General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Congressional Black Caucus strongly opposes calls to abolish superdelegates. [View all]Azathoth
(4,677 posts)First, they aren't gerrymandered strictly along racial lines; they're gerrymandered primarily along voting tendency lines. The goal is to dilute Democratic voters (including white Democrats) in Republican districts, not completely eliminate minority groups. So there are still minority voters in many gerrymandered GOP districts, just not enough to swing a general election. In fact, there are minority voters in many deep red districts as well, again just not enough to matter in the general. This means that African-Americans can still run as Democratic delegates in many gerrymandered districts, even if the majority of Democrats that remain in those districts are white. Which brings me to my second point...
... which is the underlying implication here, that white Democrats will follow the same voting patterns as Republicans and vote for white delegates over black delegates. This is the raw, identity-politics message here. White Democrats are being told, "Thanks for supporting our issues, but you vote for your people and we'll vote for ours. We want primaries where black delegates are elected by black Democrats."
Third, all of this ignores the existence of at-large delegates, who are drawn from across the state and who are usually required to be chosen so as to balance the representation of various minority groups. Here's the rule that most state parties use:
Moreover, rules already specify that state delegations be balanced according to gender. If the CBC were merely interested in guaranteeing proportional AA representation at the convention, they could request rule changes mandating that all state delegations be balanced according to state party composition (eg: if African-Americans comprise 20% of the state party, then they should be 20% of the state delegation).