Skip to main content

One of the biggest crocks of shit from the Clinton campaign, and a dirty one at that, has been the claim that Latinos won't vote for blacks. It's quickly become CW. Too bad it's not true.

University of Washington political scientist Matt Barreto has compiled a list of black big-city mayors who have received broad Latino support over the last several decades. In 1983, Harold Washington pulled 80% of the Latino vote in Chicago. David Dinkins won 73% in New York in 1989. And Denver's Wellington Webb garnered more than 70% in 1991, as did Ron Kirk in Dallas in 1995 and then again in 1997 and 1999.

He could have also added that longtime Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley won a healthy chunk of the Latino vote in 1973 and then the clear majority in his mayoral reelection campaigns of 1977, 1981, 1985 and 1989.

Here in L.A., all three black members of Congress represent heavily Latino districts and ultimately couldn't survive without significant Latino support. Five other black House members represent districts that are more than 25% Latino -- including New York's Charles Rangel and Texan Al Green -- and are also heavily dependent on Latino voters.

Not only is the spin wrong, but it's racially divisive.

But the social costs of the Clintons' strategy might end up being higher than the country is willing to pay. According to Stanford Law professor Richard Thompson Ford, who just published "The Race Card: How Bluffing About Bias Makes Race Relations Worse," such political stunts can be "self-fulfilling prophecies."

"It could make black voters more hostile to Latinos," he said. "And Latinos who hear it might think that they somehow ought to be at odds with blacks. These kinds of statements generate interracial tensions."

In a cycle where too many unmerited claims of racial insensitivity and sexism have been thrown around carelessly, this is one that is genuinely disturbing and potentially damaging to our nation. It needs to stop.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 07:59 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  yeah, this smells like bullshit to me (13+ / 0-)

    Although I'm young, and I suspect my friends get along better than the older generation.

    Still, this just seems implausible. Democrats who campaign for the Latino vote will get the Latino vote -- save some intervening factor like an exciting Latino candidate.

    Hillary is running against Bush. Compared to Bush, we all look like Gandhi. We should expect more than just "not Bush".

    by danthrax on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:01:07 AM PST

  •  I've really hated the insinuation (25+ / 0-)

    that deep down all Latinos are racists.  What a load.

    Be outrageous, ridicule the fraidy-cats, rejoice in all the oddities that freedom can produce. --Molly Ivins

    by sap on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:01:22 AM PST

    •  It is psychological ju-jitsu (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dcg2, Timothy J

      Check out the RW articles around on African American racism. If you can accuse someone of a vice before he can point it out in your own statements and actions, you have automatically placed him on the defensive.

      We saw this in 2000 and 2004 when both John McCain and John Kerry were branded as cowards and traitors based on their military records.

      •  Classic Clinton (0+ / 0-)

        If you can accuse someone of a vice before he can point it out in your own statements and actions, you have automatically placed him on the defensive.

        How many times have we seen this from Hillary's campaign over the last few weeks?

        Lots.

        "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

        by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:17:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  There is a common error made by candidates (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      heartofblue, JamieG from Md

      that they can be successful without putting in the leg work. The Clinton's have spent years figuring out how to earn Latino votes. Barack can be effective but he needs to be in the west saying the right things. I'm sure Barack has been through this before. It's just difficult to get up to speed in a short timeframe. If Senator Obama runs ads in Spanish media touting his plans to reward work and provide a pathway for people who have lived and worked/studied here for years to be able to attend college and gain permanent residency status, it would go a long way. Clinton has a familiarity with Latino voters that allows her to be less specific. IMO Obama needs to be seen fighting for exery single vote.

      Love that "power of the purse!" It looks so nice up there on the mantle (and not the table) next to the "subpoena power."

      by Sacramento Dem on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:36:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The problem is that her attempt (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sacramento Dem

        to put a positive spin on Spitzer's proposal for driver's licenses for illegals shows that she maybe has not done the degree of homework she is credited with. The issue is incredibly complex and not easy to answer well in a sound byte, which is how candidates communicate.

        The more she explained, the more confusing her stand became. I am not sure that there are not other, similar issues that will trip her up as well.

        •  The 'Spitzer' incident did not hurt her with (0+ / 0-)

          the Latino community. The lesson seems to be if she can keep her mouth shut and get the Latino vote, that's what she will do. Barack has to be aggressive, or Nevada will replay itself all over the Southwest. I'm voting for Barack, but I don't want his campaign to think they can easily peel off Hillary's support among Latino voters. They will need a reason to make that switch. OK one more football analogy Barack is down (among Latino voters) late in the fourth quarter and needs to prevent Hillary from running out the clock.

          Love that "power of the purse!" It looks so nice up there on the mantle (and not the table) next to the "subpoena power."

          by Sacramento Dem on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:15:55 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  so he needs an onsides kick? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sacramento Dem
            •  He definitely needs to execute his 2 minute drill (0+ / 0-)

              Love that "power of the purse!" It looks so nice up there on the mantle (and not the table) next to the "subpoena power."

              by Sacramento Dem on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 10:41:58 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The situation is not so desperate that an (0+ / 0-)

                'onside' kick is required, but that's when the probability of success is greatest

                During the Monday Night Football broadcast on September 13, the commentators reported that during the last five NFL seasons, the kicking team has recovered 24% of "anticipated" onside kicks, and 61% of "surprise" onside kicks

                I may have to stop now, cause analogies always break down eventually.

                Love that "power of the purse!" It looks so nice up there on the mantle (and not the table) next to the "subpoena power."

                by Sacramento Dem on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 10:49:16 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  It doesn't matter. (9+ / 0-)

    She needs to WIN no matter what the cost to the country and party!

    </snark>

    -fink

    Al Gore didn't lose in 2000. America did.

    by fink on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:01:30 AM PST

  •  damn straight, kos (22+ / 0-)

    This latino is voting and contributing to Obama.

    Bush: The buck doesn't even slow down here.

    by cgvjelly on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:01:35 AM PST

  •  Some will do anything to stir up divisiveness.n/t (10+ / 0-)

    "In your hands lies the future of your world and the fulfillment of the best qualities of your own spirit." -RFK

    by carolinadreamer on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:01:42 AM PST

  •  What's the evidence that (5+ / 0-)

    this comes from the Clinton campaign?

    •  boy oh boy you look lazy (9+ / 0-)

      questioning the post, before clicking the link. 2nd paragraph

      A few weeks ago, Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Latino expert, publicly articulated what campaign officials appear to have been whispering for months. In an interview with Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, Bendixen explained that "the Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

      •  "appear to have been whispering..." (8+ / 0-)

        Some people might say that is not very well sourced.

        It's the Supreme Court, Stupid!

        by Radiowalla on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:13:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Clinton herself (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Timothy J

          That brief quote from an obscure politician has generated shock and awe in Democratic circles. It comes close to validating the concern that the Clinton campaign is not only relying on a brown firewall built on an anti-black base but is reinforcing it. A prominent Democrat who has not picked a candidate this year told me, "In any campaign I have been involved in, Bendixen would have been gone."

          But not in Clinton's campaign. At the Jan. 15 debate, before the Nevada caucuses, where the Latino vote was important, NBC's Tim Russert read the Bendixen quote and asked Clinton, "Does that represent the view of your campaign?" Her response was chilling: "No, he was making a historical statement."

          "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

          by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:16:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  How about the rest of the quote? (5+ / 0-)

            RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, one of your pollsters was quoted in The New Yorker magazine as saying this: "The Hispanic voter has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

            Does that represent the view of your campaign?

            CLINTON: No, he was making a historical statement. And, obviously, what we’re trying to do is to bring America together so that everybody feels like they’re involved and they have a stake in the future.

            If you refuse to vote for OUR PARTY'S nominee in November, the blood of a thousand back-alley abortions will be on your hands.

            by dhonig on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:25:18 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh right once she claimed she's bringing people (0+ / 0-)

              together, then its all ok, because she claims it is so?!

            •  Please. (0+ / 0-)

              It takes a phenomenal act of intentional ignorance to claim that the Clinton Campaign pointed something out has historical fact but then divorced themselves entirely from what they claim is historical fact, and are absolutely refusing to apply what they consider historical fact to the current election.

              Anybody with any brain whatsoever can see that the first sentence was the meat, and the rest was the obfuscating political fluff.

              "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

              by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:02:56 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Doesn't matter (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Radiowalla, lovin lansing MI

          Everything we've learned about bad, lazy, poorly sourced, inaccurate, anti-Democrat, pack journalism is irrelevant when we're talking about the Clintons.

          Because she's evil and diabolical and will say or do anything to win.  And no other candidate would ever pursue a narrative to put her on the defensive. Or something like that.

    •  Right f***ing here (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, boofdah, Timothy J, pkohan
      Insensitivity was reflected in a recent issue of the New Yorker, when Clinton's veteran Latino political operative Sergio Bendixen was quoted as saying, "The Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

      Full story here:
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

      by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:06:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And here's some more from that article (8+ / 0-)

        That brief quote from an obscure politician has generated shock and awe in Democratic circles. It comes close to validating the concern that the Clinton campaign is not only relying on a brown firewall built on an anti-black base but is reinforcing it. A prominent Democrat who has not picked a candidate this year told me, "In any campaign I have been involved in, Bendixen would have been gone."

        But not in Clinton's campaign. At the Jan. 15 debate, before the Nevada caucuses, where the Latino vote was important, NBC's Tim Russert read the Bendixen quote and asked Clinton, "Does that represent the view of your campaign?" Her response was chilling: "No, he was making a historical statement."

        He said exactly what she wanted him to say. The message is exactly what they want to have out there.

        "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

        by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:07:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  virtual tip (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Timothy J

          I thought this was from the SC debate, that it's from the NV makes it even worse because this bs has had more time to infect the body politic.

        •  "Chilling" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          heartofblue

          You're being played.  Look at the words around the quotation in question:  shock, awe, concern, and... chilling.  Booga booga booga!  

          Cool, it works with anything!  

          Her response was chilling:  "Could you pass the salt?"
          Her response was chilling:  "Cereal is expensive"
          Her response was chilling:  "The cow goes 'moo'"

          The cow goes moo, indeed.

  •  The Clintons don't care. (6+ / 0-)

    They only care about themselves and winning.

    •  Always curious (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jxg, milton333

      What, exactly, do you believe they want to get by winning?  What, exactly, is in it for them?  They seek power for.....what end?  

      those who don't want to nominate Hillary Clinton because they don't want to return to the nastiness of the 1990s..are deluding themselves.-Krugman

      by BRockNYLA on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:07:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is a very good question (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Timothy J

        which I asked of a person yesterday in discussing VP Cheney. I pointed out that he had accrued a fortune over the years sufficient to support his family for several generations. He has accrued power to the extent that much of the US government actions and decisions come from his office, not the Oval Office, and he has a very bad heart and faces a shortened lifespan.
        Why then not remove himself from the fray and enjoy the fruits of his endeavours?  The only answer I could get was that for Cheney, the fight is the reason for the fight and that alone.
        Maybe it is the same for the Clintons.  

        •  So... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ofao

          You, honestly, don't believe they care about the American people?  You don't believe Hillary Clinton cares about health care? Children?

          those who don't want to nominate Hillary Clinton because they don't want to return to the nastiness of the 1990s..are deluding themselves.-Krugman

          by BRockNYLA on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:40:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I take it this is rhetorical (0+ / 0-)

            since it has been widely reported that the Clintons maintain their personal health by bathing in the fresh blood of children each morning.

            The question is why anyone would put himself through the rigors of a political campaign and I still think power or access to power is a major motivating force.  

            •  but (0+ / 0-)

              power to what end is my question.  surely if you want power you are going to use  it, no?  

              those who don't want to nominate Hillary Clinton because they don't want to return to the nastiness of the 1990s..are deluding themselves.-Krugman

              by BRockNYLA on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 02:52:43 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  It is time for Markos to make an endorsement. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cythera4, Compostings

    come on, aren't you the least bit curious as to the kind of flame war that will erupt?

    We must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom.

    by Delaware Dem on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:02:28 AM PST

  •  NOt race, but a problem (6+ / 0-)

    I think the media is to blame for perpetuating this.

    But I do have to say Obama -- at least from my outreach here in Queens - has a problem with Latinos.

    I'm not saying it is because of race, but he is not connecting with them.

    They are drawing to Hillary.

  •  Interesting you'd accuse the Clinton camp, kos (10+ / 0-)

    when it seems to me the ones accusing Latinos of racism are Obama supporters who've been surprised that Latinos, gasp!, actually like Hillary.

    I think that's the real issue here, you don't want to give Hillary an ounce of credit for having real appeal in that community.

  •  The social costs are irrelevant ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slinkerwink, Timothy J

    the only thing that matters is getting a Clinton back in the White House -- that's the path to our salvation as a nation.  And just like with Bush, since the goal is so lofty and necessary and divinely ordained, the means of pursuing that goal are justified even if they are destructive, divisive, and depressing.

    [snark off]

  •  Thanks Kos for posting this (12+ / 0-)

    Until this cycle I had never heard that Latinos had some sort of latent animus towards AA's. It sure didn't reflect the reality that I live in, or that of my friends and family.

    Then for HRC to say at that debate that what her pollster said was "historical fact" I was flipping floored.

    So, thank you for bringing this issue up and exposing it for the crock of divisive shit that it is.

  •  thanks for calling this out (5+ / 0-)

    The COM has repeated this meme which the Clintons appear to have used in a desperate attempt to marginalize Obama. By attempting to Divide and conquer the party, the Clintons are losing the election, however. The Kennedy endorsements were, in part, a reaction to the divisiveness.

    "It's the planet, stupid."

    by FishOutofWater on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:03:45 AM PST

  •  Excuse me, Markos (9+ / 0-)

    Could you please point me to the place where the "Clinton campaign" claimed that Latino voters won't vote for blacks?

    I've heard a lot of that buzz in the media, but not from the "Clinton campaign."

    •  Look upthread (3+ / 0-)

      It's been referenced probably 5+ times by now.

      "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

      by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:09:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Links (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hannibal, Timothy J

        "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

        by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:13:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Jabba....Read This, Research.... (0+ / 0-)

          Obama strikes again with his race games, this time using the words of super Muslim and racist Malcolm X as he was inciting blacks against whites. Coincidence?

          "They're trying to bamboozle you. It's the same old okie-doke. Y'all know about okie doke, right?... They try to bamboozle you. Hoodwink ya. Try to hoodwink ya."

          -- Barack Obama in a speech January 24, 2008 (a video of the speech is on-line through Google)

          "You've been hoodwinked. You've been had. You've been took. You've been led astray, led amok. You’ve been bamboozled." (Malcolm X)

          If any other candidate gave a speech that included the same phrases used to incite whites against blacks, he/she would be berated by the Obama campaign and the media as a racist and the world would come to end.

          And Obama claims Clinton is using "racist code words" in her speeches? LOL

          It's this kind of crazy, astounding double standards that will keep America from voting for Obama. You either agree with him and don't criticize him -- or you're racist. Don’t be fooled by this con man America.

      •  Still proves nothing... (0+ / 0-)

        ...every time it's referenced.  Context, context, context.  Put down the hatchet.

    •  Look above, but . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RobertInWisconsin

      A few weeks ago, Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Latino expert, publicly articulated what campaign officials appear to have been whispering for months. In an interview with Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, Bendixen explained that "the Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.

      Link

      "Race Doesn't Matter"

      by pragprogress on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:10:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Okay so ONE pollster made that observation (5+ / 0-)

        in response to a question, and that becomes THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN PUSHING THE THEME?

        Give me a fucking break.

        •  Keep reading this comment thread (0+ / 0-)

          Clinton defended him.

          "Race Doesn't Matter"

          by pragprogress on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:39:36 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  So now, relating accurately the results (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jxg, dhonig, lovin lansing MI, devil

            of polling is racist?

            Trying to keep a list of all the things that are racist.

            It gets bigger and bigger every day.

            It seems to be anytime anyone connected with the Clinton campaign is caught making any remark that has to do with the racial makeup of any segment of the public, that is twisted into being a racist remark.

            •  Who said it was racist? (0+ / 0-)

              Kos just posted excerpts from an article that refutes the historical argument being put forth by a Clinton pollster. Being that the statement made by the pollster is simply untrue then we must ask ourselves whether he's just stupid or if there was some other motive behind it.

              "Race Doesn't Matter"

              by pragprogress on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:47:21 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  "Being put forth by a Clinton pollster" (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                lovin lansing MI

                is disingenuous.  The guy is a pollster who works for Clinton.  The reporter asked if polling indicated that Latinos would support a black candidate.  The guy answered the question.

                The "other motive" is those people who have turned that one pollster's response into an effort by the Clinton campaign to push that theme forward.

                •  What's the difference between (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  FlipYrWhig

                  "a Clinton pollster"

                  and

                  "a pollster who works for Clinton"?

                  And the questioning of the motive has to do with the act that it's a false statement, as born out by my own experience living in majority Latino Los Angeles and having all kinds of black congressmen, state senators and assemblymen, county supervisors and city councilmen all of whom represent heavily Latino districts.

                  "Race Doesn't Matter"

                  by pragprogress on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:47:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

  •  Big Whoop (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PssttCmere, Antifish

    I don't think the supposed "competition" is real, but I'm not losing any sleep over it.  This is an unnecessary spin on the part of the Clintons because they have long ties that they should be proud of.

    Overall though, I don't find it terribly offensive or significant.

    those who don't want to nominate Hillary Clinton because they don't want to return to the nastiness of the 1990s..are deluding themselves.-Krugman

    by BRockNYLA on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:04:23 AM PST

  •  I just hope (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jabbausaf, costello7

    We don't have another 8 years of this nonsense.

    "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." Sen Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    by atlliberal on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:04:33 AM PST

  •  Independents Went for Hillary Over Obama 2 - 1 (7+ / 0-)

    Independents originally were not supposed to vote in this closed primary, but apparently were allowed in at the last minute if they asked for a party ballot; estimate based on exit polling:

    McCain 144,000
    Hillary 117,000
    Obama 88,000
    Romney 75,000
    Edwards 73,000
    Giuliani 43,000
    Huckabee 36,000
    Paul 29,000

    One of the biggest CROCKS OF SHIT from the Obama campaign is that he can bring in "independents" and Republicans...

    "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H.L. Mencken

    by SignalSuzie on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:04:33 AM PST

  •  many people seem to really want to have (5+ / 0-)

    set-in-stone racial rules to live by. Pat Buchanan comes to mind...during the MSNBC coverage of the SC primary he basically said it was foolish to deny that Latinos hating African-Americans wasn't a forgone conclusion.

    This information cannot leave this room. Ok? It would devastate my reputation as a dude. Relentless!

    by ablington on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:04:40 AM PST

    •  Buchanan wants (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      trinite

      a Clinton v. McCain contest because he thinks McCain can beat her.  The other hosts were openly laughing at him when he tried to assert that Obama's SC win was good for Clinton.

      that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. - Barack Obama

      by acuppajo on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:52:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What's next... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    trinite, Antifish

    this is getting absurd.  What is up with all these stats and scientific research going into who is racially inclined to vote for who?  I thought it was a personal decision.  Why is it different because somebody is not white?  Suddenly the (white) masses assume that they are a heard and all the likewise brown people will vote together.

    Are they assuming that there's some meeting of brown people before the election where they decide on a candidate?  That sounds a lot more like the evangelicals voting with their church than the hispanics or blacks voting with color.

    Wow.  2008?

    Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac. -Orwell

    by Fight or Die on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:06:06 AM PST

  •  There's only one way to stop it (7+ / 0-)

    Want to stop the ridiculous race-baiting from the Clinton camp?

    Super Tuesday.  TROUNCE her.  Get this damned race over with.

    Reminder for both sides - Our last eloquent, inexperienced 46 year old candidate? Bill Clinton. Think about that.

    by Leggy Starlitz on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:06:10 AM PST

  •  "It needs to stop." (10+ / 0-)

    Really? So stop it.

    This is front page fanning the flames of something that was one of last week's trumped up outrages. Just another desperate Obama attempt to label the Clinton camp as racist. One trick pony. Different saddle, same trick.

  •  This is why the Big-Tent (8+ / 0-)

    candidate is going to be Obama. He's shown himself to be the candidate best able to speak to voters across all the various divides within the Democratic Party instead of resorting to exploiting those divisions.

  •  this is why I would hope (10+ / 0-)

    Richardson endorses Obama. The latino's are racsit meme is  adangerous one to take hold. If Hillary wins them overwhelmingly it will now be spun as not because they like Hillary but because of "black/brown" conflict. In the end as party we all lose if that is the case.

    It's obvious to us McCain is the most electable GOP nominee, it's obvious to repubs that Obama is our best choice.

    by nevadadem on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:06:22 AM PST

    •  let's be careful folks (0+ / 0-)

      I dont think its advantageous for us to label the clintons as "racist"....the american public won't like that.  instead, we should boost our own candidate instead of tearing the other down....

      and simply call the clintons out whenever they make offensive statements, like the jesse jackson one.

  •  And when exactly has "the Clinton campaign" (11+ / 0-)

    claimed "that Latinos won't vote for blacks"???

    This is one of the "biggest crocks of shit" from Kos so far.

    The level to which Kos has let himself sink this season is downright amazing.

    Follow the development at RezkoWatch

    by DemAC on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:06:44 AM PST

    •  Her pollster made the claim n/t (4+ / 0-)
      •  Yes! (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Spit, jxg, lovin lansing MI, DemAC

        Her pollster made claim because there's truth in it!  Does it mean that no Latinos will vote for him?  Of course not, but it's not as if he pulled that CW out of his ass.

        I live in LA.  I love the city, but there are some are where Latino gangs 'cleanse' the neighborhood of black, and vice versa.  Black-brown tensions are real, and nobody is served by this stupid tit-for-tat among elite netroosters.

        Now, I hope that the CW isn't as true as I think it might be.  I hope Obama can actually translate his rhetoric into votes.  I'm not a supporter of his yet, but I think it would be a sign of something positive if Latinos voted for him.

        That said, the level of discourse around here has just really deteriorated.  And it's being encouraged by the site's proprietor.  That's sad.

        If Josh Marshall is an Obama supporter as many claim (and I think his reporting his biased that way), then at least he's big enough to swallow his pride and offer a cogent analysis of what happened last night.

        I thought you were bigger Kos.  But then again, you do seem to take these things rather personally.  I know you were broken up over Lieberman for months partly because he called you out by name.  Here's my advice to you:  try to rise above it.  Seriously.

        Son, you're makin' the same mistake with Iraq that I did with your mother. I didn't pull out in time.

        by fou on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:05:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Liar (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RobertInWisconsin, Timothy J

      It's referenced repeatedly upthread and if you and all the other Clinton supporters who've claimed it's never happened would show an ounce of initiative, you could go find it yourself.

      "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

      by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:11:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Liar! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lovin lansing MI

        Mr. Kos is a liar and you're a liar. Never has "the Clinton campaign" claimed "that Latinos won't vote for blacks" in this election, be it the primaries or the general.

        Show me some evidence or STFU! (And no, Bendixen's factually correct statement is no evidence of anything other than an unfortunate historical truth).

        Follow the development at RezkoWatch

        by DemAC on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:37:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You contradict yourself (0+ / 0-)

          And save me a lot of work. Thanks.

          "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

          by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:42:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  A lame ass excuse (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lovin lansing MI

            befitting a lame ass liar.

            The liar Kos means that "the Clinton campaign" claimed "that Latinos won't vote for blacks".

            Not true.

            The "Clinton campaign" has made no such claim.

            Bendixen noted a historical truth, unfortunate as it was. No one has claimed "that Latinos won't vote for blacks".

            The whole thing is a L I E !

            Follow the development at RezkoWatch

            by DemAC on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:48:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Historical truth? (0+ / 0-)

              prove it.

              that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. - Barack Obama

              by acuppajo on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:03:47 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  As I said (0+ / 0-)

                it's an unfortunate historical truth. Hopefully everyone wants the future to have a much different outlook.

                Follow the development at RezkoWatch

                by DemAC on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:21:08 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  A week old article (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jabbausaf

                  from the Economist? C'mon

                  The author tries to spin this as proof of animosity between the two groups but I think it actually proves the opposite:

                  In California's 37th congressional district, for example, which includes parts of south-central Los Angeles, Latinos outnumber blacks almost two to one.  Yet black politicians invariably carry the area.

                  that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. - Barack Obama

                  by acuppajo on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:37:31 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Another classic Clinton tactic (0+ / 0-)

              Take what you do a lot of and accuse the opposition of it.

              Works for race-baiting, gender-baiting, and now, lying. If irony were water, we'd all need flood insurance.

              "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

              by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 11:43:43 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  Apparently you didn't read the comments above (0+ / 0-)

      A few weeks ago, Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Latino expert, publicly articulated what campaign officials appear to have been whispering for months. In an interview with Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, Bendixen explained that "the Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.

      Link

      "Race Doesn't Matter"

      by pragprogress on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:12:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Links. (3+ / 0-)

      "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

      by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:12:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, her pollster didn't make that claim (5+ / 0-)

        Bendixen was however factually correct in his statement. Hispanics have historically "not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates". That Big Media chooses to spin that historical truth according to the "Hillary Clinton is evil" template doesn’t justify Kos sinking to the same low level.

        When exactly has "the Clinton campaign" claimed "that Latinos won't vote for blacks" this time around???

        Follow the development at RezkoWatch

        by DemAC on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:32:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wow, way to parse n/t (0+ / 0-)

          "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

          by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:43:21 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, truth's a bitch n/t (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jxg, heartofblue, lovin lansing MI

            Follow the development at RezkoWatch

            by DemAC on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:53:23 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Wasn't a compliment (0+ / 0-)

              It takes a phenomenal act of intentional ignorance to claim that the Clinton Campaign pointed something out has historical fact but then divorced themselves entirely from what they claim is historical fact, and are absolutely refusing to apply what they consider historical fact to the current election.

              I realize that posting on dem blogs from the basement at Clinton campaign HQ isn't an easy job. I accept that. Could you at least tell your boss to put some thoughts into the lines you guys push out in unison and repeat in unison, as you desperately hope that people won't look too deeply into the crap you're pushing on the rest of us?

              "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." -Einstein

              by jabbausaf on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:00:22 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You can spin, twist and lie all you want (0+ / 0-)

                The liar Kos writes that "the Clinton campaign" claimed "that Latinos won't vote for blacks".

                Not true.

                The "Clinton campaign" has made no such claim.

                Bendixen noted a historical truth, unfortunate as it was. No one in "the Clinton campaign" has claimed "that Latinos won't vote for blacks".

                The whole thing is a L I E !

                Follow the development at RezkoWatch

                by DemAC on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:03:08 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  After a while the statement become so general (0+ / 0-)

          as to become meaningless. There have not been very many African American presidential candidates among the two major parties (understatement) and since about 1868, not even proportionally, that many African American candidates for national office.

          At the same time, there has been a dearth of Hispanic candidates in the same arenas for similar reasons. The only races which would have occurred enough times to allow for generalizations would be local races or state races. It seems local races are excluded so that leaves us state races.

          Even in examining Hispanic support for African American candidates, the problem is that in some communities, Hispanics and African Americans find themselves in direct competition due to political and social realities for the same scarce resources, which would not encourage voting for the member of an outgroup.

          This would seem to be the sort of statement that cannot be proven or disproven absolutely but that surfaces each election cycle. Wonder if anyone is checking to see how many veterans are voting against McCain, just as an example?  

    •  It's been implied. Seriously, I'm going around (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jabbausaf

      sticking up for HRC a bunch lately, and I've been oscillating back and forth between her and Obama.

      But I think HRC and her campaign have seemed to take out the position that "demographic reality is demographic reality" and that it's OK to look in a hard-headed way about which people in which demographic groups for which candidates.

      On the one hand: people such as the Zogbys talk about that sort of reality all the time. People post demographic group crosstabs on Daily Kos whenever they can get the crosstabs. It seems sort of hypocritical to get mad at the HRC campaign for considering this sort of information when we ourselves do it all the time. Maybe, at some level, it's racist/demographic-ist to ignore this kind of information.

      Example: I'm Jewish. To write as if being Jewish were the only thing that affects my vote, or that I vote in lockstep with other Jews, would be extremely insulting. But to pretend that my being Jewish is completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with my vote also seems to be vaguely insulting.

      On the other hand: maybe it is a little scary and divisive to see the campaign itself bring up/condone talk of such stuff.

      On the third hand: I think that Obama, personally, just doesn't belong in one particular demographic box. He's an African American, in a sense, but he also is, in a sense, a first generation American. And, in a sense, he's a displaced Kansan. And, in a sense, he is (through a mom) descended from Henry II of England. Maybe at some weird genealogical level he's the most deeply rooted European candidate still in the race. Once he gets more attention, then I think the votes he gets from people in every demographic group will have less to do with his or their demographics and more with his particular speeches, inevitable dumb mistakes, responses to those inevitable dumb mistakes, etc.

  •  Another kos strawman (10+ / 0-)

    His daily scheduled beatdown of one camp and its supporters. Don't worry, Obama people, that means you're next up.

  •  CNN had a morsel last night that Obama (0+ / 0-)

    was thinking about reviving the drivers' license for illegals argument and the conventional wisdom of the nodding class was that this would be a major tactical error but maybe a necessary one if Obama is to attract the Hispanic vote. I believe one commenter pointed out that Obama polled 25% of Hispanics in FL primary.

    OTOH, I don't see the drivers' license for illegals being a winner as an issue for any candidate to explore.  Spitzer has several reasons for backing such an idea but he is a state official and the problem is not a federal one, if it is a problem.

    It seems with Edwards dropping out and the MSM annointing McCain on the GOP side (didn't they bury him last summer?) they need something to keep the horserace going.  

    •  Beg To Disagree... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      leonard145b, Mas Gaviota

      But I think the DL issue is a huge issue for the Latino community. It is their community which is getting ostracized and persecuted with this (although all of us lose when insurance cannot be bought by motorists).

      Believe me Latinos are watching, and Obama's attention to this issue is getting him support already.

      "There's no housing bubble..." - Fed Chief Ben Bernanke, 10/27/2005

      by chuco35 on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:24:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe I didn't explain it well (0+ / 0-)

        but the driver's license for illegals issue is an issue that grows out of the larger issue of fairness and of sane immigration policies. In the final analysis, it is really a state issue and the federal government has enough things broken not to have to go looking for state issues to find things to fix.
        For Obama to suddenly embrace this as an issue whenever these other larger issues are not resolved does not make a great deal of sense.

        •  Couple Of Responses. (0+ / 0-)

          I understand Obama's position is that this is a state issue, as you suggest and I agree. Simply taking the feds out of this issue, however, is a huge victory for Latinos.

          But the heart of the matter is that Latinos, like any other constituency, will vote for the candidate who speaks to its issues. Access to DLs is  a Latino issue which transcends race to Latino voters, and will win Obama votes with Latinos -- especially given Hillary's waffling on this issue.

          "There's no housing bubble..." - Fed Chief Ben Bernanke, 10/27/2005

          by chuco35 on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:40:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  One aside on the issue is if illegal immigrants (0+ / 0-)

            are able to receive the nondriver's license ID card from DMV or not. It may vary from state to state but it appears, de facto, that some states may already issue IDs to illegal aliens through their DMVs, though this may be a matter of negligence on the part of state employees and not state policy.

            •  It's Not So Much A Matter Of ID. (0+ / 0-)

              Although that is important to undocumented migrants who
              can't open bank accounts because of it. The critical part is the inability to get liability insurance. These migrants want to obey the law as much as anyone else, and would buy insurance. But they can't with out a DL. They drive anyway, because their and their family's existence depends on it. But their inability to buy insurance affects all of us -- both in terms of our insurance premiums indirectly, or directly, if we're involved in an accident with one of them.

              We're cutting our nose to spite our face.    

              "There's no housing bubble..." - Fed Chief Ben Bernanke, 10/27/2005

              by chuco35 on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 12:46:32 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  Stop lumping people together (0+ / 0-)

      25% of Hispanics--hello, have you been to Florida?  "Hispanics" is a meaningless category-the mix of people whose origins are from all over is so great in Florida.  This is "old" data, part of the problem.

    •  On the OTHER other hand (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mas Gaviota

      OTOH, I don't see the drivers' license for illegals being a winner as an issue for any candidate to explore.

      McCain being the Republican nominee sort of takes away the voice of the people who hate brown people in the general election, so coming out on the DL issue wouldn't hurt Obama too much (if at all) in the GE.

  •  BillaryPenn have some racial issues (4+ / 0-)

    I mean c'mon - this strategy is clearly meant to drive a wedge in the Democratic community.  They keep passively, but agressively dropping hints about race.  Jesse Jackson comments, etc. etc.  Insinuating that Hispanics won't break for Obama.  Bill injected race into this in SC.  He was all over SC shaking hands and kissing babies, trying to pull it out for Hillary - and he failed miserably.   The Clinton's got trounced there.  All they have are wedge issues at this point because Obama still has the momentum.  Edwards, the populist, dropping out probably means that Obama picks up more votes because folks that liked Edwards, probably have major problems with HRC and Obama represents the next best thing.  Obama can win at least 10 of the 22 Super Tuesday states - the Southern and Midwestern states as well as CO and AZ are probably his.  The Clintons are nervous because this thing is probably going to last way into March with HRC narrowly winning the nomination - if she even wins it at all.  So all they have are wedge issues and they're playing the race card.  It's unfortunate because we're the party that seeks a world where race does not matter and where equality really means equality not politics!

    •  In discussing the Clintons last week (0+ / 0-)

      it seemed that one constant was an agreement that both are somewhat "tone deaf" when it comes to racial issues. It is hard to exactly explain but I have also had problems explaining the idea of "GOP code" on race to people who were not born in the South. Southerners, regardless of political belief, understand immediately.

  •  i am of latin heritage (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bartimaeus Blue

    and neither obama nor clinton particularly appeals to me.  i'll vote the dem candidate, but i don't have to like the candidate on a personal basis.  

    they're not my personal friends and aren't likely to be.

    i would rather live on my feet than die on my knees -- emiliano zapata

    by labwitchy on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:07:49 AM PST

  •  remember what Hillary said (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jabbausaf

    it was a "historical comment".

    It's obvious to us McCain is the most electable GOP nominee, it's obvious to repubs that Obama is our best choice.

    by nevadadem on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:08:14 AM PST

  •  Thank you, Kos (7+ / 0-)

    I'm tired of Pat Buchanan having the last word on African American/Latino relations.

    Do we really want another YEAR of trying to explain to everyone why the Democratic nominee voted to authorize the Iraq war before they were against it?

    by ShadowSD on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:09:28 AM PST

  •  Non-Cuban Latino Voters in Florida Exit Polling (7+ / 0-)

    'Cause the Cuban vote has been traditionally Republican:

    Among Non-Cuban Latinos:

    Hillary 84,000
    McCain 41,000
    Obama 39,000
    Romney 16,000
    Edwards 14,000
    Giuliani 10,000
    Huckabee 7,000

    As you can see, Hillary received more non-Cuban Latino/Hispanic votes than all the Republicans combined, and more than twice as many as Obama.

    Among White Catholics:

    Hillary 165,000
    Romney 137,000
    McCain 133,000
    Giuliani 85,000
    Edwards 47,000
    Obama 41,000
    Huckabee 16,000

    Among white Catholics, Hillary received over 4 times as many votes as Obama.

    Among White Women:

    Hillary 397,000
    Romney 222,000
    McCain 215,000
    Obama 141,000
    Huckabee 132,000
    Edwards 114,000
    Giuliani 97,000

    Among suburban voters:

    Hillary 574,000
    McCain 444,000
    Romney 370,000
    Obama 364,000
    Giuliani 197,000
    Huckabee 160,000
    Edwards 132,000

    The full diary is enlightening:
    http://www.mydd.com/...

    "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H.L. Mencken

    by SignalSuzie on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:09:49 AM PST

  •  Kos just come out and endorse Obama (6+ / 0-)

    and quit playing coy.

  •  nope, no race-baiting... (6+ / 0-)

    no way, hillary didn't race-bait with the MLK Jr. comment.... she didn't at all try to usurp the first major black candidate on MLK Jr. Day.  nope.

    no way, bill didn't race-bait with his revealing obama being black with his comparing obama to jesse jackson's presidential run.

    no way, Sergio Bendixen from the Clinton campaign didn't start this latino slander.

    nope, the clintons are clean as a whistle and how dare you point out this proof kos!

    </snark>

  •  Just An Anecdote... (4+ / 0-)

    But Jesse Jackson did very well in 1988 against Mondale in heavily Mexican-American south Texas -- in some counties getting as much as 40% of the vote. He did well in the county caucuses in south Texas as well that year.

    The answer as to whether Latinos will vote for a black candidate is obviously -- "depends on who it is". I think Obama is that kind of candidate.

    "There's no housing bubble..." - Fed Chief Ben Bernanke, 10/27/2005

    by chuco35 on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:10:50 AM PST

  •  GLAD YOU SPOKE UP (6+ / 0-)

    I kept wondering when someone would smash this ridiculous meme. Blacks and Hispanics have collaborated for years on common issues and in politics. Los Angeles is not the best example of the partnership, but if you look at communities elsewhere, especially in the Northeast and Florida, we do work well together.

    -7.38, -5.23 One day we ALL will know the truth about the 2000 presidential election. God help us all.

    by CocoaLove on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:10:56 AM PST

  •  ps: kos is latino (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    carolinadreamer, jabbausaf

    Reminder for both sides - Our last eloquent, inexperienced 46 year old candidate? Bill Clinton. Think about that.

    by Leggy Starlitz on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:11:15 AM PST

  •  Thank you and please repeat as needed! (0+ / 0-)

    It upsets me the way some pundits and campaign aides are willing to promote racial division in order to "hype" the primary in general or their candidate in particular.  Very shameful.

  •  don't tell us (0+ / 0-)

    Tell Hillary.  Or don't. It doesn't matter anyway.  

    Bush Term Three With HRC!

    by Tuffie on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:12:14 AM PST

  •  This needed to stop weeks ago -nt- (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    entlord1

    To me, the absolute most important issue ANY of us has, and this nation has, is that we are currently being ruled by a gang of immoral war criminals. -Hornito

    by discocarp on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:13:55 AM PST

  •  it depends (0+ / 0-)

    on the candidate, like for ALL other VOTERS.

    Partly appeal, partly issues.

    like for ALL other VOTERS.

    When is the day coming that we don't even break down the vote by race, religion, ethnicity?

    When?


    Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! - President Merkin Muffley

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:14:21 AM PST

  •  It remains to be seen whether Obama (0+ / 0-)

    can campaign enough to get the Latino vote in California.  He's not at all well known enough, and his penetration remains incomplete at best.  It's not a racial thing, it's that he's not well known.  Clinton has years of networking here in all groups.  Latino groups take longer due to the language and because of inherent distrust.

  •  Hoy Negro, Manana Latino! Obama '08! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chuco35, roguetrader2000, getinthek

    Pass THAT bad boy around for a few months and we'll see who votes for whom.

    "Lash those traitors and conservatives with the pen of gall and wormwood. Let them feel -- no temporising!" - Andrew Jackson to Francis Preston Blair, 1835

    by Ivan on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:14:38 AM PST

  •  Probably true, but your examples are BS (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PHeggerUT

    The mayoral races that you cite reflect Black Democrats running against Republicans. Not elevant to Obama vs Clinton IMHO.

    I think that Hillary and Obama will split the Latino Democrat vote evenly.  In places where there has been open animosity between the Latino and black communities (eg Miami) Hillary will do better, otherwise Obama will do better.

    The best thing is that we'll know in a week and we can all shut up about it.

    What did you do with the cash Joe?

    by roguetrader2000 on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:15:28 AM PST

    •  Probably not an issue (0+ / 0-)

      but how about communities where the Hispanic communities are divided among themselves? I ask this after speaking with some Cuban emigres who either themselves or their parents, fled when Baptista fell and have a fairly conservative point of view regarding "Hispanic issues".

  •  So to recap: (5+ / 0-)

    The official position here, as expressed by the site proprietor, is that Hillary Clinton not only loathes African Americans, but Latinos as well. She is, at Daily Kos at least, basically in the Klan.

    Is this really what you guys are going with?

    •  nope (0+ / 0-)

      Race-baiting works.

      And Billary's best friend who started the whole thing, as you damn well know, is this piece of work:

      A few weeks ago, Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Latino expert, publicly articulated what campaign officials appear to have been whispering for months. In an interview with Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, Bendixen explained that "the Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

      http://www.latimes.com/...

      Shhh....

      Is race-baiting denials all you've got?

    •  No doubt, (0+ / 0-)

      THIS is race baiting. Take of A-A vote, now move latinos against Hillary by using some obscure surrogates comments (which are apparently mis characterized). Looks like the blogs have joined the media in so called "Clinton derangement syndrome".

  •  Divisive??? OF COURSE IT'S DIVISIVE!!! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shockwave, jabbausaf, Ndelible

    The power class in this country, and I'm afraid I have to put the Clintons into this class along with the monied and the multinational corporate behemoths, has to divide us one from another.  They know that if they do not put us into little groups, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Pagan, Atheist, Gay, Straight, Young, Old, etc., and pit us one against the other, we will, indeed, be a United States, and we will see that our enemy is not the person next door to us, who lives as we do, but the corporations which pollute all of our water, all of our air, destroy the fabric of our community via manipulation of the economy, global wage arbitrage, and so on.  In short, if we are all friends, we can open our eyes to see that if we have an enemy, it is the power class itself.

    Reagan famously said, "The Class War is Over.  The Poor Lost."  The only way to keep their victory is to keep us fighting amongst ourselves.

    Blacks against Women.  Please.  Like there are no Black Women.  Like ALL white men are excluded from the Democratic party!  But, of course, that's the way they want it!  You're a White Man?  Well!  Guess You're Voting Republican!  You're a Hispanic?  Well!  Hola, Amigo, and Bienvenue to the Republican Party!  

    Feh.

    Now, as always, it's stand together or fall apart.  Amigo.

    You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

    by ultrageek on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:16:34 AM PST

  •  No, the CROCK OF SHIT is my fellow liberals buyin (7+ / 0-)

    ...the media's constant mantra of "bill's and Hillary's racial comment"

    MediaMatters?  Ya heard of them, Obama supporters?

    Wake up and get right!!!

    http://mediamatters.org/...

    Then go on and read about Obama's "leaked" memo regarding the Clintons' 4 racially insensitive comments.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    http://tpmelectioncentral.com/...

    WEll now, is OBAMA dividing upon race because they are only reading the Media outlets "truncated quotes" or because they're a political campaign willing to divide by race for votes?

    SHAME ON YOU OBAMA SUPPORTERS

    •  ROVE 101 (4+ / 0-)

      Class begins:

      You claim there's a "whispering campaign" against you.

      (that you're the "black candidate"; that you're against Jews; that you said "blacks won't vote for latinos"; that you dismissed an opponent's win by insulting Jesse Jackson...).

      You make sure it gets into the mainstream media, with an op-ed by a supporter.

      It generates faux outrage among the blogs.

      Like Daily Kos or TPM, or HuffPo.

      The Washington Post's Dana Milbank picks it up.

      David Broder writes an editorial about it.

      Joe Klein tsk tsks about it.

      The phone begins to ring. They call to get quotes for their stories about how awful it is that your opponent would say such a thing. You get interviewed about it, saying you think it's TERRIBLE that anyone would say such HIDEOUS THINGS about Latinos! It's awful, and you absolutely condemn it!

      People start to hear about it, on the news, in the newspaper, and your opponent has to deny it, deny it, deny it, deny it, and you get to condemn it, condemn it, condemn it, condemn it...

      And, the people start to think it's actually true that your opponent has been smearing and attacking you, and you get to be the VICTIM of their vicious SMEAR campaign, all the while, you're claiming the moral high ground (immorally so but who cares about that, it's sinking in out there).

      And, the backlash against your opponent is taking hold, and YOU WIN voters who are angry about something your opponent never condoned or did in the first place.

      ***

      It's Rove 101.

      Thanks for playing the ROVE CARD, Markos.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H.L. Mencken

      by SignalSuzie on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:43:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Meanwhile, back in the REAL world...... (7+ / 0-)

    I doubt kos's claim that Hillary said "Latinos will never vote for a black candidate".  I don't even think that Bill said that.  Or anything like that.  This is like the "Clinton campaign playing the race card" cannard - it was MICHELE OBAMA who said something like "the blacks will come (home?) to Obama at some point" some months ago - thus PLAYING THE RACE CARD for OBAMA.  And hey, that's fine - heck, it was true when she said it and it's definitely more true now.  This is a political campaign. NO ONE has told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth - although I would probably give Edwards the highest marks on "truthiness".

  •  Obama's campaig call for Spanish speakers (0+ / 0-)

    I received this link by email yesterday;
    Reach out to Spanish Speakers in February 5th States

    Obama is enlisting Spanish speakers to call Hispanic voters through his campaign web site.

