Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Lets not over-react to Obama's win"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
KennedyGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 02:52 PM
Original message
"Lets not over-react to Obama's win"

http://www.michaelfauntroy.com/2008/01/lambasted-for-n.html
"I find myself increasingly agitated at the response to Barack Obama’s win in the Iowa caucuses. I have concluded that far too many people – from the news media to Obama supporters around the country – are reading too much into what it means for the presidential campaign and race relations. Yes, it was impressive. Yes, it was historic. Yes, it caught many people by surprise. Yes, it begins to give people reason to believe that America might be ready to elect a Black president. However, I feel compelled to make two points in my effort to warn people not to overreact to Obama’s win.



First, beware the fawning media. Virtually all of the coverage of Obama’s win has been over-the-top, almost as if he won the nomination. This isn’t a surprise with Obama, as the national news media have treated him as if he were the Second Coming from the moment he rocketed to national prominence following his speech at the 2004 Democratic national convention. His personal story and charisma have charmed the media into doing almost no critical analysis of his political positions. Most of the coverage I saw tried to suggest that his win was proof that White voters have overcome their aversion to Black presidential candidates. His chief opponent, Hilary Clinton, on the other hand, has been bashed by the media consistently since she hit the nation’s consciousness in 1992. If Clinton’s coverage were half as positive as Obama’s since her rise to national prominence, then she might have the nomination locked up by now".


Michael K. Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University, where he teaches courses in urban policy and American government and specializes in race and American politics
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sunonmars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. What I'd like
I think it should be 3 months of debates and campaigning like the GE and then all the states voting in 1 night. It puts everyone on an even basis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Except the voters.
If all states voted the same day, there would be no point in campaigning anywhere except the high-delegate states - NY, CA, TX, FL, etc. The small states would be ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
origin1286 Donating Member (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. True
But how is that any different than it is now?

Iowa, NH, and SC virtually seal a nomination.

Perhaps a funnel system. They group states by region/population and have those states hold their primaries on the same day. In order to continue, you must receive a certain % of those states delegates or else all of you DID win are split between those who met the threshold.

Eventually, this weeds out the weak candidates and keeps the strong candidates and the borderline candidates in the race. It also forces campaigning in a larger number of states (which in turn dilutes the amount of money spent in any one state)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
origin1286 Donating Member (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Hm
Put all the primaries on the same day in the middle of the year. Problem solved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
4. He's beating every republican candidate in Iowa by double digits
Obama defeats McCain by 17 points. (+12)
Obama defeats Huckabee by 23 points. (+13)
Obama defeats Romney by 26 points. (+12)
Obama defeats Giuliani by 40 points. (+19)


http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/7/14759/89209/963/432273

It's not some media conspiracy, people like the guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Yeah, but Edwards has been beating all these Republicans consistently for the last 6 months,
and Obama has not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sulawesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-07-08 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. Let's not under react either...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Dec 23rd 2024, 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC