• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think most Blacks vote for Obama just because he black?

Do you think most Blacks vote for Obama just because he black?


  • Total voters
    56
No I think most blacks vote for him because he's a democrat. Being black is just an added bonus that strengthens black voter turn out.

On the other hand had Herman Cain won for example, I think many blacks would lable him an Uncle Tom while the couple conservative blacks out there would actually be encourage to vote this time around. On the other side of the coin had a woman been the nominee regardless of color much more independent women would probably vote for her.
 
How you explain about the way blacks answered the questions on Obama's policies? It showed they knew nothing about Obama's stand on these issues and they voted for him any way?

Because he's a democrat and they assumed (rightfully) he'll back Democrat platforms.
 
I beg to differ. Most blacks have vorted democrat since alliances were forged between the remnant civil rights leadership and north eastern democrats who helped them transition into new roles as democrat elected officials. Entitlements may have played a small role but the real factor was stick together teamism. Black voters were not going to vote against the same people who marched for their right to vote, were beaten and otherwise abused for their rights to be recognized as equally American. A powerful tradition set in and today most black voters equate voting democrat with patriotism. This not because if entitements but because of love of country. I understand it might be difficult to relate to without having an American heritage from that black perspective. A similar dynamic us now being solidified among Latino voters, possibly even a stronger association with the democrats and American patriotism because in their case the GOP has been portrayed as the enemy of the Hispanic population ala Arizona immigration law, tye southern border fence, etc.

I disagree, entitlements is a major reason. that and the fact that the dems push stuff like affirmative action and easier sentencing of criminals
 
I disagree, entitlements is a major reason. that and the fact that the dems push stuff like affirmative action and easier sentencing of criminals

do you realize that you are implying that most blacks are criminals and on entitlements?
im sure that was a mistake
 
do you realize that you are implying that most blacks are criminals and on entitlements?
im sure that was a mistake

No just noting reality

Well the percentage of blacks who are receiving government help is extremely high compared to other groups and I think a third of black males have criminal records. When certain laws disproportionately help or hurt certain groups members of those groups tend to have higher or lower than favorable views of the laws. Its why many LEGAL hispanics are outraged with say the Arizona immigration laws: even though those laws don't apply to them, they see the laws as targeting people who are LIKE them
 
I watched a show the other day where where the Moderator went on the street and told Obama voters that Obama is Pro Life, against all abortions, and against equal rights for gays.........90% of them said they knew that already and were still going to vote for him so the question begs to be asked..........

Your hypothesis suggests that the majority of those (Blacks) polled don't know where Pres. Obama stands on the issues and, therefore, would still vote for him no matter what. I'm curious what show was it you were watching and when did it air? Can it be streamed online to view? How many people were polled and what was the age range?

The Black people I speak to know that Pres. Obama is pro-life, yet supports a woman's right to choose to have an abortion if either her life or the life of her unborn child is threatened.

The Black people I speak to know that Pres. Obama believes in equal rights for all and as such supports gay rights and civil unions.

The Black people I speak to know where Pres. Obama stands on the social issues of the day and will vote for him because his interests are closely aligned with their own, and believe him to be the better choice in the upcoming presidential election, not because he is Black.
 
It is undoubtedly a factor, but not an important one nor one that decides how most black people vote
 
No just noting reality

Well the percentage of blacks who are receiving government help is extremely high compared to other groups and I think a third of black males have criminal records. When certain laws disproportionately help or hurt certain groups members of those groups tend to have higher or lower than favorable views of the laws. Its why many LEGAL hispanics are outraged with say the Arizona immigration laws: even though those laws don't apply to them, they see the laws as targeting people who are LIKE them

interesting so just ignore all other factors that have already been presented to you and focus on the ones you choose and like?

got it ;)

so more to the point do you think most blacks are criminals and are on entitlements?
 
Your hypothesis suggests that the majority of those (Blacks) polled don't know where Pres. Obama stands on the issues and, therefore, would still vote for him no matter what. I'm curious what show was it you were watching and when did it air? Can it be streamed online to view? How many people were polled and what was the age range?

