Letters to the Editor
-
Republicans, Blacks & Latinos
TreeRol writes The no-shows are well aware that resources spent on black voters are resources wasted. They feel no need to pay lip-service to reaching out to anyone but their base. It's a purely economic decision, and from an economic standpoint it's the right decision.
No kidding. Especially when Republicans are already getting a pretty good return on their [non-]investment in the black community. Despite a legacy of race-baiting and policies that disproportionately have a negative effect on blacks, Republicans still get 10% of the "Black Vote." Despite the strained (at best) relationship Republicans have with the black community Angela McGlowan, Condoleezza Rice, Clarence Thomas and Michael Steele still exist.
Just think of the response Republicans could get if they made the slightest effort? Why don't they? After all, they convinced poor whites to vote against their economic interests and vote Republican on "the values." Why not try the same with blacks?
Republicans appeal to some whites by subtly and not-so-subtly invoking the threat of "the negro." Why don't they make similar appeals to the black community by invoking the threat of the latino? Another "they're taking our jobs" and "destroying our culture" argument.
Because Latinos are a better potential demographic for Republicans than Blacks are. Bush got 40% of the Latino vote in 2004, and Latinos are a rapidly growing demographic. Of course, McCain was the only GOP candidate to accept an invitation to debate on Univision. Unsurprisingly, McCain is the "pro-amnesty" candidate, and his immigration reform bill put him at odds with the party base.
Ultimately, I thinks Republicans will temper some of their anti-immigration rhetoric. The Latino population is getting too big to ignore. But the Black population? Just not money well spent.