[
Views
]
[
Top Five Views
]
[
Blog Roll
]
Discuss:
Empty Threats: A History
Member Comments
-
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By:
EarthTone at 06/10/2008 9:22:27 AM
Comment:
[1] I am serially amused by the refrain from Republicans/conservatives that "we mustn't forget it was Republican Abraham Lincoln who freed them from slavery." It is hilarious that they need to look back to events that occurred over a hundred years ago to justify why we should vote for Republicans today. I guess a bad argument is better than no argument at all.
[2] The NAACP does have some value. Every 4 years, they produce the Presidential Candidates Civil Rights Questionnaire, which highlights the presidential candidates??? positions on civil rights and black advancement issues.
It's here: http://www.naacp.org/news/press/2008-02-01/index.htm
NOTE: Clinton and Obama responded to the Questionnaire; McCain dd not.
[3] The sad truth is this: the Republican Party has a Southern Strategy which uses racial polarization to get the votes of the white majority in the southern states. This was an explicit policy in the 60s and 70s, and it is an implicit policy now.
As long as the GOP is willing to use racial division to get white votes, I see no reason to vote for them, period.
I disagree with the thesis that Democrats take the black vote for granted. But at least, the Democratic Party wants my vote. Meanwhile, the GOP has cruelly calculated how to use fear of blacks to get white votes.
That makes this AA's voting decision quite easy to make. -
Posted By:
EarthTone at 06/10/2008 9:20:55 AM
Comment:
[1] I am serially amused by the refrain from Republicans/conservatives that "we mustn't forget it was Republican Abraham Lincoln who freed them from slavery." It is hilarious that they need to look back to events that occurred over a hundred years ago to justify why we should vote for Republicans today. I guess a bad argument is better than no argument at all.
[2] The NAACP does have some value. Every 4 years, they produce the Presidential Candidates Civil Rights Questionnaire, which highlights the presidential candidates??? positions on civil rights and black advancement issues.
It's here: http://www.naacp.org/news/press/2008-02-01/index.htm
NOTE: Clinton and Obama responded to the Questionnaire; McCain dd not.
[3] The sad truth is this: the Republican Party has a Southern Strategy which uses racial polarization to get the votes of the white majority in the southern states. This was an explicit policy in the 60s and 70s, and it is an implicit policy now.
As long as the GOP is willing to use racial division to get white votes, I see no reason to vote for them, period.
I disagree with the thesis that Democrats take the black vote for granted. But at least, the Democratic Party wants my vote. Meanwhile, the GOP has cruelly calculated how to use fear of blacks to get white votes.
That makes this AA's voting decision quite easy to make. -
Posted By:
Samantha T at 05/15/2008 11:51:43 AM
Comment:
Melissa - I'm not attacking people for being Obama supporters, I'm attacking people who would stay home rather than vote for Clinton were she the nominee (unlikely at this stage). It would be irresponsible and short-sighted given the state this country is in. I am not an Obama supporter presently and am disappointed that Clinton won't be the nominee, but I will vote for Obama come November because I recognize that it is imperative to get the Republicans out. -
Posted By:
melissafrei at 05/14/2008 8:52:48 PM
Comment:
No Samantha, would you "keep this country in an unnecessary, costly, and bloody war and deprive millions of healthcare if your precious candidate doesn't get the Democratic nomination"?
This is not about having an African American candidate in the white house; this is about having someone in the white house with some integrity and about allowing someone else in the country to speak for us besides a Bush or a Clinton.
To be honest, I would prefer to not see another Bush or Clinton in the White House in my lifetime. This is after all a DEMOCRACY and not a MONARCHY. -
Posted By:
Samantha T at 05/14/2008 5:36:26 PM
Comment:
"Personally, if Hillary won the nomination, I would not vote."
Then you are an idiot who deserves your disenfranchisement. Civil rights activists who fought and died for the right to vote are rolling in their graves, believe me. Your temper tantrum will, quite literally, cost servicepeople their lives in Afghanistan/Iraq.
It is widely-known that Obama and Clinton just about mirror each other policy-wise. Obama has not a single policy that is any better for African-Americans than Hillary's policies. Your issue is that you want a black President, not that you want a President with policies more favorable to African-Americans. It's disingenuous to maintain otherwise. -
Posted By:
Samantha T at 05/14/2008 5:29:27 PM
Comment:
"If we throw the same amount of support behind John McCain that we have thrown behind Barack Obama, I do not think that we would be taken for granted in the future."
So, you're willing to keep this country in an unnecessary, costly, and bloody war and deprive millions of healthcare if your precious candidate doesn't get the Democratic nomination? Great plan. -
Posted By:
melissafrei at 05/14/2008 9:28:44 AM
Comment:
African Americans should be the biggest swing voters in America. By voting strictly democratic, we alienate ourselves in this political system. If Obama does not win the nomination of the democratic party after he wins the required delegates, each of us should concentrate on electing a democratic congress and a republican president. It is imperative that we do not stay home. If we throw the same amount of support behind John McCain that we have thrown behind Barack Obama, I do not think that we would be taken for granted in the future. John McCain has presented himself as a moderate republican. He has stood against the extremist in his party many times throughout the years. We must not forget that black people were first republicans. It is clear that the dixiecrats are returning to the democratic party and because we are seen as a group that has no where to go, we are marginalized. We have to begin to act strategically and should have no allegiance to one party. Hopefully a solid third party which embraces progressive and responsible policies will emerge. -
Posted By:
fsilber at 05/14/2008 7:50:59 AM
Comment:
Until the 1960s the Civil Rights movement eschewed partisan politics and advocated that blacks vote on the basis of civil rights, regardless of general Left/Right political issues. Perhaps that's why more a higher proportion of Republicans supported Johnson's Civil Rights agenda than Democrats. Even when since then, when courting southern white votes, Republicans refused to advocate a return to Jim Crow laws.
But really, now that Jim Crow laws are over 40 years deceased, what would you _want_ the government to do specifically for African Americans? -
Posted By:
B24-7 at 05/14/2008 5:35:16 AM
Comment:
No matter what we demand nor how loudly we demand it we will remain politically emasculated so long as our membership in the Democratic and Republican parties aren't more evenly divided.
I'm not sure what the Democratic party can do for us now anyway. Democratic party initiatives which may create a rising tide of opportunity for blue collar white Americans may leave the black urban underclass underwater. Entrepreneurship; education; family values; self reliance; reading to your children; making sure they do their homework; keeping them away from peers who would distract them from achievement... are of proven value.
However our virtually unconditional loyalty to the Democratic party has yet to provide little more than a tenuous prosperity for a very limited number of us and for an unsustainable period. We've reached a point of steeply diminishing returns for our investment of loyalty to the Democratics. Perhaps It's also time that we begin to tailor conservative principles to address the needs of the African-American community. We also might benefit from dividing our party affiliations evenly between the Republicans and Democrats during the primaries then vote for the candidate who may best advance the social values which we decide that promote the prosperity of the black community. -
Posted By:
adept2u at 05/13/2008 8:34:54 PM
Comment:
If ever there were a time to put our money where our mouth is now is the time. Hillary Clinton with her campaign is no longer sugar coating it. She and her surrogates have said the most outlandish thing with nary a peep in reconciliation. If we vote for Hillary Clinton we should get what we deserve. -
Posted By:
POLpursun at 05/12/2008 11:21:02 PM
Comment:
It IS important THIS time that there is no threat, but that there IS concerted, calm, non-whining, deliberate action in November if Obama's name is not on the ballot. Here is the specific action proposed for the black vote:
1. Turn out in very, very large numbers.
2. Leave the ballot blank at the place for choice for president.
3. Vote for democrats for everything else.
Related: my comments 05/06/2008 6:07:37 PM and 6:12:01 PM to the article, "End Games" by Michael G. Dawson May 6, 2008 at TheRoot.com
Also, with reference to the comment, below, of ldt1930 at 05/12/2008 7:39:07 PM see http://www.miamiherald.com/political-currents/story/527974.html and see comment POLpursun 05/11/2008 8:47 AM. -
Posted By:
ldt1930 at 05/12/2008 7:39:07 PM
Comment:
I will never undertand why blacks vote for democrats. Do they forget it was Republican Abraham Lincoln who freed them from slavery? Lorraine-
Posted By:
olivio at 05/14/2008 6:44:50 AM
Comment:
this is a common canard. if you swap the contents of salt and pepper containers, the labels matter less than whats in them. its the same pro-slavery demographic, democrats at the time, that are todays republicans. same bunch, same beliefs, different party labels. whats more important.. labels or substance?
