Chris Matthews: Obama’s Critics Are Driven By Racism

[Jhhnn]

Maybe in your fantasy land but in reality, according to Gallup, Clinton captured 88% of black voters in 1992, Obama had 99% in 2008.

The point is what, exactly? Black people have voted overwhelmingly Democratic since LBJ, with varying degrees of enthusiasm.

So did blacks vote for Obama because he's also black, or was it just that Repubs had gotten uglier to them in 16 years?

 

[Incorruptible]

And exactly which ones are opposing him because he is black?

A minority of them who are idiots and backwards. There are many patriots who oppose him because of his policies and his disregard for the US Constitution.

His percentage was about the same as every democratic candidate, why do you ask? Clinton, Gore, and Kerry all hit about 90%. Obama was slightly higher.

Only on ATPN would a bunch of white guys be sitting around telling each other how easy the black folk have it. Unbelievable.

Only on ATPN would a bunch of white liberals still defend obama after everything he has done.

Him being black didn't exactly hurt him since he got around 95% of the black vote and his supporters defend him all the time since they're afraid of being called racist.

 

[fskimospy]

Maybe in your fantasy land but in reality, according to Gallup, Clinton captured 88% of black voters in 1992, Obama had 99% in 2008.

LOL. You of course mysteriously neglect to mention that Clinton got 96% of black voters in 1996. So Obama's massive black advantage is a 3% increase over Clinton in 13% of the electorate. Are you fucking kidding me? Yeah, it is totally due to his magical black advantage.

You guys are fucking clowns. Again, only on atpn are a bunch of white guys whining about how good the black man has it.

 

[trenchfoot]

LOL, I've been following this thread and laughing all the way. Splitting hairs and pontificating on the evils of the Obama beast without any solid proof of how his leadership is somehow destroying America from the inside out is hilarious.

I recall how all of those many revered conservative pundits swore on anything holy that Obama was going to sink the ship of state in his first month in office. Well, the passage of time has proven that all of it, ALL of it was just them peddling fear and hate to dismantle Obama's term in office and to prevent him from being elected and from being re-elected.

All of those horrorific bedtime stories that these conservative talking heads spouted and shreiked on about, like how Obama was the devil's spawn masquerading as a Christian who would destroy the very fabric of what our nation was built upon, and how he is a closet communist/muslim waiting for the right moment to "destroy America as we know it" have been proven false beyond the pale. Yet, these accusations have taken on a life of its own through the years.

Along with all of that hate filled propaganda is the persistent *wink wink* oblique racist coded references to how Obama's ethnicity is the singular reason of why he is unworthy to lead our nation. Most, if not all of those conservative pundits groping for market share went/are on that route.

It's common knowledge that is impossible to simply ignore. There's no escape clause here. There's no denying that racism is being used to defile and defame Obama's character, his political leanings and his legacy.

So here we have the conservative pundits again shouting to the heavens how "Obamacare" is going to "blah blah blah blah.......". And just like all those other fairy tales that is repeating itself from when Social Security, Medicare/aid etc. was being debated, this too will prove to be just a pack of lies dreamt up by those conservative figureheads who always use fear and hate to drive their agenda.

What then, do these hate mongers have left to scare people into opposing Obama and in turn the Democrat's agenda to uplift the middle class and provide avenues for the poor to work their way out of poverty when all of those horror stories about Obama have withered on the vine?

Obviously, what works best amongst the uninformed and the gullible who have been convinced beyond doubt that the devil incarnate in the White House is out to get them, and the race card, subtley handled as it is, is as effective to use as any other ploy the conservative leadership is now employing. It's just too tempting a tool to leave on the shelf.

 

[ivwshane]

A minority of them who are idiots and backwards. There are many patriots who oppose him because of his policies and his disregard for the US Constitution.



Only on ATPN would a bunch of white liberals still defend obama after everything he has done.

Him being black didn't exactly hurt him since he got around 95% of the black vote and his supporters defend him all the time since they're afraid of being called racist.

Are any of those people in congress? If so, who? I want names, not generalities. After all isn't that the issue, that too broad of a stroke is being used to label the right? So let's get it out in the open and agree on who the racist in congress are.

 

[monovillage]

Oh look, another horrible racist talking about Obama risking impeachment.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dennis-k...round-congress-on-syria-he-risks-impeachment/

Former Democratic congressman Dennis Kucinich joined Hannity guest host Tucker Carlson on Friday night to say that if President Obama goes around Congress to take unilateral military action on Syria, he risks impeachment for going against the Constitution.

Those horrible hidden racists!

 

[ivwshane]

Oh look, another horrible racist talking about Obama risking impeachment.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dennis-k...round-congress-on-syria-he-risks-impeachment/



Those horrible hidden racists!

Not really. Nice try though.

 

[monovillage]

Not really. Nice try though.

