« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
How Do African Americans Feel About The Clintons Now?
I'm interested in the opinions of African Americans now that she has given this speech and suspended her campaign. Did you see her race baiting during the campaign? If so, did her speech today leave you feeling giddy like most people around TPM? Why or Why not?
Personally, I can't forget what she did with her campaign. I won't forget Bill's actions either. I don't think she has done anything to repair the breech she created between herself and the African American community. From her campaign's embracing of Fox News and Melon Scaife to her "hardworking White American" remarks to her campaign's attempt to stop people from voting or caucusing in Texas, she proved to be none of what she claimed and all of what she said she hated. This speech undid that? I missed some huge part of it I guess.



Comments (83)
I found her speech to be ok. I stll do not want Hillary to be VP for Obama. I do not trust her. She lied about the Northern Ireland Peace Treaty, the Bosnia visit, and tried to pad her resume to make it appear she had more experience than she did.
I also do not trust her because of her frequent comments about working class white voters and her stating that she is staying in the race because like RFK, Obama could be assassinated! That was appalling. Clinton cannot handle finance. her campaign is now $2-30 million in debt. NOBODY who mismanages their money is fit to be a Prez.
June 8, 2008 1:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's impossible to forget the drama that unfolded throughout the campaign. However, it is possible to move on.
Sure, we could hold on to all the things that were said and done, and we would have every right to do so. But what good would it do? If Barack and Michelle can look beyond it all, then why shouldn't the rest of us?
As Hillary Clinton said in her speech on Saturday, the Democratic party is a family. Like any family, there are certain members that we have problems with, but we remain family.
June 8, 2008 2:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
i have no problems with her at all and never felt she was being racist nor her husband. actually i though it was jesse jacksin jr who started the race baiting when interviewed after hiulliary cried and stated that he had not scene her cry for the hurricane katrina victims. in all honesty blacks have participated in playing the race card to their benefit in a way i have never thought possible. sorry if i don't follow your racial party line. i guess since over 53% of african americans want her on the ticket they got over it pretty quick.
June 8, 2008 2:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if you'll feel the same way after a few weeks of the general campaign with the right wing attacking him relentlessly using Hillary quotes.
They have a three page list.
How can she campaign for him all over the place? She's constantly going to have the not qualified to be President thrown at her and being questioned on whether she was lying then or lying now?
Today's `honeymoon` atmosphere is an illusion that's going to be blown out of the water all too soon.
I'm dreading it.
Have you thought about what it will do to her? If/when she campaigns for him and keeps getting these questions thrown at her she has to say something and whatever reply she tries it'll always come back to making her look dishonest and untrustworthy and destroy her newly minted heroine theme.
I can't imagine her copping that for long - or the Obama campaign wanting to have to deal with it for long.
June 8, 2008 2:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
michelle is backing McCain; it's just normal that she is quite pleased with Hillary's negative comments on Obama.
June 8, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh Gee the Republicans never though about attacking Obama until Hillary showed them the way. Please grow up. I am personally exhausted of black racists taking everything said by white people as offensive. If 90% of women had voted for Hillary in state after state you think someone might have noticed? ... only the women haters I guess. Please show the maturity your leader Obama has shown and quit looking to twist every situation into black vs white. That is YOUR OWN PERSONAL SHIT and is so unfair to keep trying to dump it on the Clintons.
June 8, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, michelle bociurkiw, of course you had no problems with her whatsoever. In a different thread, you also said you'd have no problems whatsoever with the Supreme Court justices that a President McCain is likely to appoint. Which was one reason that you planned to vote for McCain, now that Clinton's out, right?
I'm not an African-American but any attempts to tear us apart by exploiting racial or gender or cultural resentments, such as the Clinton campaign did -- as a campaign strategy -- should not be swept away and ignored. I support Obama but I don't agree with this decision.
I believe that the truth and only the truth is a defense against the ugliness of a divide-and-conquer strategy. We need to stare this nonsense down when we see it but first, we need to see it. Really look at it. So we'll recognize it and reject it when it shows up again. (And it will).
June 8, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
53% of African Americans want her on the ticket?
Really?
Just goes to show doesn't how little connect there is between the internet and the majority of people out there.
Because if you go to the African-American websites there's nothing but loathing for the Clintons now - they feel utterly betrayed by them.
(There was possibly some ambiguity about tge race baiting until the hard working white Americans comment. That one completely finished them off.)
The 53% surprises me. I wonder if it's because they think their Barack will have a better chance with Clinton on the ticket.
June 8, 2008 3:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
At first that percentage puzzled me also, but the CW is that an Obama/Clinton ticket is SURE to win .... and winning this election is a big thing to many of us, black and white. I can see that many people saying "well, I don't like it but if it will guarantee that he'll win...."
June 8, 2008 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please, don't feed the "michelle troll." She gets her jollies by highjacking threads and making false claims and inflammatory statements to get everyone to respond to her. Makes her feel like she is an actual living person.
Don't humor her/it.
June 8, 2008 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
many of the black sites are typically filled with hate...what new?
June 8, 2008 3:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
many of the black sites are typically filled with hate...what,s new? i guess it's like the wright experience obama explained that was typical of the black experience.
June 8, 2008 3:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
he probably will have a better chance with her on the ticket as there will be a certain percentage of folks that will not vote for him unless she gets on the ticket. i am one of them and so is my brother. that's two out my family.
June 8, 2008 3:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's over for me. Beat John McCain.
June 8, 2008 4:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mine is not a response from an African-American as you might guess, but I'll throw down anyway.
There are some good reasons for putting Hillary on the ticket. However the race issue may speak against it. The issue is political reward. If you believe that the Clintons used race unfairly and outside of their historical positions, what should that say to future campaigns about race baiting? Should not the historical judgement against this kind of race baiting (if you think it happened) be to keep her off the ticket? Not as act of punishing her but as a political reality: race baiting makes you unelectable not more. Should not this be a lesson we would want to make clear to younger voters entering the political scene? The questions turns on whether you believe the Clintons behaved badly.
June 8, 2008 8:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I like the rewarding bad behavior argument. I guess what it boils down to for some is what will get us a victory versus what will make us clean. Does clean matter when we're standing in soup lines listening to McCain's state of the union? Is all the more electibility with her on the ticket stuff real?
June 8, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's how I looked at it, donnerpass. I believe the Democratic Party should demonstrate its commitment to standing firmly against racism and sexism.
These Democratic primaries were difficult for me to witness. The realization that some Democrats were willing to exploit racial conflict for political gain was as heartbreaking for me as the realization that some Americans are willing to accept torture as a legitimate method of obtaining intelligence.
When it became impossible to believe that Senator Clinton's so-called unfortunate, inartful comments were innocent, it was a deal breaker for me. I decided I could not vote for a Democratic candidate who won by exploiting racial fear and resentment.
I do hope that Sen. Obama's candidacy--both in the primaries and the general election--illustrate how damaging and increasingly ineffective race baiting is as a political campaign tactic.
June 8, 2008 9:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Laura, I think the truth is more like some MSM personalities were willing to whip up some racial headlines where no real story existed. I think the Obama campaign used the backlash just perfectly to diminish the Clintons and solidify their support with blacks and liberals. I felt bad for the people that believed there was something real going on. I still do.
June 8, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sure hope she stays off that ticket, old guy. Good to see you're still alive and kicking. I thought maybe you got stranded in the snow and got et. Again.
June 8, 2008 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton's speech didn't change much for me. I started out an Obama supporter but had no particular ill feelings toward HRC. Now I have very little respect for her because I don't like the campaign she ran. Among the things that I did not like (and this is not the only thing), is the use of race-baiting code language by her husband, her campaign and her campaign surrogates. For me, one speech does not erase that shameful behavior. What her speech does for me is give me some hope that she will make a useful contribution to getting Barack elected in November. I am also relieved that I don't have to tiptoe around my hard-line feminist friends anymore.
June 8, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, she race-baited.
No, her speech didn't change my negative views of her. She didn't apologize for race-baiting.
And as for the 53%, er . . . black folks do want to win. And although I personally don't want her near the ticket, most of us know that realistically, after the primaries, white people will feel better voting for Obama if they can vote for her, too. I actually wouldn't mind her being on the ticket myself if I thought she'd actually let Obama be the president.
Oh, and about the 53% . . . where'd that number come from, anyway?
June 8, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a white person and I won't vote for a ticket that includes Hillary.
June 8, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am a Green Person and I won't vote for a ticket that does not include Kermit the Frog.
June 8, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, who would you vote for?
June 8, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I will vote for Obama/Clinton like any sane person ..... but I think Kermit should be in charge of the Environmental Protection Agency!!! Green is Beautiful!
June 8, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
(That was actually directed at out of the loop.) But I'm with you all the way on Kermit. ;)
June 8, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
The belief that more whites will vote for Obama if Hillary is on the ticket is based on smoke. Plenty of racists voted for Hillary because they couldn't see voting for a black man, not because they were in love w/Hillary. They aren't going to vote for a black man. Period. Doesn't matter who the veep is.
There's an old whiter than white war-monger they can vote for and they'll choose him. Like Obama said, people vote on the basis of all sorts of nonsense, despite knowing that it goes against their self-interests.
Hillary will turn off as many voters as she attracts. Obama knows this and I trust Obama to be smarter -- wiser -- than to choose Hillary.
June 8, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
point taken
June 8, 2008 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
her speech did what it was supposed to do--show unity, encourage her supporters to look beyond obama, the black man who some of them do not trust, but look to his policies and his party affiliation which is more in line with their wants than mccain...
as far as the race baiting and the implication that obama is less than for some reason other than the obvious, i do not expect too many african americans to ever hold the clintons in the same regard as they once did..this close race showcased the worst of the clintons....it proves that if you want something bad enough, you will say and do just about anything to get it....
i was proud of hillary to do b/c it must have been difficult to deliver such a perfect speech knowing how she truly feels. i am 100% certain that she will cast her support towards getting obama nominated...i am also 100% certain that if some misfortune befalls obama, she will be all too happy for it....i am also 100% certain that this is politics and she has every bit as much to lose as obama if she doesnt do the right thing and show unwavering support for his candidacy...i am 100% convinced that obama should find a position for her dealing with health care, but keep her away from the VP slot at all cost...i am 100% certain that the dems will reclaim the white house...
