2001 poll. When did you think there would be a black president?

[cheerfulgreek]

I was reading "USA Today" this morning, and I saw a poll that was done in 2001. I'm not sure how many people actually took the poll, but from 2001, 36% said there would be a black president within 10 years.

25 years: 43%
After 100 years: 2%
Never: 8%
Within 100 years: 9%

I guess for me, I was always sure history would have eventually happened. I just didn't think I would have been around long enough to witness it.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I was reading "USA Today" this morning, and I saw a poll that was done in 2001. I'm not sure how many people actually took the poll, but from 2001, 36% said there would be a black president within 10 years.

25 years: 43%
After 100 years: 2%
Never: 8%
Within 100 years: 9%

I guess for me, I was always sure history would have eventually happened. I just didn't think I would have been around long enough to witness it.

Agreed.

[ree-Xi]

Honestly, and I am not giving the "I don't see color" cliche here, I never thought about it before. I hope that I can explain this without sounding trite or ignorant or naive.

I understand the historical significance of a black president - given that not too long ago, a black person (african american?) didn't have the right to vote, sit in the front of a bus, etc., let alone be elected into the most powerful office in the largest superpower in the world. I get why this is so monumental. But I never thought that it was something that we necessarily had to "be ready for".

I have heard similar questions about when we'd expect the first female president, and if the country was ready. Given that women are so different - biologically, emotionally, psychologically, etc. - I think it's more likely that people would question "if we were ready" for a woman to be president. Women are biologically predispositioned to give birth, are innately more nurturing, etc. I have heard people joke that what if a female president had PMS and decided to (insert some horrible decision) based on her emotions.

Men are men, and will almost always be seen as the likelier candidate for any position of power. But there is no difference between how a black man and a white man "operates", if you get what I mean. Does that make sense?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

I have heard similar questions about when we'd expect the first female president, and if the country was ready. Given that women are so different - biologically, emotionally, psychologically, etc. - I think it's more likely that people would question "if we were ready" for a woman to be president. Women are biologically predispositioned to give birth, are innately more nurturing, etc. I have heard people joke that what if a female president had PMS and decided to (insert some horrible decision) based on her emotions.

Men and women aren't as emotionally and psychologically different as patriarchy and sexism have socialized us to believe.

The stupid jokes you've heard show the hypocrisy of it all. It's just a matter of which is the most salient structural inequality, racism or sexism.

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

Men are men, and will almost always be seen as the likelier candidate for any position of power. But there is no difference between how a black man and a white man "operates", if you get what I mean. Does that make sense?

Men are men because patriarchy and misogyny unite men across race, ethnicity, culture, language, and socioeconomic status. However, research shows that concepts of manhood, power, and masculinity differ for white men as compared to black men. Being of the gender power majority but of the racial power minority is what is called "intersectionality" of race and gender. We can already see that Obama has been received differently than past presidents for reasons beyond politics. Examples of this are comments like "he's such a great orator" and suspicions that he's going to advance the causes of black people over interests of Americans, in general.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

Honestly, and I am not giving the "I don't see color" cliche here, I never thought about it before. I hope that I can explain this without sounding trite or ignorant or naive.

I understand the historical significance of a black president - given that not too long ago, a black person (african american?) didn't have the right to vote, sit in the front of a bus, etc., let alone be elected into the most powerful office in the largest superpower in the world. I get why this is so monumental. But I never thought that it was something that we necessarily had to "be ready for"

I agree. I wouldn't say it was something that we are "ready for" or not. I was just saying that I didn't think I would live to see it based on how color struck this country has been and in a sense still is. But the words "ready for" doesn't make sense to me. I'm not saying you're not making sense, it's just those two words that were forever being used while Obama was running for office.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

I was reading "USA Today" this morning, and I saw a poll that was done in 2001. I'm not sure how many people actually took the poll, but from 2001, 36% said there would be a black president within 10 years.

25 years: 43%
After 100 years: 2%
Never: 8%
Within 100 years: 9%

I guess for me, I was always sure history would have eventually happened. I just didn't think I would have been around long enough to witness it.

Welp, ironically, if the poll was taken pre-9-11 people thought hijacking planes would take you somewhere to be ransomed, too... Suffice to say, those polls are not as scientific and/or the people answering them are not as globally adept as we would like to think about them...

The other issue is PEBO had not won his senatorial position at that time. While he was doing what he had to do to get elected to his first Federal position, he may have had it in the back of mind, but it was not marketed to the American collective consciousness.

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

Honestly, and I am not giving the "I don't see color" cliche here, I never thought about it before. I hope that I can explain this without sounding trite or ignorant or naive...But I never thought that it was something that we necessarily had to "be ready for"...But there is no difference between how a black man and a white man "operates", if you get what I mean. Does that make sense?

I think that you are still coming from a naivete about who Obama really is as a person. I think he has a realistic view of what needs to be done. But I think the American media outlets who often do not deal properly with cultural shifts because they are in the business selling news.

I do agree, IMO, with what you said with what do we need to "be ready for"? Obama is a Columbia graduate, Harvard educated lawyer, Editor of the Harvard Review and chose a rather mediocre career position rather than a corporate lawyer. And enamored Michelle... I know I am are ready for it and you might be, but I think people's fears are solving "all the world's problems" during his first term... People see these problems as insurmountable. And when we are collectively overwhelmed, we want to give up... We've been addicted to "giving up" when times are hard because why wait? IDK?

I think you are missing the cultural experiences that Obama has. Significantly diverse upbringing I think that gave him compassion for people different from his own background. The reconnecting with American Black's and not being alienated as so often many are. Having great patience, the astuteness to look bigotry in the eyes and to hear pain in the voices of those suffering and corral them to his cause, and to seamlessly propel the American "can do" Spirit back to relevancy, I think there are monumental differences between Obama and the last president, especially...

It would have to be a persuasive Caucasian man to have the effect we see now... Not even Bill Clinton has that deep connection. Look how many people are in the background at the Inauguration and the "festival party-like atmosphere"...

Even the media is taken aback by the sheer number and volume of people.

But like all things, the Honeymoon will soon be over... Maybe not in 2009, but definitely later... IDK?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

But like all things, the Honeymoon will soon be over... Maybe not in 2009, but definitely later... IDK?

It will definitely be over.

[AGDee]

I have made the comment "He's such a great orator" and it's not related to his race, it's a fact. Clinton and Reagan were also great orators. GW was horrendous. It got to the point that I could barely listen to him and his Bushisms. Obama has a way of inspiring me and giving me hope about our future, something I haven't been able to say since 9/11.