Do you believe on voting based on someone's race or gender?

Question

Please read before answering: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21287765/page/2/

Why the open discussion of whether a person should be racist or sexist? We already know what people think about white men giving other white men jobs, and votes(in which I agree that the best person should have the job). So, why is it okay otherwise and socially accepted by the world reknown media?

Should have been "... Race or Sex?"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21287765/

This is the correct link to the 1st page of the article(the other link was the 2nd page).

Another Sass: Because I'm questioning this article saying that women are better than men, and blacks are better than whites, that makes me racist? You make no sense.

Apple: I guess you're saying it's okay, depending on who you are.

Tera: You're saying it's okay to vote or hire someone to represent your culture, unless you're white?

Apple(and everyone): I actually get what you're saying, but Edwards is actually on the ballot as well. Also, I'm not being subjective about this question(I'm not making assumptions): You have to read the article. I'm addressing the article itself.

Sarah: I'm not making this a Me vs. You issue. You don't even know what race or culture I am! But obviously, you like to make it Us vs. Them, which is usually out of anger. And sidetracking the issue of this article is clever, but not going to work. Why is this large newspaper, condoning sexist or racist voting, instead of voting for the best person? And apparantly you're fine with it. Simple question.

Sarah: The bigot calling the person who is questioning bigotry, a bigot. hahaha

Sarah: The bigot calling the person who is questioning bigotry, a bigot. hahaha
And the first sentence of your answer: "I'm voting for Obama, because he's Black like you're voting for Mitt Romney (or whoever) BECAUSE he's white." is exactly you trying to presume my race. Your ad hominem arguments are all over the place. Just stick to the question. It's not quantum physics or anything.

Answer 1

Well...since there have never been any other option than white men (with a few exceptions) at any point in the history of the US, this question is bound to come up when someone who looks different is a viable contender. There is always going to be controversy over why people are choosing to vote for "the black candidate" or "the woman candidate" simply because they're such novelties. Rationally and realistically, people should be looking at people's platforms and forming decisions based on those; however, they are scrutinizing these "alternative" people more closely to see if there are, indeed, differences in how they approach each issue. In essence, it really doesn't matter what Hillary or Obama do--they are targets just because of their appearance. They could say what another candidate says verbatim, and they would still be looked at differently. The American people are not used to these options and really should get over the whole appearance thing. But the US bases virtually everything on appearance, so I can't see that mentality changing. What concerns me more about this article is the reasoning behind why people will not vote for Obama--they're afraid he'll be killed. That says a great deal about the American mentality.

Answer 2

those who easily voted for Obama because he's Black trust all and multiple who did not vote for him, also did so because he's Black. the reason I say that is because no individual extremely knew something about him. He has no record of success and hasn't ever made a significant decision about something in his existence. they in basic terms saved telling me how smart he become and how historic it would want to be to opt for a Black guy. properly, there are distinctive smart Black adult adult males in united states. even though it takes a lot more suitable than being smart to be a President. It takes administration, personality and braveness. Has Obama were given any of those characteristics? No on can factor to a unmarried time he ever validated that he does. He would communicate properly, he would marketing campaign properly yet at the same time as that stuff would properly be constructive to have in a President, it does no longer study to administration, personality and braveness that is what I said in Obama: administration? As a State Senator he noticeably a lot both went alongside with the overall public or voted "cutting-edge" on controversial subject matters. personality? He willingly attended a church for very nearly 2 many years the position he sat and listened to the Anti-American, Racist and Anti-Semitic vitriol of Rev. Wright and usual him as a mentor and non secular adviser. even regardless of the truth that Obama become raised by technique of his White Maternal Grandparents, become higher middle type, attended inner most faculties and Ivy League establishments. He is conscious more suitable ideal than that. braveness? He participated contained in the political cesspool of corruption it really is Chicago. yet, what did he ever do about it? So, that makes him unacceptable to maximum those who did not vote for him, no longer his colour. *

Answer 3

I believe in voting based on policy issues, qualifications, and certain imponderables of the impression the candidate makes upon me. I've been told by black friends that I am a "sell out" for supporting Richardson rather than Obama, because Richardson has more experience. In 8 years though, I probably will support Obama.

EDIT

You're drawing a misleading comparison.

People have a RIGHT to equal educational and employment opportunities. People do not have a RIGHT to be elected. People have a right to RUN and others have a right to VOTE for them or NOT. No one has a RIGHT to have me vote for them.

Answer 4

It is ironic that when most people asked in a small setting about a relatively small impact position the same question will say no; yet, here in America, in 2007; some people are scared to vote for the person they want to, because they are scared he will be killed b/c he is black! I can not believe it. I wasn't born until after the Civil Rights Movement, but, come on, haven't we made more progress than this?
No, it should not matter a person's race, gender, socio-economic status, weight, marital status, sexual orientation, age, religion, "fill in the blank". But should not and does not are two different things.
I was born and raised in the south but I have often felt like I was out of place. I wasn't raised to be racist, sexist, or any other "ist". Did I mention that I am white? I am poor. I am fat. And, sin of all sins, I married a man that is not white. He is a beautiful color of human. That is the only race that should matter in an ideal world, but one need not look any further than the tv to see that it is indeed not ideal.
Coulda, woulda, shoulda...who knows when they will change, really. Enough so that they don't matter anymore.
All I know is that I will take the power given to me as a citizen of this great nation that my 5 year old says the "Pledge of Allegiance" to every day and is proud to teach mommy what he is learning in school. He does say, by the way, "one nation under God..." but I digress...
I will take my power to vote and I WILL exercise it; either for Clinton or Obama. I haven't fully decided yet. Unless someone else really stands out for me. There are still a few months left to decide, you know.
Still withstanding, I will proudly support either our first woman or our first non-white president, and if there was a choice of our first non-white woman; I would probably support her. Provided she had a good platform.
Personally, I think that the shape of our country is a sad shame right now. We are in a mess.
I have a theory though that isn't really what you asked, but I will share it.

America will begin to get things together when we have a leader who:

has been a single, probably mom, who has had to work her tail off to support her kids, while she went to night school. She received food stamps and medicaid and lived in public housing. She worked her way up, got a good job, got out of the projects, off public assistance and is now the successful head of "xyz fill in the blank". when we have a leader that knows what it is like to come from nothing, literally. Use what they have to pull themselves up and take care of their kids by themselves and they still turn out well. She knows how to budget money, buy frugally, use coupons or whatever else to balance her budget, pay the bills and still have enough left over for school clothes and whtaever. she also knows how to deal with conflict without upsetting the whole neighborhood. she knows how to maintain control of the kids and still keep them in line, respectfully and with a lovingly firm hold.
When we have this person as our leader, she will "clean house" and get things straightened out. You might say, what about congress? How will she deal with that? Well, she has dealt with all that other stuff, she is a woman and she is a minority. She will be able to deal with a bunch of old, tired, rich white men who won't know what hit them. I bet she'd have them sitting up straight in their chairs and saying yes ma'am.

Okay, so probably not going to happen for a while, but nice thought...huh? Okay lady, where are you? We need you...
PEACE.

Answer 5

I would not vote solely on those factors; but people's experiences shape their perspectives and their perspectives are affected by their race and/or gender. My stay on earth has been very different from yours, I'm sure; therefore, my political leanings may also be different. A person votes for a candidate who is most likely to be able to understand and make a priority of the person's specific concerns.

Answer 6

Oh please. I'm voting for Obama, because he's Black like you're voting for Mitt Romney (or whoever) BECAUSE he's white. The woman in the article also said,

“A man is supposed to be the head,” she said. “I feel like the Lord has put man first, and I believe in the Bible.”

If you think that represents the view of most Black women, you're nuts.

I'm voting for Obama, because I agree with his voting record; because he's brilliant, articulate and seems the most real. I know he sure as heck can't do any worse than our last President.

And yeah, I find him attractive, but women loved JFK too, that has no bearing on my decision to vote for him if he gets the nomination.

Edit: What I really love is how supposedly Jackson and Sharpton lead Black folks around by the nose, yet they have both been highly critical of Obama. You don't mention that, but this article is enough to prove that THIS time we're thinking for ourselves without their help. How convenient.

Nowhere in my comment did I presume to know your race. You're the one projecting a persecution complex. Self-loathing Black people do exist. Self-respecting Black people aren't going to take your view; so whether you're White or Black, you have misguided and bigoted views against Blacks.

A "large newspaper" made this claim? Great. Not only did they not make such a claim, but a "large newspaper" making a "claim" based on interviews and speculation is not proof when even polls can be skewed and unreliable. Political journalism is not a science. Articles (even those in LARGE newspapers) are not concrete proof of anything.

Answer 7

No I don't believe in voting for someone just because of their race or gender. The media is skewed towards liberalism. This is just another example of that.

Answer 8

And the band plays on....... I believe in voting based on the realization that whomever is voted into the Oval office is now a President over All the people and if you haven't noticed my friend we are becoming a nation of multi colors and multi races.... Voting based on gender or race will not only not benefit the people as a whole it won't benefit the person that voted in such a way.

Answer 9

I don't need to read that link to answer your question. In my opinion, people should make educated choices when they vote, and disregard gender or race. I do understand that because of inequality that still exists today (esp. in regard to the White House- never having had a female or black or minority president)- people who feel they've been discriminated against may tend to want to vote for someone who represents the group that has been oppressed. (i.e. women voting for women, or blacks voting for blacks.) This idea probably stems from believing that the person who is representative of their group or culture would be better able to recognize, address, and affect change in the areas of inequality that have been existing issues to those people for so long. Let's hope they don't forget to take a good look at other issues, as well. But you can't blame them, really, for wanting someone in the White House that would best serve their interests in these issues. Equality is a big issue! (But of course it is not the only one.)

EDIT: Kendrick, no that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, in essence, people have a right to decide who they want to vote for and why, and hopefully they educate themselves before voting. It's not for me to judge who's reasons are valid and who's are not, as voting is a highly personal decision. I'm saying that I can understand the reasons people may have for voting for someone that they feel best represents them in issues that they feel are important to them. What those issues are, and whether or not the person is correct in assuming that who they vote for will best represent them in their issues is something that one would have to personally assess for themselves, hopefully with education on the subject and the on the candidates involved.

Answer 10

I don't believe in identity politics. I believe in voting for the person with the best platform and public demeanor. If that person happens to be one of you — a woman, a black, a guy with a lisp — well and good, but it shouldn't be the first thing you think about.