As the dust settles in the wake of a sweeping victory for Barrack Obama in the American presidential election, attention now shifts to a new question: how did Obama do it, dominating the electorate and overcoming the ‘race barrier’?
To discuss these questions, a conference was held at Wilfrid Laurier University on Thursday in which a panel of political experts analysed the election results.
The ‘racial factor’ was the dominate topic.
“Race didn’t matter. The Bradley Effect did not show up in the numbers,” quotes Dr. Barry Kay, a Laurier political science professor, gesturing to the New York Times newspaper in his hand. But Kay has reservations. “My question is...how do you tell that?”
Kay believes that while Obama won the election that does not mean race was not a factor.
“White people vote 10% more for Republicans, but this year they voted 20% more,” referencing statistics which examine racial voting tendencies compared to the national average. While this does not prove these voters were voting more Republican this election only because the alternative was a black candidate, Kay still feels it indicates race may have been an issue. “I don’t think you can conclude that race is not a factor.”
American political expert Dr. George Breckenridge from McMaster University focused on the breaking of social barriers in politics.
“I’m interested in what it takes to break through the barrier and become ‘the first’,” he opens, explaining how historically breaking barriers has required exceptional candidates. “In Barrack Obama’s case, you can say that he does not conform to any ‘black stereotype’...in many ways he is perfect,” Breckenridge says. “Obama had to be perfect.”
He went on to explain how hard it was for John F. Kennedy to overcome the ‘Catholic barrier’, and how it took a candidate as charming and “perfect” as JFK to do so – a similar situation with Obama and race in the 2008 election, Breckenridge says.
Since JFK trounced the ‘Catholic barrier’ in 1960, the factor has vanished as being an issue for the vast majority of Americans. The Catholic John Kerry ran in 2004 without so much as a cricket chirping in protest of his religious affiliation.
Breckenridge wonders if the same indifference towards Catholicism will emerge for the factor of race. “Race as an issue in politics; Is that it? Is it not an issue?”
He left the largely student audience to decide for themselves, though panel member Dr. Debora VanNijnatte, of Wilfrid Laurier, made the insightful conclusion that, “the real determination of when race is no longer an issue is when it is no longer talked about.”
There was also discussion as to the fate of the defeated Republican Party, which now fails to hold the White House, Congress or Senate – a stunning turn of fates for a party which just four years ago confidently controlled all three.
“Conservatism has to be rethought,” says Breckenridge. “The Republicans have to restore their reputation for competence, which has been lost.” VanNijnatte felt they “really have to go back to the drawing board.”
However, the panel was unconvinced that it was necessarily Obama himself who clinched the election. “I frankly thought any Democrat would have won anyways,” VanNijnatte also said, the consensus being that the Republican downfall was past due.
But what led to the turning of the tide from Red to Blue?
“Bush” was the resounding answer.
While the panel felt that McCain made major mistakes during his campaign, most prominently being the selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate, the panel agreed that it was eight years of the Bush administration which led to an inevitable shift in power.
Breckenridge went so far as to claim that, “If you look at the disastrous record of Bush, you could argue Obama should have done better,” in the election. “He’s really been a terrible President.”
No comments:
Post a Comment