Posted on 05/08/2002 10:12:30 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:53:19 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Republicans, despite hopes that they would make progress with President Bush at the helm, can't seem to get the hang of outreach to Hispanic, Asian and black voters.
"The current Republican idea for broadening the base of the party has been to bring a bunch of rich white guys in to run the party," said Michael Schroeder, former chairman of the California Republican Party. "Meanwhile, the Democrats have full-time staff people tasked with making sure their message is taken into all the ethnic communities in California."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Southack's always interesting and informative.
calgov2002:
 calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
BTW, comparing the percentage of hispanic votes in a 1984 landslide to the evenly split 2000 election is a bit misleading. A tree doesn't grow overnight, its going to take a lot of work to win converts, but I'm optimistic. And actually, there really isn't any choice if we are going to win elections.
8 years of Condi Rice, Page, and Powell, with Rice moving up the ranks into a high-visibility VP role, is probably the best that the Republicans can do for changing the current Black bloc vote, plus the fact that Blacks will favor school vouchers whenever they are available locally, a key platform difference between Dems and Reps.
McCaullife and Carville aren't exactly high-profile minorities, either, so the idea that the people "running" the two Parties are Black and White is a bit deceptive.
So I don't see a bleak picture. Republicans ARE making an effort to reach out to minority voters, and over time this effort will pay off.
So I don't see a bleak picture. Republicans ARE making an effort to reach out to minority voters, and over time this effort will pay off.
Couldn't have been said better.
This is because they don't know how. Having lived for homeless for several years, I can say with reasonable authority that the conservative message has potential with the poor, if and only if, the Party learns how to communicate with these people and stop treating them like they are stupid leeches. The message has to be straight, simple, and honest without sugar coating. Street skills have a way of building a fast and effective BS detector.
That would be good news, since it means that the Asian-American support for Republicans will now increase.
Unfortunately, Gary South is untrustworthy.
:-)
Well said. When it comes to forming political allegiances, an individuals personal experiences usually trump differences in policy opinion. For example, most Americans of Asian descent I know are Democrats, because usually the Democrats we know treat us well. I'm of Asian descent myself, and a lot of people at my workplace pretty much wear their political affililiations on their sleeves. The folk who like to call themselves Republicans are, more often than not, abrasive and offensive. The Democrats tend to be nicer. Of course, on policy matters, I agree with the Dems on almost nothing. But that doesn't change the fact that most of my close friends are Dems. Republicans, the ones I know in person atleast, tend to always be angry.. and they love to bait people like me. Then I'll turn around and agree with them and they get this "oh shit what do I do now?" confused look on their face. Anyway I realize I'm generalizing, and I've met a ton of great Repubs on FR, but for some reason I never see anyone like that in real life. Just my two cents..
GWB killed the Kyoto Treaty on Global Warming, for one. "So why was he so silent on the Senate's killing of Anwar Drilling, Southack?"
He wasn't silent, and Republicans don't control the Senate.
"So why is there no massive ABM development going on (not the token stuff we have) given the missile capability and proliferation to Arab countries?"
You haven't been paying attention. GWB's missile defense program is on track to DEPLOY our first defensive interceptors in 2004, just 2 years away. Test after test of our ABM development have been successsful, too.
"See Rumsfeld's comments. We are still subject to it, even though we are not a party to it."
Nonsense. Click on JohnHaung2's profile for an in depth debunking of that spiel.
"Legislators repeal, not the President."
Wrong. Guess again. OSHA's ergonomic rules were first created by Presidential Executive Order and they were repealed by a subsequent Presidential Executive Order (different Presidents, of course).
"Why has Bush told Ashcroft not to go after Scumbag and his cohorts?"
That's a non-sequitur. Pursuing Clinton with a Democratic-controlled Senate is pointless, anyway, unless your goal is to get Republican popularity CRUSHED in the press, and has nothing to do with supporting the 2nd Amendment as an INDIVIDUAL right.
"So why did Bush back Federalizng the Baggage Checkers?"
Because both the pro-gun and federalizing airport employee provisions were IN THE SAME BILL! Anti-Conservative nutcases would have railed against Bush as being anti-gun if he had veto'd that bill, and they rail against him for federalizing airport employees because he signed it. That's the way ideologues work; they damn you if you do something and they damn you if you don't.
"So why was Bush so silent on Pickering's rejection?"
GWB wasn't silent. He told the Senate to get Pickering out of committee and bring his confirmation to the Senate floor for a vote. They didn't. What do you want him to do, arrest Senators for being insolent?!
"So why is Bush spending money on social programs like a drunken liberal while we have a grave national security threat?"
One has nothing to do with the other, and it is CONGRESS that writes the final budget. All that the President does is SUGGEST a budget.
"Bush will sign the $180 billion Farm Bill "boondoggle"."
The farm bill has nothing to do with the Crusader artillery system, yet another non-sequitur. Moreover, the Farm Bill is the WRONG place to be fighting Congress when our goal is to replace Dashcle's Senate buddy in this year's election - IN A FARM STATE!
"Bush said he will increased Foreign Aid by 50%. Money to some will go to countries paying for terrorism--with USA $!"
Rubbish. Yet again you post a non-sequitur. Foreign "family planning" money is used for abortions. GWB killed that money giving us a clear pro-life victory (something Conservatives value, in case you hadn't noticed).
"Bush is backing Affirmative Action in the Adarand case."
Yet another non-sequitur. Affirmative Action has nothing to do with union dues and union worker rights, yet you feel free to mix unrelated topics in your pathtic attempts to slam a Conservative.
Legal immigrants deserve all legal rights and perks. If you don't like the rights and perks, have them killed for everyone, but don't blame GWB for being fair.
So what?! CFR hurts the Democrats more than Republicans, will be tossed out by the SCOTUS anyway, and signing it took away a major sledgehammer that the Left was using to bash GWB in the press. It's now a non-issue, and McCain can't give umpteen speaches criticizing GWB about it any longer. Signing CFR gets it to the SCOTUS. NOT signing that bill would have kept it in the press forever. Politics, Boy, politics!
It's ridiculous, bordering upon fanatical, to blame GWB for not vetoing Congress' bloated budgets when GWB is ASKING Congress for more money for our nation's Defense. In politics, one must GIVE in order to GET.
That's a lie. You can show no link to no reputable source for ILLEGAL aliens being welcomed by GWB as welfare recipients.
GWB secured the right to have failing schools closed and failing school administrators fired, and this was passed through a Democratic-controlled Congress. Did you think such things would be FREE?!
GWB didn't apologize for Guilianni's slam of Arabian money. Want to bet that Clinton and Gore would have?!
Netanyahu says that GWB is Israel's best friend in the world, but you are apparently more Israeli than Bibi and know better?! Get a life!
B. An outreach based upon patronization by people who refuse to show pride in their own heritage, will not and should not, appeal to anyone. It is contemptible. Let Rove talk more about George Washington and his values, and less about other peoples, and he will find those other people are more willing to listen. Meaningful respect for others starts with self-respect. But Rove is too much of a dysron to understand that.
C. For more on this, see Politics 2001--Lessons 2000.
D. To understand the Rove idiocy, get a copy of Tom Wolfe's Bonfire Of The Vanities, and read the scene when the two Yalies go up to Harlem to confront Wolfe's fictitious version of the Reverend Al Sharpton.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.