RE: nervous white liberals
“Obama's Magic Negroness is not as shiny as it once was, and black radicals are much scarier than feminist lesbians, as far as nervous white liberals are concerned.”
Says an arbiter of nervous white thought? Talk about wishful thinking!
Truth be told, this is a rather squeaky clean, polished trio of candidates we have here. (McCain's NYT-manufactured sex scandal wouldn't stick, and Obama's 'racist pastor' hullabaloo has resulted in no change in his poll results. That's the extent of what their opponents have been able to do thus far. Pretty squeaky clean for 2008, IMO.)
The choice would simply come down to platform, not even party, if the platforms weren’t so similar.
Because the pickings have been so slim in Democrat and Republican primary races, and because the current main three — McCain, Obama, Clinton — aren’t really all that different in platform, nervous white people, most notably those leaning to the right, are doing all they can to break this race down in terms of race. And they may get what they want, but it might not work out the way they intended it to. In divisive politics, the race card’s value is rapidly declining as the American voting public itself is increasingly without defined racial boundaries and/or traditional familial ties. As a people, America is truly melding, and skin color truly means less and less all the time … except to the few who keep dredging it up.
IMO, any of these three candidates will be rather unaccomplished in the wake of Dubya’s bungling of his own presidency. One could excel in international relations as a figurehead, a goodwill gesture to the world, etc., but the jury’s out on whether that’s a priority for the American people. However, with the international events of this year — increasing numbers of anti-American candidates winning national elections to our south, the continued anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, even any drama surrounding 2008’s Chinese Olympics — it won’t surprise me when choosing a new president turns into choosing an international ambassador and fixer of homeland financial woes.
Sure, I don’t doubt that there are more than a few ‘nervous liberals’ that will give Clinton their vote. There are even more that won’t vote at all because they can’t stand to give her their vote, or anyone else. Then the rest inclined to vote D — including many younger swing voters wanting some sort/any kind of ‘change’ — will vote for Obama because he’s cool. (Pubbies can thank Bush for chasing swing voters from the party this time around.) McCain will be supported by born Republicans, and that’s about it.
Says an arbiter of nervous white thought? Talk about wishful thinking!
Truth be told, this is a rather squeaky clean, polished trio of candidates we have here. (McCain's NYT-manufactured sex scandal wouldn't stick, and Obama's 'racist pastor' hullabaloo has resulted in no change in his poll results. That's the extent of what their opponents have been able to do thus far. Pretty squeaky clean for 2008, IMO.)
The choice would simply come down to platform, not even party, if the platforms weren’t so similar.
Because the pickings have been so slim in Democrat and Republican primary races, and because the current main three — McCain, Obama, Clinton — aren’t really all that different in platform, nervous white people, most notably those leaning to the right, are doing all they can to break this race down in terms of race. And they may get what they want, but it might not work out the way they intended it to. In divisive politics, the race card’s value is rapidly declining as the American voting public itself is increasingly without defined racial boundaries and/or traditional familial ties. As a people, America is truly melding, and skin color truly means less and less all the time … except to the few who keep dredging it up.
IMO, any of these three candidates will be rather unaccomplished in the wake of Dubya’s bungling of his own presidency. One could excel in international relations as a figurehead, a goodwill gesture to the world, etc., but the jury’s out on whether that’s a priority for the American people. However, with the international events of this year — increasing numbers of anti-American candidates winning national elections to our south, the continued anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, even any drama surrounding 2008’s Chinese Olympics — it won’t surprise me when choosing a new president turns into choosing an international ambassador and fixer of homeland financial woes.
Sure, I don’t doubt that there are more than a few ‘nervous liberals’ that will give Clinton their vote. There are even more that won’t vote at all because they can’t stand to give her their vote, or anyone else. Then the rest inclined to vote D — including many younger swing voters wanting some sort/any kind of ‘change’ — will vote for Obama because he’s cool. (Pubbies can thank Bush for chasing swing voters from the party this time around.) McCain will be supported by born Republicans, and that’s about it.
posted by Strother | 8:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home