Does the Democratic Party Exploit the Vote?

….You bet the Party does. It is not a mystery that black Americans constitute the largest single voting block in the United States. Blacks contend that voting Republican is not an option; it is a party largely deemed racist by blacks. I will admit this is a gross generalization; however, it is one that has prevailed since party realignment during the 1932 election of FDR.

Blaming the Democratic Party for this trend is not the right approach. Fault is clearly on the Republican Party. Since the election of Dwight Eisenhower, Republicans have marginalized the black vote. They have largely been seen as an anti-New Deal Party. And as of late, there has been a shift in the Hispanic vote, too. Thus the Republican Party can only blame themselves for alienating racial minorities, as well as gay and lesbian populations. So, what does this have to do with Democrats exploiting the vote?

Black Americans feel as though they have no choice but to endorse the Democratic Party. If one were to listen to the Republican platform, it is clear that Republicans are in bed with the Christian right and the wealthiest segment of the country. If Republicans hope and care to be relevant to blacks, they must change their language. If not blacks will continue to vote in a very solid block. And joining them in this block will be Hispanics and white allies to blacks, gays, and lesbians. In the 2012 election, Asian Americans joined both blacks and Hispanics in guaranteeing Obama a second term. Some political scientist once thought that younger populations of blacks might gravitate toward the Republican Party; however, with a candidate like Obama and a sense that the Republican Party is out of touch with 21st century realities, younger blacks endorsing Republican candidate Mitt Romney or other members of the party did not come to fruition in 2012..

Another population exploited are gays and lesbians. Why would a gay person or his/her allies endorse a party that clearly campaigns against them? You might recall during the 2004 election, the Republican Party made gay marriage part of its national platform. In a comical fashion, conservative Americans clearly forgot about a crumpling economy amidst two global conflicts. The only thing that concerned many of them was gay marriage. Thus, a number of states made gay marriage a part of state-wide referendums. Recently, as I have noted on this blog, NBA player Jason Collins came out as being gay. I am sure it will not surprise you to learn that his calculated move earned him national praise; and not just from many Americans who endorse gayness and gay marriage — but by two Democratic presidents. If the Republican Party wanted to change its message some, it would have encouraged members of its leadership to endorse Jason Collins’ actions. Maybe have George W. Bush or H.W. Bush call Collins and congratulate him for being brave. But that did not happen. When Republicans are mentioned in the gay category…it usually has something to do with promoting anti-gay marriage legislation, or a member of the Republican Party came out of the closet as being gay.

Collins’ actions earned him a political future. Many are calling him a rising political star within the Democratic Party. He has been asked to take part in party fundraising, and possibly, be an invited keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention. Boy those Democrats are quick.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Does the Democratic Party Exploit the Vote?

  1. Impressive point of view Carson. I am shocked to hear you speak against Democrats. I realize you are taking at them to point out reasonable flaws in the Republican Party. The 2012 election has the Republican Party rethinking. Their front runners do not seem to indicate a change from previous platforms.

  2. Is it exploitation, though, if the party really DOES operate in the interests of those groups (to the extent that they do, of course; that’s always up for debate). It would seem to me that the Democrats have at least an elementary understanding of something vital about social policy, and the structure of our society is such that the groups you mentioned (and the white allies of those groups – thanks for including people like me in your ruminations) see their votes in the “D” column as the only logical choice (at best, the candidates actually work to promote policies that help people; at worst, they don’t promote policies that hurt them). I’m not sure I’d call that “exploitation” in the truest sense of the word, but I do understand what you’re getting at here – and you’re absolutely dead-on right.

  3. I’m not a big fan of labels as I think they become a barrier to individuals thinking for themselves. They hinder getting to know others. With that in mind let me toss out another option. It seems possible slanted coverage may have lead to lionizing one label and demonizing another.

    Blacks who didn’t fit the preferred story line of mainstream media have been ignored by key outlets. Pundits like Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Alphonso Rachel, etc. have been dismissed as Uncle Toms in some circles, and ignored in others.

    While I disagree with many of George W. Bush’s policies his decision to lean heavily on minorities in key positions, and not just in token ones has been seriously underplayed. Why? They didn’t fit the narrative. Goodness knows W. has done far better than Obama in this area.

    Incidentally, Bush’s VP (the much loved Dick Cheney) was a much bigger supporter of gay rights than President Obama until a few months ago. Yeah, this didn’t seem to merit tons of coverage either.

    Too many people confuse the party of Abraham Lincoln (Republican) with the party of Bull Connor (yep, he was a Democrat). The point is not that Republicans are great and Democrats are awful, or vice versa, but that people have to listen to intellectual arguments and lose their affinity for labels. “This is all good and that is all all bad” rarely makes sense. And yes, that goes for people of all backgrounds and melanin content.

    When all else fails scare voters with the old ad hominem approach (see Biden, Joseph: chains). If a Republican had said that he’d have been labeled a bigot, but Biden skated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s