Miami-Dade Mayor Files for Senate Seat

Everybody should remember one thing:

The Republicans do best in statewide elections against female or minority Democratic candidates, especially in the South, when they run white male candidates. Hey, I know it doesn't sound cool and modern, but it's the best way to win, partly because the white male vote is the most fundamental Republican constituency. Running African-Americans and Latinos in white majority states is simply not smart, especially down South.

Many Republicans were very fearful during the Texas Senate race last year between John Cornyn and Ron Kirk. Kirk's popularity as the African-American mayor of Dallas was feared as cutting into white man John Cornyn's GOP base. Cornyn wasn't exciting, but he was a solid candidate. The end result was a GOP landslide (55%-43%) that surprised everybody (in the gubernatorial race, Rick Perry did the same to Latino Tony Sanchez). The best candidate to defeat Jean Carnahan in 2002 was Jim Talent, not another woman. I believe that the GOP would have done far better in the New Mexico gubernatorial race if they had run someone other than John Sanchez. Bill Richardson may have seemed unbeatable, but running Sanchez alienated and neutralised the white vote as the GOP's base and was a big mistake. In the end Richardson sounded more white than Sanchez (Richardson was half-white and half-Latino). In 1998's CA Senate race, Asian Matt Fong got dusted by that liberal lunatic Barbara Boxer in a race that was winnable. Suzie Terrel did well, but she failed to unseat Mary Landrieu in Louisiana. It's arguable, but a white male like Saxby Chambliss would probably have done better. I can go on: white Pataki crushing black McCall, male Romney upsetting female O'Brien in MA; and male Carcieri thrashing female York in RI.

There are exceptions, I know. For instance, Elizabeth Dole defeated Erskine Bowles in North Carolina, but Mrs. Dole is one of the most - if not the most - popular GOP women in America.

It may sound sexist and racist (it's not intended to), but it's simply good politics. If the Dems nominate Penelas, they might play right into the Republican hand. We need a solid white male candidate here, plain and simple. It's just a matter of whom? Foley is too liberal and McCollum is probably too lame. But there's got to be somebody out there, even if he's a darkhorse candidate like Saxby Chambliss or somebody with hidden potential.

Please read my post #21. I just think I have point here.

"I was in New York in '96 (lived in Miami 99-02) and never saw Art Teele at Republican events while I was down there."

I'm surprised. He is an elected official down there now, a Miami City Commissioner: http://www.ci.miami.fl.us/City_Officials/Comm_Teele/aetbio.html

"I've heard rumors that one of the Diaz de la Portilla brothers (or the mayor of Sweetwater, whose name eludes me) have been promised the nod by the County (Republican) Party. I'm not sure who the Dems will run, however."

Jose Diaz. I know Miguel Diaz de la Portilla ran for County Mayor last time and lost. They don't seem to have as much pull as they seem to think they do, especially when they couldn't get their kid brother, Renier, another term in the House.

"Although I no longer live down there, I hope a strong showing by GWB helps to take out Janet Reno protege Kathy Rundle. The GOP candidate Al Millian was WINNING in 2000 until the votes came in from the beach. Al is a good guy (and ex special forces to boot) who could run again."

Now we know why it's such a high-crime area with the Renobots still in control.

"My parents told me that THEIR congressman, Robert Wexler, will not be running. Its a shame, as Whiney Wexler would get killed outside of the Broward/Palm Beach axis of evil."

Wexler is a disgusting piece of vermin. Having seen him in action, he's got the personality of a Nazi. I can't believe they send trash like him to Washington.

"A Black Republican receiving the majority of the Black vote?! This is truly odd. However, much of Black population in Miami-Dade is made up of immigrants from Haiti. I think the GOP will have a better chance of appealing to Haitian immigrants than African-Americans who lived here for many generations. Unlike most Black Americans, Haitians are not scarred by the racial wounds of the Deep South."

It was an odd race where ideology/party went right out the window. Penelas, the liberal Cuban 'Rat, had solid support from Cuban Republicans, while Art Teele, the Conservative African-American Republican, had solid support from the Black Community. The situation was that Blacks felt they had practically no representation at the County level (disproportionate to their numbers), so Teele was supported on that basis, and Cubans wanted to protect themselves by putting on of their own in the Mayorship. It went entirely along ethnic lines, and non-Hispanic Whites cast the deciding vote and went with Penelas. Whether that would happen again, I don't know.

BTW, the first Black Haitian-American Mayor in Florida was elected in North Miami, Josaphat 'Joe' Celestin. Celestin is a Republican.

If Penelas wins the nod, I'd rather see Martinez face him, of course. At this point, you need to follow the money. Whomever raises the most is the likely nominee, and I don't know who that is right now on the 'Rat side.

"Thanks. I knew that and that he also had some messy domestic problems. I just wondered what he has been doing since. I was impressed by him, the way he stood up and supported Elian to stay in the US, against Reno's storm troopers, unfortunately through the treachury of his chief of police, I think, she succeeded. I think his domestic problems and the accusations, true or not, probably finished his career, unfortunately. I am just wondering what he has been doing since he is no longer mayor."

I agree that I, too, was very impressed with him during the Elian crisis is standing firm against the Clinton-Reno Nazi Regime (I don't use that characterization likely, that was perhaps the most bone-chilling day in the last 20 years in this country until 9/11/2001, when it appeared we truly lived in a police state taking our marching orders from bloodthirsty dictators in Havana). He was going to have a tough time with reelection, anyway (if you'll recall the shenanigans between himself and Xavier Suarez in the previous Mayoral contest), but the domestic abuse charges made it worse. Right now, I'm not sure what he's doing. Just laying law, probably best for him. Perhaps after some years have passed, he might try for a reentry into politics. I just hope he's able to get a handle on the domestic side of things, though. Of course, were he a 'Rat, that wouldn't particularly matter, but we expect far better conduct from our GOP officials.

It's not Jeb's time, yet. I'd like to see him run against Nelson when his term ends in '06, but he may be positioning himself to succeed Dubya in '08.

I think an 80-year-old woman's breasts are far more exciting than Foley & McCollum.

Then again, I like stale milk too.

Trace

"The Republicans do best in statewide elections against female or minority Democratic candidates, especially in the South, when they run white male candidates. Hey, I know it doesn't sound cool and modern, but it's the best way to win, partly because the white male vote is the most fundamental Republican constituency. Running African-Americans and Latinos in white majority states is simply not smart, especially down South."

This may win us votes for the short term, but this is a California strategy, and will end up costing us in the long term. We're going to have to reach out beyond the White male.

"Many Republicans were very fearful during the Texas Senate race last year between John Cornyn and Ron Kirk. Kirk's popularity as the African-American mayor of Dallas was feared as cutting into white man John Cornyn's GOP base. Cornyn wasn't exciting, but he was a solid candidate. The end result was a GOP landslide (55%-43%) that surprised everybody (in the gubernatorial race, Rick Perry did the same to Latino Tony Sanchez)."

You're forgetting something here. The media was making mountains out of the 'Rats "Dream Team" ticket, which only looked good on paper and not much else. Kirk was still a big-city Mayor, and that was not very appealing outside urban areas (especially in TX) and Cornyn had already won statewide. Perry was the incumbent and was doing a fairly decent job and there wasn't the momentum to dump him. Remember, too, that there was a split in the 'Rat side because of the bitter primary contest between Sanchez and Morales, the former AG. Morales endorsed Perry. Indeed, I thought the whole thing would be a much closer race from the way the media was covering it, but it wasn't at all. It was an electoral disaster for the 'Rats (even a Supreme Court seat they were expected to easily win after a White guy unceremoniously defeated an appointed Hispanic GOPer in a very ugly contest, still won). Ignored in the media was that we sent 3 (count 'em, 3) African-American Republicans to statewide office last November in TX, a record.

"The best candidate to defeat Jean Carnahan in 2002 was Jim Talent, not another woman."

I actually didn't think Jo Ann Emerson was a bad potential candidate, but her heart wasn't in the race. Many thought after Talent's narrow (and unexpected loss) for Governor in '00 that there was no way he could beat the Widder Carnahan, but she was woefully not up to the job and shot herself in the foot taking the lead from Daschle. Had she exercised some independence, she might very well still be sitting in the seat today. Talent's talents would've been lost in Jefferson City, anyway, and there may have been a reason from "up above" that he lost the Governorship. He was rewarded with something better.

