Election 2016

Stephen A. Smith: Every Black Person Should Vote for the Republican Nominee for President in 2016

Perhaps some Republican candidates may even be more capable of demonstrating black lives matter than Democrats

|

ESPN

Speaking at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee, ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith suggested black people vote for Republicans en masse. "What I dream is that for one election, just one, every black person in America vote Republican," Smith told the crowd. "Black folks in America are telling one party, 'we don't give a damn about you.' They're telling the other party, 'you've got our vote.'" Smith argued that that meant black voters were labeling themselves "disenfranchised," because "one party knows they've got you under their thumb," while "the other party knows they'll never get you and nobody comes to address your interest."

Smith's suggestion is nothing new. Malcolm X made a similar observation in the 1960s, when about four in five black voters voted Democrat. In his "The Ballot or the Bullet" speech in 1964, the civil rights activist explained that while black people helped Democrats get elected, the party wasn't so interested in helping black people."They get all the Negro vote, and after they get it, the Negro gets nothing in return," X said of Democrats. "All they did when they got to Washington was give a few big Negroes big jobs. Those big Negroes didn't need big jobs, they already had jobs. That's camouflage, that's trickery, that's treachery, window-dressing. I'm not trying to knock out the Democrats for the Republicans. We'll get to them in a minute. But it is true; you put the Democrats first and the Democrats put you last."

Malcolm X didn't return to Republicans specifically in the speech, but he did note critically the wealth acquired by the U.S. government from black slave labor and taxes on black wages, his belief that black Americans were always the first to volunteer to die for their country, and his support for black people's Second Amendment rights.

At The Washington Post's The Fix blog, Chris Cillizza didn't quite agree with Smith's assertion that Republicans have never come around to address black people's interests just because they don't vote Republicans, pointing to a number of previous minority outreach efforts but criticizing them for focusing on gaining black support without articulating policies that would be attractive to black people.

Setting aside the collectivist, even white supremacist mindset—after all, who wouldn't be laughed out of a room for expressing a belief that all white people should vote the same way politically because of the color of their skin—needed to believe an entire race of people would have their political interests and desires perfectly aligned, while Republicans may not offer policies that would appeal to a significant portion of the black populations, neither do Democrats. Decades of all-Democrat rule in places like Detroit and Baltimore have led to more police violence, more poverty, and a lower quality of life.

It's a realization the Black Lives Matter movement is starting to engage with. This weekend, they protested at a presidential forum at the progressive Netroots convention. Activists have been particularly keen on holding former Baltimore mayor and Maryland governor Martin O'Malley, who is running for president, accountable for aggressive policing policies that helped destroy a generation's worth of black lives even as they won the Democrat elections in the majority black city.

Cillizza is unsure whether one election cycle is enough to change the trend of Republican presidential candidates receiving no more than 10 percent of the black vote. Democrats have been ignoring the issues of criminal justice reform and policing for decades. Bill Clinton recently apologized for his contribution to the problem of mass incarceration, nearly 15 years after leaving office. President Obama has directed his focus on criminal justice reforms only in the twilight of his second term, and only after the issue of police violence exploded onto the national scene.

If Republicans fail to make inroads in the black vote in 2016, it will be the fault of the Republican candidate, not how much time is needed to buck a trend or black people's unwillingness to consider non-Democrat candidates. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has made criminal justice reform one of his signature issues since taking office in 2010, part of his "libertarian Republican" image, leading him even to be mentioned by President Obama as a force for good in criminal justice reform.

Unfortunately, so far on his run for president, Rand Paul has appeared to distance himself from the "libertarian" label in favor of parroting the same old talking points that have helped drive black voters into the hands of Democrats. There is still, of course, plenty of time to go, and no candidate has seized on the power of criminal justice and policing reform as an issue in the presidential race.  Suggesting every black person vote Republican is an interesting thought experiment to illustrate black political power but it's not realistic. The Black Lives Matter movement's demand that candidates address the issue of police violence is realistic. Given the lackluster engagement by Democrats so far, that a Republican might offer the clearest solutions is realistic too, if the worst elements of the Republican base don't get in the way.

Previous Stephen A. Smith: "Everybody can't be Jay-Z…but you can be Stephen A. Smith."

NEXT: College Students Adopt ISIS School of Art Criticism

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. f Republicans fail to make inroads in the black vote in 2016, it will be the fault of the Republican candidate, not how much time is needed to buck a trend or black people’s unwillingness to consider non-Democrat candidates. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has made criminal justice reform one of his signature issues since taking office in 2010, part of his “libertarian Republican” image, leading him even to be mentioned by President Obama as a force for good in criminal justice reform.

    The media doing everything ti can to convince blacks Republicans hate them has nothing to do with it. Nothing at all.

    1. “The media doing everything ti can to convince blacks Republicans hate them has nothing to do with it. Nothing at all.”

      Republicans blustering about the desperate need for more tough on crime drug/drug war probably doesn’t help much either.

      1. And the Democrats are any better? Since when did the drug laws change one bit under the Democrats?

        And this may come as a shock to you, but not every black person is a drug user facing jail or a professional criminal who is a single issue drug war voter. In fact a lot of black people are pretty radical drug warriors.

        It is amazing the things you can learn when you actually know black people instead of just assuming things about them.

        1. It didn’t- but they don’t go on making it part of their campaign platform.

          1. So they just lied about it. That makes it better.

          2. And again, a lot of black people support the drug war.

            1. Did they poll the ones in prison? You’re outdated, and cravenly conjuring excuses for why your party is blameless in all things, of course. But there was support by black leaders for the drug war when it was first getting underway and after, because black people were often victims of drug-associated crime. The drug war was sold as a solution to those problems. It also happened that it was implemented selectively in a racist way, which is what black leaders of today and others are now coming to terms with.

              1. well and it exacerbated drug related crime

              2. You’re the one who is “outdated, and cravenly conjuring excuses for why your party is blameless in all things.” Both parties are culpable and, yes, the republicans are the party of tough-on-crime. Nonetheless, democrats have been similarly tough on crime since the 1990s. You would know this if you had any sense of history or an honest evaluation of your party’s stance on punishment. But you don’t.

                You’re just a democrat hack and nothing more.

              3. Why assume that those who are in prison are against the drug war? I don’t take drugs, and yet I’m strongly against the drug war because I think we have a right to decide what we can put into our bodies. I also think the drug war was founded on racism and continues as a statist power grab and way to funnel money to the prison system — nothing more.

                And while I don’t speak for John, neither major party is MY party. I disdain them both pretty equally and wish the two party system would collapse.

                In the meantime, it’s pretty clear which party is your party, and it certainly isn’t the Libertarian party.

        2. While all of that is true I can tell you that all of us who are against the Drug War are not drug users and single issue voters either. And while I know some people who are in favor of a War on Drugs most are opposed to the way its being fought.

      2. But consider the problem w pointing out the opposite: “We’re working on reducing incarcer’n, which effort black leaders & voters should take note of.” “Oh, you’re saying we people are more likely to be convicts?” Even if it’s true, the implication is embarrassing.

    2. Why is it that, for every problem the GOP has with it’s public image, whether it’s issues of race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, class, etc. the culpable party is always the evil Democrats and their media operatives? At some point The Party of Personal Responsibility needs to take some personal responsibility for their image problems. They have no one to blame but themselves for it.

      1. Okay, how exactly? You tell me what they should do differently. spare me the platitudes, you tell me what they should have done differently.

        And in the meantime explain to me how it is that the Democrats had a former KKK member as a revered Senator for decades and the media never touched it. In that environment I would love to hear exactly how the GOP is supposed to capture the black vote.

        I would also point out that the biggest thing that lost the GOP the black vote was Goldwater’s opposition to the CRA. Last I looked Libertarians agreed with him.

        So are the Libertarians to blame? If not, why not?

        1. The GOP’s loss of the black vote took place over decades. After Reconstruction, they took the black vote for granted for decades, much as the Democrats do today. They sold out the black population of the South to win a presidential election in 1876 and for decades after made very few serious efforts to promote civil rights or improve the lives of black people. That enabled the Democrats to make inroads, starting with FDR for the most part. In the post-CRA era, the Southern strategy (which continued well beyond Goldwater) pretty much cemented the monolithic black vote we see today. Goldwater wasn’t personally racist from what I’ve read, but he did benefit from the racist vote and in many ways didn’t do enough to distance himself from it. There’s a reason the only states he won outside Arizona were in the Deep South. It’s also an oversimplification to say that libertarians oppose the CRA. Libertarians oppose one or two sections, and support most of the provisions of the law. Libertarians wouldn’t be to blame for the GOP’s image because libertarians have never been more than a small minority within the GOP.

          The Democrats are shitstains and don’t deserve anyone’s vote. But the GOP made their own bed on this issue.

          1. Libertarians oppose one or two sections, and support most of the provisions of the law.

            There’s a lot more than “one or two sections” of the 1964 CRA that are, as is fashionable to say these days, “problematic”. And the “one or two sections” that you’re referring to form the most significant portion of the law from a legal and social standpoint. It goes without saying that you couldn’t give a flying fuck about freedom of association or the rights of anybody you find personally distasteful, but don’t presume you speak for libertarianism broadly in that regard.

          2. Just because you accept dem propaganda as truth doesn’t mean that it actually happened that way.

        2. When the LP ran Judith Jones for mayor of NYC in 1981 & I took around campaign materials w her photo, the response I typically got from whites (verbatim in 1 case) was, “She’s against welfare? Why would she go against her people?” Meanwhile the blacks attracted by her picture lost interest when I said she was against tax-funded welfare programs.

  2. What’s next, Skip Bayless being ready for Hillary?

    1. skip would shill for Hillary in a heartbeat- it would piss off the Dallas Cowboys fanbase and skip is all about that.

  3. Setting aside the collectivist, even white supremacist mindset […] needed to believe an entire race of people would have their political interests and desires perfectly aligned…

    SPOKEN LIKE A TRUE MAJORITY RACE PERSON.

    1. I wonder how Stephen A Smith would respond to that?

      Also, he’s probably the only good thing about ESPN these days… well, Mike and Mike used to be good, but I can’t say anymore because I listen to MLB radio in the mornings now, not them… but Steve Phillips drives me crazy and I hope he gets hired away just so I don’t have to listen to him anymore.

      1. I’m convinced that Mike and Mike hate each other in real life. Like they can’t even stand each other. On the rare days that they both appear on the program, even when they’re doing their whole shtick you can just feel how irritated they are with each other.

        1. 15 years or so is a LONG time to work with the same partner…

        2. I don’t think so. They are not on together in the summer since not much is happening.

          1. They are also have good deal of money to spend and the seniority and success to get away with a lot of time off. I understand that they would take advantage that while they are still relatively young men.

  4. “one party knows they’ve got you under their thumb,” while “the other party knows they’ll never get you and nobody comes to address your interest.”

    This is exactly what Team Red thinks about libertarians.

    1. Yeah, but who else you gonna vote for, Hugh? Hillary? Bernie? YOU’RE A SJW LIBERAL COSMOTARIAN DEMOCRAT.

      See how that works?

    2. I am not sure Team Red thinks anything about Libertarians. And Team Blue affirmatively hates Libertarians.

      1. They think about libertarians like gay people think about bisexuals. They, first, don’t believe them; second, hate them; and, third, begrudgingly claim them to boost their numbers.

        1. The elected officials represent the parties, and to the extent their is diversity, it means the teams have diversity. The democrats having some candidates who are socialists doesn’t mean that they are just playing socialist and really hate them. It means there is a portion of the base who share those ideas, and maybe a portion sympathetic to them. The same applies to team red putting up libertarianish candidates.

          1. That is the thing Libertarians never want to admit. They constantly bitch and moan about being ignored and marginalized but then would happily do the same thing to every other group in the GOP. Basically they expect the GOP to tell the SOCONs, the national defense conservatives, the populist closed border conservatives, the country club establishment people (90% of the party) to go fuck themselves and embrace Libertarian purity, because telling 90% of your supporters to fuck off is clearly the way to win elections.

            1. At this point you could make a pretty good argument that the libertarians are offered more by the Rs than the Rs offer Socons. There is nothing the Republican establishment is committed to more than cheap labor, a libertarian staple.

              1. They totally are. The SOCONs are the most hated and marginalized group in politics. But the Libertarians are convinced they run the country.

                1. Socons and Neocons ran the country for the first 6 years of this century. They gave us the Sarbox, the Iraq war, torture in Gitmo, NCLB, Medicare D, TARP, and set the table for Barry, Reid and Pelosi to nationalize healthcare. How about they sit down, shut up, and let some fiscal conservatives run the show for a while?

                  1. Two of those are neocon things, with maybe some spattering of SoCon complicity. The other four are completely devoid of any meaningful Socon complicity and were efforts by the GOP to triangulate issues the Dems would try.

    3. Team Red actively spurns its base to advance the open borders project, an issue near and dear to most Reason-style libertarians.

      1. And a team Red judge gave Reason the most important civil rights victory since ending of slavery; gay marriage.

        1. Kennedy is known for being Team No Team, regardless of who appointed him.

          1. I am pretty sure team blue disagrees.

    4. And yet the only libertarianish people in national office are TEAM RED……..so weird!

  5. How long until he’s forced to apologize and/or resign?

    1. Stephen A has staying power. Trust me- if he’s booted he will pick right up with ANY other national organization he chooses.

      1. Not if he gets blacklisted. Is that a racist term? Maybe it should be changed to ‘whitelisted’ since it’s usually white Progressives who enforce the blacklisting.

  6. This post totally reverses and misses Smith’s point. Smith’s point says nothing about Republicans. Smith thinks blacks should vote Republican for one election because it would get Democrats to start actually addressing their concerns.

    How Smith’s proposal to do something about the Democrats taking the black vote and interests for granted became a post about the Republican failure to attract black votes is a mystery.

    1. How Smith’s proposal to do something about the Democrats taking the black vote and interests for granted became a post about the Republican failure to attract black votes is a mystery.

      Not a mystery to Ed. That’s why he gets paid for posting here and you’re not.

      1. Because of the voices in his head?

    2. Because Smith’s comments prompt the question of why black people (as a group) never do vote Republican, even though the Democrats just take them for granted as a result. That’s how it’s relevant. The article trashed the Democratic party, including a presidential candidate, it’s hardly an anti-GOP screed.

      1. No. But it still misses Smith’s point. The problem isn’t that Republicans can’t appeal to black people. The problem is Black people just won’t leave the Democratic party.

        If Democrats got 70% of the black vote, you could say it is a Republican problem. But they get 90+%. That is not a Republican issue. No group is that homogeneous in its views. That is a black issue. And it was the issue Smith was talking about. Republicans are incidental to it.

        1. We don’t have proportional representation in any meaningful way, so if a group is going to vote as a block, they have to throw in with one party or the other.

          1. Bloc voting is indeed a problem in that the bloc has to stay together to make an impact. By contrast there’s no bloc religion?look at the inroads the Black Muslims made vs. Xtianity among blacks.

        2. It’s the Civil Rights Act.

          Actually go to the WaPo story – it has a very interesting chart right in the middle of it, showing the percentage of black support for republicans going back to the 40s.

          They reliably voted majority dem, but not by overwhelming margins, until 1964. Then black support for republicans absolutely cratered, all at once, and never recovered.

          1. Yes. And it was the Democrats who blocked the CRA not Republicans.

            But Calidissiendent tells me it is all the GOP’s fault and the media telling lies had nothing to do with it.

            1. The vote breakdown in congress doesn’t matter, because nobody remembers that shit.

              All they remember is that LBJ had a D after his name, and that’s the end of that story.

              Not to mention, as you pointed out, Goldwater’s unease with it, even if it was for reasons which I consider perfectly valid.

              1. At some point blacks like big government and the Republicans are never going to appeal to a majority of them.

                Libertarians are delusional about the black vote and border line racist, if they think the Republicans ending the drug war is going to guarantee blacks stop voting Democrat. Not every black voter or even a majority of them is a single mother with a boyfriend and son doing prison time for selling crack.

            2. “And it was the Democrats who blocked the CRA not Republicans.”

              This is a major oversimplification of what happened. The Democrats as a party did not oppose or block the CRA. Their Southern wing did. But so did the Southern Republicans, to the extent they did exist. There were about a dozen Southern Republicans in Congress at the time, and not a single one voted for the CRA. Northern Democrats overwhelmingly supported the CRA, as did Northern Republicans (although in slightly lesser numbers). The actions of the national Democratic party is what brought black people over. They weren’t unaware that the segregationists in the South were primarily Democrats. In the decades that followed, white Southerners increasingly began to vote Republican, and partly as a result of the well-documented Southern Strategy that included appeal to white racial resentment. This isn’t controversial history at all. I’m not saying Democrats or the media never lie about Republicans or that it has no effect. I’m saying that solely, or primarily blaming the gap in the black vote, or racial/religious/ethnic minority votes in general, on those groups being easily duped by media bias is ludicrous.

              1. I’m saying that solely, or primarily blaming the gap in the black vote, or racial/religious/ethnic minority votes in general, on those groups being easily duped by media bias is ludicrous.

                And that completely mistates my argument. The Republicans are never going to get a majority of black votes because blacks are too dependent on government. But they should be getting twenty or 25% of the black vote. And the only reason they are not is because the media is pathological in its efforts to portray Republicans as evil. Take that away and the black vote would got 70-30 not 95-5.

