Watching Sen. Barack Obama announce his candidacy for the 2008 presidential election live on his web site was like being at a rock concert—17,000 people chanted "Obama, Obama." He walked onstage with his wife and two daughters, evoked Abraham Lincoln and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and made his campaign "our" campaign, and yes, he was "articulate." But can he win?
Recent polls indicate most Americans are willing to vote for a "qualified" black candidate—but they don't tell you what "qualified" means. Some polls ask whom we "plan" to vote for—but planning does not equate to doing. The Pew Research Center's most recent analysis tells us that political polls are more accurate now than in the past—and political correctness no longer dictates responses, which historically has led to black candidates' overly positive ratings.
Remember when 1982 California gubernatorial candidate Tom Bradley led the polls by a 9-22 point margin prior to Election Day and ended up losing? State papers already had been printed for the following day announcing his victory. The 2006 Senate polls proved more accurate, according to Pew, but black Democrat Harold Ford, who led by a slim margin in the Tennessee Senate race, still lost. Then again, his opponent's racist campaign ad may have had something to do with that.
Can We Trust the Polls?
Based on some polls, one might think Obama has a chance. A Dec. 6-7 2006 Newsweek poll of 864 registered voters nationwide found 92 percent of whites would vote for a "qualified" black presidential candidate if he or she were nominated by their party. Ninety-six percent of people of color would do the same.
A Jan. 18-21 CBS News poll of 168 adults nationwide found 55 percent of whites and 57 percent of people of color think "America is ready to elect a black president." A CNN poll of 1,207 adults nationwide conducted over the same period found 65 percent of whites believe the same, compared with 54 percent of blacks. If the polls are valid, why don't they show consistent results? And if this isn't about political correctness, why are blacks significantly less optimistic than whites about Obama's prospects? (See also: Are You Racist? Think Twice Before You Answer and Is Obama 'Black Enough'?)
These polls underscore confirmed differences in perception—58 percent of whites perceive U.S. race relations to be "good," compared with 38 percent of blacks and about 46 percent of Latinos. Although overt racism may be less prevalent than in the 1960s, its toxicity has infiltrated the American unconscious with an insidiousness that cannot be accounted for by any means of advancing polling methodologies.
In 1999, only 37 percent of likely voters said America is ready to elect a black president. Many will point to this 18-percentage-point (at least) increase as a sign of progressive race relations, but our current situation simply doesn't support that presumption. A few reasons why:
· People think President Bush "doesn't care about black people"
· White guys think calling a two-time best-selling author and senator who happens to be black "articulate," "clean" and "mainstream" is a compliment
· Having two black coaches face off in this year's Super Bowl is a big deal (See also: 2 Black Coaches in the Super Bowl—Yes, It's a VERY Big Deal)
· Only 1.2 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs are black
· Mass. Gov. Deval Patrick is our second black governor since Reconstruction
· Our nine-member Supreme Court has one black justice—the second in its 218-year history. We have yet to appoint a Latino. Since the court's establishment in 1789, 98.2 percent of Supreme Court justices have been white men
· Unconscious bias is grounds for a class-action discrimination lawsuit
· Congress has one black senator—and he's trying to be the first black president. (See also: Who's Worst for Diversity? The United States Senate)
Beyond the Polls—What Do We Know?
George W. Bush—touted by some as "the worst president in American history"—has botched the job so badly that many believe America wants a different kind of president, not just with respect to politics, but someone who symbolizes change and embodies hope for the country. Obama most certainly fits the bill.
Americans want change, undoubtedly. But if voting for Obama is perceived to be risky, many may cast their vote for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton because they believe she actually has a chance.
Many will point to the increasing number of people of color in high-ranking positions, whether in business, government, sports, law, the military or any other employment sector. It is true these are signs of progress, but do the above statistics suggest America will choose a black man as commander in chief, the highest-ranking position of all and the representative of this country?
Ask NAACP Legal Defense Education Fund Director Ted Shaw why—he'll tell you this country's black leaders have had to "work twice as hard to get half as far." Society hasn't changed as much as we'd like to think. By Shaw's logic, who is more qualified than Barack Obama?
As media strategist David Axelrod, one of Obama's closest political advisers and campaign adviser to Deval Patrick, says of the two black politicians, "Their personal stories are symbolic of the kinds of values that we as a society hold dear even if we haven't always honored them historically. They've seen the obstacles and the barriers and they've also overcome them: it shows the work we have to do and the possibility that that work can get done."
More from Today's Diversity News
<< PREVIOUS ITEM | NEXT ITEM >>
