Racial selectivity in Deep South congressional races

         One of the more interesting features of the Democratic primary election that has persisted into the general election campaign is, predictably, the thorny issue of racism. Those who dared to broach the subject, most prominently former Rep. Geraldine Ferarro and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, were "tossed under the bus," as many pundits put it. I myself have been bashed on this sight for any number of offenses, from being a Republican troll to "uprating race-baiting comments." Regardless, the race question will undoubtedly have a trmendous influence on the outcome of this year's presidential election and needs to be considered. PLEASE do not accuse me of being a concern troll; I am merely trying to pose a very realistic concern regarding the election. This diary ponders the race question regarding congressional races and analyzes the possible effect on the presidential race.
           In recent weeks, while Democratic efforts in the presidential race, house races, and senate races appear to be paying off, a few congressional races in the Deep South stand out for the racial tensions by which they are characterized. The most prominent is the LA-06 race, in which Don Cazayoux must not only face a Republican state senator but also a DEMOCRAT in the form of state Rep. Michael Jackson. Jackson, who lost a primary runoff by a large margin to Cazayoux, cannot seem to get over his loss and could pull much of the African American support that pushed Cazayoux over Woody Jenkins. (http://www.dailykingfish.com/showDiary.d o;jsessionid=625F918E9256AD95B57562C5010 3C53D?diaryId=791) Jackson's claim is that Democratic leaders have unfairly promoted the candidacies of whites over blacks. While in this case the DCCC's support of Cazayoux is irrelavent because of Jackson's obvious ineptitude, the fact remains that Semocratic Leaders in the past have promoted the candidacies of white candidates because they knew that they would have a higher chance of winning. Louisiana is somewhat unique case, as the state's incompetent and indicted African American congressmen insists that the campaign against him is solely because of his race. Despite this, many white Democrats in Louisiana are not comfortable with the idea of an African American representative and as such the issuse of racial tensions is considered when vetting potential candidates. I am not claiming that African American Candidates are not ideal for winning congressional races in the deep south, however. Don Cravins is running a courageous campaign against Rep. Boustany in LA-07 and I hope that he wins in Novemeber. It is intersting to ponder, however, whether Democratic leaders supporting a more competent white candidate over an incompetent black candidate is indicative of racism (as Michael Jackson so kindly told reporters).  Another prime example of this is the Democratic Primary for the Georgia senate race.
      In this race, Jim Martin faces Vernon Jones, a corrupt CEO of Dekalb County who has been accused of rape in the past and fairs terribly in the latest Rasmussen Reports Poll (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_sena te_elections/georgia/election_2008_georg ia_senate). While Jones claims that his race is reason to put him on the ballot (implying that Obama will draw enough black votes to give him the edge), this poll shows incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Now Jim Martin is not a stellar candidate but is undoubtedly better than Vernon Jones, despite Jones' overwhelming support from African Americans in the primary. To win an election statewide as a Democrat(or nationwide for that matter), it is crucial to win white votes and Vernon Jones has proved that he is incapable of doing just that.
       This brings me to the impact these subtle racial tensions may influence the general election between McCain and Obama. While it is not likely to have a noticeable impact in Kerry states (other than perhaps working class Pennsylvania), its effect will be amplified throughout the south. Contrary to popular belief, black turnout is quite large in the South and the idea that Obama could increase black turnout to a point that would win him those electoral votes (i.e. Mississippi) is laughable in its impracticality. Many of Hillary CLinton's working class supporters in states like Ohio and West Virginia may very well defect to John McCain, not necessarily because of racism but due to Obama's associations to the Rev. Wright among others (which do not exactly foster a sense of trust in Obama's judgement). Regardless, it is crucial that one be cogniscent of the challenges that race may pose in November. I say this not as a concern troll, as many of you have so succinctly put it, but as a citizen who is concerned with volatile issue of racism.


Poll
Is it racist to promote the candidacies of white candidates if they stand a better chance of winning ?
Yes
No

Votes: 2
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Hey! I like Reverend Wright. (none / 0)

seems like a good chap, with a few issues -- but don't we all have issues?

Also, you're failing to cite your damn sources, so this all comes across like bunk, particularly in comparison to the Kozzack research that was frontpaged about this stuff.

Sources please?


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:44:09 PM EST

Re: Hey! I like Reverend Wright. (none / 0)

I cited my sources so I don't know what the problem is. How can you like Reverend Wright?? Thats the more interesting question for me.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:07:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Your sources don't say much about black turnout (2.00 / 2)

which was my main focus of disagreement.

here's one from newsweek

http://www.newsweek.com/id/138611

600,000 unregistered African americans, many of which think that felons can't vote.

Rev. Wright speaks his mind, stands up for GBLT, women in the clergy, and knows how to work for G-d and his country. He served in Vietnam, he walked with Martin Luther King, Junior.

He also has a bit of a pride issue, and has some crazy idea about AIDS. But... a good man, when you sum it all up.


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:14:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

wright (1.00 / 1)

Rev. Wright claims that God created AIDS to punish whites for slavery. HE also claims that Hillary cried after NH because "aa black man stole her party." I can never respect such an arrogant self righteous pig. People who associate themselves with him are not favorably looked on in my mind.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:27:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: wright (2.00 / 1)

The first one isn't true.

I hadn't heard the second, but have no reason to take your word for it because "God created aids as punishment for __" is nothing like anything he believes.


If you hold a cat by the tail you learn things you cannot learn any other way.
by Jess81 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:16:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: wright (none / 0)

I beleive that he's conflating Wright and Pfleger (sp?).


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:18:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: wright (2.00 / 2)

Ahem, Wright alleged that the United States government, not God, created AIDS as a way of attacking the black community.  While it is likely that this is untrue, it is not a surprise that many Americans think this given the way they were used as guinea pigs for the study of syphilis.  A lot of what Wright said in the famous "God damn America!" clip-- especially about our foreign imbroglios --was right on the mark.  The problem with Wright isn't so much what he said as the way it resonates politically to a public that has the childish notion that America is always a beacon of good and can do no wrong.


by Philoguy on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:45:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: wright (2.00 / 1)

Ack, that should have read "...it is not a surprise that many African Americans think this..." not "it is not a surprise many Americans think this..."  It is disturbing to hear the diarist allege such false statements with respect to Wright.  At least get your facts straight!


by Philoguy on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:58:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree. particularly with Columbia University (none / 0)

illegally experimenting on blacks in the 1990's, at least according to that Book the good Reverend quoted (which seems scholarly enough)


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Tue Jul 22, 2008 at 09:52:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hey! I like Reverend Wright. (2.00 / 1)

Apart from the crazy AIDS stuff, most of what he was lambasted for saying was true.  Not that I like him mind you, the bullshit he pulled and which Obama tossed him under the bus for was pretty much inexcusable.


by Whash on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:29:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re (2.00 / 2)

Contrary to popular belief, black turnout is quite large in the South and the idea that Obama could increase black turnout to a point that would win him those electoral votes (i.e. Mississippi) is laughable in its impracticality

Why?  Less than half of eligible voters, black or white, vote in presidential elections.  Besides, this model has worked before - one of the things that won Bill Clinton the White House was increased black turnout.


If you hold a cat by the tail you learn things you cannot learn any other way.
by Jess81 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:48:42 PM EST

Re: Re (none / 0)

Last time I checked, he won the white house thanks to Ross Perot.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:06:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Depends on the state. (none / 0)

Montana got a lot of Perot votes. Tennessee, with it's black population and non-Libertarian culture? Not so much.


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:15:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Depends on the state. (none / 0)

Actually, neither Clinton nor Bush recieved a majority in Tennessee in 1992. The 1996 race here was even closer. If the Republicans and conservative dems had not been split, the state would probably have gone for the Republican nominee.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:18:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

my examples are bunk (none / 0)

but colorado had over 20% of its voters vote for Ross Perot?? Wowsa.


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:21:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: my examples are bunk (none / 0)

my thoughts exactly


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:23:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Uh (none / 0)

Well, you've got some good points, but what are you trying to get across here?  That we should have more Black candidates?  Fewer?

Anyhoo, Obama's doing just fine with Clinton supporters.  14% are going to McCain.  Which is not very much, all told.


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:48:44 PM EST

Re: Uh (none / 0)

Especially not much considering many of them were never going to vote democratic in the general election regardless of who won the democratic nomination.


by Quinton on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:58:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

I would appreciate a source for that. Otherwise, I would not even bother retorting if I were you.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:03:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

My point is that black candidates running in non-majority black districts (i.e. statewide) face challenges among white voters.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:13:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

NOT PROVEN! (2.00 / 2)

we have blacks winning in 95+% white counties in the deep rural south. Multiple blacks.

