Is America Ready for Another White Male President?

During the Democratic Primaries, when discussing the chances of Obama and Clinton, with some frequency, the person with whom I was talking would lean in towards me and say "Do you really think America is ready for a black/woman president?" Like many people, I found the former question racist and the latter one sexist. As a white man, I also resented the implication that I somehow understood that America wasn't ready, whatever that meant.

Initially, I responded to these questions with anger, but then began to preempt them. Whenever the presidential election came up in discussion, which was about ten times a day, I began the conversation by leaning forward conspiratorially and say "The Republicans have a problem. America is not ready for another white male president." The responses I received were always similar. First a nod of agreement, than a look of confusion that a sputtering response like "you mean Obama I mean black president Clinton woman..."

When I first started doing this, I thought I was just making up a clever response, but as the election approaches, increasingly I believe that I am right in this assessment. During the recently completed primary season, roughly 35 million people voted for somebody who was not a white man. Clinton and Obama's overall vote total far exceeded that of all the white men in the race, for both parties, combined. In the Democratic Party, none of the three highly qualified white men, made it as far as Super Tuesday. Even in the early states when the Republican primary was still competitive and Republican voters could choose from a broad range of conservative white men, the majority of voters eschewed the white male options in both parties and voted for either Clinton or Obama.

I have never been accused of being an optimist, and would never assert that sexism or racism is somehow finished in American politics. Both were evident in full force, overtly and subtly, in the recently completed primary season. The latter will undoubtedly continue to lurk around the edges of the general election between now and November.

Nonetheless, there is increasing reason to believe that these tactics, although sure to be present, will be less effective in 2008. This is partially due to the deep and broad dissatisfaction with the Bush administration as it winds down, and the corresponding profound desire to see change which many Americans feel. It may, however, be due to something beyond that. During the primary season, Obama was able to appeal to an extremely broad swath of the electorate, while maintaining a strong base in several demographic groups as well. His strength in, for example, western states is very unusual for any Democrat, let alone an African American one. His early, and somewhat persistent, support among some Republicans is even more striking. Clinton's strength, in some states, among blue collar white men, was equally impressive.

Attempts to attack Obama through his former pastor, or his church, made far less of an impact than one might have expected, given the racial component to these approaches. Racially tinged criticisms of Michelle Obama have been similarly unsuccessful as have other efforts to portray Obama as the black candidate. Interestingly, the most successful attack on Obama in the primary was probably the attempt to portray him as an elitist. The inaccuracy of that attack notwithstanding, it should be noted that there was no racial component to the one critique that may have hurt him.

The broader political context -- that 2008 is shaping up to be a strongly Democratic year, is not the only factor driving this. Something is changing in American politics. Perhaps all those young people chanting "race doesn't matter" at Obama rallies in the early primary states were telling the truth, at least for many of their generation. While there are certainly still reservoirs of nasty and extreme racism among all age groups, it may be that among young people these views have been relegated to the fringes of political life, and that for many people of that generation race is not an important part of their vote decision.

Another possible explanation is that after a generation of the Democratic Party nominating presidential candidates who are liberal on social issues and who have been consistently attacked by the right as being out of touch with American values and captive of gays, African Americans etc, all of the voters who can be moved by appeals to intolerance have abandoned the Democratic Party years ago. The question of whether or not America is ready for an African American or female president, in addition to being offensive, is also irrelevant. Of course, there are probably many Americans who would not vote for either for president, but that is not how elections are decided. The real question should be are Americans who either voted for, or considered voting for a liberal like John Kerry in 2008 or Al Gore in 2004, ready to vote for an African American or woman candidate. To this question, the answer is an unambiguous yes. Racism is still alive and well in America, it is just effecting fewer vote decisions.

America is not, however, ready to elect another white male president who builds a message of intolerance into his campaign, because there are almost no voters left to pull away from the Democratic Party through appeals of this sort and, more importantly, a substantial number of voters who no longer have the stomach for this kind of campaign. This is particularly true this year. For Senator McCain, this means that he must resist the temptation to go to the well of intolerance, and more importantly, must control the wild cards around his campaign and the myriad independent and semi-independent efforts who might otherwise do this. McCain's campaign is fighting an uphill battle, but they can make it easier for themselves by recognizing just what it is for which America is not ready.

Comments

[macintoshsauce]

Well... The current President sure is not very inspiring. He is hated by most Americans, by most of the world, etc.

