Liberals' Warnings About Obama Loss May Prove Self-Fulfilling

[HAL 9000 96]

There is one point of view, that racism against the candidate may play a part should Barack Obama lose. It's just one, of many possible points of view. It is not a 'liberal deomocratic' point of view.

Its one of several probable realities.

[IAMX 3,055]

So if it isn't racism, and some kinds of race-related violence as we've seen in the past, then how come you are so quick to prophesize that many blacks in the cities will riot?

Is racism against blacks still a problem or isn't it?

Liberal democrats seem to think so as it is most often used as a reason why Obama presumably would lose. Not issues, not "unfair polling practices", but race.

That's the point of the article and the irony.

When blacks had their votes thrown out (before they were then ruled to have their votes counted after the election was certified) in 2000, blacks could and should have rioted. But they didn't.

That in itself is proof enough that indeed this country is full of pacifists. Not very exciting or something to inspire fear for something a good portion of the country who don't even care -- including blacks. Your face is far too into sensational politics or media.

Like I said, I've archived this thread. There will be an element, and I predict that NY, NJ, CA, Al, at a minimum will be affected by rioting. It's just a matter of how serious it will be.

It took white male police beatings of blacks for (Southern) California to even riot.

People don't get that passionate over elections. If you line up a bunch of dogs and shoot them, or line up a bunch of blacks and beat them, then you'll get a riot.

So your prophetic attempt at predicting disaster is entirely based upon sensationalism -- the same sort of which if you read a lot of conservative op-eds and watch FOX news.

[kaydee457 13]

There is one point of view, that racism against the candidate may play a part should Barack Obama lose. It's just one, of many possible points of view. It is not a 'liberal deomocratic' point of view.

I'll concede to that, however those with the ability to project their point of view to the masses clearly have been overshadowing whatever the concensus may be amongst ordinary "libruls"......in fact it appears to be the majority view given that it's being repeated, over and over.

It's not diffiicult to now associate this view with the majority of liberals.....rightly or wrongly as an outsider...

[AlHayatZween 2]

Like I said, I've archived this thread. There will be an element, and I predict that NY, NJ, CA, Al, at a minimum will be affected by rioting. It's just a matter of how serious it will be.

Well, i personally plan on rioting...

You'll see me on the news: Al Hayat Zween Takes Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens.

[Sister Fracas 5]

I wanna have a riot!!!! I'll bring scones for my co-rioters...

[kaydee457 13]

So if it isn't racism, and some kinds of race-related violence as we've seen in the past, then how come you are so quick to prophesize that many blacks in the cities will riot?

Is racism against blacks still a problem or isn't it?

Liberal democrats seem to think so as it is most often used as a reason why Obama presumably would lose. Not issues, not "unfair polling practices", but race.

That's the point of the article and the irony.

When blacks had their votes thrown out (before they were then ruled to have their votes counted after the election was certified) in 2000, blacks could and should have rioted. But they didn't.

That in itself is proof enough that indeed this country is full of pacifists. Not very exciting or something to inspire fear for something a good portion of the country who don't even care -- including blacks. Your face is far too into sensational politics or media.

Like I said, I've archived this thread. There will be an element, and I predict that NY, NJ, CA, Al, at a minimum will be affected by rioting. It's just a matter of how serious it will be.

It took white male police beatings of blacks for (Southern) California to even riot.

People don't get that passionate over elections. If you line up a bunch of dogs and shoot them, or line up a bunch of blacks and beat them, then you'll get a riot.

So your prophetic attempt at predicting disaster is entirely based upon sensationalism -- the same sort of which if you read a lot of conservative op-eds and watch FOX news.

Surley you're kidding, right? DUH! It's the first black to run for the presidency! In Obama's case it has attracted a following of many that haven't voted in any election in their lives and probably won't in this one either, but that doesn't mean they don't have a horse in the race! Particularly this race!

It's clearly naive to believe that this is an ordinary election.....

Because of the supericial nature of his candidacy he has a following of all types of fringe elements......in the "hood", in Hollywood, in Germany, in Islamabad, etc......He "The One".

[Peikko 1,575]

And as I said, it would not be surprising if there was an element of disaffected people who would be disappointed should Barack Obama fail to win the election and a minority might take to the streets and what of it? Does that make a majority of black people unable to abide by the democratic process? Does that make black people dangerous? Does that make the selection of a black candidate irresponsible? What's your point, exactly?

Again, I am not living in fear of a 'black backlash' if Obama loses the election. The majority of voters will accept the results and move on.

[HAL 9000 96]

I wanna have a riot!!!! I'll bring scones for my co-rioters...

I think you'll have another reason to riot in Chicago if the Cubs make it to the World Series!

Go Cubs!

[Peikko 1,575]

Ah, so your point is really, that the Democrats should never have picked Barack Obama because his sole claim to political 'fame' is that he is black? Well, I think that's a minority view too quite honestly. I am not a Barack Obama 'fan' but I don't think his resume is quite that thin.

[HAL 9000 96]

Ah, so your point is really, that the Democrats should never have picked Barack Obama because his sole claim to political 'fame' is that he is black? Well, I think that's a minority view too quite honestly. I am not a Barack Obama 'fan' but I don't think his resume is quite that thin.

Its an election year. People do what people do to discredit their opponent in the silliest of ways.

[AlHayatZween 2]

I wanna have a riot!!!! I'll bring scones for my co-rioters...

Yes! A cross-continental brigade! i am in...

You wear your nun habit, me, my burka...

Edited September 23, 2008 by AlHayatZween

[IAMX 3,055]

Surley you're kidding, right? DUH! It's the first black to run for the presidency! In Obama's case it has attracted a following of many that haven't voted in any election in their lives and probably won't in this one either, but that doesn't mean they don't have a horse in the race! Particularly this race!

It's clearly naive to believe that this is an ordinary election.....

Because of the supericial nature of his candidacy he has a following of all types of fringe elements......in the "hood", in Hollywood, in Germany, in Islamabad, etc......He "The One".

I have news for you -- I'm in a section of the country that is constantly dealing with out-of-the-ordinary things. Your perceived nonsense about "liberals" is contradictory to that from which someone who LIVES in one of these areas, and is around, is telling you about. Again, you're taking your information from sensationalist garbage, and you're an idiot if you're going to try to tell someone who's in this "liberal" environment that they're naive about the society they're constantly around.

No matter how much truth someone tells you, no matter how rational, the only proof you're showing is your own naiveté. Keep on keepin' on, eh?

[jundp 191]

Because of the supericial nature of his candidacy he has a following of all types of fringe elements......in the "hood", in Hollywood, in Germany, in Islamabad, etc......He "The One".

I'm not sure what you're saying with this. Are you saying that urban people, Hollywood types, Germans, and Pakistanis are "fringe"?

[Peikko 1,575]

I think he's saying that because Barack Obama's candidacy is based on a super slim resume (he only got the candidcaty because he's black) only lunatics on the fringes support him, ie, people who live in inner city ghettos and are presumably black, members of the Hollywood 'movie making elite' and foreigners (Germans and Iraquis specifically) and some kind of "born again" left wing fanatics who believes Barack is their 'saviour'.

Rather an odd thing to say, but there we go...

*candidacy*

Edited September 23, 2008 by Madame Cleo

[IAMX 3,055]

I think he's just trying to reach anywhere he can to justify his opposition to Obama.

There are very logical reasons to not want to vote for Obama. He tries way too hard to find the most illogical, and his methods of justification cries out someone who feels way too threatened.