Replies

It's an interesting thought, but the statistics still showed a predominantly black vote for KKT (90% +). The main reason she lost was due to significant shift in white women voters from KKT to Ehrlich. Despite his efforts, black voters still didn't/don't trust him. Steele may be able to change that, to an extent, but look at the predominant view of blacks toward Clarence Thomas -- it hasn't changed a whit. (And I didn't meant to write "white".)

Don't want to be discouraging; just realistic.

It's an interesting thought, but the statistics still showed a predominantly black vote for KKT (90% +).

Ehrlich's percentage of the vote in Prince George's County was smaller than Sauerbrey's four years ago.

I have not seen the final demographic profile from the election. However, polls leading up to the election were showing KKT lagging (in the 75-80% range) with the black vote and Ehrlich-Steele picking up the difference. This was looking like a big improvement over the 90%+ black vote garnered by Glendening in previous elections.

Now, it is possible that the black vote did come home to some extent in the final days of the campaign. Again, I have not seen the final data (do you have a citation?). I think the earlier polling was showing that some in the black monolith were at least taking a look at Ehrlich and Steele.

It would seem as the Republicans recruit solid candidates like Steele and leaders like Colin Powell, Condi Rice, etc., they will have a chance to influence the black (and other minorities) electorate. This will not be a sea change overnight, but rather a slow and steady process over many elections. If Republican candidates can consistently draw 30-40% of the minority vote (a lofty goal), they can be the majority party for decades. This should be a serious goal for the party, because the coming demographic change in minority voters does not favor Republicans (at least right now).