Shocked & Disgusted

[OtterXO]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Bad logic based on a faulty assumption.

That faulty assumption is that the blacks who were already active voters and vote in every election haven't been voting for white candidates for years and wouldn't have voted for a white candidate if Obama wasn't on the ticket.

Which, of course, is untrue. It isn't that these voters would've voted for McCain had he not been white or that they would've sat this election out if the Dem candidate was white. So there is no indication that these black voters are afraid of a white presidency and have distrust or negative feelings towards whites that manifest themselves during election time.

I don't agree. If the black candidate vs white candidate was never an option before in the general election then the race of a candidate wouldn't have been a factor. If two white guys were running then their "whiteness" (for lack of a better term) would cancel itself out since it was on both sides of the coin. So those who were already voting would vote anyway without considering the race of the candidate as a factor.

Additionally, I wasn't saying anyone was afraid of a white president. I was just saying that it's the same decision to vote for someone because they're white OR to vote for someone because they're black. I don't think one is morally better than the other.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by OtterXO

I don't agree. If the black candidate vs white candidate was never an option before in the general election then the race of a candidate wouldn't have been a factor. If two white guys were running then their "whiteness" (for lack of a better term) would cancel itself out since it was on both sides of the coin. So those who were already voting would vote anyway without considering the race of the candidate as a factor.

Actually, the race of the candidates has been a factor in every election because whiteness, white privilege, and white male privilege were presented as the template. Whiteness isn't invisible just because we are surrounded by it everyday, although whites feel that it is because they are the mainstream and dominant group.

Race was simply a different type of factor in this election than previous elections.

So what are you disagreeing with?

Originally Posted by OtterXO

Additionally, I wasn't saying anyone was afraid of a white president. I was just saying that it's the same decision to vote for someone because they're white OR to vote for someone because they're black. I don't think one is morally better than the other.

I didn't say you said that. I'm saying that.

It still isn't the same decision, generally speaking, regardless of how many times you all type that it is.

[OtterXO]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Actually, the race of the candidates has been a factor in every election because whiteness, white privilege, and white male privilege were presented as the template. Whiteness isn't invisible just because we are surrounded by it everyday, although whites feel that it is because they are the mainstream and dominant group.

Race was simply a different type of factor in this election than previous elections.

So what are you disagreeing with?



I didn't say you said that. I'm saying that.

It still isn't the same decision, generally speaking, regardless of how many times you all type that it is.

The example of two white candidates was not to say that whiteness is invisible if they are white, it was an example of the race being the same for both candidates. It could have just as easily been two black candidates but you mentioned the races where there were two white candidates. Please don't assume the worst in my posts. I think we can probably just agree to disagree on whether it's the same type of decision. But I do think it's good for those of us who believe it to be the same type of decision to realize that there are conflicting views from different perspectives.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by OtterXO

The example of two white candidates was not to say that whiteness is invisible if they are white, it was an example of the race being the same for both candidates.

Race is the same but race is still visible for those who do not want to vote for a white Republican or Democratic candidate from fear of a white presidency or distrust of whites.

I don't believe in agreeing to disagree but I'll say this discussion is dumb. LOL.

[OtterXO]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Race is the same but race is still visible for those who do not want to vote for a white Republican or Democratic candidate from fear of a white presidency or distrust of whites.

I don't believe in agreeing to disagree but I'll say this discussion is dumb. LOL.

True. haha

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by OtterXO

I don't agree. If the black candidate vs white candidate was never an option before in the general election then the race of a candidate wouldn't have been a factor. If two white guys were running then their "whiteness" (for lack of a better term) would cancel itself out since it was on both sides of the coin. So those who were already voting would vote anyway without considering the race of the candidate as a factor.

Additionally, I wasn't saying anyone was afraid of a white president. I was just saying that it's the same decision to vote for someone because they're white OR to vote for someone because they're black. I don't think one is morally better than the other.

If?

Isn't that usually how it is?

In this case race was a factor but moreso, was how seriously he could be taken...obviously he was taken very seriously.