Is America Ready For A Black or Female President?

OK, first off, I should note that I am categorically NOT intending to sway anyone's choices here.

Now, assuming that Hillary or Obama will be the nominee, how is that going to break down? We know that any Dem candidate will have a certain amount of goodwill going into election day, just on grounds that Bush's reign has been such a catastrophe on every level.

We also know, and let's not lie, that nominating a black man or a woman will put some people off. Forget the mouthbreathers, they'd be voting GOP anyway. I'm not talking about the ones who are consciously racist/sexist, I'm talking about the majority for whom their racism and/or sexism is unconscious or minor. I imagine most of us here can agree that race and/or gender should not be an issue with regard to selecting a candidate but, again let's not lie, it will be to many people.

I'm a Brit. I can read your news, watch your TV and scan your websites but I'm not there with you, I can't feel the public mood so consider this an honest question: We know some people, even normally rational people, will vote against the black guy or the woman but would there be enough of them to swing an election? Has the USA's attitude to ethnicity and gender issues matured enough to elect either of them?

As I say, I am not trying to change your mind here, I'm looking for an honest appraisal of how you guys think your country would respond to such a nomination.

Everything else is just speculation.

Polls would seem to indicate that the answer is yes, however.

I'm always suspicious of polls. Having seen a little of how they're constructed, I tend to think that the answers are artificially limited.

But you're right, there's no real way to know unless/until one of them is nominated.

This is more of an answer.
Given that the polls show a relatively close race with either Hillary or Obama as nominee, I think that means that America is ready; that is, there are no real hard barriers in people's perception of this.
Even if either one of them is the nominee and loses that does not mean that America is not ready since people's votes are not purely based on gender or race.

Of course, that's the bugger: We can't figure out who's refusing to vote for the black guy and who just doesn't care for Barrack Obama for whatever reason.

Winning has to be the priority, not making social/political statements. Guess it's a little too late for the Dems to figure that one out. This Party is destined for the scrap heap of history.

I have been saying just that for weeks if not months - this country is in a world of hurt - and we need to win. For the longest time a lot of folks have said the Dems are a shoe in - these same folks said Clinton was a shoe in for the nomination. I think the Dem congress strategy in 2007 was just don't rock the boat, go along and get along and they'll win the White House and the Congress - well I think they were dead wrong. Although with the number of repunk senate seats up for election we are likely to get more seats there and most likely in the House too - but the White House that puppy is up for grabs and any Dem who thinks it is a lock is fooling themselves

This is going to turn into another HUGE tragedy and I fear we will never get this country back - or at least I'll never live long enough to see it and I'm really not all that old.

Until we get the ridiculous $$$$$ out of campaigns - and a corporate media that actually reports - nothing will change and unfortunately since the powers that be have the most interest in keeping it this way we're sunk....

Good lord it is SO depressing

There was a study quoted in Huffington where some MIT political professor analyzed Obama support in polls and discovered that only 20% of white democrats in the south support Obama.

While people are arguing that white democrats in IA and NH came out for Obama, it looks like the South is not as ready to embrace that type of change. And if only 20% of white democrats are ready....what does that say about the GOP-types?

... and Obama (or Hillary, for that matter) *could* win the White House without winning a single Southern state.

There are certainly many who will NEVER be ready for a white/black/asian/robot President, but I think we're within striking distance this year, due to anti-Rethug backlash. (But this may be the last election where that bump is available for a while.)

Youth turnout will put Obama over in the primaries and any Democrat over in the G.E. If the same old farts who usually vote are the only ones who turn out, Hillary will win the primary and lose the G.E.

:shrug:

are by far the smallest minority here in the states.

The point is less about who people would vote for and more about who they'd vote against.

But as a woman, I'm not exactly objective.

:)

Seriously. My training is in criminal law and there is a test in criminal law called the "reasonable man" test where the accused's actions are compared against those of a hypothetical "reasonable man". Well, any lawyer can tell you that when the test is deployed, the "reasonable man" always thinks exactly the same as the judge.

Any of our observations are going to be tainted by who and what we are. I'm a guy, mostly British, part Roma, bisexual. I'm never going to understand what it's like to be a one-legged black lesbian single mother.

... so women are more able to elect an affinity candidate than blacks. (generally speaking, disregarding actual candidates)

It's all completely speculative, of course, since there's no actual data available.

Or any other pro-war corporate crony, for that matter?

Like the old saying that "only Nixon could go to China", I've wondered if our first female/minority President would need to come from the Republican Party.

Try to imagine Dick Cheney in drag (I know, frightful image), now remove whatever trace element of compassion, humour or humanity was left and you have Thatcher. Seems she'd be perfect for the modern Republican party!

... where's our Republican version of Margaret Thatcher? I just don't think our Repugs let their women get that much power, so that's one hole in my theory.

Lee Mercer, Jr. exemplifies that first quality, prophet.

that's got to change the dynamic as compared with an African American.

Of course, we're both assuming that a female voter is more likely to vote for (or at least, rationally consider) a female candidate.

Either a black man or a woman running against the Repuke's nominee, who will be either (a) A Mormon, (b) A Baptist preacher, or (c) A Vietnam veteran. The country has already shown how much it detests Vietnam veterans, so maybe we'll find out how it feels about other "minorities" come November. :evilgrin:

Love to get your thoughts.

In terms of your question, yes. And if I'm wrong, I don't care. I think Obama is the best candidate. If other people can't get past his race, that's not his fault or mine.

I think someone of Indian or Asian descent could probably get elected here (everything else being equal, of course). A black candidate could go either way and sadly, someone of Arabic or East European descent would have no chance right now (Arabic for "big scary terrorist" reasons, East European because the tabloids are currently whipping up a frenzy about immigration).

I really hope you're right. While Obama wouldn't be my preferred candidate (I'm for Edwards right now), I think he'd make a decent president and possibly a great one (if he manages to unite the country as he obviously wants to). It'd be nice to think that the election would be free of race-baiting and similar attacks but we both know it won't be. It just remains to be seen if the sliming would sway enough people. I really hope it doesn't.

I know we have gotten better. Younger people are voting, and people are really pissed off, but I worry about it.

..with whether the candidate is black or female (or hispanic or whatever).

They're too concerned with the packaging and not the content.

I frankly don't care about black or female. I care about WHO IS THE BEST CANDIDATE and who can beat the shit out of the Repubes and IMO that isn't the female or the black guy.

I'm concerned with what's IN the box, not what it looks like on the outside (black, female, whatever).

When I see all that corprat money inside and SO many indications that the thing works like the same ol status quo - I'm not interested thankyouverymuch - I don't give a damn what the packaging looks like or what color or sex it is.

Are most Americans that observant?

NO. They don't want change and/or have no CLUE what it even means or don't give a rat.

CHANGE to them means the blue box instead of the red one. That's all. They never bother to look-see what's INSIDE the damn box - just look at the packaging.

Stoooooopid.

Edwards '08

in my decision.

I hope most of us here feel the same way. It's more the people around you that I'm concerned about.

especially when the folk in question are simply not the best we can do. Also, repukes have been known to steal presidential elections.

When I asked this question, I'm assuming all other things are equal.

ignorance and bigoty are alive and well in America

and the machines will decide. THAT'S why they were mandated to be installed by 2006. This S"election" is nothing but a dog and pony show.

Part of the staus quo being, of course, that only white, middle-aged-to-older, males need apply for the presidency.

Other nations have elected female leaders. Even in countries (arguably) more partriarchal than the US. Americans seem more resistant to female leadership than the rest of the modern world, it would seem.

As for a black man being president, it would be sad and shameful if the USA would still be so mired in racism as to reject a presidential candidate just because of his skin color.

If the USA is truly not ready for a black or a female president, then I think it's time to throw in the towel and move to another country. If the USA can only ever have a white male as our leader, then obviously the USA is behind the rest of the world. I hope that isn't the case.

Totally irrelevant. How is the gender or race of the US president relevant to the job you have, the air you breathe, or the number of cluster bombs dropped on other people?

I'd rather be asking if America is ready for an anti-war candidate. So far it seems America is not.

I'm not saying that the candidate's skin colour or gender would make one iota of difference to their policies, I am asking if, all other things being equal, the USA is now colour and gender blind enough to elect them.

... but especially when there's so much Republican aftertaste in the public mouth. I'm just not sure that the "public" will go for Hillary or Barack. Let's hope so, but the generic black/female question must be graded on a Barack/Hillary curve.

(Actually, it seems, to me, like the general "public" is more OK with Barack than Hillary, while the Democratic base is more OK with Hillary than Barack. So the Dem Party may nominate the candidate with a lower general acceptance level and make the race closer than it might have been.)

I must say I was curious about that as well: How much of the general public's willingness to take Barrack and Hillary seriously stems from the catastrophe that is Bush? Sort of "well, we tried the white guy and he was a f'ing disaster, let's see if these two can do better".

... so much as the Bush regime (color aside) has given the Left/Dems an opening earlier than they might have expected, given that the Right/Corporatists/Reps continue to have a stranglehold on much of the media.

The Dems have not yet shifted the public consciousness to the liberal/progressive/Left (even though most people agree with these values, when polled), and would need to leverage the White House bully pulpit, in a way that Clinton failed to do during his 8 years, if they are to maintain their momentum. (In this sense, I agree that Clinton was not an agent of change in the way that Reagan was; Clinton really just continued with tweaks to Republican free market policies and took the Left/Dems further away from the traditional base.)

and what they tell us. The experts. They'll let us know who is electable and who isn't. Of course, the machines will ultimately decide.

they have internal or external plumbing. It's their policies and stances on the issues that truly matter.

Is America ready for either of them? That remains to be seen, but I have some serious doubts. America is now a country that is woefully behind the majority of civilized nations when it comes to the mentality. Odd we are at war with some of the individuals we are fighting. They might possibly be the only ones more backwards (behind) in their thinking than we are.

I'm beginning to wonder if America is even ready to admit that the Earth is not flat, honestly.

who are waiting to be "Raptured", while having 4-5 kids and sucking the planet dry.

They are the the best two people for the job.

I assume (hope) you have reasons for disliking them that amount to more than their colour/gender but what about those around you?

But we are ready for a black or female leader.

Anybody know where we can find one.

I'd say that the entire country may not be ready, but a sizeable chunk of it appears to be ready for either (or both at once).