Obama Supporters: Please Reject Ugly Race Baiting Demagoguery!

[kennetha]

Some in the media and on this board have lately taken to suggesting that if the superdelegates award the nomination to Hillary Clinton when Obama is ahead in popular vote, states won, and pledged delegates then there will be "rioting in the streets." Doug Wilder said it explicitly. It was said, though more indirectly, on Meet the Press again today by Russert and company.

There is no doubt there will be disappointment and perhaps anger on the part of many Obama supporters, including his African American supporters. And some of those may walk away from the party. Who knows? We shall certainly see if it comes to that. But the idea that African Americans will "riot in the streets" because a black candidate loses in a nomination process in a way that the rules of the party completely allow and explicitly contemplate represents African American voters as if they were petulant children. Moreover, it is an instance of the vilest kind of race-baiting politics imaginable. Instead of a new politics of mutual respect and cooperation, it bespeaks the oldest kind of politics of racial intimidation and threat. It is beneath contempt. It is vile and ugly.

I doubt that Obama himself would have anything to do with this sort of threat and intimidation. If he were seen to, he would be completely and utterly finished in the democratic party. And rightly so!!

I think his supporters on this board and his sycophants in the media should tread lightly and reject this ugly divisive rhetoric

[DJ13]

1. Im white, and I'll probably riot if this is stolen by super delegates

Thats not a racial thing, thats an anger at a crooked system thing.

[LisaL]

5. And just where do you plan on rioting?

[DJ13]

11. Anywhere Im needed

:shrug:

[Drachasor]

59. By "riot" I assume you mean take political action, such as protest, form a new party, etc

You don't actually mean going about destroying objects because you are angry, correct?

[chascarrillo]

2. Scared of "threats" or riots? Typical white person.

Good grief.

[kennetha]

3. Actually, I'm a proud African American person

[Skittles]

13. lol.......Kennetha

:thumbsup:

[Tarheel_Dem]

42. you're a proud something....

[ampad]

45. LOL

I guess it's true that people cannot see through the computer screen. I'm a proud African American as well and I have to say I seriously doubt there will be rioting. If there were any protest it would probably be voting and registration protest. I can see life long black Dems registering as Independents and maybe voting for McCain.

The media seems to forget that Obama has brought in quite a few young people. If there were rioting it would probably be young people of all colors. I don't even think that would happen. There may be some who decide to organize protest but I doubt it would get to the point of rioting.

[Window]

61. I agree. Organized protests, but no rioting. More stereotyping as I see it. Sad.

[TML]

43. LOL!

That's hilarious. :-)

[dansolo]

4. They probably won't riot

They just won't come out and vote. The days have passed where the Clintons can take the African-American vote for granted. They have burned that bridge, and there is probably no going back. I would be surprised if Hillary would even be able to win her Democratic Senate primary in 2012, though I somehow think that she is no longer interested in that.

[leftofcool]

6. But Obama supporters keep reiterating this........

The news media has already picked it up and will no doubt run with it soon

[Mooney]

10. No, Fox News commentators keep reiterating this.

I have never heard, seen or read a person of color threatening to riot if Obama doesn't get the nomination. I have, however, heard several right-wing yahoos put this fascinating theory out there.

[leftofcool]

20. I assume you have not heard the veiled threats then?

It isn't just Faux Noise. It has been on CNN, MSNBC,

[Mooney]

28. If they're "veiled threats"

isn't that different than an overt threat that people will start rioting? Aren't you just extrapolating that?

[leftofcool]

31. Overt no, but I don't even like veiled ones

I take all threats seriously

[kennetha]

32. Does Doug Wilder Count?

On Sunday, Doug Wilder, the mayor of Richmond and a former governor of Virginia, went even further, predicting riots in the streets if the Clinton campaign were to overturn an Obama lead through the use of superdelegates.

“There will be chaos at the convention,” Wilder told Bob Schieffer on “Face the Nation.”

“If you think 1968 was bad, you watch: In 2008, it will be worse.”

[Mooney]

35. Wilder is predicting chaos, not riots.

The writer of the article is the one mentioning rioting, not Wilder.

[kennetha]

38. Did you ever see video of '68?

That was violent and ugly. Wilder said it would be worse than '68

[Mooney]

40. He didn't say in what respect.

Again, you're extrapolating. It makes it seem like you have more of a grievance than you do.

[Garbo 2004]

54. Yeah, I saw it when it happened. It was a police riot against antiwar protestors. Nice try. nt

[Mooney]

7. I'm white, and I can't wait to riot if the SD's nominate the loser in 2nd place.

It has nothing to do with race. It has to do with getting rid of the DLC.

[leftofcool]

8. Does your candidate know this?

[Mooney]

12. We're not on speaking terms. n/t

[Drachasor]

60. By "riot" I assume you mean take political action, such as protest, form a new party, etc

Right? I think the other side is seeing "riot" as going about and destroying things, lighting stuff on fire, etc.

[LisaL]

9. Good luck with that...

[Mooney]

14. Thanks! n/t

[bluedawg12]

47. Wow- I can't wait to vote in the primary-

the riot thing always works so well- for attracting voters to your side. Not!

[FrenchieCat]

15. Can you give me some links on this "riot" business being said?

The only folks I have heard it from our Hillary's friends over at Fox News trying to keep everything nice a provoked.

[Mooney]

17. It's total horseshit.

It's a completely manufactured controversy, courtesy of Fox News, as you've rightly pointed out.

[leftofcool]

22. Really?

I heard Chuck Todd mention it on MSNBC about a month ago

[Mooney]

23. Link? n/t

[leftofcool]

25. Old news.........interview with John Lewis on the emails

to super delegates who were getting threatening emails. Didn't you read the statement they put out where they said they would not be intimidated by threats from either side?

[Mooney]

27. If it's old news, you should have no trouble providing a link. n/t

[kennetha]

30. Here's a quote from Doug Wilder

On Sunday, Doug Wilder, the mayor of Richmond and a former governor of Virginia, went even further, predicting riots in the streets if the Clinton campaign were to overturn an Obama lead through the use of superdelegates.

“There will be chaos at the convention,” Wilder told Bob Schieffer on “Face the Nation.”

“If you think 1968 was bad, you watch: In 2008, it will be worse.”

[Mooney]

37. He said "Chaos" not "Riots."

The WRITER said "riots."

[kennetha]

39. I saw Wilder say this

He said it would be worse than '68.

[Mooney]

41. In what respect?

Unless he specifically said "There will be riots," then you're guessing.

[Garbo 2004]

44. Do you remember what happened at the 68 convention? I do.

Wilder's comments IMO were irresponsible and also, IMO, BS. There was a lot going on in Chicago in '68, outside the convention, and inside the convention. Remember at the time the Dem party was the party of the Viet Nam war and there were antiwar protests in Chicago during the convention. That's what many people think of when they think of the 68 convention (and as I recall it was more a police riot than protestors "rioting").

And here's a clip of Wilder on Face the Nation. He did not say there would be rioting at the convention. http://www.veoh.com/videos/v6257934mBqtf8dQ?searchId=7763506178309302165&rank=1

[Tatiana]

16. Hell, whites and blacks will be rioting if SD's overturn the pledged delegates leader. n/t

[Mooney]

19. And Samoans, and Micronesians, and Dominicans,

and Puerto Ricans, and Alsatians, and Macedonians, and Laplanders...

[boppers]

26. Holy Crap, Laplanders?

I thought they were in Biden's camp, and didn't have a horse in the race?

[Mooney]

29. Demographically they should have been in HRC's camp

but they CRUCIFIED Hillary Rodham Christ for 30 pieces of silver!

[boppers]

34. Silver is racist!

I knew it couldn't be trusted.

[Tatiana]

33. I am boricua. I can testify, we will have some Puerto Ricans up in there too! n/t

[EFerrari]

18. Edit: Forget it. n/t

[intaglio]

21. Didn't some Florida Politician threaten to show up with

1,000,000 Floridians? and how is that not a threat?

Ahhhhh but she was a Hillary supporter so that is different

Personally I think that I think her supporters on this board and her sycophants in the media should tread lightly and reject this ugly divisive rhetoric

[boppers]

24. Thinking that it's BLACK people who would "riot in the streets" is telling.

Quite telling.

Know anything about the last time we rioted at convention?

[LordJFT]

36. How is this race-baiting?

I'm white and I would definitely protest if this scenario came true.

[Garbo 2004]

56. The OP is doing the baiting. Disingenuous OP. n/t

[bluedawg12]

46. 1968 worked out so well- for Nixon! n/t

[cliffordu]

48. I'm there!!

IF they steal the election, I'll riot anywhere they need me.


56, honkey, dem for life....

[Drachasor]

49. If Hillary wins that way I will personally do what I can to destroy and replace the Democratic Party

I might vote for Hillary for the Supreme Court appointments and some other important issues, but that would be a tactical decision. After that I would work to replace the Democrats with a party that actually gives a damn about democracy. Beyond that I would do everything in my power to make sure Hillary was just a one-term President, assuming the got elected (which I think would be highly unlikely).

That said, I doubt this will happen.

[MADem]

50. You don't vote for "Supreme Court appointments"

The President proposes, and then there's a nice little advise-and-consent effort in the Senate.

You have nothing to do with it.

[Drachasor]

52. The President certainly has something to do with it though

Don't pretend that who is President doesn't matter in this.

[MADem]

53. What did I say? The President PROPOSES.... so who's pretending anything, except

you are now pretending that you understod the process when you posted that other remark...

:eyes:

[Drachasor]

57. I understand (and understood) the process just fine.

The President selects who can possibly be on the Supreme Court. With a conservative President, it is almost undoubtedly the case that conservative judges will be chosen. While the worst of these will not likely be picked, the fact remains eventually some conservative judge will in all likelihood be selected. The Senate can maneuver as much as it wants, but the President chooses the playing field. That's a huge advantage, and one should not pretend it means little.

[kennetha]

51. I guess the Obamaniacs

Really do intend to tear the house down, at least some of them.

Wow!

[Drachasor]

58. If the will of the people is overturned, then the Democratic Party should be replaced

Why should I try to keep a party in place that would overturn the voters? Frankly, I don't think that will happen, since even the Super Delegates largely see to realize it is insane to overturn the people's choice from what I have heard. I'd rather be part of building a new progressive party that actually followed the democratic principles it espouses.

The question is: why do you think it is RIGHT for the Democratic Party to overturn the people's will? I'm talking about morally right here. I understand it is "within the rules" but rules themselves do not always fall in line with ethics or justice. How can you find such a flouting of the core democratic principles of our party and America acceptable?

And by "riot" I think the supporters of Obama mean political protest and helping to form a new party to replace the Democratic Party.

[kennetha]

64. childish nonsense

How do you measure "the will of the people?" The caucus system in which Obama won a large number of his delegates in states in which Democrats have NO chance of winning is no measure of the will of the (democratic) electorate at large.

We have proof positive of that in Texas with its absurd "two-step" system. A democratic election during the day basically reversed by an undemocratic procedure at night. Which represents "The will of the people?" The one Obama lost or the one he won?

How does it represent "the will of the people" to disenfranchise millions of people who actually voted in Florida and Michigan, to stiff arm them at every turn, to inisist that an election be superceded with a caucus?

How do open primaries with strategic voting by people who have no intention of voting for our candidate in the fall represent "the will of the people?"

You're going to crow endlessly about "the rules! the rules! the rules!" to justify disenfranchising millions, to justify undemocratic unrepresentative caucuses and then you're going to claim about "the will of the people?"

Pure disingenuous, self-serving demagoguery of the sort I have come to expect from the Obama supporters on this board.

[bigbrother05]

55. Actually expecting something more like the vote "riot" of 2000

A bunch of Brooks Bros political hacks acting up for the cameras to demand the FL and MI delegates be seated.

So far the Obama "riots" have been more like MLK's March on DC in the 60s. Lots of folks peacefully gathered to show their support and unity. Seems those had a strong progressive slant too.

[mmonk]

62. There probably will not be rioting.

There will probably not be enough votes for Hillary in the general election either should she get the nomination after all that occured to Obama. This is not blaming Hillary. But it is blaming the character assassination and take down of Obama should it occur successfully because it will not have happened in a vacuum. I pretty much think that will be reality.

[workinclasszero]

63. More right wing racial talking points

The supers aren't going to defy the people anyway so what are we talking about?

Right wing fear mongering?

[kennetha]

65. See post 64

Anybody who wins mostly caucuses and needs to stiff arm the good people of Florida and MI has no claim to represent "the will of the people"

WIthout either seating or re-voting Florida and Michigan, this convention has no legitimacy. You don't see Clinton supporters threaten to protest, leave the party, cause chaos in the streets.

You Obama people are legends in your own minds. You have such an adolescent sense of entitlement.

You need to grow up.