Yes, indeed. There are people whose perceptions and opinions are affected by skin colour and therefore will not see past that. It is sad, but it is the truth.
It probably does. However we've made some long strides in racial equality in my lifetime. For example, some individual states mandated segregation in public schools until the Supreme Court's landmark Brown vs Board of education decision in 1954. In the 1950s, it would have been absolutely impossible for Obama to be elected president.
Absolutely...and I think it's great. It's about time that we don't have some old white guy in office (among other reasons of course).
In my opinion, yes. It is not an issue of which people speak; they justify their dislike for him (or his policies) by calling him a socialist and so forth. Yet his policies have consistently steered much closer to the middle than much of the Democratic Party would like to see. Thus the suspicion arises that the "policy disagreements" (often expressed in quite visceral terms) are really a cover for something else--and the leading candidate for that 'something else' would be the race issue.
People don't approve of racism in general, and don't wish to be racists, or considered to be racists. Yet they don't feel comfortable with the upending of the traditional racial power structure embodied in Barack Obama--so they react with criticisms that are 'over the top.'
I don't think so. His race has nothing to do with my evaluation of his presidency. While I am a republican, I was thoroughly thrilled with the democratic primary to see a black man and a woman vying to be their party's choice to run for president was wonderful to watch - history in the making.
Now I don't think that his decision influence public opinion due to his color as now people has experienced him. No Doubt when he was coming with a slogan "Change" then this question had a simple answer, "Yes".
Probably -- for some people -- polls indicate Blacks vote by ethnicity. In the 2012 elections I think most voters are going to look at more important issues -- like the economy of the U.S.
Taking the outsider view here, as an Englishman in the US.
Yes I know many people who have complained about Barak Obama because he is black. Only voiced in all white company though. Many of these people call themselves born again Christians, and are committed even now to the "Fact" that Obama is the anti-Christ.
But they vow to vote for any Republican in November, except for the white anti-Christ nominee Mitt Romney.
So if Romney gets the GOP nomination, it could prove to be an interesting election campaign through till November 6.
I suspect that it does, but not to as significant a level as was once thought to be the case.
I think of him as pink, as in pinko. So the answer is yes, Obama's color influences my opinion.
Probably. I think his color alone made some people want to vote for him in the first place and it was the only reason that some people voted against him. That is the wrong reason to vote for/against someone. You should choose them because you agree with their ideas not because of the color of their skin.
I don't know how familiar you are with the history of the United States. And I don't know if any of our fellow hubbers work for a national polling agency (How much do polls tell you anyway?). I don't mean to deflect your question in any way, but it seems to me that such a question cannot be approached sensibly without being mindful of at least some post-Civil War history, to see how race affects public policy.
Now, many scholars will tell you that in many ways -- politically, socially, culturally, religiously -- the ruling classes of the southeastern United States never stopped fighting the Civil War. To take one example of this, one reason that we, in the United States, do NOT have universal health insurance, like you guys in England and Europe and other places is because of race.
President Harry Truman proposed it back in 1946. It was blocked by southern Democrats, who (along with their constituents) feared that this would lead to integrated hospitals. At this time the southeastern and western regions of the country were much poorer than the northeast and midwest, for certain historical reasons. The south was willing to go along with Democrat Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal because they desperately needed, as a region, to improve the standard of living, and so forth.
But they were willing to go only so far! Barack Obama is the leader of the Democratic party (this is the party that had been the socially reactionary party/Republicans had been the socially progressive party from about 1850 to perhaps, in some ways, up to the 1970s (believe it or not the 1972 Republican Presidential campaign platform actually criticized corporations for going overseas to look for cheaper, more exploitable labor). There was an amazing ideological swap between the Republican/Democratic parties.
Not only was universal healthcare blocked because of race, but so were a host of other progressive reforms blocked by Southern Democrats, largely, from Truman to perhaps Carter in the 1970s, based on social implications these reactionaries feared. When Representative Joe Wilson (Republican from South Carolina) shouted out, "You lie," to President Obama when he gave his first State of the
Union address, we have to see that as the regional legacy of the south popping up in certain ways.
And so on and so forth. Etc, etc.
I have to thank everyone for answering my question, a special thank you has to go to wingedcentaur, a lot of information there lol
I feel i have a better understanding now.
by dadibobs 6 years ago
Would he get more or less support, if he were white or hispanic?Has the presidents heritage given him an advantage, or has it caused him setbacks?
by Alexander A. Villarasa 4 years ago
Obama and his leftist ideology, coupled by sheer incompetence has come back to haunt/daunt him and bite him in so many places, that people are wondering if his Presidency would ever recover from the myriad scandals that has plagued his second term, from Benghazi to the IRS to the...
by EPman 7 years ago
Would the same outrage still exist? Or did Obama's presidency ignite the flame?I tend to think that Obama being elected certainly was fuel on the fire -- that is to say, the Tea Party would not be as big or popular if John McCain was president. Much more people would be too complacent simply...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago
in light of the current sociopolitical and socioeconomic situation regarding the United States of America? Do you believe that President Obama is doing the best job he can under the circumstances? Do you maintain that President Obama can do a much better job as President? Do you contend that...
by lady_love158 7 years ago
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/ … increases/Really, and people think this guy is a genius? Why does he insist on making ideological proposals that even his own party wont support? This president is beyond inept and incompetent, he's moronic!
by Alexander A. Villarasa 5 years ago
The 3 scandals now pushing Obama's presidency into the edge of an abyss may yet un-mollify and therefore nullify the result of the 2013 presidential election." May yet" is the operative words in this case, in as much as the liberal leaning mainstream media continues to...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|