Growing number say country ready for black president

Posted: 04:01 PM ET

WASHINGTON (CNN) — A new poll suggests that the number of Americans who believe the country is ready for a black president is on the rise.

Seventy-six percent of those polled in a CNN/Essence Magazine/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Thursday say that the country is ready. That's up 14 points from December 2006, at the start of the presidential campaign.

"Some of the increase in the number of Americans who say the country is ready for a black president is a simple recognition of Barack Obama's success in the Democratic primaries," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director.

"We're not asking this question in a vacuum. In many cases, respondents must have had Obama in mind when giving their answer, even though he is not mentioned anywhere in the questionnaire."

The senator from Illinois is locked in a battle with Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York for the Democratic presidential nomination. Obama currently leads Clinton in states won, delegates pledged, and in the overall popular vote in the primaries and caucuses held so far this year.

The poll also indicates that more white Americans than African-Americans think the country is ready for a black president. Seventy-eight percent of white Americans surveyed say the country is ready, as opposed to only 69 percent of African-Americans polled. Both numbers are up substantially from December 2006.

"Drawing on their own life experience, blacks are a little more skeptical than whites," said Bill Schneider, CNN's senior political analyst. "But blacks, too, have come around, particularly after the Iowa caucuses demonstrated that Obama could win in an overwhelmingly white electorate."

Holland added, "Among blacks, the belief that the country is ready for an African-American president is highest among blacks who share traits with Obama. Optimism about the country's acceptance of a black president is higher among black men than among black women, higher among college-educated blacks than among those with no college degree, and higher among younger blacks than older blacks."

The poll also suggests that more Americans think the country is ready for a black president than a woman president. Sixty-three percent of those surveyed said that the country is ready for a female president. That's 13 points lower than those who say the country is ready for black president.

"Do Americans see more prejudice against a woman than an African-American," Schneider asked. "More likely, they see more negative feelings about this woman than about this African-American. Because it's true. More people have an unfavorable opinion of Hillary Clinton than of Barack Obama."

It's also important to note that the poll asked whether the country is ready for a black or woman president, not whether the respondent would vote for a black or woman president.

"Few people will acknowledge their own prejudices, but they will answer whether they think the country is ready to elect a black or woman president," Schneider said.

The CNN/Essence Magazine/Opinion Research Corporation survey was released on the eve of the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.

The poll was conducted by telephone from March 26 to April 2, with 2,184 Americans questioned, including 1,014 blacks and 1,001 whites. The survey's margin of error is plus or minus 2 percentage points for the overall sample and plus or minus 3 percentage points for the questions asked just of black or white Americans.

Really?!?!?!?!

Obama came out and said that their kids are off limits. I agree. However, I will talk about the fact that Palin is totally against sex education in school; against the distribution of condoms. If she's an example of how well abstinence works, we better all be convinced that teaching abstinence is what doesn't work. So she's wrong on that. Could it be more obvious how wrong she is?

She wanted to know how to get rid of "objectional" books in the public library of the town where she was elected mayor. The townspeople were outraged. So she went about learning how to win the voters back. She learned that they were upset about their property taxes. So she lowered their property taxes... which sounds good, right? Well, she lowered the property taxes but raised the sales tax. They're effectively paying just as much in taxes as before and it hits them every single day when they buy anything in that little town. And to add insult to injury, she also lowered the taxes on corporations.

She has a hockey playing son, right? this hockey mom... Well, she decided that the people would love a hockey rink in town. So she went about doing just that, building a hockey rink. She promised the people that it would be working in the black in a few years. Well, it's still operating in the red with no end in sight.

She's against a woman's right to choose. She thinks that the government should always, in every single case, intervene when a woman discovers that she has become pregnant against her wishes. She insists that every single woman must have every single child that they is impregnated with, every single time, no matter what.

Let me ask you, if you found that you, or your spouse if you're a guy, was pregnant and bearing a seriously malformed baby, one that had no chance at surviving, or if it did survive, that it would be seriously handicapped and a serious burden on you, your finances, the rest of your family and that you would not be given a choice whether or not to have that child, but that you ABSOLUTELY MUST BY LAW, bring that child into this world, do you think that it is right for the government to have that kind of control over your life? And am I the only person who understands that bringing a child like that into the world is selfish beyond belief; to bring a child... a seriously malformed child with no chance of having anything close to a normal existence... into the world to suffer, just because you want it or you think that the government has the right to compel that that child be brought into the world?

She's all for drilling in Alaska. The reason? For your gas bill - oh no, not on your life, it's not about your gas bill. It's about the money it will bring to her and the citizens of Alaska. It won't lower your gas bill - at least not for a very, very long time from now. It will, however provide more profit for the oil companies and for the what, 600,000+ ?, people in Alaska. And the pristine environment of Alaska be damned. It's none of our business what they do with Alaska. The citizens of Alaska should be the only ones who get to decide what happens in that state. Yeah, right. If they want to buy it back, they should make an offer. but they shouldn't expect to pay what Seward paid, okay?

She's a prize pick for the Republicans. Not the everyday working class variety of republicans, but the elite, wealthy, powerful Republicans. The ones who are going to benefit from another 4 years of corporate greed.

Yeah, it sure makes sense all right. You go John McCain.

http://www.peteyandpetunia.com/VoteHere/VoteHere.htm

Sorry but my computer geeks aren't home so I don't know how to post it so that you can just click on it but it's a new jib jab that is called "It's time for some campaigning"

Geeks came home and fixed the link for me

this is cute Nancy:thumbup:

Edited September 8, 200817 yr by Nanook

If a person has a "black" parent - He's considered BLACK

With this reasoning - if he has "white" parent - He's WHITE

Puleez!

More importantly -

What's his BMI?

I bet African Americans that came decades before us would loved to have benefited from that reasoning. Perhaps lives would have been spared and dreams would have been realized. Those rules were made by jim crow/ segregationist state and local governments of the U S. Its part of our painful and embarrassing history. I hope that with this election Americans will show our nation's true growth and movement towards change.

Anyone who meets the criteria set by the our Constitution is welcome to run for president. Race or sex does not matter with my vote, nor should it sway the vote for anyone.

Voters need to elect based on the candidate they believe can do the job. Not to fulfill some historical token just to have a "First".

to the republicans in the congregation... can you please tell me what the hell your candidate is doing???

cause I'm lost

First palin; then smear tactics; and now?????????????????

help me get a understanding

Anybody who believes that Senator Obama is running "just to fulfill some historical token just to have a 'first'", please stand up.

TB, is that also why you think McCain chose Sara Palin - just to fulfil some historical token, just to have a "first"?

Is McCain going to step up to the plate and face the public, oppostite Senator Obama tomorrow night, or will he continue to talk out of both sides of his mouth like he's been doing?

Honestly, I don't know what the people running his campaign are thinking. I am definitely beginning to feel embarassed for the guy. I've felt sorry for him for quite a while, but now it's downright embarrassing.

Has anyone besides me noticed that the people who are most critical of his age, are older people? I wonder why that is? Actually I don't wonder. I know why that is. We know, first hand, how much people change and the abilities that are compromised when one gets past about age 60 or so. Maybe this explains what is going on with that campaign.

You need to read my comments more carefully before you put words in my mouth. I did not say thats why the candidates are running or why they chose a running mate. I stated my opinion that unfortunately its what some voters will be voting for. Too many people already vote without knowing a single thing about any candidate. Some people don't even vote for a candidate, they vote for the R or D that is next to their name on the ballot. I know that there will be a voters out there that will vote based on race or sex. It's unfortunate, but they exist.

TB, is that also why you think McCain chose Sara Palin - just to fulfil some historical token, just to have a "first"?

n.

I hope and pray Obama wins. I have my lawn sign out, and I have volunteered here in California to work the phones. We must move towards the future and not get stuck in the past several years that have trashed this wonderful country.

I am not putting words in anyone's mouth. People can read. I only wrote what you wrote. Tell you what...I won't accuse you of putting words in my mouth either, okay? Although you may have interpreted what I wrote differently than I intended.

But what's the big deal? You made a comment about how people should choose a candidate and vote - I responded with a question about why you think McCain chose Palin. 'Cause his choice sure seems to coincide with your observations about how people may choose a candidate.

If people elect a person they think can do the job, what difference does it make if it is a "first" or not? That is the question. I can't imagine why anyone would vote for someone just because it hasn't been done before. But perhaps you're right. And if you are, that would be just wrong, like you said. Still with me?

OK i have to take a moment out and say this is a great thread i mean its been around for 22 pages and still going strong and best of all... its my tread .... yessir i started this .... sorry... back to the debates.:drool::thumbup::shades_smile::crying:

Edited September 28, 200817 yr by TheWatcher

Good for you clusk! That's great that you're getting phycially involved.

I was very impressed with the debates last night. It was a clear and defining moment for the choices we have in this election. I know no one likes to hear it, but there is no other way to see it than if we elect McCain, we will be looking at another president who is focused on war, not peace, and one who rewards the greedy fat cats. Instead of inspiring the wealthy corporate fat cats to help this country instead of just helping themselves to whatever they can squeeze out of this country, it would be more of the same under McCain. Even in the debate, he persisted in insulting Obama instead of taking the opportunity to brag on the positive plans he has laid out for the country. That's because he has nothing different to offer.

The reason we are in this mess is because of the greed that most of us are guilty of. The men at the top of the heap were already making good money, but they wanted more. So they farmed jobs out, farmed out the automobile work, made loans that they knew shouldn't be made and now it's all come to a head like a giant boil and we're left with the job of trying to do the clean up without sustaining a serious infection that we cannot cure.

I believe Senator Barack Obama is smart enough to get the job done. I don't know of anyone else who has a snowball's chance of getting all of this cleared up.

Watching the idiots who are running McCain's campaign provides a very clear picture of how lacking on intelligence they are. You can just see them sitting around a table exclaiming how great some new plan of action to discredit Obama is. No one seems to be able to be the devil's advocate and tell them what the results will be if they take that action. I feel sorry for poor old McCain. He's floundering and frustrated and angry and has no way to save himself.

I want the Democrats to win, but I wasn't hoping they would win due to some serious incompentency on the part of the Republicans, but they don't seem to be able to help themselves - they're just so used to employing every terrible smear tactic they can think up - and it's always worked before.

I'm sure they're feverishly working to come up with something else ugly. Nothing will surprise me. But unfortunately for them, I think the American public finally sees through it and are sick and tired of it.

Thanks Watcher for giving me a forum to vent my spleen.

Obama called John, Jim because the commentator was Jim Lahrer. He was trying to talked directly to John McCain but McCain would not look him in the eye or talk to him directly. Obama was trying to direct his questions to John and confused it with Jim. Simple mistake. Just like when McCain did not know the leader of Pakistan's name and said Pakistan was a failed state.