home

Ugly Truths

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2006
Posted on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 10:44:38 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Glenn Reynolds rejects the idea of race playing a role in today's election:

But if Ford loses [it won't be because of race] I think it will be because he overplayed his hand. . . . Meanwhile, if Michael Steele loses, will it be proof that Marylanders are racist? Of course not -- he's a Republican!

It won't be the only reason why Ford and Steele lose, but it will be a key reason in my opinion. Reynolds wants to reject the obvious -- some white voters are reluctant to vote for non-white candidates. This is not a new phenomenon. It is not accusing the country of being evil. It is dealing with reality.

Ford winning as a Democrat in Tennessee was a hard thing. But he ran a terrific campaign and was the Media darling. He should be close. Will he be? We'll see.

The same for Steele as a Republican in Maryland. He should be close. Will be be? We'll see.

< Have You Voted Yet? | More Voting Problems Reported >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Ugly Truths | 25 comments (25 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Ah yes, the race card (none / 0) (#1)
    by swingvote on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 10:54:37 AM EST
    Just another one of those Big Tent Democrat themes that do so much to unite the faithful.

    One question though: If racism is the reason for why "some white voters are reluctant to vote for non-white candidates", is it also racism that makes some black voters reluctant to vote for non-black candidates?

    Should I go back down to the polling place and tell the two black men who are handing out "Democrats for Steele" pamphlets that they are racists?

    And what about all those asians and latinos I just stood in line with? Where do they fall in this BTD racism scheme?

    Maybe we should stop harping on the racism issue until we have some bonfied racism to complain aboutm aye?

    Yes (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:13:02 AM EST
    black voters are reluctant to vote for white candidates right?

    Is that why Cardin will beat Steele 2 to 1 among African Americans?

    Facts are stubborn things.

    Your denial of race as an issue is the sign of a scratch the surface type of white resentment.

    Look into your soul.

    Parent

    Right BTD (none / 0) (#7)
    by swingvote on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:23:19 AM EST
    Are you really going to sit here and try to pick a fight with every person who disagrees with you? Is this whole "blogging" this just another vanity project for you?

    Try dealing  with the issues raised if you're going to take issue, Big Tent.

    You said that some white voters will not vote for non-white candidates due to racism (I'd like to know exactly how you "know" this if it's not from your own proclivities, but that's another issue).

    Assuming this is true, I asked if the same rule applies to blacks? Will some of them not vote for nob-black candidates because of racism on their part? Are those black men down at the polling place who are handing out Democrats for Steele pamphlets racists who are doing so because Ben Cardin is white? Or is it perhaps that they have looked at Cardin's record and decided for themselevs that Steele is a better choice? I think that your unwillingness to answer the question makes it very clear that you know this is just another ultra-liberal red herring run out by the people who are destroying the Democratic party.

    FYI BT: I'm white and I just voted for Steele, even though I am not a Republican. How does that play out in your little racism game?

    Parent

    IT plays out as I expected (none / 0) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:34:59 AM EST
    You are a diehard partisan Republican.

    You'll explain why Steele underperforms previous Republicans with white voters some other time no doubt.

    Parent

    Now we resort to name calling (none / 0) (#25)
    by swingvote on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 02:55:44 PM EST
    What's the matter, BTD? Can't back up a single one of your claims so you resort to labeling me a Republican based on my lack of support for your BS? If that's the best you can do, Jeralyn really should rethink her decision to allow you to guest blog here.

    What you are trying to do here seems rather obvious. If Ben Cardin wins in an overwhelmingly liberal state, you have already laid the groundwork for putting it down to racism on the part of white Republican's who would not vote for a black candidate.

    But what if Cardin loses? Will you then ascribe his loss to the unwillingness of black voters to vote for yet another tired old white man the Democrats pushed onto the ballot? Will you suggest that "some" blacks are too racist to vote for a white candidate?

    I doubt it very much, because you are still playing the tired old liberal Democrat game of pushing the race card at every turn and you can't dare to question the integrity of your black serfs, even when they betray your trust.

    Living here in Maryland, I have seen first hand that it is not about the color of the candidate. It is about what the candidate stands up for, and there are people of every color and creed supporting Michael Steele. Maybe you vote along racist lines, but that's your personal problem, not one shared by everyone else.

    Your need to label me a "diehard partisan Republican" is rather oxymoronic for a guy who claims to be about spreading a big tent. I disagree with your desire to pigeon hole the party on abortion, and I disagree with your desire to blanket label white people as racists, and I must therefore be a Republican. Truth is, it's people like you, with your small minded, narrow view that drove me from the Democratic party. I have been unaffiliated for some time now, and truth be told, I very much prefer it that way. If that doesn't fit into your black and white vision of the world, too bad; my politics are not one-dimensional.