    As I diarieda couple of days ago, El Cucuy, the Los Angeles Hispanic radio personality who was most responsible for the massive turnout for the May 1st 2006 rallies, has endorsed Obama since early 2007.

    Hispanics will vote for black candidates as they have in the past.

    Dailykos.com; an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action -1.75 -7.23

    by Shockwave on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:17:16 AM PST

  •  Another hit piece by kos. Pathetic. (6+ / 0-)

    Obama’s scandal:

    http://www.suntimes.com/...

    He lied about shaking her hand too and Clinton took the high road and said she looks forward to showing unity and shake his hand. Obama can't be trusted and ask yourself kos, why does the corporate media and RW love Obama? Because he will lose, they are punking you kos and you should know better.

    After super Tuesday, she will have a huge delegate lead and the DNC said they could petition to seat the delegates in Michigan and Florida.

    It will be Clinton vs McInsane with Clinton crushing the little more war monger. He will lose on every single issue.

    How about uniting with Clinton, a winner that can be trusted, to get our country a great Dem President.

    "It takes a Clinton to clean up after a Bush"

    by gotalife on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:18:41 AM PST

  •  Indeed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mas Gaviota, velvet blasphemy

    Ever since this meme started, I've been utterly confused by it.  Almost all of my best friends are either Latino or Black (I'm white), and I've never known any of them to have issues with the other race.  I've asked all of them if they know of such tensions and they have all said no.

    It does seem like its being played up by the Clinton campaign, and in my opinion, it would be par for the course.  But the polls definitely reflect that Obama doesn't do as well with voters who are Latino as Clinton does.

    So it begs the question...

    Is Obama's lower performance with Latino voters due to race or it coincidental and secondary to some other reason?

    Feingold is my hero.

    by Marc in CA on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:20:29 AM PST

  •  Continue showing the unfair bias against Hillary (7+ / 0-)

    and you'll soon be able to count your personal self as another of the main reasons people leave Dkos. You actually stoop to spin Hillary's words, and their meaning, in your attacks. I wouldn't expect that from you. I'm afraid I won't be able to forget it either.

    Dkos = democracy. The only problem is that both give voice to idiot and genius alike. Read an anti-Hillary diary lately?

    by JamesBrown4ever on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:21:30 AM PST

  •  Divide and Conquer! (3+ / 0-)

    As a Hispanics, my whole family voted for Obama in the Democratic Primary in 2004 even with a creditable Hispanic candidate in the race, Gery Chico.  Even time I hear this crap about Latinos won’t support black candidates or the other way around base on race, it gets me ticked off.

    Who is pushing this CW is only out for one thing, to divide and conquer for their own lust of power.  

  •  It's just suppressing fire (0+ / 0-)

    Clinton has to throw this bit of bullshit out to distract from the fact that she's the best bet the Republicans have.  

    None of the Republican candidates motivate their base the way Hillary can.  

    So, to change the subject on the question of electability, she has to play someone else's race card.  Just one more way she's gone native in DC, acting like a Republican.
    .

  •  Phantom race baiting (9+ / 0-)

    There is no race baiting by the Clinton campaign. It's a myth made up by those that can't stand her. Some of her surrogates have said some stupid things, but please. Obama is winning the black vote by a large margin. Hillary is winning the Hispanic vote by a slightly less significant margin. Some people need devious explanations for what that is happening. Is it wrong to just say Obama has a strong connection with African Americans and Hillary has a strong connection with Latinos?

    This liberal supports Hillary Clinton.

    by Christopher Liberal on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:22:46 AM PST

    •  explain Bill's Jesse Jackson comment (0+ / 0-)

      why use Jesse as an example as there are plenty of other candidates who won one state and not the nomination. Why did he not mention others since the 80s as there have been plenty?

      An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.

      by wishingwell on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:40:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Because it's true (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lovin lansing MI

        http://mediamatters.org/...

        Bill or Hillary's have not made racist comments what.so.ever.

        Second, let me ask you a question: Do you think my fellow liberals just blindly accepted the lies spread by the media about Bill's "fairy tale" comment w/o reading it for themselves because bill's white and Obama's black and they assumed it was true?

        BEcause that's VERY racist.

        Second, I have a question...why do you think Jesse Jackson who didn't have hype when he ran as Obama does, why do you think Jesse and Obama both won South Carolina?

        Hmmm?

        Because they had great suits?

        Do you think Bill pointing to a similarity is racist, even if it's true?

        Wow THAT is racist.

      •  I Will Explain It To You.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Destardi

        Though I doubt you will even consider it; since you're just looking to score cheap points instead of gathering facts:

        Bill Clinton's comment was a response to a question from a reporter, David Wright who asked what it says about Obama that he won in South Carolina while running against "two people." Wright's question was about Obama's complaint that he was running against both Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.

        Clinton's response was to say that Wright was trying to "bait" him, because Jesse Jackson won in '84 and '88.

        What Clinton was saying was that Jesse Jackson wasn't running against "two people" in '84 and '88 and he still won.

        Clinton then said, Obama's run a good campaign, has good organization and so did Jesse Jackson.

        It was not a clear answer by Bill Clinton, who was intentionally trying to stick up for his wife and who also praised Obama AND Jackson in his comment.

        But, making Obama out to be the victim or Jesse Jackson to be the victim is simply a TACTIC that Karl Rove used to his advantage in every race he ran over the course of his entire career in politics.

        If you fell for it, you're foolish.

        It's classic.

        From NBC/NJ's Mike Memoli
        COLUMBIA, SC --

        Another reporter [David Wright] asked what it said about Obama that it "took two people to beat him." Clinton again passed. "That’s just bait, too. Jesse Jackson won South Carolina twice, in '84 and '88. And he ran a good campaign. Senator Obama's run a good campaign here, he’s run a good campaign everywhere."

        http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/...

        Rove's Science of Dirty Tricks:

        http://www.commondreams.org/...

        http://www.evergreenpolitics.com/...

        http://www.pbs.org/...

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H.L. Mencken

        by SignalSuzie on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:58:20 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  A one sentece comment from a pollster (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jxg, dhonig, lovin lansing MI

      that is being circulated by the Obama camp to ignite racial tensions once again.

      Obama, fire Axelrod; he's destroying your message

  •  I agree that Latinos will vote (5+ / 0-)

    for African-Americans.  Why wouldn't they?

    I think it is totally unfair to say that the Clinton campaign has ever suggested otherwise.

    •  Did you read the upthread comments (0+ / 0-)

      were the direct quote from a Clinton pollster has been linked about 15 times?

      A few weeks ago, Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Latino expert, publicly articulated what campaign officials appear to have been whispering for months. In an interview with Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, Bendixen explained that "the Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.

      Link

      "Race Doesn't Matter"

      by pragprogress on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:35:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's one of those issues where the Clinton (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell

    campaign didn't have to nudge the media very hard to buy into the narrative hook, line, and sinker & repeat it ad nauseum. Pat Buchanan is certain that Black-Latino tensions in South Central LA and prison are indicative of the larger pattern, so who needs research?

    Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes. Go do some politics. - Barack Obama

    by 28th Democrat on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:24:24 AM PST

  •  What the fuck are they THINKING? (0+ / 0-)

    Yet another reason to bail on Team Hillary in the primary. Sorry, but this is yet another reason for me to hold my nose and tick the Clinton box on 11/4 if she "earns" the nomination...oy vey.

  •  Chicago (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dinotrac

    The Chicago experience is especially revealing.
    The coalition which elected Harold Washington was clearly a Black-Latino coalition. The Machine opposed him bitterly, and they dragged many normally-reformist White voters with them.

    The US has spent twice the amount in real dollars rebuilding Iraq than we spent rebuilding Japan after WWII. -- Vanity Fair

    by Frank Palmer on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:25:23 AM PST

    •  Yup, and isn't this whole topic weird? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RenMin

      And Chicago remains a great example -- even with white mayor (for life?) Daley -- of different groups working with each other in the sometimes rough give and take of making things work.

      As an independent, it really isn't any of my business, I suppose, but doesn't it seem weird for Democrats to run campaigns that focus on supposed racial divisions?

      Maybe it's the rarified air some of these folks breathe in their power breakfast circles, but I'll bet the rank-and-file voters are WAAAAY ahead of the leadership on this one.

  •  That's a very dangerous lie to spread around (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dadafountain

    I live in Los Angeles and anybody who has bothered to take two looks at this city knows what a crock of cow dung that statement is. Not only three congressman, but also three city councilmen, state assemblymen, state senators, and on and on, county board of supervors, a five-term mayor, all black pols who would never have gotten elected without Latino support. And it has worked the other direction as well, with blacks providing Antonio Villaraigosa with his margin of victory in 2005.

    But it's dangerous because there are also serious tensions. There are isolated neighborhoods in Los Angeles where blacks and Latinos have been shot on sight because of their race. Occasionally the gang war becomes black/brown as well, and there have been flare ups at local high schools that have gotten totally out of hand. Anybody who would spread this kind of disinformation for their own short-term political gain is not looking out for the best interests of the Democratic Party, blacks or Latinos, or America.

  •  Woo! another chance to jum all over (6+ / 0-)

    Clinton, because of waht some pollster said! B.S, also Latinos just like Hillary, I don't think it's that they dislike Obama.

  •  Hear hear! (0+ / 0-)

    Thank you Markos.  I had been planning to do a diary on this subject, and am VERY glad to see that you've given it front page attention.

  •  I agree it needs to stop NOW! (0+ / 0-)

    It is hurting the kossack and LGBT communities. I suspect the issue is not that the Latinos who do vote are not voting for African-Americans, the proof is there to prove otherwise. However, perhaps the erroneous claim is that Latinos are not turning out in large numbers to vote for African-American candidates. In many people powered House districts represented by African-Americans, there is no "white" or Republican opposition, so the erroneous argument could be made that Latinos are not turning out in big numbers.

    But, again, our priority as kossacks is people powere and the LGBT community and we need to have this nonsense stopped before it causes harm to the LGBT community.

  •  The MSM Knocked Edwards Out. Now They Want Obama (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slinkerwink, wishingwell

    To fall.

    They want establishment candidates. Hillary and McCain.

    They want to kill progressive candidates and their ideas.

    Obama / Edwards '08 REAL Change From The Status Quo

    by DFutureIsNow on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:28:47 AM PST

  •  Kos: straw man diary. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jim J, lovin lansing MI, RenMin

    The question is how race and ethnicity affects voting preferences differently, not whether one group will or will not vote for another.  That's merely a straw man.

    Obviously there are latino/as who will vote for African American candidates and vice versa.  And there are probably some that may not.

    Moreover anecdotal evidence from LA, Chicago and Denver over different cycles for different offices do not a sample make.

    Now, Ford may or may not be right -- but it strikes me that his argument as you have presented it is extremely condescending and assumes that both latino/a voters and African American voters are unable to evaluate their candidate preferences on the merits but are instead swayed by racial and ethnic stereotypes.  While this may be true around the margins -- and I can't evaluate it without looking at Ford's evidence -- it strikes me as bizarre to assert it as a general matter.

    Finally, It's clearly not good politics to stir up or foment racial or ethnic dissention.  I think that's obvious.  And if the Clinton campaign is doing it they should be ashamed.  But, and it's a big but, you haven't documented that they are.  You've just asserted it.

    Give us the links and let us make our own evaluation.

