dodoes it matter that some of the candidates are not african amrecan?
922049
Were you having a seizure when you typed this question?
186072
no but i might be able to find some white ones, why do they have to be all black and why do they have to be called african american.\n\nTeddy Roosevelt would be mad at you
361541
NO\n\n\nSOUTH AFRICAN
359953
I would watch a presidential debate IF they could nominate choices that would speak truthfully {and be held to their promises] They should be regular people who experience the real life and problems that face the majority of the people. The people who get nominated are usually always rich beyond the regular citizen of this country. They are above the problems of our country. They don't work for minimum wage. They don't even watch their own children, or clean their own homes! Let's face it, we will never get a president who has the experience that we need to help the citizens of our country.
81824
definately the Jew, i don't think this country is going to have a minority leader for awhile, although they really aren't a minority, the probability is highly unlikely, atleast not in this next election anyways.
556874
depends on their heritage
296560
Some un-american african.
747658
No, the term "African American" only applies to people with black physical features who vote Democrat.\n\nFor instance, if you are only half black, like Barack Obama, but are in the Democrat Party, then you are still "African American."\n\nBut if you are fully black and a Republican, like Michael Steele, then you are an "Oreo" or an "Uncle Tom."\n\nDid that help?\n\n-Aztec276
817729
No. The elected candidates are mostly those who contested as independent candidates. The voters are not going to be guided on communal or caste lines basing on which various political parties had given party tickets to candidates most of whom have lost even their deposit. It is a warning to the Samajbadi Party of Mulayam Singh Yadav who has been dependent on Muslim votes by appeasement to them.
75151
Highly unlikely. They are quite diverse, even within their own countries. Many have multi-party political systems, as well as a standard of different forms of government (eg, some have monarchies while others purely support elected officials). Because of their own "internal conflicts," they likely will continue to vie for their own standards.
380643
Some Dude is correct.  The exception is Asians.  When considering applicants for university admissions, several points are *deducted* from Asians' scores -- only because they're Asian!  Yet, many more times that number of points are ADDED to black applicants -- only because they're black!\n\nExcept for Asians, minorities are often favored, even at the expense of others.
444498
Hmm, that's a slightly controversial one, but not nearly as much as say, er, other stuff, so I'll jump in.  Why not?  ^_^\n\nIt may depend slightly on the type of affirmative action you're talking about, but in general I don't feel that it's right.  Especially relating to job acquisition, this is a bad idea.  If a white guy applies for a job and a black (forgive the terms, but "white" and "black" DO take less time to type...although this sentence kinda already made that a useless excuse...but meh) guy applies for the same job, and the white guy is more qualified but they take the black guy because they have to "meet quota" or they "don't want to appear rascist," then that both hurts the economy as well as being a bad moral practice.  Also, if the place those two were applying at WAS just trying to "meet a quota," and later the same white guy tries to apply and another black guy of slightly lesser qualifications also applies (please don't infer that I'm saying that non-white people are less skilled; this is merely an example), they are going to hire the white guy, or at least they should, as he meets the criteria better (not because he's white; I stated that his qualifications are better for the purposes of this example).  Anyway, if the second black guy is technically more skilled than the first black guy, then the end result in this situation is that a white guy and a black guy were hired, but the company could have had a better black guy, and the black guy that had mre qualifications did not get the job he could have had if the company had hired on what I think is a moral basis: ability.  And yes, this is a very far fetched example.  However, hiring on the basis of race is completely unjustified.  I also think hiring on the basis of need is unjustified, which of course immediately leads me to the aforementined race conclusion.  If a person really needs a job, then they need to convince their employer that they can do a darn good job of it.  Thing is, if they really need it, they will try harder to get it AND will work harder at it, which will make them at least in part better cantidates for employment.  I hope that this made sense; I tend to ramble a lot.  Anyway, I'm gonna move on to education.\n\nAs for education, there are a lot of grants out there, and I have seen stats about how African Americans and Hispanics (hmmmm, I chose to type it out NOW, but not in the earlier...oh well) are oftentimes at a disadvantage in paying for school compared to white people.  However, I really feel that we should not be labeling people like that.  there are white people I'm sure that are in just as dire straights as some of the people who apply for "race-only" scholarships.  I think scholarships should be based on merit and need.  If the people of certain races really are more needy, and they are willing to get the grades or reccomendations (and/or write good scholarship application essays), then they should get those scholarships anyway.  As it is, white people who need scholarship money are having to compete with everybody for them, but other races can enter both into "everyone" scholarships as well as scholarships that are only for their race.  Also, having quotas for letting other races into colleges can be hurtful to the people who actually try to get good grades.  I'm not saying that white people always get better grades or anything like that, but if say for one year the applicants at a university are a little more slim on the "non-white" side, and the "white" side is better qualified to get in, the unbiversity may still have to "meet quota," which is not necessarily PUNISHING ability, but is certainly not rewarding it.  If people are not rewarded for their ability and work, then something is wrong.  If minorities want to get into college, then they should (and many do of course) work h
698726
Depends. Not all people that others think are racist are actually racist.
937977
No, probably not.\n\nHerpes is not one of them.
631014
I read someone say that Puerto Ricans were of Spanish decent but lets not forget that there are people of African ancestry as well, so it should not be labeled as simply  a Spanish/Latin commonwealth.
366522
african or european??
752482
I think that some Caucasians are worried about minorities like us taking their place in the political and business world. Politics and business equals control and Caucasians know that, so they may be intimidated by that.