    As I said before, if you are going to argue with every person who disagrees with you on anything, and then do it without even making much of an argument (or do you consider name calling the height of wit?), you should probably go find something else to do. TalkLeft already has enough house trolls.

    Parent

    The shades of race (none / 0) (#14)
    by Dadler on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:41:55 PM EST
    Right off the bat, of course some black folks are virulently racist.  This is not news.  A lot of white people are.  Is it the same thing?  There are similarities, to be sure, but the origins of that racism are markedly different.  Let me put the issue to you this way: Black folks mistrust of white folks is mostly based on a long social history of experience, as well as much current personal experience.  White folks mistrust of black folks is mostly the product of historical prejudice, our white supremist slaveholding past, fear of the uprising, of the wronged other, of the stereotypical images projected around us all the time in modern life.  As a minority, black folks must go out into the white world every day, to make a living, get to a decent market, survive, etc.  The vast majority of white folks do not have to go into black America every day, or any day for that matter.  They can ignore it and go their merry way.  Which they mostly do.  Except to get upset because their kids like hip-hop or rap.

    It's why the term "reverse racism" is empty of real meaning.  Would you call it arson when a firefighter starts a small fire in hopes of stopping a larger one from spreading?  

     

    Parent

    My previous message (none / 0) (#15)
    by Dadler on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:44:32 PM EST
    Was intended as a reply to swingvote.  Can you move that around for me, Big Tent?  Thanks.

    Parent
    It read as such (none / 0) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:53:41 PM EST
    But swingvote does not like to use his brain on these things so I don't see the point of substantive responses to him.

    Parent
    Race (none / 0) (#2)
    by HeadScratcher on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 10:58:46 AM EST
    Of course Race plays a part. As does religion (or lack thereof), gender, ethnicity, fame, sexual orientation, marriage record, heredity, and even appearance - ask Dennis Kucinich...

    Ford will lose some votes because of his race - and he will probably gain some votes too (increased turnout perhaps). It's a shame but it's reality.

    African Americans (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:14:27 AM EST
    vote for Dems by 90%.

    Whites normally vote GOP by 60%.

    Let's see what happens on those numbers.

    These are ugly truths that people do not like to face.

    The facts are undeniable.

    Parent

    well, yeah................................... (none / 0) (#4)
    by cpinva on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:13:16 AM EST
    is it also racism that makes some black voters reluctant to vote for non-black candidates?

    of course it is. geez, you think racism is solely the prerogative of one race? not hardly, contrary to what some might have you believe.

    fortunately, that probably represents a small portion of the voting population, getting smaller as time goes by.

    most people vote for or against someone, for one of the many reasons noted by headscratcher, or maybe even because they agree or disagree with their position on whatever the issues of the day are.

    The fact is (none / 0) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:16:41 AM EST
    Af rican Americans votes for non-African American candidates in much higher proportions than whites vote for non-whites.

    Maryland today will prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    Parent

    Sure they do (none / 0) (#8)
    by swingvote on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:26:04 AM EST
    Got any evidence for that, BT, or is this just aother unsupported "fact"?

    Parent
    Evidence (none / 0) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:33:35 AM EST
    is available to those who believe in facts.

    I do not believe that includes you.

    But Maryland today should make it obvious to you.

    But it won't.

    Parent

    is it possible.................. (none / 0) (#11)
    by cpinva on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 11:57:03 AM EST
    that african americans in MD will vote for mr. steele's opponent because mr. steele has proven himself unworthy, regardless of his race?

    truly, if all mr. steele has going for him is his race, and that would appear to be the case, why would even the most ardent "black power" advocate waste time on him? better to cut your losses, and make the other guy beholden to you.

    same thing in TN: if all corker has going for him is that he's white, even the KKK might want to give that a second thought, for the same reason as noted above.

    iow... (none / 0) (#12)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:33:58 PM EST
    Af rican Americans votes for non-African American candidates in much higher proportions than whites vote for non-whites.

    Shorter: Well, ok, we blacks are racist, but you whites are worser racists.

    Except that your statement is so blatantly comparing apples to donuts that it's hardly worth responding to.

    But what the heck...

    Take, say, the '04 Pres election with Bush, Kerry and Nader. Pretty big election, you probably remember it. Bush, Kerry and Nader. Three non-African Americans.

    If you wanted to vote for a candidate who's part of one of the three biggest political parties, you had to vote for a non-African American. You had no choice BUT to vote for a non-white, regardless of your own race.

    This type of election happens very, very often in this country, sooooo...

    ...of course African Americans are going to vote more for non-African Americans than whites are for non-whites...because so often there is no choice for either group BUT to vote for a non-African American.

    Be aware though, that I'm not saying racism doesn't exist - among all people regardless of race - but I am saying your little factoid might make a great headline, but the ugly truth is that it conveys a lie.

    This is not a coherent (none / 0) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:52:18 PM EST
    comment.

    Perhaps you want to try again.

    Parent

    Coherent for everyone but you, BTD... (none / 0) (#22)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 01:42:24 PM EST
    ...but that doesn't surprise me much.

    BTD, in the last presidential election, tell me, why did a higher proportion of, say, Jews, vote for non-Jews, than non-Jews voted for Jews?

    Bigotry? Or, obviously, among Bush (Christian), Kerry (Catholic) and Nader (Atheist?), there were no Jews to vote for, so, obviously, every Jew (and non-Jew) that wanted to vote for one of the three main parties had no choice but to vote for a non-Jew.

    Therefor, a much higher proportion of Jews voted for non-Jews than non-Jews voted for Jews.

    Surely even you can understand this?

    Maybe this'll help:

    Why do a higher proportion of 20-year olds vote for non-20-year olds, than non-20-year olds vote for 20 year olds?

    Ageism? Or fewer/no 20-year olds to vote for?

    Why do a higher proportion of, say, pro wide receivers vote for non-pro football players, than non-pro football players vote for wide receivers?

    Pro athlete bigotry? Or fewer/no pro athletes to vote for?

    Don't bother. The answers are obvious. You've exposed yourself. Again.

    Parent

    sorry... (none / 0) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:41:53 PM EST
    ..that meant to read
    If you wanted to vote for a candidate who's part of one of the three biggest political parties, you had to vote for a non-African American. You had no choice BUT to vote for a non-African American, regardless of your own race.
    although you all probably figured that out...

    wrong take on Steele (none / 0) (#16)
    by IndependentVoter on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:44:58 PM EST
    If Steele loses it won't be because of race, it will be his lack of performance as Lt. Gov. and his stand on the issues. If anything, his race will gain him more votes. He's been continuously playing it up here in MD while campaigning and strongly courting the black democratic vote.

    In a local NPR interview he declared his admiration for Marion Barry and wouldn't address a caller's question regarding why he is using endorsements from convicted felons Mike Tyson and Don King. He wants no accountability for what led us in to war with Iraq, he only wants to "move forward". These types of stands, coupled with his lack of any meaningful work on the Death Penalty study (his only major task while in office) are some of the big reasons people don't feel he is a good candidate.

    It won't be the reason (none / 0) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:51:07 PM EST
    It will be A reason.

    Steele's campaign was better than Cardin's.

    I don't think that can be disputed.

    Just as Ford's was better than Corker's.

    Parent

    Not much... (none / 0) (#20)
    by IndependentVoter on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 01:32:08 PM EST
    It will be a much smaller factor than you are making out. Drive into the rural areas, places that are typically Republican and also tend to be populated with "smaller minded" voters when it comes to race. Steele signs everywhere, far more than you would expect in these areas. It appears party is trumping race for many.

    Steele may have run a decent campaign for someone who doesn't have much to run on, but he continues to be a strong Bush supporter. His stand on the issues and his allegiance to Bush are what make staunch Republicans ignore his race. They are the same things that work against him for everything else. Like I said above, race will help him, he's grabbing some voters who are Dems because of it.

    Parent

    Perhaps (none / 0) (#21)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 01:34:22 PM EST
    But still a factor.

    Parent
    Of course (none / 0) (#23)
    by IndependentVoter on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 01:56:01 PM EST
    Race will be a factor in every contest. Your original post states it will be a "key factor" if Steele loses. Not in heavily Democratic MD, his party affiliation will be the tough thing to overcome for voters who don't bother to look at the issues. What exactly are you basing your "key factor" assertion on?

    Cardin may not be as an effective campaigner, but he's been engaged with his constituents and has a record to show people what to expect if he moves to the Senate. People will be voting for him because of his record or because he is a dem.

    I voted for Ehrlich/Steele last election and thought Steele was a poor choice then. He's only confirmed that to a lot of MD voters. If he had run for the Gov. slot against Kennedy-Townsend I may have had to abstain from voting.

    Parent

    Insults (none / 0) (#24)
    by John Mann on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 02:06:44 PM EST
    The rules for this blog used to forbid insulting other commentors. Nevertheless, BTD regularly takes personal shots at other commentors, apparently with impunity.

    Perhaps the rules have changed.

    Incidentally, Jeralyn, a few weeks ago, BTD very generously offered to match contributions, buck for buck. You were going to send around personal notes of thanks for those who contributed. As usual, I made a generous contribution, and as usual, I didn't hear from you, so that'll be it for me.

    See you all. The last four years have been interesting.

    Ugly Truths | 25 comments (25 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment