I've seen diaries on this here and (3.00 / 4)

elsewhere and then I read the article.  It's just a poll.   It does not attack Obama.

Obama's campaign had a narrative that he would mediate all differences, political, social, economic.  He would "bring us together" in 'hope."  The evangelical nature of his campaign narrative and some followers, along with the "historic" nature of his soon nomination suggested that, in fact, Obama either did bring people together, or reflected a changed environment.

I read diaires and comments on Dkos all last year about how Obama would bring not only Americans, but the world together.  Muslims overseas would like America more, etc.    

Here's an example of ths thinking with one quick goggle search:

Letter: There's a good chance Obama will bring country together again

snip

I think if elected there is a good chance of him bringing our country together again - here, and in the rest of the world.

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/200...

Vote for the candidate that will bring us together, and reach across not only the isle, but across race and class. Barack rejects the rancor that has divided our country for over 20 years and will build a government that works for us, the people of the USA. Go O in in 08!

Obama's Kenyan father and European-Ameriocan mother suggested a blending of all.  This was explictly and implictly used to imply a post-racial era of good things about to begin with his election.  

The campaign used this theme well and obtained the nomination for a first term senator with great ability.

Having used that theme to obtain evangelic supporters, there's nothing wrong with testing the theory.  The poll  shows that, to date, the candidacy of Barack Obama has not done what some of his supporters claimed (with the support of his campaign).

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 08:54:15 AM CDT

Obama's Election Would Be A Symbol To The World! (0.00 / 0)

That the dark days of Bush's contempt are finally over.

Then, maybe America can have a dialog with other countries instead of just arrogantly trying to bully and threaten them, and ignore them when they disagree.

So, yes. Obama's campaign is more about "hope" in other countries than it even is here in America.

I'm pretty cynical about "hope", but if I lived in another country, I'd be "hoping" like mad that America doesn't elect another ignorant child tyrant-bully trying to march over other countries with Jack Boots.

---

by: Cugel @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:46:27 AM CDT

I see my earlier comment (4.00 / 2)

was troll rated.  There is nothing worng with my comment and the troll rating speaks to an intoxication among a few supporters that is danagerous.  I gave $25 to Obama yesterday and wrote a Recommended diary on Daily Kos about it.

That ridiculous attmept to shuit down reasoned discussion harms Barack Obama.    

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:08:57 AM CDT

Your comment neither (0.00 / 0)

addresses the substance of the post, nor the article.  It restates that bringing us together is a theme of the Obama Campaign, no one doubts that.  

Having used that theme to obtain evangelic supporters, there's nothing wrong with testing the theory.  The poll  shows that, to date, the candidacy of Barack Obama has not done what some of his supporters claimed (with the support of his campaign).

Who claimed that Obama's would make African Americans and white people agree on race or his candidacy?  This is a straw man argument.  It seems you are in the habit of charicaturing Obama supporters.

---

by: Jgarza @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:32:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Your explanation (0.00 / 0)

amd ad hominem attack is real bullshit.

My comment directly addressed the post and your attempt to censor it shows such weakness.

If you cannot discuss an issue, it seems that the blogosphere is not the place for you.

Indeed, your action harms Barack Obama.  Refusing to discuss issues is the antithesis of what he seems ot be about.

You could have responded to my comment with your comment, but instead gave me a zero.  Note that I did not do that to you.

If you want to know what I think, please see my diary on Daily Kos from yesterday:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...

Fear of discussion will cause us to lose.  It is people who actually look at isuses with intellectual honesty that will elect Obama.

As for your question, I gave examples in my comment you sought to hide.

Many people believe that "Obama will bring us together."  The campaign used that narrative.    

I wrote further thoughts on this issue today on Daily Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/commen...

I just think it's not that big of a deal. (1+ / 0-)

Recommended by:ScienceRocks

It's only some intoxicated youth who though Barack Obama could mediate all racial and social differences.  Understanding the history of the United States leads to the conclusion that no one could do that.  

Looking at things in a historical perspective, that Obama will be nominated speaks well of his ability to bridge some racial divides and the nations worth since the 1960s toward equality.

There still is overt, covert, and subtle racism.  

When Obama is seen as a man, rather than more, one can appreciate what he accomplished.  He could be elected President.  That's pretty damn good.  Ending racism in a nation with a nearly 400 year history (counting colonial times) of slavery, segregation, discrimination and racism, is too much to ask of any person, even Barack Obama.

The expectations are way too high.  The campaign used that to motivate some, but now it's time to be serious, if we want him to win.  

After his election, there still will be racism in America.  People in inner cities will still suffer.  Not everyone will be brought together.  Blacks and whites will still live in segregated residential areas in many places.  Schools and churches are segregated in many places. Opportunites are less for African Americans, especially if poor.  That will still exist.  We might do more to help ameliorate these things, but they may be there even after Obama's two terms.  Hopefully, it will be less.  That's what we fight for, to make it better for real people.

His election will achive much toward the goal of equality and justice for all.  Going forward toward that goal is plenty good.

There still is much work to be done.  Unrealistic expectations don't help.

In that sense, the NY Times article is no big deal.  

"There is one man who knows in his heart that we have to build one America - not two - and that man is Barack Obama." John Edwards 5/14/08

by TomP on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 07:30:49 AM PDT

[ Parent | Reply to This ]

Seeking to hide discussion of a real issue is not democratic.  It's fear based and certainly not progressive.  

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:28:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

the headline and the article are different (4.00 / 2)

The headline is ridiculous, but the article seems to me to be mostly about the continuing racial divide in this country, and the fact that whites think more racial progress has been made than blacks do.  That's nothing new, and given that racial divide, it shouldn't be surprising that more blacks support Obama than do whites.

But I don't see the article itself critiquing Obama in any way or saying that this is somehow his fault for not overcoming.  The problem to me is the headline, and headlines are generally not written by the writer of the article.  

I'm not saying to let the Times off the hook for the headline, btw, but that's different from saying that its published an entire article based upon that impossible premise.  

---

by: Aunt Martha @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:19:36 AM CDT

The headline is ridiculous and frames the whole thing (0.00 / 0)

The idea that the headline isn't written by the author is an okay excuse for a weird article in your local newspaper, but not for the NY Times.

The headline "POLL FINDS OBAMA ISN'T CLOSING DIVIDE ON RACE" paints a ridiculous straw man.  This underlying assumption -- that Obama should have, or claimed to -- close the divide is what's offensive.  Even if his campaign suggested some racial reconciliation, was it supposed to happen already?

---

by: spectatus @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 15:16:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm glad Obama responded (4.00 / 1)

and hope others review the response.  The concern was that the story painted did NOT totally reflect the numbers - and that blaring headlines make suggestions to the general public who may or may not read the article, much less dig into the actual statistics.

This is becoming a theme for the media, or maybe it always was.

QT

Visit the Obama Project

WindOnWater.net

---

by: QueenTiye @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 12:11:27 PM CDT

what an offensive statement (0.00 / 0)

"Finally, century after century has gone by and people still can't agree on religion. Another failure of leadership brought to us by Jesus."

I hope you're kidding here, but in the event you're not, this is extremely offensive to me and to people like me who put Jesus at the center of their existence.

So much for progressive (i.e. "tolerant") values!

Oh, wait, I see you are kidding. But the joke is in poor taste anyway.

---

by: Zeitgeist9000 @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 13:42:24 PM CDT