i am not african american, i am hispanic and i will never forget the ugly side of the clintons and the hidden ugly side of the dems. ...the truth is, we are a country divided by race and anything less than white have to constantly grovel, go above and beyond, jump through hoops to earn a tiny iota of respect..
i am 100% convinced that i backed the right candidate all along-OBAMA..he never sold his soul for this nomination..he won it fair and square and in the face of adversity on both ends, he stil managed to say and do the right thing, always giving HRC the ultimate respect she obviously deserves..
like a humble servant, i am proud of hrc for her support....i do not and will not ever trust her, but i understand politics and would willingly support her as i have done in the past for any other post except for VP to Obama..the woman is smart, has strong convictions..what's there not to admire? i vote on issues anyway, so regardless, i could not vote against my interest.......
on to the white house DEms...and gracious thank you HRC for your support...
with respect~
June 8, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent post. I am trying to bring myself to this position but I find it very difficult to get past what she has done. I realize you see a person's true character when the chips are down and she has none. I think in time I will get over the sting of her and her campaign's actions but it will take a little while. My enemy's enemy is my friend but she made friends with Melon Scaife and Fox so I'm not sure if that even works.
June 8, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
fran, you sound bitter...barack is as much yours if you are white as he is theirs for being black....barack is a mixed kid is he not???
there is a world out there who is not familiar with the internet, do not listen to the news, is not as obsessed with politics as we are.....i would wager that the majority of blacks who are far removed from the sensationalism is as in awe with the clintons today as they were before this ugliness....you say barack as if it is an ugly "black" word....my people love the clintons too simply because we know them better and things were good when they were in office. i believe some blacks, who believe politics is politics, saw the race-baiting as politics as usual...
the bad news is that some of them do read, do follow the news, do visit the internet and those wounds will take time to heal...
i hate to burst your bubble, but i am not black Fran and i take the clintons (both of them) behaved badly....their behavior unknowingly justify the ignorance of all rev wrights of the world....whether it was a political gamble or not, it looked bad that both clintons all but said that obama is not electable because he is black!
they even used my people to drive that point home-hispanics will not vote for a black man...the media let them get away with it, so they pummelled on with white working class and that is the line that did them in...
Fran, if you do not understand why blacks are visibly angry and feel betrayed by the clintons, then i can only assume that you feel as the clintons did-that a black man had no right to outsmart a white woman at her own "dirty" game. and he did it quite eloquently without selling his soul....the better chess player won...
move on...hrc is smart and she has already moved on...
i say no to VP b/c that will assure a loss for obama..the majority of hrc's supporters will come around, the same way obama supporters would have had to come around in the end. obama needs a vp who can go toe to toe with mccain on foreign policy, is credible, has chemistry with obama and has "strong real viable experience" unlike obama and hrc...
if hrc does her job well, she will move her voters towards him...as a matter of fact, some moved even prior to her speech b/c at the end we all know whats at stake here and it has very little to do with the "blacky Obama"...yeah said it for you..
June 8, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was a great speech in that it did what it needed to do and it was positive--something she struggled with throughout her campaign.
In terms of how I feel about the Clintons....I think their behavior was horrendous, disrespectful and dangerous. They were so narcissistic and felt so entitled to the nomination, they didn't care, she didn't care that she might do serious damage to a fellow Democratic candidate, who happens to be a biracial black man. And she still hasn't stepped up to the plate to acknowledge what Obama's win means in terms of American race-relations. Those 18 million cracks of the patriarchal glass ceiling are not any more or less important then the millions of cracks that shattered the racist glass ceiling.
They gave too much ammunition to the Republicans and relied on all the classic tools a
(and language) of white institutional racism. They remain greatly diminished in my eyes.
June 8, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm fine with Hill and Bill. The idea that they're racist is just beyond the pale. In fact, I suspect that some of their worst gaffes were BECAUSE they are so color-blind.
The only time I felt Hillary even came close to actual race politics was the "working, hard working, white" thing. That's still not something she believes, it's simply supposed to motivate a bloc of voters.
June 8, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have friends that are AA. They say you think the Jews made a quick exodus from Egyp,you never seen people leave a candidate as fast as they left the Clinton's.They remember helping Bill after he was impeached along with moveon.org.
If the AA hadn't rallied around Bill,he was headed out of office.
THE CLINTON'S HAVE LOST 92% OF THEM FOR SURE. ALL BECAUSE HILLARY WANTED TO DIVIDE THE PARTY BY RACE.
June 8, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't or won't speak for all black people. I can only speak for myself and what my friends/family has said. No matter what ignorant michelle babbles about, my family and friends are not online and they, like me, will only listen to the Clinton's once they apologize. Of course, I'm not expecting anything from them. Sen. Clinton ran the same campaign Gov. Clinton did, with the race-baiting, goal post changing, and whining about media mistreatment. SSDD.
June 8, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, her negative campaign might've ruined Barack Obama's chances to win in November by claiming she and McCain has crossed the commander in chef threshold while Obama has not. Her supporters who believed that after hearing it for longer than a year, won't ever support Obama. Too little too late, Hillary.
June 8, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm white as hell and I don't think I can forgive them. I think her speech was excellent in that it tried to get HER VOTERS to come over to Obama. African Americans were not her voters, so she didn't spend any time on them.
The thing that amazes me is that Bill Clinton is reportedly EXTREMELY ANGRY that the Obama campaign "made him out to be a racist"! Holy shit batman - he's serious! I don't think the Clintons are racist except in the sort of unconscious, unintended way that lots of us are. I'm quite sure I'm not immune to it myself, hard as I try to be aware of my attitudes. But they're clearly cynical enough politically to USE and manipulate other people's racism against a black candidate. And if that's not just as bad, then my moral compass is all screwed up.
Hillary's speech satisfied me in terms of doing what she needed to do to help Obama among her supporters. I don't really care about the Clintons beyond that. I don't care whether they're good or evil people or whatever combination. I don't see myself forgiving them until and unless they understand what they did and admit to it and that's not gonna happen. But I don't care and they don't care about that. I just want them to be largely irrelevant to me/us from now on. Hopefully, they will be. They're damn straight closer to irrelevant than they were a year ago.
June 8, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Umm yes ...... your moral compass is all screwed up. If ALL the black people voted for the black .... why is that not racist?? If ALL the women voted for Hillary THAT would be sexist. If ALL the white people voted for the white woman THAT would be racist. But that did not happen, not even close. The most blatant choice made in the state by state votes was that 90% plus blacks voted for the black man ..... yet not a breath about how that looks to everyone else.
June 8, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except you fail to remember that there are a larger number of women than black people. Not to mention the obvious overlap. What are the statistics for her percentage of the white woman vote? It's entirely possible that the actual number of people in each demographic to vote either way are not that far off. I'm too lazy to go find the numbers right now, however.
And I've said this before, and I'll say it again: There is a different between voting to maintain the status quo and voting to break it. Without knowing the intent of the voters, you cannot infer it is a result of sexism and racism. It's a near certainty that some of the voters did so for that reason, but by no means can you generalize that to all.
June 8, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hollywood -- there is a big difference between racism (putting down a group, being negative about them, feeling they are inferior because of their race) and supporting your own kind, be it blacks, or women, or Irish, or Episcopalians, or mountain climbers. A positive desire to support someone because you share history or religion or values is perfectly acceptable and always has been. Some times it's DUMB -- like when you support black/woman just because he/she is a black/woman even if he/she is the worst candidate. (If all else was equal I would have voted for Hillary because I'd love to see a woman succeed - but Hillary wasn't as good a candidate as Obama in my opinion so I voted for him.) ---- But even if you vote for someone just because they are from your group or a group you admire, that's not racism or sexism or religious intolerance, etc. Prejudice or discrimination means someone is put down because of a particular trait, not elevated because of it.
June 8, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. I am not trying to be so narrow. I am aiming at the pretense of 'color blindness' that I see so often used to beat up the innocent. The Republicans use it to pretend that everything is OK now and not lifting a finger is just being fair. The cultural left uses it to make the distance between where we are and where we want to be a complete guilt trip.
When people vote for someone like them, race or gender, it is a very presonal affirmation of pride and hope in themselves. When Clinton and Obama have nearly identical policy positions a voter is probably more purely free to take it personally. I have been listening to black women speak about that issue, what seems more important to them. I think it is cool as hell that America is asking all this in ALL 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico! Good luck to us. The Democratic Party is the heart of the 'more perfect union' we are all headed into. On to November!
June 8, 2008 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, hollywood, what bothers me about this complaint--that black voters in the Democratic primaries are racist because 90% voted for Obama--is that it ignores a few complicating factors:
(1) Black voters have historically had no problem voting for white candidates whom they felt represented their interests. They have, in fact, voted in overwhelming numbers for white candidates--even when a black candidate was available. So, as a voting bloc, it's unfair to characterize black voters as racist.
(2) Early polling (before the Iowa caucus) showed that Sen. Clinton enjoyed a greater percentage of African American voters' support than did Sen. Obama. I have not seen polls about the causes for the dramatic drop-off of Clinton's support from black voters, but my guess is that much of it occurred for two reasons: black voters viewed the Iowa caucus results as evidence that Obama was truly a viable candidate; and many black voters became dismayed and angry at some of the controversial statements made by both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
(Again, I don't know of any polling data to support my assertion, so I admit I can't defend it with anything. I'd love to see some quantified research of this, though.)
So I believe that attributing the 90% black voter support for Obama to racism--if not completely inaccurate--is much, much too simplistic.
June 8, 2008 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was not saying blacks were racist to vote for Obama. I was saying the Clinton's were not racist just for being the white people in the room. Big difference. I hear so much bullshit about the Clintons playing the 'race card' and I want to stop the jump from NOT being for the black guy to being AGAINST all black people. Please understand.
June 8, 2008 10:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course. It's as wrong to claim that Clinton supporters are racist as it is to claim that Obama supporters are sexist.
I just want to be extra clear, because I fear that general racial resentments are building because of flawed reasoning.
June 8, 2008 10:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I fear racial resentments too. I do not think it comes from any kind of reasoning though. The resentment towards the Clintons is irrational and emotional. People rationalize what they feel. Some of them can get very wordy and very creative, but the irony and the danger here is now Obama is up against the REAL racists. Given the historic drama of this election I wish him every good will in overcoming the coming shit storm.