President Obama would bring a lot of good will towards the USA from the rest of the world. That is what America needs right now after our reputation being ruined by the idiot currently occupying the Presidency.

President Obama would get rid of the corporate idiots that think they can influence and run the federal government. That is what I want to see.

[realtalk]

Some of you posters below, obviously do not get the sarcasm of the title which the writer was trying to convey. What he stated in the opening paragraph was WHY was the new media asking this question when it pertained to an African American, and a female president? The press never seemed to ask the question is America ready for a white man to be president. It seems to be pure hypocristy doesn't it? Maybe next time the mainstream press will be less focused on gender, and race, and will simple report the news, and stop trying to actively to create problems, and cause controversy.

[faceman888]

I think Mitchell is being a little hard on some of the people who question if America is ready for a black president. Only 3 states have ever elected a black person to either Governor or Senator by popular vote of the people. I don't think it is racist to question if there are 20 - 23 (that is how many Obama probably needs) states ready to vote for a black guy given the history that so far only 3 states have ever chosen a black person.

[95flhtcu]

i"m ready for another white male president. One that brings back the prosperity I had during the clinton years, you bet! If that white man turns out to be a black woman, I'd like her too! ANYTHING but Mcbush.

[olephart]

"America is not ready for another white male president."

It's not the color or gender; it's the quality of the individual, their policies and the people chosen by that individual to administer those policies. That several of the most recent choices have been disasters does not qualify or disqualify anyone of any particular race or gender. The good thing is that in being nominated, Barack Obama has widened the base that candidates may be drawn from. From a "Free Enterprise" stand point, it increases competition and, in turn, the quality of the product.

[cybertoothcat]

Well said, olephart! The president we have now, who happens to be hated here and the world over, is not even capable of leading the third shift at a McDonald's, let alone the free world. Bush is a post turtle. When you see a turtle sitting on top of a post, you know he hasn't gotten up there on his own. Do we need another post turtle who graduated at the bottom of his class (and most likely graduated only because his father and grandfather were both admirals) and who has a billionaire wife?
We've got to increase the number of candidates with the mental capacity, temperament and all the positive attributes it takes to be the president of the US. Any time we disqualify someone because of race or gender we're harming ourselves, our nation, and the world.
On the other hand, if a candidate possesses a famous name, comes from great wealth or a well-known political family but doesn't have the qualities necessary for the making of a good president, then we ARE harming millions, potentially billions of people if that person actually becomes president. It's the old Rovian, "Here's a man I can make president" trick, not a person who SHOULD be president. To this very day, I am confounded as to why there wasn't blood in the streets over the so-called "elections" of both 2000 and 2004.

[moreupnorth]

After your opening paragraph I have to ask, Why oh why are you using an obvious race and gender baiting headline Lincoln? Are you better than those who asked the same question as you? Another Male White President? I think you were trying to potray the questions in a way that says "Does color really matter in a world where people of all colors suffer grave injustices?" So why not use a non race and gender baiting headlines like "Are we ready for another President with low mental faculties and a penchant for war and invasion?" "Are we ready for another President who can't remember what he said two days ago?" or best of all "Are we ready for another President who doesn't know Shiite from Sunniola" What in the hell does color have to do with anything? What color was Colin Powell when he gave his speech to the UN? What color is Condi Rice when she publically apologises for the Bush Admin?

As you can see it takes all kinds and all colors to screw up a country. And it takes a little bit of race and gender baiting to work the public up into a furor about it. Think Social Responsibility not attention grabbing headlines. Your headline is nothing more than a right-wing talking point trying to intice left-wing readers, but the jist of your article is good.

[haleywins]

Not the one running now.

[oldfreedomdude]

Inciteful! Probably most women feel strongly that it is the "good old boy" gang of white males that has gotten the world into such a mess, and I think more and more men are beginning to feel that way, too! For the "good ole boy", the solution to every problem is more militarism, and it is obvious that that attitude is destroying the world. Part of the problem with Hillary was her effort to be a "good old boy", cheerleading the destruction of Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, etc.

[Indepatriot]

Just like to point out that Obama is "1/2" white, so even the racists among us can vote for him and still sleep at night, even if it is on a bare mattress.

