Is America Ready for a Minority President?

[tld221]

Originally Posted by 06pilot

After reading these posts and black peolpe saying America is not ready for a minority President appears to be self hatred at best. Low self esteem at worst. Dont be ashamed or hate your pwn culture. Black people are intelligent, successful and can handle themselves inthe White House as anyone esle can

well WE, the 12% of the American population, know this, but do THEY?

[06pilot]

Originally Posted by tld221

well WE, the 12% of the American population, know this, but do THEY?

I tend to believe that most of them do. Dont assume that because youare black,that white people automatically thnk youare inferior. I grew up in amulti cultural environment and I have seen good people and bad people of all races.

[tld221]

Originally Posted by 06pilot

I tend to believe that most of them do. Dont assume that because youare black,that white people automatically thnk youare inferior. I grew up in amulti cultural environment and I have seen good people and bad people of all races.

yeah yeah multiculturalism... if we're asking ourselves if America is ready for a black/woman president when the first 43 have been white/male, then how multicultural is that? If we were ready for one, don't you think that he/she wouldve already been elected?

yes theres good and bad in everyone, regardless of race, but i dont know any white ppl whove had nooses or burned crosses on their lawns. anyone who would do such would do it to those they felt superior over.

[06pilot]

Originally Posted by tld221

yeah yeah multiculturalism... if we're asking ourselves if America is ready for a black/woman president when the first 43 have been white/male, then how multicultural is that? If we were ready for one, don't you think that he/she wouldve already been elected?

yes theres good and bad in everyone, regardless of race, but i dont know any white ppl whove had nooses or burned crosses on their lawns. anyone who would do such would do it to those they felt superior over.

I do. They are called Jews

[06pilot]

And what is wrong with multiculturism? Isnt that what Jesus preacehs? isnt that what Martin L. King talked about? If its wrong to follow them, then I am wrong

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by tld221

well WE, the 12% of the American population, know this, but do THEY?

Many of "them" do. But having a minority president goes above and beyond that acknowledgement.

[KAPital PHINUst]

I think that the thread question is an unfair one and it insults the intelligence of the average modern American by thinking that a person's physical attributes implicitly makes him/her less qualified to be an effective leader. We already know that given Clinton's and Obama's current tenures as senators, as well as their frontrunner statuses in the Democratic primaries and high campaign funds raised that their "minority" status is of minimal, if any, importance.

My question to all of you would be: Given these factors, why do you REALLY want a minority as POTUS? Personally I think the real reason why so many want a minority as President is more for ego-driven and special interest treatment reasons than if the minority candidates are really and truly qualified for the position.

Let's be fair. Perhaps by addressing this, in all fairness would risk taking the thread off topic, but I have not read one post in this thread that really addressed any of the major issues that the POTUS would have to deal with should they become elected.

What about their stance on Iraq, the economy (which in now in imminent danger of a major depression), the NAU/SPP, the need to overhaul or abolish the Federal Reserve, the Patriot Act/Real ID Act/the stripping of our civil liberties? What about those issues? How have they addressed those and more importantly, do you agree with their stances?

I ask these because I think the average American has grossly underestimated the danger America is in, and by the time it has been fully realized, it will be too late to recoup the losses. This is not the time to pontificate whether America is ready for a minority president, the present state of our country makes it grossly irrelevant.

On a lighter note, I do applaud Hillary and Barack for their acheivements despite their minority status.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

[COLOR=darkred]I think that the thread question is an unfair one and it insults the intelligence of the average modern American by thinking that a person's physical attributes implicitly makes him/her less qualified to be an effective leader.

Race and gender aren't just "physical attributes." They are status groups whose memberships denote power and privilege or the lack thereof in many instances. The average modern American may or may not be all that intelligent (based on what intellect entails) but they are observant of their social world enough to know that.

As for Obama and Clinton's stances on the relevant issues, their stances may not matter if the consensus is that a voting majority does not want a woman or a black person in office yet for whatever reasons. Plus, discussing their stances on issues is a political discussion but I don't think this type of a discussion is really one of politics.

I believe that Clinton may be voted in office but America has at least 1 more election before it is ready to receive a racial and ethnic (or even religious and sexual orientation) minority president. And that will be based on overall social progression. This is the first racial and ethnic minority candidate that many Americans even see as a viable option so there is room for improvement.

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

As for Obama and Clinton's stances on the relevant issues, their stances may not matter if the consensus is that a voting majority does not want a woman or a black person in office yet for whatever reasons. Plus, discussing their stances on issues is a political discussion but I don't think this type of a discussion is really one of politics.

Then the discussion is by default trivial, because:

1. Race and gender does bring with it cultural aspects which can make for various inherent political issues because of the variance of cultures and their different standards of living and coexisting.

2. It begs my original question: What would having a minority as POTUS accomplish that wouldn't be accomplished by a non-minority if we ignore their individual stances on issues?

I don't think the real issue is whether America is ready for a minority POTUS; it obviously is to see two minority candidates come this far. I think we need to be honest with ourselves and just say the real reason we want a minority as POTUS is because we think our minority group will get special favors (pandering), or to snub our nose at the white man and say "We've arrived." (ego-driven).

[ladygreek]

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

I think we need to be honest with ourselves and just say the real reason we want a minority as POTUS is because we think our minority group will get special favors (pandering), or to snub our nose at the white man and say "We've arrived." (ego-driven).[/COLOR]

Well don't include me in that thinking. Considering how our government works between the three branches, unless the majority of all of those members are women or people of color (I hate the word minority) then special favors and snubbing won't happen.

IMO the president really doesn't run the country, those who surround him or her do. The key is electing a president who will have good judgement in selecting those people.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by ladygreek

Well don't include me in that thinking. Considering how our government works between the three branches, unless the majority of all of those members are women or people of color (I hate the word minority) then special favors and snubbing won't happen.

IMO the president really doesn't run the country, those who surround him or her do. The key is electing a president who will have good judgement in selecting those people.

Since you know what he was talking about there, can you please enlighten me?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

Then the discussion is by default trivial, because:

1. Race and gender does bring with it cultural aspects which can make for various inherent political issues because of the variance of cultures and their different standards of living and coexisting.

2. It begs my original question: What would having a minority as POTUS accomplish that wouldn't be accomplished by a non-minority if we ignore their individual stances on issues?

I don't think the real issue is whether America is ready for a minority POTUS; it obviously is to see two minority candidates come this far. I think we need to be honest with ourselves and just say the real reason we want a minority as POTUS is because we think our minority group will get special favors (pandering), or to snub our nose at the white man and say "We've arrived." (ego-driven).

I don't know what you're talking about for much of this, to be honest with you.

And I personally don't "want" a minority as president so much as I want for minority candidates to be the norm from which we choose who we vote for. But you would know that I wouldn't vote just because someone is a minority if you had read the other page. Just like I don't vote based on political party, since I'm neither a Dem or Repub--although I like the Repubs much more than I like the Dems. So if there is a minority candidate whose stances I agreed with, I would vote for her/him.

I interpreted this thread to be about status group membership ideology that has always surpassed "politics." While I think both of the race and gender minority candidates this election are wishy washy, those who wouldn't vote for a woman or a black person anyway are much less forgiving of that than someone who is open to the idea of voting for a nonwhite and nonmale candidate. That's not a trivial discussion if we ground it in a social critique. But if you crave a discussion of politics, there are threads that discuss their stances.

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

I don't know what you're talking about for much of this, to be honest with you.

Simply put, why is the thread topic such an issue? It appears that we are making an issue where if we really think about it, there isn't one.

And I personally don't "want" a minority as president so much as I want for minority candidates to be the norm from which we choose who we vote for.

There can be a multitude of reasons for that, but I don't think it is because America isn't ready for a minority president. One of the WORLD'S most powerful women is a Black American. Again, why is whether or not America is "ready" (wtfreak does "ready" mean--that phrase is a pet peeve of mine; but I digress) for a minority president such a concern?

But you would know that I wouldn't vote just because someone is a minority if you had read the other page. Just like I don't vote based on political party, since I'm neither a Dem or Repub--although I like the Repubs much more than I like the Dems. So if there is a minority candidate whose stances I agreed with, I would vote for her/him.

That is exactly how anyone should vote, regardless of their minority status or lack thereof. Again, why is this status even a matter of consideration?

I interpreted this thread to be about status group membership ideology that has always surpassed "politics." While I think both of the race and gender minority candidates this election are wishy washy, those who wouldn't vote for a woman or a black person anyway are much less forgiving of that than someone who is open to the idea of voting for a nonwhite and nonmale candidate. That's not a trivial discussion if we ground it in a social critique. But if you crave a discussion of politics, there are threads that discuss their stances.

But if you disagree with their stances, what difference does it make whether or not they are a minority? Perhaps I am missing something here, but I was taught to vote for the person I find to be the most qualified. So if I find someone to be unqualified and they happen to belong to a minority, does that mean that I am not ready to have their status group represented as leader of my country/state/county/city/school board, etc.?

The problem with this discussion is that it forces folk to read into certain sociological issues that may not exist, be a factor, or is even relevant to the candidate's electability.