Why aren't people acting like a second Obama win would be just as historic as the first?

[DHelix]

I'm convinced that people love to hear that they're experiencing something historic. It's why we love when records are broken in the Olympics (even if they'll be broken the following year). It's why the Republicans put up Sarah Palin to try and counter the enthusiasm of America electing its first Black President. It's why people turn to read headlines about historic stats in weather, finance, or crime.

So, why hasn't anybody been able to craft a solid narrative around having a 2-term Black President as historic?

Look, I realize that the best way to beat racism is to avoid making a big deal about race at all. I'm also aware of the stigma from pyscho right wingers who claim that"Obama only won because of race" last time because some white folks felt like it was time. I realize that in many ways it's a sign of progress that race is no longer the issue it was during the 2008 race. I realize it's a good thing that he's doing as well as he is without it seeming historic.

However, I want the Democrats to win more than I care about morale victories because of what's at stake. Why wouldn't a second term be just as historic as the first? Sure, America's had a black President now but we've never had a 2-term black President. A second term puts him immediately in contention to be viewed decades from now as one of the greatest, yet most polarizing in his era, Presidents of all time and a man that took race relations in America to new levels of tolerance and acceptance. Don't people feel that? They'd have been around for an American political legend. 2012 is no less historic than 2008. A second term pushes Obama from Carter to becoming the Progressive American's Reagan. I hope people feel the significance again as we get closer to November 6th. Yes, there are other battles to fight and a long, long, long list of reasons for average everyday folks to vote for Obama but records were made to broken and on November 6th another hurdle will be overcome and Obama will join the rest of the 2-term Presidents. Whether people vote for him because of his policies or the historical significance I couldn't care less. America wins either way.

[exboyfil]

1. I care because he is a better man for

the job - a far better man. I really don't care that he is black (never did). I still think Hillary Clinton would have been better, but Obama is better than the last two alternatives. If anything is historic it is that the Republicans have nominated probably the worst major party candidate in the 2nd half of the 20th century (maybe in all of the 20th century).

[flowomo]

2. That won't be the only historic precedent he'll set when he wins....

http://xkcd.com/1122/

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. He has been elected once. Being re elected is not ever as historic as that first election.

There is no narrative around that, because it doesn't make sense within the context of the election which is about bread and butter issues and not history.

[DHelix]

5. I realize that but...

Those of us on DU may not have cared about the race issue being historic but some fence sitters around America do. That's my point. Some people vote on American Idol for the nerdy kid because they think he's an underdog. Some people cheer in the Final Four for the small school because they want a historic upset. And some people voted for the first non-white POTUS because they hoped it will turn a chapter in race relations in the country and wanted to tell their grandkids someday that they were there when it happened.

In sports, journalists are often forced to craft narratives around legacy or obscure historic moments all the time. "If Michael Jordan accomplishes this feat he'll join the greats of Magic, Bird, etc. If Tom Brady wins this superbowl he'll become the ___________ QB of all time. No team has ever come back from being down 3-0. If ____ does this they'll be the first ever."

Some people become invested when they feel that something historic is going to happen so it wouldn't hurt if there was a narrative being crafted around how a second term would cement Obama's legacy and how he'd become the first non-caucasian person to win 2 terms? I just feel like something "feel good" couldn't hurt the campaign right now and my concern is that some of the people who voted this way last time feel like they "did their part" last time without realizing that this could be just as important and significant as his first win. And if they don't feel that I almost want people to feel a bit of fear that a Romney win would potentially undo the race-related gains that have been made these past 4 years by allowing a rich white man to come in after America's first black president and come out looking like a hero as a result of the next 4 years being easier than the Great recession was. The next 4 years will undoubtedly be smoother economically than the great recession's first 4 years were so the next President has a chance to look like a champ by 2016. I'd rather our first black President, humanitarian, and feminist be that champ than the rich white guy spewing conservatism.

[Coyotl]

4. Because Sarah Palin was a better V-P choice than Mitt, or because

Mitt bought the nomination

Take your pick or maybe both

[NCLefty]

6. I don't think it eclipses the first, but it's still quite historic :)

[Maximumnegro]

7. 24/7 News cycle, nonstop information...nt

[deaniac21]

8. Maybe a results based opinion

Who knows"
? The rebublicans are painting a false narrative.