Report: Democrats Voting On Race, Republicans Not So Much

A new study out suggests Obama may have a problem winning the White House because of his race. Seems that too many danged Democrats just don't like black people. I can hardly wait to hear Kanye West of George Bush doesn't like black people fame weigh in.

Here's a thought - were Obama conservative to Right-leaning, I'd vote for a guy like that in a minute and I suspect many other Right-siders would, too. In my opinion, were a Colin Powell or a Condaleezza Rice slightly more to the Right and able to appeal to values voters, they'd have strong backing from Right-side voters throughout much of the land, despite some existing stereotypes propagated by the media.

Unlike Obama, they've actually accomplished something relatively significant in their lives through hard work and not just talked a good game to get ahead.

Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown.

More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views.

Comments

[Terry Gain]

Obama's true color? Red or pink.

[seekeronos]

You see, this is the problem with the Dem's witless embracing of identity politics.

Identity becomes the end-all/be-all of everything; identity group solidarity overrides sensibility - which is why while the Democratic Party is such a large tent, its many factions may not be entirely able to reconcile themselves for West Virginia coal miners to vote for the black candidate, or for the blacks (known for their well-developed sense of racial solidarity) who will never break ranks on their candidate, even if he is dead wrong.

By feeding the identity politics mills, it continues to foster suspicion and distrust amongst the many factions within the Democratic Party.

[seekeronos]

"--- Obama's true color? Red or pink. ---"

Deep, deep Soviet Red.

[Mark]

Dan,
I think the proof that this BS about Obama losing votes due to race can be proving simply by looking at the numbers on someone like Colin Powell. His numbers show he likely would win the race against McCain or Obama.
Here are some numbers to look at
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1530

Among Republicans, Powell is favored OVER McCain! Yes, the black guy is favored by the "racist" party over their current white candidate. See here: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/powell_far_more_likely_than_obama_to_beat_mccain

[Worst President Ever]

Gee, racists walk among us. And could swing the election. Thanks for the news flash.

Obama's not a socialist. Bush, though, I'm not sure about. Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG. Who knows who'll they'll socialize next week.

[ErikTheRed]

Like most of the liberal slander against conservatives, it's a case of projection...

[dm60462]

Um, isn't Micheal Steele (GOPAC Chairman) black? No one, LEAST OF ALL MICHEAL STEELE has a problem with his race. Apparently, Obama apparently has "issues" with being black. Talk about self loathing!

[Son of a Pig and a Monkey]

Slight correction: You'd vote for Obama if he was conservative to right-leaning, wan't an empty suit, didn't have serious terrorist associations, had actually accomplished something in his career, hadn't attended a race-baiting "church" for twenty years...I could go on

[Worst President Ever]

Bush just asked to spend another $700 billion on bad mortgages - that's after the Bear Stearns bailout, the Fannie Mae bailout, the Freddie Mac bailout and the AIG bailout.

Maybe Seek, the resident expert on Socialism can weigh in.

Guess that unfettered market thing didn't work so well.

Does this mean government's not the problem, it's the answer?

[seekeronos]

"--- Bush just asked to spend another $700 billion on bad mortgages - that's after the Bear Stearns bailout, the Fannie Mae bailout, the Freddie Mac bailout and the AIG bailout. ---"

Well, that dovetails right along with Obama's plans to shell out $850B in taxpayer subsidies to the UN and various foreign aid programmes.

I guess the GOP might be "Print (Borrow) and Spend" corporate socialists, and the Dems are "Tax and Spend" welfare socialists by that tune.

"--- Guess that unfettered market thing didn't work so well. ---"

Perhaps not, particularly where the de-regulation of the financials was concerned, or the repeal of Glass-Steagall in the last years of Clinton's regime.

Funny thing though: Democrat President, Republican Congress. The votes were as follows:

54-44 Senate
343-86 House

Clinton signed the veto-proof legislation by Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act#Repeal_of_the_Act )

Bear in mind that while the Senate vote appears to have been along partisan lines with only one crossover (D), there were an ANWFUL lot of (D)s crossing over in the House vote -- 138 (D)s and 205 (R)s.

(Source: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1999/roll276.xml )

I personally think that the Fed should have kept its hands off of things back in 2006, and let the banks fail massively.

"--- Does this mean government's not the problem, it's the answer? ---"

In this case, the government WAS (and still is) the problem: rather, a lack of necessary regulation. The government, both Democrats and Republicans (but especially the post-2006 greedy Dems who allowed the conditions to prosper which permitted the mortgage bundlers and i-banks to go upside down on all that bad paper)

You libs might be surprised to know that there are some conservatives (such as myself) who believe that a modicum of regulation wasn't such a bad idea at all.

That said, my main contention is that the government shouldn't be spending/printing all this money to keep a fundamentally broken economy going, much less nationalising failed corporations.

So to answer that question, the government that governs best, governs least -- but only to the degree that it can do so without creating lawlessness and chaos.

"----- A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight. -----"
(Proverbs 11:1, KJV)

[Pegleg Stubble]

Every time my husband brings up race as an issue in American elections, I just point to Bobby Jindal. He's doing one heck of a job in Louisiana, supposedly a "racist state." And my husband, who is white, said he'd vote for him if Jindal runs for president. I think most conservatives, if not all, will probably do the same thing.

I just don't believe race is as big an issue as it's supposed to be, at least for Republicans. As a Republican, I really couldn't care less what skin color you have. If I think the candidate is good for the country, then I'll vote for him/her. Obama is just not the right guy.

[Worst President Ever]

Cutting government regulation, in particular removing financial protections put in place post-depression, has been a Republican meme for decades. Government's the problem, let the market work it's magic, excessive regulation, if government will just get out of the way, etc. etc. Those are Republican talking points mouthed at every opportunity. Yeah, Dems should never have bought into the Republicans BS, but today's mess is a product of Republican goals to gut regulations and remove the referee from the marketplace.

Whoever the next president is, they're hands are tied, the budget's blown for the foreseeable future.

[pst314]

The topic of this blog posting was racism in the Democratic Party, but once again Worst Troll Ever wants to hijack the conversation. I guess some facts are just too inconvenient to be faced.

[dumbest troll ever]

This is a thread about racism in the democrat party. Why is " worst president ever "talking about Bush being a socialist? Because he can't defend his racist, sexist, party of fascists. Change the subject quickly.

[Alfred]

I do not see what is the problem, I saw that from day one. Even though you say that Americans are not racist, we know differently. Look at the numbers who rather vote for Mc Cain and a woman who knows very little about everything.

So its not a surprise to me.

Allfed

[Rick]

"Whoever the next president is, they're hands are tied, the budget's blown for the foreseeable future."

and he'll be blamed for everything that goes wrong in the economy, the wars, future terrorist strikes etc. What kind of a fool even wants to be President? It's a no win situation.

[ic]

I wonder who set up Freddie and Fannie in 1990s to pay back his ex-cabinet loyalists. I wonder which politicians garnered most bribes (contributions) from Fannie and Freddie to block reforms and oversights from Capitol Hill. I further wonder which administration raised the alarm in 2003, and which politician proposed reform in 2005, and which politicians blocked the reform.

Just wondering.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/11LEND.html?ei=5070&en=f31e9de1e37a3180&ex=1221969600&pagewanted=all&position=

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/commentary/hc-commentaryhubbard0914.artsep14,0,5673162.story

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=109-s20060525-16&bill=s109-190#sMonofilemx003Ammx002Fmmx002Fmmx002Fmhomemx002Fmgovtrackmx002Fmdatamx002Fmusmx002Fm109mx002Fmcrmx002Fms20060525-16.xmlElementm0m0m0m

The most wonderous thing of all is: so many people do not trust their lying eyes.

[RB]

http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race

Well, as all lefties know to be a "known fact," any vote against Obama is KKK racist.

One question apparently was not asked: How many votes FOR Obama are attributable exclusively to race? After all, how many white candidates with a resume this thin would have made it this far? Personally, I think that there more voters are going for Obama because of his race than there are voters going against him for the same reason.

I'm so tired of being accused of racism by "experts" on the left. I vote based on politics, ideology, and issues. Nobody here in Pennsylvania has suggested that voter racism is why Lynn Swann lost to Ed Rendell (I voted enthusiastically for Swann)--and I certainly did not see an AP/Yahoo poll such as this one.

Puke.

[Worst President Ever]

Ah, the Republican Committee for More Regulation - not gonna need much of a room for that meeting.

In 2003, Republicans controlled the House, the Senate and the Presidency.

I thought contributions were free speech? Are you proposing some sort of campaign finance reform?

[mary lamb]

Ed Rendell so reminds me of Mayor Daly.

[ic]

Alfred: Even though you say that Americans are not racist, we know differently. Look at the numbers who rather vote for Mc Cain and a woman who knows very little about everything.

I agree totally. Americans should vote for a man who knows everything about community orgainizing, who lets survivors of botched abortions die; and another man (not a woman) whose first response after 911 was to give the Iranians $200 million to placate the "Arab" street, who said life begins at conception, making pro-choicers murderers and accessories to murders.

Yeah, we non-racists should all vote for the One because he is black.

[Worst President Ever]

Hmmm - Guess McCain wasn't THAT worried about banking problems:

"Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

http://www.contingencies.org/septoct08/mccain.pdf

[PETE]

Did anyone even read the article linked to above. Look at the chart. White republicans are in the vanguard in every single negative adjective, and bringing up the rear in every positive one. By that chart, they are FAR more racist that white dems.

Also, your premise is awesome, I love it. White GOPers won't vote for any dem, regardless of race, therefore they are ... wait for it ... not racist.

So by that same logic, if I would never buy a Ford, regardless of model, I guess that makes me not anti-pickup. Now that doesn't make any sense, does it? Exactly.

[junyo]

Did you folks actually read the chart/look at the data? In the results set from the survey, Republicans were more likely to hold negative views on blacks in virtually every asked category, in some cases twice as likely as Democrats. And in a lot of cases it's well away from the average for all white respondents, so you can't even say that the feeling represents mainstream thinking. By and large if the data is to be trusted, Republicans are more likely to believe/describe blacks as violent and not particularly intelligent. Before Republicans break their arms patting themselves on the back, not voting for a guy that you fundamentally disagree with isn't the same thing as being colorblind, or proof thereof.

[Diggs]

"So by that same logic, if I would never buy a Ford, regardless of model, I guess that makes me not anti-pickup. Now that doesn't make any sense, does it? Exactly."
Umm, if you won't buy a Ford, it shows nothing at all about your feelings towards pickups. If Republicans won't vote for a Democrat under any circumstance, is shows nothing at all about their racism. It does, however, show that they are superior in intellect.
Logic really isn't your strong point, is it.

[PETE]

I should add, that obviously there are racists in both parties. There are lots of old Italians and Poles in the democratic party (and in my family) who just plain don't trust blacks.

And I don't see the point in everyone on this thread battering the straw man that dems say there are ZERO racists in the party. Anyone can find a link to someone making that argument, I'll agree with you that they're an idiot.

But to say that there are more racists in the democratic party than the GOP is, well, willfully ignoring that facts. Including, you know, the chart data in the article linked to above.

[Mwalimu Daudi]

You know that He Whose Middle Name Must Not Be Mentioned is in trouble when the MSM starts shrieking about racist Democrats!

[PETE]

Oh boy.

"Umm, if you won't buy a Ford, it shows nothing at all about your feelings towards pickups."

Exactly. I see you do have a grasp, however tenuous, on logical reasoning. By the same token, if GOPers won't vote for a democrat, it shows nothing at all about their feelings towards blacks.

Just tell me when your brain stops hurting. I know. It's painful, I know.

Then, how about you click the link and look real hard at the actual data.

[Mike S.]

The survey is flawed and the results are skewed to conclude that there is racism involved.

The survey is flawed in two ways. First, it assumes that a single adjective like "friendly" can be used to describe an large sample population. I suggest that the only adjective that can be applied to the entire black population is "dark-skinned."

Second, for each adjective, the survey allows these responses:

How well do each of these words describe blacks?
Extremely well
Very well
Moderately well
Slightly well
Not at all
Not answered

In any survey, the mid-point is always a neutral response, like "Neither well nor poorly". This survey is skewed because "moderately well" is chosen as the mid-point.

If you answered the question, "are most blacks friendly" as describing blacks "moderately well", the survey counts YOU as racist!

In their own survey, their conclusion is refuted by this question:

CQ11. Does the fact that if elected, Barack Obama would be the first black president of the United States make
you more likely to vote for him, less likely to vote for him, or does it not affect your vote either way?

All Respondents Wave 6
More likely to vote for him 9
Less likely to vote for him 9
Not affect your vote either way 82
Refused / Not Answered 0

Whites Only Wave 6
More likely to vote for him 6
Less likely to vote for him 10
Not affect your vote either way 84
Refused / Not Answered 0

[Don]

Gov. Palin was a good strategic pick in playing against the Democrat's weakness. I was personally hoping for J.C. Watts [check Wiki for info], but I understand that went up against the Democrat's strength this time. Either one is acceptable and a good selection based upon the individual, not their color, race, creed, or gender.

Now how many on the other side of the aisle are simply voting upon the color of the skin? Lots. Voting against someone because of the color of his skin is racist, but voting for someone because of the color of his skin is equally racist. The left exempts itself from the latter condition. One set of rules for thee, a separate set of rules for me.

[Orion]

Strangely, I don't vote for someone based upon either their melanin content nor their plumbing hookup.

And I'm not voting for a Stalinist, so that leaves the Republicans.

Orion

[fretless]

"In my opinion, were a Colin Powell or a Condaleezza Rice slightly more to the Right and able to appeal to values voters, they'd have strong backing from Right-side voters throughout much of the land, despite some existing stereotypes propagated by the media."

Why, then, does Michael Steel have so much trouble gaining traction on the national scean?

(Personally, I believe that it is because the REPUBLICAN PARTY ELITE refuses to get the guy out in front, where he belongs, because he *is* a conservative. I've been watching him since the 04 republican convention - remember that? http://hiphoprepublican.com/2008/07/michael-steele-2004-republican-national.html He outperformed Oblabla on every level, but the media yawned.)

(Funny, but if I search for "Michael Steel 2004 convention" on YouTube, I get a bunch of Obama speaches. Strange, that.)

[Candide]

I am white.

I don't like Obama's politics but I dislike Biden deeply and personally.

I look at Obama and I think about his political shortcomings.

I take one look at Biden and I start swearing.

So nobody dare call me a racist.

[24AheadDotCom]

In addition to the problems with the survey outlined above, some of the questions - but not all - are a test whether someone is delusional or not. For instance, 25% of white Dems said *most blacks* are "intelligent at school". What exactly that means isn't clear, but that 25% now needs to explain the differences in test scores and overall performance. There are a large number of articles along those lines (eg., findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3626/is_199707/ai_n8763718).

Only about 15% of white Dems said *most blacks* are "violent", and once again that's too imprecise a question. However, the crime rate by blacks is higher than that by whites (city-journal.org/html/eon2007-04-02hm.html, vdare.com/Sailer/050213_mapping.htm).

The purpose of the study is clear, and it's not surprising that Insty fell for it.

