MIT Researchers: Obama Won on Race

[William Joyce]

Yep.

ParaPundit: Researchers Find Obama Won Election On Race

 

[Sunni Man]

Everyone knows it but are too afraid to say it

 

[YWN666]

I've never seen so many sore losers wanting to taint Obama's win.

 

[Svante]

Everyone knows it but are too afraid to say it

i will say this.Obama he become th e president becuase black and hispanskt people vote for him in election.white people there vote for Obama allso and he will not b e presiident if white peole not vote for him.

 

[Ravi]

Yep.

ParaPundit: Researchers Find Obama Won Election On Race

Unless there was an exit poll question asking, "Did you vote for Obama because he is black," the conclusions these two eggheads drew are unconvincing.

Shame on them.

 

[editec]

Yes, I'm certain that the economy and two land wars in Asia and the disgracful outcomes from Katrina had nothing to do with it.

Everybody voted for Obama because we are suffering from liberal guilt.

You sometimes are a smart man, but when to comes to issues of race you are blinded by your own goofy prejudices, William.

Hell Bush fucked up so badly that I could have been elected POTUS, and believe me, I'm not (intellectually speaking) as much as wart on Obama's ass.

 

[JohnStOnge]

Yep.

Unless there was an exit poll question asking, "Did you vote for Obama because he is black," the conclusions these two eggheads drew are unconvincing.

Shame on them.

There actually were exit poll questions about the extent to which race was a factor in the way people voted and unless people were lying to poll takers I don't think there's any doubt the "voting based on race" phenomenon played to Obama's favor. I think just about any reasonably viable Democratic candidate would've won the election regardless. I'd post a link to exit polling but for some mysterious reason this site says I can't post links until I've done at least 15 posts.

People who said race was the most important factor in how their vote voted for Obama by an estimated 58% to 41% over McCain. But that was only an estimated 2% of voters. People who said race was a factor to some extent voted for Obama by an estimated 53% to 46% and that was 19% of voters. However, you can see that Obama also won among the 80% who said race was not a factor at all; by 52% - 46%.

The basic pattern was the same as it's been since at least 1972. Beginning with 1972 Democrats are not known to have beaten Republicans among Whites in a Presidential election. I say "not known to have beaten" because the exit polling estimate for the Dole Clinton race had Dole getting 40% of the White vote and Clinton getting 39%. Too close of a poll result to call. But that race was unusual in that Ross Perot got 20% of the White vote. Meanwhile, Republicans have never done better among Blacks than Richard Nixon's estimated 18% in 1972.

 

[William Joyce]

Hell Bush fucked up so badly

Sure, but McCain still got the majority of the white vote, which is a pretty incredible display of racial loyalty given that McCain sucks about as bad as Bush. Obama not only got the clear majority of the minority votes, he boosted more total to come out. And the way I see it, any black person who didn't vote for Obama must have been insane. But you know blacks weren't making their decision by gathering in a room and saying, "Hey, guys, let's look at the pros and cons of both McCain and Obama, and then decide." Nah. They said, "I'm black, he's black, end of the fucking story!"

Bottom line is, race drove the thing.

 

[YWN666]

But you know blacks weren't making their decision by gathering in a room and saying, "Hey, guys, let's look at the pros and cons of both McCain and Obama, and then decide." Nah. They said, "I'm black, he's black, end of the fucking story!"

Bottom line is, race drove the thing.

A rather simplistic way of looking at it.

 

[William Joyce]

A rather simplistic way of looking at it.

But is it correct?

Sometimes, when people don't like the simple answer, say, "It's more complicated than that." When they don't like the complex answer, they say, "No, it's really simple."

 

[Modbert]

A rather simplistic way of looking at it.

But is it correct?

Sometimes, when people don't like the simple answer, say, "It's more complicated than that." When they don't like the complex answer, they say, "No, it's really simple."

And yet you ignore facts like John Kerry got 88% of the Black vote, 53% of the Hispanic vote, 56% of the Asian vote, and 54% of other non-white votes.

John Kerry also received 54% of the Moderate and 15% of the Conservative vote. 41% of the white vote, 51% of the female vote.

And that was John Kerry, so imagine an actual good Democratic candidate like Obama.

Obama received:

95% of the Black Vote, 67% of the Hispanic vote, 62% of the Asian vote, 66% of other non-white votes.

He also received 60% of the Moderate vote, and 20% of the Conservative vote. 43% of the White vote and 56% of the female vote.

Obama also beat McCain 49-48% in the Male vote.

So what does this tell us?

Obama did better in every non-white category, he got a higher % of Whites then Kerry, a higher number of females and a much higher number of both Moderates and Conservatives.

In fact, I'm pretty sure the only category across the board that Obama lost was White men 54-44%.

But hey bucko, you don't think perhaps when TWENTY PERCENT OF CONSERVATIVES VOTE FOR OBAMA that perhaps your candidate wasn't that just good? That along with SIXTY PERCENT OF MODERATES. I mean really William, get over it; a man who is half African-American is in the White House.

No matter how much you wish it wasn't true, this country voted in such a man because they thought he was the better candidate.

This thread is bullshit and really should be moved to Conspiracy Theory but that's just my opinion.

 

[elvis]

A rather simplistic way of looking at it.

But is it correct?

Sometimes, when people don't like the simple answer, say, "It's more complicated than that." When they don't like the complex answer, they say, "No, it's really simple."

And yet you ignore facts like John Kerry got 88% of the Black vote, 53% of the Hispanic vote, 56% of the Asian vote, and 54% of other non-white votes.

John Kerry also received 54% of the Moderate and 15% of the Conservative vote. 41% of the white vote, 51% of the female vote.

And that was John Kerry, so imagine an actual good Democratic candidate like Obama.

Obama received:

95% of the Black Vote, 67% of the Hispanic vote, 62% of the Asian vote, 66% of other non-white votes.

He also received 60% of the Moderate vote, and 20% of the Conservative vote. 43% of the White vote and 56% of the female vote.

Obama also beat McCain 49-48% in the Male vote.

So what does this tell us?

Obama did better in every non-white category, he got a higher % of Whites then Kerry, a higher number of females and a much higher number of both Moderates and Conservatives.

In fact, I'm pretty sure the only category across the board that Obama lost was White men 54-44%.

But hey bucko, you don't think perhaps when TWENTY PERCENT OF CONSERVATIVES VOTE FOR OBAMA that perhaps your candidate wasn't that just good? That along with SIXTY PERCENT OF MODERATES. I mean really William, get over it; a man who is half African-American is in the White House.

No matter how much you wish it wasn't true, this country voted in such a man because they thought he was the better candidate.

This thread is bullshit and really should be moved to Conspiracy Theory but that's just my opinion.

But Obama garnared nearly 90 percent of the black vote in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, which MAY have put him over the top. If 90 percent of whites had voted for Hillary and Edwards (or against Obama, as some would see it), people would have been screaming racism, yet no one screamed racism in these primaries. Help me understand that.

 

[Modbert]

But is it correct?

Sometimes, when people don't like the simple answer, say, "It's more complicated than that." When they don't like the complex answer, they say, "No, it's really simple."

And yet you ignore facts like John Kerry got 88% of the Black vote, 53% of the Hispanic vote, 56% of the Asian vote, and 54% of other non-white votes.

John Kerry also received 54% of the Moderate and 15% of the Conservative vote. 41% of the white vote, 51% of the female vote.

And that was John Kerry, so imagine an actual good Democratic candidate like Obama.

Obama received:

95% of the Black Vote, 67% of the Hispanic vote, 62% of the Asian vote, 66% of other non-white votes.

He also received 60% of the Moderate vote, and 20% of the Conservative vote. 43% of the White vote and 56% of the female vote.

Obama also beat McCain 49-48% in the Male vote.

So what does this tell us?

Obama did better in every non-white category, he got a higher % of Whites then Kerry, a higher number of females and a much higher number of both Moderates and Conservatives.

In fact, I'm pretty sure the only category across the board that Obama lost was White men 54-44%.

But hey bucko, you don't think perhaps when TWENTY PERCENT OF CONSERVATIVES VOTE FOR OBAMA that perhaps your candidate wasn't that just good? That along with SIXTY PERCENT OF MODERATES. I mean really William, get over it; a man who is half African-American is in the White House.

No matter how much you wish it wasn't true, this country voted in such a man because they thought he was the better candidate.

This thread is bullshit and really should be moved to Conspiracy Theory but that's just my opinion.

But Obama garnared nearly 90 percent of the black vote in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, which MAY have put him over the top. If 90 percent of whites had voted for Hillary and Edwards (or against Obama, as some would see it), people would have been screaming racism, yet no one screamed racism in these primaries. Help me understand that.

This is a unrelated attack on my argument because of the numbers I have proven. The primaries and general election were certainly two different things.

By the way, do you have the statistics of such numbers laying around? I'd love to see them.

 

[elvis]

And yet you ignore facts like John Kerry got 88% of the Black vote, 53% of the Hispanic vote, 56% of the Asian vote, and 54% of other non-white votes.

John Kerry also received 54% of the Moderate and 15% of the Conservative vote. 41% of the white vote, 51% of the female vote.

And that was John Kerry, so imagine an actual good Democratic candidate like Obama.

Obama received:

95% of the Black Vote, 67% of the Hispanic vote, 62% of the Asian vote, 66% of other non-white votes.

He also received 60% of the Moderate vote, and 20% of the Conservative vote. 43% of the White vote and 56% of the female vote.

Obama also beat McCain 49-48% in the Male vote.

So what does this tell us?

Obama did better in every non-white category, he got a higher % of Whites then Kerry, a higher number of females and a much higher number of both Moderates and Conservatives.

In fact, I'm pretty sure the only category across the board that Obama lost was White men 54-44%.

But hey bucko, you don't think perhaps when TWENTY PERCENT OF CONSERVATIVES VOTE FOR OBAMA that perhaps your candidate wasn't that just good? That along with SIXTY PERCENT OF MODERATES. I mean really William, get over it; a man who is half African-American is in the White House.

No matter how much you wish it wasn't true, this country voted in such a man because they thought he was the better candidate.

This thread is bullshit and really should be moved to Conspiracy Theory but that's just my opinion.

But Obama garnared nearly 90 percent of the black vote in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, which MAY have put him over the top. If 90 percent of whites had voted for Hillary and Edwards (or against Obama, as some would see it), people would have been screaming racism, yet no one screamed racism in these primaries. Help me understand that.

This is a unrelated attack on my argument because of the numbers I have proven. The primaries and general election were certainly two different things.

By the way, do you have the statistics of such numbers laying around? I'd love to see them.

If he hadn't won the democratic nomination, he clearly wouldn't have become President. Yes, I have posted these figures in the past. He won, I would say between 85 and 90 percent. It is difficult to get all that information together. I can post the figures at some point, but not tonight.

 

[Modbert]

But Obama garnared nearly 90 percent of the black vote in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, which MAY have put him over the top. If 90 percent of whites had voted for Hillary and Edwards (or against Obama, as some would see it), people would have been screaming racism, yet no one screamed racism in these primaries. Help me understand that.

This is a unrelated attack on my argument because of the numbers I have proven. The primaries and general election were certainly two different things.

By the way, do you have the statistics of such numbers laying around? I'd love to see them.

If he hadn't won the democratic nomination, he clearly wouldn't have become President. Yes, I have posted these figures in the past. He won, I would say between 85 and 90 percent. It is difficult to get all that information together. I can post the figures at some point, but not tonight.

Well I'd like to see these numbers before making a full analysis. However, I can tell you by the time NH was over that John Edwards was basically the odd man out and really was irrelevant. After several comments by Bill Clinton among several other variables, the "first black President" and his wife Hill offended alot of black voters.

I have no doubt in my mind that Obama most likely got at least 85% of the African American vote. However, we must also take in account the number of whites voting compared to Blacks and the number that each side got. That along with Hispanics and other non-white votes.

 

[andrewwang]

Go Obama!

 

[William Joyce]

A rather simplistic way of looking at it.

But is it correct?

Sometimes, when people don't like the simple answer, say, "It's more complicated than that." When they don't like the complex answer, they say, "No, it's really simple."

And yet you ignore facts like John Kerry got 88% of the Black vote, 53% of the Hispanic vote, 56% of the Asian vote, and 54% of other non-white votes.

John Kerry also received 54% of the Moderate and 15% of the Conservative vote. 41% of the white vote, 51% of the female vote.

And that was John Kerry, so imagine an actual good Democratic candidate like Obama.

Obama received:

95% of the Black Vote, 67% of the Hispanic vote, 62% of the Asian vote, 66% of other non-white votes.

He also received 60% of the Moderate vote, and 20% of the Conservative vote. 43% of the White vote and 56% of the female vote.

Obama also beat McCain 49-48% in the Male vote.

So what does this tell us?

Obama did better in every non-white category, he got a higher % of Whites then Kerry, a higher number of females and a much higher number of both Moderates and Conservatives.

In fact, I'm pretty sure the only category across the board that Obama lost was White men 54-44%.

But hey bucko, you don't think perhaps when TWENTY PERCENT OF CONSERVATIVES VOTE FOR OBAMA that perhaps your candidate wasn't that just good? That along with SIXTY PERCENT OF MODERATES. I mean really William, get over it; a man who is half African-American is in the White House.

No matter how much you wish it wasn't true, this country voted in such a man because they thought he was the better candidate.

This thread is bullshit and really should be moved to Conspiracy Theory but that's just my opinion.

John McCain "my candidate"?

Yo, Robert. You need to pay closer attention. I'm not a Republican partisan. I'm a white advocate and racial realist. Ask around. It gets me a lot of hate posts, but I'm never accused of being a shill for the GOP.

Anyway, I think the utter crappiness of McCain as a candidate -- paired with the relative slickness of Obama as a candidate -- serves to validate my point. If race weren't an issue, it would have been a freakin' blowout. But it wasn't. It was actually much closer than it "should" have been.

Race explains it.

Blacks vote black. Whites vote white. But nobody will own up to "racism".

 

[PoliticalChic]

I've never seen so many sore losers wanting to taint Obama's win.

Yes, you're right: he won because there are so many voters whose belt size is higher than their IQ's.

How Obama Got Elected

Zogby Poll

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points
97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates
Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions
57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)
71.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)
82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)
88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)
56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).
And yet.....
Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes
Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter
And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!
Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.
Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

 

[PoliticalChic]

Go Obama!

I agree: I wish he'd go away, also.

Gong Hay Fa Choi!

 

[jillian]

You're not really re-circulating that garbage zogby "poll" bought by the anti-obama people, are you?