Can someone give me a non-hyperbolic reason why Obama "can't win"?

[Perky]

WHen you don't know who the Rebublican niminee is and when you do n ot know what he will be able to do in getting new voters to the pols?

Don'y yackat us...give us cogent thought out reasons.

[goodgd_yall]

1. There's still racism in this country

That is all.

[Perky]

2. Do you think racists would vote for other Democrats?

[ElizabethDC]

4. Yes. I know some who are like that. n/t

[havocmom]

7. Some would, yes. I know too many racist DEMS. And other racists who may not usually vote

would be rushing to the polls to vote with their fears and bigotries. Count on it.

Sad in this day and age, but there are LOTS more seriously racist people out there than most liberal/progressives realize. Unless you are forced to deal with them because they make up a huge (if not majority) of the locals you have to deal with, you tend to just avoid those who are that ignorant and fucking hateful. Easy to lose sight of just how many are still out and about in the population

[gateley]

10. I think a lot of good, wonderful people don't CONSIDER themselves racist, and

it's an underlying, almost sub-conscious thing. They wholeheartedly support equal rights, non-discrimination, etc., but it's a subtle NIMBY type of thing. It could be a factor that those of us who don't have the same philosophy have a hard time understanding. But I see it around me in subtle examples frequently.

[EFerrari]

17. The Democrats have a very mixed constituency to deal with.

LBJ comes to mind as an illustration. He practiced just about every form of discrimination -- against skin color, against women, etC., AND he got the Civil Rights Act passed. :shrug:

[TheWraith]

13. We already lost those people. NT

[goodgd_yall]

19. I disagree. As previous posts say

there's plenty of racists in the Democratic Party. Not all of them are the worst absolute racists; many are "situational racists." (Yeah, I just made that up, but it seems to fit some people.)

[EFerrari]

26. Don't bet on it. Remember it was a "Democrat" that raised the spectre

of a young black drug dealer, not the GOP.

Not only have we not lost those people, "those people" are highly placed in the campaigns.

[CyberPieHole]

32. I think it was Obama who raised the spectre of drugs...

he wrote about his drug use. You think repugs won't bring it back up if he were to get the nod?:eyes:

[EFerrari]

34. Obama was candid about his past. Shaheen twisted that into

a racist stereotype.

Remind me why the top tier campaign staff is giving the GOP talking points?

[CyberPieHole]

39. Obama revealed his own drug use...he raised the issue...

You seem to think it's a plus for Obama...I think it's not. Older and more conservative Democrats don't think drug use sets a positive example. You seem to think that repugs haven't read and researched Obama's past writings. If no Democrat had spoken of it it might have gone un-noticed? I suppose you also believe that if we exit Iraq now "they will follow us home".

[EFerrari]

40. I don't recall the Senator casting himself as a drug dealer.

Do you have a source for that?

And, why are top tier democratic campaigns helping the GOP amass shit to fling at Democrats?

And, I "suppose" you find it easier to deride than to answer that question.

[CyberPieHole]

48. Where did I write that Obama was a "drug dealer"? I defy you to cite that post.

Nice straw~man, though.:eyes:

Why don't you ask the top tier democratic campaigns why they are "helping the GOP"? Why would you ask me that?

[EFerrari]

50. You're not even reading this exchange are you?

lol

[CyberPieHole]

51. You're not writing anything of note. What is there to "read"?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

15. That's right. And, even though I do not agree with Obama

I'm so happy he's running. Ditto for HRC. They are both forcing people to confront their bullshit and I'm loving it.

[goodgd_yall]

18. Reallly good point

Although, I know some of those people are too self-deceived to confront their bullshit because they don't even admit it's there.

[EFerrari]

23. Oh, sure. But still, those people still have to come up with and verbalize

"reasons" for their hatred and once you force that conversation to happen, the rationale just doesn't bear inspection.

Amy Goodman interviewed a racist from the Jenna school board not too long ago. He didn't even believe his own cR@p. The best thing that can happen is for this conversation to occur because every time it does, sanity gains some ground. :)

[Perry Logan]

3. Many of his followers are very divisive.

[Perky]

5. ANd clinton supports are not divisive?????

[havocmom]

14. The poster didn't suggest there were limits . Just add that some HRC supporters are too

and rise above the frey to just reporting the facts ;)

The front runners' campaigns have one glaring thing in common: use of tactics Rove put into play years ago. Intimidation and 'with us or with the enemy' attitudes. It turns lots of people off and that may result in some big surprises for the 'front runners'

edited for clarity

[annie1]

6. The Primaries? b/c Hil is not going to lose to him at any cost. The General, he has the same shot...

as hil.

[ColbertWatcher]

8. My non-hyperbolic reason why Obama "can't win"

His wife is black.

America isn't ready for a black First Lady.

And this will scare the racist voters, which I fear there are enough of to swing enough states.

Not that I agree; it's what I fear.

Now that I think about it, that may well be the republican's wedge issue this time around.

Just like they used gay marriage and illegal immigration at other times.

Imaginary threats against white man's proper place in America may be the issue used in 2008 to get people who want to return to a more "traditional" America (read: White, Christian, man runs the house, women know their place, etc...).

[pipoman]

9. I think his name is a huge problem for him

don't mean it's right, just realistic.

[ElizabethDC]

11. I agree. I think that's even bigger than the race issue, which I think would also be a problem. n/t

[CyberPieHole]

22. I agree.

Wrong as it may be, the reality exists.

[annie1]

24. how would this change btwn what polls say now, and voting time?...

he generally beats pubs now in similar numbers to hil's.

[smalll]

36. The thing is, most Americans still have no idea what his middle name is.

So that particular problem is not reflected in the polls yet. In real life, for example, I met someone recently who follows politics to a moderate extent, and who told me that Obama was the candidate they were favoring at this point. I asked them if they knew what his middle name was - they didn't. They were relatively shocked and surprised when I told them what it was -- not that it made them any less likely to support Obama, but they instantly realized that it might be an almost insurmountable roadblock for Obama in the general election.

[Fresh_Start]

12. "Southern Strategy"

The racists in this country are great in number....as indeed the sexists are great in number.
Sadly I think that either Clinton or Obama are feared as symbols to the racists and the sexists and will bring out opposition.

[FrenchieCat]

16. By the time the millions of folks who want to vote for an Obama

ticket register to vote for the 2008 election.......HE WILL WIN. Black folks who are eligible to vote but do not is at 40%. Young People who are eligible to vote, but do not is at 62%.

The notion that Obama "can't win" because "racism" still exists.... is a bunch of shit pushed by those who are too afraid of everything to ever believe that any else other than what is conventional can work.

They are the same kind of people who believed that Slavery could never be abolished; that Women would never be given the right to vote; that Whites and Colored would never share bathrooms, etc....

In other words, the folks that subscribe to the theory that a Black man can't become President in America (they usually add their justifying "feel good" qualifier "maybe some day"), are the exact same people that are gonna make sure that it never happens:

They are the scared "status Quo" :scared:

I don't respect much about anything that they have to say.....because they are part of the larger problem; they are anti-progressive, and just as much a cause for concern as those who would advocate outright that they will simply NOT vote for a Black American as President.

[Lurking Dem]

20. Well said!

[Armstead]

21. I love that graphic

[comradebillyboy]

27. If we shut our eyes real tight and wish real hard

racism will magically vanish from the American electorate and all our wishes will come true.

Still the repukes are so weak right now that he could win if he gets the nomination.

[goodgd_yall]

30. They would have to have an awful candidate

I'm not so sure Huckabee could beat Obama, but I may be ignorant of how far racist Democrats and independents would go.

[goodgd_yall]

28. The OP was about the general election

The question is whether registered Democrats will jump ship to avoid voting for a black man. The other question is whether independents will avoid voting for a black man. Loyal Democrats will vote for him, (as I will).

[EFerrari]

29. Well, I hope you're right but, I'm one of "those people"

who has watched racism gain ground since the Republics have been in power and who are worried that it's an obstacle for Obama. No way would you peg me as the part of the scared status quo.

On the other hand, a run by Obama is probably exactly what we need right now to right us from all this Republican race baiting that seems to be seeping into every corner of our country.

[goodgd_yall]

31. The only way we'll break down these barriers

may be to have some "trial runs," I think.

[earthlover]

45. Great Post!

I think it is hard to distinguish a racist from another person claiming not to be a racist but would be afraid to advance the cause of a black person for a job, for a marriage partner, for a neighbor, or for elected office because of the fear of what the racists might think.

Obama can win. He has charisma, is articulate, and in every way he is an electable politician. Some think he is not because of his race or his middle name. And of course they blame it on the "racists" but they are only using the "racists" for cover for their own discrimination.

One good thing if Obama is nominated and wins. It will shut up the cowards and moral pygmies who are so chicken to nominate a black or a woman for president and belie their bs rants that they can't win because of the racists out there. The fact of the matter is they can't win if they are not nominated, and if we use their race as a reason to deny them the nomination, there is no moral difference between us doing that and the racists out there who would do the same thing in the general election.

[Lurking Dem]

49. Bingo.

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

[Armstead]

25. I'm not for him in the primaries -- But I think he can win the GE

He's a great candidate. (I prefer Edwards, but that's my choice.)

The people who won't vote for him because he's black won't vote for Hillary because she's a women either. And they're not likely to vote for any Democrat except maybe Zell Miller.

Obama is also racially innocuous enough that he can overcome any subconscious racism among moderate and liberal whites.

On balance, his life and government experience is just as valid as Hillary Clinton or John Edwards. (I think Biden and Dodd have them all beat on that score.)

[ncabot22]

33. I think he can win, but what confuses me is

all the people who say he can't win because people won't vote for him due to his race. Aren't these voters, who would not vote for Barack Obama due to his race, the same people who wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton because she's a woman? :shrug:

[goodgd_yall]

37. Maybe, maybe not

But, I think HRC's gender will also lose her votes. I think there is more fear for a black man holding the highest office in the land. The difference, though, could be that people who may not be crazy about having a woman in the White House can tell themselves that there'll be a man helping her (her husband, her VP, etc). The reality is, people do think this way.

[BenDavid]

35. It truly pains my heart to even say if obama happens to get the

nomination will face issues of race in this election. Oh it is there dear friends. I took offense when some obama supporter posted a question "how soon before bill or hillary uses a racial slur against obama". Let me say if those type words are not in ones vocabulary a racial slur will not be forthcoming and I doubt serious such language is ever used by them. I digress, race will be an issue as harold ford found out in the last 10 days of his senate bid in tenn. all corker had to do is run an ad showing some white blond headed woman saying "harold call me sometimes" and harold lost his lead and corker went on to win the senate seat. Oh it will not be pretty especially in the south. I doubt serious obama will even come close to picking up a single state...The only states in play would be la. and fla..but it will be a lot uglier in the northern states as well.

As I have written many times HRC is my choice because she is for more qualified and has the personality and the aptitude for more so then obama, but I have also stated if he does get the nomination i will cast a vote for him that is far more then others will say if hrc gets the nomination.... but folks it is coming, and whether it be racism or sexism either one will be alive and well on the reptillican side during the 08 general.

[The River]

38. Unconscious Racial Bias

People who (normally) keep any trace of racial bias well hidden
in public but have a whole other view in private.
In the public sphere racism, and for that matter, sexism
are legally and morally unacceptable to society but in the privacy
of the voting booth people are free to vote how they feel,
even if they don't know exactly why they feel that way.

It's a sad truth but America is not yet 100% colorblind.
As a point of law and accepted public norm, yes, we are supposed to be,
but in reality, not yet.

[Tom Rinaldo]

41. I can't exactly do that, because I think Obama can win

But I do not think he would be our strongest candidate, if that is what you are getting at with your question. I think either Biden or Clinton would be our strongest candidate - out of those Democrats running who have any chance to win the nomination. Richardson probably would be next, and then Obama in my opinion.

Some people are fearful of race being used against Obama, and that can't be dismissed completely because America is not totally free of racism. Not all racists are hard core - some are folks who need some kind of special assurance in their own mind that a particular Black is worthy of their trust and respect as opposed to starting out with an assumption that a Black person is as likely to be a person of great character and ability as is a white person. That is a type of racism - no doubt about it. But soft racists like that can have very positive feelings about specific Blacks while still harboring uncomfortable feelings about Blacks in the abstract. To them Bill Cosby may be a fine American but those black youth on the street corners in baggy pants are more of a possible threat.

I hate racism. I hate the whole pack of 'isms. I posted a thread here that asserted that combating Sexism was one valid reason to support Hillary Clinton and I feel that combating racism is one valid reason for supporting Barak Obama also. Barriers get broken when familiarity replaces fear. For some Americans that will only sink in deeply when the highest and most important positions in society are routinely held by some of the people who they once harbored secret fears and insecurities about. I think Barak Obama is the type of person who has the ability to instill confidence in soft racists that he is someone they can trust and respect. He can be the type of person who many of them will embrace as an individual. Colin Powell was such a man also - Jessie Jackson less so, and Al Sharpton, well not so much. When Jackie Robertson integrated Major League Baseball he was chosen for athletic ability but for other less obvious reasons also. He needed more than baseball skills, he needed certain leadership and interpersonal skills combined with a special toughness also.

The special problem for Obama is that he comes into this race without benefit of an obviously long and distinguished career and much of the normal set of resume experiences that people have come to associate with a Presidential candidate. It is not unreasonable for a soft racist to reject a white politician over grounds of inexperience, that happens all the time. Obama is brilliant and he has ways of framing his life experience and demonstrated good judgment that can counterbalence certain potential holes in his resume and instill confidence in his personal leadership for many. But it can be a very convenient hook for a closet unconscious racist to hang his hat on; Oboma's alleged inexperience, that provides an easy and socially acceptable basis for rejecting him as a candidate for President while all the while claiming that Obama's race had nothing to do with it. With Colin Powell most everyone (once) agreed that the man was a leader of the highest caliber, who had risen to the very top of his competitive career through hard work and solid accomplishments that everyone could immediately understand. Colin Powell proved himself. Soft racists often need for Blacks to first "prove themselves" in ways that a White might not have to before they will fully trust them in a position of power over them.

And that of course is the special racially tinged wrinkle on an issue Obama will continually have to confront up to and untill he actually becomes President and does a good job there. Is he running to soon? Is he ready for the job? The last time America elected a President Obama was seated in a State legislature. That is a simple fact and some people will not be comfortable with that fact no matter how well Obama makes his points in speeches.

More of a process concern than a qualification concern is this; has Obama been through enough high level political fights to have honed the right instincts to immediately react in ways that turns attacks against him to his advantage? He has had less opportunity practice those skills than most of his opponents, less time in the public spotlight, less time in the hot seat. If he comes through that test this issue is moot - it won't hurt his electability. But if he is unable to stay sufficiently grounded during the fury of a Presidential campaign because of relative inexperience at that level of political combat - then that will hurt his chances of winning.

Now there are also many positive things that can be said about Obama that can contribute to his chances of winning - but that is not what you asked for a discussion of and so I did not make that a focus. I repeat, I certainly think it very plausible that Obama can win the Presidency if nominated.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

42. Two reasons (not "can't win" reasons, but "unlikely to win" reasons)

1) He is undefined and the Republicans always do a great job of defining candidates however they want. The vagueness in Obama that excites his progressive followers by allowing them to think he is who they wish he was is the same vagueness that will allow everyone else to accept however the Republicans and their compliant media define him.

He is successful among Dems because he is a symbol of their hopes. But will serve just as well as a symbol of the fears of everyone else. He will be Mike Dukakis, who had a 20 point lead as a vague symbol of change, but ultimately lost big because he was defined by the media.

2) The only unknown Democrat of the last generation to survive being defined by the media-Republican complex was Bill Clinton, who won almost by default because the economy was so bad. We are facing a similar situation where a bad economy will put a strong wind at the Democrats backs in 2008.

Unfortunately, economic insecurity promotes tribalism and the fear of the unknown. (Immigration is a good example of how economic insecurity drives racial divisionism.) So the insecurities that should help us can be a hindrance. At their most basic level, people trust people who look like them or talk like them to safeguard their interests because that person is a member of the tribe. Bill Clinton was an affable good-old-boy, which was comforting enough to counter people's base fears. But when the nation is fearful--and there is no fear like economic insecurity in a culture built on sink-or-swim--the nation is not experimental or hopeful. (If they opt for change in scary times it is out of desperation, not hope. Fear doesn't create hope.)

If a Republican incumbent were running it would be a turkey shoot, like FDR in '32, or Clinton in '92. (or the Congressional elections of '82.) But we will not be facing an incumbent.

Obama's campaign and message are perfectly suited to 2000, and terrible for 2008. Edwards campaign and message are better suited to 2008 than they were to 2004. Clinton has no message... she is a symbol of something we have seen have decent results before. The Clinton brand-name is valuable in the context of economic insecurity.

[BootinUp]

43. excellent analysis.nt

[PurityOfEssence]

44. I think he can win, but he just doesn't deserve to after the McClurkin ignominy

As far as I can tell, this country is willing and able to elect a woman or a black to the presidency, and he has quite a bit of crossover appeal. While I don't think Senator Clinton can overcome personal negatives, it seems that Obama still can.

After the deliberate tactical endorsement of a religious sub-culture that reviles a marginalized group and specifically assisting in demonizing that downtrodden group, it shows him to be dreadfully lacking in character. This strikes to the very heart of his stated values: the inclusion of everyone. For someone to resoundingly contradict his core principles and gloss the incident over with blithe dismissals and perfunctory pronouncements of having gotten what they wanted from it is breathtaking; it throws into question the very worth of the man's word of honor.

Expediency and calculated marshalling of the forces of bigotry is not the sign of decency, and to do so so backhandedly calls into question his character in a big way.

[BootinUp]

46. I just want to say, it is really not necessary to bring out

the race card as an argument for or against his chances to win. I think it is pretty clear he transcends that dichotomy as no other black politician has to date.

[wyldwolf]

47. the worm seems to have turned