Social Question

josie's avatar

How do minority voters discriminate between candidates that sort of "look like" them?

Asked by josie (30926points) August 6th, 2015

This is a serious question.
I can’t stop you from indulging in your normal reflexive and condescending Fluther doctrinaire moral judgement, but it would be interesting to get an honest point of view.

Black folks adore the President. They are ambivalent at best or disdainful of, at worst, of another black man, Dr. Ben Carson. Both men are well educated and well spoken and at the end of the day both are probably decent fellows.

Women love Hillary Clinton. They seem to have no interest in Carly Fiorina. One woman is famous because she is married to a former president and many people imagine this makes her special. The other woman was a successful business person and CEO of HP, and many people imagine this makes her special.

So, what is it? What is the “thing” that makes one popular among their like perceived minorities, and the other one not so appealing to the same constituency?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

44 Answers

DoNotKnow's avatar

@josie: “Black folks adore the President. They are ambivalent at best or disdainful of, at worst, of another black man, Dr. Ben Carson.”

You’re saying that “black folks” like Obama because of he is African American. Yet, you are puzzled when another African American does not have the support from “black folks”. Re-read your question and it looks like you have your answer.

Is it possible that “black folks” evaluate candidates on things other than merely race/appearance? It would be pretty self-defeating for anyone other than extremely rich white Christians to vote for Ben Carson because of his positions on the issues. His skin color doesn’t matter. The same goes for women and Fiorina.

It appears as if you are assuming that African Americans and women do not support candidates that hold positions that they think are important – they just vote on race/gender. Is this incorrect assumption causing your confusion?

Dutchess_III's avatar

I agree with @DoNotKnow.

I adore Obama (and Michelle,) and I am disappointed in Ben Carson. I am white.

Not sure how I feel about Hilary at this point. I have no idea who Carly Fiorina is. I am a woman.

zenvelo's avatar

Minorities and women discern the differences the same way white men do- they discount the idiots an they support those who make a rational statement that coincides with their own beliefs.

Carly Fiorina is a failed CEO who opposes women’s rights. Carson is a Doctor who prefers to ignore the plight of the poor and chastises people for being gay. Why would anyone support them? They Republicans don’t based on their low poll numbers.

Darth_Algar's avatar

Do you think that women and minorities don’t consider issues and a candidates’ positions before voting? Do you presume that they only vote based on skin color or gender?

Dutchess_III's avatar

I only voted for Obama because he’s sexy and he can dance.

tinyfaery's avatar

Not even worth it.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Come on @josie. I know you asked us not to go “there” but where else could we go? Do you only vote for white, male candidates, and only based on how much they look like you?

Zaku's avatar

Why on Earth would there be one ”“thing” that makes one popular among their like perceived minorities”?

Like other humans, humans who aren’t white men in America probably make choices between candidates based on their impressions, media effluence, what people they know say about them, gut feelings, and any other information they may have. I’m sure the answer is different for everyone, for every candidate. No?

ibstubro's avatar

Dr. Ben Carson seems tremendously popular among black Republicans and Carly Fiorina is the darling of Republican females.

Do you have a question in there somewhere?

Pandora's avatar

As a minority hispanic female, I no more identify with Marco Rubio, or Hiliary Clinton because of their race or gender.
I do tend to vote for the party member I feel is closer to the issues I care about.
I realize that no one party or party member is going to agree with all the issues I care about. It has more to do with the numbers.
For instance. Taxes isn’t a issue that bugs me. I think I have a fair understanding that the deficit isn’t going to go away by reducing everyones taxes. But the republican party believes by saving the rich money, that it means more jobs and it never does. The democrats try to raise taxes but then blow the money on idiotic stuff that have minimal to no effect on peoples lives. So I do not mind paying taxes and understand that it will help keep our nation running, but I would also like the rich to pay their fair share and money spent on creating more jobs. Instead of just sending so much of that money on welfare, spend some of that money on job training and incentives for companies to hire and train individuals so that they have a new job skill and are working.

I kind of got off track. My point is that I try to listen and read up on candidates to see who has the best countries best interest. Even if it is against my own wishes. example. I wish there was more gun control. But if someone could get the economy going and doesn’t believe the should be gun control, I would probably vote for them.

