Is it Sexist When 65% of Women Vote for The Female Candidate?

[redstate_democrat]

Sexism goes both ways. A lot of DU posters talk about the high support Barack gets with black voters and categorizes these votes as a 'bloc' or automatic vote for Barack simply because he is black. This implies that African American voters are racist in some way. Nevermind the fact that these same voters were are the highest uniform voting block in each election, year after year, a Democrat always gets 89-90% of the black vote. The Democratic party doesn't even get 90% of the women's vote. But now that black people are voting for a black candidate in a Democratic primary, somehow this voting bloc is wrong. What about the fact that Hillary got 65% of white women in PA? Shouldn't we be implying these women are sexist?

These are the facts as of right now

1. Barack has NEVER asked anyone to vote for him because he is a black man

2. Hillary has consistently asked women to vote for her because she is a woman. She talks about how great things will be with a woman in the White House. She talks about how it is "time for a woman in the White House". Then, at the slightest critisim of her campaign's tactics, she accuses people of being sexist towards her or her campaign.

3. Obama has never called anyone racist. His campaign, when asked, has stated that various remarks made might have been racist remarks or race baiting.

4. If Obama were to get on television and ask people to vote for him because he is black, he would be vilified, and ran out of town on a hot rail. He doesn't have the luxury of pandering for votes based on his identity, something he has absolutely no control over.

5. Hillary is more advantaged in this race. For one thing, she is a woman, and women make up HALF OF THE ELECTORATE, even more so in a Democratic electorate. Secondly, she is white and that still means something here in America. There are a whole hellava lot more white folks voting than black folks. Third, Hillary's last name is Clinton and she is a former first lady. With that carries all of the political backing, political machinery, perceived "experience", name recognition, and fame anyone needs to get ahead. Dare I ask, if Hillary was John Edwards in female form, would she be where she is today? Probably NOT. If Hillary Clinton was Carol Mosley Braun, would she be where she is today? Hillary Clinton is very privileged and advanataged in this race, yet, she is still losing. She should be winning considering all of the above mentioned head starts.


6. So knowing all of this, why is she not winning?

7. If Hillary Clinton were Carol Mosley Braun, running against a white "Barack Obama", she would have been asked to leave right after Super Tuesday.

8. Obama started out from the bottom up. He built a magnificent campaign. He earned his way to where he is, yet, institutions seem to be keeping Hillary in based on the fact that she is, yes, a white woman who happens to be a former first lady. She plays her gender card and then beats Obama over the head with race baiting clubs. She plays the victim, but is usually in full attack mode while being so-called "victimized".

9. Obama can't attack Hillary. If he does, he will be carticatured as an angry, black man. Hillary doesn't have this burden. When she attacks, she is seen as "tough", "gritty", "prepared". There is no doubt Barack could lay her out. Hell, get Michelle out there. You know she wants to. But sadly, even if Michelle were to go on the attack against Hillary, white women would become offended. How dare she? You see how they turned on Oprah. Oprah was loved by them...that is until she decided to use her own mind and back Obama. My, how things change. This showed me how things really are. Michelle could lay out Hillary. But she can't. Why? Because she is black.

10. The entire world is watching in awe. If the Democratic party gives this nomination to Hillary based on some meme that he is unelectable to racist whites, then we will have embarrassed ourselves around the world. We talk about free and open and democratic elections around the world, where dictators, ethnic cleansing, genocide, and race hatred can be eradicated, yet, right here in out own front yards, where the primary is basically over, the Democratic party is actually taking into consideration this racist trash Clinton speaks regarding Obama's electability based on his race, name, and who he knows in his neighborhood. If this happens, we have no damn business sticking our noses into anything around the world when it comes to "liberating" people from Fascism. We have no room to talk.