"I believe that the GOP would have done far better in the New Mexico gubernatorial race if they had run someone other than John Sanchez. Bill Richardson may have seemed unbeatable, but running Sanchez alienated and neutralised the white vote as the GOP's base and was a big mistake. In the end Richardson sounded more white than Sanchez (Richardson was half-white and half-Latino)."

I have to comment on this. I was backing Sanchez in this race because he was an impressive gentleman, race not withstanding. He knocked off a sitting 'Rat Speaker in his own balliwick. Sanchez did all the hard work and managed to beat the sitting Lieutenant-Governor (Walt Bradley, a white guy) in the primary. Saying that, however, Sanchez was not well-known around the state, and it was going to be an uphill battle against Richardson, who had been not only annointed by the media as the next Governor, but had been running for some time and raised big time $$. Sanchez was brutally attacked in the media, and he scarcely had the resources to fight back. Now, had Bradley won the nod, he would've similarly been whacked - for having beaten an up 'n coming Hispanic ! I can't see Bradley having done much better than Sanchez. This race was practically unwinnable for us (but saying that, Richardson's win was a double-edged sword for him, being annointed as he was, he brought in EXTREMELY high expectations for his tenure, and if he fails to deliver, noting that he seems to be preoccupied with more international matters, the state might sour on him).

"In 1998's CA Senate race, Asian Matt Fong got dusted by that liberal lunatic Barbara Boxer in a race that was winnable."

I've analyzed that race endlessly, and Fong should've been a strong candidate, but he didn't help himself with appearing to waffle on key issues towards the end (and Boxer is perhaps the ugliest campaigner in the Senate, a vicious viper and a truly hateful person). Fong had won statewide office before (as had his mother as a 'Rat) and we had considerable success back in '76 with the stunning win of Sam Hayakawa over incumbent 'Rat John Tunney. We absolutely need to be running more non-Caucasians in CA for office and focus on repairing the damage done by RINO Pete Wilson between the GOP and the Hispanic community.

"Suzie Terrel did well, but she failed to unseat Mary Landrieu in Louisiana. It's arguable, but a white male like Saxby Chambliss would probably have done better."

It is arguable. You forget about the fraud there. Most of us know who won in '96, and it wasn't Senator Brown Roots. I'm also backing Bobby Jindal for the Governorship this year, a young Indian-Asian.

"I can go on: white Pataki crushing black McCall,"

You forgot the damaging primary for the 'Rats that featured a Cuomo, which spelled disaster for McCall (and Pataki was carefully cultivating support in the non-White community).

"male Romney upsetting female O'Brien in MA;"

Last minute jitters on the part of MA voters to entrust complete government control to the 'Rats (and O'Brien's obnoxious behavior during the debates didn't help her).

"and male Carcieri thrashing female York in RI."

The race was over as soon as Myrthie won the 'Rat nod over AG Shelly Whitehouse, the annointed candidate. She was a two-time loser that was way too leftist for leftist Rhode Island. It had nothing to do with gender. I hope Myrthie keeps running for the next 50 years, she's the GOP's good luck charm.

"I think an 80-year-old woman's breasts are far more exciting than Foley & McCollum."

You may be right on that one. :-)

"Then again, I like stale milk too."

Well, you are from Maryland. :-)

Gallagher or Charlie Christ could probably beat Pinellas.

I agree 100%. McCollum is a loser in the general.

I expected that Gallagher would jump in. Do you think he might yet?

I have no idea about Gallagher. I heard he backed McCain though so I don't want him to be the nominee.

I thought Milligan was the only Cabinet member who backed McCain.
I just hope we can put up someone better than McCollum or Foley. Personally, I'd like to see Lincoln Diaz-Ballart.

LOL. Damned proofreading.

Thank you for your reply. I respect your comments – I really do. However, I strongly feel that your assertions are, at best, only partially correct.

“This may win us votes for the short term, but this is a California strategy, and will end up costing us in the long term. We're going to have to reach out beyond the white male.”

Your remarks echo the oft-expressed sentiment that white males are dying political breed and should be replaced with a more modernistic-styled candidate. Yet, on both sides of the aisle, it’s shocking to see how few examples there are of this brave new genre of politicians. You must realise that I’m also talking in the context of when a Democrat runs a non-white male candidate for office. When 2 white males of both political persuasions are pitted against each other, the story is sometimes different.

Even still, the truth is that racial politics are far more complicated than what exit polls and other such data would lead us to believe. A trend that I feel is occurring amongst minority groups is one of less identification with a politician based solely on the colour of their skin. It didn’t used to be that way, but, more and more, Latinos, in particular, (and, to a lesser degree blacks), seem to be more interested in the views and ideas of the politician more than his ethnicity. A further complicating factor that’s rarely discussed is that many Hispanics regard themselves as both whites and Hispanics simultaneously, creating havoc for staticians trying to track the voting trends and habits of this constituency in key states like Texas, Florida and California. I guess what I’m trying to say is that many Hispanics are closer to whites than any other minority group, making them more amenable to a white candidate’s outreach. In the Texas races of 2002, for instance, I remember reading that at least some Hispanics were unimpressed by Tony Sanchez because he was running on the color of his skin rather than on the content of his character or political views. Tony Sanchez, as you know, badly outspent Rick Perry but was crushed in the general election 58%-40%. Don’t forget that, before George W. Bush, incumbent governors in Texas didn’t have an easy time getting re-elected.

“I was backing Sanchez in this race because he was an impressive gentleman, race not withstanding. He knocked off a sitting 'Rat Speaker in his own balliwick. Sanchez did all the hard work and managed to beat the sitting Lieutenant-Governor (Walt Bradley, a white guy) in the primary. Saying that, however, Sanchez was not well-known around the state, and it was going to be an uphill battle against Richardson, who had been not only annointed by the media as the next Governor, but had been running for some time and raised big time $$. Sanchez was brutally attacked in the media, and he scarcely had the resources to fight back. Now, had Bradley won the nod, he would've similarly been whacked - for having beaten an up 'n coming Hispanic ! I can't see Bradley having done much better than Sanchez.”

I must take issue with you here. Maybe Walt Bradley wasn’t the right candidate, I don’t know, but Sanchez lost big time in an election where Republicans were winning handsomely on other spots on the ballot. A veteran (white) Republican senator defeated a Latino candidate by a near 2-1 margin, and the GOP retained a 2-1 advantage in the state’s congressional delegation (with white candidates). The way the race appeared to me (and probably to many white voters in New Mexico) was that Sanchez was running because he was a Latino and wanted to upstage Richardson in the ethnicity department. It made nice headlines, but it’s a lousy way to appear to the general populace. So, both the Sanchez’s went down BIG in the Southwest (TX and NM) at the same time. Oddly, whites are probably more likely to be racially sensitive about voting for non-white candidates to major statewide offices, because it’s something that is so foreign to them. In all the states we’re talking about, whites are still either the majority or the plurality, and, when the GOP runs a non-white candidate, they’re turning their back on a huge ethnic group that is more likely to vote for their party than ANY other ethnic group.

“I actually didn't think Jo Ann Emerson was a bad potential candidate, but her heart wasn't in the race.”

“It is arguable. You forget about the fraud there. Most of us know who won in '96, and it wasn't Senator Brown Roots. I'm also backing Bobby Jindal for the Governorship this year, a young Indian-Asian.”

“Last minute jitters on the part of MA voters to entrust complete government control to the 'Rats (and O'Brien's obnoxious behavior during the debates didn't help her).”

“The race was over as soon as Myrthie won the 'Rat nod over AG Shelly Whitehouse, the annointed candidate. She was a two-time loser that was way too leftist for leftist Rhode Island. It had nothing to do with gender. I hope Myrthie keeps running for the next 50 years, she's the GOP's good luck charm.”

All the above remarks are intended to discredit the fairly wide array of examples I’ve given. I’m afraid I can’t really agree with you on most of them. You can add Bob Ehrlich’s victory over Kathleen Townsend in Maryland to the list of my examples. I have to stand by my point. I know you want to reinforce your point, but, if you think about it, you’ll realise the GOP doesn’t have a very long list of success stories for minority or female candidates in major statewide positions. Winning a few Supreme Court seats in Texas for African-Americans is one thing, but winning the state governorship or a US Senate seat is quite another.

“We absolutely need to be running more non-Caucasians in CA for office and focus on repairing the damage done by RINO Pete Wilson between the GOP and the Hispanic community.”

I must disagree here. Don’t forget that Caucasians still constitute the largest ethnic group in California (though not a majority). Even with white males, exit polls show that the GOP is only splitting the white vote with the Dems in the state. This underscores the real problem that Republicans have in the Golden State. The LA Times Exit Poll is probably the most reliable exit poll, and it showed that Bush beat Gore only 49%-47% amongst whites, while Simon beat Davis by 46%-43% amongst whites (who still constitute more than 70% of the electorate). Increasing Hispanic share wouldn’t have affected this much, so an improvement with whites is really needed. But both of these races had white men from both parties pitted against each other, thus neutralising the GOP’s white advantage. In the race between Boxer and the GOP nominee in 2004, though, it’s a bit of different story. While running some Hispanics isn’t a bad idea in California, I don’t think that the time is at all ripe yet to challenge Boxer with a minority. As a Jewish woman, she’s a minority herself, and this is where I feel that a solid, white male candidate has the best chance in defeating her.

"Thank you for your reply. I respect your comments – I really do. However, I strongly feel that your assertions are, at best, only partially correct."

There's a few other points I'll address here...

"Your remarks echo the oft-expressed sentiment that white males are dying political breed and should be replaced with a more modernistic-styled candidate. Yet, on both sides of the aisle, it’s shocking to see how few examples there are of this brave new genre of politicians. You must realise that I’m also talking in the context of when a Democrat runs a non-white male candidate for office. When 2 white males of both political persuasions are pitted against each other, the story is sometimes different."

If that was my assertion, I didn't mean to come off sounding entirely like that. I don't want to say White male candidates are a dying breed, but merely one whose percentages will decline by a bit over the years to come. I believe we should actively embrace and be a leader in that diversification.

"Even still, the truth is that racial politics are far more complicated than what exit polls and other such data would lead us to believe. A trend that I feel is occurring amongst minority groups is one of less identification with a politician based solely on the colour of their skin. It didn’t used to be that way, but, more and more, Latinos, in particular, (and, to a lesser degree blacks), seem to be more interested in the views and ideas of the politician more than his ethnicity. A further complicating factor that’s rarely discussed is that many Hispanics regard themselves as both whites and Hispanics simultaneously, creating havoc for staticians trying to track the voting trends and habits of this constituency in key states like Texas, Florida and California. I guess what I’m trying to say is that many Hispanics are closer to whites than any other minority group, making them more amenable to a white candidate’s outreach."

I won't contest this, although these groups still, by and large, prefer to elect someone that looks like them (of course, with the exception of that Miami-Dade '96 Mayoral, if given the choice between a White Dem and a non-White Republican, their own partisan preference will cause them to go with the former in most contests. A prime example of that was Gary, Indiana a few years ago. It's about a 90% Black city and when the previous Mayor retired, the 2 leading candidates were a White Dem (one of the few Whites left) and a Black Republican. They voted for the White Dem by a fairly hefty margin, a considerable disappointment).

"In the Texas races of 2002, for instance, I remember reading that at least some Hispanics were unimpressed by Tony Sanchez because he was running on the color of his skin rather than on the content of his character or political views."

Some perhaps, but his overall campaigning style left a lot to be desired. I think he harmed the overall ticket, perhaps costing the Dems the Lieutenant-Governorship (the lone White guy running on the "Dream Ticket").

"Tony Sanchez, as you know, badly outspent Rick Perry but was crushed in the general election 58%-40%. Don’t forget that, before George W. Bush, incumbent governors in Texas didn’t have an easy time getting re-elected."

After the '60s at least, it's been a tumultuous period. Did Sanchez actually outspend Perry in the general ? He may have done so overall counting both primary and general, but I didn't think the latter.

=NM=

"I must take issue with you here. Maybe Walt Bradley wasn’t the right candidate, I don’t know, but Sanchez lost big time in an election where Republicans were winning handsomely on other spots on the ballot."

You left out the key word, and that word is "incumbents." The GOP only managed to snag a statewide office outright (an open seat), and that was for Lands Commissioner, while holding the GOP-leaning Skeen seat.

"A veteran (white) Republican senator defeated a Latino candidate by a near 2-1 margin,"

Pete Domenici, perhaps the most revered statewide officeholder. Many Hispanics have supported Domenici throughout the years because #1, he's Catholic, and #2, because his name sounds fairly close to being Hispanic (Italian, in his case), and they acknowledge him as being one of their own. In the case of Gloria Chavez Tristani, granddaughter of the legendary former Senator, her campaign never really took off (and she had never previously won office) and she wasn't able to tie herself to Bill Richardson.

"and the GOP retained a 2-1 advantage in the state’s congressional delegation (with white candidates)."

And barely. I still think it remains perilous to keep Heather Wilson (who looks more like a Congresswoman from her native New Hampshire than NM) who BARELY wins each time in this marginal seat. We've held the Albuquerque seat since 1968, and we should continue to hold it, but that seat's most successful holder of it was, you guessed it, a Hispanic/Native American Republican named Manuel Lujan (Bush, Sr's Interior Secretary). Sanchez himself would be a fine successor for the seat as a native of Albuquerque. I was also a bit wary in the case of Skeen's seat as well, but we still seemed to do alright, but the next time it opens, I hope we similarly nominate a Hispanic. It is interesting to note that New Mexico, with the highest percentage of Hispanics in the nation, has an all-White delegation for both parties.

"The way the race appeared to me (and probably to many white voters in New Mexico) was that Sanchez was running because he was a Latino and wanted to upstage Richardson in the ethnicity department. It made nice headlines, but it’s a lousy way to appear to the general populace. So, both the Sanchez’s went down BIG in the Southwest (TX and NM) at the same time. Oddly, whites are probably more likely to be racially sensitive about voting for non-white candidates to major statewide offices, because it’s something that is so foreign to them. In all the states we’re talking about, whites are still either the majority or the plurality, and, when the GOP runs a non-white candidate, they’re turning their back on a huge ethnic group that is more likely to vote for their party than ANY other ethnic group."

New Mexico, it must be said, has not had the kind of hang-ups that other states have had with electing non-Caucasians, since they've been electing Hispanics to office since the 19th Century. I still say Sanchez was a good candidate, but he had way too much going against him (openly hostile media, and vastly outspent). I don't think, again, that anyone could've beaten Richardson under those circumstances, regardless of gender or race. The whole race was a referendum on Richardson, and he didn't even have any real coattails despite his margin of victory (most every other Dem officeholder was an incumbent).

"All the above remarks are intended to discredit the fairly wide array of examples I’ve given. I’m afraid I can’t really agree with you on most of them."

My comments on those races were intended to show that these weren't really gender or racial-driven contests, they were far more complex than that, those issue were more secondary than anything else. One race you didn't cite, and I thought it very interesting, was the Nevada Governorship. For the first time ever, the Dems put up a distinguished and long-serving State Senator named Joe Neal against Gov. Guinn. Neal is African-American, and the Dems treated him like dirt (and the media utterly ignored him). Neal would later do something in the campaign to utterly infuriate his fellow Dems. He had the brass cajones to endorse the Black Republican, Lynette Boggs-McDonald, running against Shelley Berkley in the 1st US House seat, saying he thought it important that the state have a more diverse representation and that Mrs. Boggs-McDonald was an excellent choice. This entire story escaped national attention, for obvious reasons.

"You can add Bob Ehrlich’s victory over Kathleen Townsend in Maryland to the list of my examples."

Another example here, but this was not a gender race despite its appearance. That race boiled down to a Kennedy carrying the mantle of a hugely unpopular Governor in a state that hadn't elected a Republican in 36 years and the innumerable gaffes she made during the campaign, especially regarding a running mate. Ehrlich's strategy of outreach, putting an African-American (more Conservative than Ehrlich !) as his #2, and reaching out to disgruntled elements in the Black community that were given a raw deal by the White Dem establishment enabled his win to happen. It's this kind of strategy that is needed in states that we are at a decided disadvantage. It's funny, in this race, I'd consider Townsend to have been the "White male" and Ehrlich was a de facto "minority."

"I have to stand by my point. I know you want to reinforce your point, but, if you think about it, you’ll realise the GOP doesn’t have a very long list of success stories for minority or female candidates in major statewide positions. Winning a few Supreme Court seats in Texas for African-Americans is one thing, but winning the state governorship or a US Senate seat is quite another."

And you'll get no argument there. But we haven't been doing a very good job in building up the farm team, either. The 'Rats have a nice farm team, but most of them are in no position to go to the majors (way too fringy), and those that are, the "coaches" are too scared to send 'em in. We often aren't always forthcoming with strong support, either. We should be bold and preempt the 'Rats in building up and supporting our non-White male candidates. One place to keep an eye on is Ohio. Gov. Taft's successor should be Ken Blackwell, but I'm worried the GOP might try and yank the rug out from under him and have another White statewide officeholder get the nomination. They pull that nonsense over perhaps the most qualified Black man in Ohio history to lead the state, and that will give our party a "black eye" (pun unintended) for years to come.

Re: CA

"I must disagree here. Don’t forget that Caucasians still constitute the largest ethnic group in California (though not a majority). Even with white males, exit polls show that the GOP is only splitting the white vote with the Dems in the state. This underscores the real problem that Republicans have in the Golden State. The LA Times Exit Poll is probably the most reliable exit poll, and it showed that Bush beat Gore only 49%-47% amongst whites, while Simon beat Davis by 46%-43% amongst whites (who still constitute more than 70% of the electorate). Increasing Hispanic share wouldn’t have affected this much, so an improvement with whites is really needed. But both of these races had white men from both parties pitted against each other, thus neutralising the GOP’s white advantage. In the race between Boxer and the GOP nominee in 2004, though, it’s a bit of different story. While running some Hispanics isn’t a bad idea in California, I don’t think that the time is at all ripe yet to challenge Boxer with a minority. As a Jewish woman, she’s a minority herself, and this is where I feel that a solid, white male candidate has the best chance in defeating her."

But you know and I know you can't make a straight-out appeal for the "White" vote. Pete Wilson did that in '94, and while it did work, the costs our party paid for that victory were quite dear. Also, don't forget that a lot of CA Whites are, for lack of a better word, are nuts. These are the San Francisco and Hollyweird types and these people are so far beyond reach, you can just forget it. I think we should strongly focus on repairing the damage that Wilson did with an appeal to the Hispanic and Asian communities (I'd add Black to that, despite California Blacks being about the hardest in the states to reach after perhaps NY, but Blacks in CA are being rendered more and more politically impotent and irrelevent (their zenith of power came in the '70s and '80s with Tom Bradley as the shining star). I can easily see within 15 years there being no Black Dem officeholders on the Congressional level (all having been replaced with Hispanics)). Personally, I'm not sure who is the best person to face off against Boxer. We've tried a White guy (Herschensohn) and an Asian guy (Fong). There was talk of a White Jewish guy (Dennis Prager), but he just declined to run. There was talk of Condoleezza Rice herself, but her time in CA was in 1991 when Wilson should've appointed her (instead of, yup, another White guy, John Seymour) to his Senate seat. Returning there to face Boxer would be a demotion. There's also 2 Congressmen potentially gearing up to run, but both are not too spectacular, first being Doug Ose (Tom Campbell, anyone ?), and Darrell Issa (a White Arab), who was a bust against Fong in the '98 primary. Issa has money, but I just can't see him winning (and there'd be a big issue made of his ethnic background, an Arab running against a Jew. Boxer would exploit that big time, and get away with it). Who does that leave ? Pete Wilson ? (do you know this guy actually said he might consider, now about 70 years old) ? Wilson's name on the ballot will destroy any and all outreach we've made to Hispanics. That leaves who the White House is starting to build support for, and that is a Hispanic Woman, none other than the Treasurer of the US, Rosario Marin. Ms. Marin has some experience with winning local office in a heavily Dem area, and that's a plus, but is she ready for prime time ? We don't know. If I were Dubya running in CA next year, I'd be more comfortable running with Ms. Marin as the Senate nominee than Doug Ose or (gasp !) Pete Wilson. Sometimes it really does boil down to appearances (it's too bad it has to be that way, but that's just how it is in this era).

Thank you for your remarks.

"If that was my assertion, I didn't mean to come off sounding entirely like that. I don't want to say White male candidates are a dying breed, but merely one whose percentages will decline by a bit over the years to come. I believe we should actively embrace and be a leader in that diversification."

Likewise, I don't want to sound like I'm anti-minority, either. My main point on race is that the white population in most of the states were talking about here is simply too large to ignore. And while many of us may regret it, whites in states like Texas and Florida (and even California, to a lesser degree) are by no means entirely colorblind in their voting habits.