    "Terror is nothing other than justice...; it is ... the general principle of democracy applied to our country's most urgent needs." M. Robespierre

    by Bartimaeus Blue on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:29:28 AM PST

  •  More idiocy on the front page (12+ / 0-)

    sorry Kos, but it is.  A pollster was asked a question, and answered it the way pollsters do- with historical analysis.  When Hillary was asked about it, and whether it was a campaign strategy, she answered:

    Does that represent the view of your campaign?

    CLINTON: No, he was making a historical statement. And, obviously, what we’re trying to do is to bring America together so that everybody feels like they’re involved and they have a stake in the future.

    That's what pollsters do.  They make historical statements, and analysis of what people have done in the past.  That is what his polls and analysis show, and unfortunately, that is probably accurate.  Trying to turn this into race-baiting by the Clinton campaign is pure idiocy.  And dishonest idiocy at that.

    Do you remember 2000?  Do you remember the Palm Beach debacle, when a bunch of old Jewish ladies accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan?  I don't recall anybody accusing pollsters of "race-baiting" when they said this was evidence of error, because polls show Jews would not vote for that Nazi son of a bitch.  Why not?  Well, either because that was pollsters doing what pollsters do, or because we liked the answer.  Well, we can't have it both ways, not if we want to remain intellectually honest.

    Shame on you.

    If you refuse to vote for OUR PARTY'S nominee in November, the blood of a thousand back-alley abortions will be on your hands.

    by dhonig on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:29:54 AM PST

    •  Well put... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      milton333, lovin lansing MI, RenMin

      And I'd like to know if what this pollster said is actually true...not something that Kos bothered to back up in this story.

      I can't agree with a story that makes an assertion as large as the one made with no back-up that the guy lied when he made the statement he made.  If it's wrong, then show me.  I don't see where this means that Latinos won't vote for Obama...just that historically Latinos haven't voted for AA candidates.  I know it happens all the time in LA...Latinos vote for AA candidates, white candidates, Jewish ones...they vote for the person they think will represent them best.

      I have a great amount of respect for Kos and made a point of watching him on Larry King last night...where the talking heads all discussed this idea that the Clinton campaign was pushing this meme...with no proof to back up the idea that this pollster was wrong or that Hillary Clinton specifically used this man's statement to drive a wedge between Latinos and African Americans. In fact, the so called "damning quote" from Hillary starts with the word NO.  

      I've lost a little respect for Kos today.  I'm sure he couldn't give a damn about that, but I find this site getting more ridiculous everyday...and that's a shame since I've been here for years and up until now I've been pushing this site as a must read for all of my liberal friends.

    •  I wish I could recommend (0+ / 0-)

      this comment 100x over.  Thank goodness someone around here is defending intellectual honesty.  It's in rather short supply these days.

      Son, you're makin' the same mistake with Iraq that I did with your mother. I didn't pull out in time.

      by fou on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:08:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  KOS this needs to Stop! (8+ / 0-)

    I don't want to get into a long rant here. But this article is quite inflammatory and you have people taking things quite personally on both sides of the coin.

    The facts are the facts, and I accept them whether they are for or against my particular candidate. But we cannot and should not claim to act like the silly pundits that infer dishonest acts on everyone and their grandmother in this campaign.

    So some supporter was quoted something a bit odd. And the candidate stated that it the person was referring to a "historical" trend. That in itself isn't enough to conduct an attack on any candidate.

    All I am saying is that "we" as a community need to stay above the fray, so to speak, and not succumb to the poison rhetoric and innuendo of the pundits seeking ratings.

    ENOUGH IS ENOUGH PEOPLE!

    1. keep it civil.
    1. get your facts first.
    1. then respond with an "open mind"

    Otherwise, you aren't doing anyone any good.

    Telling it like I see it,
    Wynter

    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." - Hitchhiker's Guide

    by Wynter on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:31:55 AM PST

    •  telling it like I am beginning to see (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lovin lansing MI

      it is that this site has spun totally out of control since they changed the 'troll' ratings to 'hidden' rtaings, which is being abused to a degree that the site no longer has any real validity as one factions's supporters or the other in effect are 'disappearing' many valuable voices of reason.

  •  Google: Hostility between African American and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Destardi

    Hispanic communities' and you will find many articles on the growing, not lessening, hostility between these two ethnic and cultural groups. Most of them appear to be cultural and social and economic and ot political. I did not see Senator Clinton or the Clinton campaign cited as a source for what is being claimed is a scurrilous slander.

    It appears to be a proven fact especially in barrio and ghetto areas of major cities, many gang-related, many of them in the West.

    Can't we at least try and maintain some emblamce of fairness here?

    •  * sigh * (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      soccergrandmom, Mas Gaviota

      You're right about, one thing. Most of it is gang related. But then again, most of us aren't in gangs...

      •  and I'm pretty sure the pollster wasn't talking (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        soccergrandmom

        about the gangsters....

      •  oh, sorry, I didn't realise this was about US (0+ / 0-)

        I thought it was about the rumours of hostility between African American and Hispanic communities. Silly me!

        •  I'm part of the AA community (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          soccergrandmom

          and I've had relations with Hispanic community since I was a child. So when I speak of "us" I speak of me and my friends in the Hispanic community. My apologies for not being clear.

          •  your apology is accepted. (0+ / 0-)

            I am part of the Hispanic society and i was not taking the escalating warfare here personally, I was viewing the subject as a contemporary and historial reality.  That is what I always try to do. I try not to inject my own preferences or personal realities into a group discussion.

            The question of whether or not personal preferences and experiences are trrhe driiiving factor in either the primaries (which it probably is) and then the general( where I think it less likely) is the subject for a rational debate. That however in these heated days is less and less likely here.

            There are very feew African American's in the communities in my state so I imagine we bring  different perspectives. Although in my working life for forty years I have lived and worked in almost exclusively black communities in the caribbean, in Africa, as well as in New York City.

            Thanks for your clarification anyway. I shall take it as being genuine and not sarcasm.

            •  Hee (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              soccergrandmom

              I'm glad. And I assure you, I wasn't being sarcastic. It kinda messed up my point when you couldn't even tell what "us" I was referring to.
              To be honest, my main beef is that people like Pat Buchanan took the tension between the black and Hispanic gangs on the street and in prison, and used that as the standard of feelings between both communities. That's my problem.  Gangs are notorious for using extreme identity politics. That's what they're based on.  They are in no way, shape, or form, the views of the general community.
              As far as perspectives goes, I pretty much lived in Chicago in black, Hispanic, and black/Hispanic communities.

    •  I think some of it is immigration related. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      soccergrandmom

      There have been some African Americans and AA groups that have been anti immigrant rights, especially undocumented immigrants. I hope the AA vs. hispanic/latino issure doesn't get played too hard.
      Obama has been so strong on hispanic/latino issues. He's the best on the immigration issue.
      Occasionally Dobbsians tv immigrant bashers will have some African American commentator saying about how immigration and the undocumented and immigration reform hurt the black community. It's not true or fair. And then the Miami Urban League President opposes Immigration Reform. In spite of the fact that most African Americans support reform, the anti immigrant message plays to the Hispanic community. Makes me sick. Then the Latino press shows African Americans being against the undocumented and against comprehensive reform.

      When I see some in the African American community, especially leaders, jumping on the anti immigrant bandwagon I can foresee consequences in our two largest minority community. They need to stick together and see how their interests are similar. Discriminated against minorities have to struggle together for better schools, better jobs, fair taxes, eliminating discrimination, child care, health care, high rent and mortgage payments. And the list goes on.
      We have 2 good candidates now. Let the healing begin. I hope the Clinton campaign and their supporters will get their act together, and keep away from anything that could even be viewed as race baiting. And I hope the Obama campaign will stop the I hate Hillary campaign. The Republicans are the real enemy.

      That said, we should critisize race baiting, without blowing minor subtleties in discusions of race out of proportion. Hopefully, the recent critisism will help to calm down that issue here, and elsewhere.

  •  KOS, what a bunch of shit (5+ / 0-)

    your site is going down in flames because of Crap like this not only on the rec'd list but also on FP. YOU SUCK! you should really start thinking before posting

  •  This is funny... (0+ / 0-)

    Link

    But in a political stunt worthy of the late Evel Knievel, the Clinton campaign decided to put on an ersatz victory party that, it hoped, would erase memories of Obama's actual victory Saturday night in South Carolina's Democratic primary. "Thank you, Florida Democrats!" Clinton shouted to the cheering throng. "I am thrilled to have this vote of confidence."

    It was a perfect reproduction of an actual victory speech, delivered at a perfectly ersatz celebration at a perfectly pretend location: a faux Italianate palace with lion sculptures, indoor fountains and a commanding view of Interstate 595. The Signature Grand ("Elegant Weddings and Grand Social Occasions") was also holding receptions Tuesday night for a pediatric practice and for a group of optometry students, but the Clinton campaign was the biggest draw: It filled the Silver Palm Room, the Golden Palm Room and the Emerald Palm Room.

    But even some of the faithful in the hall doubted that the big margin for Clinton, flashed on a projection screen, was an accurate gauge of the race here. "Probably not," said Eleanor Forte, on the outer rim of the celebration. "If they had campaigned here, it probably would have come out differently."

    That was a nuance the Clinton campaign was hoping to overlook as it sought retroactively to give weight to the Florida primary. "I am a gutter-ball bowler," Clinton said as she campaigned Sunday night in the state in which she had pledged not to campaign. The remark, overheard by a Miami Herald reporter, was no doubt meant literally; she was standing outside Lucky Strike Lanes in Miami Beach. But in politics, too, Clinton has recently been putting some questionable rotation on the ball.

    First came the South Carolina primary, in which she and her husband tried unsuccessfully to morph Barack Obama into Jesse Jackson. Then came word Sunday that she would fly here to celebrate her "victory" in the Florida primary -- even though she and the other Democratic candidates long ago declared it null and void. She said she wanted restoration of the stripped delegates from disobedient Florida and Michigan (where Clinton, the only major candidate on the ballot, beat "uncommitted," 55 percent to 40 percent).

    "There are more voters in Florida alone than there are in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina combined," Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle argued in a conference call with reporters Tuesday. This was the same Solis Doyle who last summer committed Clinton to signing the Florida boycott pledge, saying, "We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process, and we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role."



  •  Your commentary... (4+ / 0-)

    ...left out any specific examples/links to "it."  

    I don't know how the river got so wide. ~Leonard Cohen

    by Caldonia on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:35:59 AM PST

  •  About the New Yorker article, a must read (0+ / 0-)

    the most striking thing about it is this line:

    "Racial politics have been refreshingly absent from this campaign..."

    How fast things change.  

    http://www.newyorker.com/...

  •  Oversimplification. (6+ / 0-)

    Calling this issue a "crock of shit" in a Hillary hit diary is an oversimplification.  There's a great deal of research on this issue that indicates that race is very likely to be a factor.  Dismissing this important dynamic does not eliminate the dynamic itself.

    •  Infering it upon the candidate is... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lovin lansing MI

      a crock of shit. A pollster isn't the candidate. They are looking for likely pools of voters to go after. They look at age, race, sex, location, affluence, etc. All very vulgar items to gauge people by, but its their job to look at that.. to infer the candidate is working the campaign into a race-based war of blacks against latinos is quite honestly a sham.

      "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." - Hitchhiker's Guide

      by Wynter on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:50:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Race important for whom? (0+ / 0-)

      My daughter is 20, and among her many friends, from many different backgrounds, countries of origin, skin tones, etc. the concept (a cultural one by the way, not a biological one) of race simply is not important, an issue, thought of much, etc.  The concept of race is more important perhaps to some older folks who still do this divisions in their heads (I'm 62 btw).

