Here's a disturbing article about the reception some Obama canvassers have been getting in PA and IN.
Victoria Switzer, a retired social studies teacher, was on phone-bank duty one night during the Pennsylvania primary campaign. One night was all she could take: “It wasn't pretty.” She made 60 calls to prospective voters in Susquehanna County, her home county, which is 98 percent white. The responses were dispiriting. One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn't possibly vote for Obama and concluded: “Hang that darky from a tree!”
… In a letter to the editor published in a local paper, Tunkhannock Borough Mayor Norm Ball explained his support of Hillary Clinton this way: “Barack Hussein Obama and all of his talk will do nothing for our country. There is so much that people don't know about his upbringing in the Muslim world. His stepfather was a radical Muslim and the ranting of his minister against the white America, you can't convince me that some of that didn't rub off on him.
“No, I want a president that will salute our flag, and put their hand on the Bible when they take the oath of office.”
Ugh. So, we're really over the race thing, right? Right?
Now, canvassing/phone banking are really eye-opening activities. You run into all kinds of people; some with, er, idiosyncratic views. And some folks will have odd/totally wrong/conspiratorial ideas about whatever candidate. That being said, this campaign is different from any we've experienced. I expect that racist attitudes are actually quite common — more common than they might show up in polls. (It also might be the case that someone's personal or ideological antipathy for Obama might get expressed in a racist way — race being the brickbat-at-hand.)
gives me new appreciation for the existential horror experienced by Bill Murray’s character in “Groundhog Day”. And here I thought he was merely an elitist snob!
when campaigning in Lowell for Deval. Only a couple, one specifically in person while knocking on doors. It was the saddest thing I could imagine, though at the time I was very angry. He was an old, white, gentleman, so obviously of another era and never reassessed his views. But it was an eye opener, to face that in person.
It’s out there. One can dream that we will get past this. My latest estimate for when we will all be color/creed/gender blind is the year 2500 AD.
…shows that, sure, there’s still racism out there. I’m not sure how widespread it really is, though. I still think that Obama’s race may potentially be an overall positive on balance, because of the potential of mobilizing more African-American voters and because young people and highly-educated white independents (swing voters) in particular are excited about the idea of having the first African-American President.
<
p>To answer your question, though, I do think that part of Clinton’s appeal with working-class whites is because they trust her more on the economy, as some recent polls suggest. I do think this has more to do with it than race, which is why I don’t think you’ll see this massive shift among working-class whites to McCain if (when?) Obama is the nominee. Obama will (if he is a competent general election candidate) link John “I don’t know much about the economy” McCain’s economic policy with Bush’s.
<
p>People forget that part of the reason there was such a phenomeon as the “Reagan Democrat” in the early 80s was not only because of racial issues, which was only part of the equation, but because Jimmy Carter tainted the Democrats’ ability to claim that they were the party of good economic times. Which party do you think will be able to claim that mantle this time, regardless of the nominee?
Thing is, you don’t have to go to Pennsylvania or Indiana to find it.
I don’t mean to single them out. (Hey, I’m an IU alum — I really can’t diss Indiana too badly.)
<
p>I heard a lot of racism growing up in upstate NY. Boston has its history. All the big cities have their histories and presents. That was kind of my point — that this will come up across the country in the general election.
<
p>In fact, I’m going to change the title.
After all, we are on “Blue Mass. Group,” right? đŸ˜‰
<
p>So, how are you liking the trail that Coach Sanctions has left? It’s going to take a lot from Coach Forehead (Crean) to rectify that. đŸ˜€
<
p>You take Eric Gordon for a year; I’ll take E’twaun Moore for four.
<
p>Boiler Up! WOO-WOO!! đŸ˜€
pathetic to say, but I don’t follow college hoops that much, and didn’t really when I was there, either. Bobby Knight got fired when I was there — the campus went nuts, but it was pretty much a rumor in the music school, half a block from where they were tearing apart a fountain. Mostly I heard about it on the radio.
<
p>I did watch Mike Davis’ team lose the NCAA title game in 2002, though — from a TV in Cambridge.
I’m afraid that tracking polls change so often and drastically that if you did an in-depth survey of causation, the result might not be encouraging, either. Ex: supporters might like Candidate Y more because of confidence Y can handle the economy better than Z, but they may still be unable to make a connection between Y’s policy stands and their own beliefs. They just feel it.
<
p>Racism is a function of simplification and lack of knowledge. Those two characteristics are probably present among voters in regards to most of what would be considered “substantative” issues in a Presidential election.
<
p>I would qualify those suspected findings by saying many of the issues involved are extremely complicated and difficult for the average busy voter to keep up on, including myself. It is especially so when you hear one candidate’s position on an issue spun by themselves and every one of their candidates in a different way.
After all, 23 states in this country have recently written anti-gay discrimination into their constitutions. Anti-immigrant hysteria is very high. Misogyny has been unbridled in this campaign. Christian dominionists and false religionists, member of Congress included, are happy to impose “moral” choices on other individuals. Why are we surprised that bigotry would also still manifest as racism? We’re a country of MANY bigotries that too many of us hold near to our hearts.
The Dalai Lama and buddhism evaluate moral and spiritual development by how broadly a person “draws their circle” as to who and what matters.
<
p>Just your family? Just your town or ethnic group? All human beings? All life forms? The planet. We do choose the size of our circles.
ever says “I won’t ever vote for a woman”? I know I’ve heard it. Do you think any black voters ever say “I won’t vote for the white bitch”? Why not? You can see her called bitch every day of the week by commenters at places like Kos and HuffPo.
<
p>And I’m not sure why it’s perfectly acceptable to talk about Obama’s huge black support, and Hillary’s problems with black voters, but saying Obama’s lack of success with white voters is a problem automatically makes one a racist.
<
p>I don’t doubt for a minute that racism is an issue in this campaign. But it does get a little tiring hearing every criticism condemned as racism. When the Clinton campaign supposedly tried to promote the Obama drug use story, it was condemned as racist, a charge that was one of the building blocks of the “racist campaign” theme. Yet many candidates, including Bill Clinton, have had to deal with drug use charges. Why when it’s Obama is it suddenly race based?
<
p>Similarly, the whole issue of the Muslim rumors has nothing to do with race. If Obama didn’t have a Muslim name, do you think those rumors would exist, simply because he’s black? I’ve never heard of a stereotype that blacks are secretly Muslims, have you? It’s a difficult and unfair rumor for Obama to dispel, but I don’t see the racial component.
<
p>If you recall, when the Rev. Wright issue first broke, what people objected to was “God damn America.” So Obama’s response? “Yes, we need to talk about race.”
<
p>This may seem trivial, but I know to me and a lot of other Hillary supporters, the vilest part of this whole campaign is the way the Clintons, who have done much more for the Democratic Party than Obama ever has, have been smeared as racists. The ease with which the Obama campaign and his supporters, particularly online, have vilified the Clintons has created rifts that will take a long time to heal.
<
p>When Obama felt like he was under attack from Gibson and Stephanapolous, he started pontificating that “that’s not what this campaign is about.” You know what would make that more convincing? If he didn’t start talking that way when it was him on the hot seat. I notice he hasn’t been so concerned about “what this campaign is about” when the Clintons are being branded as racists. Then, he’s conveniently silent.
<
p>If the race in Massachusetts is close, I’ll probably vote for Obama. Otherwise, I’m writing in Hillary. And I will never be an Obama supporter.
“Similarly, the whole issue of the Muslim rumors has nothing to do with race.”
<
p>Appeals to race and religion are very related in that they are both appeals to tribalism. The goal is to identify the opponent as belonging to an ‘out group’. Thus it is no real surprise to see both race and religion sharing the same conversational space in this case.
… the charge of ‘elitism’ is also an appeal to tribalism (of class) in order to define the opponent in a (class based) ‘out group’.
from racism as we know it in American politics, and as it’s being applied in this election. I’m sure there are many voters who believe and are troubled by the Muslim rumors who would otherwise be willing to vote for a black candidate. Because he’s being placed in one class doesn’t mean that the preejudices against other classes automatically apply.
<
p>And I’m sorry, but it’s a stretch to say the elitism charge fits into the same category. It’s pretty common to claim a candidate doesn’t share the voters’ values. To call each example of that “tribalism” is laying it on a little thick.
“I’m sure there are many voters who believe and are troubled by the Muslim rumors who would otherwise be willing to vote for a black candidate.”
<
p>This is of course true and that is why the more ‘out group’ categories you can throw out there into the media, the larger your catch of ‘I won’t vote for him because he is X’ will be. The goal is to fish for negative responses. The more lures the better the fishing, even if every fish doesn’t bite on every lure.
<
p>”It’s pretty common to claim a candidate doesn’t share the voters’ values.”
<
p>Describing someone as not sharing your values can be pretty nuanced, but simplifying it with a one word description that you would never use to describe yourself is a pretty easy technique for defining someone into an ‘out group’. That’s all tribalism is, so no, I think it’s an appropriate description by your own definition of values sharing.
<
p>The Nation of Islam is a religious and social/political organization with the self-proclaimed goal of resurrecting the spiritual, mental, social, and economic condition of the black man and woman of America… and as of 2005, the Nation of Islam was included in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of active hate groups in the United States.
<
p>That Obama is not a member of the NOI is irrelevant — merely stirring up the context of black American and Islam brings up all of the emotions, some positive and many negative, of the Nation of Islam, Malcom X, the Black Panther Party, and racial violence and hatred toward whites.
<
p>
<
p>So yeah, the uneasiness that many whites feel toward black Muslims as they relate to NOI is very real and very much exploited in the case of Barack Hussein Obama, a man who is neither a member of the NOI or any other Muslim faith.
What about those who say “I’m voting for Obama because he’s black”, or how about sexism, “I’m voting for Hillary because she’s a woman”. Just wondering. I don’t think any of these “reasons” are reasons at all. Content of character not color of skin.
… I think I would advise one to ignore tribalism’s effect on voting patterns at one’s own peril. Not saying its right, but any reality based analysis can’t ignore it as a phenomenon.
voting for someone based on race or gender to be in the same category. Although I’m not an expert on the sociology of the black community, I think there’s some merit to the idea that blacks held back on supporting Obama until they saw that he was a viable candidate, then flooded to him when it became apparent that he could win. I have no problem with blacks supporting Obama based on his race, or women supporting Hillary based on her gender. I just get tired of hearing a lot of black politicians saying “it’s not about race.” Can we be real for a minute? He’s winning 90 percent of the black vote because they all agree with his policies? If I was black, I’m sure I would be wholeheartedly supporting Obama. It’s only natural. It’s just silly to talk about Hillary’s “problem” with black voters. Her main problem with black voters is that she’s got a viable black opponent, exacerbated by the shameful playing of the race card by Obama and his supporters. Now, every statement of Hillary’s is viewed through the prism of racism, and the press is completely on board.
<
p>Derrick Jackson wrote a column in the Globe recently in which he contended that Hillary using the phrase “hard working whites” means she’s saying blacks aren’t hard working. Huh? If a candidate says “the hard working people of Pennsylvania” does that mean he’s saying “not like those layabouts in Ohio?” There is absolutely no logic to some of these arguments (don’t even get me started on the “as far as I know” nonsense) but the groupthink and media stampede on this are too overwhelming.
<
p>Remember the frustration when the media kept repeating that Al Gore claimed he invented the Internet, and evey other parroting of Gore’s supposed fabrications? That’s how Clinton supporters feel now. Remember how long it took to get over the resentment towards the press? Bingo. Except now it’s compounded because the lies and smears are being perpetrated by people in the Democratic Party. I’m sure a lot of Clinton supporters will swallow hard and vote for Obama, but I really don’t think people have a handle on the depth of the bitter feelings. Seeing commenters say things like “he’ll pick Katherine Sibelius for VP and the women will be mollified” makes it clear how delusional people are about this.
Vicky Switzer is from Tunkhannock, funny that you put these together from two separate articles. There is plenty of racism round there.