Black Conservative Republicans: Winning Elections ...

While this is primarily directed to black Conservative Republicans who are thinking of running for office sometime in the future, all are welcome to throw in their additions, criticisms, insights, corrections, etc.

The bulleted articles in my campaign plan are almost entirely tactical (designed to win a particular campaign) as opposed to being strategic (designed to effect a change in the political environment to make Conservative campaigns much more likely to succeed). The sole exceptions are the articles on race to the extent that you (the candidate) do not allow your outreach operation to only last the duration of the campaign ... and that you're not the only GOP candidate employing it. This is appropriate, because it does not take a genius to see that the GOP getting an extra five-to-ten percent of the minority community vote, especially the black vote, would consign the Democrats to near permanent (no pun intended) minority status. Obtaining this extra five-to-ten percent is thus a valid long-term goal. Unfortunately, the powers that be in the GOP have deemed this to be an effort that is not, as yet, worthwhile.

The last bulleted article focussed on countering Leftist organizations / individuals who are presumed to have some authority (which they can and will use against you) on certain issues, for example, civil rights. The article used the NAACP rather heavily as an example. There is a reason for this. The NAACP is perhaps the most powerful organization a Republican has to contend with. This is because its claim that it represents the black community has substantial validity, to the extent that it can actually be said that the NAACP almost leads the black community. So while they are totally predictable, its endorsements are not taken lightly because for many African Americans, the NAACP's word is golden. No organization has more credibility with the black community (and the Press) and, unfortunately, hardly any organization is more stridently anti-Republican.

The NAACP's televised campaign ads in election seasons are only the tip of the iceberg of its operations to ensure that a solid majority of black votes go to the Democrats. Through its many local chapters, it is linked to the vast majority of other Leftist "civil rights" organizations (i.e. the Urban League, etc), black churches, community centers, local radio stations and the various urban and rural black political machines all over the country, they have an informal campaigning network that is, for all intents and purposes, unparalleled. And one can be certain that whatever is being said about the Republican in the televised campaign advert is ten times kinder to the Republican that what is said at the lower informal level of the network. George W. Bush was accused of endorsing the actions of the James Byrd murderers in Jasper - TX on national television. That was nothing; in many local churches, the word from the pastor on down was that Bush has been confirmed as a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and his first act upon entering office would be to single-handedly repeal the 13th Amendment, re-introduce slavery and pack black people off to concentration camps.

I was in a predominantly black neighborhood right when Al Gore conceded on national television. And an unbelievably large number of people around me were literally shaking in terror when Gore left the podium. It was, quite frankly, amazing. In May of 2000, Bush had an approval rating in the black community as high as 35%, and he was running much higher in Texas. By November, Bush was one of the most hated men in the history of black America, a huge amount of black people all over the country convinced that he was about to launch a "Black Holocaust". All thanks to the NAACP and its network. Suffice it to say, it cannot be denied the NAACP (and other racial organizations like it) is integral to the Democrat Party's continued survival, and thus a serious obstacle for the GOP to overcome to build a following in the black community.

This is because the Democrat Party has long ceased to be a party in the sense that a political party must have an overarching philosophy and a set of principles that define it. Today, the Democrat Party is basically a coalition of high-powered special interest groups, each of which bring their own agenda to the table. Each interest group, in exchange for pledges of support for their agenda from the other interest groups in the coalition, pledge their own support for the agendas of their coalition partners. Which is why the NOW, an organization totally dominated by upper middle class white women who have no reason to oppose parents being able to choose their children's educational paths, is a strong opponent of school choice. In exchange for this support of the Teachers Unions' agenda, the NOW recieve financial support and assistance in getting their programs into the nation's schools. Another illustration: in return for the NAACP declaring any attempt to decrease the size of government to be racist, the Public Employee Unions stand four-square against any threat to racial preferences. And so it goes.

Let me give a more exact example of how this coalition operates, John Ashcroft. When he was first announced as the President's choice for Attorney General, the racial Left was silent. He was not considered anything other than a typical conservative Republican (for which they have no love lost), and they judged that launching a serious opposition campaign against him was not a worthwhile investment of political capital. Labor was silent for the same reason. However, to the feminist Left, he was one of the Senators who had proven to be an extremely dangerous opponent and so, was to be stopped and humiliated by all means necessary. They called in their chips on their coalition partners and soon enough, Ashcroft was not only an abortion opponent, he was a misogynist, racist, anti-worker, anti-environment, theocratic fascist who had no doubt been a party to lynchings, gang rapes and hunting many species of animal to extinction.

Another example is Linda Chavez; if she had been a leftist Democrat of President Gore's choosing, the fact that she had taken in an abused woman who happened to be an illegal immigrant would have been touted as a sign of compassion by the feminist and Hispanic Left, and woe betide any Republican who brings it up as a reason to oppose her. However, she was a conservative Republican nominated by President Bush whose positions were anathema to Labor. So, instead we had the spectacle of organizations such as LULAC and MALDEF quietly declaring that she was not "really" Hispanic and NOW declaring that she was not "really" a woman.

This Democrat Coalition arrangement has proven to be very profitable to the organizations within it. Each organization contributes something valuable. The feminists bring in the Leftist upper-class and elites with their cash, the environmentalists bring in the ignorant youth and media credibility, the unions bring in cash and a substantial amount of votes, the racial organizations bring in their supposed constituencies, etc. Each provides some measure of financial and moral support to the others, adding their moral "authority", however gained, to the others' agendas. This explains why, for example, a ban on Partial Birth Abortion is somehow "racist" and a ban on racial preferences is somehow "sexist" and "misogynist". And furthermore, together, they are able to get people elected who would direct money from the Treasury directly into their accounts to fund their disparate agendas. All this serves to make the coalition greater than the sum of its parts

However, the coalition remains viable if and only if each and every organization in the coalition pulls its own weight. The racial groups' primary duty is to bring in the required amount of votes from their constituents to ensure the success of the coalition's candidates. The instant the racial organizations are no longer able to assure their coalition partners of being able to deliver the votes of the minority community their days at the big boys' table are at an end. Because while all members of the coalition are responsible for bringing "constituents" to the polls, the racial groups are under a great deal more pressure to do so. Not only do they have to get people to the polls, they have to ensure that the Democrats get extremely huge majorities of the votes of their "constituents". The fact is that Democrats need at least 85+% of the black vote to remain competitive in most states around the country. Sometimes even more than that. This means the black Left cannot afford the possibility of any more black people feeling at liberty enough to even consider voting for Republicans. The NAACP's James Byrd ad reeked of that desperation. If George W. Bush had captured as paltry a percentage as 12% of the black vote, Al Gore would have lost in a landslide. If, as he had seemed likely to in May 2000, he had captured 35%, the NAACP's position at the coalition table would have been very seriously diminished.

So far, the NAACP has had an easy job of it. The GOP has not seen it fit to mount a strong encroachment of the NAACP's territory and the resultant paucity of black officials in the Republican Party has helped it paint the GOP as a Party in which black people are not welcome. A black Republican is therefore extremely dangerous in this context because he / she is by definition as strong a repudiation as possible of this picture. The NAACP is deeply terrified of such a person's potential to make black people take a second look at the GOP and cause some to even consider voting Republican. Their place in the coalition, from which they gain practically all their benefits, depends on making certain that never happens. Which is why the NAACP has spent ten times more resources attacking Clarence Thomas than it has spent attacking David Duke and Matt Hale put together. JC Watts is far more of a concern to the NAACP than George Dietz and Ward Connerly is considered far more dangerous than William Pierce.

