PDA

View Full Version : Is America Ready?


roarke
Dec 12th, 2006, 02:45 PM
Firsts
The Pattern May Change, if ...

AFTER a 217-year march of major presidential nominees who were, without exception, white and male, the 2008 campaign may offer voters a novel choice.

Is America ready to elect a woman or an African- American as president?

Left, Bebeto Matthews/Associated Press; right, Jessica Rinaldi/Reuters
POSSIBILITIES Some political analysts say they think the country may accept a woman as president. But they are less sure about an African-American, even one as popular as Barack Obama.
But as Barack Obama, the senator from Illinois whose father is from Kenya, spends this weekend exploring a presidential bid in New Hampshire, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first woman to represent New York in the Senate, calls potential supporters in Iowa, the question remains: are Americans prepared to elect an African-American or a woman as president?

Or, to look at it from the view of Democrats hungry for victory in 2008, is the nation more likely to vote for a woman or an African-American for president?

Without question, women and blacks have made significant progress in winning office. The new Congress will include 71 women — one of whom will be the first female speaker of the House — compared with 25 when Representative Geraldine Ferraro, a Queens Democrat, became the first woman to run as a major-party vice presidential candidate in 1984. There will be 43 blacks in the new Congress, compared with 13 when the Congressional Black Caucus was formed in 1969. A Gallup Poll in September showed a steady rise in the number of people who expect the nation to elect a woman or an African-American as president one day: Americans, it seems, are much more open to these choices than, say, someone who is an atheist or who is gay.

Times are indeed changing. But how much?

Over the past of the past eight years, in the view of analysts from both parties, the country has shifted markedly on the issue of gender, to the point where they say voters could very well be open to electing a woman in 2008. That is reflected, they say, in polling data and in the continued success of women running for office, in red and blue states alike. “The country is ready,” said Senator Elizabeth Dole, the North Carolina Republican, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2000. “I’m not saying it’s going to happen in ’08. But the country is ready.”

By contrast, for all the excitement stirred by Mr. Obama, it is much less certain that an African-American could win a presidential election. Not as many blacks have been elected to prominent positions as women. Some high-profile black candidates — Harold Ford Jr., a Democrat running for the Senate in Tennessee, and Michael Steele, a Republican Senate candidate in Maryland — lost in November. And demographics might be an obstacle as well: black Americans are concentrated in about 25 states — typically blue ones, like New York and California. While black candidates cannot assume automatic support from black voters, they would at least provide a base. In states without big black populations, the candidate’s crossover appeal must be huge.

“All evidence is that a white female has an advantage over a black male — for reasons of our cultural heritage,” said the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, the civil rights leader who ran for president in 1984 and 1988. Still, he said, for African-American and female candidates, “It’s easier — emphatically so.”

Ms. Ferraro offered a similar sentiment. “I think it’s more realistic for a woman than it is for an African-American,” said Ms. Ferraro. “There is a certain amount of racism that exists in the United States — whether it’s conscious or not it’s true.”
“Women are 51 percent of the population,” she added.

Many analysts suggested that changing voter attitudes can best be measured in choices for governors, since they, like presidents, are judged as chief executives, rather than legislators. There will be one black governor next year — Deval L. Patrick in Massachusetts, the second in the nation since Reconstruction.

By contrast, women will be governors of nine states, including Washington, Arizona and Michigan, all potential battleground states in 2008, a fact that is no doubt viewed favorably by advisers to Mrs. Clinton.

“Voters are getting more comfortable with seeing governors as C.E.O.’s of states,” said Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Kansas Democrat. Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm, a Michigan Democrat who won a second term last month, said in an interview that when she first ran, she had to work harder. “Not this time,” she said in an interview. “They are used to a woman being governor.”

Of course, governors don’t have to handle national security. And Mrs. Clinton has used her six years in the Senate to try to counter the stereotype that women would not be as strong on the issue, especially with the nation at war. Mrs. Clinton won a seat on the Armed Services Committee, and was an early supporter of the war in Iraq.

Mr. Obama is in many ways an unusual African-American politician, and that is why many Democrats, and Republicans, view him as so viable.

Mr. Obama is a member of a post-civil-rights generation of black politicians and is not identified with leaders like Mr. Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York, who are polarizing to many white voters. He has a warm and commanding campaign presence that, as he showed in Illinois, cut across color lines.

Donna Brazile, a prominent Democratic strategist who is black, said that she had been deluged with e-mail messages from people looking to volunteer for Mr. Obama — and that most of the requests were from white voters.

Moreover, there is abundant evidence that attitudes toward black candidates are changing among white voters. In Tennessee, Mr. Ford lost his bid to become the state’s first black senator since Reconstruction, but by only three percentage points.

Surveys of voters leaving the polls showed that 40 percent of white voters supported Mr. Ford, compared with 95 percent of black voters. More intriguing, the final result was the same as what the exit polls had suggested. Before this, in many races involving black candidates, the polls predicted that they would do better than they actually did — presumably because voters were reluctant to tell questioners they did not support the African-American.

That said, Mr. Ford lost his race after Republicans aired an advertisement that Democrats said was explicitly racist. Many Democrats said a lesson of the loss was that racial appeals still have force, particularly in the South.

Race and gender are big issues in American politics, but they are not the only ones, particularly in the coming race. Mr. Obama, should he run, may find his lack of experience will be far more troublesome to voters than his color. He is 45 and serving his first term as senator.

Mr. Obama said that many black voters he spoke with have serious questions about whether America is ready to elect an African-American president.

“I think there is a protectiveness and a skepticism within the African-American community that is grounded in their experiences,” Mr. Obama said in an interview. “But the skepticism doesn’t mean there’s a lack of support.”

David A. Bositis, senior political analyst with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a nonpartisan Washington group that studies black issues, said that it would certainly be hard, but not impossible for an African-American candidate to win.

“I certainly felt in the ’90s that if Colin Powell had been nominated on a major party ticket, he would have had a very good chance to win,” Mr. Bositis said. “If it’s the right black candidate, I do think there is propensity to elect a black. But it has to be the right black candidate.”

Jeff Zeleny contributed reporting.

Nicjac
Dec 12th, 2006, 05:38 PM
Uhm - no.

Lord Nelson
Dec 12th, 2006, 06:08 PM
'That said, Mr. Ford lost his race after Republicans aired an advertisement that Democrats said was explicitly racist. Many Democrats said a lesson of the loss was that racial appeals still have force, particularly in the South'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am rooting for Obama and I would prefer him than Clinton. I just hope he is not as much a sore loser as this Ford guy. Oh, so the guy lost due to racism? This is one of the most pathetic excuses that I've heard.

Vlover
Dec 12th, 2006, 06:42 PM
'That said, Mr. Ford lost his race after Republicans aired an advertisement that Democrats said was explicitly racist. Many Democrats said a lesson of the loss was that racial appeals still have force, particularly in the South'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am rooting for Obama and I would prefer him than Clinton. I just hope he is not as much a sore loser as this Ford guy. Oh, so the guy lost due to racism? This is one of the most pathetic excuses that I've heard.

FYI Ford NEVER said any such thing. He handled himself quite graciously and never once claim racism with the negative ads against him. Please note the article stated Democrats said not Ford because I've never read or heard him make such a claim.

BTW considering you have very little knowledge about America, racism and it's politics it would be better if you tone down on the rhetoric and let people who actually live in the US tell you about what goes on in the country.

Yes, America has come a long way with regards to racism but its by no means eradicated. If Ford was running in any other part of the country except the South his chances of winning would have increase dramatically. It's no secret in America that running for statewide or national office while black is a up hill battle. This happens so infrequently that when it happens its usually a milestone in history.

Are you aware that one of the foundamental differences in the South of the political parties is race based? Why is that the Republican party has 0 black representative in congress?

RVD
Dec 12th, 2006, 08:17 PM
FYI Ford NEVER said any such thing. He handled himself quite graciously and never once claim racism with the negative ads against him. Please note the article stated Democrats said not Ford because I've never read or heard him make such a claim.

BTW considering you have very little knowledge about America, racism and it's politics it would be better if you tone down on the rhetoric and let people who actually live in the US tell you about what goes on in the country.

Yes, America has come a long way with regards to racism but its by no means eradicated. If Ford was running in any other part of the country except the South his chances of winning would have increase dramatically. It's no secret in America that running for statewide or national office while black is a up hill battle. This happens so infrequently that when it happens its usually a milestone in history.

Are you aware that one of the foundamental differences in the South of the political parties is race based? Why is that the Republican party has 0 black representative in congress?Good points... :)

And though the article itself makes some solid points all around, the given prospects are so depressing that I don’t have the desire to even debate this. So I’ll just give my http://deephousepage.com/smilies/twocents.gif and leave it at that...


A black President...?
Not in my lifetime.
The true power in this country [fascist white America: a.k.a.: Corporate America] would never, over there dead bodies, allow such an outcome. They will tap into the imbedded fear/hatred of blacks in America to insure this never happens.

Still, though, I’m warming to Obama’s optimism, fearlessness, desire and drive. Maybe fate will intervene and grant him a position within the next highest office— as Vice-President. Though I doubt it.

I’d much prefer Obama and his team foster in a ‘new age’— a sort of Political Renaissance within the Senate for minorities, and ultimately the country. Better to affect change at the Legislative level, than fight the daily racial ones at the Executive level. :shrug:

A Woman President...?
Most definitely a higher probability.
However, I can’t see the Conservative fence-straddlers voting for a woman who they once detested and vilified not so many years ago. Also, Hilary’s war stance has certainly damaged her standing with her Democratic base. That said, she could get close, but ultimately, she’d lose by double percentage points to a Republican.

American politics is currently in the toilet, with the last two Presidencies having tainted the ‘office’, creating a less-than-honorable image of America... for Americans and abroad.

...where morals...ethics...trust...and... truth, are near-extinct concepts.

Pessimism notwithstanding, America is definitely not ready. :sad:

Stamp Paid
Dec 12th, 2006, 08:20 PM
Yes, America is ready.
but Clinton and Obama will NOT be the ones.

Stamp Paid
Dec 12th, 2006, 08:22 PM
And Aint Obama mixed?

Vlover
Dec 12th, 2006, 09:17 PM
[QUOTE]Still, though, I’m warming to Obama’s optimism, fearlessness, desire and drive. Maybe fate will intervene and grant him a position within the next highest office— as Vice-President. Though I doubt it.

I'm not in the mood for serious thought either but I must admit the Obama fever is contagious.:lol:

Well the audacity of hope got him elected to the Senate so why not take it further. I think that is the right attitude to have because two years ago he was an obscure figure and has become so prominent so fast. You never know what can happen within the next two years. I guess early next year with the new congress we'll get a better feel for how thing are turning.

*JR*
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:16 PM
If the war hadn't fucked it up for Condi, she could have been the first on both counts. :tape:

MrSerenaWilliams
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:39 PM
And Aint Obama mixed?

you should know :secret: any black = ALL Black....just like Tiger and Halle

mirzalover
Dec 12th, 2006, 10:42 PM
you should know :secret: any black = ALL Black....just like Tiger and Halle

Aint it the truth

Lord Nelson
Dec 14th, 2006, 12:28 AM
FYI Ford NEVER said any such thing. He handled himself quite graciously and never once claim racism with the negative ads against him. Please note the article stated Democrats said not Ford because I've never read or heard him make such a claim.

BTW considering you have very little knowledge about America, racism and it's politics it would be better if you tone down on the rhetoric and let people who actually live in the US tell you about what goes on in the country.

Yes, America has come a long way with regards to racism but its by no means eradicated. If Ford was running in any other part of the country except the South his chances of winning would have increase dramatically. It's no secret in America that running for statewide or national office while black is a up hill battle. This happens so infrequently that when it happens its usually a milestone in history.

Are you aware that one of the foundamental differences in the South of the political parties is race based? Why is that the Republican party has 0 black representative in congress?
I lived in the U.S. for a while, such as in DC which is a majority black city (excluding the suburbs).
Maybe Ford would have done a better job in another part of the country, so what? Bobby Jindal is an Indian American who was running for senator. He probably did not make it because there were not enough Indians in the state. Do you say anyone moaning about it? For things to get better in the South, both republican and democrat parties should welcome more foreigners. Blacks should stop trying to call blacks who join the Republican party sell outs. Whites should not be suspicious of blacks.
Jindal lost end of story and so Ford lost, period. People who complain should move on and concentrate on other potential candidates such as Obama who I think has a good chance of beating Hilary, the primary candidate for her party.
By the way, you say that there are 0 black representatives in Congress. Not true, there is Obama and as some say here even if you are mixed you are black. There is also a muslim senator who is black. So who knows more about the U.S? :lol:

RJWCapriati
Dec 14th, 2006, 12:46 AM
Yes, we are definitely ready for a change. Hopefully Hillary Clinton can piece this country and world back together.

