Theres no hostility towards Obama, if we didnt like him he wouldnt even be a front runner. Obviouslly "allll" AA's wont like him because "allll" AA's arent democrat. Nor are "alllll" AA's monolithic in the primaries but majority of blacks are still backing him..He needs 75% of the black vote to even have a chance Jesse had 90% and hes been hanging around 56%. He needs to relate to black women more.

-

You are mischaracterizing what was said. No one here said that ALL AA's loved Obama. That's absurd,anwway. We were trying to get YOU to understand that AA's didn't dislike or hate him, have it in for him, like you seemed to think. All we were saying is that he was going to have to WORK for our votes, just like anyone else would, and that he wasn't just going to be able to waltz in and get our votes without addressing our issues,relating to us, just because he's Black,and just because white folks say he's the first viable Black candidate for President and they like him,lol. As Impact said with in his last comment, that is PARTICULARLY true with Black women. He can still cut into Hillary's lead among sisters, if he makes that a priority. If not, a lot of those Black women will end up voting for Hillary.

[quote=Stranger;1428207]You make seemingly good points, but if black women had been more involved w/the Feminism Movement, do you think that they would have benefited from it? I have always associated feminism with white women (i.e. Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, etc). Where have black women been in the movement? The only black feminist I can think of is Sojourner Truth, and even she was w/the Abolition movement.

In other words, do you think white women really give a damn about their black counterparts? I don't think so. I personally don't think Feminism has help AA women in any shape or form. White women got the right to vote in 1920, while black women got the right to vote w/their black husbands in 1965. Obviously, the Feminism movement was about helping white women move up in the hierarchy, NOT women in general.

Actually, no I don't think Black women would have benefitted from being more involved with the White women's agenda feminist movement. A few sisters found that out the hard way. I mentioned on another thread, how some Black women who were involved with the Civil Rights movement became disenchanted with the way the bros in it and the Black Power movement wanted to subjugate BLack women like White people subjugated all of us. Some of those women joined the Feminist movement in response. They found out of course,that white women were no more likely to give a damn about their agenda than the Black men in the Movements they had just left. Alice Walker and Bell Hooks,Angela Davis were a couple of those women, and that's why they came up with the WOMANIST philosophy which, was specific to BLack women. It was not an appendage to Black men's agenda(which interestingly is considered BLACK PEOPLE'S agenda,automatically,eventhough the reverse is never true), and it was not an appendage to white women's agenda, either.

What's the moral of that story? Be prepared to Get your own shit. Don't ever blindly trust anyone else implicitly to do what's in your best interest(even people who you think would automatically look out for you,like Black women logically assumed with Black men). Make sure that YOUR concerns and agenda are respected by any movement you join and if it isn't start your own thing, or leverage your power within that other thing, if you must. Don't allow anybody to play you with that "we'll get to your issues later,bullshit". No mofo, we're gonna get to SOME of my issues NOW(particularly issues of respect/double standards,etc), or I'll take my marbles and go home,lol.

So Black women ended up losing in some ways, but so did BLack men, because in many ways, you are now seeing the BACKLASH to the lessons learned from that time. That blind faith and trust that was there before with sisters like Angela Davis, Nikki Giovanni is gone. Even those 2 sisters who were the EPITOME of trust/follow/have faith in the Black man, no matter what, don't espouse those views anymore, because of their own experiences. And since both of them are professors, and authors, they've spent years advising younger Black women to heed the lessons THEY learned.

[quote=Gmahogany.;1428243] It seems like a lose-lose situation for the black female when it comes to sexism and racism. I was never for black women abandoning their men completely and helping out the white woman (after all, white women have never been our "friends.") But at times I feel that black men take black women for granted, and I'm sure they do.

I do support the concept of the "Womanist" movement. Something that caters to black women.

*Standing ovation to Gmahogany!*

I think another reason why hes not getting more votes is because many blacks arent following the campagin or they simply think he cant win yet..But in the end history in on Obamas side..


Obama and the 'They' Sayers

Are white Americans really, truly prepared to elect an African American president? Seriously, is a nation with such a long and shameful history of brutal slavery, Jim Crow segregation and persistent racism actually going to put a black man in the White House?

One of Barack Obama's principal tasks in the coming months may be convincing African American voters that this whole phenomenon -- a black candidate with a well-financed campaign, proven crossover appeal and a real chance to win -- isn't just another cruel illusion.

I hear from African Americans who are excited about Obama's candidacy but who suspect that somehow, when push comes to shove, "they" won't let him win. It's unclear who "they" might be -- white voters, the "power structure," the alignment of the stars -- and it's unclear how "they" are going to thwart Obama's ambition. The point is that, somehow, he'll be denied.
This anecdotal evidence finds some empirical support in the polls, although it's far from definitive. A recent CNN poll of Democrats in South Carolina -- a crucial, early-primary state where African Americans will cast about half the Democratic votes -- showed Hillary Clinton leading Obama by a bigger margin among blacks than among whites. And while white respondents thought Clinton had only a slightly better chance of winning the 2008 general election than Obama, blacks who were polled thought Clinton was fully twice as likely to beat a generic Republican opponent.
The CNN poll's sample of black voters was so small, and its margin of error so great, that it's impossible to draw firm conclusions. For that matter, it would be a mistake to take any of these early polls too seriously. But isn't Obama at least a bit concerned that black voters might succumb to a kind of historical fatalism about how race works in America?

"What I see is a lot of press fascination with a black candidate who does not yet have 100 percent of the African American vote," Obama said yesterday in a telephone interview. "It's fascinating to me that people would expect that somehow I would be getting unanimous black support at this stage of the campaign, when probably only about 50 percent of black voters know much about me at all."

Obama pointed out that "black folks have known the Clintons for a long time." He also noted that when he ran for the U.S. Senate, his poll numbers among African Americans started low but later went stratospheric as voters got to know him.

Still, the Obama campaign recognizes the importance of South Carolina as the first primary state with a substantial African American electorate. A win there could resonate in other states where the black vote will be a key factor in the Democratic primary. A bad loss in South Carolina would resonate, too -- not in a good way, from Obama's point of view.

Last week, the Obama campaign began running a new ad on 36 black-oriented radio stations in South Carolina. Its two themes: "We have more work to do" and "It's Barack Obama time."

Asked about fatalism or resignation among black voters, Obama said, "I'm sure there's some of that going on. The way to solve that problem is to win."

That I reached Obama in the midst of a campaign swing through Iowa was no accident. "If I do well in Iowa, and if I do well in New Hampshire . . . then by the time we get to South Carolina, I think we will have dispelled the notion that somehow whites won't vote for African Americans."

The dispelling of notions seems to be a specialty of Obama's -- or maybe it's just his fate in life. Last week, in his fight with Clinton over whether a president should meet with foreign leaders who are adversaries in addition to those who are friends, Obama dispelled the questionable notion that a politician who learned his craft in rough-and-tumble Chicago, where Marquess of Queensberry rules do not apply, could somehow have failed to learn how to take or deliver a punch.

"That was a fun debate . . . an important, substantive debate," he told me, before sticking in another jab about how " 'experience' means reciting the conventional wisdom in Washington . . . that got us into the Iraq war."

Obama spent weeks dispelling the notion, held by some in the national media, that he somehow isn't "black enough." He still gets asked that question, but by now he has mostly put the matter of his racial identity to rest. As he knew all along, he's black.
Now he has to dispel the notion that because he's black, somehow "they" will slap him down.

washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines

So as an American, why would I vote for him?


If we do not have an accurate analysis of the problem, we cannot possibly develop a good strategy to resolve it.

There seems to be little analysis of the mans programme on this thread....Is it that he isn't really saying anyting about anything (immigration status of Mexicans aside)?!?

Well we dont deal with substance much in the U.S. but lets see...I mostly agree with his isolationist approach to foreign policy (No more draining pre-emptive wars). I also like his universal healthcare plan since unlike others it will not be mandatory. Against gay marriage . He'll supposably deal with the problem in Darfar. And then there the tax cut for anyone making less than an annual income of $250,000. Oh yeah an hes from the heartland . Theres other technical things I like about him but it would come out as jibberish on a UK based site..Plus its still VERY early so we dont know any of thier bold initiatives..

Now many of the other dem candidates are offering more or less of the same thing so it really comes down to what candidate can pander the most to different groups. The stupid thing is once they get elected they do what they want anyway..The only real differences in policy is if you go republican

Its either dem or repub...One more choice than communist Russia...

There wouldnt be much of a statement because Obama isnt necessarily foriegn, his mother was American many generations deep meaning there possibly still could be AA ties. I also think for anyone to not vote for Obama solely on the basis that some of his ancestry comes from Kenya would be extremely misguided too. Whether you agree or disagree with his stances, he as already redefined how blacks will practice politics here and has represnted blacks well all over the world..I think he'll pave the way for a Patrick Deval Presidency or VP in 2012.

Honestly, I can't stand how the media shoves Obama down Black America's throats, like we have to accept him. The majority of Black America can not relate to Obama; he is half white, his black father was Kenyan (not even West African!), he is not the descendant of African slaves, and he grew up in, of all places, Hawaii!

I personally don't see him winning, being nominated, or "winning over" black America.


I love black men and all, but lately they have disappointed me on so many levels. I think it is time for black women to open up their options and expand their horizons. It is obvious that black men have lost their sense of duty in the black community and have abandoned their black women and children. And for what?