Race playing apart in the presidental election?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
The day after the California primary this year I asked some of the black students at the school I was at who they would vote for. All of them said Obama and I asked them why and they literary said "because he is black". I then played around with them a bit by saying this.

"I voted for Mitt Romney because he is white." (that was lie on my part though I did vote for him, race will NEVER affect my votes to do so would be idiotic I think.) This really got them mad not enough for them to punch me thank god but enough to cuss at me a little before the teacher got them to settle down. Anyways I asked them why they could vote for Obama because he is black but I can't vote for Romney because he is white. They then realized the error they commited at least I hope they did.

I already knew they don't care about the news at all so really I feel they are inept to even make a decision.


Anyways on the same point I was making here is a clip from the Howard Stern show about this exact same issue. Expect that the people on this don't even know the issues nor the vice presidents.

http://www.bpmdeejays.com/upload/hs_sal_in_Harlem_100108.mp3
 

Verscha

Est. Contributor
Messages
272
Role
Private
In some circles, I suppose that race might have some bearing on people's decisions, but I don't think it's as big of an issue as one might expect.

Certainly, as far as voting patterns amongst the black community in the United States is concerned, they have always been strongly in favour of the Democrats. This is because, sadly, black Americans are also statistically more likely to be poor Americans. The fact that the Democratic candidate is black might potentially sway even more black voters to go for the Democrats, but they'd have always overwhelmingly supported the Democrats no matter who the candidate was-- Obama, Clinton, Edwards... whoever.

As far as white racists are concerned, they'd never vote Democrat anyway, so the point you raised is pretty irrelevant here.

You also have to remember that you were asking young people. I don't think someone can really expect young people-- in general-- to have as developed political viewpoints as older people, so it makes sense that they'd base their choice on superficial qualities.
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
In some circles, I suppose that race might have some bearing on people's decisions, but I don't think it's as big of an issue as one might expect.

Certainly, as far as voting patterns amongst the black community in the United States is concerned, they have always been strongly in favour of the Democrats. This is because, sadly, black Americans are also statistically more likely to be poor Americans. The fact that the Democratic candidate is black might potentially sway even more black voters to go for the Democrats, but they'd have always overwhelmingly supported the Democrats no matter who the candidate was-- Obama, Clinton, Edwards... whoever.

As far as white racists are concerned, they'd never vote Democrat anyway, so the point you raised is pretty irrelevant here.

You also have to remember that you were asking young people. I don't think someone can really expect young people-- in general-- to have as developed political viewpoints as older people, so it makes sense that they'd base their choice on superficial qualities.
Well in the mp3 link I provided there's clear proof that some people support obama just because he is black or its the cool thing to do, none of them sounded like teenagers at all. Also is it not important for young people to pay attention to world/national events? I don't watch the news that much anymore but its not that hard to follow either.
 

Verscha

Est. Contributor
Messages
272
Role
Private
Also is it not important for young people to pay attention to world/national events?
Absolutely, but the fact of the matter is that a large number do not. There are a myriad of reasons for this, but I am tired and thinking is hard. D:

Anyway, flimsy reasons to vote for someone is not a new phenomenon. In the 2001 UK general election for instance, the Conservative candidate, William Hague, lost some votes because he was bald. Of course, he lost the rest because the Conservative Party at the time was electorally hopeless. :p
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Absolutely, but the fact of the matter is that a large number do not. There are a myriad of reasons for this, but I am tired and thinking is hard. D:

Anyway, flimsy reasons to vote for someone is not a new phenomenon. In the 2001 UK general election for instance, the Conservative candidate, William Hague, lost some votes because he was bald. Of course, he lost the rest because the Conservative Party at the time was electorally hopeless. :p
The only reason I seen was they don't care and they think there's better stuff to do. A lot of the youth in my area are into gangs. Stockton has some of the worst crime rates in America thanks to racial tensions of nearly every single race of people living in the central Valley of California. Anyways there little excuse for them not to watch 30 or 60 mins of news per night, hell that was homework for my current events class once but I was watching about 3 hours of news per night and I looked up stuff online as well.

I also talked to my teachers about news events since none of my fellow classmates did, for this I got singled out as a teachers pet since this actually made the teachers like me better.
 

Chillhouse

Est. Contributor
Messages
3,000
Role
Diaper Lover, Carer
Race plays a part in everything. Some black people are voting for Obama because he's black. Some white people are voting for Obama because he's black. And some white people are voting for McCain because he's white.
 

Darkfinn

Banned
Messages
3,676
Role
Diaper Lover, Incontinent,
Sadly... I think a lot of Southern whites are going to vote for McCain simply b/c they don't want a "N-word" for President. Believe it or not, hate is alive and well down here below the Mason-Dixon line... there are still plenty of guys in white robes and pointy hooded hats meeting in farmer's back fields on a regular basis... you just need to know where to look and whom to ask.

