reality: Obama's impossible sell will be to whites.

[k_jerome]

repubs will not vote for him, and unfortunately, a sizeable percentage of white Democrats will not vote for him. They may say they will, but come election day, in the privacy of the voting booth, he will lose a landslide. This is the reality of America today.

[patricia92243]

1. I've asked before and did not get an answer. Can we win without the South?

Reality is that the South will not vote black.

[Mass]

5. Read Thomas Schaller "Whisling Past Dixie::

It makes a good argument that we must try to win without the South, but at the same time work on the South so that it comes back to us.

[fuzzyball]

Midwest is not much better, I lived there for 3 decades...

Only the coasts are more enlightened. Here on the west
coast, mixed race couples do not even get a 2nd stare.

[Bjorn Against]

63. much of the midwest is either blue or winnable

Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois are all blue. Iowa is a light purple and very close to blue. South Dakota and North Dakota are red but have shown that Democrats can win statewide races. Sure there are a few states that are hardly progressive, but much of the midwest is winnable.

[fuzzyball]

64. We are not talking red or blue, the subject at hand is racial

prejudices. I can guarantee they are alive and well in
the midwest. I know. I lived there for 30+ years. And I
am a minority race in the US.

[Bjorn Against]

67. Sorry I misunderstood, yes there is a good deal of racism here

Although there is a good deal of racism anywhere you go in this country. The urban areas of the midwest tend to be fairly racially diverse, although the rural areas are very white. The more diverse the area you are in the more accepting people tend to be (although that is certainly not always the case).

[nodular]

72. "prejudices. I can guarantee they are alive and well in

the Midwest"

Yes. I'm Jewish, and I was surprised at the level of antisemitic feeling there (when I went to college there, admitedly many years ago), though it was inadvertant.

[Infinite Hope]

85. Depends on where you are...

Being from Minnesota, I can say in most places nobody cares about race. Only in rare individual cases like anywhere else. I also know Wisconsin and Iowa enough to say Obama would compete there without much trouble, especially after galvanizing the black vote (small, but crucial) in the general election.

[fujiyama]

90. Where in the midwest did you live?

Many of the suburbs around major cities are now socially moderate and I really don't think the issue of race would be as great as some would make it.

Now, this isn't to say racism doesn't exist. It does. People make nasty racist jokes all too often. And while interracial relationships certainly are not as common as they on the coasts (especially the West Coast which has been much more progressive in that regard), I don't think they are viewed as that big a deal anymore, especially among younger people. I think with a large influx of non white immigrants and the growth of an African American middle class, suburbs are becoming more diverse and tolerant. My own perspective in different, being that I am younger and non-white, and my friends are about as diverse as you can get (and I grew up in suburbia).

[k_jerome]

10. its not just the south, its everywhere. nt.

[kentuck]

34. The South will not vote "black"??

If I'm not mistaken, there are more black reps from the South than any other part of the nation? Where do you pull this stuff from?

[k_jerome]

36. this is nationwide...

relegating it to the south is bs.

[jefferson_dem]

60. nonsense. what is this "this" that you speak of? and what sort of evidence do you have?

n/t

[Dawgs]

39. When was the last time you've been to the South?

There are more black people down here than anywhere else in the country.

Many of my white Republican friends have commented about how they like Barack Obama. That might change, but it's something.

[patricia92243]

41. I live in the South. Usually the more a section has a larger black population, the more prejudice

the whites are. This is sad and horrible, but mostly true.

[Hippo_Tron]

57. Look at an electoral map, of course we can win without the south

Whether we SHOULD try to win without the south is another story.

[jefferson_dem]

59. You do know that Harold Ford just received over 48% of the vote in blood red TN, don't you?

n/t

[elperromagico]

81. To be fair, he ran center-right and his opponent was an idiot.

Ford ran an extraordinary campaign, but the likelihood of a national Democratic candidate being able to run that kind of campaign in the South seems slim.

[Clark2008]

61. Hmmmm... seems to me the mid-West has a LOT more white

people than the South.

Geezus, when will you people learn the fucking Civil War has been over for more than 100 years. The South is not nearly as bigoted as other parts of the country.

The OP is correct, but it's not isolated to the South. Howe4ver, I should point out that HRC won't win either - in those same pockets that wouldn't vote for Obama.

[elperromagico]

82. It's not just a rhetorical flourish. It's a fact.

Consider 2004.

In Mississippi, where blacks made up 35% of the total vote, whites voted 85-14 for Bush.
In South Carolina, where blacks made up 30% of the total vote, whites voted 78-22 for Bush.
In Louisiana, where blacks made up 27% of the total vote, whites voted 75-24 for Bush.
In North Carolina, where blacks made up 26% of the total vote, whites voted 73-27 for Bush.
In Alabama, where blacks made up 25% of the total vote, whites voted 80-19 for Bush.
In Georgia, where blacks made up 25% of the total vote, whites voted 76-23 for Bush.

Utah's white voters favored Bush 73-24.
Wyoming's white voters favored Bush 70-28.
Idaho's white voters favored Bush 69-29.

[beaconess]

83. Wow - does that mean that Edwards shouldn't run?

After all, he was actually on the ticket that got its ass handed to them by White Southern voters so he has a track record of not being able to earn the White vote in the South.

Sounds like White voters just don't trust John Edwards, so maybe he shouldn't waste his time running since he'll probably lose in a landslide.

:sarcasm:

[elperromagico]

87. I'm pleased that you can take my argument and twist it to suit your inane needs.

Nice talking to you.

[Radical Activist]

74. 20% increase in African-American turn-out

and yes, we can win one or two Southern states.

[beaconess]

76. Maybe even more than that, given the large proportion of Black voters in Southern states n/t

[elperromagico]

80. Kerry's strategy, however flawed, almost led to exactly that.

There are states outside the South that are ripe for the picking, states won by Clinton that have since slipped away but are well within reach.

It's interesting to note that Democratic candidates seem to do better in Southern states with lower black populations. In states like Mississippi and Alabama, with heavy black populations, the white voters are overwhelmingly Republican. In states like Arkansas and Florida, the white voters are not nearly as resistant to Democrats.

[renaissanceguy]

86. We don't need the South to win!!!!

We need to focus on winning the West. They are more libertarian (lower case L). We will have better luck out there and should focus our energy there. Let's face it -- the deep South won't vote Dem, even if shrub ran as one!


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues/479862

[Double T]

2. Agreed. America has to decide if it is ready for a woman president........

BEFORE it will decide on an African-American.

[Mass]

6. Why?

[Double T]

9. You have to move the south forward one step at a time...........

woman first, THEN. It is an unfortunate BUT real truth.

[Mass]

17. Or we may stop thinking the South is the only place that matters and

remember there is also a NorthEast, a SouthWest, a MidWest, a NorthWest, ....

[Double T]

24. The south matters in a Presidential Election

[fuzzyball]

53. Are you kidding? Chicago is still the most segregated city

amongst large cities, and it is in the heart of Obama country.
I am referring to metro Chicago. The city itself is probably
majority black.

You gotta remember whom Obama defeated 2 years ago. It was a total
right wing extremist nut who had just moved to Illinois, and kept
stepping in it.

[Hard_Work]

56. Yeah, but

YOU have to remember that he was handily beating the legitimate repub candidate, before HE stepped in the shit over the sex club thing. And he was well popular as well as white. Barak was winning going away anyway.

[beaconess]

78. Why women first? Blacks helped BUILD this country from day one

and, in fact, have had the vote longer than women have. In fact, women owe much of their political and social progress to the civil rights movement, which benefitted women in some ways much more than it did Blacks. We have just as much right to be full participants in the political system - including running for and being elected president - as any other American. Why should Blacks take a back seat to women?

Why do you think it's appropriate to relegate Blacks to second-class political citizenship?

[Toots]

92. Because there are more women in america than black folks..

Women will come first. I suspect our next President and Vice-presidemt will be Hillary and Obama. Then after eight good years it will be Obama in a landslide....:thumbsup:

[yankhadenuf]

7. But what if the woman was Condi Rice

an African-American woman in the Oval Office... she would trick so many African-Americans and women to vote for her, but she would be the NEOCON's darling :evilfrown:

[Double T]

13. You'll NEVER see Condi nominated as a Presidential Candidate.......

by the rethugs,

[fuzzyball]

54. They would nominate her if she had fire in the belly for the job

which she has given every indication she has not.

[beaconess]

79. "Trick African-Americans and women to vote for her? Do you think that women and Blacks are stupid?

[Mass]

3. We were told that about Deval Patrick in MA. We all know what happened.

This argument is fallacious. We would lose the same Southern states we would lose with Hillary.

Give me one state Hillary will win that Obama will not?

[beaconess]

4. Bullshit

Blacks are always told we don't have a chance of measuring up - this is nothing new.

It's often couched in nice ways - it's never the person making the claim who is going to stand in the way, of course. It's always OTHER people who won't give a Black person a chance.

And time after time after time, we just step up to the plate, swing for the bleachers and more often than not, find that we CAN make it happen and that the so-called opposition to us isn't as daunting as some people insist on believing.

So I call bullshit on the argument - made before even one primary or general election vote is cast or any campaign has actually begun - that Obama would lose in a landslide because he's Black.

While I'm sure you're well meaning and don't intend to do so, by making this argument, you're advancing a type of paternalistic racism that, if allowed to prevail, would hold Blacks back just as effectively as outright racism does.

[k_jerome]

11. yeah. racism. pahh. nt.

[beaconess]

20. Yeah racism exists. So let's put all the Black folks in the corner to quietly wait it out until

racism goes away so we don't mess it up for everyone else.

[k_jerome]

22. you've summed up the attitude of white america..

exactly why he will not get elected.

[beaconess]

26. No - I'm summing up YOUR attitude

The attitudes of "White America" are much more complicated, diverse and nuanced than yours.

[k_jerome]

28. no they aren't...

check the threads here then check the condition of african americans in this country.

[beaconess]

31. I don't need to consult DU to "check the condition of African Americans in this country"

But thanks for your input, patronizing and misguided that it is.

[Ellis Wyatt]

14. agree

I think that's a very defeatest argument.

Colin Powell could have coasted into the republican nomination in 2000 if he wanted. Even Condi, who doesn't even have any legislative experience is a front-runner for the nomination. When JC Watts was in Congress, he was one of their rising stars

So it's not like the Republicans wouldn't ever for a black guy, they just have to agree with him or her, and I definitly think that Democrats don't have a problem.

Maybe as a white guy, I'm naive, but I think that someone like Obama could easily get elected if he won out on ideas, regardless of his color.

[iamjoy]

30. Some Blacks Have The Same Concern

I used to feel like you did - that the people bringing up race as a "concern" were privately racist - maybe not even able to admit it to themselves. This happened in 2002 when my husband and I supported Daryl Jones for Gov of Florida and my parents thought we were crazy because Florida would never elect a Black man. My Mom said, most of the people who grew up drinking out of "white only" water fountains are not going to vote for a "colored" person. Jones lost the nomination to McBride who was considered more "electable." McBride then went on to look like a total doofus next to Jeb).

Four years later, Jones is running mate to Jim Davis - Gov/Lt. Gov. I'm out canvassing in a heavily African American neighborhood, handing Davis for Governor flyers. One man (he was at least 55) looks at the picture of Jones and says, "I hope people vote for the man and don't just look at the skin color."

Now, I don't think this was one of those things like it's okay for an African American to call another by the N word, but not okay for whites to do it (not sure I agree with that philosophy, anyway). Rather, I think it was a man who faced enough discrimination in his life to be a little cynical.

[beaconess]

40. A Black person saying "I hope people vote for the man, not just look at skin color"

is very different than saying "He CAN'T win and will lose in a landslide because he's Black."

There's a considerable difference between expressing a rational concern that, based on history, some Whites won't vote for a Black candidate and insisting that a Black candidate cannot ever win. The former is just acknowledging reality, the latter is a defeatest approach that,if acquiesced to, will have the same result as outright racism.

In my view, there's little difference between saying "I don't want a Black person to be president, so he shouldn't run" and "Other people don't want a Black person to be president, so he shouldn't run." The result is exactly the same - second-class status for Black politicians who are still being told that they're not good enough to get in the ring with White candidates.

I don't accept that line of thinking and will not back down on my support of a candidate who happens to be Black because some (perhaps) well-meaning but misguided people think that it's not "our time" yet.

[Eurobabe]

49. I second your "bullshit" call on this argument too

I just think it's lame and false.

Edit: I wasn't going to post this second part, but after reading more threads I am. The OP reminds me of a CON operative, someone who comes on here and drops these stupid bombs just to see what kind of response they get from people. I swear I think Repubes have infiltrated DU with the intent of developing talking points and memes, sometimes we are our own worst enemies on GD:P

[beaconess]

62. Sadly, I think you may be right.

And, sadly, they can see that for all of our big talk, many so-called liberals are just as backward thinking on issues of race as those we criticize on the other side - we just use more politically correct language.

[TabulaRasa]

8. As oppose to Hillary, who will sweep up?

Yeah, keep telling yourself that while you lead us over a cliff. I think sexism is much more rampant in America than racism, and the idea of a woman CIC just doesn't sit well with a lot of people, no matter what they say in polls. I'd be happy to be wrong. And in every other way, Hillary sucks ... conservatives detest her; liberals certainly won't love her when they find out what she's about. She has virtually nothing to offer. Her health care proposal went over like a lead balloon. Working people will hate her pro-corporate bullshit like "free" trade. And she's been consistently for this disastrous war, which will deprive her of the right to attack the repukes on that issue. I'm still trying to figure out why anybody supports her. She just doesn't have a single plus in my accounting. Not one! Obama's at least politically astute and charasmatic. Clinton is neither. And I suspect anybody who wouldn't vote for a black man, wouldn't vote for the Democrats anyway.

[k_jerome]

12. thanks for your input. nt.

[TabulaRasa]

48. Did you forget the "sarcasm" smilie?

Btw, on an unrelated note, I'm not an idiot. I just noticed my typo on "charasmatic". I hope I'm not contributing to a freepers' version of "Get a brain, morans".

[ripple]

47. Hammer, meet nail

Excellent assessment.

The only thing I would slightly disagree with is your view that Clinton isn't politically astute. I believe she's too politically astute and her perception of public opinion largely guides her political decisions. Liberals and conservatives see right through this, as do many moderates, I suspect. People would much rather vote for someone who takes a principled stance, even if they don't agree with the person on every issue, than choose someone they perceive as a vote-pandering chameleon who's likely to betray them later.

[TabulaRasa]

50. Then, she's not politically astute.

As a friend of mine says, "If you're reading the focus group data right, you win the election." Democrats don't know how to read the polls or popular perceptions. They don't realize that people prefer someone they disagree with who will stick with their position on principle over someone who constantly panders to them. Hillary is perceived as pandering, which makes her not very astute. Obama on the other hand (or to give another example on the other side: McCain) does pander, but people don't perceive it as such. He talks about a subject as mealy-mouthed as civility, and it sounds like a strong and principled position. That's why he can be considered politically astute, and why he should be out front representing the Democratic Party. And why people like HC and John Kerry should be working behind the scenes, or as I prefer, not at all.

[ripple]

55. I thought the same thing after I posted

But I was on my way out the door and didn't have time to correct myself. I think my argument did inadvertently prove your point more than it did my own. I still think legislators might consider Hillary somewhat astute, because she'll cozy up to them to make political inroads(the Wednesday prayer meetings with Brownback are a good example). That sort of pandering plays well on Capital Hill, but not so much with the electorate.

You're spot-on about Obama, as well. If he weren't running in '08 himself (at least, I think he will), I have a feeling the other dem candidates would be falling all over each other to gain his endorsement and, more importantly, to get him out on the campaign trail with them. Obama has the makings of a true populist president, which is one of several reasons I support him. A narrow victory by a nominee like Clinton, or even Gore, won't come anywhere close to healing what's broken in this country, not just in terms of executive decisions, but also in the attitudes and outlook of the general population.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beaconess]

16. If so, lots of DUers can make a killing

since many of our so-called liberal brethren seem to be perfectly comfortable making such arguments.

[LoZoccolo]

18. Could we at least get ahold of one poll before we sink any particular candidate...

...on dubious grounds?

And do you really want to have to surmount the kind of obstacles to getting out the vote for Hillary on election day after she's won the primary on a "she's white" whisper campaign?

[k_jerome]

19. it is widely shown that polls are poor predictors for...

african american candidates. the shame of racism and all.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

25. Document or retract. n/t

[k_jerome]

27. here...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15366427/site/newsweek/

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=89

[LoZoccolo]

35. In 2008 that data will be almost 20 years old.

And besides, how do we know it's the white people who didn't turn out to vote for that guy and not people who knew he'd win and just didn't bother?

[k_jerome]

38. ok thats it...nt.

[LoZoccolo]

42. And the question still remains...do you really want to try to get out the vote for Hillary...

...after her primary opponent's been smeared for being black? Do you think everyone will be enthusiastic about voting for her after that?

[k_jerome]

43. i have seen your posts before...

being non-white, i will not engage in a debate regarding smearing a non-white candidate. good try though. we all wish for your power.

[LoZoccolo]

44. Sit out if you like, but I hope it wasn't this post that discouraged you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=2923875

[beaconess]

46. You don't think a non-white person can smear a non-white candidate?

LoZo's point is dead on - If in the quest to advance their own candidate, political operatives - whatever their race - try to play the race card ("you KNOW he can't win because he's Black and America will NEVER elect a Black president") against an opposing candidate, such tactics will come back to haunt them.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

29. I think you are making improper connections for bad purposes.

First, I live in Illinois, and vote for people of color all the time. In fact, outside the Cook County power brokers (who choose the Irish candidate, the pole, Italian, the mexican and the black - depending on the office) few people worry about skin color here.

No, the reason that people will not vote for him in Illinois is because
a) he was an unknown in Illinois, who won office because the GOP self-destructed horribly by attacking a man who wanted sex (WITH HIS WIFE! FOR SHAME) and forcibly replacing him with the superbigot, ultrachristian, mega-hypocrite Alan Keyes. Had the GOP selected a moderate, Obama would have been history.

b) His connections with crime-slime Rezko will destroy him. You don't buy a million dollar house at a $300K discount because the same day an indicted grafter and briber who collected pols on both sides of the Illinois aisle bought the lot next door at a substantially inflated cost. (from the same owner) AND shortly afterward, he sold a large plot of land to Obama for a substantial discount. If that is not a bribe, what is?

c) His total lackluster senate tenure. While some view little or no time in the Senate as a plus, especially if it is early enough to avoid the dreaded disease known as senor-itis (I am one of the 100 most powerful people in the world. How dare you ask me to follow ethics laws?) it would have been nice had he actually done something. Unfortunately, Obama is a pleasant speaking, inexperienced, good looking person with little more to offer than a smile and a sense of humor.

The world is a bit more complex than that.

[k_jerome]

32. i think you are blind to the condition of african americans in this country...

and in your own state. there is a reason for that, and its not african americans.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

45. no, not blind. I am saying that here most people do NOT vote on skin color

They vote on other issues, including whether the pol's parent is giving them the office as a birthright. (no joke, unfortunately)

You may allege that people won't vote for Obama due to skin color, but there are plenty of reasons not to vote for him outside of that issue. I still say you are ignoring those issues and concentrating on the least powerful one.
Do we have bigots in Illinois? Sure, perhaps not as bad as Goode from Va, but of course we do.
But here, we have mosques next to evangelical churches. Races live in mixed areas. And while we have some extremely poor areas (southside of Chicago, East St. Louis, Upper Waukegan) the poor are black, white and hispanic. Even though certain poverty stricken regions seem to have less racial mixing than others, you still see whites walking and working in poor black areas, blacks walking in poor hispanic areas, etc.

[fujiyama]

91. Wow, you seem to really have something against Obama

parroting RW lies about some supposed shady deal with Rezko.

And what "moderate" GOP politician would have beaten Obama? Jack Ryan? Yeah right.

[mntleo2]

33. Perhaps White Men, But White Women? Maybe Not

...white women are more liberal than white men, especially when they vote. This is because white women often experience discrimination, albeit a different kind than blacks do ~ but it is in an important category because it is in the workplace. Hit us in the pocketbook, and yeah we can relate to African American's endless struggle for equality since we are breadwinners too. White women make $.70 on each dollar a white man makes. The gap is even bigger for people of color. Still it is galling to know you are working right next to someone making 30% more than you ~ and when you go home you have another job waiting for you as well taking care of the kids as women put in on the average 12 hours more on household chores than men. White women may not get followed around by the store detective, and she may be allowed to cash a check easier, but for the most part we have been the "n" word in the workplace as well as at home.


Barak Obama is articulate, earthy, he is "safe" (meaning you know he would always be a gentleman) and he gets it about women's struggle as well as struggles for people of color. If people of color got out and voted along with white women, he would would be a threat to the white Good Old Boy's network, big time!

My 2 cents

Cat In Seattle

[Bjornsdotter]

37. Obama

Carried my 99.9% white, rural, Bush-lovin' county in the primaries and the election.

I think Obama could win

Cheers

[Poll_Blind]

51. No, it's not the reality of America today. It's your reality.

That's what you need to come to grips with.

PB

[brg5001]

52. Doug Wilder won in Virginia many years ago

Think that's an aberration? Georgia's Chief Justice is Leah Ward Sears. http://www.gasupreme.us/

Take a look. She's indeed African-American and recently beat an attempted challenge in a landside.

The post is nonsense. Numerous African Americans have been elected across the country in both majority and minority Black districts.

I'm not saying that racism doesn't exist. It does! There will always be a core of voters who won't vote for anyone of another ethnic group, and since whites are the majority in most states, such racism has the biggest impact on traditional minorities. But across the country we see evidence that people really will not just say they'll vote for minority candidates, they will actually do it.

[jefferson_dem]

58. I stopped reading after you declared with such confidence that...

"repubs will not vote for him..."

[Telly Savalas]

68. But we need the Republican vote

That's why we not only need just a white male, but a white male who supports staying in Iraq for several decades, repealing the minimum wage, and overturning Roe v. Wade.

Hell maybe if Democrats started burning crosses on people's lawns, we could better win over the hearts and minds of voters we'd lose if we nominated Obama.

[beaconess]

70. You are very bad . . .

:spank:

[KingFlorez]

65. People who vote like that probably wouldn't vote for any Democrat

Those kind of people won't effect the election results anymore than they have in the last elections.

[beaconess]

66. Exactly! Since when do Democrats determine who should run in our primaries based upon

how we think the most bigoted Republicans will react to them?

[Telly Savalas]

69. We don't

But the anti-Obama crowd keeps repeating this idiotic argument in the hopes that it will stick.

[beaconess]

71. Bigoted Republicans are par for the course, but Lord save us from our well-meaning

but misguided "I'M not racist, but we'd better not let the Black guy play because the OTHER kids might pick on him and we need to protect him from the bullies" folk supposedly on our own damned side.

[Radical Activist]

73. Iowa is very white, the last time I checked.

He's tied with someone who nearly won Iowa in '04, so I think he'll do just fine.
Obama won rural counties by large margins in Southern Illinois that still have klan chapters and are more Southern than Midwestern. In conclusion, you are full of shit.

[PresidentObama]

75. America will always be racist--to a degree.

As it will be sexist. *Cough* Hillary Clinton *Cough*

But I think Obama could overcome the race issue, and make this election about issues and change. Sure America has people not willing to vote for black candidates, but they also have people who wouldn't vote for women either.

I don't think Obama will have as tough a time as the original poster of this thread is suggesting. Yes, it'll be an issue. Just like JFK's religious practices were when he ran, and by the way who won that election anyway?

America cares about your message, and your convictions. At least the vast majority. Race won't be the deciding factor if Obama doesn't win.

[beaconess]

77. You're right - but we're definitely making progress

Just a little over fifty years ago, Blacks in many states still couldn't vote. Public accommodations were segregated by law. There were no African Americans in Congress and a tiny, tiny number held any elective offices anywhere in the country.

These things all changed, not because people said "America's not ready" and then sate back and waited for America to get ready. These things changed becausd people MADE America change.

If Obama gets in the race, that will be one more step on the road to progress. Even if he doesn't win the nomination, if he stays on message, handles himself well and makes a respectable showing in the primaries, he will have gone a long way toward helping America change just a little bit more.

So to all of these doomsayers who wring their hands and whine that "America's not ready!!!" I say,

WE'RE GOING TO MAKE AMERICA READY! SO, GET WITH THE PROGRAM OR GET OUT OF OUR WAY!!!

[Infinite Hope]

84. He won't have a problem with white Democrats in the general election.

He's a professional and respectable person just like anyone else and that's what they care about and look for. All of this "Obama will have trouble in the Midwest" is ignorance.

There's no more, and i would argue there's less, racism in individuals in the midwest than other regions because they haven't been enmeshed in all the controversy for decades and centuries - so there's no historical hatred.

[Imagevision]

88. Observe what happens after Christmas when Obama throws his hat in the ring

So far the msm is going nutz covering Barack and the man only made a few appearances. Repugs/MSM smearing of Obama will backfire, Obama is -->that smart!!

[fujiyama]

89. Maybe...

Maybe not.

We've never had a black candidate run for president on either party's ticket.

And regardless, I am not voting based on his race. I am not interested in pandering to racists.

[CANDO]

93. My wife is fairly apolitical, but she really likes him.

You may be surprised. I think people see in him a way out of this gutter politics warfare we've had since the right-wing went loco on Bill Clinton. Not that they would back off, but they would really be exposing themselves as racist bigots and people are very tired of it. What they did to Harold Ford may have worked in Tennessee, but it horrified people throughout most of the rest of the country.