The Black people I speak to know that Pres. Obama is pro-life, yet supports a woman's right to choose to have an abortion if either her life or the life of her unborn child is threatened.

The Black people I speak to know that Pres. Obama believes in equal rights for all and as such supports gay rights and civil unions.

The Black people I speak to know where Pres. Obama stands on the social issues of the day and will vote for him because his interests are closely aligned with their own, and believe him to be the better choice in the upcoming presidential election, not because he is Black.

all good points and also something most people over look is that "stance" on an issue isnt really important. What a person PLANS to do or laws they PLAN to write matter more.

for instance if a candidate was pro-life or anti-equal rights that would bother me IF they had no plans to do anything about thier personal feelings and understood the laws and rights of america doesnt have to reflect their own.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT in a candidate.

on the other hand any candidate that campaigned on the plan to stop equal gay rights or abortion would never get my vote. Not because those are the most important issues but because in my opinion they dont understand america well at all.

another example of this is people bash Obama for his gun views but yet theres orgs out there that rate him very gun friendly for what he as actually done or not done.

he can say he doesnt like guns all he wants, doesnt bother me but if he would actually do something about then it does.

SO words and stance alone doesnt mean as much as plans and record
 
No just noting reality

Well the percentage of blacks who are receiving government help is extremely high compared to other groups and I think a third of black males have criminal records. When certain laws disproportionately help or hurt certain groups members of those groups tend to have higher or lower than favorable views of the laws. Its why many LEGAL hispanics are outraged with say the Arizona immigration laws: even though those laws don't apply to them, they see the laws as targeting people who are LIKE them

Geez, not this non-sense again. This convuluted argument has already been clarified and the falsehood debunked. Yes, statistics show that the percentage of Blacks on entitlement programs (such as welfare) is higher compared to other demographics on a national level, but the raw numbers tell a completely different story. People should expect such numbers to be high when unemployment is also high within such demographics. It has little to do with Blacks having an entitlement mentality. In most cases, it's a matter of survival. I see this stuff everyday - people applying for Medicaid, welfare and unemployment benefits not because the truly want to, but because they have to in order to keep from either falling into poverty OR a means to survive. Doesn't mean there aren't some lazy folks among them, but most would much rather be able to fend for themselves and not rely on the government for food, housing or their health care as some would have folks believe.
 
Geez, not this non-sense again. This convuluted argument has already been clarified and the falsehood debunked. Yes, statistics show that the percentage of Blacks on entitlement programs (such as welfare) is higher compared to other demographics on a national level, but the raw numbers tell a completely different story. People should expect such numbers to be high when unemployment is also high within such demographics. It has little to do with Blacks having an entitlement mentality. In most cases, it's a matter of survival. I see this stuff everyday - people applying for Medicaid, welfare and unemployment benefits not because the truly want to, but because they have to in order to keep from either falling into poverty OR a means to survive. Doesn't mean there aren't some lazy folks among them, but most would much rather be able to fend for themselves and not rely on the government for food, housing or their health care as some would have folks believe.


what percentage of blacks are net tax payers vs those who are net tax consumers. I never said those suckling on the public teat wanted to do that in all cases or even a majority. But suckle they do and the last thing they care about is those of us who fund the public teat getting tax cuts or the government spending less on filling the teat they suckle from
 
all good points and also something most people over look is that "stance" on an issue isnt really important. What a person PLANS to do or laws they PLAN to write matter more.

for instance if a candidate was pro-life or anti-equal rights that would bother me IF they had no plans to do anything about thier personal feelings and understood the laws and rights of america doesnt have to reflect their own.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT in a candidate.

on the other hand any candidate that campaigned on the plan to stop equal gay rights or abortion would never get my vote. Not because those are the most important issues but because in my opinion they dont understand america well at all.

another example of this is people bash Obama for his gun views but yet theres orgs out there that rate him very gun friendly for what he as actually done or not done.

he can say he doesnt like guns all he wants, doesnt bother me but if he would actually do something about then it does.

SO words and stance alone doesnt mean as much as plans and record

And so far, Pres. Obama has been very pro-life, very pro-gun rights, very pro-equal rights, very pro-religious tolerance, very pro-tax reform (wealth redistribution) in an effort to reduce the deficit and bring about more opportunities for those within the middle-class to become entreprenuers and start small businesses to spur job growth and become prosperous, pro-education reform w/emphasis on student performance rather than teachers teaching to inflated test scores, very pro-health and health care access in order to ensure a future where this nation's citizens are healthier (which speaks to a growing health care AND national security problem where an all-volunteer military force is concerned) and so much more.

If people really understood the issues, they'd be less inclinded to promote fearmoggering along political and/or racial lines and more willing to support the best candidate to lead this country forward - back to real economic prosperity.
 
Last edited:
And so far, Pres. Obama has been very pro-life, very pro-gun rights, very pro-equal rights, very pro-religious tolerance, very pro-tax reform (wealth redistribution) in an effort to reduce the deficit and bring about more opportunities for those within the middle-class to become entreprenuers and start small businesses to spur job growth and become prosperous, pro-education reform w/emphasis on student performance rather than teachers teaching to inflated test scores, very pro-health and health care access in order to ensure a future where this nation's citizens are healthier (which speaks to a growing health care AND national security problem where an all-volunteer military force is concerned) and so much more.

If people really understood the issues, they'd be less inclinded to promote fearmoggering along political and/or racial lines and more willing to support the best candidate to lead this country forward - back to real economic prosperity.


sadly this is our current biggest problem in government right now with politicians and with citizens its absolutely pathetic
 
And so far, Pres. Obama has been very pro-life, very pro-gun rights, very pro-equal rights, very pro-religious tolerance, very pro-tax reform (wealth redistribution) in an effort to reduce the deficit and bring about more opportunities for those within the middle-class to become entreprenuers and start small businesses to spur job growth and become prosperous, pro-education reform the ephasis is on student performance rather teachers teaching to inflated test scores, pro-health and health care access in order to ensure a future where this nation's citizens are healthier (which speaks to a growing health care AND national security problem where an all-volunteer military force is concerned) and so much more. If people really understood the issues, they'd be less inclinded to promote fearmoggering along political and/or racial lines and more willing to support the best candidate to lead this country forward - back to real economic prosperity.

I agree with you there, but I can't help but disagree about the "best candidate part. To me, the most efficient leader would be either Jill Stein and Stewart Alexander. :shrug:

Obama's good middle ground, though.
 
what percentage of blacks are net tax payers vs those who are net tax consumers.

Do you even know? Somehow, I doubt you do. But if you have the latest figures, I'd really like to see them.

I never said those suckling on the public teat wanted to do that in all cases or even a majority. But suckle they do and the last thing they care about is those of us who fund the public teat getting tax cuts or the government spending less on filling the teat they suckle from

Non-sense! White Americans use welfare, Medicaid, unemployment benefits and HUD (public housing) just as Blacks and Hispanics do. So, let's stop the race-baiting, as well as promoting the false stereotype that suggests that Blacks are the leading cause of a depressed national economy. For to suggest such would be to ignore how our nation's economy got to this point in the first place. Got news for you...it had nothing to do with over use of entitlement programs by Black people. That in itself is a stupid notion and doesn't hold water. :failpail:
 
Non-sense! White Americans use welfare, Medicaid, unemployment benefits and HUD (public housing) just as Blacks and Hispanics do. So, let's stop the race-baiting, as well as promoting the false stereo type that suggest that Blacks are the leading cause of a depressed national economy. For to suggest such would be to ignore how our nation's economy got to this point in the first place. Got news for you...it had nothing to do with over use of entitlement programs by Black people. That in itself is a stupid notion and doesn't hold water. :failpail:

percentages are what matters. look it up
 
sadly this is our current biggest problem in government right now with politicians and with citizens its absolutely pathetic

It's pretty depressing when Americans express such partisanship without even bothering to learn how their country works. :x
 
percentages are what matters. look it up

No. Raw numbers do. Percetages can be very misleading. For example, if I said 80% of White people surveyed own stock, most people would assume those surveyed make up a large segment of the White population. But what if those surveyed were only White people with a net worth greater than $1 million dollars and the total number of people surveyed measured a mere 200 people? Don't you think that would make a huge difference in the percentile projections as opposed to say 3 million people surveyed?

Think it through...

Show me the raw numbers that clearly illustrates that there are more Blacks on entitlement programs than Whites and I'd agree with you that members of my racial demographic are the primary drain on the nation economy. Until then, STOP RACE BAITING! The country really should be beyond this by now.
 
Last edited:
No. Raw numbers do. Percetages can be very misleading. For example, if I said 80% of White people surveyed own stock, most people would assume those surveyed make up a large segment of the White population. But what if those surveyed were only White people with a net worth greater than $1 million dollars and the total number of people surveyed measured a mere 200 people? Don't you think that would make a huge difference in the percentile projections as opposed to say 3 million people surveyed?

Think it through...

You will never win any points with me with comments such as "think it through" when what you really are saying is that you don't agree with what I said so you have to pretend my comments are based on ignorance They are not. how many blacks are net tax payers vs net tax consumers?
 
And so far, Pres. Obama has been very pro-life, very pro-gun rights, very pro-equal rights, very pro-religious tolerance, very pro-tax reform (wealth redistribution) in an effort to reduce the deficit and bring about more opportunities for those within the middle-class to become entreprenuers [sic] and start small businesses to spur job growth and become prosperous, pro-education reform w/emphasis on student performance rather than teachers teaching to inflated test scores, very pro-health and health care access in order to ensure a future where this nation's citizens are healthier (which speaks to a growing health care AND national security problem where an all-volunteer military force is concerned) and so much more.

In many of these cases, you are simply wrong.

I assume, by “pro-life” you mean opposed to murdering unborn children? So far as I know, everything he has said on the subject is in favor of allowing innocent unborn children to be killed.

“Pro-gun rights”, again, everything he has ever said on the subject indicates him to be opposed to the Second Amendment and the rights affirmed therein.

That, as President, he has not had nor taken any opportunity to put forth policies on these matters is no reason to attribute to him positions that are opposite to those that he's clearly expressed.

“Very pro-tax reform (wealth redistribution) in an effort to reduce the deficit and bring about more opportunities for those within the middle-class to become entreprenuers [sic] and start small businesses to spur job growth and become prosperous…” — here, he has successfully pursued policies which have been the exact opposite of what you attribute to him. About the only thing I can give you here is your parenthetical remark about “(wealth redistribution)”, but I must point out that such “wealth redistribution” is usually understood to be about taking wealth from those who are deemed to have too much of it, and giving it to those who are deemed not to have enough; while President Obama's actual wealth-redistribution policies have consisted of taking wealth from all classes of taxpayers, and giving it to a few huge, badly-run corporations in the form of “bailouts”, which is rather contrary to the generally-understood point of “wealth redistribution”.

“…Very pro-health and health care access in order to ensure a future where this nation's citizens are healthier…” — this has been his signature cause, and to that end, he promoted and signed into law a horrendous mess which has ****ed up the entire health care business, in a manner that, for the vast majority of Americans, is making health care more expensive and unattainable than ever before.
 
You will never win any points with me with comments such as "think it through" when what you really are saying is that you don't agree with what I said so you have to pretend my comments are based on ignorance They are not. how many blacks are net tax payers vs net tax consumers?

I don't know....but since you're the one asking the question while proporting that the answer bares some major significants, why don't you spares us the agony and provide the answer and the source to support your claim.
 
It's pretty depressing when Americans express such partisanship without even bothering to learn how their country works. :x

I agree most cling to either a party or a one or two issues.
 
In many of these cases, you are simply wrong.

I assume, by “pro-life” you mean opposed to murdering unborn children? So far as I know, everything he has said on the subject is in favor of allowing innocent unborn children to be killed.

Why? Because he supports partial birth abortions on medical health grounds? I don't favor the practise either, but medical professionals agree that there are situations where the practise is warranted.

“Pro-gun rights”, again, everything he has ever said on the subject indicates him to be opposed to the Second Amendment and the rights affirmed therein.

That, as President, he has not had nor taken any opportunity to put forth policies on these matters is no reason to attribute to him positions that are opposite to those that he's clearly expressed.

Your position suggests to condemn the man for things he has not done. That's equivalent to accusing a man guilty before he's had a fair trail or as we use to say in the military "guilty before being presumed innocent".

“Very pro-tax reform (wealth redistribution) in an effort to reduce the deficit and bring about more opportunities for those within the middle-class to become entreprenuers [sic] and start small businesses to spur job growth and become prosperous…” — here, he has successfully pursued policies which have been the exact opposite of what you attribute to him. About the only thing I can give you here is your parenthetical remark about “(wealth redistribution)”, but I must point out that such “wealth redistribution” is usually understood to be about taking wealth from those who are deemed to have too much of it, and giving it to those who are deemed not to have enough; while President Obama's actual wealth-redistribution policies have consisted of taking wealth from all classes of taxpayers, and giving it to a few huge, badly-run corporations in the form of “bailouts”, which is rather contrary to the generally-understood point of “wealth redistribution”.

I think you'd be interesting in reading the book, "Why We Want You To Be Rich," co-authored by Robert T. Kiyosaki and Donald J Trump. You'd be surprised to learn what The Donald says on the issue of wealth redistribution where tax cuts to the wealthy are concerned in relation to the debt and deficit. (And mind you, this book was published in 2006!)

“…Very pro-health and health care access in order to ensure a future where this nation's citizens are healthier…” — this has been his signature cause, and to that end, he promoted and signed into law a horrendous mess which has ****ed up the entire health care business, in a manner that, for the vast majority of Americans, is making health care more expensive and unattainable than ever before.

Again, non-sense. Health care premiums were on the rise long before ObamaCare was made law. I agree that the law isn't perfect, but the verdict on its overall impact on the economy cannot be measured at this time since the law has not been fully implemented. Thus, your argument equates to nothing more than hyperbol. Let's wait until 2018 after federal block grants to the states end and the states are left to fund their health insurance exchanges on their own and individuals are left to fully pay for their own health care before judging the law an epic fail, shall we?
 
Last edited:
In many of these cases, you are simply wrong.

I assume, by “pro-life” you mean opposed to murdering unborn children? So far as I know, everything he has said on the subject is in favor of allowing innocent unborn children to be killed.

“Pro-gun rights”, again, everything he has ever said on the subject indicates him to be opposed to the Second Amendment and the rights affirmed therein.

That, as President, he has not had nor taken any opportunity to put forth policies on these matters is no reason to attribute to him positions that are opposite to those that he's clearly expressed.

“Very pro-tax reform (wealth redistribution) in an effort to reduce the deficit and bring about more opportunities for those within the middle-class to become entreprenuers [sic] and start small businesses to spur job growth and become prosperous…” — here, he has successfully pursued policies which have been the exact opposite of what you attribute to him. About the only thing I can give you here is your parenthetical remark about “(wealth redistribution)”, but I must point out that such “wealth redistribution” is usually understood to be about taking wealth from those who are deemed to have too much of it, and giving it to those who are deemed not to have enough; while President Obama's actual wealth-redistribution policies have consisted of taking wealth from all classes of taxpayers, and giving it to a few huge, badly-run corporations in the form of “bailouts”, which is rather contrary to the generally-understood point of “wealth redistribution”.

“…Very pro-health and health care access in order to ensure a future where this nation's citizens are healthier…” — this has been his signature cause, and to that end, he promoted and signed into law a horrendous mess which has ****ed up the entire health care business, in a manner that, for the vast majority of Americans, is making health care more expensive and unattainable than ever before.

LOL while there may be some truth in this post, I dont know I stopped reading as soon as I read "murdering unborn children?" as I always do when somebody using that term when referring to abortion. It quickly shows how dishonesty they are and I instantly laugh at the hyperbole, biased and tired rhetoric. :shrug: oh well
 
Back
Top Bottom