Next President: Barack Obama

[M.Dancer]

So in other words, you're saying that there is no way of knowing how many blacks, ie: what percentage of blacks, actually voted for Obama.

No of course there is a way ... there's the exit polls..same as how we can estimate how many blacks voted for Gore as you so kindly posted.

Are you saying you don't believe your own posts?

[Guest American Woman]

No of course there is a way ... there's the exit polls..

So you're saying exit polls are accurate?

[M.Dancer]

So you're saying exit polls are accurate?

They must be since you have no problem using them. Are you saying you don't understand what an estimate is?

Edited November 11, 2008 by M.Dancer

[jbg]

I don't want exit poll figures; I'm looking for actual statistics.

Wouldn't secret balloting make that almost unobtainable?

[Guest American Woman]

Wouldn't secret balloting make that almost unobtainable?

Yes, and that's my point. We really don't know if Obama got 96% of the black vote (or 95%, depending on which site you source) or not. I brought up the 90% going to Gore to show that with the margin of errors, with the inaccuracies that exit polls are known for, it's ludicrous to play up how much of the black vote Obama got as some sort of oddity that would never happen had he been a white candidate.

Exit polls are not the same as statistics, and as some of you pointed out for me, there is no way to "go about getting those" because "secret balloting [would] make that almost unobtainable." It's nothing but speculation based on nothing sound, ie: looking for excuses as to why Obama did as well as he did compared to McCain, to question whether a "white guy" would have gotten the same support as Obama did as if it were unheard of for another candidate to get that kind of black support.

Actually, considering all the room for errors, there's nothing really different about Obama's 95% compared to Gore's 90%-- and that was my point all along, which you all helped me prove.

[M.Dancer]

Actually, considering all the room for errors, there's nothing really different about Obama's 95% compared to Gore's 90%-- and that was my point all along, which you all helped me prove.

Since Al Gore received 90% of the black vote in 2000, the likelihood of Obama receiving 95% of the black vote even if he were white, when a larger percentage of white voters were voting Democrat too, would be quite feasible.

Oh so that was your point. Exit polls have room for errors so you have no problem .....what?

Seems like a post hoc point though....

[kimmy]

Exit polls are not a factual record of who voted for whom, but as has been pointed out that is information we do not have access to.

Exit polls *are* a statistic. They're a statistic that tracks who people leaving polls say they voted for. That's a statistic. Track a sufficient amount of this statistic, and you can obtain a statistically significant sample which you can base predictions about the population as a whole. The principle is no different from voting intention polls.

Exit polls are have the same merits and shortcomings as other polls. Sample size, the limitations of random sampling, and the potential for untruthful responses are factors that make exit polls less than perfect, but they're still rather good.

Exit poll predictions of election results have been shown to be highly accurate in predicting the final result, generally within a couple of percentage points. That speaks to the general accuracy of exit polls. Using exit polls to analyze results in terms of race, education, income level, etc, makes things more confusing, but in this particular situation we are merely relying on people to state their race correctly, which I suspect most are willing to do.

The bottom line is that when major news organizations are willing to stand behind these statistics and use them in their analysis of the results, when the political parties themselves employ these figures in analyzing what went right and wrong for their campaigns, then I think that these figures are certainly good enough for Kimmy to reference during a post on MapleLeafWeb.

And while the exit polls do not constitute factual proof of who voted for Obama, they do illustrate a strong and obvious trend: Obama obtained a huge boost from non-white voting compared to his Democrat predecessors.

+2% White votes vs Kerry

+8% African American votes vs Kerry

+13% Latino votes vs Kerry

+6% Asian votes vs Kerry

+12% "Other" votes vs Kerry

+1% White votes vs Gore

+6% African American votes vs Gore

+4% Latino votes vs Gore

+7% Asian votes vs Gore

+11% "Other" votes vs Gore

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/res...0/epolls.0.html

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/results/index.epolls.html

That just scratches the surface, as the raw percentages don't reflect the massive boost in turnout among non-white voters compared to prior elections.

-k

[BubberMiley]

Can someone refresh my memory why these demographic breakdowns are relevant?

[M.Dancer]

Can someone refresh my memory why these demographic breakdowns are relevant?

Everyone needs to know who to blame to 3 years....

[Black Dog]

kimmy:

QUOTE(Black Dog @ Nov 10 2008, 07:25 PM) *

Playing the race card can either be using race to terminate debate (for example, accusing someone who disagrees with you of racism) or, alternatively, exploiting racial fears (see: McCain's "black baby").

So only the most blatant and cynical use of race qualifies as "playing the race card" in your view?

Well, I think the term needs some boundaries, otherwise it becomes shorthand for mentioning race at any point at all.

What about, hypothetically, promising voters of all races that choosing a black president would reduce the feeling of alienation and resentment among minorities?

Would that not fall under the blatant and cynical criteria. Of course it might well be ou'r enot talking hypothetically, in which case, some context would be in order.

Has talking about racial issues ever worked out well for a white politician in America? I'm thinking probably not since Abe Lincoln, but feel free to let me know if I've forgotten anyone.

Um...Lyndon Johnson? Bill Clinton (aka the first black president)?

Obama can go out and sound like a champion to some voters and appeal to white liberal guilt in the rest and win across the board.

For McCain to even attempt to speak on this issue, the reaction (regardless of the content of his speech) would have been universal: "WTF does this honky know about it?"

Whatever.

[August1991]

BD, the CNN links above are critical and I was thinking about this after reading AW's post earlier today. Thanks.

According to these exit polls, Obama (in 2008) got 95% of the black vote whereas Kerry (in 2004) got 88%. The CNN site also helpfully notes that in 2008, the black vote represented 13% of the total whereas in 2004, it was 11%.

It's obvious that more blacks voted for the Democrats in 2008 and black turnout was higher too. Is the change "politically" significant? Dunno.

---

Maybe the Republicans should ask themselves why so few blacks vote for them? Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. I suspect that Richard Nixon managed more black votes than Bush Jnr but I don't know. (BTW, in 1993 for example, the PCs received 13.5% of the Quebec vote.)

IMHO. it seems perfectly obvious that black Americans would vote for Obama. No doubt a large majority of Catholics voted for John Kennedy in 1960. Black Americans (and Catholic Americans) have never had the chance to vote for one of their own.

This leads to two final questions:

1. If Obama won the presidency because of the black vote, does this somehow mean that he will be a "bad" president?

2. Why are Americans so obsessed with equality? People are different. We don't all have the same colour skin, speak the same language or think the same way. In its constitution, Canada officially recognizes different religions and two different languages. In the US Constitution, there is no mention of God let alone any mention of specific religions.

Edited November 13, 2008 by August1991

[jbg]

Yes, and that's my point. We really don't know if Obama got 96% of the black vote (or 95%, depending on which site you source) or not. I brought up the 90% going to Gore to show that with the margin of errors, with the inaccuracies that exit polls are known for, it's ludicrous to play up how much of the black vote Obama got as some sort of oddity that would never happen had he been a white candidate.

I didn't vote for Barack Obama but he won fair and square. He deserves my support as an American, regardless of my skin color or religion.

[BubberMiley]

I didn't vote for Barack Obama but he won fair and square. He deserves my support as an American, regardless of my skin color or religion.

There was a time when agreement with the basic tenets of democracy was a given. What happened?

[jbg]

There was a time when agreement with the basic tenets of democracy was a given. What happened?

Ask right-wing and/or left-wing hardliners, not me. Neither Bill Clinton nor GWB was given a chance to govern. This was wrong.

This mistake must not be repeated.

[kimmy]

Would that not fall under the blatant and cynical criteria. Of course it might well be ou'r enot talking hypothetically, in which case, some context would be in order.

I used the word "hypothetically" because I can't recall whether the Obama campaign specifically made this promise themselves. They certainly didn't have to, as media was enthusiastically doing so on his behalf.

But if I recall, this was the gist of some of Michelle Obama's content, notably the proud/not-proud stuff? She was speaking only for herself, of course, but I think her point was that Obama's campaign was making black people feel included for the first time.

And, if the charge can be made that the McCain campaign was playing the race card in a coded way by playing up his past associations with angry black leaders, it should be equally valid to say that Obama's talk that he could "heal the country" was also a coded appeal to the idea that choosing a black president would heal racial divisions.

Um...Lyndon Johnson? Bill Clinton (aka the first black president)?

I asked, because I honestly didn't know.