[Softnsweet]

Ditto

[macintoshsauce]

LOL

[Syco]

nice

[appetite88]

Maybe, instead of trashing white males, we should be applauding them for showing a significant willingness to not vote for their kind (in contrast to women and black people in the Democratic primary). There were plenty of white men to vote for, and yet, they (white men) largely voted for a woman or a half black half white man. I sure hope people are voting for who they think is the best candidate rather who is most like them. Although, it appears that on the whole, blacks and women are not doing that. Perhaps it's time to start blaming them for what white men are constantly attacked for?

[robXdion]

And who, pray tell, have women and blacks voted for since white men kindly allowed them both to vote without beatings and lynchings?

[sparkandy]

Do you really think that attacking white men just because of their race and gender will play well with most people? It doesn't seem particularly politically astute to malign an entire demographic based solely on an accident of birth. Not that the Obama campaign is doing that, or that the writer is implying that. But appetite88 has a point.

[Softnsweet]

Obama only has 35% of the white male vote so please do not give them kudos.

[olephart]

How about one third of a kudo?

[BryantG]

Not for nothing but Obama is 50% white.

[CAPTAINSKIPPY]

IMO Tim Russert would have been an excellent President.

[researcher]

mc cain is of my generation and has a ton of vietnam baggage from our loss to vietnam.

also he has these deep inner feelings of losing a war. ie loser complex.

he wants a win and he does not care how many people die and suffer to give him his win. as he said he will never surrender. it matters not to him that the iraq war was based on lies and deception.

he will be worst than bush jr if that is possible.

I believe that a republic deserves it politicans

if mc cain wins america deserves him.

america has supported and continues to support a mega military industrial complex with a need for a super power status and until we comes to grips with that nothing much will change in america.

the universal law of karma will do its thing on what time frame I have no idea. it appears that economic decline will destroy america's will to be imperialists in the world.

one can only hope it will then the world will be a much safer place. very few americans will understand this last statement.

national capitalism must self destruct it is based on greed for profits not a love for its people.

[Softnsweet]

researcher,

Well said! I would like to add that atleast you know how to use a computer.

[SiberianRat]

I understand that statement--sadly, much of America doesn't realize how much it's become its own enemy...

[cindy4america]

This year I am more proud to be an American than ever before. (I know this is a dangerous thing to say since Michelle Obama said it, but I am just going to take a chance) My country is trying to live up to the constitution and the bill of rights. It is incredible to see Obama succeeding in spite of being black. It is amazing to see our country evolve from lots of little groups into a big group with a common interest. At 42, I never would have thought I would have lived to see this day. I am really excited that any woman actually could have been the president and I am equally excited that an African-American may become president. We have really grown as a country and we should be extremely proud of ourselves. That being said, I don't think people don't want to vote McCain because he is a white male. I think we don't want to vote for him because he does not represent where we are as a nation right now . We are changing and he is not trying to change with us. The rest of the country is in the middle of the book and unfortunately, McCain is still on chapter one.

[Softnsweet]

cindy4america,

True Cindy, It is also the reason I did not vote for Hillary. Her campaign was way behind in the times. She copied Obama's website. She hired people based on loyalty instead of competence.

[McChimp]

We can't keep on living in the past if we are to move on into the future.

We've seen what decades of Bush-Clinton politics have done to our country, and it's time to end it.

I'm glad that Barack Obama is the nominee, because he best represents our country for what it is: a melting pot of diversity and culture.

Hillary Clinton did help break the glass ceiling for females to run in the future, although she ran her campaign in all the wrong ways.

Hopefully, we can be successful in electing Barack Obama President, enjoy him for two terms, and then elect either a woman President or another culturally diverse man. If we are to live by the standars set forth by the founding fathers, we must allow transparancy in our government and allow the American people to participate in their government, and allow ALL qualified Americans of different backgrounds, cultures, races, AND political parties to participate in politics. I would even go as far as to say we need to start supporting more third party candidates, as the two party Democrat-Republican system is getting kind of old.

[Faith101]

Well, the way I see it, we had the same thing for over 200 years; I think it is about time to give somebody else a try at it. Not to mention that John McCain is a flawed candidate. He just don't have a clue about middle america and our needs.

[tess08]

he doesn't have a clue about Americans living beneath the $100million bracket, or even has any concern for his fellow war vets. (He doesn't have to worry about retirement funds or vet benefits, he has Cindy----Lord knows WHAT she saw in him when she married him).

[Softnsweet]

tess08,

Remember Cindy McCain was a rodeo queen. That should tell you where her head was at the time.