Obama forced to "confirm his blackness?"

[Ben E Lou]

Fascinating double-edge sword regarding the jobs pitch.



The Associated Press: Obama jobs plan heartens frustrated blacks (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9DVMA4zhpjREg4WgQXAEUxFz8cQ?docId=7fb55f1cf20f443188dd8a6a287aa10b)


The specific part of the article that interested me...


Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, an Obama supporter who engaged in damage control for the president this week, said black Americans "need to burst this false notion" that the president should put black unemployment on par with overall unemployment.


"If leaders in our community want to push him to lay out a black agenda, I believe that will end up disserving the black community and help elect people who certainly don't have a past history about caring about the interests of the African-American community," Reed said after Obama's speech. "This debate is weakening the president and puts him in a political position where he has to do something to confirm his blackness."

In other words, Reed seems to be saying there is that if Obama is pushed too hard and too publicly by black leaders, he is forced to "confirm his blackness" to the black community--a political move that is in the final analysis damaging to not only his own chances of re-election, but also to the agendas of the very people who are pushing him. It's actually quite the interesting dynamic.

[Apathetic Lurker]

Very true.......

[Dutch]

Not to make this too simplistic, but I'm pretty sure doing nothing will get 95% of the black vote, so the strategy then would be--why rock the "white community" vote?

[Ben E Lou]

Not to make this too simplistic, but I'm pretty sure doing nothing will get 95% of the black vote, so the strategy then would be--why rock the "white community" vote?95% of the black vote != 95% of the black voters who show up to the polls. Off the top of my head, NC and Florida would be two states that went Obama in '08 that I believe were fairly close and that have a significant number of black voters. A bunch of disaffected black voters not showing up in '12 in those two states could be a difference maker in turning them red.

[Dutch]

That's a good point. I didn't think about raw number of votes. What I also don't know is whether an energized black voting block is greater than a apathetic black voting block.

Meaning, assuming the mayor is suggesting an energized black voting block reverses white independents, what's of greater value?

IF ENERGIZED
additional black DNC voters
AND
% of white independents voting RNC INSTEAD OF DNC

IF APATHETIC
only base black voting block
AND
% of white independents voting DNC INSTEAD OF RNC

Both of which also energize or apathize RNC and DNC voters above the usual base numbers.

It does seem like a dangerous game for Obama, especially if there is a close election coming up.

[JPhillips]

I think the Latino vote is going to be a bigger issue than the Black vote. Latinos aren't going to swing to the GOP, but they may stay home.

[RainMaker]

Not to make this too simplistic, but I'm pretty sure doing nothing will get 95% of the black vote, so the strategy then would be--why rock the "white community" vote?
To an extent it's true. Not because Obama is black, but because he's a Democrat. I believe Kerry finished with the same black vote percent as Obama.

The issue comes down to people who actually vote. If a percent of black voters just say "fuck it, I'm not voting", how much does that hurt him? To me it's not the percent who would vote for him, it's the percent who show up to vote at all.

Edit: Nevermind, I didn't read the next few posts.

[SackAttack]

95% of the black vote != 95% of the black voters who show up to the polls. Off the top of my head, NC and Florida would be two states that went Obama in '08 that I believe were fairly close and that have a significant number of black voters. A bunch of disaffected black voters not showing up in '12 in those two states could be a difference maker in turning them red.

An excellent point.

Dutch also makes an excellent point about a "dangerous game", but he fails to recognize that it's a dangerous game for the black community that's calling President Obama out here as well.

There are still parts of the country where voting for a black man is not something that comes easily or naturally, regardless of politics. Obama got elected as the country was heading into the worst economic crisis of my lifetime. In a normal or prosperous economy, I'm not sure that happens.

A one-term Presidency wouldn't help prospects for minority candidates going forward - particularly considering that future minority candidates probably aren't going to be running against an incumbent party that has an economic crisis dragging their candidate down.

In a way, I think it's a similar conundrum the Tea Party faces heading into 2012 - their approach to the debt ceiling debate was "everything I want and a pony too or fuck you." We'll see how the country responds to that approach when the elections roll around.

Same kind of thing here - if the leaders of the community make this a dealbreaker, they may end up getting somebody who's sympathetic to their concerns defeated in favor of somebody who has no intention of working toward their goals, whatsoever (or is, at best, ambivalent about using government power in that way).