                And there is not a damn thing Republicans could do different that would change that.

                1. “And the only reason they are not is because the media is pathological in its efforts to portray Republicans as evil. Take that away and the black vote would got 70-30 not 95-5.

                  And there is not a damn thing Republicans could do different that would change that.”

                  Ok, so you are blaming the extent of the current gap on media bias? You are blaming a majority of the total gap in the black vote on media bias (your numbers give a 50 point swing from a 90 point gap), and presumably the numbers are similar (relative to current vote totals) for other groups, such as Latinos and Asians? You’re arguing exactly what I thought you were.

                  1. Ok, so you are blaming the extent of the current gap on media bias? You are blaming a majority of the total gap in the black vote on media bias (your numbers give a 50 point swing from a 90 point gap),

                    Yes. The fact is the black middle class mostly works in government and their interests are never going to align with Republicans. But there are 20 to 30% of the black community whose interests do align with Republicans. There is no reason they shouldn’t get those votes. The only reason they don’t is media bias.

                    A decent percentage black people serve in the military, are very socially conservative, are very supportive of the drug war and hate welfare. Those people should be voting Republican. They only don’t because the media is so fanatical in portraying Republicans as racist and any black Republican as an uncle Tom. The left is brutal about making it clear any black person who goes Republican is betraying the race.

                    You tell me why someone who is religious Christian, is against gay marriage, thinks drugs are poison and welfare is for bums, and serves in the Military would ever vote Democrat? There are about 20% of black people out there that fit that description or something like it. And they still vote D.

                    So don’t tell me that media bias isn’t behind that.

                    1. John, I’m saying that the perception of Republicans being racist, which prompts black people to vote Democrat, is something that Republicans are largely responsible for. Media bias doesn’t help, but they have done more than enough to make their own bed. I don’t think most are, but it doesn’t take a majority to alienate people. Go on to almost any conservative website and comments and oftentimes articles are dripping with white racial resentment. Donald Trump has gotten to the top of GOP nomination polls based on little more than race baiting comments about Mexicans. You can put your head in the sand and pretend that Republicans have done nothing to contribute to this image they have, and that’s it all the media, but it doesn’t make it true.

              2. What’s the great documentation on the southern strategy, because as far as I can say it’s that anyone talking of Federalism, or reducing the welfare state, or getting rid of affirmative action was sending out a dog whistle because someone in the KKK could theoretically get behind those policies for different reasons. But if we’re going to accept that line of bullshit then it means that all libertarians policy is also totally racist.

                1. Lee Atwater himself admitted to and described it, and the GOP national committee issued a formal apology in 2005. This really isn’t a contested fact anywhere outside of certain Internet forums. That isn’t to say that Democrats don’t exaggerate or lie about the extent of it, or certain aspects of it and civil rights history more generally, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a real thing.

                  1. Just read the Atwater quote though, it’s just saying exactly what I said. So I don’t see him admitting or describing it, he admits that those who are racist would probably subscribe to the same policy, but never says that’s the strategy of his policy. It seems obvious to me that those policies pre date any strategy so all of a sudden claiming in the 60’s that federalism is racist is triumph of stupidity over truth. I would think any intellectually honest libertarian could admit the same, that if a racist person was looking for a candidate they would look for the one who doesn’t support affirmative action. It doesn’t mean the candidate is racist though, or that racism is their strategy to get votes.

                    1. “You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”?that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. ”

                      That’s the direct quote. And while yes, he is talking about the issues you mentioned, it is at the very least heavily implied that these issues are brought up for the purpose of appealing to racial resentment (especially focus on the part between “you can’t say” and “so you say”). It’s true that supporting federalism isn’t inherently racist by any means. But the idea has been used by racists as cover for their bigotry. That’s simply an unfortunate historical reality. And it doesn’t help that Republicans have not exactly been consistent in their support of states rights, beyond rhetoric, much like Southern segregationists didn’t usually support the concept consistently.

                    2. If racist, former southern dems went over to vote Republican, what did they get out of it? — if Atwater said it was stopping busing, that is something Libertarians should support as well. Can’t do much about that alignment of interests can you?

                    3. RB,

                      The point isn’t that Republicans supported some things that racists also supported for other reasons. Read what he’s saying – he’s saying that Republicans messaging around these issues was aimed at appealing to racial resentment in an effort to make inroads with the Southern white population. It’s one thing if you support something and then someone unsavory also supports. It’s another if you’re actively trying to use that position to recruit said unsavory people.

                2. There was no ‘southern strategy’.

                  Had there been any interest in Republican policies by these supposed racist southerners the GOP would have gotten control of congress long before Gingrich–long before 40 years had passed.

                  And GOP acquiescence to Dem propaganda is one of the big reasons why they’re called the stupid party.

                  As a party, Republicans have never done anything that was designed to hurt black people. Democrats, even today, cannot say this–though they cloak their racism in pretty rhetoric now.

          2. They reliably voted majority dem, but not by overwhelming margins, until 1964. Then black support for republicans absolutely cratered, all at once, and never recovered.

            Johnson wasn’t kidding when he said “I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for 200 years.”

            1. Funny how it’s Atwaters rambling that gets called a ‘southern strategy’.

        3. “No. But it still misses Smith’s point.”

          It’s not about missing the point. It’s analyzing why, despite the logic behind Smith’s argument, it doesn’t happen. And while it may be a “black issue” to some extent, it’s asinine to think that the Republican Party has no responsibility for a group voting 90% against them.

          1. No. It is asinine to think the GOP bears significant responsibility or at this point could do anything to change it. If it ever changes it will be blacks who change it not the GOP.

            You just refuse to admit that anything could possibly not be the fault of the GOP. We get it Cali, the GOP are big mean evil racists and it is totally reasonable and expected that Blacks would vote 90% Democrat. That is all you are saying.

            1. “No. It is asinine to think the GOP bears significant responsibility or at this point could do anything to change it. If it ever changes it will be blacks who change it not the GOP.”

              I actually agree that I’m not sure the GOP really could do much to significantly change it, at this point. Change from black people themselves is probably necessary, though in my opinion there would need to be some changes within the GOP before the conditions for such a change would be right. Where we part ways, however, is on the notion that the GOP doesn’t bear significant responsibility for the situation.

              “You just refuse to admit that anything could possibly not be the fault of the GOP.”

              There is a difference between saying everything is the fault of the GOP, and saying that the GOP is primarily at fault for their own public image. And I’ll say the same thing to any Democrat who tries to blame the Republicans and Fox News for the Democrats poor perception in rural areas, religious Christians, gun owners, business owners, and other groups they do poorly with.

  7. If Republicans fail to make inroads in the black vote in 2016, it will be the fault of the Republican candidate, not how much time is needed to buck a trend or black people’s unwillingness to consider non-Democrat candidates

    Uh… huh. Who is this magical Republican candidate and where has he or she been hiding?

  8. Didn’t Rand go specifically to speak at historically Black colleges and hasn’t he spoken about needing to campaign in areas with a high density of African American voters?

    On a side note- did you know that Race is the only indicator of what party someone will vote for- and only for minorities?

    Not money, education, age, etc. It’s race. White people it’s a 50/50 shot- but minorities lean heavily blue- especially african americans.

    1. “did you know that Race is the only indicator of what party someone will vote for- and only for minorities?

      Not money, education, age, etc. It’s race.”

      What? This isn’t even remotely true. All of those other factors and more affect voting patterns. And in many areas of the South, white people vote Republican almost as heavily as black people vote Democrat. And nationally, white people vote Republican about 60/40 (in presidential elections at least) Republican, not 50/50. Furthermore, what exactly was the point you’re making? There are a number of implications one could take from your comments, and I’m honestly not sure what you were trying to imply.

      Rand has made some efforts, but it’s a tough uphill battle for him.

      1. It is true. If you look at the economic makeup of people who vote in the election for each party, they spread.

        “Among voters earning less than $100,000 (78 percent of voters), 55 percent said they voted Democratic, 43 percent Republican. Among those earning $100,000 or more, 47 percent voted Democratic and 52 percent Republican.”

        I don’t county 5%+/- as something I would be comfortable with calling an indicator.
        http://www.minnpost.com/health…..epublicans

        1. Those are arbitrary cutoffs, and you’re also ignoring things like religion and geography that are extremely influential indicators.

          Again, though. What is your point? It’s not like anyone is unaware that there are large differences in racial voting patterns.

          1. yes. that mean, by themselves, they are not indicators.

            The only thing, by itself, that’s an indicator is race.

            It’s just strange that race would be an issue- over education. over wealth. race. It’s just strange.

            1. For certain religious groups, voting patterns approach the monolithic-ness of most racial groups, with the possible exception of black people – however, you specifically referred to “minorities” not just black people in your comment. Also, cutting off the income brackets at different levels than the ones that article did yield different results.

              I personally don’t find it that strange given how important race has been in our country’s history. And how much it has historically tied into all those other issues.

              1. You don’t find it strange because you don’t know many black people. If you did, you would realize how conservative a lot of black people are.

                1. John,

                  I’m not really sure how you would possibly be aware of how many black people I know. I also find it odd how you seem to think everyone in the country is white or black, ignoring the millions of people who are neither. In case you missed it, the discussion Spencer and I have been having is not strictly limited to black people.

                2. They are. Unfortunately they’re “conservative” in ways not especially pleasing to libertarians. Even on economic issues, they’re against tax-funded aid to the poor, but not much against gov’t spending generally. They’d as soon see that spending shifted to other things as see it simply as a total budget reduction.

        2. Also, when it comes to education- there are slight advantages to post graduate degree holders for democrats- but it’s not that big. And among college graduates its nearly gone.

      2. Yes in some areas of the South (three states to be exact) whites kind of almost vote for Republicans with the same frequency as blacks support Democrats. In only seven states did Romney break seventy percent of whites. Obama broke 90 percent in every state I believe.

        1. Which doesn’t contradict what I said. Also, I said “areas” not necessarily states. Even within states where Romney didn’t win 70% of the white vote, there were areas where his share was well above that. Furthermore, Spencer explicitly was not exclusively referring to black people, but minorities in general in his first comment. And other non-black groups, like Latinos and Asians (although granted Latino isn’t a race) have voted Democrat in numbers similar to Southern whites for the GOP.

          1. It wasn’t meant to contradict what you said. If I wanted to contradict I would have pointed out that statistical regression analysis actually shows race to be the number one predictor of voting patterns for black voters.

            1. “If I wanted to contradict I would have pointed out that statistical regression analysis actually shows race to be the number one predictor of voting patterns for black voters.”

              How would that contradict what I said when I never stated otherwise? I stated that race is not the only indicator of voting patterns, and not only for minorities. I said nothing about it not being the number one predictor for black voters.

          2. well there were “areas” where every single candidate got 0 of the vote, if you consider 2’*2’*6′ an “area”. i don’t see any reason that would be too small to qualify. i also dont see any reason that that means anything

            1. *100% of the vote*

            2. i would consider it a volume, but colloquially i think “area” works

            3. Don’t be pedantic. I’m talking about instances where Democrats can compete for the white vote in urban areas in some parts of the South where they can’t compete in nearby rural areas.

  9. The Democrats gave them soul-crushing projects and the Republicans gave them stiff prison sentences. I guess at least having your soul crushed under a moribund stack of weird looking bricks under blue skies is marginally better than months or years behind cinder blocks and steel bars.

    1. Here is the other issue. Poor black people as a rule don’t vote. Middle class blacks vote and they work predominantly in government. Government employees vote D usually.

