Barack Obama and Jason Heyward

[Julio3000]

But he didn't really run that well.

Oh, he did.

He had his share of bobbles and bad days—everybody does, it's pretty much designed into the process—but his campaign transcended them. He beat the presumptive nominee, who couldn't have been any better wired into the national organization and the big donors. He did it, for the most part, while running AWAY from race. You can credit his organization for it, sure, but at the very least he was a B+ candidate with an A+ organization.

 

[weso1]

Imo, Obama got a big push from the media partially because of the color of his skin. I mean it does make for a nice story. I'm not saying it was just because of the color of his skin, but I think it was part of it. First black president and all. Plus more blacks showed up at the polls partially because of Obama's skin color. I could argue that Obama wouldn't have beaten Romney in 2012 if he hadn't been black. Blacks voted at an unusually high rate in 2012.

Now with that in mind, I don't think he needed it. Hillary coasted along in the primary and ran a bad campaign. Plus I personally don't think she's a good politician. A little bit better now, but this is why I don't pencil here in for 2016.

I think the race with McCain was over the minute the economy collapsed. And I still think he had Romney beat any way, but it would've been closer.

 

[Hawk]

Oh, he did.

He had his share of bobbles and bad days—everybody does, it's pretty much designed into the process—but his campaign transcended them. He beat the presumptive nominee, who couldn't have been any better wired into the national organization and the big donors. He did it, for the most part, while running AWAY from race. You can credit his organization for it, sure, but at the very least he was a B+ candidate with an A+ organization.

Plouffe and Axelrod are geniuses, absolutely, but I can't quite be brought to the point where I'd consider his primary campaign anything more than aggressively desperate and lucky. He enjoyed an Iowa bump (and boy, just barely) -- but struggled to put Hillary down for the next 5 months. The two had finally reached a point (after some epic mudslinging and exercises in PR) where neither had a clear majority of delegates and Clinton (who had the popular vote) basically gifted him enough super-delegates to technically win the nomination. She could have fought him in the nomination process but it would have reflected poorly on the party headed into the general elections and by that point Obama did appear to have the upper hand, anyways. So Clinton took State and the rest is history. I guess it all depends on your parameters for success, but squeaking across the finish line with somebody pushing you isn't exactly a clear win to me. But I understand, to some, a win is a win.

It wasn't as though Obama was a non-contender out of the gates, either. He was a favorite and had been stockpiling political favor and cash since 2004. Clinton's ground operation outgunned him, but that's basically the only advantage she possessed ... and then she gave it to him during the general election and all of a sudden it was this amazing grassroots effort.

 

[Hawk]

Hillary coasted along in the primary and ran a bad campaign. Plus I personally don't think she's a good politician.

 

[Hawk]

LOL you don't think the (c)overtly racist right criticizes Obama more, partially because he's black? Are you insane?

Edit: Also, maybe I'd think that way if I was a warped and jaded, but I'm not . . . so I guess I'm insane.

 

[zitothebrave]

Imo, Obama got a big push from the media partially because of the color of his skin. I mean it does make for a nice story. I'm not saying it was just because of the color of his skin, but I think it was part of it. First black president and all. Plus more blacks showed up at the polls partially because of Obama's skin color. I could argue that Obama wouldn't have beaten Romney in 2012 if he hadn't been black. Blacks voted at an unusually high rate in 2012.

Now with that in mind, I don't think he needed it. Hillary coasted along in the primary and ran a bad campaign. Plus I personally don't think she's a good politician. A little bit better now, but this is why I don't pencil here in for 2016.

I think the race with McCain was over the minute the economy collapsed. And I still think he had Romney beat any way, but it would've been closer.

Obama being first black pres is easily cancelled out by Hilary being first female pres and there's a whole lot more women out there than black folks.

The lie that Obama won because of the black vote is a lie.

2012 exit polls had Obama getting 93% of the black vote, 2008 he got 95% of the black vote (whoops) 2004 ultra white John Kerry got 88% of the black vote, 2000 AL Gore got 90% of the black vote. What you and the other people who point to race are not acknowledging is that Obama trounced his opponents in all races. While Bush held around 40% in Latinos and Asians, McCain and Romney slipped in both of those McCain carrying about 30% in latinos and 35% in asians and Romney at about 30% latinos and 25% asians. While it's worth it to note, Romney carried more of the white vote than Bush did in 2000, if you don't think that's a clear disadvantage for Obama than well, I don't know what to say.

 

[Hawk]

Obama being first black pres is easily cancelled out by Hilary being first female pres and there's a whole lot more women out there than black folks.

The lie that Obama won because of the black vote is a lie.

2012 exit polls had Obama getting 93% of the black vote, 2008 he got 95% of the black vote (whoops) 2004 ultra white John Kerry got 88% of the black vote, 2000 AL Gore got 90% of the black vote. What you and the other people who point to race are not acknowledging is that Obama trounced his opponents in all races. While Bush held around 40% in Latinos and Asians, McCain and Romney slipped in both of those McCain carrying about 30% in latinos and 35% in asians and Romney at about 30% latinos and 25% asians. While it's worth it to note, Romney carried more of the white vote than Bush did in 2000, if you don't think that's a clear disadvantage for Obama than well, I don't know what to say.

First of all, why are you using EXIT polls? Obama got over 95% of the black vote in both 2008 and 2012. Period.

Also, you are not taking into account the proportionately higher turnout of African Americans (especially black youth) in 2008 -- I read somewhere that all told that particular minority vote resulted in a ~10% swing in the 2008 general election.

That's kind of large, and is a subset not traditionally well-represented in elections at all -- that's more significant than the white vote that you keep desperately clinging to.

 

[zitothebrave]

First of all, why are you using EXIT polls? Obama got over 95% of the black vote in both 2008 and 2012. Period.

Also, you are not taking into account the proportionately higher turnout of African Americans (especially black youth) in 2008 -- I read somewhere that all told that particular minority vote resulted in a ~10% swing in the 2008 general election.

That's kind of large, and is a subset not traditionally well-represented in elections at all -- that's more significant than the white vote that you keep desperately clinging to.

Why am I using exit polls? What other data do we have on how races voted in an election? I mean you say he got over 95% of the black vote, Period. But you provide no evidence.

And as far as the black turnout, let's again go back to the exit polls, 2000 Gore got 90% and it was 10% of the electorate, 2008 Obama got 95% and it was 13% of the electorate. So out of 100M (rounding) voters in 2000 and 120M voters (rounding) in 2008 you see gore with a projected 9M black votes and Obama with a projected 14.8M black votes. That difference is a total of 4.5% swing. Which is a good amount, but considering Gore pushed with BUsh and Obama beat McCain by 7.5M votes, it's not fair to only attribute that to black votes unless you happen to have better evidence.

 

[The Tariff King]

Let's not even forget the people who voted against Obama because he's black. That in itself is a number we know is there but not quantifiable right now. That IMO just cancels out the "extra black vote".

 

[zitothebrave]

I wouldn't say it "cancels out" the difference but it does play a part. Probably not to the tune of 4.5M votes though. I'd say closer to 1M. As I think a healthy chunk of the people who wouldn't vote for him for being black, probably were gonna vote for McCain as it was.

 

[Hawk]

Why am I using exit polls? What other data do we have on how races voted in an election? I mean you say he got over 95% of the black vote, Period. But you provide no evidence.

And as far as the black turnout, let's again go back to the exit polls, 2000 Gore got 90% and it was 10% of the electorate, 2008 Obama got 95% and it was 13% of the electorate. So out of 100M (rounding) voters in 2000 and 120M voters (rounding) in 2008 you see gore with a projected 9M black votes and Obama with a projected 14.8M black votes. That difference is a total of 4.5% swing. Which is a good amount, but considering Gore pushed with BUsh and Obama beat McCain by 7.5M votes, it's not fair to only attribute that to black votes unless you happen to have better evidence.

By looking at raw voter data along with census data. I could break it down here, for example, Hamilton and Cuyahoga counties in Ohio in 2004 versus 2008, but it's an incredibly tedious process.

Exit polls are useful to some degree but you've got to take into consideration the Bradley effect when looking at those kind of numbers relative to Obama (especially in 2008).

 

[zitothebrave]

But raw voter data doesn't tell you how they voted. Just tells you potential spots for swings.

There are flaws to Exit polls as there are flaws to all polls. That doesn't mean your 95+% statement is even close to correct.

 

[Hawk]

But raw voter data doesn't tell you how they voted. Just tells you potential spots for swings.

There are flaws to Exit polls as there are flaws to all polls. That doesn't mean your 95+% statement is even close to correct.

When you put together all of those 'potential spots' then you have enough empirical evidence to support a trend. That's the design, and it's a much more respected angle of analyzing voting data by demographic than exit polls. It's the kind of data that the campaigns pay millions of dollars to utilize when determining what type of assets to deploy where in advance of elections. It's why Karl Rove still is on TV.

You aren't going to find anybody, anywhere, that would argue that Obama received less than 95% of black vote in 2008 and 2012 unless they, like you, are trying to specifically make a point about how he didn't benefit from the swing (which, by the way, has as much do with tactics and strategy as it does with straight votes).

 

[zitothebrave]

I never said he didn't benefit from the swing, but I'm saying it's overstated as he swung all demographics his way when compared to bush elections.

 

[yeezus]

Edit: Also, maybe I'd think that way if I was a warped and jaded, but I'm not . . . so I guess I'm insane.

So you honestly don't think the right criticizes him more because he's black? seriously? they accused him of not being a citizen. does that happen if he's not black? this has to be a joke. they are pretty clearly racist, despite trying to hide it. (note: i said trying. they're pretty bad at it).

 

[Hawk]

So you honestly don't think the right criticizes him more because he's black? seriously? they accused him of not being a citizen. does that happen if he's not black? this has to be a joke. they are pretty clearly racist, despite trying to hide it. (note: i said trying. they're pretty bad at it).

You are talking about a vocal minority, so no.

 

[yeezus]

You are talking about a vocal minority, so no.

lmao alrighty. keep them blinders on, bruh.

 

[Hawk]

lmao alrighty. keep them blinders on, bruh.

Or, leep living in your bubble and perpetuating stereotypical race-baiting misinformation. Obama won huge swaths of 'right' white votes in 2008.

 

[yeezus]

Or, leep living in your bubble and perpetuating stereotypical race-baiting misinformation. Obama won huge swaths of 'right' white votes in 2008.

LMAO yup, I'm in the bubble.

 

[Hawk]

LMAO yup, I'm in the bubble.

Anybody who actually believes that Arpaio and his ilk are in any way representative of the greater 'right' is delusional, at best. But I guess that's convenient to whatever weak point you are trying to make, so have at it.