Again, you really need to take a flying leap.
What I said about THIS article is that it is stupid to ignore minority voters when the White vote is declining and Democrats have substantial numbers of hard corp White voters that are not going to change. Also, the dominant White voter opinion is to include minority participation and has been so for generations. That is why Thurmond and Wallace failed and that was at times when the vote was much Whiter an no PC to worry about either.
The idea that the GOP adopt an increase the White Vote strategy, "because winning the non-white vote is obviously not possible" would be perceived as racist is true and a far different matter than merely courting White voters as a segment of the general electorate. The GOP should reach out to all voters. It is not just a matter of perception and political angles. If the GOP stops reaching out to any major segment like Blacks or Hispanics you have Jim Crow and Racism right there.
You just can't resist it can you?
What I said about THIS article is that it is stupid to ignore minority voters when the White vote is declining and Democrats have substantial numbers of hard corp White voters that are not going to change.
Neither are the minority voters that the Dems have locked up. However, this brings up an important point. There are plenty of non-white majority regions in America. Why doesn't some enterprising Republican go into one of those communities and turn it into a GOP stronghold? South Texas, for example. Or Gary. If we're supposed to run a national campaign based on the idea of winning more of the non-white vote, then a test run should be carried out in a non-white region. If someone can come up with a strategy for conservative Republicans to win South Texas, Gary, Newark, or Detroit, then I'li concede that that's the way we should go.
Also, the dominant White voter opinion is to include minority participation and has been so for generations. That is why Thurmond and Wallace failed and that was at times when the vote was much Whiter an no PC to worry about either.
No one said minorities shouldn't participate. Everyone here admires Clarence Thomas and Bobby Jindal and Herman Cain. Again, you're confusing supporting white interests with racism. I don't recall anyone in this thread saying that we need a white party that tells everyone else to go to hell. What was said was that whites have interests and that it isn't racism to defend those interests when they're under racial attack.
We're so browbeaten by the scare word "racism" that we can't even secure the borders. Since most of the people entering illegally are non-white, it's considered "racism" to enforce the law. And it's considered "racism" to raise it as an issue. Meanwhile, groups like La Raza (The Race) openly support criminal invasion of our country, and openly brag about how they're going to eventually outnumber us.
The idea that the GOP adopt an increase the White Vote strategy, "because winning the non-white vote is obviously not possible" would be perceived as racist is true and a far different matter than merely courting White voters as a segment of the general electorate.
So why isn't it racist to adopt an increase the non-white vote strategy? You're correct that it's perceived as racist to court the white vote, but that's because we've allowed that idea to become accepted. It's also perceived as racist to oppose open borders, oppose affirmative action, oppose Barack Obama, oppose La Raza, and so forth.
The GOP should reach out to all voters. It is not just a matter of perception and political angles. If the GOP stops reaching out to any major segment like Blacks or Hispanics you have Jim Crow and Racism right there.
In general, there's nothing wrong with reaching out to all voters, but in reality there's no point spending inordinate amounts of time catering to people who vote against you in every election. In the face of the Democrats practicing overt racial identity politics, you're suggesting the GOP not even practice defense. Instead, they should pretend that racial blocks don't exist, or perhaps even cater to the same racial blocks that vote Democrat (otherwise, how do you suggest that we win that increased share of the non-white vote, because they've been totally non-responsive to our race-blind message)?
As I said earlier, we're in a bad situation. Thanks to the 1965 Immigration Bill, which the GOP supported, and open borders, which Bush & McCain & Company have supported, we're trapped in a suicidal spiral. The electorate is increasingly composed of racially-driven non-white voting blocks who are hostile to conservatism. Meanwhile, the shrinking white electorate is constantly berated for being "racist" if it does anything short of total capitulation.
I've agreed with you that a large segment of the white vote is a lost cause. That was clear when 43% voted for Reverend Wright's parishioner. It may not be possible to increase our share of the white vote because over 40% of whites are pod people, like in Invasion of the Body Snatchers, who have been replaced by a multicultural cypher. That's why I'm not optimistic about the future of the country, though I think going for an increased white vote is at least worth a shot.
But you seem to be quite optimistic that we can win more of the non-white vote. Given the fact that McCain was the La Raza Republican, and still got slaughtered in the Latino vote, not to mention that blacks always vote 90% or so (or more) for the Democrats, explain your strategy for winning those votes.