June 8, 2008 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe for a moment the Clintons are racist. But I do believe desperation caused them to make some bad decisions, including race baiting. I remember vividly when I "found out" that latinos didn't like black people. Hilary said "I know... it's sad" Well I didn't know. The latinos I laugh and talk with at work did not let me in on the joke.
And all those "hard working White people" who would not vote for a black man (seriously?), of course this only came up while she was in W. Virginia and Kentucky where this kind of thing would resonate (and we know those two states are the only states that have "hard working White people." Those "hard working White people in, say, OREGON are just posers.) Yeah they race baited. Yeah it was politics. No I don't want her as V.P.
But while the Clintons will probably never be seen in same way as prior to this election by me and many more black Americans, I try to remember that they did do some good and so I don't hate them (although many times during the primary I felt I did).
June 8, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, i won't forget the behavior of the Clintons or their supporters. Now that Barack has won the nomination, i guess i feel more sadness than anger. I wonder would any of the other Democratic contenders have acted this way if they were closer to the nomination and wanted to discredit Barack? It's hard to imagine John Edwards or Dennis Kucinch saying in essence, "vote for me cause i'm white". But, then i never expected this from of ALL PEOPLE, the Clintons. And Hillary's supporters either can't see what they did or don't care! I don't understand that in any way, but racism. They're angry, i understand, but Barack has always treated Hillary with compassion and respect, yet many of her supporters can't see that either. It seems that we black Democratics should examine more closely who our political allies are and what do they really think of us. I will say that if , with the help of corporate news, election fraud, October surprise, and still irrationally pissed-off Hillary supporters john mccain gets the presidency, as the world crumbles around us , Hillaryluvs remember this, WHEN IT HAPPENS TO ME, IT WILL HAPPEN TO YOU!
June 8, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
What the fuck is so awful about saying "hard working white people?" There are many many more poor white people in American than poor black people. Why can't we talk about them? Because some blacks are so bitter and racist they think all whites are rich and happy? I really do not get this whole line of thinking.
June 8, 2008 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Try some black paint, the non bitter type!
June 8, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's very apparent that you don't get it. There's nothing wrong with saying "hard working white people" except in the context that she said it. You won't get that either.
We supported the Clintons whole heartedly for years and Bill got over 80% of the Black vote when he ran for President. When the Clintons went through their difficult times with the scandals and cries for impeachment we supported them. It is difficult for us to see that they would use race baiting in order to win the election. And they did race bait, even though you won't see that either.
June 8, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
That I don't get IT? I think what is under question is the context of race when ALL the blacks vote for the black and need to justify that by saying they now think the Clintons, who spent their lifetimes working to advance civil rights, are now racists. Anyone who can take one step back and look at the contest without their baggage sees the black stampede to Obama as a choice based on race. When the Clintons suggested there is something unfair about that given their long history of black support .... I think they have a point.
June 8, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone?
A bit less shucking and jiving here, please.
HINT: The word racist is over used, and the shock value has long passed. If this fails try my post above.
June 8, 2008 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I never called the Clintons racists. I said they race baited. I see a difference, others do not, the fact is they used other people's racism to garner votes. I have a problem with this and while I can't say it influenced my decision to vote for Obama (I was always his supporter, although I was willing to vote for Clinton if she were the nominee), I believe it has influenced quite a few AA's to turn away from them.
Hillary initially had the majority of Black support at the beginning of the primary. She lost it. I will grant that some may have decided that Obama was electable after Iowa and decided to vote for him for racial pride; however, I believe many more switched from Hillary to Obama after the race baiting. We can agree to disagree, but there is a difference between voting for someone for racial pride and voting against someone for racial prejudice.
June 8, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
hollywood,
It sounds like you are nursing a grudge against black voters in general. This is dangerous, and I think it's a shame, because I believe it is based on some errors in thinking. I hope you read my post upthread and try to keep an open mind. Please make a commitment to yourself to rethink this issue after the anger about Sen. Clinton's loss has healed a bit.
It would be a shame if you have made an erroneous cause-and-effect determination in this specific event (the 2008 Democratic primaries) that leads you to nurse a permanent grudge.
June 8, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not angry about Clinton. I am so very very happy Obama is going to be the next President I can hardly sleep. I would have taken either of them, or both. What I deeply object to is trying to paint the Clintons as race baiting dirty dealers for being against the black guy winning in this one contest. It is a leap too far. It is a prejudice of some kind that needs to be called out for being totally unfair. If we really do want to live in a more perfect world, please quit implying that the Clintons are racist because their opponent was black.
June 8, 2008 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
"...please quit implying that the Clintons are racist because their opponent was black."
Be careful here. A lot of African Americans (and white folks too) genuinely believe they heard race baiting coming from the Clintons. That's not the same thing as saying the Clintons are racists. Nor is it an attempt to discount the Clintons' past advocacy on behalf of African Americans.
Whether they race baited or not is a matter of perception, I guess. Innuendo is a sneaky political tool. When innuendo is used, it's difficult, if not impossible, to prove or disprove intent, so these endless arguments are probably futile.