One of the claims that Matthews made about racists was they were "talking about impeachment" which is exactly what Kucinich was talking about in my link. Criticism of Obama is usually politically motivated, not racially motivated. Just because you get a tingle running up your leg when Obama talks doesn't mean that anyone that doesn't tingle for Obama is a racist.

 

[bpatters69]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/chris-matthews-obamas-critics-are-driven-by-racism

Hey Chris, you're way off base here. There are people being honest today, and they don't want him impeached...


http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.c...icial-visited-by-secret-service-for?ref=fpblg

YAWN.......

Another lame lib defensive move... Here is how to tell when a lib is wrong - they blame you for racism! Pathetic.

 

[boomerang]

This racist angle is just a subset of the progressive mindset.

1. They love Obama because it's so historic to have our first black president and it's so cool to have voted for him, blah, blah, blah.
2. They consider themselves to be highly intelligent with superior thought processes.
3. Therefore, logic dictates that everyone must love Obama too.

If others don't love Obama, there must be an explanation for that. What could that be? The convenient answer is that it's because of the color of his skin. They can't be wrong because they are highly intelligent. This tidies things up very neatly in their minds. Simple and concise.

I blame this type of thinking on our schools. They're churning them out by the millions.

 

[TerryMathews]

Few Repub leaders & pundits, at this point, are actually racist. They exploit racist sentiment in their political base ruthlessly & cynically. They play for the chump vote every chance they get.

Ah, so then you agree that Matthews is full of shit.

The point is what, exactly? Black people have voted overwhelmingly Democratic since LBJ, with varying degrees of enthusiasm.

So did blacks vote for Obama because he's also black, or was it just that Repubs had gotten uglier to them in 16 years?

I don't think anyone can truly answer that question. Both are possibilities and I'm sure they both contributed to some degree.

On some level, being black helped Obama with black voters. You're head is in the sand if you believe "He's one of us" never came up with any black voter.

And this is getting way off the point that being black did not hurt Obama politically. His policies hurt him.

 

[TerryMathews]

LOL. You of course mysteriously neglect to mention that Clinton got 96% of black voters in 1996. So Obama's massive black advantage is a 3% increase over Clinton in 13% of the electorate. Are you fucking kidding me? Yeah, it is totally due to his magical black advantage.

You guys are fucking clowns. Again, only on atpn are a bunch of white guys whining about how good the black man has it.

I didn't fail to mention anything I did an apples to apples comparison. Gallup doesn't have 2012 demographics available yet.

They were both first term elections of democrats. That was as fair as I could make it.

 

[fskimospy]

I didn't fail to mention anything I did an apples to apples comparison. Gallup doesn't have 2012 demographics available yet.

They were both first term elections of democrats. That was as fair as I could make it.

How would that be as fair as you could make it? That would imply that the electorate in 1992 was approximately the same as the electorate in 2008 when we know for a fact that isn't true. Additionally, 1992 was a 3 candidate race.

That is the opposite of fair.

This of course also presupposes that black people were more likely to vote for Obama but that white people were no less likely to do so, which is a highly dubious assumption considering the political science literature on the subject.

Sometimes threads like this go a long way in explaining other insane threads on this board. There are apparently a notable set of posters who think that in America being black is an advantage. Baffling.

 

[Jaskalas]

Chris Matthews: Hitler never used chemical weapons

Fascinating topic from Mathews. Apparently he's quite the war hawk now. Going so far as to say MAD won't work for Iran's nukes. Of course I've always shared similar concerns.

 

[Incorruptible]

Oh look, another horrible racist talking about Obama risking impeachment.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/dennis-k...round-congress-on-syria-he-risks-impeachment/



Those horrible hidden racists!

Don't expect the left to call him out. He's one of them so it's alright.

 

[TerryMathews]

How would that be as fair as you could make it? That would imply that the electorate in 1992 was approximately the same as the electorate in 2008 when we know for a fact that isn't true. Additionally, 1992 was a 3 candidate race.

That is the opposite of fair.

This of course also presupposes that black people were more likely to vote for Obama but that white people were no less likely to do so, which is a highly dubious assumption considering the political science literature on the subject.

Sometimes threads like this go a long way in explaining other insane threads on this board. There are apparently a notable set of posters who think that in America being black is an advantage. Baffling.

And what sample should I choose? You make it sound like I ignored a better election for comparison purposes.

 

[fskimospy]

And what sample should I choose? You make it sound like I ignored a better election for comparison purposes.

I don't even know what you're trying to prove.

Percentage of the black vote over the last 4 elections:

1996: 96%
2000: 95%
2004: 93%
2008: 99%

None of that takes into account the fact that Gore and Kerry lost, which likely means that they were modestly less appealing candidates so you could expect slightly lower percentages for them.

