With the show of support for the state’s newest Democratic elected official, former Republican State Senator Chris Koster — who’s also jumping in the field of Democratic candidates for Attorney General — the following question deserves to be asked: What kind of treatment can the party’s most loyal block of voters expect in 2008?
Will the Missouri Democratic Party ask its strong African-American base to support yet another statewide ticket with not a single black candidate, but one anchored by a candidate for Governor with a long and controversial history on issues most sensitive to the black community and a candidate for Attorney General who will have been a Democrat only slightly longer than it takes for a Missouri girl to go from an abstinence-only education to the host of an unwanted pregnancy to a single mom with no health care coverage?
In an environment with some supporters of a certain white male Democratic Presidential candidate saying that it would be bad for the party for Jay Nixon to have to campaign in the state’s more conservative counties with Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton at the top of the ballot, what will the Dems offer its strongest, most loyal block of voters — or rather, what should black elected officials demand of the party they fuel?
OPEN THREAD. Opine away!
Loading ...
August 2nd, 2007 at 5:07 am
Blacks can expect more of the same until they wake up and start playing both parties against each other. That’s why I like Rodney Hubbard. He makes Republicans and Democrats fight for his support. That makes him smarter than your average black democrat and therefore a threat to white democrats and lazy black ones.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:22 am
where else can african-americans run? The party of george w bush and matt blunt? Blacks are stuck and the democrats know it.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:41 am
Black people can’t expect anything since they sit back and let white people run them. Look at Local 420. What are they doing for an all white run school district that has stepped on them time and time again. Wake up black people show you mean business.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:12 am
420 Exec. Board is currently comprised of 9 black members and 6 white. I’m not certain of the percentages of the total membership but I would guess maybe 60% African American and 40% white. (There are other ethnic groups represented also, of course, but not statistically significant)
IF 420 is going to do anything it will need both groups. I would say wake up ALL people and show them you mean business.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:19 am
1. A myrmidon that selects their political party or casts his or her vote based on the color of their skin gets representation they deserve.
2. The arrogance of the democrat party is justified. They have deliberately made false promises and ignored a loyal black community. The democrats have treated them like house ‘servants’ (I would have used another word here but there was a funeral for it this summer). When the black community is willing to vote for a non-democrat, the democrats will stop paying lip service. Never forget, in any negotiation, if you are not willing to walk away from the deal, you aren’t negotiating, you are begging.
In short, blacks should expect nothing as long as they allow themselves to be served up as a block by a group of self-serving “leaders†who skim the gravy. Just look at Jesse Jackson. He is a multi-millionaire. What product does he produce? A large block of loyal black voters for the democrats—and they compensate him very well for it.
I will never understand why more blacks don’t vote republican.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:35 am
Republicans dont even campaign in African-American communities. On important issues like education and healthcare Republicans are usually on the wrong side of the fence. There are blacks that can run statewide, but many would rather take a more lucrative job in the private sector, can you really blame them since most of us come from lower class or middle class families? We arent stuck with Democrats, WE ARE Democrats, its up to us to make them move more towards our issues, but when we only turnout 20% of voters thats not really something most politicians are going to be campaigning for.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:50 am
Well it would be nice to see more African American candidates. Given Obama will be getting the democratic nomination, turn out among African Americans should be very high. This is a great time for African Americans to run for office.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:41 am
From Wikipedia:
Democrat: In political science, a democrat is an advocate, follower, or proponent of democracy. One who advocates or practices SOCIAL EQUALITY is commonly referred to as a democrat.
What floors me is the republicans who think they are elite enough to benefit from being republican. At what income level does it benefit someone to become republican?
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:17 am
Social equality? Hello, does anyone ever look at history anymore? The Republicans were the Party that fought against slavery, for the civil rights amendment and against segregation. Did anyone here know that the reason the phrase “yellow dog Democrat” came to pass? Because in the South (and parts of Missouri) the left over segregationists and confederates only voted for Democrats even if they were a ‘yellow dog’ over the Republicans. Why - social equality. The Republicans were founded on it…live by it. Not Democrats. In fact many Republicans were lynched just for being a Republican.
I never knew what I was until I realized the the Democrats wanted me to stay poor. It is so much easier to pander to me if I NEED the government for my livelyhood rather than helping me take care of myself. I will vote for the person who respects me for a person, not for my color, gender or anything else. I will vote for the party that says, “I belive in YOU - not in welfare.”
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:42 am
Agreed, Abe and the old republicans stood for their respective civil beliefs. I wish there were some today who could put ‘honest’ in front of their names. I think Nixon(R)/Kennedy(D) are a closer (famous and judgable)portrayal of the parties today, and they are even history.
August 2nd, 2007 at 3:14 pm
An ally of the African-American community is Mike Evans for Lt. Governor. Mike has already openly spoken out against racial profiling. He’s also the only candidate talking about real issues. He’s a Democrat and he can be an effective advocate for the African-American community if elected. He’s not afraid to go into the Northside. I wish Antonio you’d return emails or phone calls from our campaign.
Call Retta Crawford at 1.314.601.3674 or email the campaign at press@mike4missouri.com or visit us online at :
http://www.Mike4Missouri.com/
August 2nd, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Drew, I have not been intentionally snubbing your campaign. If you’ve been reading the site, you can see I’ve been pretty busy. In fact, I’m out of town right now.
But regardless, this is not the way to get me to turn my attention to your campaign. In fact, “calling me out” on my own blog might just piss me off.
Have you seen me cover the Lt. Gov race at all so far? I’m not snubbing you. The race just isn’t on my radar screen right now. Bigger fish to fry.
August 2nd, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Antonio,
I understand you have bigger fish to fry but everyone sees their fish as the biggest to fry. I am not trying to call you out nor pick a fight. However, when nothing else worked this was my only recourse. Please accept my sincere apologies. Still it was a hustle that hopefully worked. Please get with me at your convience.
Thanks!
Drew
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:14 pm
There is something kind of sinister going on in California.
They are trying to put a proposal on the ballot to make the choosing of electors “winner take all”—but not by state—by congressional district. North Carolina democrats are trying the same mischief, figuring to pick up 3 or 4 votes.
The idea in California is that the democrats are going to win 43 electoral votes—but if they can change the rules—it would come out about 23 to 20—a significant gain in republican electors.
Think about what such a change would do in Missouri—Clay’s district and several republican districts would be foregone conclusions as to who their electors would be—–devaluing the St. Louis city voters in the presidential race.
kjoe
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:54 am
kjoe-
The other side of the coin is whether or not its better to have 3 to 5 Electoral College votes for you or 9 against?
If Missouri had this plan in place Gore or Kerry could have won.
Additionally, if the congressional plan was in place a 3rd party candidate could actually get some votes in the Electoral College.
34% of the vote in a 3-way race could win a congressional district.
Wouldn’t that be interesting?
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:46 pm
Jason, I think the ramifications are very much worth exploring—I am open to changing my mind about it.
I do think what California is doing (I read about it in the front of the New Yorker magazine)could have a profound impact on the way we choose the president.
kjoe
States which are basically democratic I would think would have easier access to putting proposals like the one in California on the ballot—which would lead to more republican electors. Republican states—(where democrats could be looking to harvest unwinnable electors if it is winner take all) would figure to be a tougher road to travel.
As one who has voted for 3rd party candidates, I find that point you made interesting.
At this point, I think the idea that 400 electors could be all but decided before the election—and I do not know if the writer is accurate in that projection—would lead to something republicans generally like—an overall lower voter turnout.
Specifically, in Clay’s district, for example, there would not be much doubt that a democrat elector would be chosen.
Let’s keep an eye on this—to see if it is something which spreads and gains momentum. Sounds to me like it is not likely to be stopped because of being unconstitutional–states can choose electors however they want.