11. The Democratic party is showing itself to be just a phony, weak excuse for a political party. The leaders in this party, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Dean, Brazille, obviously have no back bone because they are allowing this fiasco, this blatantly racist and sexist fiasco, this heist by the Clinton campaign, this total disregard for the rules set up by the DNC, a total lack of respect for the party itself by the Clinton campaign, to go unanswered in the public square without as much as a slap on the wrist. This is occurring in broad daylight and no one seems to be saying anything of note. Hillary Clinton is a candidate. There were several candidates before her and there will be several after her. The DNC must do something to maintain the decency, credibility, and legacy of this party. If they do not, this party will never be the same. The word "Democrat" will never mean the same. The history of this party will be tarnished simply because some people were too afraid to stand up to perceived power and influence. Why are they there if they can't be leaders? Leaders stand up. If the shoe were on the other foot, Hillary's campaign and the leaders within the DLC would be raising pure hell. What is wrong with the DNC? Are they willing to let the Repukes dreams come true this year simply because Hillary makes a lot of noise and threats, and is percieved to be "powerful". Hillary only has the power that others have given her. The DNC has given her a lot of power so far. They need to reign it in. They need to take it back. We are a party of the people, not of the few and powerful.

12. So, are the women who voted for Hillary at 65% margins sexist? What is the starting point for so-called bigotry? 50% of the bloc , 60%, 70%, what?

[goclark]

1. Has Hillary bothered to ask Black Women to vote for her

because she is a woman?
Or Asian women?
Or Latino women?

No ~ she and all the rest of them are only concerned about the vote of White women.

That is wrong!

[redstate_democrat]

4. Sadly, that is the case and has been the case

When terms like "women" are used, the defacto racial identity connected to that term is white. White needs no introduction I guess. The term "woman" needs no modification. Only when referring to women of color is there some modification or introduction needed, because, women of color or not just simply "women", they are "women of color". So when Hillary talks of "women", of course she is talking about white women. When she talks about black women, she says "black women" or "African American women". She talks a good game when she wants to. I remember when she made that speech talking about if white women were dying from AIDS at the rate of black women, something would be done about it. I don't hear her making these remarks in front of predominately white crowds. Obama has the same speech everywhere he goes. Hillary changes up depending on who she is talking to. She doesn't need to speak to the choir, she needs to get in front of the people who may disagree with her or may not know about the problem to impress me.

[Eric Condon]

7. That is exactly right.

The way the media paints "African-Americans" as Obama's base and "women" as Hillary's base is disgustingly reductive in how it ignores the fact that half of all African-Americans ARE women. To hear the media tell it, black women aren't "women," they're just "black."

Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure someone might have addressed this topic before:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sojourner_Truth

[redstate_democrat]

11. Exactly

I really have to bite my tongue whenever these demographics are presented. I have to wonder, when they say "women", when referring to her "demographic", does this include ALL women, or just white women. Then they lump both women and men together in the African American demographic as if separating the genders isn't at all important or even relevant to the discussion, because, as you know, African Americans are just "there" as this monolithic and tragic group undeserving of any meaningful investigation or discussion, leave it to them to tell the story.

I look at the exit polls and marvel at the racism. If you look at white voters, they always have every age group breakdown. If you look at black voters, they have limited age breakdowns. Same goes for Hispanic voters, too. White voters are heavily investigated and researched. Society MUST know at all times what white voters desire, need, and respond to. Black voters? Well, they all want the same thing right? A black president and the stability of "welfare programs", leave it to Pat Buchanan (MSNBC POLITICAL PUNDIT) to tell the story. Black voters couldn't possibly be interested in the war in Iraq or the capital gains tax, or the environment, reduction of the deficit, trade, balanced budgets, etc. No, leave it to them, all we care about is whether or not the next president will apologize for slavery, create gang task forces, create inner city programs and put 10 new computers in the local libraries, and maintain the current funding for the food stamp program.

I shake my head in disgust.

[bhikkhu]

18. Demographic analysis is the last refuge of racism and sexism

Perhaps it has its uses, but every election it divides us all up into our separate segments and tells us what we are thinking and then what we have decided. All in packages of unassailable facts...

[goclark]

13. I totally agree ! Excellent thoughts

[GetTheRightVote]

2. it is sexism when that is the reason you vote for her of course

I as a woman I have been hit over the head many times now because I am not voting for her even though I share the same gender. Any woman who makes a statement that isn't the biggest reason why so many women are voting for her, HRC, are simply not being honest. Fess up, it is good for you to be truthful, good for the soul.

[redstate_democrat]

8. I feel so bad for Oprah

Oprah took a lot of crap from black people for YEARS because black people perceived her to not really be involved in the black community. There were so many stand-up routines about that woman, it is absolutely ridiculous thinking back on it. She wasn't quite at Michael Jackson stage in regard to the frequency in which she was talked about in comic routines, but she was not seen as someone who really was involved in the black community. I remember when black people raked her over the coals for building that school in Africa. Many wondered why she wouldn't build one in an inner city in the US. She said that kids in the US didn't need it as much and that many were really ungrateful for the education they were receiving by blowing off school. This angered many. Add to that the fact that she is sort of Cosbian, and you can see where people were sort of split on her. She was also perceived as just catering to white women. She took a lot of heat. She has always been someone whom transcended race in my opinion. She is a self made woman. She came from nothing. She has a lot of love and giving in her heart. She doesn't dwell on the past, but is a very inspirational figure. She has given away tens of millions of her own money to underprivilged women and children all over the world. Yet, when she decides to support a charismatic young man with an inspiring story similar to her own, she is branded as a woman hater and racist.

How bizarre is that? If you look at Oprah's staff, you will see one common theme. White women. Maybe her hair dresser and makeup artist aren't, but the rest of her staff definitely is. She is one of the most powerful, respected, and admired women in the world. She has NEVER been married and has made her way on her own, yet, she is sexist and racist? I suspect that she probably sees something of herself in Obama. She probably sees him as the son she never had. She also has quite an affinity for Halle Berry as well, as well as Tiger Woods. All of these people are biracial. She probably sees the future, or hope, or unity manifested in these people that she so desires. Yet, she is branded and raked over the coals for it.

The women who harass her on her message board loved Oprah until she committed the greatest sin of not backing Hillary Clinton. I don't recall Oprah supporting Carol Mosely Braun, even though I'm sure she knows her since they are both from Chicago, yet none of these women harassed Oprah over that. Oprah's only mistake is that she did not back Hillary. And then these same people have the nerve to whine because John Lewis decided to save his congressional seat by switching to Obama. They love to talk about how he was threatened to switch, yet, they can't even see the hypocrisy in their own deeds. One minute they are calling Oprah a traitor and racist on a message board because she didn't vote for the woman, the white woman, and the next they are blasting people who have asked their congressman to fall in line with the voters of his district.

It is quite something.

[merciful]

3. There is a big difference between 65% and 90% n/t

[redstate_democrat]

17. There is a 25% margin between the two numbers.

Substantively, even with Hillary's smaller margin, she garners more votes simply based on the fact that there are more white women than black women and black men put together. Substantively, the difference means nothing because both numbers are extremely high. How do you determine when the number is too high? What arbitrary metric do you place on it? If you look at voting patterns, then how do these numbers break down? In the 2004 primary, who received the most black votes, and by that percentage? Now, look at white women voters during that same time. What was the breakdown of that vote? Were they voting for one candidate at 65%? I believe that the trend in the black voting block is similar to what it was in 2004. I don't know if I can say the same thing about white women voters. Their votes were probably more evenly spread throughout the DEM candidates. Hell, how many votes did Al Sharpton get last time? Carol Mosley Braun? Black people could have voted in large margins for either of those candidates, but they did not. If black people are supposedly so casual with their vote as to just vote for the black candidate regardless of policy, why didn't they just vote for Sharpton or Braun? If black people are just blinded by race, why didn't they just vote for them. You would have to assume that black people have no real vested interest in voting for a candidate they believe in, in order to suggest that black people just vote along racial lines. Black people voted overwhelmingly for the white candidate, why? Perhaps because they actually thought that person was better than Sharpton. They could have easily just tossed their votes to Sharpton because there would be no real danger of not having a Democratic nominee. It's not like we were in the general election where you just HAD to vote for the frontrunner or presumed candidate. Those were primaries, and they still didn't get lots of support.

[BenDavid]

5. oh you mean something like this: Michelle Obama, If You’re Black

Vote for Barack. Because He’s Black.Michelle also tells the black community that they should be voting for her hubby for no other reason than they share the same color skin.Voting for a person because of the color of his skin is racist.It also is stupid.

Or better yet, how about this. "What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something -- for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I've seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it's made me proud."

That dear friends is the 2008 version of racial code."hope is making a comeback" = Barack is winning. This message is code to blacks to say, if they don't nominate Barack, its' the same old Democratic Party taking blacks for granted. The message to whites is that "for the first time", I don't think you're a racist nation. It's clear this is contigent on Barack winning.

For those out there who doubt that this is racial code, give an alternative explanation. This is shameful in 2008, that such a powerful group would emotionally blackmail voters and politicians into accepting someone so unqualified.

[gabeana]

6. Hey DS did Obama say it?

[redstate_democrat]

14. You are so wrong, as usual.

When Michelle made her statements about being proud for the first time within her ADULT life time, I suppose she was talking about being proud of a country that is willing to vote for HOPE over their FEARS, one that is willing to forgo the status quo, for real change, an electorate that is FULLY involved in the process and not just sitting by waiting for the right politician to fall in their laps. That is what she is proud of. She is proud of the wave that has swept over America, the awakening of everyone to the idea that we don't have to settle for less in crooked, uncaring politicos desperate to have their names written in history books. We can do better and a lot of people are realizing that post Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush.

I would like to ask you a question, BenDavid. I know you probably think Clinton was the best thing since sliced bread, but to a lot of people, he lacked in serious ways and have major character flaws.

Let me put it to you like this. I assume you're Jewish. Right? Okay, as we know, Israel is considered sacrosanct to the United States. What if, during Clinton's presidency, he sat by and watched ONE MILLION women, men, and children be chopped to death with machetes? Would you feel this undying, unwavering love and unquestionable respect for the Clintons? Well, Bill Clinton sat by and watched as one million people in Rwanda died in the most horrific ways. And today, under Bush, millions suffer and have died in Darfur and we aren't doing anything in this country about it. So when I hear Hillary say she will nuke Iran if they attack Israel, I have to wonder how this sense of empathy and retribution could be so selective. I had to wonder the same thing about the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia as well back in the 90s and how we intervened, but not with Rwanda simply based on the public perception of it following Somalia. When you have to calculate how many votes you might LOSE by stopping the genocide in an African country, I have to calculate whether or not my respect for you rises above zero.

That is the problem, and I suppose that is what Michelle Obama was referring to, among many other things, for example, the War in Iraq, the bombing of innocent women and children around the world, not just in Republican administrations, but also in Clinton's administration. We can bomb without congressional authorization, but in order to send troops to save people from genocide or to drop a bag of rice in a poor country, we have to get congressional approval and have it budgeted, and then rally the American people around it. This is what she means. I feel the same way.

Nothing racial about it. She wasn't speaking in "black code", she was speaking in HUMAN.

[woolldog]

9. Actually the number is higher when you look at white women over 50

Closer to 75%.

[SunsetDreams]

10. You just made me cry redstate...

I was thinking about this same very thing today.

It really bothers me when I hear Hillary imply or any of her supporters that she is losing because she is a woman. That could not be further from the truth, otherwise we would have 2 men in the race right now. She beat out all these other men, and she has the nerve to claim that?

As a post above mentioned, I too have noticed that they will refer to women being Hillary's base, and African Americans being Obama's...if ALL women are Hillary's base, then why don't they just say Afican American Males are Obama's base?

Are black women, not truly considered women by them, because they are not white?

I am a middle aged white woman, and this makes me cry to think that people would be so blatantly cruel as to suggest that, whether consciously or unconsciously.

[BlooInBloo]

12. Obviously oversensitive.

[redstate_democrat]

15. Obviously detached, disconnected, unaffiliated, unconcerned, and way over your head.

nt

[TahitiNut]

16. The White House was built with African-American (slave) labor.

Women have lived in it ever since. It's about damned time a black lived there!

Sexist? Racist? Nope. Just a "typical white guy."

[cliffordu]

19. KICKED

[TragedyandHope]

20. Nothing is -ism or -ist if it's your own side doing it

That's the twisted reality for a lot people. It was never sexist or racist to vote for only white male candidates for hundreds of years because that's "just the way it was." There are a lot of tough, complicated and deeply ingrained issues voters have to face during this election. These simplistic pigeonholing arguments usually do not stand up to thoughtful analysis, nor can you claim complete innocence of them when the mirror is held up to your own candidate and their campaign.

[futureliveshere]

21. Great post!! K&R

[davidpdx]

22. I've seen several people try and make the argument

that if you don't vote for Hillary you are sexist. I've also seen people say the primary was about race, which bothers me. Personally I don't think it's about either. Anyone making those kind of arguments is just plain weak.