• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

A black GOP candidate polling at 23% and climbing?

I don't see this as mysterious at all. Both Trump and Carson are anti-establishment candidates. Those voters who are racist and/or assholes support Trump. Those who are not support Carson. And those who are not AND are not misogynistic support Fiorana. The proportion seems to be 6:3:1, with the anti-establishment being about 60% of the republican vote. Later things will probably change as people start being more strategic.
 
I don't see this as mysterious at all. Both Trump and Carson are anti-establishment candidates. Those voters who are racist and/or assholes support Trump. Those who are not support Carson. And those who are not AND are not misogynistic support Fiorana. The proportion seems to be 6:3:1, with the anti-establishment being about 60% of the republican vote. Later things will probably change as people start being more strategic.

I would not have guessed that the misogynists so outnumber the racists.

Bad news for Hillary.
 
For a certain value of misogynist. One can also say that Trump's business credentials blow Fiorina's out of the water. There are plenty of other factors muddying the waters.
 
It's not so surprising that the GOP would love Ben Carson. Do not underestimate the power of compartmentalization - that cognitive whirligig so deeply entrenched in conservative minds. Black people are *mostly* lazy and violent, but not *this* black person 'cause he's a politician who forwards the ideological disease. See how that works?

Sure, that's basically what I was alluding to by pointing out that Carson is a sexist, homophobe, so he gets a 2 out of 3 score among GOP voters and that could be good enough.
In truth, my "somewhat surprising" comment was tongue-in-cheek. While deep seated racism of the sort that would prevent handing any black man the reigns of the Presidency is common among the GOP base, it isn't at 100%. So, a black man that is otherwise bigoted and has all the "right" (literally) views on things including race, would be passable to some % of GOP voters.
Yep. "See? We're not racists!" lol
 
Sure, that's basically what I was alluding to by pointing out that Carson is a sexist, homophobe, so he gets a 2 out of 3 score among GOP voters and that could be good enough.
In truth, my "somewhat surprising" comment was tongue-in-cheek. While deep seated racism of the sort that would prevent handing any black man the reigns of the Presidency is common among the GOP base, it isn't at 100%. So, a black man that is otherwise bigoted and has all the "right" (literally) views on things including race, would be passable to some % of GOP voters.
Yep. "See? We're not racists!" lol

Yeah, but look at the Republican field. Seriously. They aren't ready to nominate a woman for the top seat so that leaves out Fiorina. Everyone else is either batshit or an incompetent ideologue. Or both. Carson and Fiorina represent the best the Republican party has to offer and Carson is not particularly articulate.

- - - Updated - - -

For a certain value of misogynist. One can also say that Trump's business credentials blow Fiorina's out of the water. There are plenty of other factors muddying the waters.

Or, more accurately, that Trump just blows. Hard.
 
Yep. "See? We're not racists!" lol

Yeah, but look at the Republican field. Seriously. They aren't ready to nominate a woman for the top seat so that leaves out Fiorina. Everyone else is either batshit or an incompetent ideologue. Or both. Carson and Fiorina represent the best the Republican party has to offer and Carson is not particularly articulate.
Actually Bush and Pataki are the best the party can offer.
 
For what? that black voters surprised even Hillary's team by how quickly they jumped to Obama?

Here is news story covering how the black leaders working on Hillary's campaign were stunned by losing the black vote so easily.


Or are you doubting that blacks' social/religious conservatism on most issues outside of race and economics isn't well established? That would also require pretending that the many variables on which blacks and whites differ (income, education, religiosity, etc.) have no predictive relationships to conservative attitudes about sexuality, gender roles, science, etc.. Hint: they have well established reliable relationships that all predict greater conservative/authoritarian views on those issues among blacks.

If you really aren't aware of the mountain of evidence for this, here is a place to start. A gallup poll showing that black "Democrats" actually looks much like white Republicans than white Democrats on acceptance of homosexuality in general, gay unions, abortions, out of wedlock sex, and stem cell research.

You made several specific statements, but this one stuck out

As soon as Obama became a candidate in 2008 about 85% of black voters in every state immediately switched to supporting him over Hilary.

Can you source that one?

I did. The article refers to the 85% support Obama already had by Feb 2008 in the States with the largest black populations, and how it happened so quick they didn't see it coming. Its tough to find actual early primary polls still posted from 8 years ago, but I followed the election closely and like most people paying attention saw that Obama grabbed the black vote from Hillary "overnight" in political change terms.

Also, its well established that Obama got a higher % of the black vote (already quite high) and a greater jump in raw numbers of black people voting for him than any other Dem before him. The 2004 to 2008 jump in % turnout among blacks was more than twice that of any other group. Given that chronic non-voters tend to be among the least informed, odds are high that the extra blacks that felt motivated to vote for the first time in 2008 were not compelled by knowledge of his policies as better than prior Dems that didn't vote for, but by his race.

Bottom line is that some people vote with race as a deciding factor, and unless black people are a unique sub-species, this also applies to them. That makes it beyond reasonable doubt that he got some % of black votes for being black (and lost some % of white votes for being white). Also, as I said, it likely mattered that Obama was not merely black, but black at a time when zero blacks had gotten close to the Presidency. It is highly likely that some people chose him over Hilary for that historic and symbolic reason.
Sure, no women has won it either, but lets be real, the historical symbolism of a white female president doesn't come close to that of a black president.

And as conservative as black people are, getting us to vote in significant numbers for the party of the Southern Strategy, Jesse Helms, and Willie Horton will take a lot more than fielding a black candidate.

I agree that this is true of the majority. But "significant numbers" is rather vague. Voters tend to be highly emotional and not well reasoned or grounded in historical understanding. Again, that is true of most American voters, which includes black voters. Older Blacks that experienced the Southern Strategy and Jesse Helms are far more likely to reject any GOP choice, but people under 35 could quite plausibly find a way to delude themselves that the only black choice was an acceptable one. If Obama had not already won in 2008, many people would still be doubting that a black person would ever win in their lifetime. So, a black Republican in a general election could easily get 10%-30% of the black votes.
In fact, 1992, Colin Powell was a Republican campaigning for Dole and other Republicans. Exit polls showed that he would have kicked Clintons as 50% to 38%, with many left leaning independents voting for Powell over Clinton, including 1/3 of blacks.
 
Looking at a February '08 poll, it appears that men were polling towards Obama at 67%. White men were about 61%. So it'd appear that the support went well across race boundaries.

Going to an early January poll, Clinton had 34% black support, Obama 49% black support.

In November '07, Obama had a 14 point lead over Clinton with blacks.

Although, maybe you are correct about states with the greatest black population. What would that be? Georgia, Mississippi, New York?
 
Is it really a promising outcome for a candidate to get 23% of the support from the batshit crazy wing of a party?
 
You made several specific statements, but this one stuck out

As soon as Obama became a candidate in 2008 about 85% of black voters in every state immediately switched to supporting him over Hilary.

Can you source that one?

I did. The article refers to the 85% support Obama already had by Feb 2008 in the States with the largest black populations, and how it happened so quick they didn't see it coming.
This is what you said
As soon as Obama became a candidate in 2008 about 85% of black voters in every state immediately switched to supporting him over Hilary.
The article you sourced does not say that. It says this:

Obama has swamped Clinton among black voters in each of the 20 contests that had exit polls and large enough samples of African Americans to be meaningful. Just to put that kind of shutout in perspective, black voters represent the only demographic group that the New York senator has not carried at least once during the Democratic primary campaign. Obama now has such a lock on the loyalties of African Americans -- 84 percent of the black vote in Alabama, 87 percent in Georgia, 84 percent in Maryland, and on and on -- that the black vote is no longer contestable.e

Not the same thing as what you said.

Did you misspeak?



Its tough to find actual early primary polls still posted from 8 years ago, but I followed the election closely and like most people paying attention saw that Obama grabbed the black vote from Hillary "overnight" in political change terms.

Also, its well established that Obama got a higher % of the black vote (already quite high) and a greater jump in raw numbers of black people voting for him than any other Dem before him. The 2004 to 2008 jump in % turnout among blacks was more than twice that of any other group. Given that chronic non-voters tend to be among the least informed, odds are high that the extra blacks that felt motivated to vote for the first time in 2008 were not compelled by knowledge of his policies as better than prior Dems that didn't vote for, but by his race.

Bottom line is that some people vote with race as a deciding factor, and unless black people are a unique sub-species, this also applies to them. That makes it beyond reasonable doubt that he got some % of black votes for being black (and lost some % of white votes for being white). Also, as I said, it likely mattered that Obama was not merely black, but black at a time when zero blacks had gotten close to the Presidency. It is highly likely that some people chose him over Hilary for that historic and symbolic reason.
Sure, no women has won it either, but lets be real, the historical symbolism of a white female president doesn't come close to that of a black president.

And as conservative as black people are, getting us to vote in significant numbers for the party of the Southern Strategy, Jesse Helms, and Willie Horton will take a lot more than fielding a black candidate.

I agree that this is true of the majority. But "significant numbers" is rather vague. Voters tend to be highly emotional and not well reasoned or grounded in historical understanding. Again, that is true of most American voters, which includes black voters. Older Blacks that experienced the Southern Strategy and Jesse Helms are far more likely to reject any GOP choice, but people under 35 could quite plausibly find a way to delude themselves that the only black choice was an acceptable one. If Obama had not already won in 2008, many people would still be doubting that a black person would ever win in their lifetime. So, a black Republican in a general election could easily get 10%-30% of the black votes.
In fact, 1992, Colin Powell was a Republican campaigning for Dole and other Republicans. Exit polls showed that he would have kicked Clintons as 50% to 38%, with many left leaning independents voting for Powell over Clinton, including 1/3 of blacks.

Will some people vote for the black candidate regardless? Yes. Will blackness be the sole reason for the majority of black people to vote for someone, no. Otherwise Jesse Jackson would have carried every black vote back when he ran in the eighties. He didn't.

Prior to the Iowa caucuses, Obama was not that hot a candidate. Black people liked him, but they feared for him. After Obama took a state that was very white, and he showed himself not to frightening to white people, THEN he picks up momentum.

The GOP is known in the black community as the party of racists and the negroes who love them. Ben Carson's run could be quite upsetting and game changing candidacy, but it won't be. Carson won't do or say the things necessary to reach out to the black community, to overcome his association with the GOP, because that would scare too many white people in the GOP.

And right now, those white people are his base.
 
I think the debate last night hurt Carson as much as the first one helped him. Last time he looked up on stage as the only rational person with an outsider view and a moderate and sensible agenda. This time, not so much. He looked more radical and he also looked weak. He had all the facts and credibility on his side when the subject of autism and vaccines came up, but he failed to capitalize on it.
 
Back
Top Bottom