Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Whither the black vote in a Hillary nomination?

posted at 7:35 am on May 2, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Howard Kurtz wrote yesterday that he hadn’t heard anyone demand Hillary Clinton’s withdrawal from the race for over a week, although events later proved that moot when Joe Andrews, former DNC chair under Bill broke very publicly with the Clintons. The calls have mostly ended, though, and for good reason; Barack Obama has stumbled badly over the last few weeks and hasn’t yet righted himself. With North Carolina slipping from his grasp and Hillary at least pulling even in national polling, some wonder whether the superdelegates shouldn’t pull rank after all and nominate Hillary for her electability.

However, the question remains about how that will affect the critical bloc of black voters who have been inordinately loyal to the Democrats. Will a convention decision to hand the nomination to Hillary create an irreparable schism?

Many black voters are making it very clear: They’re concerned that Barack Obama is going to be denied the Democratic presidential nomination that they see as rightfully his, and if that happens, a lot of them may stay home in November.

“It would hurt me not to vote,” said Charles Clark, an Indianapolis retiree. He’s thinking about leaving the presidential box on his ballot blank this fall if Hillary Clinton is the Democrats’ nominee. …

African-Americans have been the Democratic Party’s most reliable bloc, giving about 90 percent of their votes to former Vice President Al Gore and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in the last two presidential elections.

In a close election this year, an African-American exodus from the voting booth could be costly to Democrats, particularly in the South, where blacks are a large proportion of the electorate.

If Obama isn’t the nominee, “there would be a significant number of African-Americans who would stay home. They’re not voting for (presumptive Republican nominee) John McCain,” predicted David Bositis, a senior analyst at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, which researches black voting trends.

As it turns out, the McClatchy analysis finds that one of the biggest culprits in this fiasco is none other than James Carville. His unrepentant characterization of Bill Richardson as “Judas” for endorsing Obama recalled decades of paternalism for black and Hispanic voters. Vote like we tell you, the message read, and it stoked the resentment that came from white political leaders demanding loyalty from minority groups while denying them leadership roles for themselves.

Black voters see Obama as the legitimate winner of this process. Any move to deny him the top spot on the ticket will be viewed as illegitimate and a fraud, and they will walk, according to authors David Lightman and William Douglas. That is not an empty threat, and it could have consequences all the way down the ballot. While many of them might just skip voting for Hillary Clinton — a move that will doom the Democrats’ chances for taking the White House — some of them may not bother to vote at all. Their absence would create an impossible hurdle for Congressional and Senate candidates, as well as state and local races.

The DNC may have to choose the weaker candidate as a loss leader in order to save their candidates in Congress. If so, it will provide a fitting denouement to one of the strangest campaigns in American history.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

The DNC may have to choose the weaker candidate

Whichever one that turns out to be. Her high negatives and a possible black vote vacuum are haunting the superdelegates as much as the skeletons tumbling out of Obama’s closets – and he’s not through yet (e.g., his curiously unexplained trip to Pakistan years ago).

whitetop on May 2, 2008 at 7:50 AM

They won’t walk. Rush talked about this in his daily update today – the Democratic party has done much worse to them and they’ve stuck around. Let’s see… voting against (and filibustering) the Civil Rights Act, socialist programs that have destroyed black families in the inner cities, refusing them positions of power in the DNC, courting the Hispanic vote once that bloc grew larger than the black vote… and that’s just what I can remember off the top of my head.

JeffC_95 on May 2, 2008 at 7:56 AM

If only there were a way to create a Public Service Announcement which went something like:

“You see, Americans, when Democrats pander to and encourage racism within the black community, that very same racism serves only to foster hate, separatism and resentment. None of which helps to keep this great country together. 90% of a sub-population within these United States cannot continue to vote en-bloc for one party and honestly call itself ‘free thinkers,’ let alone ‘free.’”

Lockstein13 on May 2, 2008 at 8:00 AM

Excellent analysis. This election has been a fubar for both sides, and the result may be determined by whose chances are fouled up the least.

backwoods conservative on May 2, 2008 at 8:01 AM

I’m calling BS. I doubt very many of the reliable black Democrat voters will break rank and file with their straight ticket Democrat voting. I could see a small minority leaving the box unchecked, but I think most blacks in the Democratic Party still like the Clintons plenty. This may be one area where having Bill actually HELPS Hillary.

malan89 on May 2, 2008 at 8:03 AM

I’m calling BS

So am I because it assumes widespread black racism. It suits Barrack to cast himself as the ‘black’ candidate-victim just as it suits Hillary to cast herself as the “female” candidate-victim but I don’t think the whole ‘racism-sexism’ angle is the be all and end all for voters. As Malan said, black voters have been given the shaft before and voted democrat – and while there may be a black man in play here I suspect most black voters are not single-issue, that issue being race.

Ares on May 2, 2008 at 8:11 AM

Will female voters stay home in protest if Obama is the nominee? What about Latinos? Jews? Senior citizens? The Dems are screwed, and they have no one to blame but themselves.

Michelle Moore, an Indianapolis housewife, is less gentle: “Hillary Clinton would not even still be in the race if Obama was a white man,” she said.

Gotta love the irony there. Paging Geraldine Ferraro.

Her tough tone was common this week in this city’s black community. Why, people asked, is the Illinois senator’s relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright being judged so harshly? Why won’t Democratic Party officials acknowledge that Obama’s in the lead and unite around him?

Maybe there is something to Jeremiah’s claim that blacks and whites learn differently, because as a typical white person I can’t figure out why some in the “black community” don’t get why he and his pastor are being judged so harshly.

Buy Danish on May 2, 2008 at 8:12 AM

Blacks not voting? This is myth making at its best.

The Black electorate is probably 30% of registered Dems. Without their 85-90% block voting record the Dem party ceases to exist as a functioning party.

When/if Obama is denied the nomination he will endorse Hillary. Every preacher will turn out the vote for Hillary and the Black vote will turn out. McCain will be portrayed as the second coming of the KKK. Rush and company are delusional thinking that they are somehow tearing the Dem party apart. When it comes to the general election, if Hillary is the nominee, she will trounce McCain 52-48. It won’t even be close.

McCain’s only hope is against Obama as slim as it may be. A few Blue dogs, a smattering of Hispanics and some independents will slide over to McCain making the race close.

For all the fears that folks yap about in regards to Obama, should he get elected, are nothing compared to the Clinton’s getting back in office. Their machine, akin to a modern Tammany hall, is entrenched throughout state and federal offices waiting to rewrite most laws, which they will do with majorities in both the House and Senate. The stupidity of even allowing them to get close to power again is mind boggling. Obama has no machine–it takes years–thus none of his supposed radical ideas (whatever those are) will ever see the light of day.

patrick neid on May 2, 2008 at 8:28 AM

Black voters see Obama as the legitimate winner of this process. Any move to deny him the top spot on the ticket will be viewed as illegitimate and a fraud,

Despite the process not being complete, black voters feel a sense of entitlement. Demofacists, you reap what you sow.

peacenprosperity on May 2, 2008 at 8:37 AM

Absolutely right, if Hilpatine is the Nom, enough black voters will stay home to wreck her chances, purely outta spite and ‘disenfranchisement’. Watch, as soon as Hillary wins the primary, she’ll go straight to the black churches to play up her own ‘blackness’ … “YOU know what mean.”

Tony737 on May 2, 2008 at 8:46 AM

When/if Obama is denied the nomination he will endorse Hillary. Every preacher will turn out the vote for Hillary and the Black vote will turn out.

I disagree. Further, I don’t see many in the black community blowing this off like the other times the Dems have screwed them. The difference is the election itself. An expectation has been created that Obama will be the nominee. If he is not the nominee, many, including many outside the black community, will believe he was screwed out of it. Because we’re dealing with a situation directly linked to the election, those that are offended will not support Hillary. Further, since the Presidential election is what brings most people out, it’s likely that they will simply stay home. I still see enough people coming out that the Dem slate isn’t terribly hurt, but it could lead to a landslide in the Presidential, and the GOP could pick up seats in the tighter races.

flydiveski on May 2, 2008 at 9:16 AM

It’s not often I disagree with Rush on things, but I’m thinking a large number of black voters will not vote for Billary, and most of that number won’t vote at all — won’t bother to go to the polls. What I’m not so confident about is how long the schism will last.

petefrt on May 2, 2008 at 9:18 AM

Reading through the comments of a similar discussion over at ABC this morning I came across this comment concerning how to fix America…

End the war, Give a hugh rebate to the people…abt $300,000 per person middle class down, health care for all including dental, hydrogen and solar and other forms of green energy, no income taxes for the middle class and redesign NAFTA. This will solve most of America’s problems

.

That is the Dem donor. Sure, not all of them, but that is where Barak’s $96 average donation comes from.

It is all about FREEdom, not freedom. I don’t buy into this massive split vote argument. These nutjobs will come together. FREEdom will trump race, gender, electibility.

Limerick on May 2, 2008 at 9:38 AM

Black people won’t just stay home but they will start voting in an entirely different pattern. I do not count on the Republican ranks to swell with frustrated black people but you will see issues rather than skin color become a larger factor in how black people vote. “Black people vote Democrat” would be dead. Immigration, black people take the brunt of the job loss and lower wages. School choice, black people pay a far higher price for bloated classrooms and wasted funds. The economy, sooner or later black people in Detroit and Flint will figure it out, to be a wage earner you need a wage payer and they have to stop voting for politicians that drive businesses out of the state.

This would be the nail in the coffin for liberals nationally. One look at an electoral map will tell you that without the 90/10 split in the black vote Democrats could not hold an office beyond that of mayor. The aforementioned change in voting habits would force Democrats to tack to the right on issues near and dear to the far left. Democrats poor black constituents just might vote with the knowledgte of supply and demand, then start voting against the party that is not supplying them with cheap gas and forcing them to pay higer prices. The GOP has several conservative solutions that address issues that blak people traditionally vote on, if black people choose the better option in even a small way say 80/20 you will see an immediate change in the Democrat party.

Goodbay far left…

Theworldisnotenough on May 2, 2008 at 9:44 AM

First, if Obama is not selected the streets won’t be safe for several weeks.
Second, the black vote would go to Hillary, but in a much smaller number then Obama. They will tend to stay home.
Third, the blacks will take decades to switch to Republicans, they are too entrenched in their victim mentality, they will not vote Republican for decades, until the school and education process is taken care of…and the dems haven’t done it for the past 40 years, and they ain’t going to do it in the next 40 years.
However, this is the caveat, as the hispanic influence becomes more important, they will throw the blacks overboard to make room for the hispanic vote. Much greater power and more money. Already see this beginning (come on in and take the jobs)…the blacks are being displaced by the hispanics, don’t you just love those caring liberals?

right2bright on May 2, 2008 at 9:45 AM

Hillary could find someone else who’s African American to be V.P.

I gotta check on my popcorn supply…

MamaAJ on May 2, 2008 at 10:00 AM

This discussion cuts the other way also. It is assumed that if Clinton gets the nomination, then blacks will stay home, and possibly stop voting monolithically for the Dems. Let us assume this is even true. But. Then by the same logic, assume that Obama is the nominee — and he loses to McCain. This outcome will just cement the black vote even harder to the Dems.

SunSword on May 2, 2008 at 10:13 AM

With regard to the Hispanics taking jobs away from Blacks, why is that? How is it achieved? Are they better qualified? Or is it a red herring?

OldEnglish on May 2, 2008 at 10:15 AM

patrick neid on May 2, 2008 at 8:28 AM

I disagree. It seems to me that Tony737 has it right, and many, many blacks would simply stay home. I’m not saying that there would be some sort of organized “message” to the Dems; I just think that enough animus toward HilldeBeast would exist that supporting her would be impossible.

That said, I think Ed has it right: the Dems would rather put up Obama and lose, just to retain the monolithic black vote for another cycle.

Jaibones on May 2, 2008 at 10:16 AM

A lot of black men will vote for McCain if the Clintons steal the nomination. Especially veterans and the middle-aged.

What’s with quoting the ‘McClatchy analysis’? Reading anything from McClatchy is like listening to Radio Moscow. Their POV is simple–scare readers away from Clinton at any cost. Obama is the American Allende.

Hope P. Muntz on May 2, 2008 at 10:34 AM

The DNC may have to choose the weaker candidate as a loss leader in order to save their candidates in Congress.

But will they? They see the population of African Americans dwindling and Hispanics and others rising. Down the line, this will weaken their support for black voters. The parties don’t care a fig for them; they want votes.

PattyJ on May 2, 2008 at 10:45 AM

Obama has no machine–it takes years–thus none of his supposed radical ideas (whatever those are) will ever see the light of day.

patrick neid on May 2, 2008 at 8:28 AM

Dude, you ever hear of the Chicago machine? That’s the machine that got John Kennedy elected.

Big John on May 2, 2008 at 10:59 AM

With regard to the Hispanics taking jobs away from Blacks, why is that? How is it achieved? Are they better qualified? Or is it a red herring?

I’ve heard it said that the entry level jobs a lot of southern blacks had that paid a living wage (in AL, for instance, chicken processing) have been inundated by Hispanic workers willing to do the same thing for minimum wage. Your black construction crews ~ indeed all the construction crews white AND black ~ have given way to a few supervisors, a few highly skilled individuals and gaZILLIONS of Hispanic workers. Doing it for minimum wage. The black workers have been forced out.

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM

Check this Google search for stories about the most recent raids. There are places in the sleepy little Lake Guntersville/Albertville area that have literally become Hispanic shanty towns because of the chicken processing in the area. Tyson, Pilgrim’s Pride (whom I believe bought out Gold Kissed) all have MASSIVE hatching-to-processing operations there.

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 11:08 AM

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM

Okay. Thanks for the info.

So, it seems that the minimum wage is the real decider as to who gets to keep their job at the entry level. Or is it the word “willing”?

OldEnglish on May 2, 2008 at 11:14 AM

It’s also pointing out, with regard to downticket Dems/coattails, that many of the Superdelegates are elected officials running for reelection. They have a massive conflict of interest in choosing the nominee, in that they want one who will help them win, whether or not they can win the nation.

Superdelegates were a stupid idea then, are a stupid idea now, and hopefully the Dems will get rid of them in the future–or we will face more elections like this.

daryl_herbert on May 2, 2008 at 12:06 PM

Or is it the word “willing”?

It might well be the word NOW, but, if I’d made a living in those same factory ops and wound up pushed out by minimum wage, no benefit illegals AND had nowhere else to turn for employment, I might be bitter. And unwilling.

And don’t think for two seconds those chicken execs don’t overlook even blacks willing to work for those wages, because Hispanics aren’t union types. A good swath of them illegal, they’ll take anything they can get, because at least they’re getting something. And that keeps wages artificially low in a great many formerly blue collar industries.

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 12:09 PM

And that keeps wages artificially low in a great many formerly blue collar industries.

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 12:09 PM

Sorry, I don’t agree. One can have an artificially high wage – paying someone more than they are worth to the market, usually through the force of unionism, but low wages are a direct result of changes to the great mover – market supply and demand.
At a time when the labour force is scarce, they can demand higher wages because of said scarcity – whether the job is really worth that wage or not.

OldEnglish on May 2, 2008 at 12:33 PM

“Vote like we tell you, the message read, and it stoked the resentment that came from white political leaders demanding loyalty from minority groups while denying them leadership roles for themselves.” Bingo, Ed.
The Demo elite know that the Obamas (’black messiahs’) of their party only have so much veneer; that’s why they don’t let them have leadership roles. O’Reilly sure let HRC get away with her elitism in that patta-cake interview, but what could I expect from an ‘elite’ thug such as Big O?

Christine on May 2, 2008 at 2:29 PM

I just realized that O’Reilly strikes me as a circus hawker in front of the Freak Show tent. Jerry Springer is the King of the Freak Show, but I won’t split hairs.

Christine on May 2, 2008 at 2:32 PM

but low wages are a direct result of changes to the great mover – market supply and demand.

Respectfully DISagree. That was true years ago in these industries (I’ll refer specifically to poultry, framing and roofing), but not now. Those artificially low wages are motivated by nothing more than the bottom line: profit margin. Even in boom times, they remain low because: a) illegals aren’t going to walk off the job or organize for raises b) if they should, there are 15 waiting in line take that same minimum wage like a shot.

The only thing that will change the dynamic as it currently exists are ICE crackdowns chasing off workers that are already in place and scaring off their replacements, which is happening to a certain degree.

In the housing industry locally, the ONLY blacks I’ve seen in the developers crews are the bricklayers, and those teams are almost exclusively black. The roofers are ALL Mexican, except for the company rep checking in on the jobsite.

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 2:45 PM

And, anecdotally, I have seen blacks soliciting even piece work turned away from construction sites here loaded with nothing but ~ you guessed it ~ Hispanics.

One pair of guys I saw even had all their own carpenters’ tools in the truck and ready to go.

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 2:48 PM

Re the comment quoted by Limerick about giving the middle class a $300,000 rebate per person. If we assume that 80% of the American public are middle-class or poor, that’s about 240 million people, times $300,000 is $72 Trillion. Where would the government find $72 Trillion when it currently runs deficits while spending about $3 trillion a year?

People who would suggest a $300K giveaway probably don’t think Jeremiah Wright is so bad–after all, look at the house the church gave him!

Steve Z on May 2, 2008 at 4:50 PM

big john,

I’m very aware of the Daley machine. However it is in Chicago and its national tentacles are very limited. The Clinton machine borders on the international.

As to the comments about the “theory” Blacks will stay home, it is just that, a theory. And on this theory you would let Hillary get the nomination because then you think McCain could win because said Blacks will stay home? Wow!
Talk about rolling the dice with the devil.

The Clinton’s will eat your lunch if you let them get close. Where have you been these last 20 years? If Obama is as clueless as everyone says he is, help him get the nomination. Rush is completely out of his mind. Everything that is happening would have happened on its own–Hillary would never quit–the only difference is Obama would have a bigger lead and would be certain of the nomination. Now its not certain and you are counting on “Watts II” if she gets the nod to get McCain elected.

I said it before and I’ll say it again, Rush has no problems with Hillary getting elected–its good for his business. That’s why he’s got folks crossing over.

patrick neid on May 2, 2008 at 5:36 PM

tree hugging sister on May 2, 2008 at 2:45 PM

My apologies, I should have made my post more clear.

I meant the labour force market demand, not product.

As for the labour pool itself, I would think that most Companies would go with those who would be unlikely to organize/agitate for increases. Bottom line is the raison d’etre after all.

OldEnglish on May 2, 2008 at 8:21 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.