The Democrats’ Dilemma
Published in La Prensa
(Panama) on April 27, 2008
by Betty Brannan Jaen (link to original)
In the United States right now, there is a new significance to the phrase “mixed marriage”. Before it was used as a term to describe a couple with distinct religions, but now it is used to describe a couple divided over the great impassioned “single theme” of present day America: the political war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I can tell you that I have seen with my own eyes that there are couples that already cannot discuss the theme without arriving almost, almost to physical violence.
All the indications are that this will be a fight to the death and many fear (myself included) that this self-destruction among the Democrats shall produce a triumph for the Republicans in November. This fear profoundly influences the viewpoint of those who are pro Barack and those who are pro Hillary because the great unknown is which of the two is more brutally “eligible” (in English “more electable”) given that the United States has never had a president that has not been white and male. As a Washington Post newspaper headline asked in 2006, “Is the United States too racist for Barack and too sexist for Hillary?”
Well, two days ago I found a poll that responds directly to this question and the answer is that the American citizens are very ready to accept a black or a woman in the White House although, curiously, under no circumstances shall they accept an atheist.
A little more than a year ago (February, 2007), Gallup polled to measure how many Americans would be ready to vote for a candidate “well qualified” for the presidency in different nontraditional categories. The results give out the following figures (www.gallup.com): 95% would vote for a Catholic (4% declined to support); 94% would vote for a black (5% declined); 92% would vote for a Jew (7% declined); 88% would vote for a woman (11% declined); 87% would vote for a Hispanic (12% declined); 57% would vote for someone 72 years old (42% declined); 55% would vote for a homosexual (43% declined); 45% would vote for an atheist (53% declined).
Based on these results, one that is considering the candidature of Barack Obama has a small advantage, but not insignificant over that of Hillary Clinton. As a feminist, it injures me to confirm that the United States still suffers from sexism that unjustly restrains the candidature of Hillary or whoever aspires for the White House, but it doesn’t serve to close one’s eyes to the hurtful truth. Of comfort is that the act of acceptance of women in the presidency has been changed: according to Gallup, in 1937 it was only 33%, and in 1967 57%. The acceptance of 88% that women now mark is an important advance but, by final count, unsatisfactory.
On the other side, consider the little acceptance for a candidate of 72 years, specifically referring to John McCain, whose win would make him the oldest president in American history (at the moment of his election). Ronald Reagan, for example, was 69 years old when he was elected and perhaps the example of deterioration during the eight years of his presidency now explains why only 57% of those questioned would vote for a candidate this old while 42% would flatly reject him.
Even so, and besides other debilitations such as his support for the war in Iraq and the unpopularity of George W. Bush, the poll demonstrates that McCain would be a formidable candidate, but not invincible. But now, the polls clearly indicate that Barack as much as Hillary would narrowly win against McCain, although Barack would do it with a little more margin. (See http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html).
As a postscript, I recommend that you focus also on the results of this Gallup poll that indicate that there is good acceptance of a Hispanic candidate; although Bill Richardson roundly failed, perhaps he opened the way for the next one. On the other hand, it is depressing to see the profound political prejudice against homosexuals and atheists, by my judgment there is only one problem: the religious fanaticism that has empowered American politics. I am sure that in my life I shall see the election of a woman and a black to the presidency of the United States-if not now, then next time- and I believe that the acceptance of homosexuals in the White House is not impossible. But that which I truly long to see before my death is the election of an atheist.
All the indications are that this will be a fight to the death and many fear (myself included) that this self-destruction among the Democrats shall produce a triumph for the Republicans in November. This fear profoundly influences the viewpoint of those who are pro Barack and those who are pro Hillary because the great unknown is which of the two is more brutally “eligible” (in English “more electable”) given that the United States has never had a president that has not been white and male. As a Washington Post newspaper headline asked in 2006, “Is the United States too racist for Barack and too sexist for Hillary?”
Well, two days ago I found a poll that responds directly to this question and the answer is that the American citizens are very ready to accept a black or a woman in the White House although, curiously, under no circumstances shall they accept an atheist.
A little more than a year ago (February, 2007), Gallup polled to measure how many Americans would be ready to vote for a candidate “well qualified” for the presidency in different nontraditional categories. The results give out the following figures (www.gallup.com): 95% would vote for a Catholic (4% declined to support); 94% would vote for a black (5% declined); 92% would vote for a Jew (7% declined); 88% would vote for a woman (11% declined); 87% would vote for a Hispanic (12% declined); 57% would vote for someone 72 years old (42% declined); 55% would vote for a homosexual (43% declined); 45% would vote for an atheist (53% declined).
Based on these results, one that is considering the candidature of Barack Obama has a small advantage, but not insignificant over that of Hillary Clinton. As a feminist, it injures me to confirm that the United States still suffers from sexism that unjustly restrains the candidature of Hillary or whoever aspires for the White House, but it doesn’t serve to close one’s eyes to the hurtful truth. Of comfort is that the act of acceptance of women in the presidency has been changed: according to Gallup, in 1937 it was only 33%, and in 1967 57%. The acceptance of 88% that women now mark is an important advance but, by final count, unsatisfactory.
On the other side, consider the little acceptance for a candidate of 72 years, specifically referring to John McCain, whose win would make him the oldest president in American history (at the moment of his election). Ronald Reagan, for example, was 69 years old when he was elected and perhaps the example of deterioration during the eight years of his presidency now explains why only 57% of those questioned would vote for a candidate this old while 42% would flatly reject him.
Even so, and besides other debilitations such as his support for the war in Iraq and the unpopularity of George W. Bush, the poll demonstrates that McCain would be a formidable candidate, but not invincible. But now, the polls clearly indicate that Barack as much as Hillary would narrowly win against McCain, although Barack would do it with a little more margin. (See http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html).
As a postscript, I recommend that you focus also on the results of this Gallup poll that indicate that there is good acceptance of a Hispanic candidate; although Bill Richardson roundly failed, perhaps he opened the way for the next one. On the other hand, it is depressing to see the profound political prejudice against homosexuals and atheists, by my judgment there is only one problem: the religious fanaticism that has empowered American politics. I am sure that in my life I shall see the election of a woman and a black to the presidency of the United States-if not now, then next time- and I believe that the acceptance of homosexuals in the White House is not impossible. But that which I truly long to see before my death is the election of an atheist.