Why Obama will lose in the fall

[Miss P]

Let's assume that the candidates are roughly even at the moment.  That's already taken into account racism of all stripes.  Now what trends can we identify?  People are growing more concerned about the economy.  I would think that this would tip the rough parity in Obama's favor (due to the fact that people tend to lean Democrat when economic matters are the focus).  Anyone disagree?

Not I.  But I am concerned about the way McCain and Palin have been able to repeat lies that hurt Obama with relative impunity.  See, e.g., http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/opinion/21rich.html?em (describing some of the lies and why their general acceptance is such a worrying trend).

[Harvey Dent]

Let's assume that the candidates are roughly even at the moment.  That's already taken into account racism of all stripes.  Now what trends can we identify?  People are growing more concerned about the economy.  I would think that this would tip the rough parity in Obama's favor (due to the fact that people tend to lean Democrat when economic matters are the focus).  Anyone disagree?

Not I.  But I am concerned about the way McCain and Palin have been able to repeat lies that hurt Obama with relative impunity.  See, e.g., http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/opinion/21rich.html?em (describing some of the lies and why their general acceptance is such a worrying trend).

Okay but to what degree is this a new development and to what degree are such things already built into the polls?

[Miss P]

Okay but to what degree is this a new development and to what degree are such things already built into the polls?

It is a fairly new development, one that has led to McCain's recent surge.  It also points to an effective technique at the Republicans' disposal that could be applied closer to the election, targeting different groups of people.

[vercingetorix]

i have included links to recent articles outlining a pervasive latino and asian racism against blacks specifically. you can choose to ignore those, although i think you do that at your peril (both in terms of its impact on the election and just in general as a perceptive, all around good person).  i have admitted that white racism continues to be a problem, though not on a scale purported by the left. 

I don't know what good you think it is going to do to continue to call people racist, but you should go on by all means.

WRT the scale of white racism, I am sure you've read this new study: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/20/could-obamas-race-cost-him-the-election/.


this is central to my point MissP.  you don't think it is any good pointing out that other groups are racist and yet the left continually hyperbolizes white male racism.  your link only underlines how obsessed white, and liberal white males in particular, are at pointing out how pervasive white racism is (and i think it bear repeating once again, since people distort just about everything on these boards, that i do think white racism still exits, just not to the extent people think it does and it is certainly not an institutional racism, thankfully that is a thing of the past).  they (and you) are quite uncomfortable talking about how much more overt racism is in other ethnic groups.  it is, as i pointed out, the pink elephant in the room. 

[vercingetorix]

i have included links to recent articles outlining a pervasive latino and asian racism against blacks specifically. you can choose to ignore those, although i think you do that at your peril (both in terms of its impact on the election and just in general as a perceptive, all around good person).  i have admitted that white racism continues to be a problem, though not on a scale purported by the left. 

I don't know what good you think it is going to do to continue to call people racist, but you should go on by all means.

WRT the scale of white racism, I am sure you've read this new study: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/20/could-obamas-race-cost-him-the-election/.

as for your fannie/mac argument, i think it is flawed.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/will092108.php3
i cannot pretend to put it more eloquently than one of my heroes George F. Will.

I am not sure what you think my "argument" is.  I was answering your question with facts, and I haven't really made any arguments.  I do agree (perhaps I didn't state so explicitly) that government backing of private investment is both bad for the economy and a moral hazard.  I am not sure what else you want from me.  Of course, the implicit government guarantees did nothing to prevent Fannie and Freddie from being so reckless.  I think you'll find, however, that other organizations that did not have these guarantees (AIG, Lehman, Bear, Merrill, et al.) were also reckless.  You can't, therefore, attribute Fannie and Freddie's fall to government action (except inasmuch as you are referring to their formal privatization in the 1960s and the dismantling of the regulatory regime throughout the last several decades).   

look.  this is central to my point.  you say on the one hand that calling people racist doesn't amount to guacamole and then you cite a poll that states white people are racist.  this is my problem with liberals, and white male liberals in particular.  as i have said ad nauseum on these boards, i concede that white racism still exists. however it is hyperbolized by the media (speaking of fear mongering) and used as a wedge issue.  institutionalized racism simply doesn't exist anymore (thank God).  what is never discussed/dismissed out of hand by liberals is the existence of a very health racism in other ethnic groups.  this is the pink elephant in the room to which i was referring. it is also a hilarious double-standard.  arguments that you somehow have to be in a position of influence to be racist are ridiculous and fail on their face.  espousing such positions, may actually cost Obama the election (i.e. ignoring the significance of these deeply held cultural convictions). i could include the black racism embraced by the likes of reverend Wright, but that is for another board entirely. 

[Harvey Dent]

Okay but to what degree is this a new development and to what degree are such things already built into the polls?

It is a fairly new development, one that has led to McCain's recent surge.  It also points to an effective technique at the Republicans' disposal that could be applied closer to the election, targeting different groups of people.

You think it's new?  I think Obama has had people whispering quietly about him for quite some time.  Certainly during the primaries.

[Harvey Dent]

That whites have no monopoly on racism is, in my humble opinion, an uncontroversial statement. 

[pig floyd]

That whites have no monopoly on racism is, in my humble opinion, an uncontroversial statement. 

I was trying to read Vercing's post into the form of "White people aren't the only racist people, therefore ___________."

Yeah.

[Miss P]

i have included links to recent articles outlining a pervasive latino and asian racism against blacks specifically. you can choose to ignore those, although i think you do that at your peril (both in terms of its impact on the election and just in general as a perceptive, all around good person).  i have admitted that white racism continues to be a problem, though not on a scale purported by the left. 

I don't know what good you think it is going to do to continue to call people racist, but you should go on by all means.

WRT the scale of white racism, I am sure you've read this new study: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/20/could-obamas-race-cost-him-the-election/.

this is central to my point MissP.  you don't think it is any good pointing out that other groups are racist and yet the left continually hyperbolizes white male racism.  your link only underlines how obsessed white, and liberal white males in particular, are at pointing out how pervasive white racism is (and i think it bear repeating once again, since people distort just about everything on these boards, that i do think white racism still exits, just not to the extent people think it does and it is certainly not an institutional racism, thankfully that is a thing of the past).  they (and you) are quite uncomfortable talking about how much more overt racism is in other ethnic groups.  it is, as i pointed out, the pink elephant in the room. 

For goodness' sake, learn to quote, man. 

I think you're wrong on many counts.  (1) You overestimate Latino and Asian racism; (2) you underestimate white racism; (3) it's less worthwhile to talk about the racial biases of a small group of voters than it is to talk about the racial biases of a large group of voters; and (4) institutional, not personal, racism is the primary form of racism that exists today (you may be confusing it with de jure racism).

I am not in the slightest bit uncomfortable talking about racial bias in any form.  I just don't think that racism of Asian and Latino voters is going to be decisive in this election.  I also doubt that overt white racism will be decisive, though certainly there is some indication that a significant number of married white women and some white working-class Democrats have refused to vote for Obama because of his race.  You will not find similar statistics connecting Asian and Latino racism to this election outside of the Puerto Rican primary.  (You may argue that this is because of a bias among researchers, but, to believe you, liberal whites are obsessed with racial guilt so I don't see why they wouldn't feel redeemed by such studies if they came to the conclusions you presume.)

[Miss P]

look.  this is central to my point.  you say on the one hand that calling people racist doesn't amount to guacamole and then you cite a poll that states white people are racist.  this is my problem with liberals, and white male liberals in particular.  as i have said ad nauseum on these boards, i concede that white racism still exists. however it is hyperbolized by the media (speaking of fear mongering) and used as a wedge issue.  institutionalized racism simply doesn't exist anymore (thank God).  what is never discussed/dismissed out of hand by liberals is the existence of a very health racism in other ethnic groups.  this is the pink elephant in the room to which i was referring. it is also a hilarious double-standard.  arguments that you somehow have to be in a position of influence to be racist are ridiculous and fail on their face.  espousing such positions, may actually cost Obama the election (i.e. ignoring the significance of these deeply held cultural convictions). i could include the black racism embraced by the likes of reverend Wright, but that is for another board entirely. 

I don't plan to parse this long enough to figure out if you are trying to make a different point than you did in the post I quoted.  Let me know.