www.usatoday.com/news/poli...view_N.htm
Second paragraph- do you think that what she said could be called a racist statement? I am just curious, not trying to start a politic flame war.
Or am I?
;-)
Second paragraph- do you think that what she said could be called a racist statement? I am just curious, not trying to start a politic flame war.
Or am I?
;-)
posted by:
|
Portland
|
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 1:39 PMhmm.
that one's interesting... openly playing for the
woman's vote and now the *white* vote...
in my country, it depends on who makes the best bannock... -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Fri, May 9, 2008 - 7:04 AM<As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.">
The order of her words and the emphasis might tell you something about her psychology.. or you might read too much into a discussion of voting trends examined on the base of employment and race. Her spin doctors have probably has a chat to her about her words.. Big call to make a final decision on one quote - but perhaps something to keep your ears peeled in case there is more of this from her.
Might go either way. I am also assuming she is correctly quoted and in context. Not being particularly interested in "race" or "colour" or such (and also not in the details of American Politics) - I read it in my Australian simpleness as "the particular demographic" - being employed white voters. If you think looking at demographics based on employment and race is racist - then it is certainly a racist comment (and poll). For me however, I think she was simply describing the weakening support for Omana amongst a certain demographic as reported by a poll. Support "among working, hard-working Americans, black Americans, is strengthening again... " would also not be a racist comment to me - but again simply talking about support within a certain demographic... I guess you have to do that because in order to follow voting trends - you need differentials such as age, gender, employment, location, wealth, religion, etc to break it down into small groups in order to discover where support is strong and weak. Doing that perpetuates "race" and hence is a bad thing - but tell that to a campaign manager and he will tell you you're crazy ..
Anyway - not my problem Haha :) I don't have to make decisions about her at the ballot box :) -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Mon, May 12, 2008 - 8:59 AM>><As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."<<
Hillary is playing the race card hard. The stuff about "hard-working white Americans who had not completed college" is an attempt to send a slimly coded message that screams, Hey, all you racist white folks and rednecks who are afraid of minorities vote for me. Its definitely a divisive, racist tactic, and one more reason to back Obama who truly seems to be trying to get past that bullshit. Hasn't anyone noticed that Hillary's support among older white voters is reflexive of that group's fear of minorities? I was a huge hillary supporter back when she was actually a liberal but now that her political gamesmanship has reached the level of do anything to win or atr least tear your opponent down to where he can't win has turned me off to her completely. I hope Obama takes the nomination although I would vote Hillary if it came down to her and Grandpa warhawk.
-
-
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 1:48 PMElaine - Sure, you just want to see what a group hug looks like when everyone's on fire! ;-)
It certainly comes off as if she's equating being hard working with being white.
Overall, I've found it kinda weird to watch two insanely rich, privileged white boomers act as though they believe Black people owe them something. Clinton certainly seems determined to dig her own grave - or at least whoever is running her campaign is .
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 1:52 PMMeh. I am just sick of race being discussed at all during this campaign.
Economy
War
Environment
Healthcare
Education
Constitutional Rights
Unless the candidates are talking about these issues then I just don't give a shit. -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 1:58 PMIt seems to me that it isn't a racist statement,as a racial statement. Poorly chosen and poorly worded. The spin is already starting on this, of course.. I studied that comment for a while trying to decide and then got curious enough to wonder what other people might think of the same words as I was seeing..
I hear ya, Why,next it will be about the candidates shoe sizes..
Though i have had a lot of fun with this campaign so far, but I like me some crazy chaos as long as I can make snide comments about it.
Thing is- I used to be a fan of hers not so long ago.
-
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 1:57 PMHer desperation is so pathetic, I'm embarrassed for her. Does she not realize he has the majority of votes? If Obama couldn't get white votes, he wouldn't be ahead. I'm so sick of hearing about how people vote based on race, it's such a gross generalization and this election should have proved that point by now. Just another reason not to vote for her... her head is still stuck in the stone ages.
I like her policies about as much as his, but when it comes to character, she has really shocked and awed me. Racist? not as much as just being a sore loser. I can't believe the choices she has made in this race, it's really tarnishing her image and that gets right to the heart of good decision making- a necessary trait if you're going to be president (at least one hopes!)
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 3:04 PMClinton made an observation on a statement originating with the AP. Clinton didn't equate anything with anything, she gave a laundry list from the AP survey, nor did she "play" for any class of vote - she repeated what the AP reported, no more, no less.
"that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me." "There's a pattern emerging here," she said.
Why should she not quote a statement by an independent organization stating a positive for her campaign.
The reporters said "Clinton's blunt remarks about race. . ", and started the spin, spin, spin.
If the AP had stated Obama's support among poor hispanics was weakening, Clinton would have said the same thing, using "hispanic", and no one would have said a word. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 4:02 PMThe poll was racial. The finding of a "pattern" and repeating of the poll as stated with the "whites" in it is racial pandering: i.e. designed to increase her appeal among racists. It makes it appear that she has mostly conceded the 'black' vote to Obama and is trying to counteract this by broadening her appeal among blue collar whites, whom conventional wisdom seems to suggest are racist (I disagree with conventional wisdom on this).
If she wasn't trying to pander to racists, she could have said "APs latest poll finds me gaining support among hard working blue collar workers." Why she left the 'whites' in and the 'who had not completed college' is beyond me. The two groups fit nicely into the less insulting term of 'blue collar' no real need to separate them out by race. I'm assuming she wasn't talking about unemployed people because she used the term 'hard working'. -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 4:56 PMI disagree with conventional wisdom on that too.
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 7:37 PM"The poll was racial. The finding of a "pattern" and repeating of the poll as stated with the "whites" in it is racial pandering:"
How, exactly is a poll racial? Or is the AP itself a racist organization?
Other than the fact that any poll which puts people into categories which include race, may be called "racial". Every poll in which I have taken part has asked me to place myself in various categories. I assume the AP did the same
The reason for having polls is to identify opinions and trends among various groups, or for some issues, the population as a whole.
Finding patterns is part of the reason for having polls in the first place. If there IS a pattern, it should be reported. If the results of a poll show a racial divide, I fervently believe it should not be suppressed. We need to know this stuff.
But an income divide is OK, because it isn't "racial". Apparently so: "she could have said "APs latest poll finds me gaining support among hard working blue collar workers."
It bothers me when facts are deemed unacceptable for publication because they contain information which is politically incorrect.
Applying such logic to past circumstances would result in a poll taken in Germany in 1938 being condemned as "racial pandering" because it showed a large number of Jews disappearing from public view. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 8:05 PMFirst of all, I never said AP was racist. The poll, as you yourself admit, was racial. Hillary Clinton's use of the information was racial pandering. I stand by my opinon. Placing yourself in various catagories is certainly part of polling and the income divide is a fact of life. If you had shown me a poll that separated us by class, I would have said it was class based and using it to political ends was class pandering. There is not much class warfare in this country, if you haven't noticed, at least none that is open. Politicians and the capitalists that control them have convinced most of the country that we are able to freely move up in class by hard work and education and thus we must make the upper class as unfettered as possible (low capital gains, top income, and inheritance taxes are very popular even though they don't effect most people).
"Facts" rarely come from polls. The questions are inherently biased, the results misused, and the polls are often misquoted. A census would have shown fewer jews. You win a prize for bringing up the holocaust in a rather far-fetched tangent, Edward. -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 8:53 PMYAY! Thread be Godwinned.. -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 10:19 PMGod bless us every one.
We need all the help we can get.
The country's in the middle of a slow motion wreck, and all we talk about is race.
Or some young female "personality" behaving in bizarre fashion.
-
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 10:02 PM"You win a prize for bringing up the holocaust in a rather far-fetched tangent, Edward."
I cannot accept the award.
The logical train of thought which leads one to that inevitable conclusion was in fact your creation.
The best way to test an hypothesis is to extend it to its extreme limits. If one rapidly runs into inconsistencies, absurdities (as in this case), or contradictions -it's time to rethink.
In polls, people gave their opinions. They also identify their race, although usually that's an option left to their choice. By that very fact, I suppose one could say any poll on any subject, be it presidential candidates or pop-up toasters is "racial".
Opinions are another matter. There were many (some still) of the opinion George W. Bush was chosen by God to be our President.
Others opine Hillary is the female anti-christ, and others of the opinion Obama is a latter-day JFK.
Maybe they are all correct. -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 10:12 PMPardons and apologies.
"The questions are inherently biased"
I left out the following link showing the actual questions used by the telephone interviewers:
www.ipsos-na.com/news/clie...sp_pdf.cfm
Tribe members may judge for themselves as to the inherent bias thereof. -
-
Unsu...
Troll Logic
Thu, May 8, 2008 - 11:13 PM>Other than the fact that any poll which puts people into categories which include race, may be called "racial". <
My point, exactly. Do you think race really has any bearing on people's satisfaction with their pop-up toasters? Should toastmaster market different toasters to all the various ethnic groups? Or is your stretching 'logic' to it's conclusions limited to polls?
As far as biased questions go, do you think that question D8:"Would you describe yourself as a born again or evangelical christian or not?" is an unbiased question?
Or how 'bout question D10: "Are you of Hispanic ethnicity?"
They will ask you D11 "Are you white, black, asian, or some other race?" only if you answer 'no' to Hispanic.
So, yeah, I would say the questions are biased. I don't know who you talk to in your daily life, but the people I talk to are concerned about a lot more than race and the drug escapades of Britney et al so don't try and paint me with that brush. As far as the award, you are fully deserving of it, I am not the one who dragged the jews (who are not a race, by the way) into a question of whether or not Hillary Clinton's comments on a very specific topic were racist. I don't think we are in a 'slow motion wreck' it's pretty obvious to me that we (that would be white non-college educated people) are being fucked over by the uber weathy and being prepared for servitude to them . If you think Hillary Clinton is gonna save you from that, I feel like you are looking for saviors among your keepers. -
-
Re: Troll Logic
Fri, May 9, 2008 - 7:40 AMDefinitation of Bias (Miriam Webster online):
"1: a line diagonal to the grain of a fabric; especially : a line at a 45 degree angle to the selvage often utilized in the cutting of garments for smoother fit
2 a: a peculiarity in the shape of a bowl that causes it to swerve when rolled on the green in lawn bowling b: the tendency of a bowl to swerve; also : the impulse causing this tendency c: the swerve of the bowl
3 a: bent, tendency b: an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice c: an instance of such prejudice d (1): deviation of the expected value of a statistical estimate from the quantity it estimates (2): systematic error introduced into sampling or testing by selecting or encouraging one outcome or answer over others"
Assuming (3) to be the definition applying in the present case - How does the question "Are you of Hispanic ethnicity?" meet any of the criteria stated.
Please note D11 could easily have been asked before D10, with the same results. A comment on question order such as this might be appropriate from ThirtyNine.
The AP pays for these polls to be run, and reports the results as news. AP has a vested interest in seeing that the polls are as accurate and fair as possible. Their credibility as a news source depends upon it, and credibility is the Holy Grail of news services.
Have said in other post, and in personal conversation: "If Obama is the candidate, will vote for him, hoping there is substance behind the retoric, and the DC sharks don't chew him to pieces. If Hillary is the candidate, will vote for her, hoping she can become less confrontational, and the knee-jerk Clinton bashers won't destroy her effectiveness by constant belittling."
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Troll Logic - another topic needed
Fri, May 9, 2008 - 7:53 AMYour statement: "we (that would be white non-college educated people) are being fucked over by the uber weathy and being prepared for servitude to them ."
Deserves another topic, with emphasis on how that problem may be addressed.
I believe we as a society have, like sheep, put ourselves in this situation, and we need to get ourselves out. Claiming conspiracy, bad politics, and corrupt government is passing the buck.
And that no elected official, or even a group of same, will or can do the job for us.
As Brother Dave Gardner said years ago; "People used to pray to God for rain. Now they call Washington." -
-
Re: Troll Logic - another topic needed
Fri, May 9, 2008 - 8:25 AMEdward >> As Brother Dave Gardner said years ago; "People used to pray to God for rain. Now they call Washington." <<
Well put.
Asking the government to solve society's problems is like a bunch of hens asking a fox to guard their hen house. The primary beneficiary of that arrangement will be the fox.
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.Unsu...
Re: Troll Logic
Mon, May 12, 2008 - 11:05 PMOf course I was talking about the shape of a bowl on green grass, what else could I have possibly meant? The way Nazi tires were constructed?
If the question was asked: Are you Hispanic? if no ask: Are you White? Are you Black? Etc. I would say that - especially if asked in random order - they were unbiased. But the way that question is asked, it lumps four races into one category and separates out Hispanics all by themselves. So each Hispanic counts as one and whiteblackasiansomeother are counted as one. So if one white answers, one black answers, one asian answers, one Samoan answers and one Hispanic answers the data would say their were four 'other' catagory and one Hispanic. No bias at all?
The worst, which you skipped over, was the 'Would you describe yourself as an evangelical or born again Christian or not?' Maybe if they had left off the OR NOT I might have been able to buy this one (maybe not) but having to use a negative to describe yourself to save the poor overworked surveyor from coding a question like 'What, if any, is your religious affiliation?' just doesn't strike me as unbiased. The sad part is that AP is probably one of the least biased of the poll takers. I get polled on the phone and can usually tell within a few questions who is wanting the info and what they are wanting it for.
And to take it all back to the original point: Hillary Clinton used the information from the poll to pander to (ask for votes from) people she perceives to be racists. Yes, that is my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Fri, May 9, 2008 - 9:59 AM<<Facts" rarely come from polls. The questions are inherently biased, the results misused, and the polls are often misquoted>>
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" ---Mark Twain
This whole race is utterly ridiculous. But not more than any other political race, ever. The press always chases its own collective tail...the news gets spun, and then everyone is listening to the endless spin on the spin.
The world might come to an abrupt end if the candidates actually expressed their own opinions and policy ideas, and stood by them, instead of trying to figure out which way the spin is spinning, and ride the most powerful wave.
Or maybe just a random, national lottery.
Feeling burnt out on politics today. :-) -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Fri, May 9, 2008 - 11:01 AMi stopped reading at 'Germany in 1938'... blah.
-
Unsu...
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Sat, May 10, 2008 - 6:46 PM>The world might come to an abrupt end <
Thanks, Free, you've taken all the hypothesi to their 'logical' conclusions. :-) -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Sat, May 10, 2008 - 8:50 PMlol - some days i'm not sure it would be a bad thing for the world to come to abrupt end.
i'd miss the hazelnut lattes , though.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Fri, May 9, 2008 - 5:15 AM'I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on," she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."
"There's a pattern emerging here," she said.'
Ok OK. I’m going to answer this as a surveyor. I can tell you as someone who has designed questionnaires/surveys: we want to know as much as we can! We’d ask even more questions if we thought people would answer them! (Ie the survey takes time to complete so we have to be quite judicious at the end of the day.) Any survey will face this issue of items numbers (questions), time and response rate. All surveys are designed to match categorical (yes/no)) data to continuous data (ungrouped) - so Sex and Income etc - it gets very complicated. Every surveyor wants to match things like age group, race, class, sex, years of education to everything else - from voting patterns to dementia. A skilled statistician makes it their job to finds a link..
Is Hillary making a racist statement?
This a circular argument. In order to justify using race in statistics you have to show statistically that race is a factor in voting! Do you see what I mean? You have to use stats to justify stats!
My 10 cents… -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Mon, May 12, 2008 - 8:39 PMThank You!
Worth at least ten bucks.
-
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Tue, May 13, 2008 - 8:35 PMVoting results are almost completely in for the West Virginia Primary.
The margin of victory for Clinton is greatest In the counties with the highest percentage of white blue-collar workers.
Highest margins are Mingo County, and Logan County with 85% and 84% of the vote for Clinton.
Kanawha County, the most urban and economically diverse County, 59% Clinton, 37% Obama, Edwards, 4%.
Jefferson County, a bedroom community region for the DC area; 49% Clinton, 46% Obama, Edwards, 5%.
For the State overall, Clinton 66% (16 delegates), Obama 27% (7 delegates), Edwards, 7% (0 delegates)
For West Virginia, both the poll results, and the Clinton statement were accurate.
For many, it would appear, the Truth is racist. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Tue, May 13, 2008 - 9:11 PM>For many, it would appear, the Truth is racist<
Or that racial pandering works. -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Tue, May 13, 2008 - 10:17 PMOh, forgot to ask earlier. What does this mean?
"If you think Hillary Clinton is gonna save you from that, I feel like you are looking for saviors among your keepers."
Thanks. -
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Wed, May 21, 2008 - 5:42 PM
-
-
-
-
Re: Clinton Interveiw
Tue, May 27, 2008 - 4:46 PMl'm curious what you all think of this: www.youtube.com/watch
My thoughts on this conversation....l agree with everything in Rich's original post, Elaine's points about the differences between racial and racist, and Fido's opinion that it was the semantics of it that made it suspicious vs. plain reporting of facts. l understand what Edward was saying; l just think that there are different ways of relaying facts in a situation that is inevitably based on race for the simple fact that it's history in the making. Reporting the basic percentages, it is clearly based on race and gender, no matter how you cut it. For that very reason, special fucking care needs to be taken in how one words themselves, and after Clinton's assassination comments of her own, it's very, very hard not to recognize the implications.
Thing is, like Yuni, l'm sick of race being discussed, and think that there are far more important issues on the table. l think the race thing is inevitable, but l don't see Hillary as a woman or Barack as a black man as much as l did at the beginning when l was just considering the weight of it all. Now l'm starting to see them as candidates l want to represent me; it is the very comments and fighting tactics on either part that are clarifying my preferences for me for the very reason that one seems to be focusing on race and defamation more than the other. l certainly don't want anyone representing me that thinks putting a presidential candidate's name in the same sentence as 'assassination' is anything but abominable. Obama's got his own demons there, but he hasn't stooped quite to that level yet, so maybe the race thing is a good way to maintain perspective and have a clearer idea of who l choose to vote for.