      If Rand Paul ever got his way about the size of government, the black middle class would be devastated. I seriously doubt they would give a shit that he also let a bunch of people out of jail.

      1. If you’re right about poor blacks not voting, that is by far the best explanation for the Democrats owning the black vote I’ve heard.

        1. It is that and the CRA.

      2. Here’s an article from NPR stating just that.

        http://www.npr.org/2012/05/09/…..ddle-class

        1. And for your cherry on top: stating that you wish to cut public spending is a racist dog-whistle.

          http://www.publicworks.org/is-…..-job-cuts/

      3. Black turnout in 2012 was higher than whites. Some poor black peoples where definitely voting.

        1. Poor whites don’t vote that either. Not that many poor blacks vote.

          1. Good point. I guess it kind of depends on what you mean by poor. Really poor people never vote.

  10. Martin O’Malley, who is running for president, accountable for aggressive policing policies that helped destroy a generation’s worth of black lives even as they won the Democrat elections in the majority black city.

    I am no more in favor of aggressive policing than anyone else, but as far as policies most at fault for bringing about the current state of affairs, police are small potatoes next to welfare dependency, wholesale destruction of the economic base, terrible public schools, and the acculturation of helplessness led primarily by black leaders and their toadies in the power structure. If anything, sociopathic policing is a symptom of the social disarray brought about by progressivism. I’m concerned that we’ll see police effectively pull out of minority-dominated neighborhoods to avoid further conflicts, and nothing else will be done to roll back the spiritual and cultural destitution. These places will become American-style no-go zone.

    1. I’m not sure what you take issue with in the comment. It clearly said “helped” destroy, it didn’t state or imply that it was the only factor, or even the biggest.

      1. Because, as I said, the solution to overpolicing will inevitably be underpolicing. The drug laws will still be there, the illicit trade will persist, and the conditions necessary for bringing it about?few opportunities, little education, and nothing much to lose?will ensure the trade remains violent and debilitating.

        I applaud Rand for making it a highlight of his campaign, and Ed here for hammering O’Malley on it. I wish the pro-reform element of the right would go further and push for decriminalization. Between school vouchers and drug law reforms, the right will have done more for blacks in a few years than decades of Democratic rule has managed. But let’s not pretend reining in abusive police departments is going to roll back the economic destruction wrought by the left, especially when those departments are filled with Democratic apparatchiks. If we didn’t like Chicago under Chicago-style policing I’m not sure what we’ll make of Chicago done Detroit-style.

        1. the solution to overpolicing will inevitably be underpolicing. The drug laws will still be there, the illicit trade will persist, and the conditions necessary for bringing it about?few opportunities, little education, and nothing much to lose?will ensure the trade remains violent and debilitating.

          I’m afraid that’s true. The powers that be don’t consider changing the program, only adjusting the volume control. More generally it’s part of the quantitative theory of gov’t: that your choice is the degree to which the popul’n is attempted to be controlled, not distinctions as to what the controls are directed at. John Podhoretz opined as much in a piece in the last century. You want law & order? Then they’re gonna make it like Singapore. You want freedom? Then they’re gonna make it lawless.

          1. I should clarify: It’s not just that those are the choices people’ll give you. It’s that they actually believe that the more things about people’s behavior you try to control, the more decently they’ll behave; while the more liberty you try to grant them, the more they’ll hassle you.

    2. All symptoms of the same disease. Welfare checks come from the state, police are agents of the state, etc. Progressives have inflicted upon poor people a system in which the state actively manages their lives. That they don’t realize that aggressive policing is part of the system they set up just shows how really stupid they are.

      1. I think they do realize, which is why stop-and-frisk lasted as long as it did. It’s why they’re content, up until the riots break out, with horribly abusive cops. For Democrats, black patronage is a political asset but blacks are a tremendous liability. They’re walking a fine line helped along by heaps of corruption and, as Malcolm X realized, the cooperation of a few, highly-placed quislings.

  11. STEVE SMITH THINK BLACK PEOPLE SHOULD GO HIKING EN MASSE.

    Well, someone had to say it.

    1. I was going to say that Steve Smith looks… shorter, than I thought he would be.

  12. The Republicans have failed to attract black voters because they say things like blacks can get jobs on their own, and high amounts of violent crime are related to children with single parents in dramatically high numbers. I mean holy shit, saying violent crime is high for blacks is spouting hate-facts. These things are super mean. What we really need is a GOP candidate that speaks the hard truth, that all of the black communities problems are the fault of white people.

    1. Republicans can’t get black votes because they put black fathers in prison for selling drugs and then lecture black mothers condescendingly about how single parent families are bad.

      1. That is not true and an appallingly racist thing to say.

        Most black people are not in prison. Many black people support law and order. Many black people support the drug war.

        I am sorry but the idea that blacks are all suffering in prison and voting in hopes of getting their family out is an appallingly stupid, untrue and racist stereotype.

        1. The most appalling racist thing being said right now is by you and it’s your overt claim that there’s something inherently wrong with black people that makes them almost universally vote Democrat despite it not being in their interest. That is what you’re saying.

          It has to be one of two things, one of which is appallingly racist. Either the GOP has totally alienated black people by being the party of racist shitheads, or there’s something defective about all black people that makes them act so collectively and wrongheadedly. You claim the latter. What is that defect, do you think?

          1. that’s a false dichotomy. IT could be that one party lies a lot about supporting african american communities, and then blames their lack of post election support on the other party.

            I mean, that goes along way.

            1. Same thing I said: black people are universally duped by this, election after election. What’s wrong with them that makes them this way?

              1. i don’t think it’s universal. college aged white kids get duped too. as to poor whites. it’s all duping . everyone is lied to.