"Did Sanchez actually outspend Perry in the general?"

I've been told that Sanchez outspent Perry 3 to 1, though I'm not sure the timing parmaters. I'm quite sure that in the general election Perry was outspent. One thing we do need realise is that the Democrats did really try to win the gubernatorial and senate races in Texas in 2002, insisting right to the very end that they were winnable (some Dems actually were claiming that they were pretty sure Kirk would win, though I never bought that).

"And barely. I still think it remains perilous to keep Heather Wilson (who looks more like a Congresswoman from her native New Hampshire than NM) who BARELY wins each time in this marginal seat. We've held the Albuquerque seat since 1968, and we should continue to hold it, but that seat's most successful holder of it was, you guessed it, a Hispanic/Native American Republican named Manuel Lujan (Bush, Sr's Interior Secretary). Sanchez himself would be a fine successor for the seat as a native of Albuquerque. I was also a bit wary in the case of Skeen's seat as well, but we still seemed to do alright, but the next time it opens, I hope we similarly nominate a Hispanic. It is interesting to note that New Mexico, with the highest percentage of Hispanics in the nation, has an all-White delegation for both parties."

It is interesting that it's all white. Even more interesting, the 2 Rep districts are the most Latino. You're right about Heather Wilson barely winning each time, though it's interesting that she did significantly better in 2002 (55%-45%) than she did in either 1998 (46%-43%) or 2000 (47%-46%), even though Bill Richardson was at the head of the ticket. Off the record, I do think, if we had decent data to refer to, we'd find that a growing percentage of Latinos are voting Republican.

"My comments on those races were intended to show that these weren't really gender or racial-driven contests, they were far more complex than that, those issue were more secondary than anything else."

I understand and respect your opinion, but I just don't think that it's entirel coincidence that the winner in all of these cases was the white male.

"But you know and I know you can't make a straight-out appeal for the "White" vote. Pete Wilson did that in '94, and while it did work, the costs our party paid for that victory were quite dear. Also, don't forget that a lot of CA Whites are, for lack of a better word, are nuts."

I agree. I'm by no means saying that whites should run on the platform of being anti-Hispanic. That would be an egregious mistake. And, yes, you're absolutely right, many CA whites are brutish folk, some of the most spiritless in the nation. When I used to live there as a kid, I had very few friends, mainly because I didn't want to be friends with people of that caliber. You're also right about CA blacks. Their influence is definitely in decline in the Golden State - they only constitute 6.7% of the population in the state now! Considering that most blacks have an innate hatred for the Republican Party, regardless of what they do, I'd say that this is good for the future prospects of the GOP in the state.

"I think we should strongly focus on repairing the damage that Wilson did with an appeal to the Hispanic and Asian communities"

It's a very difficult situation in the Golden State, because nobody seems to much like the GOP anymore. There's no GOP statewide officeholders, for the first time since about 1882. Even heavily Democratic states like Massachusetts and Rhode Island can't say that. Republican fortunes have headed far south in California, but I don't think it's terminal. The question is: How does the GOP appeal to Asians and Hispanics without ignoring whites, who aren't exactly enamored with their party? Considering that whites are still the largest racial group, I think they need to be the prime target (as undesirable as this state's whites are). That said, I think that white candidates should be fielded in the most important statewide races, but they must be more to Hispanics and Asians than they have been in the past. It may sound a bit fruity, but I really think it's the best path to victory.

"Personally, I'm not sure who is the best person to face off against Boxer. We've tried a White guy (Herschensohn) and an Asian guy (Fong)."

With Boxer, I strongly feel that a white male is the best candidate. It's going to be tough, but she's not near as popular as Diane Feinstein. What we need, though, is a candidate who isn't so busy backpedaling on his conservative views, that the voters would rather stick with the incumbent sleazo. Some people mentioned that Michael Reagan might run, although I can't help but wonder if his association with Newsmax might hurt him. Whoever it is, he needs to be strong (though not obnoxious) and unapologetic. He mustn't allow himself to be on the defensive like Bill Simon did in 2002. Boxer is the incumbent with the lousy record. She's devilish and mean, but a strong white guy might just call her bluff.