But race in America is anything but simple, and polls seem powerless to measure its political influence. There is clearly an undercurrent of prejudice in parts of the electorate, evident even among some Democratic primary voters. There is also massive enthusiasm among younger voters to break the color barrier in the Oval Office, coupled with large increases in African American primary turnout. These unpredictable factors may well balance in Obama's favor, which would speak well of the country."There is clearly an undercurrent of prejudice ..."--maybe some people don't like Obama because he's black. Let's agree that is racism and it is bad.
(Washington Post)
"There is also massive enthusiasm among younger voters to break the color barrier in the Oval Office, coupled with large increases in African American primary turnout." How does one explain either of those phenomena without finding racism at its core?
I agree with the numerous commentators and pundit who have noted that the race of a candidate should never be a sufficient reason for voting either for or against a candidate. The vote must come down to policy issues and character. If McCain and Obama switched races and my vote followed from one to the other on that basis then I am a racist regardless of which way I flip-flopped. Repeated from Gerson:
These unpredictable factors may well balance in Obama's favor, which would speak well of the country.It would speak well of the country if if racism in favor of blacks was more popular than racism against whites? Please, let us recognize the ridiculousness of that proposition. It would speak well of the country if both types of racism diminish.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please remain on topic and keep coarse language to an absolute minimum. Comments in a language other than English will be assumed off topic.