Whether Johnson's addresses on the subject worked out well for him is somewhat debatable, judging from the race riots during his tenure. He certainly had lots of opportunity to plea for unity, and little choice but to address the subject.

As for Clinton, I'm not actually aware of how he earned this title of honorary black person. Is it because he played saxophone and had a lot of sex? Did he say or do anything notable on the subject of race relations, or is it just that black people thought that he was pretty cool for a honky?

Whatever.

You can "whatever" if you wish, but we both know how it'd have played out. "How can this man, who has never experienced racial discrimination in his life, this son of an Admiral whose military career benefited from family privilege even as a captive of the North Vietnamese, this man who owns more homes than he's ever visited, how can this man even pretend to understand the experience of the excluded minorities, the disenfranchised, the people who hold their breath with fear whenever a police cruiser rolls past, the people who blah blah marginalized blah white privilege blah blah..."

-k

[sharkman]

On another matter, I keep hearing whispers that Obama has a citizenship problem. I don't care for the man, but I really hope this is just drivel from the right, it would become a constitutional crisis.

[BubberMiley]

Do you also really hope the 9/11 Truthers are full of hot air because of the crisis that would arise if it turned out what they say is true?

[bush_cheney2004]

Do you also really hope the 9/11 Truthers are full of hot air because of the crisis that would arise if it turned out what they say is true?

No....seems that Canada already has a "crisis" without 9/11 Truthers either way.

[sharkman]

Do you also really hope the 9/11 Truthers are full of hot air because of the crisis that would arise if it turned out what they say is true?

Hey, you keep the 9/11 truthers out of this!!

[BubberMiley]

Hey, you keep the 9/11 truthers out of this!!

At least the 9/11 Truthers had some interesting stories to tell. The Barack-was-born-elsewhere whackjobs don't believe in anything like real evidence.

[bush_cheney2004]

Liberals miffed...Obama stiffed them (suckers!):

...Liberals are growing increasingly nervous – and some just flat-out angry – that President-elect Barack Obama seems to be stiffing them on Cabinet jobs and policy choices.

Obama has reversed pledges to immediately repeal tax cuts for the wealthy and take on Big Oil. He’s hedged his call for a quick drawdown in Iraq. And he’s stocking his White House with anything but stalwarts of the left.

Now some are shedding a reluctance to puncture the liberal euphoria at being rid of President George W. Bush to say, in effect, that the new boss looks like the old boss.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16292.html

[BubberMiley]

Liberals miffed...Obama stiffed them (suckers!):

But who are the suckers? Those who fall for his attempts to seem moderate?

[jbg]

I love my country, and wish it the Best, even if I disagree with what happened tonight. Barack Obama has the potential to be a transformational President. Clearly, though the Democrats did not get 60 Senate seats, even one who often votes independently cannot be deaf, dumb and blind to what the American people said. Put simply, the people showed that ours is a country where anyone can do anything, if they have the brains, the drive, and the will.

Too bad he's so sadly disappointed. Fortunately the damage is about to be undone, much the way Harper's undoing Trudeau's damage.

The United States is truly an amazing land. It is a land made up of people from all nations. Some people came involuntariiy, and are part of the heritage that Barack Obama partially springs from.

Others are descended from people wanting to leave the idiotic culture, ethnic and religious wars. In many respects, the quilt that makes up America is a speaking quilt. To quote Barack Obama's campaign slogans, the quilt says "Yes We Can". What we learned today is that the immigrants whom came here for a merit-dominated rather than religion and ethnicity based experience have prevailed.

The U.S. still has these people, and hopefully always will. Nothing Obama could do could destroy the overall decency of the American public. Its greatness will outlive the mediocrity or malice of those that would make us a member of the Euro zone, and more like Greece than any other country.

We know that Obama is inspiring. It is up to him how to use his considerable oratorical gifts, and charisma, for the country. He will either soar, or fail miserably. I will never root against my country, and hope, despite my voting for McCain, that he meets his promise. Ronald Reagan surprised me, quite pleasantly. I both hope and fear for the future.

He could and should have used his bully pulpit to encourage is own ethnic group to foreswear dropping out, teen pregnancy, and welfare, and embrace work and initiative. That could have been a unique gift even though I disagree with him on almost all policies. He would never let his offspring run with the perpetual underclass. Too bad he chose political correctness and pandering to using his example of achievement to inspire.

That is the real tragedy.