As a result, Clarence Thomas is in very real danger of being killed if ever he shows his face in many black neighborhoods around the country. What Harry Belafonte says about Colin Powell is nothing compared to the things being said about black GOP officials in the less visible local levels where the racial members of the Democrat coalition mostly operate. Black Republicans are not only traitors, they are murderers, child abusers, and every other nasty perverted thing you can possibly imagine, etc. In fact, I heard a story upon the revelation that Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist may be retiring last year; that if the President names Justice Thomas as his choice to the Chief Justice position, the Georgia NAACP was prepared to level an accusation of child abuse at Justice Thomas. In any case, they probably would need not bother, in a worryingly large number of black neighborhoods, being a child molester seems to be far more forgivable than being a Republican.

The fact remains that the NAACP and others have invested a lot of time, money and effort to convince black people that being a Democrat and toeing the coalition party-line is part and parcel of being authentically black, and woe betide anyone who dares to think differently by whatever small degree. Corey Booker, a black Democrat who advocated school choice, tough anti-crime policies, and free market alternatives in solving problems in the black community of Newark (thereby offending the teachers unions, public employee unions and racial organizations, all super players in the coalition), found this out when he challenged the incumbent black Democrat Mayor of Newark, Sharpe James, a party-line stalwart, for the Mayoralty. In response, the NAACP, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et al. with the active participation of Sharpe James himself, launched a massive barrage of attacks at Booker, branding Booker a traitor to his race and viciously attacking him for his impudence in questioning the wisdom of his betters in the Democrat Party and NAACP. Although he denies it, Sharpe James actually told Booker: "You have to learn to be an African-American!" implying that being black is dependent on an adherence to certain views to be defined by others, among those views not challenging Sharpe James. It is therefore quite clear that the NAACP and its allied groups believe that an African American loses his / her "blackness" the instant they move anywhere to the right of Maxine Waters.The Congressional Hispanic Caucus adamance that Miguel Estrada is not truly Hispanic because he has the audacity to be a conservative is based around the same principle.

In the end, one thing is clear. These racial organizations' grip on the black (and Hispanic) community has to be broken. And I am convinced that the only people who can effect this are black Republicans running for office and using the bully pulpit this affords appropriately.

Unfortunately, as is apparent, this is something that demands that the conservative principle of color-blindness be bent, because any candidate other than a black candidate would lack the credibility necessary to do what needs to be done. Basically, what is being said is that while a white candidate can certainly make a competitive race of trying to get the black vote in a race, this would only be a tactical short-term victory. The black community needs to see a black Republican standing tall and proud and in no uncertain terms, defying the NAACP and its partners in intimidation and character assasination. The GOP can break the NAACP and other racialist organizations' hold on the black community only if the black community can be convinced that one can be (or vote for) a Conservative Republican and still have the best interests of African Americans at heart. JC Watts did his very best to find a way to get more black people to consider the GOP as a viable alternative, but was always wary of crossing the powers that be in the black community. Either way, he still got, and continues to get called an "Uncle Tom" and he still failed to make any headway. To his credit, he did not run scared or move Left to placate them ... but he also did not stand up for himself as forcefully as he could have.

The fact is, when it comes right down to it, black Republicans are the least electable people in the country. They have to work a lot harder than anybody else to even get a mention and they start off with extremely powerful enemies in the NAACP, etc. Black people tend to live in the more populous states and in more or less racially homogenous neighborhoods / districts, and black Republicans are not any different. The strongly Democrat nature of most black neighborhoods and / or black majority districts often means running as a Republican in local elections is a waste of time and money that the state GOP often can better spend elsewhere. A black Republican with an interest in getting into electoral politics therefore either has to move to a more GOP friendly, and thus less heavily black, area, where, of course, he / she would have to contend with many other people who have been there before him / her and who may already have a base and are well-known. Funny enough, unlike black Democrats, this often means that black Republicans are more likely to win statewide races than local ones because non-black voters are far more receptive of black Republicans, and they compose the majority of voters in every state of the union. But ironically, primary voters of both parties usually much prefer giving the Party nomination to someone with experience and thus a track record at the local level. Someone who has more or less paid his / her dues. All this serves to make elected black Republicans a very rare breed.

My belief is that black Republicans should go for the conventional wisdom designated "unwinnable for the GOP" seats, with a focus on the statewide level (or the US Congressional district level provided that there is a substantial enough number of non-black constituents in the district) as well as the winnable seats at whatever level. Every opportunity should be explored and if possible exploited. Republican Virginia State Delegate Winsome Sears, who successfully won the election for her seat in a district that is 58% black with substantial racial arsonist opposition has shown that it is far from certain that this will always be a fruitless venture. But note that she did it the only way open to her, the hard way. She did not enter the race with the thought that she was on an mission impossible and as a result studied the issue and then did everything she needed to do to win. In fact, her decision to literally walk her district and personally meet as many voters as she can strongly inspired the emphasis I put on the personal touch in the campaign plan, which was itself authored with the hope of seeing it being used in so-called "hostile" territory (like the black community as a whole), as well as "friendly" territory.

Understand that I admit that it would be the height of willful blindness to not acknowledge that the vast majority of these campaigns by black Republicans are very unlikely to be successful, at least initially and that could be quite a while. But it should be understood that each time a black Conservative Republican runs a credible campaign, especially a high profile one (i.e. Governor, Lieutenant Governor, U.S. Senator, State Attorney General, etc.), the strategic position of Conservatism and the GOP in the black community, and the credibility of black Republicans, improve. Either way, a black Republican who decides to implement my campaign plan in charting his course for election needs to add two more things. Vigilance and fire. Vigilance so that you would know what it is being said about you at the local level of the racial organizations in the black community. And fire because as with most bullies (what else is the ruthless demonization of people who simply choose to think for themselves and not toe the party line but bullying?), the racial organizations of the Democrat coalition and their spokesmen respect only force. Make them afraid of attacking you because of what you can do to them and their reputation. And that means that you have to be unafraid of crossing them.

A black candidate running a viable campaign for some high-profile office like Governor or United States Senator is going to draw attention. But while a black Democrat candidate would recieve oodles of free positive press and the full support of the NAACP and its cohorts, a black Republican would likely be faced with Press indifference and would catapult himself / herself to the top of the enemy lists of the NAACP and Co. If a black Republican should win the GOP nomination for any of the Gubernatorial or Senate races next year, the primary mission of the NAACP in 2004 would switch from defeating the President's re-election effort to destroying the upstart black candidate. Bush poses far less of a threat to their fortunes than a successful high-profile elected Republican who is black. And judging from the NAACP's continued hate campaigns against Clarence Thomas and other black GOP officials, they would stop at nothing until the transgressor drops out of the public sphere, humiliated and despised the country over. Nothing short of leaving the GOP and swearing eternal loyalty to the agendas of the Democrat coalition would placate them. So the only option you (as such a candidate) have is to go nuclear on them whenever they attack you.

If some Press-beloved "black leader" like Jesse Jackson, Julian Bond, Al Sharpton or someone of their ilk, gets up and calls your "blackness", integrity or character into question, in whatever venue such that it reaches your ears, do not hesitate to slash him / her to pieces as soon as possible on your website, in a press release and, if possible, in your own voice (a speech) in public. If he / she does it on the radio, try and get on that same show as soon as possible and not only present your case but denounce him / her as strongly as possible. Do not court disaster and serious disrespect in the black community, like so many Republicans, black and white, who, upon being told that Jesse Jackson called them Klansmen (or race traitors) at a rally somewhere, are too intimidated to defend themselves too strongly for fear of pissing him off even more, and give a weak response such as "Well, Reverend Jackson is entitled to his opinion ..."

Whenever a racial arsonist attacks you as being an "Uncle Tom", hurt him and hurt him bad. Respond by pointing out that when you were born there was no tattoo on your forehead or ass declaring you the property of the DNC, NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Bill Clinton, etc. Declare that you are unaware of any divine commandment instructing black people to obey the commands of the NAACP and / or their hand maidens. And then clearly and carefully point out the Democrats' myriad of failures in the inner cities after decades of their one-party control, and take the opportunity to plug your own platform and the GOP. Ask whoever the racial arsonist attacking you is to account for his / her precious Democrat Party's whereabouts all this time while black children were graduating from high school as functional illiterates, while black-on-black violence was escalating, etc. If he / she is a so-called "community leader", ask him / her where his / her voice was while all this was going on. Do not concede to the racial arsonists one millimeter of the moral high ground.

