Barack Obama, our Democratic nominee!
Whew, it’s finally official*. Even though it’s long been inevitable, it’s a relief to know that Barack Obama has finally secured the number of delegates necessary to clinch the Democratic nomination. I haven’t really made it a secret that I support Barack Obama, though I haven’t particularly talked about it on here often because political analysis isn’t exactly my thing. For political analysis, I would refer you to DailyKos.
So how am I feeling right now? Ecstatic! It’s time to take down John McCain now! On nearly every issue, he’s wrong when Obama is right. It’s a no-brainer to me, and to most of my peers as well. Of course, others will differ, and that’s their right, but I’m hoping there are more people who agree with me than agree with McCain, and so far that’s looking about right.
I also wouldn’t want to miss this opportunity to talk about how historical Barack Obama’s nomination is. No other western nation has ever had a minority as a nominee of a major political party for the top position (be it president, premier, prime minister, whatever). It’s historical. Many have beaten us in having women leaders, but we’ve beaten them to this. Only in America. It’s one of the few things that’s happened in the past eight years that makes me say I’m genuinely proud of my country.
*Technically it’s not finally official until the Democratic National Convention, of course.
June 4th, 2008 at 05:07
“no other western nation has ever had a minority as a nominee of a major political party for the top position”
For goodness sake. This is really stretching for something to boast in. Women are 50% of the population, so it is rather shocking that you’ve never even had a female nominee never mind VP/ president. UK did it 20 years ago (Thatcher 1979, party leader 1975), and nearly every other nation has.
As for other minorities, few nations have such woppingly big minorities as the US has, so it is an unfair comparison. The US is the only nation I can think of where the MAJORITY of the population (52.1%) are MINORITIES. In the US the “non-white” is only 7.9%.
Further, let’s look at some facts: UK first ethnic Jewish Prime Minister – Benjamin D’Israeli (1868); first atheist “nominee” – Neil Kinnock (1982); ethnic minority (Scottish) – George Hamilton Gordon (1827); working class socialist – Ramsay MacDonald (1924). Other than the fact that the US has had a Roman Catholic leader (ours only convert on leaving office) I’d say there’s little to boast in here. I can’t think of any statistic whereby a proportion of the population measuring 50%+ has been excluded from office until 2008.
Indeed it is rather shocking that the US hasn’t had a minority candidate long before now.
June 4th, 2008 at 06:39
Just start off with, how do you figure that we have minorities as 52%? My figures put us at around 80% whites, with the next largest group (blacks) at almost 13%.
Wikipedia’s number match up with mine, as well, to save you the trouble.
I won’t say that we have a great track record with minorities being represented in leadership positions, but I also don’t care. Maybe I’m just being stupid, but I don’t see why it’s important to have someone with what is effectively a permanent tan as president. Far more important to me as a voter are what they are for or against.
Now, all of that said, I’m definitely not in favor of Obama. My key issue in politics is guns, so I’m stuck with the republicans, because it seems like most democrats are determined that they are the work of the devil. Or something to that effect, in any case.
Defending the second amendment in Japanese is even harder than doing so in English, by the way.
June 4th, 2008 at 07:12
Sorry misread. Still only 75.1% are “white only” by ethnicity. Which means 24.1% are minorities of some ethnic abstraction, 300% more than in the UK. What % are white upper middle-class males? Because that’s the minority that the leadership is drawn from.
My post above is, on reflection, overly dramatic, but I was reacting to Cyde’s US triumphalism that adopting a black nominee demonstrated some sort of superiority in US tolerance and minority enfranchisement compared to other nations. For goodness sake even Islamic nations have had female presidents.
June 4th, 2008 at 11:16
I didn’t think Cyde had a tone of superiority. If anything I thought his post was paying homage to the more progressive western countries while simultaneously celebrating the US’s possible entry into the upper echelon of progressive nations.
June 4th, 2008 at 12:07
I think I know where Doc’s coming from, ’cause I got the same sort of feeling. I’m American, though, so I’m not really bothered by it.
June 4th, 2008 at 12:10
William: Your number one issue is guns? Really? Aren’t there more important things to worry about? I own a rifle, and about the only time I even think about it is when I’m going to the target range. To me issues like the economy, the Iraq War, reproductive rights, our standing in the world, etc., are far more important. And it’s not like they’re even going to be taking rifles away anyway. The Democrats have largely come to realize they’ve lost on this issue, so they aren’t pushing the gun control thing nearly as much as they did in past years.
June 4th, 2008 at 12:48
It’s my pivotal issue largely because I simply don’t care about a lot of the other things. The thing that bothers me is that I’m afraid we’ll join the rest of the world and ban guns altogether like Japan* or many parts of Europe.
I was under the impression that Obama was rather pro-gun-control. Is that not the case?
*They’re effectively banned, though are exceptions.
June 4th, 2008 at 12:49
Woah, sorry about the above post. It’s kind of 2AM here and my thoughts aren’t so coherent right now.
June 4th, 2008 at 21:34
Naturally, a few minutes after writing this post, and before Obama came on to give his victory speech, a thunderstorm killed the power to my house for a few hours. Brilliant.
So I had to watch his speech this morning, not live.