Are white Democrats against Obama closet racists?

I have absolutely no use for Hillary Klinton. The only potential candidate for the nomination of Prez in my lifetime who has less real experience than Hillary would be Obama. Neither has ever done anything worth mentioning. Maybe I'm not only racist, but misogynistic, too??? :D
 
While we might argue on particular issues, PBP, the point is,
THEY ARE ALL PRETTY MUCH THE SAME.

Both have an elitest oligarchy in place, and, depending on their moods, do whatever they want, regardless of party lines, etc.

My reaction to Hillary, her 'hubbie', and BO are based on what they have done in the past, what they suggest, and, their hypocritical actions and words.

Bush and his oil buddies are clearly not much better. I don't find it a coincidence that gas prices have rocketed, he hasn't done anything, or attempted to take any action, and, it's his last year in office. Pay off for 8 years of the presidency to his good buddies that backed him...
 
Bush is no fiscal conservative. He's a "compassionate conservative". Translation: "I see the democrats are able to buy votes by promising to take care of people. I like that idea. That's my compassionionate side. As for my conservative side, I base that on my religious beliefs and the fact that I'm a lifelong member of the republican party. That ought to be good enough to define me as a conservative".

I have been sorely disappointed in Bush's liberal program tendencies. His education programs with Ted Kennedy, his prescription drugs for Senior Citizens, etc. have all lead to huge domestic spending increases. I did appreciate his tax cuts, which increased revenue. But the increased domestic program spending, plus the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, meant we were not able to shrink the deficit enough. Meanwhile, the dollar has been devalued which has contributed greatly to the cost of oil and energy. Bush has some pluses and some minuses. Being a tight fiscal spender is not one of his accomplishments.
 
What do you consider Medicare Part D (ie, the drug program for old people who didn't plan on getting old)?
Click to expand...

Point out a single flaw (or multiple flaws for that matter) on the repubublican side does not change the fact that democrats are far closer to socialism than republicans could ever hope to be.
 
Without question some (possibly many) of the white Democrats who are against Obama are being racist. Racism is alive and well in America but we all pretend it doesn't exist because then we don't have to talk about it.

Other white Democrats who oppose Obama do so because, although they want change, Obama's platform is NOT the change they want. Obama's a very radical candidate within the Democratic party and I think many moderate to conservative Democrats have no reason to support him based on that alone. If McCain had a record showing him to be 99% more conservative than the rest of the Senate he'd be losing the moderate to liberal Republicans for sure.
 
Point out a single flaw (or multiple flaws for that matter) on the repubublican side does not change the fact that democrats are far closer to socialism than republicans could ever hope to be.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on how many hairs you are willing to split in order to see a difference. I can't think of many social programs that the Democrats support that the Republicans don't also support.

If you think that it makes the Republicans less socialist because they want to spend a few dollars less some social program than the Democrats, then I am willing to agree with you.
 
Other white Democrats who oppose Obama do so because, although they want change, Obama's platform is NOT the change they want. Obama's a very radical candidate within the Democratic party and I think many moderate to conservative Democrats have no reason to support him based on that alone.
Click to expand...

OK, so tell me what part of Obama's platform you are talking about.

What radical ideas does Obama have that Hillary does not also have?

Why can no one answer that question? Its the crux of this thread.
 
Neither Hillary nor Obama is a realistic candidate for any normal person. An American who supports either is clearly not reasonable. Trying to figure out why such a person would prefer one of these goofballs over the other may be a fool's errand.


Are Democrats unlikely to be "racist" because that's a concept they use to pander to racial minorities? Hee hee. They're as racist as anybody else. They converted racism from a characteristic found in all cultures into a thought crime of which only whites could be guilty. Convenient, given that the racial minorities to whom they pander are extremely racist.


Something like 90% of blacks favor Obama. Racism? Well, duh. Surprising? Weird and unexpected? No.


We're not going to see less of this. Once upon a time, you voted for a white guy no matter who you were. Soon (or maybe from now on), the typical voter will vote for the guy who looks like him. There are only two major parties, so they'll have to split along racial lines. I'm betting the Republicans will get whites, asians, and miscellaneous; the Democrats will get the blacks and hispanics. 21st century American politics in a nutshell.
 
White Demos Closet Racist?

"There are only two major parties, so they'll have to split along racial lines. I'm betting the Republicans will get whites, Asians, and miscellaneous; the Democrats will get the blacks and Hispanics. 21st century American politics in a nutshell. "


Sadly, what you postulate might just come to pass.
 
Unregistered said:
OK, so tell me what part of Obama's platform you are talking about.

What radical ideas does Obama have that Hillary does not also have?

Why can no one answer that question? Its the crux of this thread.
Click to expand...
Previously in a response to Socrates calling for a close to this thread, you said:
Socrates, I don't see this thread as a discussion of race, but a discussion of racism, which is different. If someone agrees with Obama on all issues, but still does not support him, I am interested in understanding their reasons.
Click to expand...
So which is it? Even being that you're the thread starter, you don't get to change horses in mid-stream.

Surprisingly, this thread has pretty much remained on topic. It can stay that way or it can get closed. The problem that I see (from past experience) is that if it gets closed, some of you posting to this thread may go MIA. - No threat here, just saying it like it is. (yeah, I know... some of you will perceive this as a threat, regardless. sigh)
 
Not sure what you mean Antipitas.

I am asking basically two questions, neither of which have been answered:

1. How are Obama and Hillary different on major issues?

2. If they are not significantly different on major issues, then why do Hillary supporters not support Obama?

A coalition of Hillary supporters are saying they don't support Obama because he is too liberal. But they don't say what they mean exactly. Too liberal on what? I don't see a significant difference on the issues between the two. If it isn't racism, then what is it?

Sorry if I didnt articulate well.
 
If they are not significantly different on major issues, then why do Hillary supporters not support Obama?
Click to expand...

For me, there are other considerations than issues:

1. Integrity
2. Competence
3. Leadership

Issues make up my fourth consideration.
 
I don't care for either Hillary or Obama. But I'll try to explain why demos might prefer Hillary over Obama, and I doubt it has anything to do with race. Hillary doesn't attend a church or have a campaign advisor who screams that God should damn America. Hillary doesn't have close ties to an indicted slum lord in Chicago. Hillary doesn't have close ties to some guy who bombed the Pentagon. Hillary has far more experience with the Federal government. Hillary doesn't believe that Iran is a fuzzy little kitten that just needs some understanding, a big group hug, and nuclear weapons. Hillary isn't stupid enough to say that bitter people cling to their guns and religion. And Hillary is better known than Obama.

There, that's the best I can do.
 
My take:
BO got his Senate position by a freak: Jeri Ryan divorced her husband, Jack Ryan, over his wanting to have sex with her in public places. Jack Ryan resigned from the senate race, and BO ran uncontested. BO was the only other person in the race, and, he's not been around that long. He lies, and changes position like Hillary. He's not a woman, so, he doesn't instantly get the "I want Hillary because I want the first woman president people."

BO, at least according to Rush, Mike Savage, and the other conservative talk show guys, has fairly extensive contact with terrorist muslim leaders. He can't seem to figure out what religion he is, Catholic/Christian or Muslim. Combine that with his anti-gun stance, Chicago's anti-gun stance, his failure to do anything about D.C.'s anti-gun laws, and what he stood for before he had a chance to run for president, and, we never have to get to race.

However, in a pragmatic sense, I would guess that the first black president in the U.S. might be a high risk for assassination, so, his VP has to be very good. That's about as far as race plays into it for me, that the possibility of being a target for a racist is the only real consideration I would give the issue, and, for that reason, I would seriously look at the president and the VP as a package, more then I would with most other candidates.
 
The little bit I gather about this guy brings up this question:

Is the Democratic party, having failed with the feminist battleaxe card, seriously playing the race card at this point, and, if so, WHY?

Are you telling me in the entire Democratic party they couldn't come up with a qualified, experienced politician, instead of this guy? Or, is this there angle, and gamble?

I don't really get it. Bush barely won his election, and, I seriously doubt he's going to go down as one of the top presidents ever.:rolleyes:

I can't believe the Democats can't come up with a better candidate...
 
Thinking that people need a logical reason to vote for a particular candidate was a false premise to start with. There is a huge part of the electorate that has no idea what either stand for although they will not likely vote. Some would vote for Hillary simply because she is a woman and Obama because he is black, some will not vote for them for the same reason.

Their major policy difference is that Hillary was more of a hawk on Iraq and voted for the war although she has tried to distance herself from that. But, she was reallistic enough to say that an instant pull-out now would be a catastrophe and the far left hammered her for it. Obama voted against the war and has vowed to remove the troops.He adjusted that a little a couple of weeks a go and the left hammered him for it.

There are people who really dreamed of having a woman president. There are people who dreamed of having a black president. That's not a bad thing.

I doubt there are any more people voting against Obama because he is black than there are voting for Obama because he is black.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top