Obama predicts 30% increase in black vote if he's the nominee

[BeyondGeography]

Obama: He Can Turn Out Black Voters
By NEDRA PICKLER | Associated Press Writer

CONCORD, N.H. - Barack Obama predicted that black voter turnout would swell by at least 30 percent if he wins the presidential nomination, giving Democrats victory in Southern states that have been voting Republican for decades.

"I'm probably the only candidate who having won the nomination can actually redraw the political map," Obama told a Democratic voter skeptical that he could defeat a Republican candidate. "I guarantee you African-American turnout, if I'm the nominee, goes up 30 percent around the country, minimum," Obama said. "Young people's percentage of the vote goes up 25-30 percent. So we're in a position to put states in play that haven't been in play since LBJ."

...Obama's comment came in response to former New Hampshire state Rep. Carol Moore, who told him the candidate to get her vote will be the one she feels has the best chance of winning in the general election because she's so scared another Republican will replace President Bush. She asked Obama what made him think he could win. Another voter later told Obama because of his lack of experience, "by any stretch of the imagination, it would be a leap of faith to vote for you."

...Obama noted that in in Mississippi, blacks make up more than a third of the state's population, but make up a smaller share of the electorate. "If we just got African Americans in Mississippi to vote their percentage of the population, Mississippi is suddenly a Democratic state," Obama said. He said Georgia would also turn Democratic and South Carolina would be in play.

Obama said his biggest weakness in the general election would be the same as in the primary where Hillary Rodham Clinton is his chief opponent -- overcoming the perception that he hasn't been on the national stage long enough and isn't tough enough to win. "Let me tell you, if I beat the Clintons, folks aren't going to ask whether I'm tough enough," Obama said to laughter from the crowd.

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-obama-black-voters,0,7191001.story

Comment: Have at it, folks, just don't confuse these positive statements about his ability to turn out a vital part of the Democratic base with "playing the race card" as has been done in the past.

[AtomicKitten]

1. After Katrina, it would be wonderful to engage black America --

on the basis of hope.

Gobama.

[jaysunb]

4. He's right, even if's it's GOBAMA !

and I hope it is !

[sandnsea]

2. oh boy, here we go

I think the campaign just started.

:popcorn:

[journalist3072]

3. Not this black voter

Just because someone looks like me, doesn't mean they represent my interests or values.

As an African-American, I am offended when people like Tom Joyner encourage us to support Barack Obama simply because he's black.

I think if someone said they were supporting Clinton, Edwards, Biden or Kucinich simply because they are white, there would be outrage, and rightly so.

[BeyondGeography]

5. You should be offended, but Barack Obama is not Alan Keyes

and surely that reality is factored into such statements.

[Captain Hilts]

9. Blacks vote as a bloc to a greater degree than do women, Hispanics, Asians, Jews, etc.

But, yes, I don't blame you one bit for being offended by what Joyner said.

[noiretextatique]

68. black people do not "vote as a bloc"

we tend to vote against the most evil asshole in the race (e.g., bush, reagan, etc.), and against the "bloc" called the republican party. obama will probably get some of the black vote, but I sincerely doubt it will be a "bloc."

[ecstatic]

11. I hear you, but I think Obama is gaining ground and he is one of the few who

was against the war from the jump. I think people are warming up to him as they dare to believe that he could win.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

20. As a minority I think it is sick that the first viable minority candidate for prez is sinking to thi

Obama becomes more of a disappointment each day. :( #1, it is just wrong to use your race to convince people to vote for you. #2, he is simply inviting pundits to look at how the other 88% of the electorate would react to his nomination. This is another mistake by Obama. He is a punk. He knows none of the other candidates can directly challenge him on this. He knows Edwards or Clinton cannot claim they will magically increase white turnout by 120% if they are nominated.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ruggerson]

36. You do realize your venomous spew is against DU Rules

n/t

[rufus dog]

38. A Punk!

You are well aware of what I think of you.

[Ethelk2044]

23. I am voting for him. I feel he is the best for the job. I am not offended

because people are doing for Hillary. Vote for her because she is a woman. Woman are voting for Hillary. They think we should vote for her just because she is a woman. Tom Joyner is right people should vote for Obama. It is not just because he is black Tom and other African American leaders were against Obama at the State of the Black Union. However, Obama met with them because they had questions on what issues he was going to address in his presidency. Your Post is Bull Shit. Because they are the very ones who were giving him a hard time because they did not think he was going to address Education, Outsourcing Jobs etc. You evidently did not listen to the STate of the Black Union on CSPAN. Next time get your facts straight before dissing Tom. He was the very one who said Barack had to earn his vote.

[journalist3072]

42. You need to get YOUR facts straight.

One, I watch the State of the Black Union every February. I always look forward to it.

Second, I listen to Tom Joyner's radio program EVERY DAY, and so I hear what he's been saying about the presidential race. And he indeed has been advancing this theory that we need to get behind Obama because he's black.

And to offer some additional perspective.

A few months ago, he had Sen. Hillary Clinton on his program, and he asked her the following (this is the exact quote):

"Why should a Black person want you to be President when there's Barack Obama, a perfectly good and qualified Black person, running for President?"

On that very same program, he had Rep. Kendrid Meek of South Florida on. Rep. Meek is endorsing Sen. Clinton's presidential bid, and so Tom asked Rep. Meek the following:

"There's a black man running for President...why aren't you endorsing Barack Obama?"

[Ethelk2044]

69. There is nothing wrong with Him asking that question.

I have my facts straight. With the State of Black America all of the leaders were going after Obama because he did not announce his candidacy there. They were all upset because he did not attend. Cornell West was really hard on him. He finally came around after listening to what Obama's agenda. They are all coming around because they are finally listening to what Obama has to say instead of lashing out. Just like to other media has been lashing out at Obama (Is he Black Enough). People have had enough to that kind of Bull Shit. Yes, I have my facts straight about Tom. I am glad to see he is supporting Obama. Yes, my station is set to 1400 AM every morning. The questions Tom ask are very valid. If you are so upset. Take at look around you and look at the MSM. Everyone know that is all they do is push Hillary all day long. Do you have a problem with them pushing Hillary down your throat? Are you views just one sided. The media can push Hillary. But it is okay when they make up lies about Obama because they want to push her Agenda.

[emilyg]

24. Bravo!!!

[ripple]

30. Obama himself has said that

He's counting on you to listen to him and feel moved enough to vote to change the direction of the country. He also believes he can inspire a lot of white voters. This is nothing new for a politician to say and again, he's made it clear that he doesn't want, nor does he expect to automatically get the black vote.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

34. Have HRC and Edwards said they would increase white turnout by 30% more than Obama would? nt

[ripple]

39. See post #37

You've been asking for specifics from Obama. At least he provided a number. :)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

41. Touche

:toast:

[Superman Returns]

54. you're way off

This is the equivalent of HRC saying she can turn out higher number of women, or Edwards saying he can compete in the South. By the way Edwards has subtly said that he can compete in places HRC and Obama can't, whatever that meant. But basically, what they are talking about is their strengths. Obama's strength is in the African-American community, not because he is just black (obviously Sharpton was black and didn't get the support) but also because he is a qualified candidate who can win and also has experience as a community organizer.

You are like the Republican claiming reverse racism when it reality Obama is saying something positive about his strength in minority group. Clinton and Edwards are not defined by their whiteness, and saying they can bring out more whites to vote for them makes no sense when whites are the majority in this country whose interests dominate this country. There is no "white community" but there is a black community and hispanic community that as a minority have distinct needs and interests to their systematic well being. What is comparable is what I mentioned before, Edwards turning out southern or blue collar Americans, Hillary turning out suburban women, and in this case of Obama, black and young Americans.

Get over yourself man.

[noiretextatique]

65. i am not sure obama has a much support as he claims

among african-americans, therefore, i think everyone needs to get over his claim.
and of course there is a "white community"...bush got a lot of votes from that community. black people are no more of a monolith than any other racial/ethnic group, e.g., "white" americans.
and although black people tend to vote overwhelmingly democratic, there are several candidates to choose from, some who i think are more qualified than obama, and a least two who more closely reflect my political values.

[zulchzulu]

46. Is it because your percieved view by Tom Joyner that you would not vote for Obama?

Just a question...

If I walked up to you and asked why you would not vote for Obama, what would you say...

[journalist3072]

47. Here's why

If you asked me why I would not vote for Obama:

- I do not believe he's ready for prime time. One great speech at a political convention, does not make one presidential material. As I've watched Obama in many of these debates recently, he has come across to me, as someone who really hadn't done their homework.

- Obama seems too easy to give in to political cowardice. Recently, when the Senate was taking a vote on whether to hold a "no confidence" vote against Alberto Gonzales, Obama was recorded as "not voting." Now I ask you, why on earth would Obama not even want to be on record as stating whether he thinks a no-confidence vote against Gonzales should be held. This wasn't even the actual no-confidence vote. This was a vote on whether to have a vote! And he didn't want to be on record.

- I'm still having a tough time with the fact that Obama voted to report Condi Rice's nomination out of the Foreign Relations Committe, to the full Senate for a vote. One of the first things he did as a newly elected U.S. Senator, was to vote to send Condi Rice's nomination out of the Foreign Relations Committee, to the full Senate. I do not believe she was qualified to be Secretary of State, and I felt her nomination should have died in Committee.

[zulchzulu]

63. In Obama's defense...

Thanks for your response.

You mentioned that you "don't think he is ready for prime time" due to the perception that he basically has only made one great speech. You also mentioned that he came across as "someone who really hadn't done their homework" in the debates.

While that may be your opinion, it is also fairly subjective. You'd have to be more specific on where you think he wasn't aware of an issue for me to take that with some validity. My view is that the "stumbling" responses that were made into points against him were in fact nothing more than political theater by those that used his statements for political gain.

Specifically, Obama's statement about Musharraf had in fact been agreed on by Clinton and Edwards. His statement about meeting World leaders on all sides of the equation had also been agreed on by Clinton and others in past statements in regard to Bush not wanting to meet with those leaders not firmly "on his side". People like Richard Clark agreed with his position as well. That sounds like someone who indeed has done his homework and has been consistent, as opposed to knee-jerkingly attacking another opponent without perhaps doing their homework on past statements.

When it came to foreign policy experience and political courage, Obama has pointed out correctly that his view in 2002 that going into Iraq was the incorrect strategy. That would be seen as a sign that he did do his homework when he mentioned at a time where it could have been political suicide. When other candidates brag about experience as an issue yet took the bait from Bush and thus have contributed to the Iraq quagmire, that is the kind of experience we don't need.

Cheerypicking Obama's "not voting" on a non-binding vote against Gonzales when it was obvious the Republicans (and Lieberman) were going to vote for the criminal is not exactly a way to measure his voting record. A better way to measure Obama's voting record and ratings would be to go here: http://votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=9490

With any Senator, you can cherry-pick a vote and construe it any way you want to politically. I'm sure you know that. With the vote for Condi Rice, the final vote was 85-13. Progressives like Feingold and Leahey also voted for her, so I assume you would use the same template disregarding their record because of that vote? Probably not.

Obama is a complex person with an amazing background and would provide a new face of change to America and the World if (and when) he is President. To me, I could care less what race he is. There's many other good reasons why many want his to win the White House. I assume you have been to his web site: www.barackobama.com

I'd be interested in what candidates you are looking at and why you'd support them.

