Watching the Republican National Convention was a little like being lost in an Alaskan snowstorm: I was blinded by the unbearable whiteness of being a Republican delegate. It was surprising, therefore, to find out that the delegates were even whiter than they appeared on TV. It seems the camera not only adds ten pounds, it also increases the amount of melanin in the room.
<
p>
| cite: 1, 2, 3 | Democrats | Republicans | National Average |
| White | 57% | 93% | 74% |
| Black | 25% | 2% | 13% |
| Latino | 12% | 5% | 15% |
| Asian | 5% | ~0% ? | 4% |
| Male | 50% | 68% | ~50% |
While 44% of all delegates at the DNC were minorities, this was true for only 7% of RNC delegates. In fact, this was one of the whitest RNC conventions in decades, pretty much since Black Americans effectively regained the franchise:
Only 36 of the 2,380 delegates seated on the convention floor are black, the lowest number since the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies began tracking diversity at political conventions 40 years ago [Link]
This was a big shift from 2000 and 2004, when the Bush campaign successfully reached out strongly to Black and Latino voters. The absence of Latino voters was particularly striking, probably because Latino activists have been driven out of the party grassroots that constitute the delegates by the rancor over immigration.
The party has also made a concerted effort to court Hispanics, but its electoral gains have been diminished by the hard-line stance many Republicans have taken on immigration… 5 percent of delegates are Hispanic, the lowest percentage at a Republican convention since 1996 [Link]
McCain’s own campaign manager said:
“We have to make a better case to the Hispanic voter that the Republican Party has something to offer other than a deportation slip,” [Link]
And while I was unable to find any figures on Asians at the Republican convention, the numbers leave little room for Asian delegates unless in very small number.
<
p>
Note that neither party does a good job of representing the American people as they are today. Democrats over represent Blacks and under represent Whites, the Republicans do the opposite. It’s only with Latino delegates that the Democrats come close to parity and the Republicans are far off. These differences may represent differences in party membership overall.
However, when you look ahead, the Democrats do a far better job of representing America of the future:
The Census Bureau reported last month that racial and ethnic minorities will make up a majority of the country’s population by 2042 — almost a decade earlier than what the bureau predicted just four years ago. [Link]
The difference in minority representation in part emerges from a deliberate difference in approach – the Democrats set diversity goals and the Republics let local parties choose whoever the wish:
Nelson Warfield, a Republican consultant, pointed out that Democratic Party rules called for race- and gender-based numerical goals for state delegations, a factor that most likely contributed to the greater minority presence at the Denver event. “The Republicans,” Mr. Warfield said, “trust delegates to represent the interests of all people more than Democrats do with their quotas.” [Link]
However, these differences are not just a product of ideology. Compare the 2008 convention to the more diverse 2000 and 2004 conventions held under the same rules with the same ideology. This year the core of the party is experiencing a nativist reaction and the convention reflects that. Related is the fact that there are few minority Republican elected officials, so the automatic delegates were also very white this year as well.
I’d like to say that the RNC delegates reflect America of yesterday, but that wouldn’t be true – America has never in its history been 93% White, except perhaps on TV. Instead, I think it reflects a certain self-conception within the party today – that real Americans are White Americans. And if that’s the message that they’re sending, it’s one I’m receiving, loud and clear.
If you have, you’ll know what people mean when they say “people like us who are from small towns”
to be fair, people mean different things, and people take things differently. that’s why these debates can be frustrating, because
1) someone could be using “code” language, and the audience might not get it 2) someone could be using “code” language, and the audience might get it 3) someone could be using language which is misinterpreted as “code” by the audience (there was a few moments when guliani mistakenly seemed to trigger reactions at the convention that he didn’t get because he wasn’t consciously using code, he just stumbled into it) 4) someone could be using language in a way which totally is clear to the audience
IOW, reasonable people can disagree, and agree that it’s complex and there probably isn’t one answer. this is language we’re talking about, not the rate of acceleration of an object.
Uh, I dunno. The restrictionist R base pissed off Hispanics and blacks have a chance to vote for the first black President? The base is predominantly suburban, exurban and small town, and those are the demographics of suburbia, exurbia and small towns?
