There is something that every analysis piece of the president’s decision to embrace gay marriage has missed. They all wonder whether his decision will dampen enthusiasm among black voters, but they don’t ask why black voters support Democrats at better than a 90% clip. There are many reasons for this, but the most important one is that Republicans send a clear and sustained message that they do not like black people. They characterize them with negative stereotypes on a constant basis. They feed the feeling of white resentment by continuously suggesting that government programs for the poor are just handouts that white people give to undeserving black people. And, in this cycle, they’ve gone so far as to pass bills all across the country that are ostensibly about voter fraud but which are in effect nothing less than Jim Crow-lite voter disenfranchisement laws.
In the black community, there is a very large church-going community. And many of those churches are very traditional and quite conservative on social issues, including sexual orientation. These voters do not support gay marriage. But they’d like to remain voters. They’re not going to show up to vote for a party that is doing everything it can to keep them from the polls. They aren’t going to vote for a party that demonizes them and their children for political profit.
It will be hard to replicate the excitement Obama’s first run for the presidency created in the black community, but that’s a separate question, isn’t it? Black folks play the role of Lex Luther every day on Fox News. Do these analysts think that they don’t notice this? But we don’t see analysis about how hyping the practically non-existent New Black Panther Party or the constant ridicule of black culture on Fox News is going to harm the Republican nominee. How do black folks feel about the fact that the Mormon Church banned black people until the 1970’s? How do black folks feel about Mitt Romney saying he is not concerned about poor people? How do they feel about the Republicans’ budget priorities than slash support for food security and medical treatment and add billions to the military?
The real story isn’t even in the black community because they long ago figured out that the Republicans dislike them. What’s happening now is that Latinos are coming to the same conclusion. There are plenty of very socially conservative Latinos. Many of them are anti-choice. Many of them are very protective of their daughters and embrace very traditional ideas about gender roles. There’s a reason that George W. Bush won over 40% of the Latino vote. And there’s a reason that John McCain, despite trying to advance an immigration reform bill, only won 33% of their votes. There’s a reason that Mitt Romney is polling well below McCain. When you make it clear as a party that you don’t like a segment of the population, that segment of the population doesn’t like you back.
Next on the list is women who use contraception. You make it clear that you don’t like them, and you can go tubing down the gender gap.
Nevertheless, the president did make matters harder for himself in swing states by coming out for marriage equality. But that’s because marriage equality still polls poorly in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina. He certainly didn’t improve his prospects in those states by taking his new position. That it did it anyway showed courage. But it also probably shows that they don’t think it will cost him the election.
What people should be focusing on is not how black folks feel about marriage equality but how Republicans are alienating huge constituencies of people with their intolerance and radicalism.
ok, that’s just funny, even if it’s true.
I am worried about this fallout, though.
So, Obama has come around on gay marriage. Will he bring some black folks? Will his acceptance persuade some others, black professionals, black clergy, black opinion leaders, that this is not the Crack of Doom, but just gay people with rice?
Good question. I think the answer is that no, HE will not bring anyone along. Anyone who would change their mind on this issue BECAUSE OF ONE PERSON, would probably have found a reason to changed it prior to Obama’s statement.
What will happen, however, is that his example of “evolution” will cause others to think and re-examine the facts.
We all know that facts have a liberal bias.
I’m a Black professional, I work with Black professionals, I even know some Black clergy members, and guess what they all in one way or another have no problem with gay marriage.
I’m really sick of white liberals thinking that Black folks are the ones they have to worry about in terms of gay marriage. Won’t matter if every damn Black person in America voted for Gay marriage…you STILL have a whole lot of White folk who come out to oppose it too.
Enough of this.
Also, there are alot of white Dems who come out to vote against marriage also, has Hilary Clinton or Bill Clinton’s stance on marriage brought along many of those people.
The idea that now that Obama has come out for it, then of course he’g gonna bring “his people” along with him is just as borderline bigoted as the GOP saying Blacks voted overwhelming for Obama as is Blacks don’t vote overwhelming for Dems anyway.
Well, the media bigboyz like to have as close a horserace as possible, so you know they’ll bump Obama down as much as they can. All the same, I think Obama’s simple message of “Saved Detroit, got Osama” is simple enough and strong enough to beat a decent opponent. As it happens, it only has to beat Romney, who is certainly the worst presidential candidate since Dukakis, and maybe worse.
.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Hellfire and Brimstone and Horseshit.
Thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy.
Fascinating interview with Ted Olson yesterday on MSNBC that followed a Tony Perkins bit. And that was followed by a Old Testament/New Testament discussion.
Ted Olson’s clarity on Obama’s position, the history of marriage (and of course polygamy’s role) and the legal framework that separated out Christianity from the discussion was a stand up and cheer moment for MSM. Olson brought to the table the black and whitedness of a Republican method of argument that made the nuances I always appreciate, seem like a distraction.
His type of argument, where it’s all about civil rights has to be a connector for all but the 1% ers.
.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
“. . . the fact that the Mormon Church banned black people until the 1970’s?”
Not quite. They banned black people from the priesthood until 1978, but there has been a tiny minority of black Mormons from the beginning. It would seem that the negative attitude towards blacks in Mormonism came not so much from Joseph Smith, the founder, as from Brigham Young, his successor.
http://www.angelfire.com/mo2/blackmormon/homepage.html
Obviously this doesn’t affect your point.
Also people are now aware of the Okey-doke strategy that GWB and Rove pulled on them in ’04. I know that when I talk to older AA in my community, they all make note of GWB and how their gay strategy and all of them say “they ain’t wasting their vote again”!
I am just amazed that people still think that the administration was caught flat-footed by David Gregory of all people, and forced into doing this. They are playing the GOP and the media like a Stradivarius. The idea that anyone still underestimates this man remains a mystery to me.
Biden’s statement was a trial balloon for sure. If the reaction had been hard negative, the White House would have explained, “Oh, it’s just another of Joe’s gaffes.”
Politically it was brilliant because, as has been numerically analyzed at Kos, most people that would be really offended already thought he had advocated gay marriage. They probably heard that from Faux News.
Of course, it was the right thing to do morally, but it is rare that morality and good politics coincide.