How Obama is viewed among blacks

African Americans are proud to have a black president but have seen little change in their daily lives since he took office.

Larry Downing/Reuters
US Attorney General Eric Holder, who has often been more vocal on black issues than President Obama, listens to the president talk about the My Brother's Keeper task force at the White House.

When Barack Obama launched his presidential campaign in 2007, African-American voters didn’t flock to him. Was he black enough? they asked. Would he stand up for their issues? Could he win?

By late January 2008, when then-Senator Obama won the South Carolina primary, he had clearly captured the hearts of black America. His mixed-race heritage and multicultural upbringing in Hawaii and Indonesia – far from the typical African-American back story – didn’t matter. He had moved to the South Side of Chicago, married a black woman, and joined a black church.

“He made a lot of cultural decisions that signaled that he identifies as African-American,” says Andra Gillespie, a political scientist at Emory University in Atlanta.

In both of his presidential victories, Obama swept the black vote – 95 percent in 2008 and 93 percent in 2012. Now, deep into his second term, that support has dipped into the mid-80s, but remains the bedrock of his overall support.

African-Americans interviewed in Little Rock, Ark., say they’re proud to have a black president, though they don’t see much difference in their day-to-day lives since Obama took office.

“My life is pretty much the same as it was when Bush was in there – it hasn’t changed much for the better or the worse,” says Guss, a mechanic who asked that his last name not be used.

“White men put Obama in the White House, and white men still control this country,” he says, adding: “I’m old and I’ve seen a lot, and in the end, it doesn’t matter if Obama is black or white, he’s a politician. They make promises. They don’t keep them.”

Chane Morrow, a lifestyle artist and musician in his mid-30s, says he grew up believing he’d never see a black president. Obama’s inauguration didn’t scream of “hope,” he says, but rather, “don’t limit the possible.”

Mr. Morrow, a graduate of Stanford University, says he had fairly low expectations for Obama’s reign, given the situation he inherited, and has been disappointed by some of his moves, or inaction.

But “I will still say he surpassed what I thought we’d get from him,” he says. “Plus he hasn’t ever let these ‘boys’ rattle him.”

“Given the firestorm he received from his position and blatantly racist attacks,” he adds, “that’s impressive.”

Ray Jones, an unemployed man in his late 20s who lives with his parents, expresses mixed feelings about Obama.   

“Sure, I’m glad there’s a black man up there, but it’s not putting money in my pocket,” says Mr. Jones, who finished high school but did not go to college. “I can’t find a job, or I find one and they only want you to work part time and then lay you off and you start over. They pay horrible.”

“I got an Obama shirt and I wear it. I’m proud,” he says. “I guess things are better, health care and all, but they aren’t great.” 

Political observers have wondered if Obama would inspire a new generation of politicians, of any race. 

It may be a bit soon for the political “children” of Obama to start running, but in Little Rock, Vivian Flowers is set to take her seat in the Arkansas legislature. She won the Democratic primary in May, and faces no opposition in November.

Ms. Flowers says she has wanted to run for years, and Obama’s win didn’t influence her directly. But she does draw on his example.

“I actually use his election to try to inspire others to run,” she says. “So many people hate politics and don’t believe it will make a difference. Or they believe elections are rigged and their votes don’t really count. I believe you will see more black, Latino, and gay Americans running for higher [statewide and congressional] office in Arkansas and across the nation because of the precedent President Obama set.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.