Donald Trump and the gullible right wing.

[UpaLoompa]

Obama likely would have won had he been white, but it's no secret that a lot of black people (and white people) voted for him because they wanted the first black president. How can you even argue that, they spoke about it openly.

You're conflating things. If you were going to vote for Obama anyway (because 8 years of Bush and McCain/Palin), you didn't vote for him because he was african-american even if you viewed his being african-american as an additional positive.

 

[dontsnitch]

I think Obama being 1/2 black and identifying as black is a net positive for many. I thought it was a positive and I'm not black or a filthy leftist. The reason being is that having diversity in leadership is inspirational.

I thought this was accepted, I guess not.

 

[UpaLoompa]

I thought this was accepted, I guess not.

What he wrote was not "Voting for Obama because he is black".

 

[panamaican]

Clinton was pretty low, which is surprising, but are you saying that you can't attribute that very small increase for those that wanted the first black president?

Also, lets say I vote Democrat because I hate Republicans, and now a black guy is running and he may be the first black president. I can vote for him because he's black, even though I would have voted Democrat, anyway. Just because I was going to vote Demo, doesn't mean that I can't vote for Obama because he's black.

But Clinton was the 1996 candidate. The 2000 and 2004 candidate both had better percentages. Also, I can attribute the small increase to people wanting a black president. I can't attribute it to "a lot of black people", precisely because the increase was small. Clinton to Gore went from 84% -> 90%, a 6 point swing. Kerry to Obama was a 7 point swing. The difference is negligible.

As for your voting, if you were going to vote Democrat anyway then your reason isn't that he's black. Your reason is that he's a Democrat, his being black is just another positive characteristic but it wouldn't have influenced who you voted for. If he was a black Republican and that made you change from Dem to Republican, then his being black is why you voted for him. But since you were always voting Democrat, his race didn't change your behavior.

 

[dontsnitch]

You're conflating things. If you were going to vote for Obama anyway (because 8 years of Bush and McCain/Palin), you didn't vote for him because he was african-american even if you viewed his being african-american as an additional positive.

People have different reasons for doing things. There is no reason to suggest that only one of those reasons is valid.

I thought the numbers speak for themselves, no?

 

[dontsnitch]

What he wrote was not "Voting for Obama because he is black".

Yeah, I know, he said diversity in leadership. Do you also not believe that black people voted based on race?

 

[UpaLoompa]

Yeah, I know, he said diversity in leadership. Do you also not believe that black people voted based on race?

I've no doubt that some people did indeed vote based on race (both for and against Obama). There is, however, no way to cut up the numbers to suggest that race made a difference in the outcome in 2008. There is, however, some evidence to suggest that race hurt Obama in 2012 (but again didn't affect the outcome).

 

[dontsnitch]

But Clinton was the 1996 candidate. The 2000 and 2004 candidate both had better percentages. Also, I can attribute the small increase to people wanting a black president. I can't attribute it to "a lot of black people", precisely because the increase was small. Clinton to Gore went from 84% -> 90%, a 6 point swing. Kerry to Obama was a 7 point swing. The difference is negligible.

I can accept that.

As for your voting, if you were going to vote Democrat anyway then your reason isn't that he's black. Your reason is that he's a Democrat, his being black is just another positive characteristic but it wouldn't have influenced who you voted for. If he was a black Republican and that made you change from Dem to Republican, then his being black is why you voted for him. But since you were always voting Democrat, his race didn't change your behavior.

This is going to get too philosophical, I don't think it changed their behaviour, but people can be motivated by many factors. You could have a black guy voting Democrat out of habit one year, and that very same guy proudly showing up to vote for Obama hoping there is a first black president. His actions are the same, I grant you that, but his reasoning is more nuanced than simply voting how he usually votes.

 

[UpaLoompa]

As for your voting, if you were going to vote Democrat anyway then your reason isn't that he's black. Your reason is that he's a Democrat, his being black is just another positive characteristic but it wouldn't have influenced who you voted for. If he was a black Republican and that made you change from Dem to Republican, then his being black is why you voted for him. But since you were always voting Democrat, his race didn't change your behavior.

Exactly. There certainly were some who changed from dem to republican or vice-versa but not enough to make a difference in the outcome.

 

[dontsnitch]

I've no doubt that some people did indeed vote based on race (both for and against Obama). There is, however, no way to cut up the numbers to suggest that race made a difference in the outcome in 2008. There is, however, some evidence to suggest that race hurt Obama in 2012.

I don't think you can suggest that race was the one factor, that's pretty out there, and not what I was getting at.

 

[UpaLoompa]

I don't think you can suggest that race was the one factor, that's pretty out there, and not what I was getting at.

If you say "X voted for Obama because he is african-american" you are indeed saying that race was the relevant factor.

