So, I got into an interesting discussion recently. A radio show host just recently tried asking President Obama the following question - "I recently spent time asking African Americans about your policies and over 90% couldn't even name one. Do you believe its (sic) right that the black community votes for you strictly because you're part black?"
This isn't the first time I've heard such a declaration. Following Barack Obama's victory in the 2008 Presidential Election, many far-right conservatives made the claim that he won due to the black vote, as he won 95% of it. Some went as far to say that African-Americans were being racist with their votes, because according to them - they were voting for Obama simply because of the color of his skin. Since almost 100% of blacks voted for President Obama, well, it seems pretty obvious that they were just voting for him for that very reason, right? Sorry to burst these people's bubble, but I'm not thinking so.
In the 2000 election, Al Gore won 90% of the black vote. John Kerry won 88% of it in 2004. It's not as if Obama's winning over 90% of the black vote was a shock to anyone, largely due to his party status. The Democratic Party has dominated among African-Americans for half a century (or so). Were there certain individuals whom voted for him partly due to his skin color? That's highly possible. On the flip-side, however, would there not just as likely be people whom voted against him for that very reason? So, in the end, what was the net effect of his skin color on the overall election results?
Seriously, if we're going to single out African-American voters of the current president and describe them as misinformed on his policies, why must we stop there? I can all but guarantee if one were to interview Anglo-American supporters of McCain (and/or Romney), they too would likely be misinformed about Obama's policies and both groups of people would also likely be misinformed about McCain and Romney's policy ideas (generally-speaking, of course). Sadly, most people get their news from highly partisan sources and in the end, regardless of facts proving the contrary, they believe what they want to believe. This is leading to a more and more misinformed public. Given that, though, I feel it's unfair to single out African-American voters of Obama as such.
Also what's the sample size of this "study" the speaker was referring to, though? Can we objectively declare that 15,000,000 African-Americans voted for Obama simply because of his race due to this much smaller sample size? Was a similar "study" conducted in 2000 or 2004, when these same individuals overwhelmingly supported Democratic candidates Al Gore (90%) and John Kerry (88%), whom last I checked, weren't black?
While it may be "ignorant' or a person may be in "denial" to lay claim that race didn't play a factor in some voters' minds on both sides of the aisle, I think it'd also be "ignorant" and "in denial" for a person to lay claim that most or all voters (on either side) voted as they did solely due to a candidate's skin color. I'm not going to say all white McCain supporters in 2008 voted for him because Obama's black, just as I'm not going to say all black Obama supporters voted for him in that election because of his skin color.
I think it'd be quite objectively difficult to find out the net result of Obama's skin color on the 2008 election (due to people not being honest about if they did or didn't vote for a candidate due to his/her race). One person attempted to do this, however. One Seth Stephens-Davidowitz - a political scientist from Harvard University - conducted a study which showed that Obama lost between 3% and 5% of the vote due to his skin color.
I'm sure the video the speaker was talking about will be entertaining on some level. From the science side of it, though, I have some questions: Were these individuals asked about their votes in the 2000 and/or 2004 elections? Considering approximately 89% of African-Americans voted for the Democratic candidates in those two elections, if any of these participants did in fact vote in either or/both election(s), chances are they went with Al Gore and/or John Kerry. In addition to that, if they were asked about whom they voted for in the preceding two elections, were they then asked about Gore and/or Kerry's policy ideas? If so, how did they fair in their knowledge of those policies? Any better or worse than when asked about Obama's policies? I guess my point is, how can we truly determine the level of importance Obama's race was when these individuals (and other African-Americans) cast their votes in the 2008 election, regardless of their level of cognizance about Obama's policies, if we don't have such data from previous elections? If they did vote for Gore and/or Kerry and were just as "uninformed" of their policies, wouldn't this negate the working hypothesis that a large number of African-Americans voted for President Obama strictly due to his race?
While I'm sure many African-Americans were certainly excited about voting for the first black president into office, I highly doubt this was the deciding factor for most of them, just as I'm sure while race may have played a slight factor in others voting for McCain, I highly doubt it was the deciding factor for most of his voters. Including the 2008 election, Democrats have won, on average, 91% of the African-American vote in the past three presidential elections. Was Obama's 95% a slight bump? Sure. But was it much more than that? No. If African-Americans had voted Republican more times than not in the 2000 and 2004 elections, that 95% number would have been quite significant - quite the extravagant jump. However, that wasn't the case at all and objectively speaking, it's nearly impossible to measure just what the overall net effect was of Obama's skin color on the election. However, as the previous study notes, if anything, it hindered him by between 3 and 5 percentage points. We can speculate all we want to, but that's all it's going to be - fallacy and speculation. I will say that I think the far-right is blowing things out-of-proportion. If anyone will recall, when John McCain chose his running mate - Sarah Palin - he received an initial boost in support among women. However, before long, that boost vanished, because while many women may have been excited about the prospect of voting the first female vice president into office, in the end, they decided they really didn't want Ms. Palin to be her. Also, I find it kind of funny that this talk and accusatory language by the far-right only started when there was an African-American running as the Democratic candidate for president. At no other time in our history have these African-American voters' motives been questioned like this when they've cast their votes for Caucasian Democratic candidates. With their logic, we should always question Anglo-Americans' motives for voting for Caucasian presidential candidates!
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/blacks-and-the-democratic-party/http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/blacks-and-the-democratic-party/
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~sstephen/papers/RacialAnimusAndVotingSethStephensDavidowitz.pdf
This isn't the first time I've heard such a declaration. Following Barack Obama's victory in the 2008 Presidential Election, many far-right conservatives made the claim that he won due to the black vote, as he won 95% of it. Some went as far to say that African-Americans were being racist with their votes, because according to them - they were voting for Obama simply because of the color of his skin. Since almost 100% of blacks voted for President Obama, well, it seems pretty obvious that they were just voting for him for that very reason, right? Sorry to burst these people's bubble, but I'm not thinking so.
In the 2000 election, Al Gore won 90% of the black vote. John Kerry won 88% of it in 2004. It's not as if Obama's winning over 90% of the black vote was a shock to anyone, largely due to his party status. The Democratic Party has dominated among African-Americans for half a century (or so). Were there certain individuals whom voted for him partly due to his skin color? That's highly possible. On the flip-side, however, would there not just as likely be people whom voted against him for that very reason? So, in the end, what was the net effect of his skin color on the overall election results?
Seriously, if we're going to single out African-American voters of the current president and describe them as misinformed on his policies, why must we stop there? I can all but guarantee if one were to interview Anglo-American supporters of McCain (and/or Romney), they too would likely be misinformed about Obama's policies and both groups of people would also likely be misinformed about McCain and Romney's policy ideas (generally-speaking, of course). Sadly, most people get their news from highly partisan sources and in the end, regardless of facts proving the contrary, they believe what they want to believe. This is leading to a more and more misinformed public. Given that, though, I feel it's unfair to single out African-American voters of Obama as such.
Also what's the sample size of this "study" the speaker was referring to, though? Can we objectively declare that 15,000,000 African-Americans voted for Obama simply because of his race due to this much smaller sample size? Was a similar "study" conducted in 2000 or 2004, when these same individuals overwhelmingly supported Democratic candidates Al Gore (90%) and John Kerry (88%), whom last I checked, weren't black?
While it may be "ignorant' or a person may be in "denial" to lay claim that race didn't play a factor in some voters' minds on both sides of the aisle, I think it'd also be "ignorant" and "in denial" for a person to lay claim that most or all voters (on either side) voted as they did solely due to a candidate's skin color. I'm not going to say all white McCain supporters in 2008 voted for him because Obama's black, just as I'm not going to say all black Obama supporters voted for him in that election because of his skin color.
I think it'd be quite objectively difficult to find out the net result of Obama's skin color on the 2008 election (due to people not being honest about if they did or didn't vote for a candidate due to his/her race). One person attempted to do this, however. One Seth Stephens-Davidowitz - a political scientist from Harvard University - conducted a study which showed that Obama lost between 3% and 5% of the vote due to his skin color.
I'm sure the video the speaker was talking about will be entertaining on some level. From the science side of it, though, I have some questions: Were these individuals asked about their votes in the 2000 and/or 2004 elections? Considering approximately 89% of African-Americans voted for the Democratic candidates in those two elections, if any of these participants did in fact vote in either or/both election(s), chances are they went with Al Gore and/or John Kerry. In addition to that, if they were asked about whom they voted for in the preceding two elections, were they then asked about Gore and/or Kerry's policy ideas? If so, how did they fair in their knowledge of those policies? Any better or worse than when asked about Obama's policies? I guess my point is, how can we truly determine the level of importance Obama's race was when these individuals (and other African-Americans) cast their votes in the 2008 election, regardless of their level of cognizance about Obama's policies, if we don't have such data from previous elections? If they did vote for Gore and/or Kerry and were just as "uninformed" of their policies, wouldn't this negate the working hypothesis that a large number of African-Americans voted for President Obama strictly due to his race?
While I'm sure many African-Americans were certainly excited about voting for the first black president into office, I highly doubt this was the deciding factor for most of them, just as I'm sure while race may have played a slight factor in others voting for McCain, I highly doubt it was the deciding factor for most of his voters. Including the 2008 election, Democrats have won, on average, 91% of the African-American vote in the past three presidential elections. Was Obama's 95% a slight bump? Sure. But was it much more than that? No. If African-Americans had voted Republican more times than not in the 2000 and 2004 elections, that 95% number would have been quite significant - quite the extravagant jump. However, that wasn't the case at all and objectively speaking, it's nearly impossible to measure just what the overall net effect was of Obama's skin color on the election. However, as the previous study notes, if anything, it hindered him by between 3 and 5 percentage points. We can speculate all we want to, but that's all it's going to be - fallacy and speculation. I will say that I think the far-right is blowing things out-of-proportion. If anyone will recall, when John McCain chose his running mate - Sarah Palin - he received an initial boost in support among women. However, before long, that boost vanished, because while many women may have been excited about the prospect of voting the first female vice president into office, in the end, they decided they really didn't want Ms. Palin to be her. Also, I find it kind of funny that this talk and accusatory language by the far-right only started when there was an African-American running as the Democratic candidate for president. At no other time in our history have these African-American voters' motives been questioned like this when they've cast their votes for Caucasian Democratic candidates. With their logic, we should always question Anglo-Americans' motives for voting for Caucasian presidential candidates!
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/blacks-and-the-democratic-party/http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/blacks-and-the-democratic-party/
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~sstephen/papers/RacialAnimusAndVotingSethStephensDavidowitz.pdf
It's ridiculous how race always comes to be a matter in things
ReplyDeleteYeah, yet when you point that out to them, they'll come back with, "Race? Who said anything about race? You're the one talking about race..."
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking, "Really? What were you talking about then? The weather? Work? The Perseid meteor showers? A former pet goat you named Bucky?"
It seems these same people feel it's fine for them to bring up race in just about everything, yet when they're called out about it, they'll suddenly feel uncomfortable talking about race.