Problem is most people vote for the issues they feel relate most to themselves and not so much who is the over all best candidate for the country. I like President Obama. Seems like a nice guy, and I even voted for him. Mostly because there was no one better. I think he did a better job than those before him, but I knew with a republican majority. He was going to have one hell of a time. Especially since right from the beginning his Presidency became about his color. Not his issues. I knew the Good Ol boys were going to make him suffer and make the nation suffer rather than do the right thing. So if anything I almost didn’t vote for him because I felt they would make sure that his presidency was nothing more than a figure head. They put it out from the beginning that they would make sure he accomplished nothing. They almost succeeded .

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Pandora “Problem is most people vote for the issues they feel relate most to themselves and not so much who is the over all best candidate for the country.”

People tend to feel like the issues that matter to them personally are what’s most important for the country, and thus feel like the candidate who most aligns with their stance on those issues is the candidate who is overall best for the country.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

“One woman is famous because she is married to a former president…” Or it could be she’s popular with a lot of women because of her actual politics and/or what she’s done for women’s rights. Regardless, she doesn’t have my vote. I’m voting for Sanders.

stanleybmanly's avatar

I too take issue with the idea that Hillary’s following exists because she’s an appendage of Bill. As for Fiorina and Carson, I’m not maudlin or sentimental, but there’s something rather sad about the pair of them. Fiorina’s rich but heartless, with about as much empathy for the average soul as you’d get from a cinder block. Carson on the other hand is a black man yet to appreciate that there might be some inconsistency in throwing his lot in with a crowd of sociopaths and spouting that nonsense defining the conservative line. Just listening to the man parrot those talking points endorsing greed, selfishness and intellectual paucity Is like watching a talking steer passionately advocating the consumption of beef. So you have an adding machine in a dress whose sole qualification for governing lies in having ruthlessly fired a few hundred people, and a black physician who will probably receive a hearty endorsement from the klu klux klan. Go figure!

Dutchess_III's avatar

It is depressing for person with the extreme intelligence Ben Carson has, to be throwing his lot in with the conspiracy theorists.

ucme's avatar

You lot elected a peanut farmer with a mouth literally full of teeth (Carter) a failed actor (Reagan) & a chimpanzee in a suit (Dubya)
Trump or Hellary will join that hall of shame, be proud America, be proud :D

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, that just goes to show that anyone can work their way up to President, not just a few, select elite, like in the Old Country (England.) You can include Obama in that list.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@ucme “You lot elected a peanut farmer with a mouth literally full of teeth”

Do politicians in the UK have mouths full of something other than teeth?

Pandora's avatar

@Darth_Algar I know why they do it. But if you truly want the best candidate. You will vote for the one who is more fiscally responsible and has the record of doing so. You can’t help a nation to prosper by doing everything else and killing us financially. Money does still make the world go round. Wishes are a waste of time.
But I guess, so are most politicians.

Dutchess_III's avatar

^^^ Just ask Trump.

Brian1946's avatar

@Darth_Algar

“Do politicians in the UK have mouths full of something other than teeth?”

Many fans of Maggoty Thatcher have nicknamed Carter “the tongueless bungler”. ;-)

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Pandora

That’s your view. Some people, in their own view, consider other factors more important than “fiscal responsibility” (whatever that means anyway).

zenvelo's avatar

@Pandora But most people don’t agree with you about killing us financially, because they re-elected George Bush.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Some of us stupidly thought we were showing solidity against the perpetrators of 9/11 when we re-elected Bush.
Biggest mistake I ever made.

ucme's avatar

@Darth_Algar Bless ya, Jimmy had a huge toothy grin did he not?
Fluther to be renamed Sesame Street, blatant shit needs spelling out.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@ucme

And that has exactly what to do with his qualifications for office?

zenvelo's avatar

Yes, Mr Carter looked like he’d had his dentistry done by the National Health. But he is a great person.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

Don’t count me among the “we” that voted for Bush. I knew what a POS he was from the beginning.

ucme's avatar

@Darth_Algar Ahh, so it comes down to you defending the man, vote for him did we?
It’s okay dear, far as i’m aware he will never see my post, although you seem to be offened on his behalf, which is amusing if not a little odd.

Darth_Algar's avatar

I’m neither defending him, nor am I offended by your post. I’m simply trying to figure out what in the blue fuck your point is here.

ucme's avatar

The American public vote in idiotic Presidents, time & time & time again.
Easy really, you may continue with your blue fuck.

Darth_Algar's avatar

And you define “idiotic” by the shape of one’s teeth?

tinyfaery's avatar

British people talking about teeth. Hahahaha.

ucme's avatar

Love how you focus on Carter, you seem obsessed by the guy, not a word on the chimp or the crap actor.
My teeth are fine, so i’m allowed…American people offended coz they voted in idiots hahahaha.

tinyfaery's avatar

Too young to have voted for Carter. First time I voted was for Clinton. Only once, though. Obama, once. All the other times I voted Green.

We’re not all the same. Stop generalizing. It makes you look ignorant.

ucme's avatar

Why are you bothering, oh yeah, whining fluther vet :D
As for generalising, British & their teeth? Ignorance as an art form.

stanleybmanly's avatar

I wouldn’t be so smug regarding the stupidity of your bumbling Yankee cousins. A great deal of effort has gone into persuading we rubes to vote against our own interests, and you can point & grin all you like, but if you think those lessons have not been embraced and studied by your own ruling class, then you can expect what you deserve. There is absolutely no reason to suppose that just as with American leadership in so many fields, the dumbing down of its citizenry is the prototype for the rest of you out there.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@ucme

Understand this: I have no particular feelings towards Carter one way or the other. I was in diapers when the man was in office. I’m simply trying to figure out your idiotic logic here.

ucme's avatar

Hahahaha & so it goes on, as is the rule of the idiot.
@Darth_Algar There is no logic or any real point, just stating the obvious, that Americans have voted into office a collection of village idiots. On Carter himself, his main characteristic was his horsey grin, hence the sarcasm in my comment…“a mouth literally full of teeth”
Reagan, speaks for itself & Bush needs no explanation such is the stupidity of the dumb fuck.
In conclusion then, it doesn’t matter who gets the gig next time, Hell-ary Clinton, Trump or A.N. Other, they’re only joining a rogues gallery of arsehats that went before them.
There shall be no further tutoring on the subject as the class has shown itself to be pretty much fucked :D

stanleybmanly's avatar

nothing subtle there!

Pandora's avatar

@Darth_Algar Fiscal responsibility, explained easily. When a person decides spend all of their money on rent, food, utilities and health care, rather than spend most of it on hookers, drugs, gambling or a new set of boobs, knowing full well they need shelter and food and health care. Only the government wastes on a much larger scale, Just look at Congress and the Senate.

ucme's avatar

No, just plain facts!

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Pandora

Again, it comes down to personal views. What one person considers government waste another person considers necessary spending. Some folks view our ginormous military budget (we spend more on our military that the next 12 countries, including heavyweights like China and Russia, combined) as wasteful spending. Others view it as necessary to defend our country and/or to maintain American influence around the globe. Some people view programs such as Social Security, Medicare, etc as wasteful spending. Others view it as necessary. This is what I’m talking about – it all boils down to personal, subjective views. If these things were as black and white as you seem to want to paint them then running a government would be a simple matter.

Pandora's avatar

Never said it was all black and white. But every situation isn’t so complicated either. The government has groups set up to study where waste is being made and they are presented with solutions. I know of one company that was let go after they made their observation and gave solutions that would save money. But here’s the problem. If a group is designated a certain amount of money and doesn’t use up all the money by the end of the fiscal year, than the following year they will have to make due with the same amount of money and projects may come up that make it more expensive the next year. So that this doesn’t happen, agencies scramble to use up whatever they saved before the fiscal year. They buy things they really don’t need. So now the government pays these other agencies for their money saving ideas that never will be implemented. Instead of saying. Hey, if you save us 25 percent, we ill still give you the other 75 percent. Twenty five percent doesn’t sound like a lot but add that agency after agency that have a millions of dollars invested in them, and that can be quite a ton of savings for other needed necessities. At the very least don’t higher people to do a job you don’t want them to really do. That by itself would save a lot of money.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther