Thread: Is American politics inherently racist/sexist?

Originally Posted by noahath

I thought people voted for the candidate they best thought represented their ideals, or could deliver on the needs and services their community required. Why does it appear that so many groups within the US appear reluctant to vote outside their ethnic group or gender? Thoughts?

Most everyone is... save for one group here. They feel particularly oppressed, and feel that they should have 'their fair share'

Someday they might just grow out of it... someday...

I think it is more partisan than racist. Gerrymandering happens for partisan purposes. Minorities tend to cluster in geographic areas and tend to vote Democrat. Put the two together and you get race division in certain districts. I would vote for a black or hispanic conservative in a New York minute.

Partisanship caused by lack of education.
The earlier one learns, the less likely they won't seek out the facts.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

I think it is more partisan than racist. Gerrymandering happens for partisan purposes. Minorities tend to cluster in geographic areas and tend to vote Democrat. Put the two together and you get race division in certain districts. I would vote for a black or hispanic conservative in a New York minute.

I think that's true. IMO the way the gerrymandering works in outrageous. I don't even know why the US bothers with the FEC, as they are toothless. If Congress was to be truly democratic, then districts would be set via a fully independent body, whose sole rationale was population size within districts, not how residents within districts voted in the last election.

I think the OP's initial question is unfortunately worded. To call someone or something "racist" is to condemn him, her, or it out of hand.

I would say that racial and ethnic loyalties are usually stronger than economic loyalties, and that people are inclined to vote for someone who is racially or ethnically similar. This is pretty much the way it always has been since the beginning of democratic elections. It is this way throughout the world. It is particularly this way in countries where tribes continue to exist, and where the level of education is fairly low.

Blacks and Hispanics usually vote Democrat because unlike most white blue collar workers they have the sense to realize that they will never become rich, and that economic policies that benefit those who are rich are unlikely to benefit them.

Jews usually vote Democrat because they have a collective memory of persecution when poor, and discrimination and prejudice by affluent Gentiles when they became well educated. In addition, they are by nature compassionate and sympathetic people.

Originally Posted by Mandala

I think the OP's initial question is unfortunately worded. To call someone or something "racist" is to condemn him, her, or it out of hand.

I would say that racial and ethnic loyalties are usually stronger than economic loyalties, and that people are inclined to vote for someone who is racially or ethnically similar. This is pretty much the way it always has been since the beginning of democratic elections. It is this way throughout the world. It is particularly this way in countries where tribes continue to exist, and where the level of education is fairly low.

Blacks and Hispanics usually vote Democrat because unlike most white blue collar workers they have the sense to realize that they will never become rich, and that economic policies that benefit those who are rich are unlikely to benefit them.

Jews usually vote Democrat because they have a collective memory of persecution when poor, and discrimination and prejudice by affluent Gentiles when they became well educated. In addition, they are by nature compassionate and sympathetic people.

Now that is a heap of stereotyping if I ever saw one.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

Now that is a heap of stereotyping if I ever saw one.

And not far from the truth.

Originally Posted by Mandala

I think the OP's initial question is unfortunately worded. To call someone or something "racist" is to condemn him, her, or it out of hand.

I would say that racial and ethnic loyalties are usually stronger than economic loyalties, and that people are inclined to vote for someone who is racially or ethnically similar. This is pretty much the way it always has been since the beginning of democratic elections. It is this way throughout the world. It is particularly this way in countries where tribes continue to exist, and where the level of education is fairly low.

I think there is some truth in that but white folks seem to be an exception.

Put up an Hispanic candidate and---everything else being equal, he/she is going to have a lock on the Hispanic vote. Much has been written and it’s generally acknowledged that Obama couldn’t lose the black vote if he tried to---which is actually kind of a scary thought in our form of government.

But white people can go in just about any direction in ethno-political terms---and they proved it in 2008.

Maybe the OP does need re-worded.

Originally Posted by Mandala

I think the OP's initial question is unfortunately worded. To call someone or something "racist" is to condemn him, her, or it out of hand.

I would say that racial and ethnic loyalties are usually stronger than economic loyalties, and that people are inclined to vote for someone who is racially or ethnically similar. This is pretty much the way it always has been since the beginning of democratic elections. It is this way throughout the world. It is particularly this way in countries where tribes continue to exist, and where the level of education is fairly low.

I think that is fairly stated.

Blacks and Hispanics usually vote Democrat because unlike most white blue collar workers they have the sense to realize that they will never become rich, and that economic policies that benefit those who are rich are unlikely to benefit them.

And that is a crock. What is good for corporate America is generally good for America as a whole.

Jews usually vote Democrat because they have a collective memory of persecution when poor, and discrimination and prejudice by affluent Gentiles when they became well educated. In addition, they are by nature compassionate and sympathetic people.

Another crock. Their persecution when poor has nothing to do with their affiliation of the democrat part. They are like me. I am a democrat and have hung on in spite of the lest wing take over of my party, and I believe so have most Jewish people.

But every year it gets harder and harder to remember my democrat roots with the wingnuts move further and further to the left.

