Why Is Barack Obama Not Whipping John McCain?
8 out of 10 Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction, Republican approval ratings across the board are at their lowest levels since Watergate, the economy is headed south, foreclosures, gas prices, and the national deficit are at all time highs, we’re engaged in a very unpopular war, and our President likes to make up laws as he goes along.
And yet, the Republican candidate for President, John McCain, is now either slightly leading or tied with Barack Obama in most major polls.
Why?
Can it really be because that many Obama supporters don’t have land-lines?
The delegates at the Democratic National Convention are apparently wondering about this curious fact as well.
Their answer: America might just be too racist to elect a black man with a funny name.
Here are parts of an article I read this morning in the Washington Post titled “For Those From Swing States, The Watchword Is . . . Worry.” [1]
“As the Democrats kicked off a convention designed to unite support behind Obama, interviews with several dozen delegates pointed to an undercurrent of anxiety among many from key swing states who will be charged with leading the push in their communities. They expressed doubts bordering on bewilderment: Why, in a year that had been shaping up as a watershed for Democrats, amid an economic downturn and an unpopular Republican presidency, is the race so tight?”
“To be sure, many delegates here confidently shared the campaign’s assurance that all is going according to plan. They argued that polls understate Obama’s strength because they miss many of his younger supporters who use cellphones, and that many voters are only now tuning in to the election. Judy Byrne Riley, a delegate from Niceville, Fla., said she is impressed by the excitement about Obama in her mostly Republican area. “He can carry the state,” she said.”
“But for some delegates, the concern is a more fundamental one: They do not share Obama’s confidence that he can overcome the resistance many voters may have to electing a black president with an unusual background and name.”
“Some, such as Rendell, worry aloud about the “Bradley effect” — the theory, disputed by some political scientists, that voters are likely to tell pollsters they will support a black candidate even though they don’t intend to. With a little more than two months to go until Election Day, some of these most ardent and veteran Democrats have not bought into the idealism that has driven the campaign from the start and are unsure whether their neighbors and co-workers are ready for Obama.”
“Sarah Hamilton, a Clinton supporter who works for the Ohio Federation of Teachers, linked Obama’s challenges in the state to the resistance that other Democratic presidential candidates have faced in trying to trump social issues with economic ones. “I really think it still has to do with ‘Gods, guns and gays.’ You bring in his race, and the Muslim rumor, all these things are factors that are easy to play out in the rural areas,” she said.”
The exact opposite point of view was presented in an article I read this afternoon titled “The Racism Excuse” in the Wall Street Journal. [2]
This article’s thesis is that Senator Obama’s fall in the polls has nothing to do with race. Racism is just a convenient excuse for democrats who are just now realizing they nominated a man short on experience, backing policies most Americans don’t agree with, and who looks more and more like a conventional politician.
To quote the article:
“Not so long ago Mr. Obama was the Tiger Woods of American politics. As Geraldine Ferraro indelicately pointed out this spring, his African heritage helped him cast his candidacy in a history-changing light. Now, merely because the McCain campaign has begun to get its act together and raise issues like taxes and foreign policy, Mr. Obama is suddenly the victim of rampant Jim Crow sentiment?”
“There are Americans who judge politicians by their race, or gender, or religion; Mr. Obama will certainly carry the black vote in November because he is black and because he is a Democrat. But we reckon that a scant number of voters are motivated by racism, and that number’s growing smaller by the day. Virginia elected a black Governor two decades ago, and Illinois has had two black Senators. America has had two black Secretaries of State, and major corporations are run by black CEOs. No other Western democracy has done as well at opening up political, business and other arenas to minorities.”
“Mr. Obama’s descent from his Icarusian heights earlier this spring reflects a shift in this race that has nothing to do with race. A skin-deep Obamamania had energized the country. Now that’s giving way to serious consideration of credentials and policy substance. After all, voters are choosing the world’s most powerful man. Mr. McCain has been drawing contrasts with his younger rival to close the gap in the polls. We’ll see if the trend continues.”
“As a matter of sober fact, many Americans look at the junior Senator from Illinois and worry, as his Democratic Vice Presidential candidate pointed out last year, that he isn’t “ready” for the job. Does this mean that anyone who agrees with Joe Biden’s previous assessment is a racist? Do Democrats really think so little of their fellow Americans?”
So which is it?
Is Senator Obama under-performing in the polls because Americans won’t vote for a black man for President or because he is a candidate who, once the soaring rhetoric wears off, does not measure up to a decidedly less charismatic but more experienced John McCain?
You’ll have to decide for yourself.
But in my opinion, if Barack Obama loses this election given the huge advantages democrats enjoy this year it will not be because of his race or name.
It will be because he failed to convince a majority of Americans that, regardless of his race and name, he is the man who can make their values and ideals real.
Comments
Leave a Reply