The real story for me this election is the way that McCain, even while likely losing the election (Hey, everyone is tired of the Republicans, even the Republicans), will manage to re-ignite a demoralized base. See, I can do boring conventional wisdom as well as the next useless pundit 馃檪 Sarah Palin will, like all politicians, disappoint, but I find it refreshing to break free, a bit, from that awful, dull, senseless nonsense of big government conservatism. I think some of the ecstatic reaction to Palin is the idea that the party can return to a more small government vibe. It’s a rejection of what the R ‘elite’s have been shoving down the base’s throats (or so I keep reading on righty sites).
I actually semi-like and semi-dislike both tickets and waver from day to day (about voting third party or possibly McCain. I will shock you by saying I’ve (very) briefly entertained voting for Obama, very briefly, and then I break out of it as if out of a fever or illness……they are a strange bunch. I’ve never seen anything like it.)
I think some of the ecstatic reaction to Palin is the idea that the party can return to a more small government vibe.
hm. from what i have seen in the media it is identity-politics identification as a christian conservative. and i just got done listening to a radio show and it seems that a lot of republican politicians in alaska are peeved at because she is too fiscally centrist (e.g., they want to save the surplus revenue for later, while she wants to spend some of it on modest entitlements).
it’s not that she will/would disappoint, but that her state is in no way an exemplar of small-gov’t conservatism. In fact it’s pretty much impossible to conceive of small government-conservatism there since they don’t have a diversified economy (Oil, oil, oil….and commercial fishing) and pull $1.87 from the Fed govt for every $1 they send back.
41 脗路 Ennis said
Actually, McCain’s record on immigration is far more liberal than you allude. Also, I can understand them not focusing on black voters as much since they really haven’t got a shot in hell of winning much of that vote this election. While I do think the GOP should do more outreach, I don’t see a reason to throw good money after bad in this election. Especially given the number of easily swayed black republicans contemplating voting against nearly every one of their values just to get Obama in office.
BTW, McCain HAS done a few things that many republicans haven’t done, including address the NAACP and the Urban League.
53 脗路 razib said
wasn’t she in Assembly of God churches since childhood? They tend to toe the “Catholic Church is the Great Whore” line. Which is a message that resonates very strongly with a Hagee-like congregation.
So your first salvo is the abolution of slavery, how recent was that? (#21)
Vote early, often, & for whom you like. I’ll agree partly with KaraKara and say,some people may feel peer pressure to vote one way or the other. I heard a black Clinton delegate give an interview, at the DNC and she mentioned the horrible names she was called for sticking with Hillary over Obama. It is a generational thing,how some African American “elders” have seen themselves, whites and others. (note Jesse Jackson Jr. and son). The patronizing attitude of some minority Republicans who have ‘seen the light’ is just as dismissive, as if the voters just don’t get it- as to who’s looking out for their real/perceived needs.
Republicans shy away from admitting a class bias in their policies– yet people feel it. Others have measured it. For historical reasons we know race has been shorthand for class ,so its no wonder to me about the racial disparity(only speaking of b-w.)
To the larger “values” argument- if any one was so naive as to think one group or the other had a lock down on conservative vs liberal and what a real American looked like- I think Mark Penn, the New Yorker cover, etc laid that to rest,–though I don’t think anyone was shocked.
That’s why Michelle was called bitter- because she couldn’t just be a ‘gal from a hardworking, blue collar family’ talking about the changes that have made her climb difficult for those who will come after. She was attempting to speak like any American- forgetting that the only un-hyphenated Americans are white Americans. How could she complain after all the gains ‘the black people’, (with her affirmative action education 馃槈 have made. At any rate— I’m hoping the symbolism will shortly turn to ‘the real’ job of what comes next, and what we—all Americans, are going to do about it.
54 脗路 Nayagan said
not just alaska as a whole, her small town wasilla lived on federal funds and earmarks. and despite that she managed to leave it with a budget deficit of $20m. small government, my foot.
Nayagan: Who needs it to be an exemplar? Just a rebuke to the general idea, even if only rhetorical. Anyway, she didn’t make all those lands federal and I think it’s hilarious to sell planes on e-bay. It may have been a gimmick, but, well, I’m in Chicagoland where the politicians don’t even bother to pretend they care about governing well. They just take the money. Palin has put a lot of noses out of joint, including some on the right, like David Frum over at NRO. Boy, he does not like the Palin pick. He’s now very putting up e-mails from pro Obama types. Pundits!