  •  If you are going to discuss race and Latinos (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cythera4

    You should also discuss fairly prevelant Macho attitudes among Hispanic men that marginalize women into domestic roles.  Do you think that these Latinos will vote for a woman or their spouses will challenge their husbands?

    •  Don't cry for me Eva Clinton... (0+ / 0-)

      ...or the current president of Argentina, or the current president of Chile.

      Unfortunately these assumptions and generalizations are more complicated than we want them.  Your post is more than mildly offensive...and certainly indicative of weak thinking and sloppy essentialism.

      dunkel ist das leben...

      by harry the taoist on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:47:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Argentina is not our neighbor (0+ / 0-)

        And it is a valid point.  The ability of the leader is more important and the comments were meant to offend, just like the comments on race are offensive.  If this crap is going to continue to get trotted out then lets discuss all of it.

  •  So the Obama camp is back to the racist theme (7+ / 0-)

    And Kos is fanning the flames. Sweet. How fucking unifying can you get.

  •  Kos denigrates Hillary again and again. SAD! (5+ / 0-)

    It looks like dailykos has become the place to be if your business is to to denigrate Hillary. It's obvious that the vast majority of what one might define as reactionary posters, on dailykos, seem to be incapable of uttering mature and progressive reactions to a woman running for the highest office. SAD.

    As I've said, in an earlier thread, I would guess that any litmus test required in order to check the true progressiveness of any rabid Obama supporter, should incorporate language critical of America. In my experience, it's usually only staunch republicans who take offence in the fact that one might be critical of certain aspects of American society. I, for one, am highly critical of certain aspects of the society I live in. In fact, any progressive minded person will, of course, almost always be far less patriotic and nationalistic than than your average right-winger. Sadly therefore, and based partly on many of the responses to this diary, I've come to conclude that a majority, it seems, of Mr Obama's supporters on dailykos are, in fact, republicans in disguise.

    •  my guess is that maybe 30-40% of obama supporters (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lovin lansing MI

      have a higher loyalty than the democratic party, since that's what most of the polls about whether they'll support the nominee show.  whether this loyalty is to obama himself or another political entity is immaterial if you're counting votes.

      as hillary's delegate count grinds on toward 2025, either they'll leave, or the website as a whole will develop a new mission statement. the one about electing nore and better democrats will seeem a bit irrelevant at that point since they won't be able to bring themselves to actually vote for democrats.

      Hillary 2008 - Flying Monkey Squadron 283

      by campskunk on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:57:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  ...and they demonstrate a serious lack of (0+ / 0-)

        knowledge of contemporary history. When J.Jacksonjr started to spin Hillary's take on LBJ's role on  civil rights legislation, it was sad to see how a lack of historical insight can lead the angry masses into ignorance... However, I've been listening to Obama and want to hear RFK or Dr. King. But I find it sort of like listening to The Archies and hoping to hear Dylan or The Beatles. The trappings are there, but no substance there seem to be.

  •  Clean up your act people! (5+ / 0-)

    I thought this group of people were "progressive", not just in politics, but on principle. This so-called "gotcha" on the Clinton Campaign is nothing but a pollster citing the facts he uses to make judgements on where to put his very limited resources for best results.

    Was it a politick response, NO.

    Was it a quote from Hillary, NO.

    It was a factual, historically accurate statement from a pollster that thinks in numbers like economic indicators and racial profiles. Not like the candidate which is focusing on her campaign issues and policies.

    If we were all progressive in principle, we would all understand this and not simply overhype a single simple statement and make it into a open bleeding wound in the campaign. We are above these tactics!

    I know why these tactics are coming about and it's not a pretty thing to see. It's because so many people here are rabidly chasing after Sen. Obama as the next president. I am not saying beleiving in your candidate is somehow wrong. But we need to keep ourselves in check and keep perspective on the issues going on around us. Otherwise, we are just acting like a hackjob pundit. Keep an open mind and focus on the facts, not the rumors that support your choice. Give each candidate a fair shake when going over these items you see here and in the other news of the day.

    And above all, get the whole truth, before you repeat something that was false to others here.

    Just saying,
    Wynter

    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." - Hitchhiker's Guide

    by Wynter on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:46:50 AM PST

    •  if I could recommend it a thousand times I would (0+ / 0-)

      but today I have finally given up seeking any kind of fairness or balance here on this website.

      For one, I think it should have been disclosed last night on CNN's Larry King, that Marcos, as well as being the founder of DailyKos has also publicly stated on his blog that he has voted for obama. Surely that by any standards is an 'endorsement' and in the interests of full disclosure to enable viewers to evaluate the various voices giving them conflicting opinions and varying degrees of expertise need to know exactly where each 'guest' stands. For example, we know who is actually employed by CNN (and i use them genrically) so know how to weigh their views on the scales of our own acceptance.

      When outside experts are brought in the viewers are entitled to know what their personal and political preferences are.  Telvision has become a game show where we get to pick the winners.  Full disclosure is essential.

      The first rule of accurate journalism is 'Consider The Source'.  That probably does not apply anymore though, since objective and crredible journalism is now in the dustbin of history.

  •  Well (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    velvet blasphemy

    if I could recommend this one, I would.

    Thanks for pointing this out.  

  •  Thank you (0+ / 0-)

    I heard this (that Latinos wouldn't support blacks) but didn't know if it were true or not.  And I noticed that the Noise Machine was getting louder about it.  Soon, it would become "conventional wisdom."

    Thank you for telling the truth.  What would we do without blogs?????

  •  Racialization. Alliances and political events. (0+ / 0-)

    Race & race divisions are not static. They have origins. They are always changing: either being created, built up, stimulated, or overrided, demoted, eroded, diminished, eventually forgotten.
    Political alliances and events are decisive in this.

  •  "America will never vote for a black guy." (0+ / 0-)

    I think we need to start a betting pool on when a Clinton surrogate (one who will surely be disavowed by the Clinton campaign), puts the sentiment in my subject line into play publicly before February 5.

    I predict Friday.

    Any other bets?

    •  well they already did..according to Obama (0+ / 0-)

      Why not lie and say they've already said that,
      considering everything obama supporters and media say about Hillary and Bill is a lie:

      http://mediamatters.org/...

      •  "According to Obama?" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mas Gaviota

        The MediaMatters link you posted doesn't say squat about Obama. The title of the piece is:

        Media outlets continued to mislead on the Clintons' "fairy tale" and civil rights quotes

        Note that the title says "Media outlets," not "Obama" or "Obama campaign."

        Are you having a problem with reading comprehension?

        •  ooooohhhh, bob johnson.... (0+ / 0-)

          that was just an attention getter.

          In YOUR post you're suggesting that will be Hillary's next insinuation...

          I was being SARCASTIC in the sense that YOU and other Obama supporters are not smart enough to read Bill's actual comments, and go charging off making dangerous claims such as racism tainting the Dem election.

          YOU people are the ones causing the problem, and making us look stupid because YOU join the chorus of lemmings "clinton is racist clinton is racist"
          without knowing the FACTS...YOU people are dividing, not Hillary or her supporters.

          Now, read that again
          http://mediamatters.org/...

          now read Obama's "leaked memo" which caused a racial stir even more:
          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

          Did any of that make it to the news outlets?

          NOPE.

          Obama's gaining votes by dividing the races...the media threw the ball, and Obama hit a home run with "racism whispers".

          DISGUSTING!

          What was that you said about "reading comprehension"?

          •  Golly, calm down. (0+ / 0-)

            All the shouting...

            Yeah, Hill and Bill have never played dirty. They are all pure and clean.

            Jeesh...

            •  re: Calm Down (0+ / 0-)

              Bob, first it's never personal...and I certainly don't mean to negate your point of view BUT:

              The LOWEST of the low is to divide people by racism, and your reasoning that essentially says "the Clinton's play dirty too" in no way excuses the Obama camps' exploitation of racial gaps in America.

              Obama will never get my vote in any way, shape or form...Clinton might triangulate, but at least they've always kept it political and not personal.

              How can his supporters call him a uniter when he's just pulled a brilliant Rovian tactic?

              http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

              http://mediamatters.org/...

              Race baiting...it's a dangerous thing to do.

              •  Nonsense. (0+ / 0-)

                The Clinton started all this crap and I suspect they'll finish it. They are nasty folks when it comes to their own ambitions.

                Unlike you, apparently, I will vote for the Dem nominee.

                I find it humorous that exit polls in South Carolina showed that there were more Clinton supporters who vowed they would never back Obama than the other way around.

                And the Obaam supporters are always labeled as "Kool-Aid drinkers" by the Clinton folks.

                That's hilarious.

    •  why wait. Why don't you just put out the word (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Radiowalla, jxg

      here that the clinton camp says that America will never elect a black President and link it to DailyKos. I will bet you can get the meme circulating throughout the entire blog world by 5 pm tonight.

      Go ahead, let's see how quick you can get this pot bubbling.

  •  The Real Spin (5+ / 0-)

    You cite very thin anecdotal evidence to support the charge that the "Clinton Campaign" is purposefully using race issues to influence election outcomes.

    Well how about the Obama campaign and supporters continually accusing the Clinton campaign of using "race issues" to Obama's disadvantage and Clinton's advantage? This is the spin that is winning at the moment. All of the news people, politicians, and Obama supporters who hate the Clintons gladly pile on and accept this spin uncritically as gospel -- to Clinton's disadvantage.

    Honest arguments need honest effort

    by Political Logic on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:56:44 AM PST

    •  It's the media/blogs that are race-baiting (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jxg, lovin lansing MI

      on behalf of obama

      http://mediamatters.org/...

      •  Thanks for linking to this MediaMatters piece! (0+ / 0-)

        I hadn't seen it and I'm glad that they are not ignoring these egregious inaccuracies.

        Not that it will influence  the race-baiting going on right here.

        It's the Supreme Court, Stupid!

        by Radiowalla on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 10:50:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  your logic is impeccable (0+ / 0-)

      but I can't agree that the 'MSM" loves or hates either candidate.  Their love is purely for the 'GREEN" and I dont mean the environment. It is Money, money, money, that deives the 24/7 news cycklewsa. Advcertising revenue. Last night Chris Matthews actually alluded to it by saying their revenues are up.

      They will stoke whatever fire is handy to raise the temeperature so people will watch their network, basically CNN, MSNBC and FOX being the candidates in their race for the biggest bottom line during the finite primary season.  The hotter the flames the bigger the pot.

      What is truly surprising me is how quickly the blogosphere, especially here on DK, have fallen for it and are enthusiastically emulating their most rabid anchors.  I must confess I did nto expect that. I truly bought the line that this time it would be different. That the blogs would provide an alternative perspecitive.

      Such disillusionment.  Anyway it has proved to be better entertainemnt in the mornings anyways. I still watch the nightly wars on television at night.

  •  you wish (0+ / 0-)

    statistics did show so far they will vote for Hillary

  •  The Original New Yorker Article (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FlipYrWhig, JamesBrown4ever

    http://www.newyorker.com/...

    Here is the quote everyone, in context. It's clear that Bendixen had absolutely no reason to riff on Hispanic voters supporting, or not, black candidates.

    On the morning after Clinton’s victory, I talked to Sergio Bendixen, one of her pollsters, who specializes in the Hispanic vote. "In all honesty, the Hispanic vote is extremely important to the Clinton campaign, and the polls have shown—and today is not a great day to cite polls—that even though she was slipping with women in Iowa and blacks in South Carolina, she was not slipping with Hispanics," he said. "The fire wall doesn’t apply now, because she is in good shape, but before last night the Hispanic vote was going to be the most important part of her fire wall on February 5th." The implications of that strategy are not necessarily uplifting.

    When I asked Bendixen about the source of Clinton’s strength in the Hispanic community, he mentioned her support for health care, and Hispanic voters’ affinity for the Clinton era. "It’s one group where going back to the past really works," he said. "All you need to say in focus groups is ‘Let’s go back to the nineties.’ " But he was also frank about the fact that the Clintons, long beloved in the black community, are now dependent on a less edifying political dynamic: "The Hispanic voter—and I want to say this very carefully—has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

    The question was just about Clinton's strength with the Hispanic community. For Bendixen to then turn the answer around and talk about how hispanics don't vote for blacks was CLEARLY unnecessary and CLEARLY out of bounds race baiting.

    •  Reco (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JamesBrown4ever

      For the full quotation, even though I don't agree with the analysis.

      •  Honestly (0+ / 0-)

        I think Bendixen should've just stayed in the realm of talking up Clinton's strengths. Why move into the negative about hispanics not supporting blacks? Especially when that's not even proven by history?

        I think that was clearly uncalled for.

        •  Bendixen (0+ / 0-)

          But he was also frank about the fact that the Clintons, long beloved in the black community, are now dependent on a less edifying political dynamic: "The Hispanic voter—and I want to say this very carefully—has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

          I mistrust the writer's frame that the statement is tied to "a less edifying political dynamic," and in fact I'm not entirely convinced that Bendixen's second quote statement immediately followed the first.  

          I can all too readily imagine the reporter asking, "But why wouldn't Hispanic voters back Obama?" and then not writing it up as part of the story, figuring the answer is more interesting than the question.  It might be sloppy, not malicious, but I've been reading The Daily Howler too long not to be extremely dubious about how reporters work.

  •  "A few weeks ago?" (0+ / 0-)

    A day is a week in this business.

    Surely there must be a litany of such Clinton campaign staffer comments to the media we can easily google & not just one isolated, recycled backwater comment to base this diary on.

    ?

  •  No one in Clinton's camp said it; it's true, tho' (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soccergrandmom

    Hispanics are very antagonistic towards the notion of a black president, which must be analyzed separately from lesser offices.

    There are still legitimate racial tensions within our country; Obama's campaign serves as a concealer rather than an ointment, and I think Hispanics are not likely to be duped.

  •  Why Clinton won florida with 800 thousand votes (0+ / 0-)

    There was this little referendum on the ballot:

    Amendment - 1 Property Tax Changes - Ballot Issue
    Florida - 6903 of 6913 Precincts Reporting - 99%
    Name Votes Vote %
    Yes 2,635,790 64%
    No 1,477,823 36%

    It was a very important issue which had to do with the funding for pretty much everything local.

    •  I'm sorry, but this is misleading. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      soccergrandmom

      Perhaps voter turnout was high because of the initiative, but those people could just as easily have pulled the lever for Obama, or Edwards for that matter.  Why didn't they?

      Son, you're makin' the same mistake with Iraq that I did with your mother. I didn't pull out in time.

      by fou on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:10:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  sorry, I don't see what that has to do with (0+ / 0-)

      people voting for Clinton? that surely has to do with voter turnout. Surely she has nothing to do with ballot initiatives in Florida? I thought she was New York's senator?

      •  Name recognition, mostly (0+ / 0-)

        Obama didn't campaign there. He did, however, gain eight points in the last few days.

        •  neither did Hillary (0+ / 0-)

          but they both held fund raisers I beleive, and although I have no links I was certain that Obama was running an ad campaign, not sure whether clinton was as well, or edwards for that matter.

          All allowable udner the DNC's rules for disenfranchsing delegates because the state dem party violated the agreed upon rule.  If any of these things are untrue I would be more than grateful if you would provide links.

          I am not trying to stir up trouble, just trying to keep the playing fields level.  I am an anachronism in journalism. I prefer fair and balanced and accuracy.

  •  Thanks for front-paging this, kos. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fredly, Mas Gaviota

    It hasn't gotten much attention.  I thought it was yet another appalling example of the Clinton campaign's pattern of injecting racial issues in order to marginalize Obama.  Very disappointing.  And, of course, you can always count on the idiotic MSM to just chortle along and uncritically echo any kind of divisive statement like this that furthers their horserace narrative.

  •  Norah's laugh is more annoying than Hillary's. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bten

    Moron O'Donnell on MSNBC last night stated how BIG the Kennedy endorsement was with the Hispanic community because Bobby Kennedy was tight with Hugo Chavez.

    HEY MORON!!! Robert Kennedy's family is in the Clinton camp!!! Oy Vey.

  •  Gore makes dirty racist attack (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FlipYrWhig

    on Pat Buchanan.

    Palm Beach, Florida (November 2000)- In response to Pat Buchanan receiving surprising support from the Jewish community, the Gore camp unleashed a racist attack.  Relying on "pollsters" providing "historical data," Gore and his surrogates argued Buchanan did not really earn his votes, because "all those Jewish people in Palm Beach certainly weren't voting for Buchanan."  Gore's spokesperson, Donna Brazile, attempted to defend the attack, saying "look, Buchanan has always been hostile to Jews and to Israel.  We just don't believe all those little old Jewish ladies voted for him."  Buchanan's camp, when told of Brazile's comment, responded, "the votes were counted, and we got them.  Gore is just making a desparate and dirty racial attack, injection what we can only describe as anti-Semitism into the race.  I say 'anti-Semitism' because it is grossly insulting, and racist, to presume you can predict what people will do based upon history and data, as if the voters were not individual people capable of making up their own minds."

    If you refuse to vote for OUR PARTY'S nominee in November, the blood of a thousand back-alley abortions will be on your hands.

    by dhonig on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:31:22 AM PST

  •  Demographic generalizations... (0+ / 0-)

    deal sharply with realities that are actually pretty fuzzy.  They're artificial distinctions that do more to paralyze and suck the life out of political efforts than they do to make them more successful.

    Only weak candidates depend on such tactics.  You should be able to appeal broadly if you want to win broadly.

  •  We need clean and clear thinking (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    daryln

    The idea of whether Latinos will vote for a black candidate is complicated.  There is certainly plenty of evidence that they will.

    But tell me no one in the Obama campaign didn't think through what Teddy's endorsement means in Latino communities.  Tell me that Latinos aren't supportive of Clinton more than they were of Edwards, or are now of Obama.  There are historical reasons.  Part of it is a certain black-brown tension, especially among older Latinos.  The essentialist notions of what is "Latino" itself is suspect, of course.  Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, other Afro-Latinos are very different from Mexicans.  Mexican gachupines are different from Mexican mestizos.  Mexicanos nacidos en Mexico are different from Chicanos.

    But to say that there is not a complicated relationship between those groups is wishful thinking.  And as we build a better country, where we look at bringing people together, ignoring realities isn't helpful.  A friend's son, a Latino, writes for USA Today and had written an article about the problematic relationship of the black and brown communities... the editors softened it down, saying "nobody wants to hear this now."

    If Obama is nominated, his outreach to Latinos will be a watershed moment in US social/ethnic history.  It will be "Progressive" in the most profound sense.  But to say it will not be complicated is delusional.

  •  Here's some real analysis (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    harry the taoist

    Son, you're makin' the same mistake with Iraq that I did with your mother. I didn't pull out in time.

    by fou on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 09:46:04 AM PST

  •  Nobody likes to hear this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla

    but it's the blogosphere that has pushed the race line.  Good night, all of a sudden the blogosphere is aflame with speculation about the Latino vote.  Yes, let's obsess about that for the next few days, and interpret every little thing that anyone says about it as being somehow racist.

  •  G-rod burns a straw man. The crowd loves it. (0+ / 0-)

    The relevant question of fact is not whether Latinos are "relentlessly racist" (which is the alternative Rodrigeuz poses).

    The relevant question of fact is not whether Latinos have ever voted for black candidates.

    The relevant question of fact is whether Latinos have demonstrated reluctance to support black candidates ... and on this point, one of Clinton's pollsters made a carefully qualified statement, well-founded in opinion research.

    [I might mention that in my town, the Latino political community and the black political community are locked in fierce conflict. YMMV.]

    Clinton-haters (some with journalistic posts, some with academic posts and some with blog posts) declared it a bloody shirt and took off running down the street with it.

    So, what's new?

  •  What are the (0+ / 0-)

    Latino total of registered voters?  Does anybody have an idea of what kind of numbers were talking?  

  •  I'm in love with SignalSuzie (0+ / 0-)

    Suzie...

  •  Uh, it's true (0+ / 0-)

    At least here in CA. Ask Mayor Villaraigosa.

  •  that editorial is a crock of shit (0+ / 0-)

    there is absolutely nothing about this meme that could possibly serve the Clinton campaign. They don't want to look like the beneficiaries of racism!! Why on earth would they promote this line of thinking? It is simple, they aren't promoting this line of thinking. Wherever this bullshit meme is coming from it ain't camp Clnton.

  •  Why is Benedix being pilloried? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LittlegNYC

    The posters to this site are outrageous.

    This man stated a hard and true fact:

    One of the posters printed an excerpt of an extension study done by several sociologists who back up Mr. Benedixen's claims:

    1.  Hispanics are prejudiced toward Blacks.
    1.  Hispanics have benefitted at the expense of AA who struggled for civil rights gains without participating in those struggles, since before the 1960's claimed they were white to "get over."
    1.  Only after civil rights legislation was passed including ALL minorities groups did Hispanics become brown in order to take advantage of those civil rights gains.
    1.  For Cocoalove who states that Blacks and Latinos get along well in Miami - that is an out and out lie and you know it.
    1.  To say that Blacks support immigration is another lie.  Why would Blacks commit suicide in an attempt to advance another group over them.
    1.  Blacks do not support immigration reform.

    These are hard true facts that many of you academic-types need to consider as you sit sipping your lattes and typing away on the keyboard.

    Hillary Clinton didn't say it, Obama Barack didn't say it so give it a rest on the nuances of who said what.  

    Take it for what it is.  Truth speaking.  Something many of you who are so desperate to sound sophisticated and erudite have forgotten.

  •  The MSM media fools us again (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ignacio Magaloni

    The media is once again writing the narrative. It only becomes CW because they say so. The pundits endlessly pontificate about racial and gender issues in voting patterns. Demographic issues are always fair game in political discussions(no matter what the racial and gender of the canidates). The Democrats should be proud that they offering a historic choice of canidates. Instead the press and unfortunately many of the canidates supporters are turning the "nuts of bolts" of politics into a devisive fight.

  •  Thank you KOS for making me feel bettter about... (0+ / 0-)

    This Black Issue.  My mother and I are only 18 years apart....white women.  We both voted for Obama....in the SOUTH....Case Closed.

  •  Thanks, Kos, for this clear call (0+ / 0-)

    to end the stigmatization of Latinos as racists.

    The moment I read that bit of spin from a vendido pollster in the Hilary camp, I knew that, should Edwards drop out, I would certainly have to back "Si Se Puede" Obama.

    Habeas Corpus:See Hamilton quoting Blackstone in The Federalist Papers, number 84.

    by Ignacio Magaloni on Thu Jan 31, 2008 at 11:25:58 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site