-
-
Posted By:
Robin08 at 05/12/2008 7:23:33 PM
Comment:
I think the point Mr. Lartigue misses in his history of "empty threats" concerning the black vote is 2008 is unlike any other year in American history. Judging this year by years past is a wholly inadequate measure.
In my estimation past threats concerning the black vote came from "leaders" who did not really have authority to speak for the "masses" of black people. They had neither the power nor the ability to mobilize, organize or communicate on mass with black people about doing anything. Consequently their threats were always by definition empty.
Not since the days of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X have we had black leaders who had the kind of mass appeal, broad respect, and ability to articulate a message such that they could mobilize masses of black people to turn out, to demonstrate, to vote, to take mass action of any kind.
Though Barack Obama didn't do it in the way it's been done in the past (e.g., another reason the past is an inadequate measure) he has earned the respect of a majority of black voters through the character, intelligence, vision and bottom-up organization demonstrated in his campaign for the presidency. Obama has gotten everyday people invested in this campaign. He has said to the people this is your campaign, I'll be the vessel to carry the message, but the campaign and the message is yours.
After the race baiting tactics of the Clinton's, I do believe masses of black voters will sit this one out if she manages to wrestle the nomination away from Obama after he has won more states, more delegates and met the requirements to win the nomination.
That's why I think this time the threat is real -- it's coming from everyday people. For the first time in a long time black people and others believe they have someone to vote for as opposed to a candidate to vote against. For many blacks and others this is the first time it's not a vote for the lesser of two evils but a vote for the person you???d actually like to see as the president. In the 2008 election people believe they have a chance to make a difference -- a change to make a change.
I think the threat is real this year. That said I also don???t think we have to worry about it because I believe Obama will be the Democratic Party nominee.-
Posted By:
Khathu at 05/12/2008 10:26:01 PM
Comment:
Dr. King and Malcolm X have mass appeal now but when they were alive that was not the case. Most African Americans were scared to openly identify with Malcolm X in fact many thought he would undermine the work of Dr. King and other. Ossie Davis talks about this in his biography. And once Dr. King moved away from civil rights and started talking about social justice and against the captialism and the Vietnam War he lost alot of support amongst African Americans.
We as a people have not changed. We still gives our votes away without demanding that the candidate we support explicitly discuss his/her platform for addressing the issues that disproportionately impact our communities. So the threat of not voting or voting for McCain are just that threats with no substance.
The Democratic or Republican Parties are not taking our vote for granted, we are taking ourselves for granted by not demanding respect or loyalty. People only do to you what you allow them to do. So when will we wake up and demand justice and equity? If we want to make history, lets now by insisting that the candidate that we support address our issues before giving him/her our vote. Failure to do so will result in a cosmetic change with no substance. -
Posted By:
cjl at 05/12/2008 9:09:11 PM
Comment:
Robin08, thanks for the reply. I did not miss that point. My prediction was that even if the Clintons found a way to wrestle the nomination away from Obama that 85 to 90 percent of blacks would still line up to vote for the Democrat..
-
-
Posted By:
db08 at 05/12/2008 6:50:35 PM
Comment:
Katherine...
Barack never said that he represents hard working black people and that they would vote for him and further imply or directly say that they would not vote for Hilary. Many black people initially support Hilary until her campaign started attacking Barack on character and not policy. If he had made the statement she made about white people but instead for black people there would be protest by everyone including black folks. BTW...the majority of whites do not support Hilary...that is why Barack is ahead. -
Posted By:
db08 at 05/12/2008 6:28:57 PM
Comment:
Katherine...
Barack never said that he represents hard working black people and that they would vote for him and further imply or directly say that they would not vote for Hilary. Many black people initially support Hilary until her campaign started attacking Barack on character and not policy. If he had made the statement she made about white people but instead for black people there would be protest by everyone including black folks. BTW...the majority of whites do not support Hilary...that is why Barack is ahead. -
Posted By:
katherine at 05/12/2008 4:55:33 PM
Comment:
1980 is a good example. Why is it okay for Obama to say 90% or the majority of blacks will vote for him, but wrong for Hillary to repeat the polls that say the majority of whites will vote for her (60%+). Sounds like a double standard to me. -
Posted By:
katherine at 05/12/2008 4:52:38 PM
Comment:
The 1980 election is a good example. It is okay for Obama to say he will get 90% or most of the black vote, but not for Hillary to repeat what the polls say, that she will get most of the white vote. That is holding us to a double standard that we are supposed to have done with. -
Posted By:
Cesareagato at 05/12/2008 2:12:02 PM
Comment:
I don't think black people should necessarily vote for republican candidates or republican values., but we should register equally for both partioes. Until both parties believe that they need to fight for our votes, people like the clintons will emphasize their need for the latino and "white working class" vote to our detriment. We seem to forget also that the democrats bow to the will of the jewish community (which is smaller than our community) on the issue of Israel becayuse of their financial backing. When clinton was in the white house the black haitain boat people were sent back, but not the mainly white cuban boat people. We delude ourselves that the democrats really "care" about black people. -
Posted By:
blessinggirl at 05/12/2008 11:18:13 AM
Comment:
But we do vote on the issues. The "habit" is that of the Republicans trying to turn the clock back 200 years. Thanks to the entry of Bob Barr into the presidential race, we will truly be able to affect the election. -
Posted By:
JazzyD at 05/12/2008 12:59:59 AM
Comment:
I recall a conversation that I was having with my future husband, one of Fordham University's shining stars--majoring in Political Science and Economics. We were discussing this very topic, the Democratic Party taking the black vote for granted, and he argued that the black vote is not appreciated because of our undying support of the Democratic Party. I wholly agree; however, I have to worry. It is said that voting is making a decision between the "worser of two evils" and if Hillary Clinton were to receive the Democratic nomination, that is exactly what the general election would be. However, thinking critically about the situation, if blacks were to vote for the Republican Party in droves, then it is a logical inference that the Republican Party will begin to cater their agenda to the needs of their new voting base. The Democratic Party continues to disregard black voters because they do not make themselves heard, nor is their support ever in question.
It would a purely political statement for blacks to support McCain if Hillary received the nomination because the DP would begin to take black voters seriously???knowing that they can lose support at any given moment. In the midst of this obsession with voting patterns amongst blacks and whites, it is evident that blacks are overwhelmingly supporting Obama, and Clinton continues to have a lead among white working class voters. However, if the desired candidate of each constituency lost the nomination people would refuse to vote. In the analysis of the North Carolina and Indiana primaries, political pundits cited that 47% of white working class voters would not vote for Obama if he received the nomination. Are we certain that blacks will do the same?
Blacks need to widen their voting patterns in order to attain greater political power and influence. Personally, if Hillary won the nomination, I would not vote. But I would encourage people to be wise about casting their support. The only way for the black community to be taken seriously in politics is they vote based on the issues, and not based off habit.-
Posted By:
Khathu at 05/12/2008 10:12:10 PM
Comment:
The Black Vote is taken for granted because we as a people do not demand that either the Democratic or Republican Parties address the issues that disproportionately affects our community before giving them our support or vote. We assume that they will be accountable to us without demanding it. We continue to do the same thing every election and then get upset when elected officials do take us seriously. We need to wake up! If we truly want change then me must begin to act differently and demand that any candidate we support explicitly discuss their platform for addressing the issues that disproportionately affects us. The Jewish Community is doing. The Latino Community is doing. The Labor Unions are doing? The business community is doing. So when will we?
-
Reply
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse