Letters to the Editor
Ricardo Malocchio
Published Letters: 151 Editor's Choice: 2
-
Hillary pursues Southern Strategy for the primaries...
[Read the article: A look at exit polls from the Mississippi Democratic primary]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...is it possible for Barack to pursue an inverted Southern Strategy for the general?
I've learned a new term in the last few weeks: "white ethnics". I apparently was born into this demographic, though I now bear the label of "latte-sipping lefty coastal elite". Ain't pigeon-holes grand?
Still, I know a few things about these folks, still have family and acquaintances who fit that demographic, and Ferraro precisely identified and put into words both the express and inchoate fears, resentments, and anger of these so-called "white ethnics" (I'm using quotes as I'm not entirely comfortable with the term).
You know what I mean. The notion that blacks lead a charmed life, playing on white guilt and succeeding on affirmative action... at the expense, of course, of "white ethnics". And how many of these "white ethnics" have been criticized for expressing their anger and resentment over the advantages they perceive of being black, and feel themselves to be the victims of "reverse racism"?
Well, my white brothers and sisters, victims of affirmative action and reverse racism, you don't have to be Reagan Democrats anymore. Hillary feels your pain.
I don't believe Hillary is racist. I simply believe that she holds not a single principle that wouldn't be trumped by her pursuit of power. In this respect, I think that ol' bastard, Joe Klein, sussed out the true nature of this couple way back in '92. That chilling final scene now seems to be politics-as-usual. Simply typical for the Clintons. Expected.
And I don't believe that Clinton, Wolfson, Penn or anyone has developed a white paper delineating a Southern Strategy, and I don't believe that Ferraro was sent out as an emmissary to give voice to it. I think this feeling simply exists within the coterie of the Clinton Campaign, and it just happened to be expressed by a national figure the day before the primary in one of the true bastions of old-school racism.
But I can't help but think that this would not have occurred had the black vote not started peeling away after Iowa, and then become completely alienated after South Carolina. It's no longer simply that black voters prefer Obama over Clinton. They now resent Clinton very deeply. The calculus is pretty clear: she'll trade her chance of getting considerable black support in the general election to win the primary.
Of course, this creates larger problems for the Party. She's alienating a core constituency that has always been reliably and overwhelmingly Democratic for a constituency that has crossed over to the Republicans in the last several decades. Clearly, it's a risk she'll take to win the nomination. More than that, when the Clinton Campaign sent Bill to appear on the Rush Limbaugh show the day before the March 4 primaries, it can only be construed as a validation of his efforts on her behalf (Rush's efforts of course are really on McCain's behalf, but Clinton's been giving assists to the GOP candidate for weeks now).
So, Republicans in Mississippi who voted in the Democratic primary gave her 77% of their vote. Do any of you think she'll get their vote in November?
Bottom-line: Clinton is no longer simply playing with the politics of personal destruction. She's now risking the politics of party destruction.
Two questions: (1) will these "white ethnics" ("Reagan Democrats" if you prefer) ever vote for a black candidate? (2) Conversely, will Obama's strength in the black community - coupled with McCain's lack of support among socially-conservative, Christian-right Republicans - put Southern states into play should Obama win the nomination?
Maybe one more question: as a Democrat, which of these Southern Strategies are you more comfortable supporting?
-
The analysis is slight, but embarrassing?
[Read the article: A look at exit polls from the Mississippi Democratic primary]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I know, I know. The headline should read "Obama wins by a landslide... as predicted". While that may be the most obvious characterization, it's not the most interesting aspect of this primary (and other recent primaries).
CBSNews has posted the exit results, and along with such telling morsels as the "white ethnic" vote and the huge, Rush-inspired Republican crossover for Hillary, it certainly appears that the rift within the Democratic party is growing. 55% of Obama voters would NOT be satisfied with Clinton as their nominee, and 72% of Clinton voters would NOT be satisfied with Obama as theirs. The notion that everyone will fall into place behind the Democratic nominee come Fall strikes me as wishful thinking. And I believe the worst is yet to come.
I know my own thoughts on the subject have changed considerably over the last few weeks, and I can no longer envision myself voting for Clinton. Time will tell, of course, and I have a history of holding my nose and voting for the lesser of two evils. But if Clinton is the Democratic nominee, I'm no longer quite so convinced that I know which candidate that would be.
-
You want the background on the Florida primary fiasco? You *HAVE* to read this!
[Read the article: Florida's House Dems oppose second primary]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Nelson-ORDER12-14-07.pdf
That's the order dismissing the suit brought in the USDC-Northern District of Florida by Sen. Nelson, et al., rejecting both the constitutional and Voting Rights Act claims.
But the most interesting part is the recitation of facts. Read those closely, and note that in all the voting for the bill that approved moving up the Florida date in contravention of DNC and RNC rules (specifically, the FL House vote, the FL Senate vote, and the FL House re-vote on the Senate version of the bill), only 3 votes out of the over-270 cast were *AGAINST* the bill. And these votes were cast even though Florida lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans, new that the DNC would strip them of delegates.
Read it. There's so much misinformation floating around about what happened in Florida, and the truth is likely more galling than you can imagine. Why, Florida? Why must you continue to be the big ol' monkey wrench in our political process?
(Florida sends thank-you note to Michigan for helping spread the blame.)