the question is to what degree it will really matter. I rather doubt that Mccain's picks would differ much from Obama's, at least to any pertinent degree. It's a matter of record that neither Mccain nor Obama have actually
done much to suggest otherwise.
Ghostly Apparition on 7/2/2008 at 23:56
Quote Posted by Swiss Mercenary
Obama, on the other hand, is unlikely to get the latino vote... Which could cost him California on the presidential elections. And if he loses California, he's done.
You're basing this on what? What you hear the pundits say? The pundits have been wrong on just about everything so far. The pundits said Hillary would take California by a large margin, last I checked it was a virtual tie with Hillary getting a small margin of victory.
I know a few Latinos that live right here in (you guessed it) California. none of them voted for Hillary. The primary was held here already and they both got a substantial number of delegates.
paloalto90 on 8/2/2008 at 00:09
Quote:
The fact that the clown car candidates don't have a chance doesn't dismiss the sheer power of what's going on right now. Both the Democratic and Republican races at the moment are massive detours off the beaten path, the path that was previously cynically accepted as the only way our two party system functions.
It would actually be detours off the beaten path if their ideas were radically different from the norm but they are not.Unless your basing it on the fact that just blackness and femalness warrants your supposition none of which grants character or creativity to the political arena.
My aunt is acquainted with people who have done security work for the Clintons and say they are the most arrogant individuals they know.
Pyrian on 8/2/2008 at 01:01
Quote Posted by Ghostly Apparition
The pundits said Hillary would take California by a large margin, last I checked it was a virtual tie with Hillary getting a small margin of victory.
:p ...When did you last check? 2007? 52% to 42% is perhaps not quite a "large margin" (your words, the pundits I've read assigned California to Hillary by a small but solid margin) but it isn't a virtual tie.
Quote Posted by Ghostly Apparition
I know a few Latinos that live right here in (you guessed it) California. none of them voted for Hillary.
Anecdotal evidence. Polls have Clinton going close to 2-1 over Obama among Latinos in California.
That being said, I doubt California will go Republican regardless of who wins the primary, despite the fact that Obama is not nearly as popular as Clinton among Latinos and that McCain is widely lambasted on the right for supporting latino-friendly immigration reform.
heretic on 8/2/2008 at 01:14
Quote Posted by Pyrian
That being said, I doubt California will go Republican regardless of who wins the primary, despite the fact that Obama is not nearly as popular as Clinton among Latinos and that McCain is widely lambasted on the right for supporting latino-friendly immigration reform.
I think you are right about this, but a lot of the latinos I know are voting for Mccain. This is in part due to the efforts of Mccain's hispanic outreach choice, which is none other than open-borders incarnate Juan Hernandez. (The Director of Office for Mexicans Living Abroad during Vicente Fox's administration in Mexico.)
This will probably not be enough to make up for the conservatives that may sever party lines though.
