Chatting with a Longtime GOP Operative (Kerry Spot NRO)

National Review Online ^ | Jim Geraghty

[mabelkitty]

They can't do it so easily in Ohio.

[garbanzo]

a national poll showed Bush getting 18 percent

This about all you need to know about where the election is going. Add to that an additional 5-10% of the black vote sitting at home (not at all enthused about Kerry) and Kerry simply cannot demographically win in close states.

Also remember that the last debate was less than a week ago - polls still haven't quite caught up.

[Dog Gone]

A poll taken by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, shows 18% of the black Americans are supporting Bush. If the President gets that 18% of the black vote, he will win in a landslide.

That 18% doesn't really amount to much, unless you can convince me otherwise. Blacks represent about 12% of the population. In 2000, they cast about 10% of the ballots, meaning they voted less than their numbers would normally suggest.

If Bush goes from 8% of the black vote to 18% (a huge increase, to be sure), that suggests about a 1% shift in the popular vote.

That sounds great, but since most of the black vote is located in the south, states that Bush will probably sweep anyway, its effect is even further diminished.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>That 18% doesn't really amount to much, unless you can convince me otherwise.

First off, I said "[t]wo separate factors could give Bush a landslide victory." Meaning the Christian vote and the black vote. In addition, the get out the vote efforts by both the Dems and the GOP have been quite significant this time around. So there will be more Americans voting overall and therefore, more black Amewricans voting too.

>>>> ... but since most of the black vote is located in the south, states that Bush will probably sweep anyway, its effect is even further diminished.

According to 2003 data from the Census Bureau, southern states contain about half of the entire US black population. So everything considered, I believe if Bush doubles the amount of total votes he garners with black America, that will be a big plus in his overall election victory.

[Zack Nguyen]

Reasons to be hopeful: huge Christian votes for Bush because of his pro-life and pro-marriage stances...

Barring no major problems these last two weeks, I think you can count on that the largest evangelical and conservative Catholic turnout for a Republican in modern history.

[Dog Gone]

The four states with the biggest black voter groups are California, Texas, New York, and Georgia. It doesn't matter how blacks vote in those states; the outcome is already known and was never in doubt.

More than half of the Gore voters in Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana were blacks, states which he lost quite handily.

I'm not meaning to diss your post. More than doubling black support for Bush in this election could signal an end to plantation politics in this country.

But I can't find a single state where it would make a difference in the electoral outcome.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>The four states with the biggest black voter groups are California, Texas, New York, and Georgia.

As of July 2003, Florida was second among states in black population, at 2.8m. Ohio is 12th at 1.4m and Pennsylvania is 14th at 1.2m. I think Bush garnering 18% of the black vote is a substantial overall pickup. Especially in the three states I highlighted.

In 2000 there were roughly 106 million votes cast for POTUS. About 10% of that 106m were from black voters. Bush recieved 9%, or 954K. If he doubles his take this time around, Bush will get 1.908m. That's all based on 2000 voting stats. Get out the vote efforts will increase the total votes Bush receives in 2004. Bush could garner 2.5m. Substantial.

[wagglebee]

2) He's a yankee. He has to win as a Democrat without a single Dixie state, Florida included. This is a monumental task.

NO Democrat has EVER been elected without winning a single southern state!

[Dog Gone]

I agree. Substantial. But I don't think it makes an electoral college difference. I welcome you to suggest a state where the increased black support would make a difference in the outcome.

If not, let's drop the discussion. I think we've both agreed that the news about increased black support is quite welcome.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>I welcome you to suggest a state where the increased black support would make a difference in the outcome.

I just gave you three. Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

[Dog Gone]

You gave me none. The miniscule difference in the black voter preference for Bush would change none of those state's results or voter preferences.

NONE. Drop it. Let this thread die, or put up a lot of statistical evidence to prove your contention. You can't. It doesn't exist.

[Reagan Man]

You're the one who changed the parameters of the debate. My original contention about a possible landslide for Bush was based on what I said were "two factors". The Christian conservative vote coming out for Bush and the black vote trending higher for Bush then in 2000. Btw, you're the one who pressed the issue of the black vote. Anyway, I think I gave you three possible states in which the overall vote could be effected, if Bush was to pick up 18% of the black vote. Any pre-election "statistical evidence" is a guesstimate at best.

[Reagan Man]

From the Washington Times.Check it out.

[Jerry W. Howard]

"...unprecendentedly large (20%? total) of black vote for Bush because of his pro-marrage views.."

I think you are right on here. I have a good friend (black guy) who goes ballistic over the fact that the Dems farm blacks like plantation slaves. He thinks that telling a young black person that they "need" special handling by the do-gooders is the biggest impediment to their getting ahead. I think he is right.

If significant blacks go for Bush the side benefit is they will be looking for opportunities (personally and politically) rather than looking for proof they were "disenfranchised."

If a large number of minorities (I include hispanic Texans as well) give Bush/Republicans a chance they will be rewarded and we will too. Best deal is always one good for both parties!

[fromunda]

First, I am not wrong - my source is also a longtime GOP "operative" and has direct access to the Bush campaign. If I disclosed his past role with the campaign, you would know that what I say has merit.

Second, the WashPost/ABC poll backs this up - Bush up 5 nationally, but down 3 in Ohio.

You are just h*&# bent on labeling me a Kerry supporter. You couldn't be more wrong. In fact, as I sit here, I am looking at pictures of me with John Engler and Bob Dole and others, not a single Democrat amongst them - all surrounded by my Republican memorabilia and Impeach Clinton bumperstickers.

I just am not a pollyanna (sp?) when it comes to politics. Having won and lost, been polled up and down, I know that when a good friend, who knows, tells me that there is a problem in Ohio, he's not bs'in me.

You don't want to believe, I frankly don't care. Live in your little fantasy world.

[fromunda]

Just so you know - out of curiosity I searched my source's name on this website and it appears repeatedly. Believe what you will, however . . . I could not care less.

[Paul Ross]

fromunda

Since Oct 19, 2004

view home page, enter name:

~ About ~ Links ~ Contact ~ In Forum ~ Mail To ~

Return

fromunda hasn't created an about page.