Pretty much what I expected in terms of numbers.
Once the Baby Boomers -.5 generation pass, the country will change the conservative religious ideology that has been mainstream for the past twenty years.
Peggy’s not feeling it eiether or has she recanted for her heresy of calling “country
friedfirst” a gimmickOh, dear. Who knew so many Sepia Mutiny commenters were such fans of small government conservatism? Why, I think I have misjudged you all…..it seems the love of Sen. Obama is a love of small government, exemplified by, er, a lifetime in government. Well, that goes for the other two Senators, too, so you have me there. Like I said – they are an odd bunch.
Also, good job on the community organizer comeback, Sen. Obama’s surrogates (I actually like the guy, just disagree with him on a lot of stuff). What did you say? Jesus was a community organizer, too? Yeah, that’ll work. Take that line. Sure to go down awesome with the general public. Jeez. Is Axelrod on vacation or something?
59 脗路 MD said
for the record, it was not Ebay (Meg Whitman’s company. Either just serendipitous or a brilliantly subtle talking point), but a private broker. Like us regular folks do. And it’s hard for me to concentrate on rhetoric when there’s so many inconvenient facts flying around. I found much of Obama’s protectionist populism pump-up rhetoric unbearable. Good thing there was a puppy to play with.
I do get your point, however, about refreshment.
62 脗路 MD said
i don’t need to be a fan of small government conservatism to point out the ridiculousness of the straw-grasping strategy of upholding sarah palin as the great white hope of limited government. and even pretending to be excited about it. at least let’s be honest and appreciate the red moose meat she doles out.
Eh, Peggy’s had a soft spot for Obama for ages. No one on the right (as in the base-y right) pays attention to her unless she accidentally says something complimentary about McCain. Look, you all have to realize that there has been a rift between the base and the R ‘elites’ (for lack of a better word) for some time now. They do not like the direction of the party and want a break in that direction and sense a break in Palin. That is one of the reasons the base has been electrified by Palin. They think the standard R pundits have gotten lazy and doctrinaire and stale.
southern strategy (with a blog name like that, I bet you are an Ayn Rand fan/sarc) – please. I can smell the talking points, so don’t bother, okay?)
Okay, I’m done. Except for re-iterating the points I already made.
62 脗路 MD said
I think the misjudging is due to a lack of slacking off from your real job and not reading every fracking comment 馃檪 I certainly don’t love Obama (voting for Barr) and certainly do get mistaken for an ardent supporter all the time (since the anti-Obama rhetoric has been so egregiously thin and made porous by this acidic culture war atmosphere that has returned for the election season, I really can’t resist. It’s Tim-Tam’s and Dilmah all over again!)
66 脗路 MD said
no, just a party line republican. why are you arguing with my name rather than my point?
wasn’t she in Assembly of God churches since childhood? They tend to toe the “Catholic Church is the Great Whore” line. Which is a message that resonates very strongly with a Hagee-like congregation.
she was baptized a catholic, her family switched to nondenominational christian (so protestant by default), she was with the assemblies as an identified member of years, and now she is simply a “bible believing christian” who still attends a christian center with assemblies affiliation. it’s complicated.
Not in K-8, but I think that in high school, our education system should leave room for intense debate and discussion over the merits of both arguments. If it has no scientific basis it will quickly fall out of vogue. I really don’t care much about the evolution vs. ID debate, but it’s interesting that people get all perturbed about the culture wars, but easily get apoplectic over the remote chance that the creationist perspective be presented for debate. It’s such a small and insignificant issue when you look at how crappy our schools are.
That is QUITE a distortion of what he said. He said founded on Christian principles… which is about as innocuous and truthful as saying it was founded in Western traditions. I don’t normally harp too much on the nuance of words, but “as a” Christian nation (with the implication to me that this country was founded specifically for Christians alone) has a completely different meaning that I’m sure McCain realizes is unconstitutional. And he didn’t say the President should be Christian, he said that when HE votes, he votes for candidates who share his faith. That’s not a mandate for other people to vote a certain way, its a personal conviction and decision.
