I’m with you on this.

I think we should really start to lean on our media outlets, particularly people like Roland Martin. We need to let the media know that Democrats can’t assume they’ll get the black vote in November if Hillary is the nominee.

I’m not voting for her. Neither is anyone in my family. And I know we’re not the only ones who feel this way.

For the past month we’ve heard story after story detailing Obama’s trouble reaching the rural working class voter.

Well, Obama’s problems with Reagan Democrats are NOTHING compared to the trouble Hillary’s gonna have with the black vote if she steals this nomination.

90% is more than an endorsement of Obama. It is also a REJECTION of Clinton!

This gets at a core issue. Black people are people too. It sounds funny when you say it but let’s face facts.

Black people are working class voters as well.

Black women are women too.

How can Hillary be the populist candidate when she loses big time in the inner city? I have to check the stats, but I think she loses the “poor” vote. I’m not talking about the “working class.” I’m talking about the poor vote, where working class is a step up the economic ladder.

How can Hillary be the “women’s” champion if she’s losing 80-90% of the black female vote?

I’d really like to see the media pick up on some of these issues. Michell Bernard made a great point on MSNBC. When Obama wins NC by more than 20% the Clintons will be more than happy to dismiss it as a “black state.”

Yet Obama struggles with blue collar whites and we’re supposed to see this as a threat towards his electability?

Give me a break!

Let’s see Hillary win PA without the black vote in Philadelphia. Look at any electoral map. PA is RED with blue spots. Those blue spots? Cities like Philadelphia where blacks can make as much as 50% of the Democratic vote.

Talk about electability issues. We need to get the media to start asking some of these tough questions.

We are a monolith to them. I was watching Chris Matthews break down white voters in Pennsylvania to

1. Beer Drinkers
2. Bowlers
3. Hunters
4. Some other wach category

They just lump us together…we really dont exist.

They always do that all forms of media, social science etc…do that.

Against Race Politics

I’ve been thinking the same thing for weeks.

omg I’m sorry, I’ve been calling you anonymous…I was too caught up in my ranting.*laughs*

You said that!

I must admit I used to vote for the Dem nominee (whoever it was) as the primary never usually made it around my way so(ashamedly)I was never too interested b/c they were all one in the same. NOT THIS TIME- now I really see what is going on!

Against race Politics (can’t seem to sign in)

2. He’s done a poor job at exploiting Hillary’s weaknesses to gain political points (they haven’t followed Hillary’s controversies: “screw ‘em”; her comments about MoveOn; Rendell praising Farakhan; Mark Penn and Columbian Free Trade, etc.); and

3. His surrogate game is weak. He reacts but rarely gets out in front of a story. Hillary should be reacting to him, not the other way around. He’s the frontrunner, not her.”

B-Serious, I’m ITA with ya! For the life of me, I can’t understand why the BHO camp waited until the DAY BEFORE the primary to send out flyers on trade? That’s a hot button issue in PA and should’ve been pounded into the PA psyche the moment the WSJ published the article about Mark Penn. The same thing with Clinton’s “Screw ‘em!” comments and MoveOn.org.

I understand Obama not wanting to appear to be picking on the girl, but that doesn’t mean he should allow her to get away with things that have facts and proof to back them up!

Well that’s exactly my point…who will? Obviously the opinion of the “MSM” and the DNC is that blacks are the good ole faithful and therefore we are expendable so marginalize Obama and marginalize blacks as a whole. Make “us” the villians to win some votes…

Priceless.

Which, as I stated (before), can be partly blamed on us (“us”, as in black dems in general) accepting the status quo for the past couple of decades and being that ole standby while being ignored and taken for granted.

I’m with Michelle, some Black American needs to wake up! We’re being played like a fiddle if Black Obama supporters stick by this party after what is being revealed that’s a damn shame and welcome to slavery light. To me, I’m happy this is the dynamic of the Dem primary, because it’s revealing a lot and maybe we can make some true change in the fall.

Let the DNC gain (or lose) the Presidency without us aiding them. Then we can move on to finding leaders that can form a party that truly cares about the issues of all not just some.

GOOD QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!

“Against Race Politics”

DISCLAIMER: Didn’t write it, not cosigning, just feel it MIGHT be relevant to the discussion.

In Election 2008, Don’t Forget Angry White Man

Anon 10:45,
Hell no they won’t stick with the party. I think a lot of blacks will just sit it out.

And for the love of JJP, can someone please tell me why Black folk aren’t described as “working-class”?

So which group is more likely to vote or form a 3rd party if their candidate should lose? I just don’t see that happening.

MSM is pushing polling that says whites will defect to McCain in greater numbers than blacks.

Will blacks stick with the party even if Obama loses the nomination?

@ anonymous

And basically we all know where they may feel that falls…on Black Americans and personally I think that many black voters (myself included) have aided (in the past) in being placed in the expendable category by supporting the DNC regardless of results because…what’s the options? We should have been holding their feet to the fire by being willing to vote Independent and aid in creating our own rising stars.

It’s not so black and white. Republican’s racist, Dems our saviors…hardly. Both major parties are collectors of wealth and power with little to do with serving the people. One of the leading issues being class. Now they can ignore social injustices by using class as a wedge to divide blacks. Not to mention the same ole’ same ole with gender politics with feminist’s leading the charge and good ole’ boy racism with blue collar whites.

We need to abolish the two-party system or nothing ever changes.

But if women vote for Mrs. Nixon because she’s a woman, the poor white men don’t care. They have nothing to lsoe from have a white woman as president. Especially when they’re actually voting for Bill.
———————————–

I think these men swing to McCain if Hillary is the nominee. ‘Race/gender loyalty’ yet again.

There is no denying that people vote for a candidate that they like, who they are comfortable with, who they think shares their values, that is like them. Race and gender are contributing factors among all voters and all 3 candidates.

The truth of the situation is that superdelegates are going to ‘deliver’ the nominee to the voters. The party is polarized and 3 main demographic constituencies risk alienation: blacks, women and blue-collar whites.

Identity politics is the defining ideology of the party. This is a Dem self-inflicted divide. Republicans split more along ideological lines: small government voters, social/values voters, low taxes voters, etc.

The superdelegates will be need to determine which group they can afford to lose. What group can be relied upon to stick with the party, even if their candidate loses.

Those type of ads-from a strategic standpoint-are best left to the 527s, which have been nonexistent of late (which is confusing). Any individual/large scale organization that does an ad like that one (1) doesn’t do it well, as in this case, and (2) alienates themselves from the McCain campaign, as he can’t (shouldn’t?) publically associate himself with it. So he has to renounce it (not explain it away, because conservatives’ standards are much higher than those of liberals), which then pisses off the individual/organization (recall the guy from-TN?-who tried to throw Obama under the bus at a McCain rally).

He would be a hypocrite and a coward if he endorses HRC!