Have we seen the end of the white male president?

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The 'thirst for change' idea is completely incorrect.

We wanted this change and got it this year. Four years from now people may want something totally different.

If Obama is a failure then people may want a return to the traditional governor as President thing that has become the norm the last 30 years.

Heh. Failure, you say?

His predecessor and the associated ideology have set the bar rather low, basically the lowest since 1932, so that's mostly wishful thinking on the part of Obama's detractors.

With any luck at all, the Obama presidency will pave the way for a more ethnically diverse America to have more ethnically diverse presidents, too... and that's a good thing, unless you're still depending on the southern strategy of every repub president since Nixon, in which case you may have a problem...

Obama isn't going to be judged on whether he sucks less than Bush.

4 years from now Bush will be a distant memory and people will grade Obama on his performance and nothing else.

With your track record you have thye gall to attempt to predict the future...rofl...hahaaaa

 

[Starbuck1975]

His predecessor and the associated ideology have set the bar rather low, basically the lowest since 1932, so that's mostly wishful thinking on the part of Obama's detractors.

Bush may have set the bar incredibly low, but Obama set expectations incredibly high given his message of change...if things don't "change" during his first term, American voters will judge Obama based on his ability to deliver countered against who the Republicans nominate in 2012.

 

[piasabird]

I have a theory on this. In many places in the USA we have elected officials that may not be white, and they happen to represent their constituents in their district. This makes perfect sense. However, taking this elected official to the next level, means that they have to represent their constituents. At the national level the elected official has to represent all of their constituents. Some minority may be able to do this. However, the trick is to convince the entire nation that a minority can represent white, asian, hispanic, and other groups, minority or caucasion.

 

[HomerJS]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The 'thirst for change' idea is completely incorrect.

We wanted this change and got it this year. Four years from now people may want something totally different.

If Obama is a failure then people may want a return to the traditional governor as President thing that has become the norm the last 30 years.

Heh. Failure, you say?

His predecessor and the associated ideology have set the bar rather low, basically the lowest since 1932, so that's mostly wishful thinking on the part of Obama's detractors.

With any luck at all, the Obama presidency will pave the way for a more ethnically diverse America to have more ethnically diverse presidents, too... and that's a good thing, unless you're still depending on the southern strategy of every repub president since Nixon, in which case you may have a problem...

Ethnic diversity in the presidency is not inherently good. It is a fact that the majority of Americans who are qualified to be president are white males. If the best person for the job is a white male, what is the value of electing someone else?

The last 8 years pretty much put your little theory in the shitter.

 

[HomerJS]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think the more relevant question is whether the Democratic Party has nominated its last all white male ticket.

Obama won several key primaries based on the black vote alone, that could easily happen again in 2012 with the right candidate.
Then you have its large female voter based inclined to vote for a female candidate.

Add the two together and any white male is going to find himself fighting for votes.

The first primary won had zero to do with the black vote, Iowa.

Considering blacks are only 12% of the population they are not able to singularlly elect Obama

 

[runestone]

OK, I'm going off the PC scale here: some of the main reasons obama was elected was :
he's not TOO black, and the media have some clinical hatred of President Bush, and showed it in their reporting.
Ah well, there went my chance at becoming the ambassador to the U.N.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: runestone
OK, I'm going off the PC scale here: some of the main reasons obama was elected was :
he's not TOO black, and the media have some clinical hatred of President Bush, and showed it in their reporting.
Ah well, there went my chance at becoming the ambassador to the U.N.

Well, the media and the majority of the country. Seen the guys approval rating lately? Probably in the single digits.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: HomerJS

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The 'thirst for change' idea is completely incorrect.

We wanted this change and got it this year. Four years from now people may want something totally different.

If Obama is a failure then people may want a return to the traditional governor as President thing that has become the norm the last 30 years.

Heh. Failure, you say?

His predecessor and the associated ideology have set the bar rather low, basically the lowest since 1932, so that's mostly wishful thinking on the part of Obama's detractors.

With any luck at all, the Obama presidency will pave the way for a more ethnically diverse America to have more ethnically diverse presidents, too... and that's a good thing, unless you're still depending on the southern strategy of every repub president since Nixon, in which case you may have a problem...

Ethnic diversity in the presidency is not inherently good. It is a fact that the majority of Americans who are qualified to be president are white males. If the best person for the job is a white male, what is the value of electing someone else?

The last 8 years pretty much put your little theory in the shitter.

I don't see why you would think that. We don't always pick the best guy for the job, but we generally pick one from the pool of most qualified candidates. President Bush, as bad as he was, previously was a governor. The people who hold the positions that are likely to lead to the presidency are mostly white males. I'm sure the parties will make an effort to add some diversity to the ticket in the future, but to say that we won't have another white male president for 20 years, which is what the OP is asking, is crazy.

 

[Nemesis 1]

What makes you believe. That Dems will win the next election.. Obama and all the kings men . Will try to put humpty together again . But well fail miserably.

 

[Nemesis 1]

You guys are something really. Watch obamas speech. He talks of the end of Iraq war . That is basicly over now. But than he goes on to say it started in Afganistan and will end in afganistan . He goes on to say its about terrorism .Thats an out and out lie. This is what its about. And its already getting really ugly in this area. AS the Western powers are not getting any of the oil or gas. It already a done deal. Ya believe the lies.


http://www.newhumanist.com/oil.html

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
You guys are something really. Watch obamas speech. He talks of the end of Iraq war . That is basicly over now. But than he goes on to say it started in Afganistan and will end in afganistan . He goes on to say its about terrorism .Thats an out and out lie. This is what its about. And its already getting really ugly in this area. AS the Western powers are not getting any of the oil or gas. It already a done deal. Ya believe the lies.


http://www.newhumanist.com/oil.html

A monkey would be better at punctuating a paragraph of text than you.

 

[Peelback79]

The media wants to hype skin color, but at heart, he's just a typical rich white elitist politician. Sure his skin color is different, but his ideologies and beliefs and promises are nothing we haven't heard from any number of the rich white elite who've ran before him.
Nothing will change. We will not get a tax break. There will be no new faces. Same old gang on the hill regardless of skin color.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Comment on the link . Smart guy. Or was that poorly written also. So my grammer sucks , . Talk about links . Or is reading really that hard for ya.

http://news.newamericamedia.or...45330aaaa5e138dab40b06


http://www.voanews.com/english...an2006-06-26-voa43.cfm

 

[SMOGZINN]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The 'thirst for change' idea is completely incorrect.

We wanted this change and got it this year. Four years from now people may want something totally different.

If Obama is a failure then people may want a return to the traditional governor as President thing that has become the norm the last 30 years.

Heh. Failure, you say?

His predecessor and the associated ideology have set the bar rather low, basically the lowest since 1932, so that's mostly wishful thinking on the part of Obama's detractors.

With any luck at all, the Obama presidency will pave the way for a more ethnically diverse America to have more ethnically diverse presidents, too... and that's a good thing, unless you're still depending on the southern strategy of every repub president since Nixon, in which case you may have a problem...

The problem with Obama is that the media has put him on a pedestal so high that he will never be able to live up to it. People are expecting nothing short of miracles from him and that will inevitably lead to disappointment. He is just a politician, not a messiah.

 

[Muse]

Have we seen the beginning of the non-white male president? All up to now have been all white male. On Jan. 20th we will get a partial exception, a half-white male president.