Point out the racial organizations' whorish relationship with the Teachers Unions that are destroying education, especially for poor minority children who have no options. Point out that one-third of all abortions involve black babies and that this does not bother the NAACP because their palms have been greased by the abortion lobby. And you are supposed to be the sell-out? Highlight and deride the ludicrousness of the racial arsonists positions; if you don't love Tom Daschle and hate Clarence Thomas, you hate black people. Challenge the arrogance that enables them to decide that they can define what it means to be black, to such an extent that Bill Clinton is supposed to be "more black" than JC Watts and Colin Powell. Put the racial arsonists on the defensive by explicitly letting them know that you will not be intimidated and wage a relentless slash and burn campaign on them until they back off.

You may not succeed in getting elected, but you will get respect, which would make you much more likely to succeed next time. Note that you might be able to win while ignoring the racial organizations' attacks ... but this would go a long way towards allowing them to negate the strategic importance of your victory. Again, Clarence Thomas is an apt example. The fact that a Republican president chose a black man to be a Supreme Court Justice was initially greeted with much joy in the black community, and his elevation could very well have caused a lot of black people to take another look at the GOP. But this was before the NAACP et al and their cohorts in the Democrat coalition went on a rampage to help destroy his reputation and make him a pariah in the black community. The strategic advantage he could have provided was lost because as a judicial nominee, Thomas was restricted in answering the ludicrous charges made against him. This would not apply to you and you should take full advantage of it. It is very possible that even if their efforts fail to torpedo your campaign, the racial arsonists could still end up with you being made a pariah in the black community, and thus your victory to an unacceptable extent, being made Pyrrhic a la Justice Thomas.

Mafree,

The problem is this: some Black candidates who run as Republicans get little or no support from the official GOP structure. This is especially true when they run in districts that are overwhelmingly Dem and/or with a strong incumbent. Sure, the odds are against a Black Pubbie winning in these areas but it looks worse when their own party, the one they take all manner of heat for belonging to, fails to support them.
I may run and lose but if I at least know that my party gave as much as it could to my candidacy I'd feel better about running under that party banner again. When that doesn't happen I'd seriously wonder if I should run under that party again. Wouldn't you?

I knew there was something I forgot! But I believe the most important thing is financial support. I am not exactly that knowledgable on campaign funding issues. But then these things are what black Conservative / GOP organizations, i.e. BAMPAC, NCNE, CORE, AARLC, Project 21, etc. are supposed to exist for.

But the problem is, I've never yet heard of any state's GOP (or Democrat) organization ever having "enough money" ... and so it's understandable that they'll prefer to spend money in areas where they believe a better hope of victory exists. This generally has nothing to do with race, i.e. the RNC would spend more money on a Governors' race in Kentucky than it would spend in West Virginia. Either way though, morale and moral (as opposed to financial) support from the Party is something you're owed and you should demand it. They should be made to understand that you are indeed taking an inordinate amount of heat for flying the GOP banner and their morale/ moral support is the least they can give you.

But all that notwithstanding, black districts are still the most hopeless cases, unfortunately. Which is why I placed a lot of emphasis on black Republicans aiming for statewide and not-too-black-dominated districts, a sort of top-down policy (kind of a reverse for Conservatism, eh?). Higher profile seats demand party support in the first place, so you won't even need to ask for it.

Anyway, after putting some much needed thought into it, I'm convinced that the hands-on and end-run approach is necessary here when it comes to getting funding. Rather than appealing to the state GOP, go directly to the groups and individuals that are, in some ways, the gatekeepers of the GOP's funding base and ask them directly to utilize their rolodexes for you. i.e. I'm talking about Stephen Moore, Grover Norquist, Bill Bennett, Alan Keyes, Clint Bolick, Newt Gingrich, JC Watts, Dick Armey, etc. and their organizations like the CSE, Club for Growth, NTU, AEI, NFRA, etc.

With the support of black (and other minority) Conservative organizations, explain to them the strategic importance of your campaign - a credible black GOP candidate for office, provided his / her campaign is run well (strong, smart, vigilant and unafraid), could be a major tactical asset to the entire ticket and a major strategic asset to the future of the GOP in the minority community of the state (maybe even the nation).

I thought that the Winsome Sears story illustrated this to a certain extent. Once it became apparent that her campaign had broken the 35% barrier of support in the black neighborhoods of her district, the Virginia GOP dumped almost $50,000 into her campaign coffers. In other words, once it looks like, you can win, the GOP would most likely come through. Unfortunately, the VA GOP recognized Sears potential too late to utilize her success for the benefit of her up-ballot ticket mates, Mark Earley and Jay Katzen, in her district. They got somewhere around 10% of the black vote in her district while she got 46% (which is amazing for a Republican of any color).

With this in mind, point out that if you're able to get up to 30% (or even somewhat less) of black voters in your constituency to consider you a viable alternative, you could provide a platform for your GOP ticket mates to get the black community to give them a second look i.e. when you invite them to come campaign for and with you. Make note of the fact that in most states, Democrats cannot win elections without at least 85+% of the black vote. So losing just 2% of the black vote could very easily mean disaster for them.

And again point out that even if you do not succeed in getting yourself elected and / or that extra 2% that would have helped your ticket mates; Rome was not built in a day. You would / could end up being a major building block. A huge factor in the GOP's weakness in the black community is their lack of presence after all, and it's time this was rectified. As for moral support, i.e. ticket mates campaigning with you, etc.

Either way, black GOP'ers need to start EARLY. There are "unwinnable for the GOP" U.S. Senate seats in CT, MD and OR that don't yet have active declared Republican challengers for 2004. A black Republican (Marvin Scott) is challenging Evan Bayh for Indiana's junior Senator's seat. He gets points for starting early ... but none for his inactivity (I may be wrong about this), so far, when it comes to building support.

Hope this goes some way towards addressing your concerns.

There are "unwinnable for the GOP" U.S. Senate seats in CT, MD and OR that don't yet have active declared Republican challengers for 2004.

In CT, we tried running Gary Franks in 1998, and it was a disaster. For whatever reasons, Franks wasn't able to attract many black voters, and Chris Dodd coasted to victory. But I agree that we'd be better of if he tried again and worked harder this time (his lackadaisical campaigning cost him his House seat in 1996), and maybe put a dent on the Dem's lock on the black vote in CT.

In MD, the state with the largest percentage of black voters outside the Deep South, there are several potential black GOP Senate candidates. Two of them, Lt. Gov. Steele and Ambassador Keyes, are strong conservatives (Keyes obviously being the more conservative of the two), and another is a moderate Dem. officeholder from Prince George's county (I believe his last name is Curry) who is considering jumping to the GOP and running against Mikulski. Keyes has run twice for the Senate, and failed miserably both times; I think MD is just too liberal a state for him (and this is coming from someone who supported Keyes' presidential candidacy in 2000). Steele would be a great choice, but I don't know if it makes sense for him to run while still being Lt. Gov. (if he loses, it may hust the Ehrlich/Steele 2006 reelection campaign). The Dem. who might switch isn't really a conservative, but may have a strong chance of knocking off Mikulski. If I had my druthers, I'd have the PG County partyswitcher run against Steny Hoyer for the House, Steele run for the Senate and Keyes campaign for conservatives nationwide.

As for OR, I'm still in shock that we don't have a strong challenger to Ron Wyden, who's far too liberal for a state where Bush trailed Gore by less than 1% in 2000. I know very little about OR politics, but it seems to me that 2002 gubernatorial candidate Kevin Mannix would be an ideal candidate, since he's got statewide name recognition and came within like 3% of winning the governorship last year. Oregon's got a tiny black population, so I don't see much of an upside to running a black candidate who doesn't have much name ID.

I didn't know Bayh challenger Marvin Scott was black, and agree he deserves points for starting early (I believe he announced his candidacy before the 2002 elections). Since no Republican heavyweight wants to take on the popular Bayh (they're all fighting for the gubernatorial nomination), a black candidate may give us a better chance to win than we would otherwise have. If the GOP can get just 20% of the black vote, not only could Scott pull off the upset of the year, but he could help knock off vulnerable Dem. incumbents Julia Carson and Baron Hill and give the GOP the governorship. But if Scott wants monetary support, he'd better start campaigning hard or else the GOP will keep this race in the "unwinnable" category.

African-Americans are one of the most religious and socially conservative constituencies in America, and the right messenger could increase the GOP's share of the black vote from 10% to 25% in no time flat. In my opinion, there are dozens of House seats where a black conservative could knock off a Dem. incumbent. The South is filled with seats where blacks are between 30-50% of the electorate and in which Bush got between 40-60% of the vote in 2000, and if the GOP House nominee could get as little as 20-25% of the black vote, he or she would be practically unbeatable. I agree with you, MAKnight, we need to support black conservatives wherever they run. This means supporting them not just in the seats I described above (in which black Republican candidates give us our best shot at victory), but also in safe Republican seats where we don't need the black vote to win. Richard Burr's very Republican House seat (which he's vacating to run for the Senate) comes readily to mind---we need to support Winston-Salem Alderman Vernon Robinson, who would show North Carolinians of all colors that it's okay for a black man to reveal he's a conservative. Vernon Robinson's election to the House could be a catalyst for runs by black conservatives in NC01 and NC12, which are between 45-50% black but in which Bush got between 40-45% of the vote in 2000, as well as in four 20-35% black districts in which Bush got between 48-54% of the vote but which have Democratic Congressmen.

BTW, in my earlier post about "unwinnable" Senate races, I forgot to mention the fact that Wyden, Dodd and Bayh have all voted against allowing Miguel Estrada's nomination to be voted upon, and a minority candidate could best exploit their unconstitutional actions.

From what I remember of Gary Franks, he was a "moderate" / Rockefeller Republican (the anti-thesis of an AuH₂0 Republican) ... basically a hair's breadth away from being an out and out RINO. "Moderates" (of all races) generally lack the fire in the blood necessary to motivate Conservatives and the courage that would be needed to not be afraid of pissing off the Press and the NAACP, NOW, etc. which is what in my humble opinion, is what is needed for a Republican to make it in hostile territory.

Anyway, It doesn't surprise me that Franks' simply being black didn't attract many black voters. You can be certain that the black Left made every effort to make the fact that he was a Republican to be interpreted in the black community (is it large?) of CT as proving that he was less black than Chris Dodd. Either way, I really do not think he should be run again. We need a more fiery and more conservative candidate.

As for MD, I don't know if it is wise for Michael Steele to run, given that he only won the Lieutenant Governorship only last year. Alan Keyes has run and lost before, and his reputation has already been seriously soiled by the racial arsonists. Curry (I think his first name is Wayne) simply does not deserve the nomination for the Senate race. Another Arlen Specter may be better than Mikulski but he will be even weaker than Franks was in CT. I think your idea of his running for Steny Hoyer's seat is a much better idea than him running for the Senate. Either way, considering how popular Mikulski is in Maryland, I confess to much hope of this seat being winnable.

Oregon's got a tiny black population, so I don't see much of an upside to running a black candidate who doesn't have much name ID.

While I pretty much echo your points about House seats, I'm more concerned about the "higher-profile" seats, i.e. Governor, Senator, etc. because I think that, uniquely for black Republicans, they're more winnable than the more local black dominated seats ... and the cool thing about that is that they're also much more strategically important. My stance is that it is therefore not that important that a black Republican run in a state / district that has a substantial black population. Note that I agree that it is extremely important that we up the number of black GOP Congressman (without resorting to preferences) and I am very excited about Vernon Robinson. But, quite frankly, black Congressmen are a dime a dozen and the GOP having one or two doesn't really do that much for us strategically. The NAACP and its cohorts can easily dismiss (and demonize) them as "tokens" and go about still asserting that "GOP = Ku Klux Klan".

