[MossadConspiracy]

Originally Posted by Revert

YOu might not be able to get a clear statistical conclusion but the general view is his skin colour and apparent Muslimness are reasons why certain demographics aren't convinced by him, hence the statements by myself and others.

I go by the man on the street view not the CNN view.

I corrected my earlier statement so try and let it go.

if you go by the man on the street then its not a statistical conclusion, its an anecdotal one

[Revert]

Originally Posted by MossadConspiracy

if you go by the man on the street then its not a statistical conclusion, its an anecdotal one

I personally feel its true represntation of the country feels. I'm Working Class thats how we roll.

[MossadConspiracy]

Originally Posted by Revert

Good point, i'm going by my gut..sometimes i get the runs..so wait what was the question?

I personally think he's the best of a bad bunch and if i could vote, i'd vote for him.

he is the best positioned candidate to win the presidency in 2008, and the fact that he has beaten the Bill-Hillary machine within the democratic party as well as in local and national politics means that he is a very viable candidate with alot of popular support among Americans. The fact that he has gotten this far itself shows that the image of Americans as racist ignorant hicks is false

[Revert]

Originally Posted by MossadConspiracy

he is the best positioned candidate to win the presidency in 2008, and the fact that he has beaten the Bill-Hillary machine within the democratic party as well as in local and national politics means that he is a very viable candidate with alot of popular support among Americans. The fact that he has gotten this far itself shows that the image of Americans as racist ignorant hicks is false

There are many factors that fall into play when talking about Obamas voting percentage.

[sixpakistan]

Originally Posted by MossadConspiracy

he is the best positioned candidate to win the presidency in 2008, and the fact that he has beaten the Bill-Hillary machine within the democratic party as well as in local and national politics means that he is a very viable candidate with alot of popular support among Americans. The fact that he has gotten this far itself shows that the image of Americans as racist ignorant hicks is false

No, it just shows that the Democratic party is not a bunch of racist and ignorant hicks. He hasn't run in a general election yet. Although that won't necessarily show Americans aren't racist/ignorant hicks either, since relatively few Americans vote (and the less educated, the less likely they are to vote)

[IbnMardhiyah]

Originally Posted by Variable

If someone were to make similar statements about a Muslim leader and their votership, opposite but equal in magnitude, their rep bar would look like roberto's in short order. But when such statments are made broadly about Christians/Americans, everyone's nodding in agreement.

Ummmm, nice try, but no.Here on Islamica its been said several times about both Ahmadinejad and Musharraf that they were spouting anti-Western just to garner votes from their constitiuencies [not votership] and there was no objection, everyone here agreed because that's what politicians do - they pander to the masses because the masses have the vote.

That's what Chotoo was trying to point out.

What's so offensive about that?

Go eat your ice cream.

I'll eat mine and yours too, thanks.

NEXT!

[Variable]

Originally Posted by IbnMardhiyah

Ummmm, nice try, but no.Here on Islamica its been said several times about both Ahmadinejad and Musharraf that they were spouting anti-Western just to garner votes from their constitiuencies [not votership] and there was no objection, everyone here agreed because that's what politicians do - they pander to the masses because the masses have the vote.

That's what Chotoo was trying to point out.

What's so offensive about that?

Nope, no that's not the same. What's happening here is not the lambasting of an individual who's making outlandish statements, as is what happened with Ahmedinejad. The disconnect between him and his constituents was understood - nothing was being said about the Iranian people as a whole. Contrast that to statements that Americans need to see their leaders harm 'brown people' or attack Muslim countries.

A comparable claim would be that Muslims in general would need to see their leader persecute Christians and Jews in order to prove their loyalty to Islam, or attack and harm white people in order for them to be a viable candidate.

[sally]

why are people discussing this right now? didn't she say this like a while ago? or did she do it again? i feel like deja vu

[sixpakistan]

Originally Posted by Variable

I'm fully aware that people have called his religion and even allegience into question over his 'Muslim sounding name' etc. It doesn't mean that "nobody would vote for him if..."

