Comments on: Like ‘Shoe Polish,’ Clintons Rub Obama’s ‘Blackness’ Into Electorate

By: Jammer

Jammer — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 17:15:00 +0000

This is a pretty aggravating post I must say. The candidates, both of them because both of them have said dumb things, have gone way beyond this issue now, this is old news, and your regurgitating it now is hardly helpful to our national discourse. I have news for you: Obama is black. He might be the first black president. His race is not irrelevant. He hopes to do well among black voters. Hillary is a woman. She may be the first woman president. Her gender is not irrelevant. She hopes to do well with woman voters. And the notion that the Clintons have race baited in this campaign is an urban myth spread by people with an unduly thin skin, whose heads will probably explode this summer when they see what the Repubs have in store for them.

By: DLS

DLS — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 15:36:18 +0000

The black vote is of more interest than the Religious Right vote and Obama as well as Huckabee must be interested in how well they do in the South today.

See page two of this map.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/mso01-bp.pdf

By: Pat_Patterson

Pat_Patterson — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 11:47:45 +0000

So by pointing out the obvious that somehow makes Pres. Clinton a race baiter? Sen. Obama won South Carolina by an extremely healthy margin but in a state whose demographics are unique vs. the rest of the US. He won over 80% of the black vote and barely 25% of the white vote. He also had a huge reversal in Nevada where he received the endorsement of the largest union in the state. In many cases union members carried Obama signs then went into the caucus to vote for Sen. Clinton. But if it was pointed out that the majority of the casino and hotel workers were of Mexican or Central American descent would that also be considered race baiting.

Also Rev. Jackson won 5 primaries that year and garnered over 24% of the vote yet in the all inclusive Democratic Party only received 8% of the delegates.

The corollary would be to suggest that Gov. Huckabee won in Iowa by mobilizing a rather large evangelical vote that was primarily home schooling its children. And that unless he could find other states with a similar demographic his victory was a oner. Yet that's exactly what happened. Does that make one anti-Christian for pointing that out. I suspect that by now the tide of hysteric overreaction among the press will accept any normal political charge made by the Clintons as throwbacks to the ante bellum South. I'm also wondering when someone will claim that the Clintons came from Arkansas and we all know that state is populated by hillbillies and racists.

By: Presidential election 2008 |Republicans Vs. Democrats » Like ‘Shoe Polish,’ Clintons Rub Obama’s ‘Blackness’ Into Electorate

Tue, 05 Feb 2008 09:34:24 +0000

[...] Dana J. Tuszke wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptHe received 55 percent of the vote against his main opponent, Hillary Clinton, who won 27 percent. And at the start of the month [January], Obama scored his first win at their first showdown in White Iowa. … Read the rest of this great post here Posted by [...]