3 ms·
It's a little elevated but not much, I would guess any "reverse racism" going on is probably proportional or lesser than the people who didn't vote for Obama be
by evilduck 14y ago
It's a little elevated but not much, I would guess any "reverse racism" going on is probably proportional or lesser than the people who didn't vote for Obama because he was black. Recall that black voters historically align with the Democrats in the 80-90% range anyways:
1984 Walter Mondale 90% Ronald Reagan 9%
1988 Michael Dukakis 90% George H.W. Bush 10%
1992 Bill Clinton 83% George H.W. Bush 10%
1996 Bill Clinton 84% Bob Dole 12%
2000 Al Gore 90% George W. Bush 9%
- gadders 14y agoAnd I believe Bush Jr had one of the most diverse cabinets as well...
- rpm4321 14y agoEven though the percent might not be much higher, it's really about turnout, not percent won. Twice as many blacks showed up to the polls for Obama than for Clinton. Obama was a "movement" candidate in the black community. However, I'm sympathetic to your argument - I think blacks turning out for Obama was more akin to Irish Catholics showing up for Kennedy, rather than whites showing up for George Wallace - more of a pride thing, and a symbolic triumph over past discrimination, etc.
- theorique 14y agoGood point - Obama's results with the Black vote was more of a bump, rather than a sea change compared to White candidates in the past.