If the GOP Seriously Wants to Run Black Candidates, Why Doesn't It Run Serious Black Candidates?

[ZiprHead]

How about Michael Steele? He's intelligent and not completely nuts (although I guess that would disqualify him amongst most Republicans).

And where is he now? Michael Steele was actually trying to get black folk to vote republican because he knew that there is a large number of conservatives within the black voter demographic. But Michael Steele would not just be a figurehead that would counter the image of Barack Obama, would not "Jump Jim Crow" for the white folk, would not kowtow to Tea Party, so that black man had to go!

My A/V reports that as a dangerous site and blocked it. Didn't know of that history. Got a better link perhaps? Sounds like an interesting story.

 

[arkirk]

And where is he now? Michael Steele was actually trying to get black folk to vote republican because he knew that there is a large number of conservatives within the black voter demographic. But Michael Steele would not just be a figurehead that would counter the image of Barack Obama, would not "Jump Jim Crow" for the white folk, would not kowtow to Tea Party, so that black man had to go!

My A/V reports that as a dangerous site and blocked it. Didn't know of that history. Got a better link perhaps? Sounds like an interesting story.

I'll go you one better zippy! Why doesn't the GOP have ANY SERIOUS CANDIDATES OF ANY COLOR?
If you look at their debate slate it is a bunch of haters, of braggarts, and blusterers with nothing to offer but austerity and insult for the common man. The odd thing is that America seems to be a country full of folks that enjoy getting hurt by their polticians. The Democrats have different problems with an insincere Woman candidate who is always billed as the front runner and perhaps is given her sponsors' massive influence. She acts so hurt when her duplicity is pointed out by her opponents...like they were not supposed to criticize what is every politician's prerogative...lying, flip flopping, and war mongering.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

the candidates the GOP runs reflect what they think of the groups to which those candidates belong. Run black candidates who are buffoons and you are saying to the world "We think black people are buffoons."

You say that as though Ben Carson were an iota more of a buffoon than Donald Trump.

Trump is balanced by other white candidates who are, well, not TRUMP. Carson is it for black folk running for president. TRUMP will never be consider representative of all white people. Carson puts one foot wrong, the choruses of "just like those people" begins. And there is a counter narrative to the character TRUMP, in that this whole performance is just that, a performance. Carson's whole appeal begins with he is sincere.

The problem with your whole premise is that "the GOP" doesn't "run" candidates. Candidates are self-selected.

Yes and no. Let's just say, if the powers that be within the GOP (or the Dem. Party) don't want a particular person to run, that person probably won't run and if they do, they won't get party support.

If non-buffoonish candidates of whatever color don't want to run for President -- and why would anyone in his or her right mind want the job, let alone the deranged campaign -- then what's a party supposed to do about it? Back in the 80s I heard a lecture on the radio about the Soviet Union by some obscure poli sci professor named Condoleezza Rice and decided on the spot that she should be the President. But now, even if she wants the job, she's damaged goods -- irrevocably associated with Bush's disaster in Iraq. She knows perfectly well that that will be a massive anchor around her neck if she ever runs. How's the GOP supposed to fix that?

Stop courting the low information vote. See, the low information voter likes voting for low information candidates. Which gets you to the field of contenders and the idiotic talking points you have with this years crop of would be nominees.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

And where is he now? Michael Steele was actually trying to get black folk to vote republican because he knew that there is a large number of conservatives within the black voter demographic. But Michael Steele would not just be a figurehead that would counter the image of Barack Obama, would not "Jump Jim Crow" for the white folk, would not kowtow to Tea Party, so that black man had to go!

My A/V reports that as a dangerous site and blocked it. Didn't know of that history. Got a better link perhaps? Sounds like an interesting story.

http://maxblumenthal.com/2009/03/the-rushed-rise-and-fall-of-the-rncs-first-black-chairman/

 

[arkirk]

Athena: "Those people" are Republicans...and Carson IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Athena: "Those people" are Republicans...and Carson IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

The problem with Carson is that he is a kook. A creationist, ignorant about basic things like the pyramid crap, religiously fundamentalist in a not so good way, his economic "plans" are dangerously naive and unworkable.

As president, he'd be in way over his head.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Athena: "Those people" are Republicans...and Carson IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

Not among the tea party base.

 

[ZiprHead]

My A/V reports that as a dangerous site and blocked it. Didn't know of that history. Got a better link perhaps? Sounds like an interesting story.

http://maxblumenthal.com/2009/03/the-rushed-rise-and-fall-of-the-rncs-first-black-chairman/

Thanks. I'll check it out.

 

[arkirk]

Athena: "Those people" are Republicans...and Carson IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

The problem with Carson is that he is a kook. A creationist, ignorant about basic things like the pyramid crap, religiously fundamentalist in a not so good way, his economic "plans" are dangerously naive and unworkable.

As president, he'd be in way over his head.

We had George W, Bush and he clearly was in over his head, but he had handlers who were milking his presidency. We lived through that. It is not looking like we can take too many more of these characters. I definitely am hoping for the best but these contests have usually boiled down to two corporatists facing each other in the last round in November...each of the TWO candidates having a long chain of corporate obligations to fulfill. All of our winning politicians have been that way. Carter was perhaps just a bit short on corporate support and appeared more liberal than any that followed him. He was torn to ribbons by his moneyed scheming adversares in the campaign for his second term.

 

[arkirk]

Athena: "Those people" are Republicans...and Carson IS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE.

Not among the tea party base.

I frankly think we will be more severely troubled economically if we get another Republican president. As has already been pointed out, Carson is in way over his head, tea party or not and he will not make the cut.

 

[ZiprHead]

My A/V reports that as a dangerous site and blocked it. Didn't know of that history. Got a better link perhaps? Sounds like an interesting story.

http://maxblumenthal.com/2009/03/the-rushed-rise-and-fall-of-the-rncs-first-black-chairman/

Hi, Athena

I read your link and a couple others about Steele. Much of it confirmed my prior beliefs about him as being very intelligent and a very savvy political leader. He was quite successful running the GOP. He apparently misjudged the idea that Rush Limbaugh really is the de facto leader of the Republican party. Apparently his success didn't matter. The GOP, being controlled by a mouth-breathing, know-nothing voting block, makes me wonder how they can be so successful.

The Dems could use a guy like him.

 

[arkirk]

http://maxblumenthal.com/2009/03/the-rushed-rise-and-fall-of-the-rncs-first-black-chairman/

Hi, Athena

I read your link and a couple others about Steele. Much of it confirmed my prior beliefs about him as being very intelligent and a very savvy political leader. He was quite successful running the GOP. He apparently misjudged the idea that Rush Limbaugh really is the de facto leader of the Republican party. Apparently his success didn't matter. The GOP, being controlled by a mouth-breathing, know-nothing voting block, makes me wonder how they can be so successful.

The Dems could use a guy like him.

I do not regard Steele as smart. He was instead trapped between Limbaugh and his conscience. He should have looked at where his zeal was taking him before he joined up with the Republicans who do have clear racist agendas. Any notion he could back that down is just plain wrong headed. How smart was that?

 

[ZiprHead]

Hi, Athena

I read your link and a couple others about Steele. Much of it confirmed my prior beliefs about him as being very intelligent and a very savvy political leader. He was quite successful running the GOP. He apparently misjudged the idea that Rush Limbaugh really is the de facto leader of the Republican party. Apparently his success didn't matter. The GOP, being controlled by a mouth-breathing, know-nothing voting block, makes me wonder how they can be so successful.

The Dems could use a guy like him.

I do not regard Steele as smart. He was instead trapped between Limbaugh and his conscience. He should have looked at where his zeal was taking him before he joined up with the Republicans who do have clear racist agendas. Any notion he could back that down is just plain wrong headed. How smart was that?

He made one mistake. He insulted the King. Other than that, he was extremely successful at advancing the party during the short time he was their leader. Insulting the King, however, requires beheading.

He actually could have been one of the few Republicans I might have considered voting for. Probably wouldn't anyway since most of the Rep platform is disagreeable to me. But I still respect the man.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Hi, Athena

I read your link and a couple others about Steele. Much of it confirmed my prior beliefs about him as being very intelligent and a very savvy political leader. He was quite successful running the GOP. He apparently misjudged the idea that Rush Limbaugh really is the de facto leader of the Republican party. Apparently his success didn't matter. The GOP, being controlled by a mouth-breathing, know-nothing voting block, makes me wonder how they can be so successful.

The Dems could use a guy like him.

I do not regard Steele as smart. He was instead trapped between Limbaugh and his conscience. He should have looked at where his zeal was taking him before he joined up with the Republicans who do have clear racist agendas. Any notion he could back that down is just plain wrong headed. How smart was that?

I think he was naive. I think he thought he could deliver up a third of the black vote to the GOP and be their golden boy. I think he was right about the first part, but then the GOP went hard right after the election of Barack Obama and he wasn't dealing with the same party any more. He thought he was, or that at least he owed some loyalty from moderates in the party.

He was wrong.

 

[Bomb#20]

The problem with your whole premise is that "the GOP" doesn't "run" candidates. Candidates are self-selected.

Yes and no. Let's just say, if the powers that be within the GOP (or the Dem. Party) don't want a particular person to run, that person probably won't run and if they do, they won't get party support.

True, but that's just veto power. When credible candidates aren't in the pool to begin with, what do you do? When has an unenthusiastic drafted candidate won? "Draft Eisenhower" was lovely political theater but he wanted it. Powell and Rice don't appear to want it.

She knows perfectly well that that will be a massive anchor around her neck if she ever runs. How's the GOP supposed to fix that?

Stop courting the low information vote. See, the low information voter likes voting for low information candidates. Which gets you to the field of contenders and the idiotic talking points you have with this years crop of would be nominees.

Quite so. But the parties court the low information vote because the low information voter decides the election. Stop courting him and you lose. The Democratic voters are choosing between two low information candidates too. You want a high information candidate; you think the Democratic Party could draft Elizabeth Warren if they decided to? It doesn't work that way.

Maybe if the mainstream media hadn't torpedoed Lessig, something could have been done about it -- he was the only one talking about reforms to the political process with any chance of breaking the low information voter's grip on the decision. But he was locked out of the debates for not being over 1% in overall polling. Of course, he did poll higher than 1% in every poll his name appeared in; but the MSM simply didn't list him as an option in most of their polls.

 

[untermensche]

I've seen Steele on the Bill Mahar HBO show several times.

I've never heard him say an original or genuine thing.

It is rhetoric and nothing else.

People can call that smart if they want to. Being able to learn the rhetoric.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Yes and no. Let's just say, if the powers that be within the GOP (or the Dem. Party) don't want a particular person to run, that person probably won't run and if they do, they won't get party support.

True, but that's just veto power. When credible candidates aren't in the pool to begin with, what do you do? When has an unenthusiastic drafted candidate won? "Draft Eisenhower" was lovely political theater but he wanted it. Powell and Rice don't appear to want it.

I find it hard to believe that in the length and breadth of the GOP, these clowns are the cream of the crop and the only ones with presidential ambitions. Now, I am not saying that this is not the case. It may very well be the case. I mean, after all, I am familiar with facebook and twitter.

She knows perfectly well that that will be a massive anchor around her neck if she ever runs. How's the GOP supposed to fix that?

Stop courting the low information vote. See, the low information voter likes voting for low information candidates. Which gets you to the field of contenders and the idiotic talking points you have with this years crop of would be nominees.

Quite so. But the parties court the low information vote because the low information voter decides the election. Stop courting him and you lose. The Democratic voters are choosing between two low information candidates too. You want a high information candidate; you think the Democratic Party could draft Elizabeth Warren if they decided to? It doesn't work that way.

Maybe if the mainstream media hadn't torpedoed Lessig, something could have been done about it -- he was the only one talking about reforms to the political process with any chance of breaking the low information voter's grip on the decision. But he was locked out of the debates for not being over 1% in overall polling. Of course, he did poll higher than 1% in every poll his name appeared in; but the MSM simply didn't list him as an option in most of their polls.

The political parties, IF they wanted to and evidently they don't want to, could get around the media and what the media may or may not want, by allowing or demanding of the people they get elected to vote for:

• making voting easier not harder
• making election day a holiday
• having actual debates instead of talking point whine-offs which is what we have been seeing as of late.

and the elephant in the room, GETTING BIG MONEY OUT OF POLITICS.

So once again, the blame for the candidates who run ultimately rests with the political parties, and for the purposes of this discussion, specifically the GOP.

(We can discuss what is wrong with the Dem. Party in another thread, multiple threads since there are multiple things wrong.)