Two weeks ago,
noted that the Republican Party has been digging itself
an ever deeper
electoral hole by tolerating (when not
exacerbating) the lax immigration policies of
last four-plus decades. These caused demographic changes
that are indisputably and
deleterious to the
Yet, I pointed
out, there remains a logical possibility that the country
can avoid one-party Democratic rule even as far out as the
middle of the 21st century. If all else remains equal, I
calculated, Republican candidates could win in the 2048-2052
era simply by 1) increasing the GOP`s share of the
McCain`s 55 percent to 70 percent, and by 2) raising the
white turnout level back to that seen in 1992.
this fairly obvious but apparently unmentionable option is
course, this arithmetic raises some difficult questions.
how could the GOP go about
deserving to get
70 percent of the white vote? That`s a question I can`t
fully answer yet. But at least I`m thinking about it, which,
I suspect, is more than you can say for anybody
connected to the Republican Party in
any official capacity.
difficult question is: How can the GOP keep
“all else equal” while raising the white share of the vote?
the blogger The Cold Equations
reflected thusly on the possibility of the GOP getting
about 70 percent of the white vote:
“This is not out of the question. Other races
in blocs. But, I`m not sure how it could be done,
especially without alienating other races and making the
target even higher, high enough that you`d have to get white
hardcore liberals, which isn`t going to happen.”
reading, the Republican Party can`t
just have a
positive strategy of attracting and mobilizing
voters. There has to be a supplementary tactic.
Republicans must also drive voters
away from the
Democrats by using wedge issues and shrewd rhetoric to
aggravate the inevitable fault lines in the
Democrats` unwieldy coalition.
this doesn`t convert anyone to the GOP, it would lower
turnout among potential voters who lean Democrat.
McCain let Obama position himself to blacks as
the black candidate, to
other nonwhites as the nonwhite candidate, and to whites
postracial candidate. Yet, unless treated as
timidly as McCain handled his opponent in 2008, a
black-led four-race coalition is an inherently fragile
news for the GOP about black voters: it really can`t get
much worse than 2008. McCain ran as gingerly as imaginable
on topics even remotely related to race, and still
lost 95-4 among blacks.
turnout was very high. Indeed, the highest turnout rate
among any group was among
black women—which is quite remarkable considering that
turnout typically correlates positively with income,
education, and age. This is a tribute to the
politicization of blacks.
the GOP starts finally advocating and delivering on policies
that are beneficial for America`s white majority, and in
response the Republican Party drops a stunning
black support. Instead of losing among blacks 95-4, the
GOP would then lose 98-1.
Rove labored mightily to
into Republicans, with minimal success and catastrophic
effects. There simply are fundamental reasons why a
low-income group will always be
attracted to the Democrats, with their proud
tax-and-spend tradition. (Asians
might be a
different story, but there`s no evidence of it as yet and
anyway nobody has paid them much attention.)
plausible Republican strategy, one with much history on its
side, is to work to make Hispanics and Asians less
enthusiastic about voting Democrat.
they could get so disgusted with the Democrats that they
convert to Republicans. Or maybe not. Maybe they`ll just
vote less. Half a loaf (or a non-cast vote from your
opponent`s base constituency) is better than none.
Hispanics and Asians have been good at not voting. Hispanics
tend to find politics a bore and Asians find it a
distraction. Even in 2008, with the excitement of voting for
a non-white candidate, neither group saw even
half of its citizens turn out, versus 66 percent of
whites and 65 percent of blacks. And lots of
permanent residents (especially Mexicans)
never bother becoming citizens.
But let`s be
realistic. Being, in essence, the white party
the GOP uncool. And that`s only going to get worse as
the impact of
of indoctrination in the
uncoolness of white people by the school system and Main
Stream Media continue to pile up.
the GOP will never
be able to shake its white party image. It will either
increase its share of the white vote or it will go out of
business as a
party capable of winning national power.
My suggestion: the only long-term option
for the Republicans, the de facto white party, is to rebrand
the Democrats as the de facto
Sure, it`s kind of retarded, but
Americans, especially American intellectuals and pundits,
aren`t good at thinking in terms of
shades of brown. You can`t beat it, so use it.
Hispanics and Asians certainly will never
be terribly happy with the idea of being junior partners in
the white party. (Indeed, lots of white people have an
allergy to belonging to the
white party.) Hence, the alternative must be framed that
if Hispanics and Asians don`t want to be junior partners in
the white party, they get be junior partners in the black
white: choose one.
can not choose and stay home on Election Day.
The subtle cunning of the tactic of
rebranding the Democrats as the black party is not to
criticize the Democrats for being the vehicle of
African-American political activism, but to
praise them for
it, over and over, in the most offhand
Republicans can hurry along the coming
Democratic train wreck by, for example, lauding blacks as
core” of the
Democratic Party. Respectfully point out that the
Democratic Party is the rightful agent for the assertion of
African-American racial interests, and that advancing
black interests is central to the nature of the Democratic
Party. Note that, while individual blacks wishing to vote
the good of the country are more than welcome in the
GOP, black racial activists have their
natural home in the Democratic Party. That`s what the
Democrats are there for.
argue it. Just treat it as a given.
Moreover, Republican rhetoric should
encourage feelings of proprietariness among blacks toward
Party. It`s not all that hard to get blacks to feel that
morally deserve something, such as, for example,
predominance in the Democratic Party. African-Americans
are good at feeling that others owe them deference.
kind of subtle language, casually repeated, puts Democrats
in a delicate spot. Either they insult blacks by denying
this presumption, or they alarm their Asian, Hispanic, and
white supporters by not denying it. As everybody knows, but
seldom says, black political control hasn`t worked out well
for places as far apart as
For instance, 2016 on the Democratic side
will be interesting. If Obama wins re-election in 2012,
blacks will argue, not unreasonably, that they`ve brought
the Democrats political prosperity and therefore a black
deserves a spot on the 2016 national ticket. If Obama
the media will relentlessly
on white racism, and blacks in 2016 will demand a black
candidate to fight the scourge of anti-black feelings.
blacks are rebuffed by the Democrats in the 2016 nominating
process, they aren`t going to vote Republican in the fall.
But without a black on the ballot, they won`t show up to
vote in quite the huge numbers seen in 2008.
Conversely, if the Democrats pander to blacks in 2016, thus
establishing a precedent of a permanent black spot on the
national ticket, that will raise severe questions in the
rest of this awkward alliance.
black sense of rightful ascendancy in the Democratic Party
becomes more pronounced, Hispanics will be demanding that
burgeoning numbers mean that it`s now
Asians will wonder why they are supporting an
agglomeration dominated by blacks who
share their values. And white Democrats will wonder how
exactly they can prosper in a party where everybody else is
allowed to speak out in internal disputes as representatives
of a legitimately aggrieved racial group, but
faces a daunting future of their own making. Then, again, so
do the Democrats. All Democrats should be helpfully assisted
to confront this.