But a black GOP Governor or United States Senator ... now that would seriously cramp their style. It doesn't matter whether he / she represents Maryland with its huge black population or North Dakota with its near non-existent black population. If the only black U.S. Senator(s) / Governor(s) are Republicans, the Democrats and their handmaidens have to work a lot harder to terrify the black community with tales of all white (and even black) Republicans in Congress being secret members of the American Nazi Party, who can't wait to start working on legislation to legalize lynching.

Secondly, sh*tty deal though it may be (life has never been fair, after all), all black Republicans running for any office have the additional task of broadcasting it loud and clear that one need not be a Democrat, support high taxes, Partial Birth Abortion, racial preferences or worship Jesse Jackson and Bill Clinton to be "really black". Estrada has it easy compared to what black Republicans routinely go through. This basically means that even if a black Republican loses, so long as he / she runs a credible race and uses the bully pulpit his / her campaign would afford him at every reasonable opportunity to smash into the local racial arsonists' hold on the minority community, he / she would have advanced the ball that much further.

A lot of sensible yet Democrat-voting black people I know tend to be conservative on social issues. A substantial number are extremely unhappy about high taxes and extremely skeptical of big Leftist government programs, because (like everyone else) most are smart enough to see that they seem to discourage individual responsibility and punish initiative and success. And I can't think of one of them who is happy about the state of public education or crime-control in poor black neighborhoods.

The only thing that seems to be stopping them from voting for the GOP is the fact that for well over three decades, they have been taught and told (by organizations / individuals they feel they owe some allegiance to, like the NAACP / John Lewis for their past actions on behalf of civil rights) that there is something intrinsically "wrong" about voting for someone with an 'R' next to his name. The Press plays a huge part in this as well.

Being rather outspoken about being a Conservative and a Republican, I've had to slap down a lot of idiots calling me an "Uncle Tom" (which I don't react quietly too), usually in front of a largely black audience. I haven't lost a single argument yet. Almost every opponent was forced to concede that I could very well have come to the decision that Conservatism is the best path to progress for the black community and that it doesn't make me any less black than they are. Practically after every time, when it's over, people come up to me and tell me that they've never really thought about it "that way" before. And most of them are extremely well educated.

There is a name for this in psychology, I think. It's almost as if they need some sort of permission to actually think it through and vote their minds. It reminds me of the story of the Emperor's New Clothes. Everyone pretended that the Emperor's "new clothes" were simply too beautiful for words until a child gave them leave to acknowledge what they were seeing with their own eyes, by pointing and exclaiming: "The Emperor's naked!". That, in other words, is the black Republican's most important job when running for office, apart from winning; to give that permission by pointing at the racial arsonists and their handmaidens and shouting that the "Emperor is naked!".

This is by far the best thing I have seen anywhere on the issue of converting the Black community to the GOP.

The GOP has either ignored Blacks, on the assumption that their resources are better spent elsewhere, or has pandered to Blacks – with predictable results.

Your ideas are great. They are required study – not only for Black GOP candidates – but also white ones.

Let me give you an insight that may help in the financial and activist area. My wife’s Republican Women’s club gave some money to Winsome Sears. They only gave a token amount. First, because they thought she was a long shot and second, because she did not appear personally before them. The next time around, she will get a lot more support.

Here’s a dirty little secret though. The local GOP District Committees are usually not much more than endorsement committees. Once you get the nod, you get the opportunity to raise your own money, get your own volunteers, plant your own signs and do all the other work to get you elected.

The real untapped resource of the GOP candidate are the women’s groups. They will provide money, polls workers, sign posters, literature drops, and all the other nuts and bolts of door-to-door politicking.

Combine this with a no-nonsense style of meeting the enemy that your advise, and we could have an unbeatable combination in a lot of districts.

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.