By Antonio D. French
Filed Saturday, February 4 at 7:45 AM
Sen. Jim Talent and Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman met with a group of local African-Americans yesterday to discuss the relationship between blacks and the GOP.
Mehlman said it was time to begin to restore the bond between African-Americans and the party of Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglas. He said that blacks are not well served by voting disproportionately for Democrats.
"There's a reason farmers get everything they want," Mehlman said, paraphrasing his law school classmate Sen. Barack Obama. "Because every politician competes for their vote."
He told the group of about 25 people that "There's a difference between outreach and inclusion." Outreach is when parties come to communities four weeks before an election and ask for your vote.
"Inclusion is Michael Steele in Maryland, Lynn Swann in Pennsylvania, Ken Blackwell in Ohio, Keith Butler in Michigan, Michael Williams in Texas, Colin Powell and then Condi Rice at the State Department, Alphonso Jackson, Rod Paige... Inclusion is when you have people making the policy," said Mehlman.
Click here to see pictures from the event.
3 Comments:
"There's a reason farmers get everything they want," Mehlman said, paraphrasing his law school classmate Sen. Barack Obama. "Because every politician competes for their vote."
Competition doesn't have to be limited to two parties. Third parties often sound the best message, and supporting them really does send a message. Following last year's mayoral election, in which the Green Party candidate won about a third of the African American vote, a Green Party forum on lead poisoning got the attention of the Slay administration and prompted some action. The Missouri Green Party recently concluded its annual meeting without launching a petition drive, but the Progressive Party (which is affiliated with the Green Party of the United States) has launched its own petition drive for ballot status and already has over 2,000 signatures. Perhaps they will offer meaningful alternatives to a Democratic Party that panders to the right and takes its black base for granted.
10:00 AM, February 04, 2006
Right you are, Oracle.
You might remember that we covered the Greens involvement with the lead issue a few months back (http://www.pubdef.net/2005/10/updated-slay-not-in-hej-progress.html).
The issue that I have with the Greens is that I see a lack of seriousness and/or political maturity with the party. That is not at all to say that the members are not very serious about their beliefs. They do very much.
But in a city made up of wards that regularly have such low voter turnout, why not make a serious attempt -- say over 3 election cycles -- to get at least one Green on the Board of Aldermen? Why waste resources and time on a Governor's race or, even dumber, a Presidential race?
If this state won't elect a black candidate statewide, or a female Governor, why do Greens year after year, waste their resources and further add to their tarnished image as a fringe group?
The fact is that the two parties that run our government at every level are the Republicans and the Democrats. In any forseeable future (though you are the Oracle so maybe you can see further than most), if blacks, or any group for that matter, want to get their issues addressed, those are the two roads that any legislation must travel.
7:23 AM, February 05, 2006
Third parties run high profile campaigns where they have no realistic chance to win for several reasons:
1. In order to have ballot status (the right to file candidates without a time-consuming petition drive), a party needs to win 2% in a statewide contest (for statewide ballot status, like the Libertarians have now) or citywide (for ballot status in the City, like the Greens have now) or in a particular district (like the Green, Reform and Constitution Parties have in a few districts).
2. A party's ideological identity (i.e., voters' perceptions of what the party stands for) is usually formed by high visibility contests, because unfortunately most voters pay little attention to the smaller down-ballot contests.
3. A third party often fills an ideological vacuum when the major parties nominate candidates whose positions are the same (e.g., both for the Iraq war and the Patriot Act). Giving voters a meaningful choice attracts people to the polls who would not otherwise bother to vote. Those complaining about the "spoiler" factor overlook this. Choice is a good thing, not a bad thing.
And there are other reasons too that I haven't thought of during this spontaneous post.
But, yes, once a party's ideological identity is established with enough voters, then the party is ready to take the battle to the ward level. Expect some third-party activity in next spring's aldermanic elections.
1:33 PM, February 05, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home