Do you read BlackKos? Maybe you need to get up to date.

Those African American candidates, from what I read, seem like they did one better than Jesus. When someone punched them, hurt them, they not only turned the other cheek, but they offered the man a hand up.


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:18:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NOT PROVEN! (none / 0)

I was not trying to make a blanket statement, with those like Sanford Bishop being the obvious exceptions. However, racial tensions remain strong throughout many southern states.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:21:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Do you live down south? (none / 0)

... your screen name is intriguing me. sorry for being nebby.


yo mir kennen
by RisingTide on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:18:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you live down south? (none / 0)

I live in FLorida, which is not considered part of the deep south but very few white democrats voted for obama in the primaries and a substantial number are voting for mccain.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:22:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you live down south? (2.00 / 1)

Got a link to a poll that backs up your assertion?


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:25:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you live down south? (none / 0)

It is just my observation from where I live, thank you very much. However, for Obama to make McCain sweat over Florida he needs overwhelming support from South Florida and from the looks of things here he does not yet have it.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:29:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you live down south? (2.00 / 1)

So you've got nothing.  Anecdotes are nice, but not something to build an argument on.  Additonally, Obama isn't doing too badly in FL:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/fl/florida_mccain_vs_obam a-418.html

And he dosen't really need it.


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:33:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you live down south? (none / 0)

don't count your chickens before they hatch. Remember the Bradley effect? Look for it come Nov....


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:35:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you live down south? (2.00 / 3)

Oh, yeah, the Bradly effect.  Not operative in the areas where Obama tips this election.  But both of us could work harder to ensure Obama's election.


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:39:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Mojo-ed for your last statement...I may add (2.00 / 3)

"All of us could work harder to ensure Obama's election."


by louisprandtl on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:24:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you live down south? (none / 0)

And here is the 'concern' portion of this diary. "Oh, noes!!! Obama is BLACK!!!!!!"


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 10:47:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (2.00 / 1)

Well, sure, there are plenty of people who won't vote for a candidate because the candidate is black, a woman, gay, Mormon, etc.  What do you propose as a solution?  And do you see this as a growing or fading problem?  Can we overcome this in the next ten or tenwty years?


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:23:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

This is a largely stagnant problem that will likely not be remedied for quite some time. When COngressman Cohen was rejected from the congressional black caucus because he was not black, i thought to myself, "What if there was a White causcus?" Accusations of racism would spring forth. However, this tool for unity only fosters divisiveness.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:31:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (2.00 / 2)

There is a white caucus in congress.  It IS congress.  Actually, it's a while male caucus.  Whites, men specifically, control most committies, and have almost all of the leadership positions, as well as ranking membership positions.

I'd like to think that we'd get to a place where we wouldn't need specific minority caucuses, but we aren't quite there yet.

Starting a "white caucus" would be akin to starting a "white pride" club at a highschool - it would be exteremly offensive and counterproductive.  Now if there were a call for an Irish caucus, that would be fine.


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:38:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

My premise, however, is that Cohen wanted to best represent the intersest of jhis black constituents so he requested membereship in the caucus. Their rejection of him is blatant racism, denying him entrance solely because of skin color. In the same way, affirmative action is reverse discrimination as well.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:47:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (2.00 / 1)

Well, I guess we just see thing differently here.  There is no way that affermative action can be considered reverse discrimination.


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:51:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (2.00 / 1)

Just to clarify - do you also oppose Title IX?


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:56:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

No. Title IX is not discriminatory, it simply prohibits discrimination.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:59:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (2.00 / 2)

No it doesn't - it's a quota system.


If you hold a cat by the tail you learn things you cannot learn any other way.
by Jess81 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:19:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (2.00 / 1)

This guy's a peice of work, I swear.


by NewOaklandDem on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:20:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (1.50 / 4)

You know, David Duke saw this as a problem too.  That's why he started the National Association for the Advancement of White People.  You might look into joining, I'm sure you'd be right at home.


by Whash on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:41:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

Now I can add being accused of being a white supremacist to my list of grievances. Thanks, Whash.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:45:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (1.50 / 2)

'Ignored and Disgusted' keeps a running list of all his grievances?  I'm shocked.  Is it like, in a little black book?  Or do you write them on your apartment walls?


by Whash on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:49:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (2.00 / 1)

Maybe its on all of the Obama mail I keep getting. Annoying stuff, frankly, for its lack of any policyu proposals.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:50:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

And there was nothing troll worthy in my previous comment. Look for yourself.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:49:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (1.66 / 3)

yet you keep troll rating any people supporting the Democratic party and attacking the GOP PUMA movement.

you are the troll.

I doubt you are on our side.


by DemsLandslide2008 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:51:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (none / 0)

I only troll rate people if they violate blog rules by directly attacking other users by calling them trolls or, even better, members of the KKK.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:55:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (1.66 / 3)

Calling someone a troll isn't against the rules, it's half of what the rating system is based on.  Not only that, but the rules are quite clear about GOP trolls and people bashing our party and candidates.  


by Whash on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:04:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uh (1.66 / 3)

But noquarter is affiliaited with a racist ideology.

That is not debatable.

Dont be offended if the letters KKK are affiliated with that.

Noquarter is not embaressed of their ties to hate groups and the hate movement, Im sure they would appreciate you trying to delute their message.

and you are a troll.  after seeing you snivel cry and then Troll rate anyone against McCain I followed you here to see you write another racist diary.

You hate Rev Write because he is black.

Show me in context where he is differnet then any other preacher and I will concede.

But until then I will assume if you saw Hagee you wouldn't cross the street even though he looks at you as just another pawn that will be killed in his armageddon games.


by DemsLandslide2008 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:07:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Racial (2.00 / 1)

Um.

"Those who dared to broach the subject, most prominently former Rep. Geraldine Ferarro and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, were "tossed under the bus," as many pundits put it."

Was Senator Obama thrown under the bus?  He "broached" this topic as well, from what I can recall.


by Reaper0Bot0 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:59:39 PM EST

Re: Racial (none / 0)

Giving a speech that wowed the press is not considered putting oneself out there to be excoriated, as were Ferraro and Wright.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:05:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Then you should write better (2.00 / 1)

and say what you mean, because his speech certainly "broach[ed] the subject".


by JJE on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:08:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Then you should write better (none / 0)

His speech was simply a publicity stunt to elevate himself after the Rev. Wright fiasco.


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:12:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Then you should write better (2.00 / 3)

That's your opinion.  Nevertheless, he broached the subject.


If you hold a cat by the tail you learn things you cannot learn any other way.
by Jess81 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:20:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wow, (2.00 / 1)

So which progressive members here got TR'd today by this clown.

Tired of diaries written by trolls with content.

Trolls are supposed to write trashy stuff that gets our blood pressure all high and our fingers sore from typing.

Also, I beleive history written just a year from now will annialate the American's people's perception that we are not a racist country.

The whole thing with Wright was based on race.   His sermon was no different than any other church, which is why so many pastors of many faiths defended him.

In the end, what wright reminded the racist voters is "Barack is black, really black"


by DemsLandslide2008 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:54:47 PM EST

Re: Wow, (none / 0)

Thanks for your scathing censure of my opinion. Interesting that you did not address the issue presented in the diary. Any thoughts on the actual issue?


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 05:56:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wow, (none / 0)

Also, I beleive history written just a year from now will annialate the American's people's perception that we are not a racist country

So you are saying that voting will be split among racial lines despite Obama's qualifications?


by Ignored and Disgusted on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:03:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wow, (2.00 / 3)

Yes, and you will be first in line.

Its a shame, but we need to step out of our liberal bubble and realize there is profound racism in this country, and alot of these waste of breathable air types are raising children.

Tell me something, how can someone in a poll say that they found Rev Wright disturbing and still thought Obama was a muslim.

And again yes, the history will show how preposterous we are.

Tell me, what is the difference between the fact McCain was born in Panama, and the rumor Obama was born in Indonesia which your buddy TexasDarlin is so obsessed with?

Man I am so glad to be on the right side of history.  I always kinda felt bad for the racists of the 60's and 70's they had that whole cultural thing to hide under.

But man, its 2008, and we still have people like you, TexasDarling, Flowbee and wanna-flowbee(susan)


by DemsLandslide2008 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 06:11:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.