I will also say that there are a lot of ignorant blacks who are voting for Obama simply because he is black as well... so it works for both sides.

As long as Obama doesn't put a set of dub spinners on the Presidential limo and have his own version of "Here Come Da Cheif"... he's just fine in my book.
 

GoodluckBear

Est. Contributor
Messages
66
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Sadly, it does play a huge part, America needs a President that's a mix of every race and is an Atheist. Just think a President with no Religion sadly of course this will never happen.
 
Messages
131
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Babyfur, Carer
In my opinion, if black people want to vote for Obama just because he's black, more power to them. I wouldn't suddenly feel an obligation to educate them on the election and the participants. I'm white and plan on voting for Obama.


Besides, these votes will help cancel out some of the votes cast south of delaware. And believe me, there's going to be thousands of redneck "AIN'T GON' HAVE NO NIGGER RUNNIN' TEH KUNTRY!" votes being cast. If they want to vote against him for being black, then good news that some people are voting with him for being black. Doubly so that he's the right choice to be making in this election.


"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" was never a really catchy jingle anyway, John.
 

mm3

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,795
Role
Carer, Other
Are you kidding?! It's extremely race-biased. Not to sound racist or anything, but my town is really... err, black. I live in the semi-ghetto part of New York, luckily I'm in a nice neighborhood. My school on the other hand is really, really... um, gangsta?

It's disgusting, everyone is voting for Obama for the following reasons:
"Because! He's Obama!"
"He's black. We need a black president."
"He's going to bring so much change to this country!"

Like, he's going to get voted into office without a doubt, and for all the wrong reasons! It's pathetic. I have my own personal religious beliefs on what is going to happen in the near future, but in a down-to-earth point of view, something's going to change, and it's this country. Sadly, it's all falling down the toliet as it is, and in the next 10 or so years? Fuhgettaboutit. We're done in the near future, I'll guarantee it.
 

dogboy

Est. Contributor
Messages
20,380
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Living in the South, I totally agree with DarkFinn. On my way to work, we drive through a pretty poor section. In some of the front yards are McCain signs. McCain and the wealthy Republicans will do nothing for the poor, yet there is the sign. I have to assume it's because the sign poster is a racist. Of course the reality of politics is that no politician will do anything for the poor or the middle class. Maybe Obama will lower taxes for us, but usually it's too little, too late.
 

Fire2box

Est. Contributor
Messages
10,934
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Sadly, it does play a huge part, America needs a President that's a mix of every race and is an Atheist. Just think a President with no Religion sadly of course this will never happen.
Whats would be so good about a president having no religion? How is having no religion better then having one?
 

Vladimir

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,784
Role
Private
The decision of a president should never be based on his faith. Believing in something nobody has ever seen is not a good way of governing a real, present, important country. I don't care if you believe in God, or Greek mythology, or spirits from nature, but we're talking about presidents here. Presidents of the United States, which is one of the most, if not the most influential and powerful country in the world. God is a metaphorical and spiritual figure, according to me. Believing in him, and the Bible, is simply a way to blame every bad thing that's happening in the world on someone. At least that's how I feel.

Also, a Christian could suffer from discrimination from Muslims, or Jews, for example. I believe Goodluckbear was simply demonstrating how a president should be like in order to be accepted by everyone.
 
Messages
1,113
Role
Other
Living in the South, I totally agree with DarkFinn. On my way to work, we drive through a pretty poor section. In some of the front yards are McCain signs. McCain and the wealthy Republicans will do nothing for the poor, yet there is the sign. I have to assume it's because the sign poster is a racist. Of course the reality of politics is that no politician will do anything for the poor or the middle class. Maybe Obama will lower taxes for us, but usually it's too little, too late.
I'd like to point out that going through the history of US income tax rates. In 1912 there was no Federal Income Tax. In 1913 it was created and ran from 1 to 7% on a scale from 0$ to $500,000 and above. By 1920 that scale had changed from 4% to 73% for $0 to $1,000,000. (President Woodrow Wilson, Dem)

During the Harding, Coolidge and Hoover (Rep) administrations, there was a bunch of modifications to the brackets, and went through a period where the bottom rate dropped to 1.5% for $4,000 and the top at 25% at $100,000+. Hoover though raised them back to where they were at 4% and 63% at $1,000,000,

Roosevelt (Dem) raised the top end of the brackets in the 30's ending with 79% at $5,000,000. Then in the 40's jacked them up to pay for WWII, 10% at $2,000 to 81% at $5,000,000, by 1945 it was 23% at $2,000 to 94% at $200,000.

Those rates dropped by 3% across the board until 1951, when Truman (Dem) raised the bottom 2 brackets by a fraction of a percent. Just the bottom two brackets. People making under $4,000. In 52 he increased the bottom rates by 1.8 - 2% and the top by 1%.

In 1954 Eisenhower (Rep) dropped them back to where they were in 1950. Where they stayed for 10 years.

In 1964 Johnson (Dem) rearranged the tax bracket (bottom is now $500) and cut tax rates. The bottom is now 16% at $500 (18% at $2,000) and 77% at $200,000. So while he cut the bottom some, he cut the top 14%. The very bottom got 4%. In '65 the bottom dropped another 1 to 2% and the top dropped to 70% at $100,000.

Things pretty much stayed the same, unless you were single, until 1977 when Carter (Dem) made the first $1,600 tax free for everyone. In '78 10 of the brackets were eliminated.

In 82, Reagan (Rep), the bottom rate was dropped by 2% and the top rate was made 50% at $42,800 a 9% for that bracket and a big drop for everyone above. An inflation index was added so the income amounts would continue to be larger in '84.

Reagan (Rep) did some strange things and eliminated that 0% bracket in '87, then on $1,700, and had a bottom bracket of 11% on $1,500 going up to 38.5% at $45,000.

Bush (Rep) eliminated the bottom 11% bracket and increased the rate on some wealthier people to make up what they saved on the bottom :)dunno:).

Clinton (Dem) added two higher brackets on even wealthier taxpayers.

Bush (Rep) added a bottom rate of 10% and lowered the other brackets by 2.5% to 4.1% in the four upper brackets. His "Tax Rebates" eliminated the bottom bracket in the years they were issued.

Obama (Dem) wants to eliminate the Bush tax rate cuts, which gets rid of the bottom bracket, and would raise the tax rate on people starting roughly
at $35,000.

There may be some minor errors in here, I was going off this webpage The Tax Foundation - U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2008 and tax laws may be confusing. Until 1949 there was only one way of filing, then they added Married filing Separately, which I think gave an advantage to married couple that filed that way. Later they added Head of Household and Single. I went by the only rate and then Married Filing Separately rates.

So the big claim that only Democrats would cut taxes for the middle class and lower is a load of bunk.

With the exceptions of Truman, who dropped the rates across the board, before raising them on lowest wage earners and then raising everyones. Eisenhower, who cut the rates across the board.
Carter who added the bottom 0% rate, but his elimination of 10 brackets may have cost some and saved others, you would have to check on an income by income basis.
Every other President that cut tax rates, had bigger cuts for the wealthy.
 

Kovy

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,877
Role
Diaper Lover, Little, Carer
Sadly, it does play a huge part, America needs a President that's a mix of every race and is an Atheist. Just think a President with no Religion sadly of course this will never happen.
Does religion, or race for that matter, even MATTER?
Not trying to appear rough, I just think your post was a little silly. No offense, at least you contributed.
 

Darkfinn

Banned
Messages
3,676
Role
Diaper Lover, Incontinent,
I'd like to point out that going through the history of US income tax rates.
Yes yes... we have already discussed and agreed that the Democrats raise taxes and build up a surplus in the budget, and the Republicans come along, declare war, lower taxes, and build up a defecit. That's just how the game is played.

Historicly the tax breaks have always been given to the rich and powerful, hoping for a "trickle down " effect. All I have seen from the rich and powerful in the past 8 years is greed greed greed.

Does religion, or race for that matter, even MATTER?
You'd better damn well believe it matters. Why do you think McCain chose Sarah Palin in the first place... to appeal to the bible thumping conservative base.

If you really look at things... there are 3 reasons why this country is as split apart as it is...

#1: Jesus
#2: Guns
#3: Roe v Wade

Frankly people... there are much much greater issues and challenges facing our country and the world today. People need to get their heads out of their asses and start thinking more progressively. Technological and social developments are being made in other nations that simply blow us out of the water. Imported cars sell better, imported electronics are all the craze, imported clothing sets the latest trends, and more immigrants take jobs in the upper-echelon scientific and mathematics fields every year.

Population is growing at an exponential pace, food and energy supplies are dwindiling, poverty is spreading, the environment is suffering, and I haven't seen one quality solution yet for any of it. This trend needs to be reversed... and backwards conservative thinking will not get it done. We need fresh new ideas from innovative young people to get us moving on the right path again.
 

GoodluckBear

Est. Contributor
Messages
66
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Does religion, or race for that matter, even MATTER?
Not trying to appear rough, I just think your post was a little silly. No offense, at least you contributed.
Are you kidding me, have you been alseep for the past 8 years? Look at the Bush Admin We have the war in iraq to blame on religion just like the re-election of Bush:laugh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top