Would a white Obama stand a chance? - Page 7 - Political Forum

TeaSea · #61 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calvin-X

Glad we are in agreement there.

He is admired as a unifer. THat is not quite the same thing as actually being a unifer.

Ever freakin president since Nixon has addressed the Palestinian/Isreali problem. No of them were idiots. To assume that this inexperianced guy is going to do better than all of them is to raise expectation unrealisticly high.

Blaming Bush is another example of how unrealistic you are being.

A President Obama is still going to be supporting both Isreal and Saudi Arabia. That will be plenty to keep the terrorists motivated.

There will be others who will interpert Obamas message of consiliation as weakness. They will try to take advantage. Obama will not get presidency without some national security crisis.

Do not be surprised if his response looks familar. As I said Carter tried to play nice, look how that turned out.

I blame FDR's wife for that. He should never had represented us vs Stalin at Yalta.

Yes this old one. All republican president are stupid.

Is this the type of open mind that will enable Obama to find solutions that generations of presidents have failed at?

Sooo, all indirect attacks will be allowed to proceed without response? I hope Obama makes that clear during the campaign!

Why did Hillary, one of the sharpest politicans today, spend her entire time in Congress running to the middle?

Because she knew that the far left is to scary for middle america. She though she would breeze through the primary and then be perfectly positioned to appeal to the center.

I am glad Obama has dragged her to the far left. And that he is such a leftist.

At a time when America is beleived to be in a recession and in a unpopular war it looks like the Republicans are going to be able to win because both Dems are to far to the left.

If he does will you reconsider you belief system of how racist America is?

There's always a lot of unknown about how a candidate will actually perform once elected. We have no way of knowing about any of them. Obama, IMO, shows evidence of being a unifier in two ways - he has a reputation, from his past political career, cited by first-hand observers and participants of both parties, as someone with a marked talent for bringing together people of diverse opinions. Second is he seems to have an ability to inspire people.
So I don't assume anything, but I do believe there is such a thing as natural talent, and in some fields it is rare. And I believe that it is far more important than experience.

I might not have mentioned Bush, but your bringing in Carter was an irresistible invitation. Unlike Carter, Bush IS at least a big factor in this election, as reaction against his policies is a major motivator for many voters. Carter is just a total non sequitor in this whole issue. OK, so maybe Bush is not quite technically an idiot - but he sure is below average. I didn't say anything at all about any other Republican presidents - it never even occurred to me to label them all stupid (I can think of a couple though).
If Bush has done one good thing, it is that he's made it OK to be a Liberal.

Conciliation does not = weakness, nor does it mean an chance for us to be taken advantage of. However, I would say that knee-jerk sabre-rattling DOES = weakness, as well as loss of opportunity.

As a campaigner, Obama has responded to threats, direct and indirect, quite well. So that gives us some evidence that he would respond to threats well as a President too. Far short of assurance, though - I freely admit. We're not going to get that for any candidate. And I do not think there is any validity whatsoever in extrapolating from the acts of one president what a future president might do. They are not the same person. The situations faced and the individual people dealt with will be entirely different.

As I've said before, we are much less racist as a nation. than we once were. But racism is still a factor, varying greatly from one region to another. I grew up WASP in Memphis in the 50s and 60s, a senior in high school when MLK was killed. Memphis' population was close to half black, but except for the occasional household maid I encountered in other people's homes, I never met a black person until I was 18 or 19 and had my first summer job. One of my new friends at that job was a black girl my age. My parents would absolutely not let me bring her home to visit - the neighbors might see. Since the mid 70s I've lived in Portland - way different. Memphis has progressed a lot since I left, but it is well over half black now, whites have largely fled to the greatly expanded suburbs and there is a lot of poverty associated with that and it feels like a weight on the city.
I don't go to church anymore but if I did and I walked into the chuch and saw the congregation neither overwhelmingly white nor overwhelmingly black, then I would be willing to begin to consider this not to be a racist nation.

TheKentuckian · #62 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 01:49 AM

Race may not be a significant factor in the primaries but that could easily be notched up a bit in the general election.

The red states can be a little...red.

Also, even amongst democrats those that are uncomfortable with a black man probably aren't doing flips over a woman either. The neckish may be staying home.

notahack · #63 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 07:48 AM

Would a white Obama stand a chance?

No

presluc · #64 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKentuckian

Race may not be a significant factor in the primaries but that could easily be notched up a bit in the general election.

The red states can be a little...red.

Also, even amongst democrats those that are uncomfortable with a black man probably aren't doing flips over a woman either. The neckish may be staying home.

I dissagree,and here's why,
If any American see's a light {no matter how small} at the end of this economic disaster that America is in they will show up at the voting polls, even the reckish.:cool

If you are new to the forun I suggest you check out the introducton/welcome aboard thread for a proper welcome.

presluc · #65 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notahack

Would a white Obama stand a chance?

No

RE YES

notahack · #66 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by presluc

RE YES

It's speculation on the part of both of us. We know that he has the majority of the black voters backing him. I don't want to get into a racist thread but if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck........

I just don't think he would have received the support of Oprah or the black vote and his campaign would have lost legs many months ago; again IMHO.

Hey, Irish catholics supported Kennedy solely that he was an irish catholic so it cuts both ways

presluc · #67 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notahack

It's speculation on the part of both of us. We know that he has the majority of the black voters backing him. I don't want to get into a racist thread but if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck........

I just don't think he would have received the support of Oprah or the black vote and his campaign would have lost legs many months ago; again IMHO.

Hey, Irish catholics supported Kennedy solely that he was an irish catholic so it cuts both ways

You are correct it is speculation.
However since I han't seen you on the introduction thread"hint,hint" .lol
I will have to guess that you were not a part of the civil rights movement.
I marched for civil rights and I assure you I was not the only white person that did.
We didn't march for civil rights for a particular reason we just thought it was a wrong that needed to be corrected.
Just as the protest of the Viet Nam war, I protested after I got back from Viet Nam there were black and white people that protested, another wrong that needed to be corrected.
Perhaps the situation in America today is differant perhaps not.

notahack · #68 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by presluc

You are correct it is speculation.
However since I han't seen you on the introduction thread"hint,hint" .lol
I will have to guess that you were not a part of the civil rights movement.
I marched for civil rights and I assure you I was not the only white person that did.
We didn't march for civil rights for a particular reason we just thought it was a wrong that needed to be corrected.
Just as the protest of the Viet Nam war, I protested after I got back from Viet Nam there were black and white people that protested, another wrong that needed to be corrected.
Perhaps the situation in America today is differant perhaps not.

pres, I'm color blind and fortunately, in my travels for work throughout the world, everyone I have met is the same. We're just a bunch of slobs doing our jobs and working together to solve problems.

Unfortunately, it wasn't until I moved to the southern part of the USA (from a small town in the north) that I was reminded that racism from both sides is still alive.

Calvin-X · #69 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeaSea

There's always a lot of unknown about how a candidate will actually perform once elected. We have no way of knowing about any of them. Obama, IMO, shows evidence of being a unifier in two ways - he has a reputation, from his past political career, cited by first-hand observers and participants of both parties, as someone with a marked talent for bringing together people of diverse opinions. Second is he seems to have an ability to inspire people.
So I don't assume anything, but I do believe there is such a thing as natural talent, and in some fields it is rare. And I believe that it is far more important than experience.

Gang of 14 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

The Gang of 14 term coined to describe the bipartisan group of moderate Senators in the 109th United States Congress who successfully negotiated a compromise in the spring of 2005 to avoid the deployment of the so-called nuclear option (or constitutional option) over an organized use of the filibuster by Senate Democrats to prevent the confirmation of conservative appellate court candidates nominated by President George W. Bush. It consisted of 7 Republicans and 7 Democrats led by Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) and John McCain (R-Arizona).

What does Obama have to match that?

Quote:

I might not have mentioned Bush, but your bringing in Carter was an irresistible invitation. Unlike Carter, Bush IS at least a big factor in this election, as reaction against his policies is a major motivator for many voters. Carter is just a total non sequitor in this whole issue. OK, so maybe Bush is not quite technically an idiot - but he sure is below average. I didn't say anything at all about any other Republican presidents - it never even occurred to me to label them all stupid (I can think of a couple though).
If Bush has done one good thing, it is that he's made it OK to be a Liberal.

Conciliation does not = weakness, nor does it mean an chance for us to be taken advantage of. However, I would say that knee-jerk sabre-rattling DOES = weakness, as well as loss of opportunity.

My point was that far left liberals have been in power before and to act as though Obama is something unprecidented is wrong.

Jimmy Carter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

South Korea
During his first month in office Carter cut the defense budget by $6 billion. One of his first acts was to order the unilateral removal of all nuclear weapons from South Korea and announce his intention to cut back the number of US troops stationed there. Other military men confined intense criticism of the withdrawal to private conversations or testimony before congressional committees, but in 1977 Major General John K. Singlaub, chief of staff of U.S. forces in South Korea, publicly criticized President Carter's decision to lower the U.S. troop level there.

Quote:

The Camp David Accords produced two frameworks for peace between Egypt and Israel, and a peace treaty was later signed on March 26, 1979.

Quote:

Human Rights
President Carter initially departed from the long-held policy of containment toward the Soviet Union. In its place Carter promoted a foreign policy that put human rights at the front. This was a break from the policies of several predecessors, in which human rights abuses were often overlooked if they were committed by a nation that was allied with the United States. The Carter Administration ended support to the historically U.S.-backed Somoza regime in Nicaragua and gave aid to the new Sandinista National Liberation Front government that assumed power after Somoza's overthrow.

Quote:

Panama Canal Treaties
One of the most controversial moves of President Carter's presidency was the final negotiation and signature of the Panama Canal Treaties in September 1977. Those treaties, which essentially would transfer control of the American-built Panama Canal to the nation of Panama, were bitterly opposed by a majority of the American public and by the Republican Party. A common argument against the treaties was that the United States was transferring an American asset of great strategic value to an unstable and corrupt country led by a military dictator (Omar Torrijos). Those that supported the Treaties argued that the Canal was built within Panamanian territory therefore, by controlling it, the United States was in fact occupying part of another country and this agreement was intended to turn back to Panama the sovereignty of its complete territory

Quote:

Carter and Leonid Brezhnev, the leader of the Soviet Union, reached an agreement to this end in 1979 — the SALT II Treaty, despite opposition in Congress to ratifying it, as many thought it weakened US defenses. Following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan late in 1979 however, Carter withdrew the treaty from consideration by Congress and the treaty was never ratified (though it was signed by both Carter and Brezhnev). Even so, both sides honored the commitments laid out in the negotiations.

Quote:

When the Iranian Revolution broke out in Iran, and the Shah was overthrown, the U.S. did not intervene. The Shah went into permanent exile. Carter initially refused him entry to the United States, even on grounds of medical emergency.

Despite his initial refusal to admit the Shah into the United States, on October 22, 1979, Carter finally granted him entry and temporary asylum for the duration of his cancer treatment; the Shah left for Panama on December 15, 1979. In response to the Shah's entry into the U.S., Iranian militants seized the American embassy in Tehran, taking 52 Americans hostage

Quote:

As a campaigner, Obama has responded to threats, direct and indirect, quite well. So that gives us some evidence that he would respond to threats well as a President too. Far short of assurance, though - I freely admit. We're not going to get that for any candidate. And I do not think there is any validity whatsoever in extrapolating from the acts of one president what a future president might do. They are not the same person. The situations faced and the individual people dealt with will be entirely different.

If the ideology and world view is similar we can expect similar actions.

Thus the whole move to tar McCain as Bush 3.

Quote:

As I've said before, we are much less racist as a nation. than we once were. But racism is still a factor, varying greatly from one region to another. I grew up WASP in Memphis in the 50s and 60s, a senior in high school when MLK was killed. Memphis' population was close to half black, but except for the occasional household maid I encountered in other people's homes, I never met a black person until I was 18 or 19 and had my first summer job. One of my new friends at that job was a black girl my age. My parents would absolutely not let me bring her home to visit - the neighbors might see. Since the mid 70s I've lived in Portland - way different. Memphis has progressed a lot since I left, but it is well over half black now, whites have largely fled to the greatly expanded suburbs and there is a lot of poverty associated with that and it feels like a weight on the city.
I don't go to church anymore but if I did and I walked into the chuch and saw the congregation neither overwhelmingly white nor overwhelmingly black, then I would be willing to begin to consider this not to be a racist nation.

I grew up in the 70s and 80s and my expericances were very differant. And by using chruches as a measure you are limiting yourself.

The election is much more universal. Obama is winning among democrats. THat is a huge portion of the nation.

Once the general election is over we can review his performance against past canidates as liberal as himself.

If his performance is about what you would expect from a white liberal democrat...

presluc · #70 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notahack

pres, I'm color blind and fortunately, in my travels for work throughout the world, everyone I have met is the same. We're just a bunch of slobs doing our jobs and working together to solve problems.

Unfortunately, it wasn't until I moved to the southern part of the USA (from a small town in the north) that I was reminded that racism from both sides is still alive.

Too true, the most unapreciated people of the world is the average people{slobs} that are just trying to make a living,and trying to help in some way to solve problems.

Sad ,but true racism does exist in America today from all sides.
As I have said before as long as soceity is branded with labels like Caucaion,African American,Mexican American ect this problem can never be properly faced.
WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE WE ARE ALL HUMAN BEINGS NOTHING MORE NOTHING LESS.