[Tood]

Why is this a surprise? Almost all injustices against blacks have been done by Democrats, not Republicans. From slavery to George Wallace to Robert "Kleagle" Byrd, it is Democrats all the way.

For details on Democratic racism, check out Myth #8 over here.

http://www.singularity2050.com/2008/08/ten-myths-in-america.html

[Tood]

Reverend Jeremiah Wright is just 30-40% black, BTW :

http://www.singularity2050.com/2008/04/reverend-jeremi.html

[ic]

Don: Sorry, but J.C. Watts, the supposed anti-abortion conservative, supports Obama because he's black.

[craven]

Candide said:
"I am white.
I don't like Obama's politics but I dislike Biden deeply and personally.
I look at Obama and I think about his political shortcomings.
I take one look at Biden and I start swearing.
So nobody dare call me a racist."

You just hate men with hairplugs, don't you?

[Ted]

I have no specialize knowledge about this sort of thing, but sense that the polling is worse for Obama than the article reveals, for three reasons:
-- A typical white person will look at a black person and consider him as an individual and judge him on his own merits, regardless of any general feelings he may have about blacks as a group. In this case, people have to judge Obama's fitness for the presidency, and large numbers rightly find him lacking in this respect.
-- People tend to say one thing to a pollster, then vote differently in private, when giving the "wrong" answer to a pollster would open them to disapproval. There will probably be a significant gap between polling and voting.
-- "Now vote, or I shall taunt you as a racist a second time!" Is not the rallying cry of a confident campaign machine.
Lastly, the idea that Obama would be six points ahead if he were white is backwards, preposterous. If Obama were not black, he would not even be the nominee-- if a typical white candidate had shown up with such a paltry résumé, he would have been laughed off the stage a year and a half ago. Obama has gotten a free pass on so much exactly *because* he's black.

[bc]

It's not like Bill and Hillary didn't try to explain all this to their party a year ago. They were shouted down and labeled "racists". Black's incomes soared under Bill Clinton. The Obama experiment is going to cost them a lot of money, at a time of great economic stress. Hope the excitement of having a black candidate was worth it.

[rocko]

This seems like the beginning of the storyline of why Obama lost the election. It will be the reason the MSM will use to expalin away the loss.

[LOL]

once the republicans nominate a black man... then we'll see

[Worst President Ever]

Ah, the hand-wringing of Conservatives that racism among Democrats might bring defeat to Obama, almost brings a tear to my eye. Fear not, just like Hillary, Obama will beat McCain. Why? First, because Obama really is the better candidate. Second, McCain's the Candidate of the Status Quo, and that's an ugly place to be right now.

[mary]

Worst President Ever, you must remember that McCain has been consistently McCain. Can the same for said for your candidate?

[Worst President Ever]

John McCain - Keating Five.

[templar knight]

"Ah, the hand-wringing of Conservatives that racism among Democrats might bring defeat to Obama..."

Hand wringing? Are you nuts? I think it's funny as hell that racists in your own party will contribute to your defeat. Ever heard of poetic justice?

[Worst President Ever]

Like I seid, Temp, Obama's gonna win. In a walk.

Meanwhile, whaddaya think of the Wall Street Welfare Queens? Personally, I'm 100% against giving them a $700 billion blank check.

[mary]

"Like I seid, Temp, Obama's gonna win. In a walk."

Is that because you are already rigging the voting system?

[templar knight]

"Like I said...Obama's gonna win. In a walk."

Nah, too many people who are Democrats won't vote for a black for President. Your own party members are going to cost you the Presidency. If you had make Hillary the choice, you would have won in a walk. I still can't believe the stupidity of the Democratic Party. It has been taken over by Soros and the nutroots.

As for the financial bailout, I'm also 100% against it. The Congress needs to readdress this issue.

[Worst President Ever]

If you're against the $700,000,000,000 no strings attached bailout, call your rep and let them know.

House switchboard is (202) 224-3121.
http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/mcapdir.html