Poll: Racial views steer some white Dems away from Obama

[CptSternn]

http://tinyurl.com/3rblkv

WASHINGTON (AP) — Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent," responsible for their own troubles.

The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 — about two and one-half percentage points.

Certainly, Republican John McCain has his own obstacles: He's an ally of an unpopular president and would be the nation's oldest first-term president. But Obama faces this: 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents.

More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views.

Such numbers are a harsh dose of reality in a campaign for the history books. Obama, the first black candidate with a serious shot at the presidency, accepted the Democratic nomination on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, a seminal moment for a nation that enshrined slavery in its Constitution.

"There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean there's only a few bigots," said Stanford political scientist Paul Sniderman who helped analyze the exhaustive survey.

The pollsters set out to determine why Obama is locked in a close race with McCain even as the political landscape seems to favor Democrats. President Bush's unpopularity, the Iraq war and a national sense of economic hard times cut against GOP candidates, as does that fact that Democratic voters outnumber Republicans.

The findings suggest that Obama's problem is close to home — among his fellow Democrats, particularly non-Hispanic white voters. Just seven in 10 people who call themselves Democrats support Obama, compared to the 85 percent of self-identified Republicans who back McCain.

The survey also focused on the racial attitudes of independent voters because they are likely to decide the election.

Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown.

Not all whites are prejudiced. Indeed, more whites say good things about blacks than say bad things, the poll shows. And many whites who see blacks in a negative light are still willing or even eager to vote for Obama.

On the other side of the racial question, the Illinois Democrat is drawing almost unanimous support from blacks, the poll shows, though that probably wouldn't be enough to counter the negative effect of some whites' views.

Race is not the biggest factor driving Democrats and independents away from Obama. Doubts about his competency loom even larger, the poll indicates. More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that.

Three in 10 of those Democrats who don't trust Obama's change-making credentials say they plan to vote for McCain.

Still, the effects of whites' racial views are apparent in the polling.

Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama's support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.

But in an election without precedent, it's hard to know if such models take into account all the possible factors at play.

The AP-Yahoo News poll used the unique methodology of Knowledge Networks, a Menlo Park, Calif., firm that interviews people online after randomly selecting and screening them over telephone. Numerous studies have shown that people are more likely to report embarrassing behavior and unpopular opinions when answering questions on a computer rather than talking to a stranger.

Other techniques used in the poll included recording people's responses to black or white faces flashed on a computer screen, asking participants to rate how well certain adjectives apply to blacks, measuring whether people believe blacks' troubles are their own fault, and simply asking people how much they like or dislike blacks.

"We still don't like black people," said John Clouse, 57, reflecting the sentiments of his pals gathered at a coffee shop in Somerset, Ohio.

Given a choice of several positive and negative adjectives that might describe blacks, 20 percent of all whites said the word "violent" strongly applied. Among other words, 22 percent agreed with "boastful," 29 percent "complaining," 13 percent "lazy" and 11 percent "irresponsible." When asked about positive adjectives, whites were more likely to stay on the fence than give a strongly positive assessment.

Among white Democrats, one third cited a negative adjective and, of those, 58 percent said they planned to back Obama.

The poll sought to measure latent prejudices among whites by asking about factors contributing to the state of black America. One finding: More than a quarter of white Democrats agree that "if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites."

Those who agreed with that statement were much less likely to back Obama than those who didn't.

Among white independents, racial stereotyping is not uncommon. For example, while about 20 percent of independent voters called blacks "intelligent" or "smart," more than one third latched on the adjective "complaining" and 24 percent said blacks were "violent."

Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they "try harder."

The survey broke ground by incorporating images of black and white faces to measure implicit racial attitudes, or prejudices that are so deeply rooted that people may not realize they have them. That test suggested the incidence of racial prejudice is even higher, with more than half of whites revealing more negative feelings toward blacks than whites.

Researchers used mathematical modeling to sort out the relative impact of a huge swath of variables that might have an impact on people's votes — including race, ideology, party identification, the hunger for change and the sentiments of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's backers.

Just 59 percent of her white Democratic supporters said they wanted Obama to be president. Nearly 17 percent of Clinton's white backers plan to vote for McCain.

Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well, a finding that suggests many of her supporters in the primaries — particularly whites with high school education or less — were motivated in part by racial attitudes.

The survey of 2,227 adults was conducted Aug. 27 to Sept. 5. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

[CptSternn]

Of course, we knew this was true. That being said look at the attached graph in this article:

http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/nws/electio...race_obama.jpg

That speaks for itself. According to the republicans, blacks are lazy, stupid, violent criminals who are not trustworthy.

[MegearaErotica]

I don't think it's all racism that's keeping them from voting for him. Maybe they think, like I do, that a black president would do us good, but don't think that Obama is the right man for the job...

[Godslayer Jillian]

Why not? (filler)

[MegearaErotica]

I'm not exactly sure but something about him strikes me as off, and normally my instincts are right. It might have something to do with his repetitive line about change coming.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

I'm not exactly sure but something about him strikes me as off, and normally my instincts are right. It might have something to do with his repetitive line about change coming.

... You mean the basis for voting for a neo-Fascist piece of shit over at least creating a cultural landmark of equality is his aura?

[Disaffected Shoelaces]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

I'm not exactly sure but something about him strikes me as off, and normally my instincts are right.

I always wondered what kind of people keep clairvoyants and palm-readers in money. Thanks for resolving that mystery.

[MegearaErotica]

Nice you guys, but I'm not old enough to vote anyways, and I never said I'd vote for McCain or Clinton. I would vote for Bob Barr, who is a libertarian. I also do believe in latent psychic abilities... I read tarot and follow my horoscope.

[Joker_in_the_Pack]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

I also do believe in latent psychic abilities... I read tarot and follow my horoscope.

I've got some lovely beachfront property in Arizona I'd love to sell you.

[MegearaErotica]

Only if it's in Fairyville... rofl.

[chelseagirl]

Well, I don't like Obama-and it's not because of his race. But, I don't like McCain either, and I really dislike Palin.

It's a shame the US is so stuck in a two party system. We need MORE CHOICES, DAMMIT!

[Despanan]

I'm not quite sure I believe that yahoo news poll. 40% of all white house holds sounds a bit far-fetched. I'm sure his race will be a factor for many people, but I don't think it's the crippling dis-advantage that article makes it out to be.

Plus, Internet polls also told me that I was Naruto, when I am quite clearly Goku. Obviously the internet is made of lies.


...

Kamahameha.

[chelseagirl]

I truly believe that Obama is going to be our next president. I will be surprised if McCain is elected.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

I would vote for Bob Barr, who is a libertarian.

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

I also do believe in latent psychic abilities... I read tarot and follow my horoscope.

Just when you thought gullibility had reached its pinnacle...

[MegearaErotica]

Hey, Bobb Barr has a lot of good moral values and I like his campaign style.

[viscus]

Obama isn't perfect, but he's the best choice we've had in a while.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

Hey, Bobb Barr has a lot of good moral values and I like his campaign style.

Thus you're throwing your vote away for a fringe candidate with absolutely no hope of winning?

Why not just vote for Ron Paul or Hulk Hogan? Hell cast your vote for Jesus. It'll come out to the same thing in the end.

[Jonathan]

It amazes me that race is an issue in 2008. **need more coffee**

I've heard my grandparents talk about it, and it is utterly perplexing. I love them and all, but it is disapointing whenever it comes up.

Maybe it is a generational thing, and eventually we'll be free of it.

I'm not particularly impressed by any of the candidates, but that has nothing to do with race or gender. Or how they smile or how I "feel" when I look at their posters.

---

If you vote for a main party instead of the fringe guy you like, and the other party wins anyway, you sold yourself out for nothing. It isn't like you get a special cup or trophy if the candidate you vote for wins it.

Vote for whoever the hell you want. I only hope you do it for the right reason.

[MegearaErotica]

Originally Posted by Despanan

Thus you're throwing your vote away for a fringe candidate with absolutely no hope of winning?

Why not just vote for Ron Paul or Hulk Hogan? Hell cast your vote for Jesus. It'll come out to the same thing in the end.

Let me say this once more. I am too young to vote at this time, but if I could vote it would be for Bobb Barr. I wouldn't care if he has no hope of winning. He's still the best candidate in my opinion.

[PortraitOfSanity]

He's a nutcase. The entire Libertarian platform is ridiculous.

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

Let me say this once more. I am too young to vote at this time, but if I could vote it would be for Bobb Barr. I wouldn't care if he has no hope of winning. He's still the best candidate in my opinion.

But do you get what Despanan is saying?

It's like this -

You can opt for a write in candidate if ye want. You can put any name ye want on there and send that in for your vote for President. I'm sure there are DOZENS of more qualified, better educated, smarter persons in America whose name ye could put on the write in ballot and cast a morally superior and intellectually better choice for President.

...but your vote will count for nothing other than a small personal political statement which the overall outcome will be a sleazy scumbag might take office because of your lack of positive action.

Thats what happened with Ralph Nader. Hell, I like the guy, but he siphoned off enough votes during the last election to keep bush in office.

Sure voting for him is a personal statement, but the outcome is the worst possible candidate takes office because your personal statement is short sighted in the grand scheme of things.

It happens everywhere, Ireland included. We have a half dozen 'Republican' parties here. Each have a small voter base. If all worked together to support one candidate we could have someone elected. Only problem is each group bashes the other and tells their people to only support their candidate for moral reasons. In the end none of the candidates ever get elected to anything and the same crowd maintain power.

*Please note Republicans in Ireland are the exact opposite of the ones in America - we are left wing socialists here, who still abide by the original meaning of the term Republican, not the bastard blasphemous incarnation which is has morphed into in America.

At the end of the day ye have to make a decision - is your personal political statement which no one will ever know about more important that the real issues at hand?

You can support another candidate verbally, ethically, and morally - but on election day make sure that your vote counts for something, don't throw it away - thats exact what the current powers that be want.

[MegearaErotica]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

But do you get what Despanan is saying?

It's like this -

You can opt for a write in candidate if ye want. You can put any name ye want on there and send that in for your vote for President. I'm sure there are DOZENS of more qualified, better educated, smarter persons in America whose name ye could put on the write in ballot and cast a morally superior and intellectually better choice for President.

...but your vote will count for nothing other than a small personal political statement which the overall outcome will be a sleazy scumbag might take office because of your lack of positive action.
.

Yes I understand what he was saying but in my opinion, both the main choices are sleazy scumbags and there really is no lesser evil, so I might as well show my support to someone I agree with. If there wasn't anyone I remotely liked on the ballot, I wouldn't vote.

[Slap Your Love]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

Let me say this once more. I am too young to vote at this time, but if I could vote it would be for Bobb Barr. I wouldn't care if he has no hope of winning. He's still the best candidate in my opinion.

That's who I'm voting for.

[MegearaErotica]

See, other people are voting for him.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by MegearaErotica

there really is no lesser evil,

There is, it's Obama.