Can the DNC lose the black vote?

[RK77]

What would happen if the DNC lost 20% of the black vote in November?

What would happen if the RNC gained it?

In 2004, the republican party identified a portion of the african american community that shares their values, and they courted them heavily. That portion is the black church that has been insulted so tremendously over the last several weeks. That portion is the portion that is dumbstruck by the sudden amnesia of the of white america, who forgot all about the Hell and Damnation churches that sprinkle the US country side.

The african american faith communities are no more monolithic than the european american faith communities and they sat quietly and patiently waiting for their party--the party they had been loyal to for 40+ years to put a kabosh on the rabid insults to their faith! What they heard was a deafening silence from the party and the levying of the most heinous and offensive comments that all of white america could levy without the use of their more traditional epithets.

The republicans have not however been silent. They have been sending their african american pastors like the Rev Watson of philadelphia who has been just about everywhere on the cable news circuits, into the churches. In 2004, they ran 5 black congressional candidates all of whom were defeated in the rejection of their party.

The Democratic firewall from the loss of a great chunk of the african american vote has been an image of being LESS racist than the Republican party. The anti-gay and anti- abortion population has almost en masse prioritorized the lives and safety of their children into the hands of the Democrats because their perception was that the Democrats carried less of the disease of racism.

Hillary and Bill Clinton and Hillary's supporters have succinctly changed all that. And unfortunately, the DNC has not denounced and repudiated the slap in the face to the black churches allowing them all to be tarred and feathered with a grostesque racist mischaracterization of being intrinsically filled with hate and anti-patriotic sentiment.

And a huge portion of the party has revelled in and encouraged and fueled the ugliness.

All these factors are serving to level the "race" playing field in the eyes of many African American voters. With those things being equal the african american evangelistic trending voters are primed to prioritorize their values votes over all other factors. The republicans know it and have begun to make their play. Do you think McCain is in Selma by accident?

So---now the question that remains to be answered is can the DNC lose the black vote in November?

[RK77]

Do Democrats need the black vote?

By Robert Schlesinger

How much do black voters matter to Democrats in a presidential election? Try 76 electoral votes worth.

I was home in NYC for part of Easter weekend and during a family gathering, the Democratic debate broke out. My family reflects the current Democratic spectrum: We’ve got a staunch Obama-ite (who would not vote for Clinton), a couple of either-works-for-me types (including me), some committed Clinton-ites (at least one of whom swears they will not pull the lever for Obama in November).

I argued — as I have here and elsewhere — that Barack Obama’s got the nomination virtually sewn up, barring a colossal collapse. She can’t overtake him in pledged delegates, and the superdelegates (being mostly elected officials who have to stand on a Democratic ticket in the fall and in the future) won’t risk the wrath of black voters by tossing Obama aside.

One of my brothers raised an objection I had not heard before: Black voters are critical in Democratic primaries, he argued, because they make up a huge portion of the electorate, especially in the south; but in how many general election states is the black vote important for Democrats? I didn’t have an answer. Thanks to exit polls and some rough calculations, I now do.

I started with the 20 states that John Kerry won in 2000; then using CNN’s exit polls I estimated the number of black voters in each state and the number that voted Democratic. I found that black votes numbered more than Kerry’s margin for error in six states: Pennsylvania (21 electoral votes), Michigan (17), New Jersey (15), Maryland (10), Wisconsin (10), and Delaware (3).

Of course there’s no scenario under which black voters simply don’t show up. Instead, the danger is depressed turn-out. So, again using CNN’s exit poll numbers, I ran some estimates of what would happen if a smaller percentage of blacks turned out:

- At 90 percent black turn-out, Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes slide into the GOP column.
- At 75 percent black turn-out, Pennsylvania’s 21 electoral votes go Republican.
- At 70 percent Michigan’s 17 electoral votes turn from blue to red.
- At 50 percent the GOP collects Delawre’s three electoral votes.

I don’t know what a realistic number to project is for the effects of angry black apathy, but I’ll stop at 50 percent. It may be that going as low as 75 percent is unrealistic. Most likely it’s impossible to say. (And this doesn’t take into account things like congressional districts where black voters make the margin of difference.)

