Es ist tatsächlich erschreckend wie extrem die politischen Ansichten von schwarzen, weißen und hispanischen Wählern divergieren.
Man könnte meinen, daß sich die USA eben doch noch in den 50er Jahren befinden.
Obama wird vermutlich die Stimmen der Frauen, der Jugend, der Schwarzen und der Hispanics mehrheitlich abgreifen können - aber er hat ein Problem mit den „normalen weißen Männern“.
Hier ergeben Umfragen nur rund ein Drittel der Stimmen für den Demokraten.
(But only 34 to 37 percent of white men support Obama, according to the Gallup Poll's latest weekly index of 6,000 voters.)
Selbst bei den übzeugten weißen männlichen Demokraten, verbleibt ein Rest von 20 %, die letztendlich nicht für Obama stimmen würden, weil er ihnen zu schwarz ist - das nennt sich dann „racial anxiety“.
In Umfragen ist dies gar nicht so leicht festzustellen, da jeder Befragte sagt, daß ER natürlich gar keine Vorbehalte habe einen Schwarzen zu wählen! Aber bei genaueren Nachfragen stellt sich dann doch raus, daß sie aber doch „einen Nachbarn“ oder einen „Cousin“ haben, von dem sie wüßten, daß der keinen schwarzen Präsidenten will.
Je höher der „Rassen-Ressentiment-Index“ ist, desto schlechter sieht es für Obama aus
(Who exactly are these high Racial Resentment Index voters? A majority, 61 percent, have less than a four-year college education, many are older (44 percent were over the age of 60 compared to just 18 percent under the age of 40) and nearly half (46 percent) live in the South.)
Interessanterweise haben also die Rechten - genau wie in Deutschland - trotz einer vollkommen anderen Geschichte auch in den USA keinerlei Rückgrat.
Die hohen NDP - und DVU-Wahlergebnisse insbesondere in den ostdeutschen Bundesländern haben auch deswegen überrascht, weil die Nazi-Wähler ihre Wahlabsichten eben nicht bei Umfragen zugeben, sondern erst still und heimlich in der Wahlkabine das Kreuz an der ganz fiesen Stelle machen.
Also sind auch in Amerika alle Umfragen mit besonderer Vorsicht zu genießen, da das “Manko” FRAU sich scheinbar weniger bei der Wahlentscheidung durchschlagen würde, als es das “Manko” SCHWARZ tut:
Among white Democrats with a low Racial Resentment Index rating, Obama beat McCain in a hypothetical match-up 78 percent to 17 percent. That is virtually identical to Clinton's margin in the category, 79 percent to 13 percent. But among white Democrats with high scores on the Racial Resentment Index, the picture was very different: Obama led McCain by only 18 points (51 to 33) while Clinton maintained a much larger 59-point lead (78 to 18).
Obama hat umgekehrt aber ein sehr starkes Übergewicht bei den schwarzen Wählern - die aber insgesamt in der Minderheit sind:
More than 80 percent of black voters said they had a favorable opinion of Mr. Obama; about 30 percent of white voters said they had a favorable opinion of him.
Da kann man ja nur froh sein, daß die weiße Mehrheit in Amerika immer kleiner wird - hoffentlich bleibt das so, obwohl all die Evangelikalen Irren im Bible-belt poppen und Kinder ausbrüten wie die Karnickel.
Ich möchte noch einmal einen Kommentar hervorheben:
Po8 hat gesagt...
Rassismus ist halt eine sehr menschliche Eigenschaft. Diese kann leider nur mit der nötigen Intelligenz überwunden werden und selbst dann ist sie weiterhin latent vorhanden...
Doch bevor ein Atheist in Godsowncountry Präsident wird, wird es vorher eine vorbestrafte, drogensüchtige Schwarze, die mindestens einmal abgetrieben hat, dreimal geschieden ist und in einer lesbischen Partnerschaft lebt. ;-)
16. August 2008 23:22
Dazu habe ich inzwischen einen netten Blogeintrag gefunden:
By Kara Miller, Local columnist Posted Sep 07, 2008 @ 12:28 AM Last month, after grilling Barack Obama and John McCain at Saddleback Church, Pastor Rick Warren sat down with CNN's Larry King. Obama and McCain had relished the opportunity to appear at Saddleback - which draws more than 20,000 worshippers a week - to profess their religiosity, consider whether "evil" exists, quote from the Gospel of Matthew, and reminisce about drawing crosses in the sand. When Warren took a valedictory lap on CNN, King jumped right into the religious fray. "Does a person have to believe in God to be president?" King asked. It was a softball question, and Warren knew it. "I would say so," he said. "I couldn't vote for a person who was an atheist, because I would think - I think the presidency is a job too big for one person. I would think there's a little arrogance that says, 'I don't need anybody else.' I could vote for someone of different religions than mine, but I don't know that I could personally vote for somebody who denies that we need somebody greater than ourselves to help us." Most Americans agree with Warren. A USA Today/Gallup poll taken in 2007 found that people were more than twice as likely to vote for an African American as an atheist (94 percent to 45 percent). In fact, people would vote for pretty much anyone over an atheist: a Jewish American (92 percent), a woman (88 percent), a Mormon (72 percent), even someone who's been married three times (67 percent). Can I just say: huh? Does that mean that an atheist who has been married once, works hard, and is an upstanding citizen would lose an election to some morally-questionable guy who's been married three times? It's not a hypothetical, people. We've had president after president and congressman after congressman who have professed their religiosity and then mounted stunning displays of insensitivity, duplicity, and moral laxity. Newt Gingrich (Baptist) left his wife while she was recovering from cancer (he would go on to divorce his second wife and marry a staffer in a Catholic ceremony). John Edwards (Methodist) struck up a relationship with a filmmaker while his wife's cancer was in remission. John McCain (Episcopalian, but attends a Baptist church) got involved with his soon-to-be second wife, Cindy, while he was still married to his first wife, Carol. And, as we all know far too well, Bill Clinton (Baptist) brazenly cheated on Hillary and then lied to the country about it. Amazingly, President Clinton - whose faith obviously didn't prevent his indiscretions - thought that religion might yet repair his marriage post-Lewinsky. So, he invited Rev. Jesse Jackson, who would soon father a child outside his own marriage, to counsel him. Which is simply to say that the fact of being religious - or belonging to a particular religious group - is a poor indicator of behavior. I know several atheists who are among the most straight-laced people I've ever met. They work incredibly hard (sometimes too hard), are faithful to their partners, barely drink, and, I would guess, have never picked up a cigarette. Indeed, in an increasingly global world, impugning or trivializing non-religious people makes no sense. Most people in China and Japan aren't strongly attached to a particular faith (though many may combine elements of Buddhism, Christianity, Shintoism, and Taoism); does that mean we wouldn't elect an Asian-American president unless he or she converted to Catholicism or Episcopalianism? If you don't embrace God, does that efface your record, from workplace accomplishments to civic contributions? Sadly, the language of faith has run away with our politics. Obama and McCain end speeches by imploring God to bless America, as if God needed direction from a presidential candidate. In the Republican Party, questioning the study of evolution has become commonplace. Faith has infiltrated the classroom, eroding science and crippling a nation that already struggles to produce enough scientists and engineers. Imagine, for a moment, that Bristol Palin's parents were atheists, rather than conservative Christians. The country would be going berserk. "This is what happens when you have no moral values," people would mutter. "This is what happens when you shut God out of your children's lives." If the Palins were atheists, they would become the poster family of moral laxity. Instead, they are celebrated by the Christian Right as the poster family of traditional family values. It's a double standard, clearly. A double standard that has - and will continue to - cripple this nation's civil discourse. Kara Miller can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.