You obviously feel that folks are perceiving race baiting where there was none. But it's not as if we're trying to be unfair by feeling the way we do. It's what we perceived and how we felt. I appreciate your efforts to the extent that you are trying to persuade people to see things differently. I think that's totally fair. But I resent the assertion that I perceived race baiting simply because the Clintons ran against the black guy. Trust me, in my case, that's not the reason for my perception.
June 8, 2008 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
For hollywood and anyone else who thinks that blacks are racist for voting 90% for Obama, fine, go on and think that. Or, I should say, for hollywood and anyone else who wants to keep swinging that rhetorical club, keep doing it, because as a practical matter, it doesn't matter a damn.
I don't think the Clintons resorted to race-baiting out of desperation. It was a deliberate, calculated strategy, and it actually worked beautifully. Not beautifully enough to overcome the Obama campaign's superior organization, or the Clinton camapign's own ineptitude, but all in all, the race-baiting was the most successful component of her campaign.
How do I feel about it? Angry, and her loss doesn't assuage my anger. However, I know I have to put it aside, at least for now. At the same time, I think it's been a valuable lesson for blacks in America. The idea that Obama may actually become President has had a 9/11-like effect on many white liberals. We always knew the pro-abortion, anti-war, pro-gay rights, anti-black white liberals existed, but we had no idea how widespread the phenomenon is. Now we know.
Whether Obama wins or not, this campaign has reinforced thoughts I've had for some time- the emotional disconnect I and many other blacks have when it comes to this country, and the objectivity that comes along with it, are things that should be cultivated rather than lamented, and we have to stop being the only group of people in this country that actually believes it's not about competition between groups. Everyone else says it, but we are the only ones who actually believe it, and we lose because of it. There is opportunity here for us, if we choose to take advantage of it.
June 8, 2008 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
And oh- I don't think they're racists. I think the triangulation dictated that they use racist tactics, and they had no scruples about doing so. That also applies to their black surrogates like Stephanie Tubbs Jones. She knew exactly what was going on, and enthusiastically helped implement it. It wasn't racism on their part. Just a lust for power.
June 8, 2008 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
So now all the blacks who have been lifelong friends and allies of the Clintons are complicit in "racist tactics" ??? Do you have any idea how laughable that sounds to someone who doesn't see the world through your racial baggage? The things said about the Clintons have been so completely over the top that I am sad that there is so much black racism I never knew existed. When 90% of blacks stampeded to Obama after his win in all white Iowa, I think it was blacks choosing based on the color of someone's skin and not the issues or the record of service. There it is. Deal with it.
June 8, 2008 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hollywood, you say:
"Do you have any idea how laughable that sounds to someone who doesn't see the world through your racial baggage?"
White people often feel that they don't have racial baggage; it's blacks who are always going on about race, right? White folks like you and me just see things objectively, without any of those antiquated subjective filters that these other people have.
I'm sure you mean well, but I find your particular line of reasoning here really noxious. Your obsessive posting on this subject, and your borderline sneers at black voters, suggest strongly that you, like almost all Americans, myself certainly included, have a giant, teetering pile of racial baggage which you are carting around. It might be a good idea to examine it before you go calling other people out.
June 8, 2008 11:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the help Noah. My point is.... while wanting to believe the worst of your enemy in battle, the true blue Obama supporters have stretched interpretation into fact. And now they want it recorded as history. It is sad that wanting to win so bad makes people believe what is helpful to them is actually true. I am also trying to make the point that the real racists in this country are alive and well and lining up to smear Obama with everything they have. Making the Clintons out to be blatant race bait artists at this point is so painfully not the point and not productive. As of Hillary's concession speech, why not focus your passionate minds on the real right wing menace getting ready to beat Obama down.
June 9, 2008 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the biggest disappointment of this primary season is the end of the love affair I had with the Clintons. Guess what...I'm Black. So for me, some of my friends, and some of my family members, that meant supporting Democrats, and especially the Clintons. But not this time.
I went into this thing with my eyes wide open. After the 2000 election, and then the disastrous Iraq war, I said I would never again take my vote so lightly and would become more politically aware. So my first strike against HRC was not her race, despite what some of these commenters have said, it was her short sighted decision to vote for the Iraq war. Yes, I realize that HRC represents New York and that it was a scary time for all Americans, but that's just it. That's when you need to employ your leadership skills and approach a monumental decision with a level head. Its not that I couldn't forgive her for that mistake, because many Democrats made the same one, it was her unwillingness to actually admit that she made the mistake and then dememphasize the fact that despite Barack not having a dog in the fight so to speak (because he was not in the Senate) his prediction of the problems with this war were spot on. I mean, so perceptive that it is scary. So, while I had my doubts about this newcomer, his ability to see, what so many others failed to see despite their years of "experience" made me bend my ear a little more whenever he spoke. Now, even though I liked Barack more at the beginning, I didn't have a problem voting for HRC because I thought she still had other admirable qualities that would make her a good leader. But, as the campaign has progressed, she has left much to be desired.
Let's just leave the race baiting off the table for a minute. Back in NH, I was extremely pissed that she chose to distort his pro-choice record in order to gain votes. I thought that it was dishonest and showed a lack of class. And then, there seemed to be consistent race baiting coming from her surrogates. I gave her the benefit of the doubt because it wasn't coming directly from her mouth, but as time went on, it started to make me feel uncomfortable because it seemed like it was a strategy/tactic. I think what really put me over the top was her comments after the Louisiana primary. To explain her loss, she said that she understood the historic nature of the campaign in why people (Black people) preferred Obama.
I am the first to admit that many Black people voted for Obama because of racial pride, but that was the most condescending thing she could have said. Black people are NOT a monolithic group. It totally ignored the fact, that she still had die hard Black supporters rooting for her, and that maybe people didn't vote for her because they preferred Obama as a candidate in that matchup for nonracial reasons.
All that to say that I don't think either Bill or Hillary are racists, but I do get the sense that they felt Black people "owed" them their vote because of the Clinton presidency, and we were supposed to shut our eyes and ears to their questionable behavior.
June 8, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Clintons weren't being racist -- they were being disloyal and they were inflaming the racism of others for their own personal benefit. That's worse, and it's offensive and harmful to all of us (Living in a racist society hurts all of us, especially the group that is supposedly 'superior')
I don't think an apology - to blacks especially but to all of us - is enough. In fact, I think the only thing that might be appropriate "atonement," if you will, would be for the Clintons to work their heart out -- effectively not in a way that sabotages -- to help get Obama elected. THEN maybe it would be time for some healing discussions.
(And don't be mean about Stephanie Tubbs Jones -- At least SHE, and many others, DO understand about loyalty and committment. I'm sure there were many Clinton supporters who would have held back or endorsed differently if they'd known 1) how the Clintons' campaign would be run and 2) that Barack Obama was going to be the kind of candidate he was. I don't envy them and truly respect those - like Jones, Bayh, Rangel, Rendell - who carried out their committment without becoming divisive and mean-spirited.)
June 8, 2008 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am sorry Elizabeth but I think you are buying into the MSM circus dog and pony show. Most all the breathless speculation about race cards was talking heads talking to keep the drama up. In this corner .... the white woman, and in this corner ...... the black man! Stay tuned through our stupid commercials while we think up new ways to exaggerate and whip it up into a big screaming fight. Look out now, I think the real racists are here to beat the shit out of all of us until November.
June 8, 2008 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
To believe this, you have to believe the huge number of us who perceived race baiting had no personal, independent response to these events. You'd have to believe that we all formed our opinions only after getting our cues from the MSM. You may be right about some people, but not all of us. Not most of us.
I know what I saw and heard. For instance, Mrs. Clinton, during the infamous ABC debate in PA, made a point of bringing up Farrakhan in a completely irrelevant and inexplicable context, and it was obvious that she was doing it to invoke a black man who is controversial and perceived by whites as scary and angry. Her mention of him had nothing to do with the matter being discussed--her intent, to me, was transparent.
June 8, 2008 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
laurajordan said it pretty well, but I just wanted to add that I truly don't need anyone to tell me that some of the things the Clintons & co. said were racially offensive. (Nor do I beleive everything the talking heads say, by the way.) I lived through the 50s and 60s, much of that time in the deep South, and, like many blacks and others who were active in the civil rights movement, I know race-baiting when I see ... and smell it.
Is there a NON-racially-offensive explanation for Bill's comment in South Carolina? Remember -- the question to which he was responding was something like "What do you say that it was 2 of you campaigning against one of him and Obama still won?" And his answer was "Well, Jesse Jackson won in SC too." Doesn't that reasonably interpret to "Oh, don't pay any attention to the result in SC -- it's just a bunch of black people voting for a black candidate." Is there any OTHER way to interpret it?
The Clintons are political animals and they will use almost any 'hook' they can get to put an opponent down. Fine - that's the way the game is played. BUT when the 'hook' is distancing or minimizing someone because of their race, then it's either racism (if you believe it) or race-baiting (if you don't but know that some of your audience does). ------- I think many of us, black and white, believed that the Clintons would never use that particular hook for such purposes. But in my eyes and the eyes of many others, some of whom have posted here, that's exactly what they did.
If you didn't see it, then your arguments make sense and it speaks well for your purity of mind and belief in the goodness of man (joke - not sarcasm), but it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. The whole premise of this thread is "since the Clintons engaged in race-baiting, how do you feel about them now?" It's simply not an arguable point to many of us.
June 8, 2008 11:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr Farrakhan IS scary and angry! Mr Obama's church and pastor made Farrakhan out to be some iconic leader. Yuk. Obama had to walk out of his church. That is sad. Should this be hushed up? Farrakhan is very anti gay. Is this part of Obama's church too? Yuk.
June 8, 2008 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
She brought it up at a time when Farrakhan was NOT a part of the discussion. That's the point I was making. But you didn't acknowledge that. Instead, you, like Clinton, took the opportunity to try to link Obama to Farrakhan. Interesting.
Furthermore, Obama has NO relationship whatsoever with Farrakhan. So what the hell is YOUR point?? Is it necessary to establish a connection here? Why? Are you afraid Farrakhan's views will have an influence on Obama's governing or legislative agenda? If not, this just looks like guilt-by-association, race-baiting crap.
June 8, 2008 11:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Listen, if you hang around with people who make bigoted statements and never make the point either they quit it or you need to move on, then you are after years and years with these people "guilty by association" Obama finally decided in the glare of the media to move away from these associations. Plainly said, if my church was giving awards to and celebrating the work of blatant bigots, I would leave my church immediately. Yes I am afraid that having chosen once not to confront these "agents of intolerance" until force to, I doubt he thinks it matters unless he gets caught. Are you familiar with Farrakhan? Would you invite him to your church? Is he a role model for your children?
June 9, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a 31 y/o black male. I don't think the Clinton's are racist, but I do believe they tried to use race to win the election. Once they realized they lost the black vote after Iowa their strategy was to paint Obama as the black candidate. They hoped by doing so it would create a backlash amongst white voters.
What really upset me most about Hillary was her cheer leading for John McCain and basically saying only she and McCain were qualified to be president. I would have no problem if she just said she was more qualified or even that Obama was not qualified to be president. But to say that McCain is the only other candidate qualified at a time when it was increasingly likely that Obama would be the nominee really put me off of her.
I am a forgiving person and was willing to set my grudge aside on the last day of the primary when Obama reached the magic number. But when she came out and said "she doesn't know what she's going to do now", and did not congratulate or acknowledge that Obama had the delegates to be the nominee, she lost all favor with me.
The fact that she had to be pushed by her supporters to finally concede and acknowledge that Obama won, took something away from the speech she gave. Given the circumstances I think she delivered a good speech as a politician, but you could tell her heart really wasn't in it.
Whether or not I will like her or Bill Clinton again really depends on how well she campaigns for Obama until November. I will be watching her closely to see if she or Bill are trying to sabotage Obama's campaign, or if they seem sincere in their desire for a democrat to win the white house this year (not 2012).
June 8, 2008 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, it's over so this rehash is of limited value.
Basically just before South Carolina when HRC was falling behind badly, she looked around for a way to criticize Obama (pre Wright). One way was the Commander in Chief dig, another was the "might be a Christian" dig, and another was the he only here cuz he's black dig. She (and Bill, and Ferraro and Wolfson) tried them all and they didn't get much traction. For a while she had no good message. "Experience" fell flat during a change election and "Ready on Day One" was less impressive when she lost Iowa on day one. Eventually she morphed into Norma Rae, and that slowed the hemorrhage in PA, OH, TX and a little in IN. It wasn't enough.
Did she try out the race card. Yeah, a little. Kinda clumsily. Is she a racist. No. Did it obliterate her black support. Yup. Did it get a few white votes. Probably. Did it give a lot of blacks and a lot of whites, Asians and Latinos who dislike politicians (of any color or even half-color) who play the race card a reason to support Obama. Yup. Smart move. Nope. She just didn't have another one.
June 8, 2008 11:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great comment, eamseneca, damn straight rehash. The only thing you got wrong is saying it's of limited value.
June 8, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
"There it is. Deal with it."
There's nothing to deal with. As I said, as a practical matter, it matters a damn. If you want to think that 90+% of all the black people who voted in the Democratic promary are racists, go ahead.
"So now all the blacks who have been lifelong friends and allies of the Clintons are complicit in "racist tactics" ??? Do you have any idea how laughable that sounds to someone who doesn't see the world through your racial baggage?"
Not all, but some, yes. And it doesn't sound laughable at all to a whole lot of black people...like many of those who live in the districts of Tubbs-Jones and Sheila Jackson-Lee, for instance. When their constituients pay them back by voting them out of office, and Hillary won't be able to help them. Remember, the majority of the people in their districts are part of that 92% of "black racists" who voted for Obama, LOL.
That's the thing, hollywood. You and people like you can flog all that up-is-down racial rhetoric in which I'm a "racist", and in which the only racism that exists is black racism that exists is black racism, but it's just rhetoric. When it comes down to it, it has no practical negative effect on blacks in Amrica. If anything, it will have a positive effect by convincing us that we should indeed cultivate the emotional disconnect many of us have in regard to this country, and motivate us to see that it's all about group competition, and stop us from being duped into thinking otherwise. So...keep it up, please.
June 8, 2008 11:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
"There it is. Deal with it."
There's nothing to deal with. As I said, as a practical matter, it matters a damn. If you want to think that 90+% of all the black people who voted in the Democratic promary are racists, go ahead.
"So now all the blacks who have been lifelong friends and allies of the Clintons are complicit in "racist tactics" ??? Do you have any idea how laughable that sounds to someone who doesn't see the world through your racial baggage?"
Not all, but some, yes. And it doesn't sound laughable at all to a whole lot of black people...like many of those who live in the districts of Tubbs-Jones and Sheila Jackson-Lee, for instance. When their constituients pay them back by voting them out of office, Hillary won't be able to help them. Remember, the majority of the people in their districts are part of that 92% of "black racists" who voted for Obama, LOL.
That's the thing, hollywood. You and people like you can flog all that up-is-down racial rhetoric in which I'm a "racist", and in which the only racism that exists is black racism that exists is black, but it's just rhetoric. When it comes down to it, it has no practical negative effect on blacks in America. Sorry. If anything, it will have a positive effect by convincing us that we should indeed cultivate the emotional disconnect many of us have in regard to this country, and motivate us to see that it's all about group competition, and stop us from being duped into thinking otherwise. So...keep it up, please.
June 8, 200