 

[dontsnitch]

If you say "X voted for Obama because he is african-american" you are indeed saying that race was the relevant factor.

I'm saying that there were black people who voted for Obama because he was black, not that Obama won the elections because black people voted for him. McCain/Palin lost that election more than Obama won it, he would have won if he was Korean.

 

[panamaican]

People have different reasons for doing things. There is no reason to suggest that only one of those reasons is valid.

I thought the numbers speak for themselves, no?

The numbers do speak for themselves. That's why we're disagreeing with you.

First, the trend in black turnout was upward for both previous elections. The numbers say that OBama didn't create the uptick in black turnout.

Second, the Democrats were also trending upward in the percentage of the black vote they were garnering. Between Clinton and Gore, they saw a 6 point increase. The increase for Obama was only 7%. 1% point more than going from one white Democrat to another white candidate.

The numbers don't say Obama won because he's black. The numbers say that the black vote has been increasing and that the GOP had already been losing their minimal share of the black vote for over a decade prior to Obama running.

I'd bet money that you'll see the same trend in female turnout and percentages. Yup at least for turnout, I'm looking for party trends.

 

[UpaLoompa]

I'm saying that there were black people who voted for Obama because he was black, not that Obama won the elections because black people voted for him. McCain/Palin lost that election more than Obama won it, he would have won if he was Korean.

Again, there were people that voted for Obama because he is African-America. There also were people that voted for McCain and Romney because Obama is African-American.

The argument you inserted yourself into was whether or not Obama being African-American played a role in his winning. As you state here, it did not.

 

[Cold Front]

I didn't make an inference in my post. I think you missed the train of thought. The argument presented was that Obama won because he was black. Someone pointed to the increase in black turnout to indicate that Obama's blackness was a significant factor in the election outcomes.

However, the increase in the black turnout wasn't unique to Obama's campaign, the previous 2 elections also enjoyed increased black turnout. Since the trend preceded Obama's presence on the national stage, his blackness can't be the reason for the trend.

That was when you commented on the decrease in white turnout. While accurate, that decrease certainly wasn't related to Obama being black. So, I addressed your comment in the context of the preceding posts - specifically how Obama's race influenced the election outcome.

If you're saying that the lower white turnout wasn't related to Obama's race then we're in agreement.

I'm largely in agreement with this post, but I want to point out that voting participation rates go up and down all the time, with white and black voting participation rates usually going up and down in tandem. They did not go up in tandem in 2008, however.

Why was 1996 such a down year for voting participation? Clinton was up big in the polls throughout the year. The air was coming out of the Perot movement. Dole was a dull candidate. The economy was booming and the U.S. was not at war, so no controversial and/or important issues dominated the headlines.

So both black and white voting rates were depressed. That's natural.

The 2000 election was much closer, and so the voting participation rates ticked up. But still no important issue dominated the headlines.

The 2004 election was also closely contested, but there was now the fallout from 9/11 and the Iraq War to motivate partisans. Voting participation rates skipped up to a twelve-year high.

The 2008 election, however, was not close. The Democrats won by a larger margin than they have in over forty years. But important issues still dominated the race, and the 2008 financial crisis heightened the importance many voters gave to the election. But Barack Obama's novelty as a candidate still motivated a lot of new voters to go to the polls, including minorities and the young - and especially black voters.

 

[dontsnitch]

The numbers don't say Obama won because he's black. The numbers say that the black vote has been increasing and that the GOP had already been losing their minimal share of the black vote for over a decade prior to Obama running.

The argument you inserted yourself into was whether or not Obama being African-American played a role in his winning. As you state here, it did not.

Are you saying that I can't make the argument that people voted by race without making the argument that race was the factor in the elections?

 

[UpaLoompa]

Are you saying that I can't make the argument that people voted by race without making the argument that race was the factor in the elections?

You can make whatever argument you want, though you seem a bit confused as to what argument that was.

 

[dontsnitch]

You can make whatever argument you want, though you seem a bit confused as to what argument that was.

I've said it plainly, Obama got votes because people wanted the first black president. I'm not reaching farther than that, it doesn't mean those votes were the deciding factor.

 

[My Spot]

Clinton was pretty low, which is surprising, but are you saying that you can't attribute that very small increase for those that wanted the first black president?

Also, lets say I vote Democrat because I hate Republicans, and now a black guy is running and he may be the first black president. I can vote for him because he's black, even though I would have voted Democrat, anyway. Just because I was going to vote Demo, doesn't mean that I can't vote for Obama because he's black.

Thanks for agreeing with us.

 

[dontsnitch]

Thanks for agreeing with us.

As long as we agree that race played a role, then I'm happy we reach a consensus. As if the first black president was a small thing that went by unnoticed.