This basically means that Obama's 'black advantage' is somewhere around 3% in 13% of the electorate. That means that even if you're 100% right Obama's additional percentage from the shift was 0.4% of the vote. STOP THE PRESSES. AND AGAIN, that doesn't even take into account white voters being less likely to vote for him.

Seriously, just stop. Clearly being black is such a huge advantage for presidential candidates that we've had exactly one elected in 225 years.

 

[waggy]

Chris Matthews: Hitler never used chemical weapons

Fascinating topic from Mathews. Apparently he's quite the war hawk now. Going so far as to say MAD won't work for Iran's nukes. Of course I've always shared similar concerns.

the guy has no clue on reality. also millions of jews would disagree with no chemical weapons..oh wait they would but they are dead..by chemical weapons.

 

[Svnla]

<snip>
Seriously, just stop. Clearly being black is such a huge advantage for presidential candidates that we've had exactly one elected in 225 years.

To be fair, blacks and women did not get to vote (without any restriction/harrashment) until 20th century.

 

[cubby1223]

Seriously, just stop. Clearly being black is such a huge advantage for presidential candidates that we've had exactly one elected in 225 years.

Nobody said it was such a huge advantage for presidential candidates. All anyone ever said was it was an advantage for this one candidate.

Your lack of ability to comprehend is disturbingly poor.

For the entire history of the U.S. up until 2008 we have had zero female presidential candidates, and one female vice-presidential candidate on a losing ticket (major parties only). Then suddenly in 2008 the Presidential race was basically going to be won by the Dems, the choice was between a woman and a black man. Even on the Republican side there was a woman for the V.P. candidacy.

In the year when voters in this country were ready, willing, and wanting to vote for someone who was not a white male, you're going to sit there and argue that Obama being black was not an advantage for him starting with the push to be a candidate in the Democratic primary?

 

[TerryMathews]

I don't even know what you're trying to prove.

Percentage of the black vote over the last 4 elections:

1996: 96%
2000: 95%
2004: 93%
2008: 99%

None of that takes into account the fact that Gore and Kerry lost, which likely means that they were modestly less appealing candidates so you could expect slightly lower percentages for them.

This basically means that Obama's 'black advantage' is somewhere around 3% in 13% of the electorate. That means that even if you're 100% right Obama's additional percentage from the shift was 0.4% of the vote. STOP THE PRESSES. AND AGAIN, that doesn't even take into account white voters being less likely to vote for him.

Seriously, just stop. Clearly being black is such a huge advantage for presidential candidates that we've had exactly one elected in 225 years.

I don't think the constitution allowed for 3/5ths of a president. :awe:

 

[buckshot24]

1996: 96%
2000: 95%
2004: 93%
2008: 99%

Blacks seem to be so easily manipulated. Amazing.

This basically means that Obama's 'black advantage' is somewhere around 3% in 13% of the electorate. That means that even if you're 100% right Obama's additional percentage from the shift was 0.4% of the vote. STOP THE PRESSES. AND AGAIN, that doesn't even take into account white voters being less likely to vote for him.

To know for sure you'd have to find out who voted for him because he was black and who didn't because he was black. Unknowable unfortunately. My view is that it was "cool" to be voting a black president into office so people uncritically did so without really knowing what he was all about. (this is in 2008 mind you). Did these people outweigh the racists who voted against him because he was black? No way to know.

Seriously, just stop. Clearly being black is such a huge advantage for presidential candidates that we've had exactly one elected in 225 years

What does the first presidential election have to do with today's society?

 

[fskimospy]

Blacks seem to be so easily manipulated. Amazing.

Either that or perhaps a certain political party has been explicitly race baiting them for about the last four decades.

What does the first presidential election have to do with today's society?

What's past is prologue.

 

[fskimospy]

To be fair, blacks and women did not get to vote (without any restriction/harrashment) until 20th century.

That would seem to make my case even more.

 

[fskimospy]

Nobody said it was such a huge advantage for presidential candidates. All anyone ever said was it was an advantage for this one candidate.

Your lack of ability to comprehend is disturbingly poor.

For the entire history of the U.S. up until 2008 we have had zero female presidential candidates, and one female vice-presidential candidate on a losing ticket (major parties only). Then suddenly in 2008 the Presidential race was basically going to be won by the Dems, the choice was between a woman and a black man. Even on the Republican side there was a woman for the V.P. candidacy.

In the year when voters in this country were ready, willing, and wanting to vote for someone who was not a white male, you're going to sit there and argue that Obama being black was not an advantage for him starting with the push to be a candidate in the Democratic primary?

Yes of course I'm arguing that. Haven't you noticed? My argument is based out of the electoral history of the US. Your argument is based out of a narrative you pulled out of your ass that confirms what you already want to believe.

I don't want you to mistake my dismissal of your unsupported, bullshit argument for not being able to comprehend it. It's very important to me that you know I think your idea is dumb.