RunDown
Dec 14th, 2006, 02:21 AM
you should know :secret: any black = ALL Black....just like Tiger and Halle

Barack Obama and Halle Berry identify themselves as black :shrug:

mykarma
Dec 14th, 2006, 02:23 AM
Firsts
The Pattern May Change, if ...

AFTER a 217-year march of major presidential nominees who were, without exception, white and male, the 2008 campaign may offer voters a novel choice.

Is America ready to elect a woman or an African- American as president?

Left, Bebeto Matthews/Associated Press; right, Jessica Rinaldi/Reuters
POSSIBILITIES Some political analysts say they think the country may accept a woman as president. But they are less sure about an African-American, even one as popular as Barack Obama.
But as Barack Obama, the senator from Illinois whose father is from Kenya, spends this weekend exploring a presidential bid in New Hampshire, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first woman to represent New York in the Senate, calls potential supporters in Iowa, the question remains: are Americans prepared to elect an African-American or a woman as president?

Or, to look at it from the view of Democrats hungry for victory in 2008, is the nation more likely to vote for a woman or an African-American for president?

Without question, women and blacks have made significant progress in winning office. The new Congress will include 71 women — one of whom will be the first female speaker of the House — compared with 25 when Representative Geraldine Ferraro, a Queens Democrat, became the first woman to run as a major-party vice presidential candidate in 1984. There will be 43 blacks in the new Congress, compared with 13 when the Congressional Black Caucus was formed in 1969. A Gallup Poll in September showed a steady rise in the number of people who expect the nation to elect a woman or an African-American as president one day: Americans, it seems, are much more open to these choices than, say, someone who is an atheist or who is gay.

Times are indeed changing. But how much?

Over the past of the past eight years, in the view of analysts from both parties, the country has shifted markedly on the issue of gender, to the point where they say voters could very well be open to electing a woman in 2008. That is reflected, they say, in polling data and in the continued success of women running for office, in red and blue states alike. “The country is ready,” said Senator Elizabeth Dole, the North Carolina Republican, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2000. “I’m not saying it’s going to happen in ’08. But the country is ready.”

By contrast, for all the excitement stirred by Mr. Obama, it is much less certain that an African-American could win a presidential election. Not as many blacks have been elected to prominent positions as women. Some high-profile black candidates — Harold Ford Jr., a Democrat running for the Senate in Tennessee, and Michael Steele, a Republican Senate candidate in Maryland — lost in November. And demographics might be an obstacle as well: black Americans are concentrated in about 25 states — typically blue ones, like New York and California. While black candidates cannot assume automatic support from black voters, they would at least provide a base. In states without big black populations, the candidate’s crossover appeal must be huge.

“All evidence is that a white female has an advantage over a black male — for reasons of our cultural heritage,” said the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, the civil rights leader who ran for president in 1984 and 1988. Still, he said, for African-American and female candidates, “It’s easier — emphatically so.”

Ms. Ferraro offered a similar sentiment. “I think it’s more realistic for a woman than it is for an African-American,” said Ms. Ferraro. “There is a certain amount of racism that exists in the United States — whether it’s conscious or not it’s true.”
“Women are 51 percent of the population,” she added.

Many analysts suggested that changing voter attitudes can best be measured in choices for governors, since they, like presidents, are judged as chief executives, rather than legislators. There will be one black governor next year — Deval L. Patrick in Massachusetts, the second in the nation since Reconstruction.

By contrast, women will be governors of nine states, including Washington, Arizona and Michigan, all potential battleground states in 2008, a fact that is no doubt viewed favorably by advisers to Mrs. Clinton.

“Voters are getting more comfortable with seeing governors as C.E.O.’s of states,” said Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Kansas Democrat. Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm, a Michigan Democrat who won a second term last month, said in an interview that when she first ran, she had to work harder. “Not this time,” she said in an interview. “They are used to a woman being governor.”

Of course, governors don’t have to handle national security. And Mrs. Clinton has used her six years in the Senate to try to counter the stereotype that women would not be as strong on the issue, especially with the nation at war. Mrs. Clinton won a seat on the Armed Services Committee, and was an early supporter of the war in Iraq.

Mr. Obama is in many ways an unusual African-American politician, and that is why many Democrats, and Republicans, view him as so viable.

Mr. Obama is a member of a post-civil-rights generation of black politicians and is not identified with leaders like Mr. Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York, who are polarizing to many white voters. He has a warm and commanding campaign presence that, as he showed in Illinois, cut across color lines.

Donna Brazile, a prominent Democratic strategist who is black, said that she had been deluged with e-mail messages from people looking to volunteer for Mr. Obama — and that most of the requests were from white voters.

Moreover, there is abundant evidence that attitudes toward black candidates are changing among white voters. In Tennessee, Mr. Ford lost his bid to become the state’s first black senator since Reconstruction, but by only three percentage points.

Surveys of voters leaving the polls showed that 40 percent of white voters supported Mr. Ford, compared with 95 percent of black voters. More intriguing, the final result was the same as what the exit polls had suggested. Before this, in many races involving black candidates, the polls predicted that they would do better than they actually did — presumably because voters were reluctant to tell questioners they did not support the African-American.

That said, Mr. Ford lost his race after Republicans aired an advertisement that Democrats said was explicitly racist. Many Democrats said a lesson of the loss was that racial appeals still have force, particularly in the South.

Race and gender are big issues in American politics, but they are not the only ones, particularly in the coming race. Mr. Obama, should he run, may find his lack of experience will be far more troublesome to voters than his color. He is 45 and serving his first term as senator.

Mr. Obama said that many black voters he spoke with have serious questions about whether America is ready to elect an African-American president.

“I think there is a protectiveness and a skepticism within the African-American community that is grounded in their experiences,” Mr. Obama said in an interview. “But the skepticism doesn’t mean there’s a lack of support.”

David A. Bositis, senior political analyst with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a nonpartisan Washington group that studies black issues, said that it would certainly be hard, but not impossible for an African-American candidate to win.

“I certainly felt in the ’90s that if Colin Powell had been nominated on a major party ticket, he would have had a very good chance to win,” Mr. Bositis said. “If it’s the right black candidate, I do think there is propensity to elect a black. But it has to be the right black candidate.”

Jeff Zeleny contributed reporting.
Nope they're not.

mykarma
Dec 14th, 2006, 02:33 AM
I lived in the U.S. for a while, such as in DC which is a majority black city (excluding the suburbs).
Maybe Ford would have done a better job in another part of the country, so what? Bobby Jindal is an Indian American who was running for senator. He probably did not make it because there were not enough Indians in the state. Do you say anyone moaning about it? For things to get better in the South, both republican and democrat parties should welcome more foreigners. Blacks should stop trying to call blacks who join the Republican party sell outs. Whites should not be suspicious of blacks.
Jindal lost end of story and so Ford lost, period. People who complain should move on and concentrate on other potential candidates such as Obama who I think has a good chance of beating Hilary, the primary candidate for her party.
By the way, you say that there are 0 black representatives in Congress. Not true, there is Obama and as some say here even if you are mixed you are black. There is also a muslim senator who is black. So who knows more about the U.S? :lol:
It's not you for damn sure. Obama is a democrat.:nerner::nerner::nerner:

RunDown
Dec 14th, 2006, 02:42 AM
By the way, you say that there are 0 black representatives in Congress. Not true, there is Obama and as some say here even if you are mixed you are black. There is also a muslim senator who is black. So who knows more about the U.S? :lol:

They meant that the Republican party has zero black members of Congress (the Democrats have at least 40).

I'm gonna guess that the Republican party has very few minorities of any race representing them in Congress.

Junex
Dec 14th, 2006, 04:36 AM
Even if i am not a US voter, I would have gone to campiagn for Hillary as President & Obama as her VP!


Besides, isn't Hillary the one who run the office of the President in Bill's terms..., in fact the only "-" i can remember about Bill's terms is the "lewinsky" period which is Bill's own doing... :devil:

Lord Nelson
Dec 14th, 2006, 12:05 PM
They meant that the Republican party has zero black members of Congress (the Democrats have at least 40).

I'm gonna guess that the Republican party has very few minorities of any race representing them in Congress.

Oh right he said that, I missed that out. Still, Republican party has latinos in the senate. So there are minorities. There were blacks and Indian americans (Jindal) running for senate but they lost the election. So it is not from lack of effort.

Oh Junex, what makes you think that Obama wants to be VP of Clinton? Maybe he wants her to be his VP. He is there to fight her for the primaries if they both decide to run. Remember politicians like John MCain did not want to be VP's after they lost primary election. He is from a different party but many of the top dogs don't want to be VP. Too much pride at stake I guess. :p