In Tony Weeg's post about how Obama makes him "proud to be an American", one commenter mentions that he's worried that neither Democratic candidate, Clinton or Obama, will be electable against any Republican candidate because a majority of Americans aren't yet willing to vote for a woman or a minority. I respect his worry, and it's a valid question for a political party when it's choosing which candidate to field. But even if there are worries that a candidate isn't electable because of their gender or race or religion, someone or some group is going to have to make the first step of ignoring those biases, so that others can learn to follow.
But do we need to worry about these candidates' electability? I know of two factors which lead me to believe that America is ready to elect a ground-breaking candidate.
First, a recent CNN poll reported that 72% of white Americans and 61% of black Americans think that the country is ready for a black President. I can't think of a more obvious piece of evidence to answer this question in the positive.
Second, the number of Democrats coming out to vote for these primaries has been quite large; larger than the number of Republicans, and larger than the Democratic turnout from years past. That tells us that existing Democrats are more excited about these two candidates than others in the past, or it tells us that more people out of the population at large are willing to vote Democratic than are willing to vote Republican. Perhaps both are true. Either way, more people are turning out for Obama and Clinton than turned out for Kerry or Gore.
So whether you're going to vote for Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John McCain, I think we can share a feeling of humble satisfaction that Americans decide this election based on the candidates' values, qualifications, and policy. That's what it should be, and nothing more.
Comments (7)
February 6, 2008
12:27PM | #
It seems as if Tony has disabled comments on that thread, so I will respond here.
I understand that having a woman or minority on the ballot for President of the United States is a historic, ground-breaking event.
Yes, Hillary and Barak are raising tons of money, and getting a lot of support...from democrats. They are all that the democrats realistically have to choose from.
In the general election it is more than just the support of Democrats that come into play. John Kerry got tons of support from the Democrats, look how that turned out.
As I said on Tony's blog, saying you think the country is ready for a black president is different than saying you will vote for a black candidate, which is different than saying you think that candidate will be elected.
Personally, unless something drastically changes between now and November, I plan on voting for the Democratic candidate (be it Hillary or Barak) as they represent my ideals more than any of the Republican front-runners.
Unfortunately, I think best candidate was pushed out of the race in the effort to be the most 'ground breaking'.
I hope I am wrong. If I were religious, I would pray I am wrong.
February 6, 2008
12:48PM | #
Scott, thanks for your comment. It certainly seems that you and I have different perceptions on whether a woman or minority candidate could win the election, although we both would want such a thing to happen. So let me ask you this: if you think that a minority candidate can't be elected, do you think that the Democrats should have tried to support another candidate for the sake of getting to the White House?
That question, which is one of political strategy, is much harder to answer. Let me know your thoughts.
February 6, 2008
1:11PM | #
I've never been concerned with whether we would have a female or minority president. If we do, great, no skin off my back. I will say that I won't be voting for Clinton because I don't feel the is the right (female) candidate for the job. Surprisingly, I know a lot of women that echo my opinion. They would LOVE to see a female president, but just don't feel she's the one.
As for Obama, I only have issue with him and that's about it. While I understand the need for the country to get the hell out of Iraq, I don't think this is something that should be on a "public" timetable.
In the past, I really didn't give a crap about the elections. I'm finding now, that I own a house, feel a little more mature (at the mature age of 34) and such, that I need to get involved, do my research and make my vote count.
This upcoming 2008 election isn't going to be pretty.
February 6, 2008
1:13PM | #
Heh, or should that be the "at the immature age of 34." ;)
February 6, 2008
1:33PM | #
I'm still waiting for THE ground breaking candidate. One that has read the Constitution of the United States and understands that document defines the maximum scope of our federal government.
I fear I'll be waiting a very long time.
February 6, 2008
3:52PM | #
Tom - just so I am clear, I do think eventually we will have a woman president and a minority president, I just don't see it happening in 2008. I think what happens this year, regardless of who get the Democratic nomination, will open doors for future candidates of different races, religions, etc.
As for the question, do I think the Democrats should have supported another candidate for the sake of getting the White House? I think they should put up the best candidate. I don't think Kerry was the best candidate 4 years ago, nor do I think Hillary or Barak are the best candidates this year. Rather, they each represent, to me, the best of what's left.
Last week sometime there was a debate or interview with Hillary and Barak, and there were 2 things said (one by each candidate) that made change my feelings for each of them.
First, Hillary was asked about 2 families, the Clintons and the Bushes, running the country for 'a generation'. Her response was 'It took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, and I think it will take a Clinton to clean up after the second one'. I thought that was a great answer, I may not agree with her, but it was a great answer.
Second, when asked about being described as someone who would raise taxes, Barak responded by saying he would like to confront any Republican about fiscal conservatism with when we have the largest deficit ever.
What is truly sad is that I know people who have told me that they won't vote for Hilary because she is a woman, or vote for Barak because of his name (one person said his name was too close to Osama for him to feel comfortable with him in the White House) or his religion (some think he is a Muslim, which I believe is inaccurate, and should be irrelevant). Maybe its these few who have skewed my views towards whether or not either will win, or maybe its these few who greater represent the attitude of Americans in general but they don't make these views public.
Either way, I want to be clear, I don't not them to win based on sex, skin color, religion, etc. Nor do I want them to win because of those same reasons. I want a president who most represents my ideals, and, right now, both Hillary and Barak are as close as I am going to get in 2008.
November 4, 2008
9:04PM | #
When I am wrong, I say I am wrong.
I sold our country short. It looks like not only are we ready to elect a black man president, but that we may actually do it.
I only hope that this indeed the change we need.