[journalist3072]

71. My response...

Well, I thought his response about meeting with certain foreign leaders, was very telling. I thought Sen. Clinton hit the nail on the head (and helped demonstrate how wet behind the ears Obama is), when she said that before she would conduct such high level meetings with people like Chavez, etc....she would probably send a dimplomat to first do the ground work and see the intent and the way forward, because she wouldn't want the POTUS to be used for propoganda.

I thought Obama's answer demonstrated how he hadn't really done his homework.

Now, on to your response about Obama not even bothering to vote, on whether the Senate should hold a no-confidence vote against Gonzles...the excuse you give for him, is the same one many of the Obama apologists on here gave....that the vote would not have passed anyway, so Obama's not voting didn't make a difference in the outcome.

For me, that is beside the point. It's not about the fact that the vote would have failed even if Obama voted. It's about one thing: he didn't want to be on record. He didn't want to put himself on record as yes or no for moving on to a no-confidence vote against Gonzales. That's very telling. Obama's asking for us to elect him to the highest office in our country. Yet, he doesn't want to be on record about the most criminal Attorney General of our time?

And yes, I'm just as upset with the other Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee who voted to report out Condi Rice's nomination. I think it's clear she did not understand her role as National Security Adviser during the first term, and I don't think you reward incompetence by promoting the person.

And yes, I've been to Obama's website.

[zulchzulu]

72. Thanks for your response

You did mention about how Clinton showed Obama how she would not meet with foreign leaders not "on our side". What is confounding to me is that she had said basically what Obama stated last spring, as the New York Times reported:

"Mrs. Clinton has never publicly promised to talk directly to those leaders. But on the campaign trail this spring she has repeatedly criticized the Bush administration for not dealing directly with Iranian leaders, and she has chided President Bush for saying “he will not talk with bad people.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/25/us/politics/25debate.html?ex=1343016000&en=ac93c0d99900d9c1&ei=5088&partner=rs

Clinton can have it both ways. She has also attacked Obama on the issue of using nukes, even though she is on record with the same opinion. Add that she also is on record agreeing with his view on the issues regarding Musharraf.

On Obama's non-vote for a non-binding statement on Gonzales that was pretty much in the Republican bag, it was his choice. He did vote against Gonzales initially (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00003) and has come out with statements, such as this one on the Senate floor:

"He (Gonzales) showed no ability to speak with responsible moral clarity then, and he's indicated that he still has no intention to speak such truths now. During his recent testimony, he refused to refute a conclusion of the torture memo which stated that the President has the power to override our laws when acting as Commander-in-Chief. Think about that -- the nation's top law enforcement officer telling its most powerful citizen that if the situation warrants, he can break the law from time to time.

The truth is, Mr. Gonzales has raised serious doubts about whether, given the choice between the Constitution and the President's political agenda, he would put our Constitution first. And that is why I simply cannot support his nomination for Attorney General."

http://obama.senate.gov/news/050203-floor_statement_from_senator_b/index.php

Yes, he missed a non-binding resolution, predicted well in advance that was overwhelmingly going to be voted in favor of the Republicans. I would call that a ruse to think it's some kind of "deal-breaker" in my view.

Perhaps you failed to see that Hillary Clinton voted in favor of Condi Rice (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00002).

Anyway, support who you want. I'll certainly work hard for my candidate to be successful as well as will express his record to those willing to see the full picture.

[Captain Hilts]

6. Okay, blacks comprise 13% of the population. Of that %, let's say 50% are eligible...

to vote. Of that percentage, let's say half vote , so we're down to a 30% increase of 50% of 7.5%....I guess every little bit helps.

I do wish blacks - and low income people and single women under 30 - would vote in higher percentages. Until they do, the wealthy, male and white will still run things.

Fingers crossed.

[Colobo]

7. GOBAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! That's the kind of talk I like!

[ecstatic]

8. I really wish he didn't reveal that...

I think he may be right, but now what happens once KKK types hear this?

[Colobo]

10. Shoot themselves in the head.

[ecstatic]

14. Which brings up the issue of voter disenfranchisement

If Dems let Repugs suppress the vote again, I'm through. For good!!

[wyldwolf]

12. delete

[BeyondGeography]

13. Math wasn't your major, was it?

If your figure is correct, a 30% increase would bring turnout to 84.5%.

[wyldwolf]

15. no it wasn't. The figure I gave was black registered voters in 2004

[BeyondGeography]

16. Whatever; It's an excuse to look into 2004 turnout figures

Overall turnout was 60.4% and states with large AA populations such as Arkansas and South Carolina were at the low-end of the scale:

<The election of 2004 saw unprecedented efforts to register people to vote and to get them to turn out. The parties, aligned organizations, and organizations targeting specific demographic groups all worked to encourage people to vote. Person to person contact, particularly from family, friends and neighbors was particularly effective. In addition the debacle of Florida in 2000 reminded voters that voting can indeed make a difference. The result was the highest turnout since 1968, 60.7 percent of eligible citizens according to the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. States with the highest turnout were Minnesota (77.32% of eligible), Maine (75.28%) and Wisconsin (73.90%); at the other extreme Hawaii came in lowest with (48.92%), followed by Arkansas (51.29%) and South Carolina (51.85%).>

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/electrte.html

[draft_mario_cuomo]

21. So shouldn't we nominate the candidate who runs best among black voters then to increase AA turnout?

That would be Clinton, not Obama...

[Colobo]

17. Obama's victory in 08 will be so wonderful. It'll be a moment of joy the nation will never forget.

[illinoisprogressive]

18. He's right. I've seen it in Illinois. and he turns out alot of white voters, too.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

22. So why is he losing among the very voters he claims he will magically turn out at a 145% rate? nt

[Ethelk2044]

27. He is not losing. It is the MSM pushing that.. He knows as well as other

AA knows they will be voting for him. Yes, it will be record numbers. Normally only 25% African Americans vote. It will be a lot more this year. They are contributing to his campaign. Normally AA does not give to political campaigns.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

31. Show me any evidence of Obama beating Clinton among black voters

Thanks in advance...

[emilyg]

26. By the same token

lots of white voters will vote against him.

[Ethelk2044]

28. and a lot will vote for him too.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

32. As many as would vote for Hillary or Edwards? Not according to Obama's own logic

Obama can't have it both ways. He can't claim his skin color will magically boost turnout among blacks and then say that HRC and JE being white would not increase turnout among white Democrats. Whites are four-fifths of voters. Using the Obama theory we should nominate HRC because she is white, like roughly 80% of voters, plus she runs the best among blacks. If Obama will increase black turnout by 30% surely HRC will increase it by 45% plus she will increase white Democrat turnout by 89%. :crazy:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

19. Obama: Vote for me because my skin color makes me the most electable

:eyes: We know what the reaction would be from Team Obama if Edwards made a similar statement about his skin color or Hillary about her gender.

[Ethelk2044]

29. you are full of SHIT. Obama is the very one who said he has to work for the AA vote.

Get your facts staight.

[AtomicKitten]

33. he don't need no stinkin' facts

he runs entirely on snark

[draft_mario_cuomo]

35. How would you react if Hillary said she would increase white Democratic turnout by 30%?

We both know what the reaction would be...

[BeyondGeography]

50. You're right; he's hopeless on this point

[ripple]

37. Actually, Penn and Carville (aka: Team Hillary) did exactly that

www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/04/womens_vote_no_sure_thing_for.html

And let's not forget Elizabeth's insulting statements.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/08/elizabeth-edwards-cant-make-john-black-or-a-woman/

Sorry, d_m_c, but to whine and complain about Obama's statement is some serious hypocrisy. Everyone running for president claims to have the ability to tap into various demographics. It's nothing new and certainly nothing to become alarmed about.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

40. They spoke of an "x-factor". The article does not say what that is

They did not say she would win female votes because she is a woman. The articles disproves that meme. Moreover, there is a huge difference between a candidate saying something like this and aides.

E.Edwards' did not say Edwards was more electable because he would increase white Democratic turnout by 2,000%.

==Everyone running for president claims to have the ability to tap into various demographics.==

Only one candidate is claiming his skin color makes him more electable. How would you react if Hillary said she can appeal more to whites than Obama and hence she is more electable?

Here is what annoys me about this. First, I am disappointed as a minority that the first viable minority candidate for prez is doing this. It is very divisive. So much for "unity" I guess? Second, it is also low because he knows Hillary and Edwards can't make a similar statement about being to appeal to whites more than Obama, although such a statement would be just as (in)valid as Obama's.

On the plus side, at least Obama is recognizing the IWR card alone is not going to get him the nomination. ;)

[rufus dog]

43. are you Sean Hannity!

[LWolf]

44. Chalk up yet one more problematic statement Obama has made.

The more this man talks, the less respect I have for him.

I would hope that Democrats would know better than to base their vote on race.

[Colobo]

45. The more he talks, the more I believe in him. America needs him.

[LWolf]

57. I know you believe that.

While I respect your right to believe what you will, that "belief" is part of the problem.


I don't "believe in" politicians. I agree with their platforms, their records, their plans, or not. It's not a matter of faith; politicians are not gods.

I don't agree with Barack Obama's plans for the U.S.. I've expressed that disagreement numerous times, and don't need to rehash it with you; my disagreement isn't going to change the mind of a true believer, so I won't waste my time.

I don't need Barack Obama, and the U.S. doesn't need Barack Obama.

[Dawgs]

58. "I would hope that Democrats would know better than to base their vote on race."

He's saying to vote for the candidate that can bring out more DEMOCRATIC voters.

Your hatred of Obama is shining through again - give it up already.

[noiretextatique]

66. i have a problem with his comment, regardless of what he meant

i am not sure he is as popular among african-americans as he thinks.

[LWolf]

I don't hate Obama.

I don't hate anyone, on principle. I don't respect Obama's position on many issues. That's not hate. It's also not personal. I hope your admittedly faulty vision can see and understand beyond polarized, shallow characterizations.

Your propaganda is shining through again. Give it up already.

[DURHAM D]

48. The solution for this is very simple.

Clinton/Obama. Clinton because she is the most prepared for the job and Obama because he is framing himself as a uniter. This is a great combo and most feel he is not ready for the top spot. I personally think his Rodney King message about all of us just trying to get along with the hateful Repubs is really, really naive but if others buy it - ok.

He can gain much needed experience and maturity as the VP. In eight years he will be ready to run for President after gaining a lot of experience and will benefit from proper framing that number two affords and he will be unbeatable. If he has to run in eight years from a senate position (with a longer voting record) it will be very, very difficult. Should be a breeze from the Naval Conservatory.

[FlaxieB]

49. People, accept the reality of Barack Obama.

Barack Obama is a black man, an African American. He is running for President Of The United States. He has the best chance of winning with a vision, passion, commitiment and strategy that will get him there. He connect with all americans, ESPECIALLY the huge majority of African Americans who feel the same way about him. He will get a large AA voter turn out for this Democratic nomination and the Presidency. Presidential candidates have been getting support from their core base for centuries. The only difference is, 99.99% of all the other past candidates and the current contenders of all parties have been white. So what, he mentions that AA voter turn out will increase because of his campaigning. What's the difference between him saying that and when white candidates say or do the same thing. They may say Bible Belt, they may say Catholic, they may say Angelical Christan right/left, they may say Mormon. Code word: White. What is the difference? There is none. The bloggers on this thread are upset because your attempt to sway the AA community from supporting him is not working. These psychological tactics of using media spin, confusion and repetitive downplay had been utilized for decades trying to undermine AA from voting for a person of color because deep down inside (and some of you need to admit it) that you don't want your President to be an AA. It's so politically correct to support him now since we are in the middle of this process and I applaud the ones out there who are true to his campaign but all others need to look at yourselves and re access your thoughts.

Barack knows as well as I do that they are posers out there supporting him because being "PC" makes you acceptable and hides your racism. All he said was that AA voter participation will increase because of him and suddenly all the posers are outraged, "how dare he say that! He's playing the race card"! Grow up. All you are doing is beginning to show your true colors. AA are well aware of what's going on so it's no surprise and your attempts are laughable. Yes, AA will make up a large % of his votes and some AA will not vote for him. That's their choice but at least they are not, as they say "faking the funk" or going along with the program just to fit in and be seen as acceptable.. Barack Is a Black Man, an AA who will win the Presidency. Do me and AA's a favor, deal with it or go away.

[BeyondGeography]

51. Very well said; and welcome to DU

:thumbsup:

[FlaxieB]

52. Thank you and thank you.

[ariesgem]

55. You couldn't have said it any better.

:thumbsup:

[Dawgs]

59. Thank you.

As I said earlier, Obama is making the point that he will bring more(and new) DEMOCRATIC voters to the table. It really has nothing to do with race.

[beaconess]

61. HEAR! HEAR!!!

[noiretextatique]

75. obama's "core base" is not african american

and i suspect you aren't either. i am suspicious by nature, so forgive me for not trusting your word. also forgive me if i do not share the belief that obama respresents all the things that are being projected onto him, e.g., hope, vision, passion, etc. he's clearly is a brilliant man, but the big difference between him and some other candidates is that he's black. it seems to me the only difference.
i am not so sure that's a good enough reason to vote for him.

[BenDavid]

53. Obama I believe is getting just a

tad too cocky, and if this was baseball I would call him "hotdog".The assumption he believes, is he is going to get all the black votes in the primaries and from the look of things HRC and he are about equally devided thus far. Obama is beginning to poll worse in the black community because he has been going around these past several weeks trying to convince black folk that he is "black enough". Black folk know already who is who when it comes to asking for their support.

Now if that is the case and Obama believes he will get 30% of the black vote then one could say that HRC would increase the womens vote by 30% and maybe achieve 20% increase in the black vote as well. HRC will not let the black community be taken lightly. She will campaign long and hard to get their vote and they will know she is not taking them for granted....There is the difference. Obama expects to get the black vote automatically without doing anything but paying lip service, whereas HRC will get right there amongest any group she can talk too and convince them she is the one that will win the presidency.

I do thank you
Ben David

[Forkboy]

56. He may be right,or it may just be wishful thinking.

Either way,he better hope he gets those votes in the first place or he won't be the nominee and won't have to worry about being right or wrong anyways.

[jmp]

60. Blacks will vote for Obama ... white southern men will vote for Edwards ...

Women will obviously vote for Hillary, and Hispanics for Richardson.

This is the progressive party? :eyes:

[beaconess]

62. And women will vote for Edwards, and Hispanics for Obama and blacks for Hillary

Yes - it IS a progressive party.

[Skittles]

73. I don't think that is really the sentiment

I think black folk may feel a little more included in the process with a black candidate, regardless of whether or not they vote for him.....as a woman I know I am very glad to see a woman running even though she is not my particular choice

[Raine1988]

64. Ofcourse

Yes of course he is black himself, a lot of black Americans will support him

[noiretextatique]

67. of course, just as lots of white americans will vote for romney

(since he is white himself).

[Forkboy]

70. Why the hell are you never around anymore?

And don't give me that "I have a life" crap.There is no life outside of DU! :)

:loveya:

[noiretextatique]

74. i have a job...and i have no home computer

i am in the process of building 4 computers, but i haven't gotten around to actually making them work yet :D
no...i don't NOT have a life :loveya: :hi: