Letters to the Editor
-
This Poll is actually good for Clinton
I'm going to repeat myself, because no-one seems to be addressing this point in all of the back and forth
Joan only mentions parenthetically a key factor of the poll parenthetically:
"(One limit of the poll is that voters weren't asked if they would support a black or a woman president, only if they think others would.)"
This poll is about what people assume about other voters, not how they'd vote themselves. So it does NOT reveal Americans are more ready for one or the other. IT SHOWS THOSE BEING POLLED THINK OTHER PEOPLE ARE MORE SEXIST THAN RACIST.
Which I think is a good thing.
In fact it might mean the exact opposite of what Joan tries to argue. People are paying attenton to the sexist attacks on Clinton and it does disturb them more than the racist attacks on Obama.
This is still not a good thing for Clinton, since people make assumptions based on electability. But it does mean people do recognize the obstacles she's against, and they may not think it's right.
It is also not a good thing for Obama, because it might mean people refuse to believe racism is an obstacle, which might mean they won't recognize racist tactics when used against him.
Anyway, Joan downplays this vital aspect like an afterthought, when it's vital to the discussion. More importantly, by taking this angle she could still be making points for Clinton without utterly insulting all the Obama supporters. I don't understand why she - and Salon - feels the need to keep using language which demonizes Obama, and people's feelings about race, in order to elevate her own candidate.
It's the same as her refusal to acknowledge her obvious bias, bing honest and supportive, is far less infuriating than supporting and weasely.