Poll question: Is it racist when 90% of white people in America vote for the White candidate?

[ericgtr]

A simple rebuttal to the "Poll question: Is it racist when 90% of African Americans in Mississippi vote for the African American candidate?" thread.

[northzax]

1. 90% of white people voted for Hillary Clinton?

when?

[ericgtr]

3. Call it a hypothetical

Is it racist?

[northzax]

12. of course it is

if the only reason you vote for (or against) someone is the color of their skin, that is racist. If you only vote for female candidates, (or male) then that is sexist. If you only vote for the taller candidate you are heightist. etc. why is this a difficult thing to say?

my grandmother, who is 92 and white, is an enthusiastic Obama supporter. the first thing that drew her to his campaign is that she promised herself, after not paying enough attention to the civil rights movement, that she would seriously consider any black candidate for higher office first, and look for reasons NOT to support them. is that racist? sure, it's racist guilt. her heart's in the right place, but her reasons are suspect.

[moodforaday]

19. You can't answer a question posed in this way.

You can't answer a purely hypothetical question posed in this way. Racism does not exist in a vacuum. It is a phenomenon of culture, with all sorts of past and present historical and social conditions. Therefore the question could only be answered if the premise (90% white people vote white) were true. Since it does not seem to be true, the question simply doesn't make sense.

It is in itself a race-baiting question. Because yes, typically, looking at history, 90% whites voting for a white candidate *is* an indicator of racism. However, this says absolutely nothing about the current situation. Here's a counter hypothetical: if the Republicans nominated, say, Colin Powell (which at one point in the past was not an entirely absurd proposition), would it make all Democrats racists for voting for a white Dem candidate?

You can pose questions like those if you wish but they just do not make sense and any answers will not tell you anything about whether a statistical voter is racist or whether the Hillary/Obama rivalry today has any real racist overtones.

[spoony]

22. Except you said "when" not "if"

[Kokonoe]

5. It doesn't say Hillary Clinton

[northzax]

10. ok, so let's take another example

please name a state wide election in which there were two viable candidates and the white candidate got 90% of the white vote.

if you don't think that some people, at least, voted for Barack Obama simply because he is the first viable candididate who happens to be black? really?

[Kokonoe]

14. As a white person, I agree with the black voters 99%

of the time. Maybe they just don't watch fox news.

[northzax]

20. most people don't

most people decide who they are going to vote for because someone they like or trust supports them. or because they like the person, or dislike their opponent.

tell me, if, last Monday, Barack Obama declared that he was embracing his white mother's tradidtions, and would henceforth be calling himself white (50/50, why not pick one over the other?) do you think he would still have gotten 90% of the black vote in Mississippi? seriously?

[Kokonoe]

27. No he would not.

But people vote how they feel about someone they will never meet. And just because a black person can empathize with a black candidate does not make racism. Racism is disparaging someone for their heritage.

[northzax]

28. no, that is the negative part of racism

racism is making a decision about somebody based solely or in large part on the color of their skin. whether that is a good decision or a bad one is really irrelevant.

[Kokonoe]

30. I'm sorry you lost me, what is the positive part of racism?

Making a decision about somebody based solely or in large part on the color of their skin. whether that is a good decision or a bad one is really irrelevant?

I am sorry I am twisting your words(but I did copy and paste). I join you in wanting the best for democrats. And thank you for expressing your opinion.


The Clinton campaign is involved in baiting Barack Obama into making a sound bite for all to play over and over for the rest of the election.

[northzax]

31. well, there are identity politics than can be very useful

to minority communities. Choosing to only patronize black owned businesses, for instance, is certainly racist (just as much as refusing to patronize black-owned businesses) but it can be a valuable economic tool in oppressed communities.

if Obama can be baited into making a stupid comment about this, he isn't ready for a General Election anyway.

[Kokonoe]

32. The problem is love beats hate.

Here is a quick article that somes it up. I need some rest.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5030052

[mac2]

38. Except for Rice and the Powell family.

There are Afro-Americans in our government I'd wouldn't go to hear them speak if they paid me.

Then there are the others like Julian Bond, Shelia Jackson Lee, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, etc. who would be good candidates for President or VP.

Mostly I agree with their political agenda since it is a Progressive voice.

[mac2]

2. This is not a fair poll when a majority of the people in this

country are "white".

[ericgtr]

4. Ahh.. so it's only racist if blacks vote for blacks then? n/t

[mac2]

11. What?

Or their self interest. Wasn't your question racist in the first place?

I'm not a Hillary or Obama supporter regardless of their race. They both are globalists and belong to those secret organizations. They both were in Congress and let Bush run all over us. There will be no change. I'd like to be wrong.

[skooooo]

6. This only happened in Miss.

Why is everyone acting like this is some kind of significant development that means something?

Mississippi is a pretty racist place. You can't extrapolate what happens there to the rest of the country. States that were over 90% white also voted for Obama.

Use a little critical thinking.

[mac2]

15. Right

[EffieBlack]

40. Until this year, 99% of Democratic voters voted for white candidates in the primaries

even when a black candidate was running. Yet, at the same time, black voters voted overwhelmingly for white candidates.

Funny - I don't seem to remember any handwringing about "bloc voting" or "racism" among white voters then. So, why is it now a big issue when black voters vote in large numbers for a black candidate(although in a smaller percentage than white voters voted for white candidates)?

Frankly, I think the problem is that it appears this time that black voters are making a difference in the outcomes and that scares a lot of people.

[Exilednight]

7. Bad question. People vote for candidates for various reasons. I would have voted.....

for John Edwards, but not because he is white. Now I will vote for Barack Obama, but not because he is black.

[TheZug]

8. Is it sexist when women vote for the woman?

[northzax]

13. if that's the reason they are going it, yes

if your only reason to vote for someone is racial, you are racist. if your only reason is sex, you are sexist.

[ericgtr]

17. Exactly my point

thank you.

[mac2]

18. What about the fact that a women might be more sympathetic

to their needs like education, health, child care, equality, etc.?

[dmallind]

9. In between

Both are examples of bias towards the "us", but "racist" has IMO developed an implicit meaning in the US at least of bias of the empowered majority against a less powerful minority, so can only be one way except in certain specific microcosms where non-whites are the powerful majority.

BTw I think it was 70% whites for HRC, but yes that's skewed enough to be clearly based on something other than policy/character preference based on the very small difference in overall popular support. And yes so is the 90% black for Obama.

[Ronnie]

16. Too many variables.

No one is either just Black or just White.

[Beacool]

21. Yes, it would be.

It's racist when 91% (yesterday's black vote in MS) of one group of people vote for the candidate who represents their race, no matter whether they're black, white, hispanic, etc.

This race HAS become about race when 80% to 90% of black people are consistently voting for the black candidate and they themselves tell reporters they are doing so because of his race. The issues? Heck, who cares as long as he's a "brother".

For the record, I think that it's equally wrong if some women are voting for Hillary based solely on her gender.

[EffieBlack]

24. So white voters in 2004 were racist?

When 99% of them voted for white candidates against Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley-Braun?

In fact, black voters consistently split their votes between white and black candidates - and usually vote overwhelmingly for white candidates even when black candidates are running. On the other hand, white voters consistently vote in HUGE numbers against black candidates. It's not as noticeable because they spread their votes out among two or more white candidates. But the bottom line is that they overwhelmingly vote AGAINST black candidates.

Are white voters racist for voting for white candidates? Or do you assume they have other reasons for voting for white candidates besides race? And if they do, shouldn't you make the same assumption about black voters?

[northzax]

29. Al Sharpton?

Carol Mosely-Braun? you are putting those two in the same breath as Senator Obama? reaching.

[Beacool]

33. Yep, it's called overreaching..........

:eyes:

[EffieBlack]

34. Not at all - if black voters were voting for candidates solely because they're black, they SHOULD be

in the "same breath." The fact that you think there is a difference between them demonstrates my point.

Black voters are voting for Obama for the same reasons that white voters vote for white candidates - because they think they are the most qualified to serve. The claim that black voters are voting for Obama primarily because he is black is insulting - and it is disproved by the fact that black voters have consistently voted for white candidates even when a black candidate is running and that Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley-Braun did not garner significant numbers of black votes (which would not have been the case if black voters were voting for black candidates just because they're black).

[Johnny__Motown]

23. you are not giving enough information on these polls. either way ir people base their decision on

race then it is racist.


The question you should be asking.


Is it racist when 90% of blacks vote for the black candidate after that candidate has suffered multiple racial attacks, or is it an act of rebellion against those attacks?

[SeaLyons]

25. Yes, it's racist

of course it is. It's a brother voting for a brother - and hey, that's not racist to say because that's the word used by Obama when referring to Bill. Furthermore, a "brother voting for a brother" takes precedence over electing the best candidate. The proof is in the 90% vote in MS. Can't be denied.

[AX10]

37. kick

[George_Bonanza]

26. 100% of presidents have been White; Blacks were enslaved, disenfranchised, and discriminated against

Cut them some slack, will you? Blacks have been the most loyal supporters of White Democrats since the Civil Rights era. They are NOT racists.

[mac2]

39. Everyone of a different race can be racist and angry.

Get real...

[BenDavid]

35. Voting for a person because of the color of his skin is racist.

92% blacks voted for obama last night. 72% white voted for HRC. Of those percentages how many voted based on the color of his or her skin? I would not even venture a guess.

[marions ghost]

36. About the only way I see

you could decide this burning issue definitively is to have equal numbers of white and black candidates running in every ticket in every state. Then you'd have a lot of statistics.

Discussing the race factor is OK as it's certainly a reality, but I doubt you can draw any numerical conclusions about the percentage of votes that are primarily racist.

[Medusa]

41. Bad Question.

If 50% of the political candidates were black and 50% were white and whites voted 90% of the time for the White candidates, then yes, we might be able to do a true comparison. Your logic is quite faulty.

[EffieBlack]

42. So, as long as whites are more than 50% of the electorate, it is wrong to ask whether there's a

problem with them voting 99% year after year after year for white candidates against black candidates?

For example, in 2004, white Democratic votes were split between Kucinich, Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Sharpton as follows:

Kerry 64%
Edwards 21%
Dean 5%
Kucinich 5%
Sharpton 1%


On the other hand, in the same year, black Democratic votes were split this way:

Kerry 65%
Edwards 15%
Dean 5%
Kucinich 3%
Sharpton 5%


In other words, 99% of white voters voted for white candidates and against the black candidate, who got less than 20% of the vote of the lowest polling white candidate. On the other hand, 94% of black voters voted for white candidates and against the black candidate. You don't see anything telling in these numbers?

If the fact that 80-90% of black voters are voting for Obama this time around is somehow proof of black racism, wasn't it racist for 99% of white voters to vote for white candidates in the past? And if black voters have consistently supported white candidates over black candidates in the past, what proof do you have that black support for Obama is based on his race and is therefore, racist? What changed between 2004 and now that has suddenly turned black voters into a pack of racists, something we clearly weren't four years ago?

Or could it be that, unlike white voters, black voters have consistently voted for whomever they thought would be the best representative, regardless of race, notwithstanding the consistent attempts to view everything we say, do and think through a prism of race - something that is never done to white voters?