I can understand black people voting for Obama because he is black, the first time. I can't see them doing that again. Most will vote for him this time because he's a Democrat and many have been sold on the idea that Democrats care more about black people. They still believe this despite decades of experiences that should prove just the opposite.

Originally Posted by Mandala

I think the OP's initial question is unfortunately worded. To call someone or something "racist" is to condemn him, her, or it out of hand.

I would say that racial and ethnic loyalties are usually stronger than economic loyalties, and that people are inclined to vote for someone who is racially or ethnically similar. This is pretty much the way it always has been since the beginning of democratic elections. It is this way throughout the world. It is particularly this way in countries where tribes continue to exist, and where the level of education is fairly low.

Blacks and Hispanics usually vote Democrat because unlike most white blue collar workers they have the sense to realize that they will never become rich, and that economic policies that benefit those who are rich are unlikely to benefit them.

Jews usually vote Democrat because they have a collective memory of persecution when poor, and discrimination and prejudice by affluent Gentiles when they became well educated. In addition, they are by nature compassionate and sympathetic people.

Yes, I agree with much of your views here. Using the word racist, in the OP really takes it on a different journey. And perhaps the real reason why people vote for people that look like them is a racial(not to be confused with racism) collective unconsious manifestation. I really think that is the primary reason for the way people vote as they do, generally speaking.

The democratic party, the great depression, the ww2, and the post depression and ww2 party was indeed a party in which most working americans agreed with, and from which they saw positive changes in their personal, economic lives. The democratic party for awhile was a populist party, and worked for the common man. This created a perception, that has endured, although the party has changed to such a degree as to no longer represent the common working american. Yet many people still believe that it does. And that is why so many minorities vote democratic. They are voting for a party that once acted differently. I voted democratic in years past because I thought I was still voting for the same party of the 1960's. But I was too busy trying to obtain the american dream at the time to have anytime for political news, or any news for that matter.

I am quite puzzled some days as to why so many white working people vote republican, and for conservative republicans to boot! I understand that Reagen was elected by the party of the rich appealling to the working stiff, on social issues, a populism of sorts, and at least for the south, many white people were still pissed off at racial integration, and saw the democrats as the culprits of imposing this upon them. And in reagen they saw him as perhaps shrinking the gov't so much as to throw all welfare programs in the trash bin. For the South, the racial factor helped get reagen elected. And helped to get and keep republicans in power. I don't think it is a factor so much today though. But it was in the transition to republicans once again ruling the roost in DC.

Today most white men vote republican because they have been terrorized by talk radio, and Fox news, into believing the take over by the socialists is imminent. They utilize the fear that mankind has, and gin up a new, delusional fear, shared by some on this very board. Republicans rely upon a politics of fear. They see communists and socialists, and even islamic extremists behind every tree, in every nook and cranny, and their propaganda arms expend a lot of time in ginning up the delusional threats.

They try to convince the american people, especially the white men, that the dems are evil socialists, or communists, and that everyone on food stamps is gaming the system, as the socialists try to make them more and more dependent upon welfare. Socialism to the repubs isn't the gov't ownership of the production and distribution of ALL goods and services, but instead it's our welfare programs. Programs that are intended to keep folks from being homeless and hungry, with millions of these people being victims of the republicans concocting free trade, which left these workers unemployed. They call this welfare, socialism. They need to take the time to learn what the defintion of that word is.

So, they have convinced white men that the dems are socialists, and the republs are God's own chosen men, the capitalists. But the white american is much dumber today than in past times. The greatest generation was real familiar with propaganda, so what passes as the news today, from fox and talk radio, would not have worked with the greatest generation, as they had seen Hitler use that sort of thing. Only when these men started to die out was it possible to bring back propaganda and use it upon the voters. It has been an overwhelming success! It really is cleverly brilliant, to get a people to vote against their own best self interests, and to do it time and time again! I have to hand this to the republicans and the conservative/corporate media.

Well, this is the way that I see it, anyways.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

I can understand black people voting for Obama because he is black, the first time. I can't see them doing that again. Most will vote for him this time because he's a Democrat and many have been sold on the idea that Democrats care more about black people. They still believe this despite decades of experiences that should prove just the opposite.

I think obama got quite a few votes driven by another emotion, white guilt. And the guy made that very easy, as he was and is a very likable human being. He is well spoken, he seems to be more intelligent than the voters on either side of the aisle. And I really believe unconsiously, many americans wanted to show EVERYONE america was no longer a racist nation, in regards to its blacks.

To say that none of this existed is to know nothing of yourself, or of other people. I really believe that to the bones.

Henceforth, obama will lose some votes this time. Because once we expunge our collective guilt, that will be enough to prove we are not what we used to be. And we can with good conscience NOT vote for him this time unless we really feel he is the better choice.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

I can understand black people voting for Obama because he is black, the first time. I can't see them doing that again. Most will vote for him this time because he's a Democrat and many have been sold on the idea that Democrats care more about black people. They still believe this despite decades of experiences that should prove just the opposite.

Good point.

At the end of the day, a black voting for a fellow black man doesn't put food on the table.

What is the black unemployent rate under Obama?