PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

[Sober]

2. Black Americans tend to vote for Democrats, regardless of what color their skin is.

*snicker*

What about White Black Americans?

*I get the point, but the syntax is beautifully ambiguous.

[erik]

But my point is that there's going to be many on both sides that will come out and vote based on the image being sold to them, that have no clue about the political issues.

I have no doubt that there are lots of people who vote for ignorant reasons. But in the case of something that can by noticed by anyone with the power of eyesight, I just think it's a bit much to point fingers at political parties and say "You're selling an image of a black republican candidate to America instead of relying on the issues to speak for themselves." That's not what's happening here. No one has to "sell the image" of Obama as a black guy. People can see that for themselves. If that's the only reason they want to vote for him, that's not his campaign's fault. That's the fault of the voters who made the decision based on race.

But I have no doubt that there are lots of people who vote for ignorant reasons.

[Billy's Little Trip]

If that's the only reason they want to vote for him, that's not his campaign's fault. That's the fault of the voters who made the decision based on race.

No no, I don't put fault on the campaign at all. Both parties are covering their political agenda quite well as to how they answer and don't answer certain things. I blame the media 100%. But I will say I get a kick out of Colbert with his extremest right wing role, lol.

[Sober]

Biden is a badass. Biden gives great argument on senate floor ~2 years ago (can anyone better nail down the date?). Best line is "the two-word test for any 'solution' in Iraq is 'then what?'"

The Obama voter registration machine has registered roughly 55 million new voters (almost 1/6 of the total US population) to date. I haven't seen an aggregate total, but on a state-by-state basis, it appears that roughly 75% of new voters identify as democratic or independent.

This isn't going to be as close as the media is portraying it.

Example: North Carolina has McCain up ~4 points (47-42.8). A random poll doesn't guarantee who is going to show up on election day. If Obama has just 10% more registered voters in the area, he'll squeak out a 48-47 win. Obviously there are a million statistical deviations, but this is the kind of trend that I think will make this a resounding victory, in popular votes and electoral.

[Caravan Ray]

If Obama was running for the republican party, do you think it would bring African American voters to the republican side?

I don't really understand this?

Is Obama actually considered "black"? I mean - I know he has dark skin, but is he actually considered by black Americans as "one of us"?

As I understand it - Obama has a Kenyan father and a white American mother. It doesn't sound like he really has much in common with I understand "black Americans" to be - ie. the descendants of West Africans taken to North and South America in the 18th and 19th centuries.

I am the descendant of Irish convicts transported to Australia in the 18th and 19th centuries, but I don't think I would feel any particular cultural affinity with a politician just because he had an Irish father (of course though, it has been at least 80 or so years since the descendants if Irish convicts could be considered as a disadvantaged minority, and I have a similar skin colour to the descendants of most free settlers, but...)

Or George Gregan, who was until recently Captain of The Wallabies (a position which carries far more respect than President of the USA), was never held up as being any sort of spokesman for Aboriginal Australians or Pacific Isanders, just because he shares a similar skin colour with those people (GG was born in Zambia).

------------------------
edit - brain explosion on counting my "centuries"

[jb]

If Obama was running for the republican party, do you think it would bring African American voters to the republican side?

I don't really understand this?

Is Obama actually considered "black"? I mean - I know he has dark skin, but is he actually considered by black Americans as "one of us"?

When it comes down to it, people vote for whoever they perceive will do them personally the most good. As for whether Obama is "black" or not, I dunno, you'd really have to ask someone in that cultural category whether they consider him to be "one of us".

I think he's an American, and more likely to do the things I want done if he wins office.

[Billy's Little Trip]

If Obama was running for the republican party, do you think it would bring African American voters to the republican side?

I don't really understand this?

Is Obama actually considered "black"? I mean - I know he has dark skin, but is he actually considered by black Americans as "one of us"?

Well, that's the term used in the media. Yes, I am guilty of absorbing too much media hoopla. But it really doesn't make any difference. As pointed out, the mass majority will vote for the candidate that promises to do the things they want and who is the most convincing.

[erik]

I don't personally know of a single American who, when asked if Barack Obama was black, would answer "No, he's not black." It's true that his cultural experience is probably not close to the average experience of most black Americans, but I don't think that "disqualifies" him for most Americans.

[Sober]

I don't personally know of a single American who, when asked if Barack Obama was black, would answer "No, he's not black." It's true that his cultural experience is probably not close to the average experience of most black Americans, but I don't think that "disqualifies" him for most Americans.

Rush Limbaugh, my dad, etc.

As far as people voting their personal interests, it's important to note that most people are too stupid to know their net gain/loss from voting one way or another. They put way too much emphasis on some stupid single issue, and we end up with 8 years of Bush.

Example: Taxes. Take a look:





Obama makes no bones about the tax increase for the wealthiest 1%. McCain lies about his lower decrease for 80% of Americans. These are facts - not opinions or talking points - yet the Republican party is able to convince people that the libs will raise their taxes.

Basically my argument is that if you make less than $110k/year, you have no financial interest in the Republican party. And still, elections are not 80% landslides. AMERICANS ARE STUPID.

Most important issue for me personally - overturning the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). Regulate and tax the online poker industry. Bring the billions of dollars being made off Americans by overseas entities HOME and let it fix the deficit. This would also have the pleasant side-effect of making me a millionaire.

And when I'm a millionaire, we can host SFLive in my backyard. With strippers.

[Billy's Little Trip]

Sober 2012

[melvin]

Basically my argument is that if you make less than $110k/year, you have no financial interest in the Republican party. And still, elections are not 80% landslides. AMERICANS ARE STUPID.

The basic counter argument is that most of the people who make less than $110k/year work for companies that are founded, funded, and managed by people and businesses that make more than $110k/year. They also buy their day-to-day goods and services from these companies. So you set up the working poor to save $100 in taxes this year, to absorb higher inflation, and they just end up unemployed next year anyway. Americans are not stupid. No nation has ever shown greater acumen for productively putting capital to work and growing the wealth of its entire population.

[Caravan Ray]

I don't personally know of a single American who, when asked if Barack Obama was black, would answer "No, he's not black." It's true that his cultural experience is probably not close to the average experience of most black Americans, but I don't think that "disqualifies" him for most Americans.

But does Obama himself present himself as some sort of spokesman for African-Americans?

The news here recently was all about "...the first African-American man to run for President...", and there seemed to be a lot of comparisons of his speech with Martin Luther King (it coincided with some anniversary of something or other as I recall). And while he is most certainly "African-American" by definition - so would be a son of Colonel Gadhafi or F.W de Klerk be they had married American women. Not really "African-American" in the Martin Luther King sense of the word.

Obviously none of this makes any difference - and he does seem by far the best candidate and I hope he wins - but this has been puzzling me since he first emerged. I would have thought African-Americans (or black Americans or American Negros..or whatever the correct way to describe the large group of people that are the descendants of the slaves of the 1800s is) would have been a bit insulted by some bloke claiming to represent them, when all he really has in common with that culture is pigmentation and a father that came from the same continent as their ancestors (albeit a completely different part of that continent)

[erik]

I don't personally know of a single American who, when asked if Barack Obama was black, would answer "No, he's not black." It's true that his cultural experience is probably not close to the average experience of most black Americans, but I don't think that "disqualifies" him for most Americans.

But does Obama himself present himself as some sort of spokesman for African-Americans?

The news here recently was all about "...the first African-American man to run for President...", and there seemed to be a lot of comparisons of his speech with Martin Luther King (it coincided with some anniversary of something or other as I recall). And while he is most certainly "African-American" by definition - so would be a son of Colonel Gadhafi or F.W de Klerk be they had married American women. Not really "African-American" in the Martin Luther King sense of the word.

Obviously none of this makes any difference - and he does seem by far the best candidate and I hope he wins - but this has been puzzling me since he first emerged. I would have thought African-Americans (or black Americans or American Negros..or whatever the correct way to describe the large group of people that are the descendants of the slaves of the 1800s is) would have been a bit insulted by some bloke claiming to represent them, when all he really has in common with that culture is pigmentation and a father that came from the same continent as their ancestors (albeit a completely different part of that continent)

I've never heard of Obama doing this.

[erik]

I don't personally know of a single American who, when asked if Barack Obama was black, would answer "No, he's not black." It's true that his cultural experience is probably not close to the average experience of most black Americans, but I don't think that "disqualifies" him for most Americans.

Rush Limbaugh, my dad, etc.

Just out of curiosity, how would your Dad finish this sentence: "Barack Obama, is not black, he's _______." I mean, without using the word "stupid" or some other joke answer.

[Billy's Little Trip]

I may be wrong, but I think Sober may have misread what you said, Erik. The high-falutin' brainy way you wrote it, I had to read it twice. Fricking geniuses and their pie prizes.
Confusing to me = I don't personally know of a single American who, when asked if Barack Obama was black, would answer "No, he's not black."

More fitting for the lowest common denominator, like me = I don't personally know any American who doesn't think that Barack Obama is black.

[Sober]

Sober 2012

Obviously. Perhaps on the prohibition ticket?

I am actually considering going back to school for political science. My mom is all about it, but my when my dad found out what I'd be studying, he wasn't too excited. My dad and his wife are the kind of people who actually believe that liberals 'hate America.' If I ran for local office, my dad would vote against me, if not contribute/campaign against me. The idea that my own father doesn't believe that I have this country's best interest at heart is depressing, to say the least.

Basically my argument is that if you make less than $110k/year, you have no financial interest in the Republican party. And still, elections are not 80% landslides. AMERICANS ARE STUPID.

The basic counter argument is that most of the people who make less than $110k/year work for companies that are founded, funded, and managed by people and businesses that make more than $110k/year. They also buy their day-to-day goods and services from these companies. So you set up the working poor to save $100 in taxes this year, to absorb higher inflation, and they just end up unemployed next year anyway. Americans are not stupid. No nation has ever shown greater acumen for productively putting capital to work and growing the wealth of its entire population.

Well shit. Let's just raise their taxes, then! Then they'll be MILLIONAIRES.

Are you saying that the >40% of people who vote against their immediate financial interest are doing it because of their interpretation of an outdated theory of macroeconomics? Really?

I say they vote against their practical self-interest because the right is able to spin up issues to frighten people. For example: Vote republican or you'll "end up unemployed next year." Unprovable, but also undisprovable.

Fiscal issues are a matter of masking, spinning, obscuring, and just lying about the facts for the right. They lose on this issue, and that's not a matter of opinion. Their agenda is to make themselves and the wealthy even more wealthy. GDP may go up, which is likely the reasoning behind your last sentence, but GDP doesn't tell the story of people scraping by on minimum wage.

[Sober]

Just out of curiosity, how would your Dad finish this sentence: "Barack Obama, is not black, he's _______." I mean, without using the word "stupid" or some other joke answer.

I think he'd try to pull the "he's black when it suits him, white when it suits him" line. Remember Rush Limbaugh's "Obama the magic negro" song? That's the kind of mindset that still pervades through that community. Oh, and he's a secret muslim.

[melvin]

Are you saying that the >40% of people who vote against their immediate financial interest are doing it because of their interpretation of an outdated theory of macroeconomics?

Yes, minus the "outdated" part. Many mature Americans understand that raising taxes on dividends, capital gains, estates, small businesses, and people with high incomes will not make a material or lasting improvement in anyone's life. Dipping into the nation's most productive capital in order to give each family a few hundred bucks does, as you say, partially satisfy the immediate financial interests of some voters. But it's not a serious long-term policy if jobs and a rising standard of living are the goals. Ask Europe.

PS. Of course, the ideal policy is to cut taxes for everyone across the board.

[Sober]

Are you saying that the >40% of people who vote against their immediate financial interest are doing it because of their interpretation of an outdated theory of macroeconomics?

Yes, minus the "outdated" part. Many mature Americans understand that raising taxes on dividends, capital gains, estates, small businesses, and people with high incomes will not make a material or lasting improvement in anyone's life. Dipping into the nation's most productive capital in order to give each family a few hundred bucks does, as you say, partially satisfy the immediate financial interests of some voters. But it's not a serious long-term policy if jobs and a rising standard of living are the goals. Ask Europe.

PS. Of course, the ideal policy is to cut taxes for everyone across the board.

But it's ok if it comes in the form of a Bush rebate check, right?

Interpretations of fiscal policies aside, my question was whether you thought that people made these leap-in-logic votes based on their informed opinions on economics, and you replied "yes."

Really? Trailer park white trash vote republican because they believe in trickle-down Reaganomics? You don't think that they're instead afraid that the democrats are going to gay-marry their kids?

Really really? Voters have evolved in the last four years into a group of financial analysts? Last election, one of the biggest documented issues to voters was "family values." WTF DOES THAT MEAN. Well, I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean taxes or rebates.

Obviously I'm immature and that's why I don't understand economics. I DO, however, know what it's like to live in a section 8 housing complex alongside Katrina evacuees. I DO know what it's like to be without health insurance for 5 years and counting. I DO know what it's like to live on two cans of soup per day for months. Tell me 2 years ago that giving the wealthiest 1% breaks on capital gains taxes is in my best interest.

People vote against their best interests because of fear.

[Caravan Ray]

Are you saying that the >40% of people who vote against their immediate financial interest are doing it because of their interpretation of an outdated theory of macroeconomics?

Yes, minus the "outdated" part. Many mature Americans understand that raising taxes on dividends, capital gains, estates, small businesses, and people with high incomes will not make a material or lasting improvement in anyone's life. Dipping into the nation's most productive capital in order to give each family a few hundred bucks does, as you say, partially satisfy the immediate financial interests of some voters. But it's not a serious long-term policy if jobs and a rising standard of living are the goals. Ask Europe.

PS. Of course, the ideal policy is to cut taxes for everyone across the board.

Huh?!?!

Sorry - my eyes usually glaze over and I look the other direction when people start talking economics - but are you saying taxes should be cut?

Isn't the USA one of the least taxed Western nations (which is why the USA has such relatively poor health and education systems). But why do you say "Ask Europe"? Don't the places with the highest standards of living on earth like Norway, also have the highest tax? Sure I'm just an old socialist at heart - but I always shudder when I hear about tax cuts. I'd really be happier to pay more tax and have my government actually build and maintain infrastructure and provide social services with it.

(Of course - I may have misunderstood you completely, and if so I apologise. I really don't pretend to know anything about economics)

[melvin]

Sober and Ray: it's important to look at the world on a RELATIVE basis. There is no utopia. The American government may not have lived up to your expectations during Hurricane Katrina, but then again, hundreds of Europeans have died due to a mere heatwave.

This article, based on a Swedish study, provides some quick metrics on American wealth and standard of living compared to Europe. The American healthcare system is a mess, yes, but a larger government monopoly is not the answer. It never is. Watch and see what happens to the world's socialist healthcare systems as Western populations age over the next decade or two. Socialism feels good, but it does not work. The math is simply untenable.

Regarding why/how people vote -- I agree, the rational fear that liberals will fail to protect the country, contribute to the further erosion of its moral fabric, and drive it into the economic sewer are probably stronger drivers than an academic point of view on economics for most "white trash". Fortunately, these fears still outweigh the desire for a short-term tax rebate among the majority. There's hope left.

[erik]

More more hahahhahhhahah