Yeah, those people exist, but like Code Pinkos and Daily Kos nuts, these people are relatively fringe. This goes for both sides, but people need to be careful of accepting caricatures of the other side as fact. There are many Christian conservatives who don’t like religion and government to be intertwined.
I beg to differ. There was a time when there were lots more blacks were republican because they shared the conservative ideals of doing for yourself and your community with or without the government (Booker T. Washington vs. Dubois is a testament to this endless argument). But as people began winning more rights through contesting government, that became the dominant way of dealing with issues. The problem now is that the government isn’t actively holding black people back anymore, but the strategy hasn’t changed. Democrats have actively cultivated an image of Republicans as racists while taking advantage of the black vote. And comments like yours just continue to play into that narrative.
Some unknown GOP rep made a comment that other black people use against each other all the time, and my world is supposed to stop? I’ve heard all sorts of patronizing, racist BS from democrats as well. Sorry, that’s just not a good reason for me to change my values and go to the Democratic party.
nayagan – I,m not working so I figure I can play around in blog comment sections if I want to. Thanks, though. That was very sweet.
southern stragey – so, who did you want in the VP role? Huckabee? Romney?
I beg to differ. There was a time when there were lots more blacks were republican because they shared the conservative ideals of doing for yourself and your community with or without the government (Booker T. Washington vs. Dubois is a testament to this endless argument).
the democrats were the party with the hardcore racists until the 1960s, that was why blacks stilled voted for ike in the 1950s after their FDR interregnum (i believe one of adlai stevenson’s VP running mates was a southerner and stevenson was a proponent of not being aggressive about civil rights). when woodrow wilson came into power in 1912 a crap load of blacks with gov. jobs were fired in DC. it wasn’t anything about conservative ideas of doing for yourself, especially when the progressive movement was powerful in both parties, it was about the fact that the democrats were the ones with the self-conscious white supremacist anti-black wing (the republicans didn’t have to be anti-black because their strongholds had relatively few blacks, partly due to history, and partly due to laws which prevented black settlement and migration).
p.s. and obviously teddy roosevelt was racist by today’s standards; he was just less racist than woodrow wilson. times change….
70 脗路 NotADemocrat said
If Lynn Westmoreland had called Michelle, “high-saditty,” then bob herbert would have dashed off a column immediately.
70 脗路 NotADemocrat said
N-A-D, I hope you use large doses of Pantene. I worry for all the hairs you split so finely.
How could she have a soft spot for a man from Nowhere (nowhere?), that’s not even in America. Obama, Speeches,.. Nuermeberg rally. Hate to see what she writes when she gets over her crush.
I guess then, the base agrees with McCain’s campaign manager who observed the election “is not about Issues, it’s about personalities”. link
On the other hand- if, as McCain campaign manager said, the “Election is not about Issues” but pernonality, why the campagin is not about issues- its about
let’s not pretend that palin was a naked play for two factions: the red meat right wing nutsos, and pumas, with no consideration for the supposed experience card which supposedly so damned obama. i can’t think of a better admission by mccain that he was bullshitting the voting public.
Where does the “Jesus was a community organizer” thing come from? He had his merry band of twelve and gave a some good speeches. Fed a large crowd once with five loaves of bread. Prevented the stoning of a prostitute. Chased some moneylenders (capitalists) out of the temple. Etc. But the gospels don’t talk of his organizing the masses to effect political change. Yes, he talked about it, but it doesn’t seem that he did much of the organizing. Now Paul, who never met Jesus, was a great organizer and direct-mail campaigner . . .
preston, i think the idea is that jesus was leading a prolish revolution against the saduccee and pharisee elite among the jews.
let’s not pretend that palin was a naked play for two factions]
let’s not pretend that palin wasn’t a naked play for two factions
mad props for posting with a chart with quantitative data btw. sure plan on making me a !stranger.
Bobby Jindal
Within the context of this discussion? A point made before Razib made the point about parties changing. I was explaining why the refrain that the Democratic party has been a historic friend of black people is false. Nice try though.
True, but in keeping with your meme about how parties change, I think it would be remiss of you to ignore the Reagan Revolution and the impact it had on the ideology of the Republican party.
And I still wouldn’t care.
They didn’t need Jindal after all.
If the audience doesn’t get it, then, arguably, it’s not code. But it is a commonplace that “elite” is code for “uppity” so that is working code.
That could be a great motto for the Democrats.
i never knew that until this election. is there any way to substantiate this? I also never knew messiah complex = uppity was a well known southern slur until david gergen bought it up, and he’s pretty bi-partisn. had i known, you know i would’ve used it against hillary when she mocked him with the “sky will open” spiel.
70 脗路 NotADemocrat said
Oh those poor republicans!! They can’t even defend themselves against such false imposed images. And what can be said about those gullible black people.
86 脗路 KarmaByte said
This is the 2nd time people have thrown out the “conservatives think black democrats are dumb and gullible” argument. I missed the 1st reference because so many people are responding to my comments…
Anyway, I don’t think Republicans can’t defend themselves, I think they simply choose not to. Partially because they’ve proven they can win without defending themselves to liberals, but also because the lack of civility among some on the left. Like I said, it’s hard to have a political discussion with people who think calling the GOP racist off the bat is a way to attract attention from the party.
As far as gullibility, I’ve never said black dems were dumb. I do, however, think many black people are holding on to a strategy that worked in the 60s but has long since lost its potency. It isn’t stupid to try strategies that have worked in the past. At the same time though, I don’t pretend not to see the intensity of anger and hatred that is lobbed at black conservatives. This open disdain for blacks who do not identify as liberal creates an artificial barrier that Democrats are all too happy to maintain.
It isn’t stupid to have really considered all perspectives and still choose a liberal one, but it IS stupid to try to revoke someone’s black card because they don’t fit your stereotype of what a black person should be. That nonsense limits debate and forces a community to put all its eggs in one basket. Again, a stupid strategy.
Anyway, I’m out for the night 馃檪
Ennis – the National Average Column on the right adds up to 106%. I suspect the white total is overstated. Perhaps this is based on opportunistic census surveys that “allow” Hispanics to call themselves white?
Good post.
small government: coming soon to a home near you.
Ironically, I heard she’s a lapsed catholic herself. Have to confirm
87 脗路 NotADemocrat said
Right! That makes a lot of sense.
91 脗路 KarmaByte said
come, come, don’t be the angry left again – always interested in belligerence and swagger and picking a fight under false pretences.
She wasn’t just a speechwriter for Reagan, she took time off from the WSJ to campaign for Bush in 2004.
Rove’s strategy for 8 years was to govern for the base, not for the average American. It’s funny that the base are complaining about Washington now. Read McClellan’s bio, he talks about this in great depth, how Rove (and therefore Bush) were very careful to always put the needs of the base first, rather than governing from the middle.
…the unbearable whiteness of being…
馃槈 sorry, i got completely sidetracked from the point of the post, but…highfive for that line, ennis!
whoa! righteous much?!
78 脗路 Preston said
whoever this guy you are talking about is, he sounds like a commie who encourages welfare queens, and derides the free market to me. hope that the republicans denounce him and his ideology.
Nah, venting after the spectacle of personal attacks on Obama coming from under beehives, can’t help wonder how spit is generally used for grooming.
Razib:
This is ignorant to say the least. Apparently you have no clue that the “Hillary Democrats” were once known as “Reagan Democrats”. Now they are also being called “Sam’s Club Republican’s”. Blue collar whites, evangelical or catholic, with less than a college education are trending Republican. Perhaps the main reason Sarah Palin was picked was to appeal to that constituency. That she will also appeal to women including PUMAs is icing on the cake.
This widely believed notion is nothing but a big fat LIE.
America was founded as a secular nation. The constitution owes nothing to the Bible. The Founders were called “infidels” by the christians of their time, being mostly Deists and Unitarians. So was Abraham Lincoln the greatest President who belonged to no church and did not believe in the christian scheme of Salvation through blood sacrifice. None of them would have passed the test McCain and Obama were put through in the Saddleback Inquisition. The very idea that any political candidate should be grilled by a christian pastor to test his religious beliefs is contrary to the core principles on which America was founded: rejection of the authority of Church and Monarch.
Preston:
Because his campaign was cruelly cut short. He was condemned to death by the religious fascists of his time. And the sentence was carried out by a governor, as another poster pointed out. This mocking of community service is going to backfire on the republicans.
If you think about it, christians are actually followers of Paul the community organizer, not of Jesus the preacher.