          2. Yes Tony. You are a horrible racist who actually believes the stereotype I describe. We know that.

          3. That’s not what he is saying at all. He is saying in a country where whites are roughly evenly split and Hispanics are split 65/35 the definite outlier is the 93/6 split for blakc voters. And let’s be clear the states that whites vote 80+ for Republicans in are precisely the states that you and other leftists think should be subjected to the federal jackboot come election time. So apparently it’s a problem when some races vote monolithically.

            1. White racism against blacks and the consequent social issues are the problem. Particularly racist states have lots of white support for Republicans, go figure. Maybe Republicans do actually appeal to white racial resentment as a dominant strategy as every historian will tell you.

              1. How many decades of Democratic rule over, say, Baltimore will it take to finally purge the last of those Trotskyists Republicans from their midst and usher in the socialist utopia?

              2. Yup, that explains why Detroit and Chicago and Baltimore are utopia for blacks. I’m sure you’ll never put together how blacks could be doing so much better in red places than blue.

              3. This isn’t an argument. This is special pleading for why your tribe gets to be exempt from scrutiny. If it’s a problem that whites vote as a block it’s a problem when blacks do it to an even greater degree.

          4. The most appalling racist thing being said right now is by you and it’s your overt claim that there’s something inherently wrong with black people that makes them almost universally vote Democrat despite it not being in their interest.

            This from a guy who masturbates furiously to What’s The Matter With Kansas?

        2. The rate of black male incarceration and disenfranchisement is significant. It’s significant largely because of laws against victimless behavior. If you don’t think this has impacted black family structures you’re kidding yourself.

          It seems likely that a good chunk of the 2/3 of black males who aren’t involved in the criminal justice system see Republican lawmakers lecturing the single mothers attached to the 1/3 of black men who are, and decide that they’ll just stick with the asshole they know.

          1. When does all this lecturing occur? I’m genuinely curious as to when the last time was that a prominent Republican lecturered a black audience about anything.

            1. Rand Paul comes to mind.

              1. So when someone asks for an example your first response is a person. Are you sure it was Rand Paul maybe it was a Bengal tiger?

          2. You are talking out of your ass. Do you know any black people? If you do, you would know that a large number of them don’t give a shit about the incarceration rate and in fact support it. Black people are often very conservative. They just vote Democrat regardless.

          3. The problem is unless you think blacks are incapable of controlling themselves it doesn’t really explain this discrepancy. So if we say it’s WOD, then all you’re saying is blacks break more drug laws. Okay, why?

  13. Best comment from the WaPo story:

    “Right now, republican governors around the country are working hard to disenfranchise black voters in a number of ways.

    If black voters would vote republican, they’d change their minds about “voter fraud” and open the doors to the voting booth again. It’s easy! All you need to do is bow to their extortion!”

    1. what?! So is this person admitting to voter fraud? Or accusing black people of it to win elections?

  14. “…his belief that black Americans were always the first to volunteer to die for their country”

    I’m a huge fan of Malcolm, but I have no idea where I got that idea. He must have meant Southerners. As blacks were far more likely to dodge. (Nothing against dodging, mind you)

    1. He was an interesting guy, but he was not that bright.

      1. Of course, there’s always a nagging thought when reading him. It’s just hard to take someone seriously when they believe that white people were made by a mad scientist to be devils. (Kind of endearing from the perspective of a devil though)

        But plenty of useful people believe seemingly crazy things.

      2. There you go being racist again.

        1. I know. I just judge people by their merit. I am so racist like that.

  15. It is not ideal that black people, being completely alienated by the GOP, are forced to almost universally support Democrats, who thus can more safely ignore their particular interests than they could if they had to compete. It’s a recipe for being ignored by the entire establishment, truly making it a choice between the lesser of two evils (being ignored vs. being treated as subhuman).

    The good news is there seems to be a real lifting of complacency as media attention has stoked activism in the name of Black Lives Matter, which is holding the feet of Democratic nominees for president to the fire, tripping up Hillary, O’Malley, and Sanders each (then there’s Webb, ugh). Hopefully when Hillary becomes president she’ll know better than to treat black issues with the same uninformed glossing-over her predecessors have (including to some extent Barack Obama).

    Not to say only presidents matter. The candle of black interests is being held by a few congressmen from ghettoized gerrymandered districts. Segregation continues to perpetuate itself and the other problems. Without bipartisan help, it will be hard to work on the issues. Luckily the party by for and of white people won’t be sustainable for much longer.

    1. Yes stoked Black Lives Matter activist to such a degree that they erupt in rage and lecture any politician obtuse enough to say all lives matter.

      1. “All lives matter” being a slogan for protesters who think we’re giving too much attention to dead black people. The candidates were simply unaware of this, and now they are.

        1. All lives matter being the slogan of people who are actually post-racial.

          1. Come on, it’s a co-opting by racist assholes and you know it. “Black lives matter” means something specific, something to which, to its credit, this magazine has devoted a lot of coverage. “All lives matter” means “ignore black lives matter.”

            A post-racial attitude is a luxury people enjoy who don’t have negative social outcomes associated with their race. When social metrics are equal for the races, and when people stop being racist shitheads, then we can be post-racial.

            1. I know that your tribe is addicted to 90 percent plus vote margins from black voters. Those disappear and all of a sudden your tribes in danger of going extinct. That’s reason enough to discount your special pleading.

              By this logic MLK co-opted constitutional protections for his own narrow minded racializes agenda. Do you not realize how easily your arguments can be turned around against you? I guess content of their character isn’t just asshole racialism. Judge them by their skin color after all.

              Why we can’t wait. The Tony’s of the world tell us thou shall not pass, racial Balkanization must not be soothed. The Democratic Party is counting on those votes. Ginsburg’s getting old and all.

    2. You’ve always been dumb, but now I’m afraid you’re losing what little grip you have on reality.

    3. The good news is there seems to be a real lifting of complacency as media attention has stoked activism in the name of Black Lives Matter

      Phew! That ought to make up for 70 years of consistently taking the black vote and then telling them to go fuck themselves by burying them further in section 8 poverty and welfare, as the urban democratic districts continue to decay in to third world status.

      Yep, just mention that “black lives matter” and all is forgiven.

      1. Again I’ll ask, what is it about black people that makes then so consistently vote against their own self-interest? (Nearly all black people, not just a portion like with whites voting for tax cuts they’ll never see.)

        1. I’m not going speak for all black people because I’m not black. I don’t know why they vote for democrats when democrats clearly have failed to deliver the promises they’ve made over the last 70 years. You could argue a variety of Sowell-like responses such as forced addiction to welfare, the break down of the two parent family, and the democrats use of victimization, but unlike you I don’t pretend to speak for all black people. They have their own reasons.

          I’m just saying it’s not working. I’m not saying they should all vote GOP either. I agree with SS though, just once they should all vote for any candidate other than the D on the list and see if that makes any difference.

          1. Democrats in their initial push for civil rights and antipoverty measures greatly improved the lives of black people, though things stagnated at some point, coinciding with the loss of power of Democrats as Republicans campaigned and won on white resentment in a backlash to that success, and as they halted progress on antipoverty programs as well. I don’t know why I should have to remind you that Democrats have not been in a state of omnipotent power for the last 50 years. There was a rather significant span of time in which the prevailing political mood was fear of black men and hatred of black women with their welfare checks. The problem of blacks being an underclass has been a reality in this country since before its founding and hasn’t been solved yet. You’re free however to set whatever expectations you like for Democrats–but having none whatsoever for Republicans is a bit unfair.

            1. antipoverty measures greatly improved the lives of black people

              Citation needed.

              though things stagnated at some point

              You are as full of shit as you are wrong.

              “Between 1950 and 1965, the proportion of people whose earnings put them below the poverty level, had decreased by more than 30%. The black poverty rate had been cut nearly in half between 1940 and 1960. In various skilled trades during the period of 1936-59, the incomes of blacks relative to whites had more than doubled. Further, the representation of blacks in professional and other high-level occupations grew more quickly during the five years preceding the launch of the War on Poverty than during the five years thereafter.”

            2. What gets me about people like you is that you have the arrogance to determine what other people’s best interests are when you know shit about them. Chicago is probably one of the best examples of a city being under Democratic dominance but yet have high poverty rates among black people while being forced to send their children to the Factory of Failure called public education.

              1. Ed with the beatdown (leaping to my feet in delight)

        2. No one is saying they are voting against their interest. They are saying that black self-interest isn’t qualitatively different from white self-interest just because your tribe needs those votes. This is bigger than your power worship and fealty to a political party.

  16. I have a cunning plan. Instead of voting for the Republicans, which makes many blacks uncomfortable, run with this idea of showing the Democrats who is boss–which is fucking brilliant, by the way–by voting LP. That’s win-win. The blacks flex their political muscle, and the LP breaks into double digit territory–maybe even to the point of getting some people in national office or, at worst, in some state legislatures.

    1. I think they’d sooner break for the Socialist Party.

      1. Well, that would be silly.

        1. Silly as it is, they captured a shockingly high percentage of the black vote before.

          1. That won’t teach the Democrats anything. Need to do something freaky, like all bets are off.

            1. Maybe it taught them to be more socialistic.

  17. Of COURSE the dems take blacks for granted. Why wouldn’t they? The only question is about black turnout.

    The stupid party has mostly written them off, but notice how many hoops they’ll jump through to try and get a bigger slice of the latino vote.

    It sounds like crazy talk to have blacks vote en mass for a different party, but it would probably be the greatest thing to happen to them politically in quite a while.

  18. The thing about the identity politics is that it always comes down to saying group A doesn’t vote for this party because they don’t promise them free shit and tell them how wonderful they are. Yeah, that’s true and I’d like to keep it that way.

  19. Bob bless Tony. A guy who probably don’t hang out with many black people but pretend to know how they feel and knows what’s best for them. Black people couldn’t live without the benevolence of white people like Tony.

  20. I skipped over many of these comments, but the whole thing about it just being Republicans…

    I don’t know, I saw the reaction to those videos of Rand Paul talking to black people. Granted, it was a selective group of particularly pretentious liberal arts majors, but they were pretty damn dismissive of his ideas.

    Libertarians aren’t the dog whistle racists the left makes them out to be, but I think libertarians are kidding themselves if they think their message has appeal to black people. It doesn’t mean it would be bad for them. Just that they aren’t going to buy into it.

    1. but I think libertarians are kidding themselves if they think their message has appeal to black people

      Poppycock and balderdash!

      1. Alright. I concede. I was wrong.

  21. If Republicans fail to make inroads in the black vote in 2016, it will be the fault of the Republican candidate,

    People who don’t know why blacks vote D have either never spent much time around black folks, or are particularly dim. Here’s the deal: a significant majority of black natives are really, really into being black. Black music. Black movies. Black names. Black clothes. Black cars. Black nightclubs. Of course they overwhelmingly vote for one party in a way that Hispanics and Asians don’t. The standard sociological and political analysis probably explains why it’s D rather than R.

    1. Yes. It is a cultural thing.

  22. articulating policies that would be attractive to black people.

    Which would be?

  23. If Republicans fail to make inroads in the black vote in 2016, it will be the fault of the Republican candidate,

    I think its a little more complicated than that. Other factors include, of course, the Democratic candidate, the campaign issues, and . . . wait for it . . . whether the Repubs can figure out how to go over the relentlessly, brutally, pro-BLUE major media outlets to get to voters without being filtered and misrepresented.

    I suspect that, if a great Repub candidate ran on issues that were going to help blacks with their problems, and the Dems ran a, well, HIllary, the Repub getting 20% would be a frickin’ miracle. People vote on habit and peer pressure; unless and until a genuine preference cascade busts open the monolithic black voting bloc, Repubs ain’t gonna get black votes.

  24. JUST GLAD STEVE SMITH SUPPORT VOTE.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.