So: More grist for the argument mill.

Source

[RK77]

April 24, 2008, 7:53 pm

Black Leader in House Denounces Bill Clinton’s Remarks

By Mark Leibovich

Representative James E. Clyburn in his office on Capitol Hill in January. (Photo: Susan Etheridge for The New York Times)

The third-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives and one of the country’s most influential African-American leaders sharply criticized former President Bill Clinton this afternoon for what he called Mr. Clinton’s “bizarre” conduct during the Democratic primary campaign.

Representative James E. Clyburn, an undeclared superdelegate from South Carolina who is the Democratic whip in the House, said that “black people are incensed over all of this,” referring to statements that Mr. Clinton had made in the course of the heated race between his wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Senator Barack Obama.

Mr. Clinton was widely criticized by black leaders after he equated the eventual victory of Mr. Obama in South Carolina in January to that of the Rev. Jesse Jackson in 1988 – a parallel that many took as an attempt to diminish Mr. Obama’s success in the campaign. In a radio interview in Philadelphia on Monday, Mr. Clinton defended his remarks and said the Obama campaign had “played the race card on me” by making an issue of those comments.

In an interview with The New York Times late Thursday, Mr. Clyburn said Mr. Clinton’s conduct in this campaign had caused what might be an irreparable breach between Mr. Clinton and an African-American constituency that once revered him. “When he was going through his impeachment problems, it was the black community that bellied up to the bar,” Mr. Clyburn said. “I think black folks feel strongly that that this is a strange way for President Clinton to show his appreciation.”

Mr. Clyburn added that there appeared to be an almost “unanimous” view among African-Americans that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton were “committed to doing everything they possibly can to damage Obama to a point that he could never win.”


Mr. Clyburn was heavily courted by both campaigns before South Carolina’s primary in January. But he stayed neutral, and continues to, vowing that he would not say or do anything that might influence the outcome of the race. He said he remains officially uncommitted as a superdelegate and has no immediate plans to endorse either candidate.
At one point before the South Carolina primary, Mr. Clyburn publicly urged Mr. Clinton to “chill a little bit.”

Asked Thursday whether the former president heeded his advice, Mr. Clyburn said “Yeah, for three or four weeks or so. Or maybe three or four days.”

A Clinton campaign spokesman, Jay Carson, declined to specifically address Mr. Clyburn’s statements.

“Look, President Clinton has an impeccable record on race, civil rights and issues that matter to the African-American community, the strongest of any president in our time,” Mr. Carson said. He added that in making his radio remarks on Monday, the former president was “simply reacting to a deeply offensive accusation that runs counter to principles he’s held and worked for his entire life.”

Source

[Veronica]

I don't know if they would vote Republican, but they may abstain from voting period in protest. Maybe to prove a point, you don't want us or need us so do it without our vote. Hillary and Bill have played the race card and continue to use code language and implications that a black man can't win. I know a few enraged black people that will not vote for Hillary which were supporting her over Barack at the beginning of the campaign.

I can clearly say that after the race card in New Hampshire and South Carolina most African Americans were squarely behind Barack.

Sorry to all who will flame me, but I will also abstain from voting if she is the nominee.

[winthrop]

That is your prerogative, for which people have died, but it will help elect John McCain, continuing the foreign policy of war for war's sake, demonstrated cluelessness about the economy, and the destruction of the Supreme Court as a barrier to authoritarian government.
But your point will not doubt be made.

[CosmicRocker]

That is your prerogative, for which people have died, but it will help elect John McCain, continuing the foreign policy of war for war's sake, demonstrated cluelessness about the economy, and the destruction of the Supreme Court as a barrier to authoritarian government.
But your point will not doubt be made.

exactly.
I still think Hillary would be a superior president for the middle class.
But i would never not vote for Obama out of spite.

We should treat each election as a choice.
My choice is for Hillary over Obama.
My choice is also Obama over Mc Cain

[al Asaad]

What would happen if the DNC lost 20% of the black vote in November?

What would happen if the RNC gained it?

In 2004, the republican party identified a portion of the african american community that shares their values, and they courted them heavily. That portion is the black church that has been insulted so tremendously over the last several weeks. That portion is the portion that is dumbstruck by the sudden amnesia of the of white america, who forgot all about the Hell and Damnation churches that sprinkle the US country side.

The african american faith communities are no more monolithic than the european american faith communities and they sat quietly and patiently waiting for their party--the party they had been loyal to for 40+ years to put a kabosh on the rabid insults to their faith! What they heard was a deafening silence from the party and the levying of the most heinous and offensive comments that all of white america could levy without the use of their more traditional epithets.

The republicans have not however been silent. They have been sending their african american pastors like the Rev Watson of philadelphia who has been just about everywhere on the cable news circuits, into the churches. In 2004, they ran 5 black congressional candidates all of whom were defeated in the rejection of their party.

The Democratic firewall from the loss of a great chunk of the african american vote has been an image of being LESS racist than the Republican party. The anti-gay and anti- abortion population has almost en masse prioritorized the lives and safety of their children into the hands of the Democrats because their perception was that the Democrats carried less of the disease of racism.

Hillary and Bill Clinton and Hillary's supporters have succinctly changed all that. And unfortunately, the DNC has not denounced and repudiated the slap in the face to the black churches allowing them all to be tarred and feathered with a grostesque racist mischaracterization of being intrinsically filled with hate and anti-patriotic sentiment.

And a huge portion of the party has revelled in and encouraged and fueled the ugliness.

All these factors are serving to level the "race" playing field in the eyes of many African American voters. With those things being equal the african american evangelistic trending voters are primed to prioritorize their values votes over all other factors. The republicans know it and have begun to make their play. Do you think McCain is in Selma by accident?

So---now the question that remains to be answered is can the DNC lose the black vote in November?

No. "Errr"; Hell no!

[aloysious]

As important, can the Republicans afford to lose the Angry White Male vote? So if the DNC loses the Black vote and the R.'s lose the Angry White Male vote, it's a close race.

[Jonesy]

Whatever happens, can country music be outlawed? Please?

[winthrop]

Party Fears Racial Divide
Attacks Could Do Lasting Harm, Democrats Say

By Jonathan Weisman and Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writers
April 26, 2008

The protracted and increasingly acrimonious fight for the Democratic presidential nomination is unnerving core constituencies -- African Americans and wealthy liberals -- who are becoming convinced that the party could suffer irreversible harm if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton maintains her sharp line of attack against Sen. Barack Obama.

Clinton's solid win in the Pennsylvania primary exposed a quandary for the party. Her backers may be convinced that only she can win the white, working-class voters that the Democratic nominee will need in the general election, but many African American leaders say a Clinton nomination -- handed to her by superdelegates -- would result in a disastrous breach with black voters.

"If this party is perceived by people as having gone into a back room somewhere and brokered a nominee, that would not be good for our party," House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (S.C.), the highest ranking African American in Congress, warned yesterday. "I'm telling you, if this continues on its current course, [the damage] is going to be irreparable."

That fear, plus a more general sense that Clinton's only route to victory would be through tearing down her opponent, has led even some black Democrats who are officially neutral in the race, such as Clyburn, to speak out.

Clinton's camp has a vastly different interpretation, arguing that the most recent primary demonstrated that Democrats remain very interested in seeing the contest continue.

"Pennsylvania did the job of calming any nerves that existed," said Clinton campaign spokesman Jay Carson. "It showed that the big states around the country think she's the best person to be president."

But that opinion is far from unanimous. More than 70 top Clinton donors wrote their first checks to Obama in March, campaign records show. Clinton's lead among superdelegates, a collection of almost 800 party leaders and elected officials, has slipped from 106 in December to 23 now, according to an Associated Press tally.

"If you have any, any kind of loyalty to the Democratic Party, perhaps you need to rethink your strategy and bow out gracefully in order to save this party from a disastrous end in November," Rep. William Lacy Clay (Mo.), an African American Obama supporter, said in an appeal to Clinton.

Clyburn accused Clinton and her husband yesterday of marginalizing black voters and opening a rift between her campaign and an African American Democratic base that strongly backed Bill Clinton's presidency. Some surrogates in her camp are trying to render Obama unelectable against the Republican nominee so she could run for the Democratic nomination in 2012, he suggested. The discussion flared up yet again when Bill Clinton suggested this week that Obama's campaign had played "the race card" after the former president compared the candidate to Jesse Jackson after the South Carolina primary.

"We keep talking as if it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter that Obama gets 92 percent of the black vote, because since he only got 35 percent of the white vote, he's in trouble," Clyburn said. "Well, Hillary Clinton only got 8 percent of the black vote. . . . It's almost saying black people don't matter. The only thing that matters is how white people respond. And that's what bothered me. I think I matter."

The reemergence of the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., Obama's controversial former longtime pastor, in an appearance on PBS last night may only fan the dispute.

"When something is taken like a sound bite for a political purpose and put constantly over and over again, looped in the face of the public, that's not a failure to communicate," Wright said in an appearance with Bill Moyers. "Those who are doing that are communicating exactly what they want to do, which is to paint me as some sort of fanatic or as the learned journalist from the New York Times called me, a 'wackadoodle.' "

Both campaigns sought yesterday to tamp down a race controversy, appealing for Democrats to stay focused on winning back the White House.

"I never believe in irreparable breaches. I'm a big believer in reconciliation and redemption," Obama told reporters in Indianapolis. "So, look, this has been a fierce contest. I've said repeatedly: Come August, there will be a whole lot of people standing on a stage with a lot of balloons and confetti raining down on the Democratic nominee, and people are going to be excited about taking on John McCain in November."

Campaigning for Clinton in Gary, Ind., yesterday, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (Ohio), who is black, said she does not share her colleagues' concerns. "I don't think Bill andHillary Clinton will 'do anything' to win this election," she said. "They are trying to be successful, but I disagree they will do anything or they are trying to hurt Barack Obama." She added that black voters "are not a monolith, and we recognize the importance of this election."

There are signs that the anger voiced by some African Americans is beginning to extend to the Democratic donor base. Campaign finance records released this week show that a growing number of Clinton's early supporters migrated to Obama in March, after he achieved 11 straight victories. Of those who had previously made maximum contributions to Clinton, 73 wrote their first checks to Obama in March. The reverse was not true: Of those who had made large contributions to Obama last year, none wrote checks to Clinton in March.

"I think she is destroying the Democratic Party," said New York lawyer Daniel Berger, who had backed Clinton with the maximum allowable donation of $2,300. "That there's no way for her to win this election except by destroying [Obama], I just don't like it. So in my own little way, I'm trying to send her a message."

The message came in the form of a $2,300 contribution to Obama.

Donors are not the only ones who have made the leap. Gabriel Guerra-Mondragón served as an ambassador to Chile during Bill Clinton's presidency, considered himself a close friend of Sen. Clinton, and became a "Hill-raiser" by bringing in about $500,000 for her presidential bid.

But he had a fitful few weeks as the battle between Clinton and Obama turned increasingly negative. Last week, he decided he had seen enough.

"We're just bleeding each other out," Guerra-Mondragón said when asked why he had decided to join Obama's finance committee. "Looking at it as coldly as I can, I just don't see how Senator Clinton can overcome Senator Obama with delegates and popular votes. I want this fight to be over -- the quicker, the better."

The Obama converts include William Louis-Dreyfus. The billionaire New York financier said he had been impressed by Clinton's performance in the Senate and distressed by eight years of the Bush administration when he donated the maximum to her campaign last August. Then, he said, he began watching more closely.

"However much one might have supported the Clintons, or one might support the usual suspects in the Democratic Party, I began to believe Obama represents a new approach. He gives off such a sense of relevance that he's sort of irresistible," Louis-Dreyfus said.

He also expressed, as did other big givers who crossed to Obama, exasperation about the tone of the Clinton campaign and frustration with the candidate herself.

"At the end of the day, all she had to do was open her mouth for me not to believe her," Louis-Dreyfus said.