I was addressing your statement about whether people would believe he was Christian, not whether people would vote for him..

Originally Posted by Variable

Because nobody would believe he was Christian if he didn't want to attack a Muslim state??

[IbnMardhiyah]

Originally Posted by Variable

A comparable claim would be that Muslims in general would need to see their leader persecute Christians and Jews in order to prove their loyalty to Islam, or attack and harm white people in order for them to be a viable candidate.

And if in case you didn't notice, that happens everyday in countries like Palestine, Iran, and many more Muslim countries.

Its a variation on the wag-the-dog theme; but all the same, politicians often seek to buttress themselves and garner more support by lashing out at what is perceived to be a greater enemy beyond the borders.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by IbnMardhiyah

And if in case you didn't notice, that happens everyday in countries like Palestine, Iran, and many more Muslim countries.

Are you serious? You think in order to prove their Islam/effectiveness, those leaders need to persecute Christians and harm white people? Well, A) I disagree and B) I find that equally offensive for those peoples. But I would've expected something like that to come from an Islamophobe.

[IbnMardhiyah]

Originally Posted by Variable

Are you serious? You think in order to prove their Islam/effectiveness, those leaders need to persecute Christians and harm white people? Well, A) I disagree and B) I find that equally offensive for those peoples. But I would've expected something like that to come from an Islamophobe.

Look man, we're just trying to point out something that perhaps you're unaware of.

It really has less to do with religion or ethnicity or anything else, and more to do with politics and power. Its about pandering to your constituency and their emotions, because the vast majority of sales in this world are made based on emotion.

Cars, houses, clothes, cosmetics, and .... votes.

Yes, there are many leaders in the Muslim world who use such cheap tactics in order to gain popularity. Ahmadinejad talks sh*t all the time about whupping America's @$$ if she ever decided to pay a visit. The leaders of Palestinian groups do it all the time, against Israel. Syria does it. Iraq used to do it. Pakistani politicians do it.

Its very common.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by IbnMardhiyah

Look man, we're just trying to point out something that perhaps you're unaware of.

It really has less to do with religion or ethnicity or anything else, and more to do with politics and power. Its about pandering to your constituency and their emotions, because the vast majority of sales in this world are made based on emotion.

Cars, houses, clothes, cosmetics, and .... votes.

Yes, there are many leaders in the Muslim world who use such cheap tactics in order to gain popularity. Ahmadinejad talks sh*t all the time about whupping America's @$$ if she ever decided to pay a visit. The leaders of Palestinian groups do it all the time, against Israel. Syria does it. Iraq used to do it. Pakistani politicians do it.

Its very common.

And there is always the chorus of people who put distance between the people and the leaders. It'd been pointed out repeatedly that the general sentiment of the Iranian people towards the West don't really match up to Ahmedinejad's rhetoric. The Palestinians are tiny population whose every issue revolves around their stateless situation in relation to Israel. Saying that, in general, Muslims need to see their leaders persecute non-Muslims to justify their leadership is offensive, and is an often debated issue here amongst Islamophobes and Islamicans.

Likewise it's offensive to assert that Americans in general require their potential leaders attack Muslims and persecute 'brown people' to be considered viable candidates. That's an assertion about the American people that is absolutely offensive.

[Jamroll]

Originally Posted by Variable

And there is always the chorus of people who put distance between the people and the leaders. It'd been pointed out repeatedly that the general sentiment of the Iranian people towards the West don't really match up to Ahmedinejad's rhetoric. The Palestinians are tiny population whose every issue revolves around their stateless situation in relation to Israel. Saying that, in general, Muslims need to see their leaders persecute non-Muslims to justify their leadership is offensive, and is an often debated issue here amongst Islamophobes and Islamicans.

Likewise it's offensive to assert that Americans in general require their potential leaders attack Muslims and persecute 'brown people' to be considered viable candidates. That's an assertion about the American people that is absolutely offensive.

If you did a straw poll of Americans today, and asked them who they thought their enemy was, who do you think they would say? And what colour skin would their enemy have?