Old Times There Are Not Forgotten

joefromchicago wrote:

I'll let others comment on whether or not southern whites are a bunch of racist crackers. The fact remains, however, that the Democratic Party simply doesn't need their votes. Kerry could have won the 2004 election simply by carrying Ohio, even though he didn't win a single southern state. Gore could have won simply by carrying New Hampshire, even though he too didn't win a single state south of the Mason-Dixon line. It's certainly not a new idea, but it remains true that the Democrats don't need the south to win the White House.

Gore could have won by carrying his home state.

But the folks who knew him best didn't support him.

It's ok. He's got another pretty good chance this year.

0 Replies

Re: Old Times There Are Not Forgotten
What?

Southern Dems, the party of Jim Crow, the party of the KKK, the party of George Wallace, the party that voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in greater percentage than the Republicans, the party of Grand Kleagle Robert Byrd of WV (the 'dean of the Senate'), the party of Al ('Low Negro Tolerance') Gore, the party of Joe ('finally there's a clean, bright, articulate black' ) Biden, the party of Andrew ('you can't shuck and jive') Cuomo, the party of Bill ('William Fulbright is my mentor' ) Clinton, the party of Hillary ('I don't feel no ways tired') Clinton..............

..........that party won't support Obama?

0 Replies

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

revel wrote:
You know a couple of months ago I never would have thought I would say this; but I think McCain is going to win. He is not black, nor a woman nor a Mormon. I think snood is right after all; old times are not forgotten.

(I am just so disappointed in Bill Clinton I can't see straight this morning; what is worse is that I don't think he is racist but he is willing to use the racist card which makes it worse in my opinion. This is a little over board; but it almost breaks my heart. Getting ready for snide comments about my silliness...)

Moreover he (McCain) seems to get votes from both the anti-war crowd and the military crowd and the moderate crowd (not evangelist). If I had to pick a republican; I can live with McCain without having to spend the next four or eight years dissing him. I think once he gets president; he might not be ultra conservative. It is risky bet but better than the other alternatives in the republican candidates. Not that I am going to vote for him. I am not sure; but in the end; probably will vote for whoever ends up in the democratic slot for domestic reasons.

Do you believe that a vote for McCain is representative of disregard or disdain for blacks, women, or Mormans? This seems to be what you are suggesting by the comment "I think snood is right after all; old times are not forgotten."

I'm not sure how someone employing tactics of racism can be considered anything other than a racist.

BTW I don't think there is anything silly about being deeply disappointed in Bill Clinton. He seems to have that effect on his supporters.

I don't think racism accounts for all of it but it does play a big part in the south most of all. I live in the south and hear the comments about each of those things I mentioned. I am mostly talking about the left over white southern democrats and republicans which make a good deal of the south anyway who mostly these last years have voted republican in any case.

(you might wonder how I go to church being a liberal; I believe in leaving things to Caesar that are Caesar's and things that are God's to God and letting people be free to choose their own morality and beliefs)

My preacher has said many times there is no way he would vote for a democrat because of the abortion issue and a general lack of morals he perceives in the Democratic Party. Other members of church who are mostly democrats have said they don't support gay marriage or gay rights. I know half of them wouldn't support a woman president just because they don't think a woman should be leading. They are backward folks so I am not sure if they would vote for Obama even though they are not overtly racist. But they might surprise me; I hope so. In my county it is not anything to see people proudly waving confederate flags on their cars and in their yards and on their clothes so I know they would not vote for Obama nor most likely given their mind set a woman president. Although some of them might of dismissed all of that and picked Condi Rice over a liberal democrat and still go to white supremacy meetings and wave their flags. But they would never vote for a democrat in any case. They probably will vote for McCain. I might have over played the Mormon issue unless more is made of the extra wives thing on McCain's side. I was just upset yesterday. I guess in the south it would come down to who displays as the most conservative moral patriotic American between McCain and Romney. Immigration is not a big issue here yet as far as I am aware but I think it is further down south in Florida since they have a border.

(went on too much with a little rambling but I was trying explain the way I see it here in southern kentucky where I live.)

0 Replies

In my southern neck of the woods, you won't hear blatant racial comments by the average person, but you catch it in their actions and some unguarded moments. Many will selectively feel good about a person of another color, but they haven't learned to accept the group. I am speaking of all colors, not just whites.

0 Replies

I find it odd that everyone everywhere seems to be in agreement that Obama won SC largely in part to the tremendous turnout of black voters who voted for him. To even suggest that they voted for him because he was one of their own would draw cries of racist.

But if white people vote for the white candidate they are racists.

Let's face it fellow white people, we all seem to be scumbag racists, while the noble black man is merely elevating himself by displaying the same behavior...i.e. voting for one of his own.

Maybe, just maybe, that doesn't make white or black people racists.... just people.....but then what would we cluck and whine about? How could we talk about how there's only one race... the human race? How could we talk about how there's only one America.... how could Chris Matthews, Rush Limbaugh, Tim Russert and Matt Drudge pay for their summer homes?

We never really lose our love for the circus do we?

0 Replies

I love Snood's very telling absense since he posted this crap!

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

I love Snood's very telling absense since he posted this crap!

He may be sitting back, reading, for the time; don't think for a moment he will back down from a discussion of this kind.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

In my southern neck of the woods, you won't hear blatant racial comments by the average person, but you catch it in their actions and some unguarded moments. Many will selectively feel good about a person of another color, but they haven't learned to accept the group. I am speaking of all colors, not just whites.

I was listening to a young (I'm guessing mid-twenties) Latino being interviewed on NPR about why he thought so many Latinos were supportive of Hillary Clinton, as opposed to Barack Obama. Just before the interview there had been quoted a bunch of statistics illustrating Hillary's wide lead among Latinos - especially in California.

The young man was saying, quite bluntly, that one of the reasons that Hispanics will continue to support Hillary whether or not they individually think Barack is the better candidate, is because they think a lot more whites than will ever admit it just cannot stomach the idea of a black man as president. He said "Woman or not, Hillary Clinton is still of the caucasian race."

When pressed on this - I believe the next question was "Do you think that would be true for a Latino candidate?" - the young man didn't flinch. "Oh, yeah! For a Latino, or an Asian, too!"

The comment was made that I had fled from this thread after opening it. I've read every word, and I frankly was letting what I feel to be a no-brainer concept speak for itself - that there is a silent quantity (how large or small is a good question) of whites who may never say it aloud, but who would vote for a martian before certain ethnic minorities.

My original post quoted an article that postulated some of that quantity was a hindrance to Obama in the South.

The NPR interview suggested that a lot of minorities will also vote for a white over a black or other minority, simply because they are white.

No matter what snide suggestions are made here about the motivations for my posting these sentiments, or for their veracity, I stand by the admittedly unpleasant to ponder (but I think imminently rational) assertion that some whites simply won't vote for Barack because he's black. So what? Absolutely nothing. Except for the fact that I got such vehement resistance to a notion that I think self-evident, I'd have dropped it at the launch.

0 Replies

of course there are ignorant white people like that....and you are correct to find that wrong.... what is your feeling on blacks who will vote for any black candidate simply because they are black? Are they equally ignorant, racist, uninformed and narrow minded? Just a yes or no will do.

0 Replies

a view from across the northern border :
i'm at least somewhat surprised to hear OBAMA being called a BLACK candidate in the media - even here in canada .
as far as i know he is 50/50 , isn't he ?
couldn't he just as well be called a WHITE candidate then ?
i'm sure the majority of us have some mixed parentage if we go back far enough .
is there a special test to be applied to check how much "white , black , indian , asian ... ... blood/genes/whatever " a person has to be put into a certain category ?
i'm wondering how a candidate will be identified when running for president (or prime minister in canada) if that person is bi/homo or whatever sexual ?
are we really living in the 21st century or are we still in the 19th century - when it comes to identification of a candidate for public office ?
(imo we have NOT arrived in the 21st century yet when it comes to identifying candidates) .
hbg(looking across the border)

0 Replies

Can I just say again that there doesn't seem to be many of those black people, if they exist at all?

Obama's numbers with black people started out in the gutter. He earned their vote.

I'm sure there's an and-both aspect -- that they like him as a candidate and it looks like he might be able to win and he's black too, great!

But why were his numbers with black people so low for so long?

0 Replies

hamburger wrote:

a view from across the northern border :i'm at least somewhat surprised to hear OBAMA being called a BLACK candidate in the media - even here in canada .as far as i know he is 50/50 , isn't he ? couldn't he just as well be called a WHITE candidate then ?i'm sure the majority of us have some mixed parentage if we go back far enough . is there a special test to be applied to check how much "white , black , indian , asian ... ... blood/genes/whatever " a person has to be put into a certain category ?i'm wondering how a candidate will be identified when running for president (or prime minister in canada) if that person is bi/homo or whatever sexual ?are we really living in the 21st century or are we still in the 19th century - when it comes to identification of a candidate for public office ?(imo we have NOT arrived in the 21st century yet when it comes to identifying candidates) .hbg(looking across the border)

I can't say for sure but it seems i read an article that said something to the effect that Obama would be considered white in almost any other country...but black here...

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Can I just say again that there doesn't seem to be many of those black people, if they exist at all?

Obama's numbers with black people started out in the gutter. He earned their vote.

I'm sure there's an and-both aspect -- that they like him as a candidate and it looks like he might be able to win and he's black too, great!

But why were his numbers with black people so low for so long?

if you're addressing my question you haven't answered it...

0 Replies

Well, one is about voting for and one is about refusing to vote for.

I think a white person who refuses to vote for a black person because he or she is black is racist.

I think a black person who refuses to vote for a white person because he or she is white is racist.

I think a white person who wants to vote for a white person may or may not be racist... and same with a black person who wants to vote for a black person.

I do think that in that last one though it's not quite equivalent. There are a lot of white people in politics already. I've seen white people who say, all other things being equal, they'd rather vote for the black candidate just for the sake of diversity. Is that racist?

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I've seen white people who say, all other things being equal, they'd rather vote for the black candidate just for the sake of diversity. Is that racist?

The problem is, all things can never be equal. Each candidate brings with him/her a host of backgrounds, experiences, and various positions on issues. Sometimes it is difficult to equate one person with another, even if their political views are superficially consonant. I would never vote for someone just because of the diversity issue. To me, that is being just as racist as NOT voting for someone just because he is...........................whatever.

I would vote for the person, of whatever color, faith, background, sexual persuasion, etc. if I though that he/she were the person who most closely mirrored my own political views. In a case where my perception of two candidates are equally favorable, I would have to go with that "indefinable something", my gut reaction.

0 Replies

soz still not answering the question... how about a person who votes for the candidate based ON THEIR RACE BEING THE SAME?

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

I find it odd that everyone everywhere seems to be in agreement that Obama won SC largely in part to the tremendous turnout of black voters who voted for him. To even suggest that they voted for him because he was one of their own would draw cries of racist.

But if white people vote for the white candidate they are racists.

Let's face it fellow white people, we all seem to be scumbag racists, while the noble black man is merely elevating himself by displaying the same behavior...i.e. voting for one of his own.

Maybe, just maybe, that doesn't make white or black people racists.... just people.....but then what would we cluck and whine about? How could we talk about how there's only one race... the human race? How could we talk about how there's only one America.... how could Chris Matthews, Rush Limbaugh, Tim Russert and Matt Drudge pay for their summer homes?

We never really lose our love for the circus do we?

Good one bipo

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I've seen white people who say, all other things being equal, they'd rather vote for the black candidate just for the sake of diversity. Is that racist?

I don't often agree with Phoenix in anything political, but, yes.

0 Replies

Is affirmative action racist, then?

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

sozobe wrote:
I've seen white people who say, all other things being equal, they'd rather vote for the black candidate just for the sake of diversity. Is that racist?

I don't often agree with Phoenix in anything political, but, yes.

Perhaps not. It might be the person is thinking to give the black citizen a chance to be at the pinacle, for once. Which is a gesture for equal civil rights, for the very first time. This scenario could be based on righting old wrongs, not promoting one race to be above the other.

0 Replies

Old Times There Are Not Forgotten

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know