Democratic Party Fears Racial Divide - WaPo

[WillyT]

Democratic party fears racial divide
Attacks could do lasting harm, party officials say

By Jonathan Weisman and Matthew Mosk
updated 10:15 p.m. PT, Fri., April. 25, 2008

<snip>

The protracted and increasingly acrimonious fight for the Democratic presidential nomination is unnerving core constituencies -- African Americans and wealthy liberals -- who are becoming convinced that the party could suffer irreversible harm if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton maintains her sharp line of attack against Sen. Barack Obama.

Clinton's solid win in the Pennsylvania primary exposed a quandary for the party. Her backers may be convinced that only she can win the white, working-class voters that the Democratic nominee will need in the general election, but many African American leaders say a Clinton nomination -- handed to her by superdelegates -- would result in a disastrous breach with black voters.

"If this party is perceived by people as having gone into a back room somewhere and brokered a nominee, that would not be good for our party," House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (S.C.), the highest ranking African American in Congress, warned yesterday. "I'm telling you, if this continues on its current course, is going to be irreparable."

That fear, plus a more general sense that Clinton's only route to victory would be through tearing down her opponent, has led even some black Democrats who are officially neutral in the race, such as Clyburn, to speak out.

Clinton's camp has a vastly different interpretation, arguing that the most recent primary demonstrated that Democrats remain very interested in seeing the contest continue.

"Pennsylvania did the job of calming any nerves that existed," said Clinton campaign spokesman Jay Carson. "It showed that the big states around the country think she's the best person to be president."

But that opinion is far from unanimous. More than 70 top Clinton donors wrote their first checks to Obama in March, campaign records show. Clinton's lead among superdelegates, a collection of almost 800 party leaders and elected officials, has slipped from 106 in December to 23 now, according to an Associated Press tally.

"If you have any, any kind of loyalty to the Democratic Party, perhaps you need to rethink your strategy and bow out gracefully in order to save this party from a disastrous end in November," Rep. William Lacy Clay (Mo.), an African American Obama supporter, said in an appeal to Clinton.

Clyburn accused Clinton and her husband yesterday of marginalizing black voters and opening a rift between her campaign and an African American Democratic base that strongly backed Bill Clinton's presidency. Some surrogates in her camp are trying to render Obama unelectable against the Republican nominee so she could run for the Democratic nomination in 2012, he suggested. The discussion flared up yet again when Bill Clinton suggested this week that Obama's campaign had played "the race card" after the former president compared the candidate to Jesse Jackson after the South Carolina primary.

"We keep talking as if it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter that Obama gets 92 percent of the black vote, because since he only got 35 percent of the white vote, he's in trouble," Clyburn said. "Well, Hillary Clinton only got 8 percent of the black vote. . . . It's almost saying black people don't matter. The only thing that matters is how white people respond. And that's what bothered me. I think I matter."

<snip>

More: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24320557/

:shrug:

[TomClash]

1. This is the new meme

Good for Republicans.

But who started race-baiting? Gee, I wonder.

[Joe Bacon]

9. Hillary Clinton = Lurleen Wallace

and Billy is gonna "call the shots" just like his soul brother George Wallace.

[Freedom Train]

19. Bill Clinton and George Wallace soul brothers?

Thanks for making me feel more certain I made the right choice voting for Hillary. I could never be in the same camp as someone who held such idiotic views.

[WillyT]

2. And...

<snip>

There are signs that the anger voiced by some African Americans is beginning to extend to the Democratic donor base. Campaign finance records released this week show that a growing number of Clinton's early supporters migrated to Obama in March, after he achieved 11 straight victories. Of those who had previously made maximum contributions to Clinton, 73 wrote their first checks to Obama in March. The reverse was not true: Of those who had made large contributions to Obama last year, none wrote checks to Clinton in March.

"I think she is destroying the Democratic Party," said New York lawyer Daniel Berger, who had backed Clinton with the maximum allowable donation of $2,300. "That there's no way for her to win this election except by destroying , I just don't like it. So in my own little way, I'm trying to send her a message."

The message came in the form of a $2,300 contribution to Obama.

Plus...

He also expressed, as did other big givers who crossed to Obama, exasperation about the tone of the Clinton campaign and frustration with the candidate herself.

"At the end of the day, all she had to do was open her mouth for me not to believe her," Louis-Dreyfus said.

<snip>

Same article.

:wow:

[Saturday]

3. Clyburn needs to quit pretending to be neutral when in fact

he is solidly in Obama's camp. And Mr. Clyburn it was Bill and Hillary Clinton that for years said that black people DID matter. How soon we forget when we have a black candidate running.

[Chulanowa]

7. They mattered when they voted for Bill, and never again after that.

[WillyT]

8. Exactly !!!

:kick:

:hi:

[MADem]

4. Here we go, playing that FEAR CARD again...!!! If the party is that weak, which it ISN'T, it

deserves to be "damaged beyond repair," because it would already BE dysfunctional if that were the case.

Typical load of Sky Is Falling bullshit.

We're tough. We're disorganized. We argue. We're Democrats.

[stillcool]

12. Judging by the actions of Congress...

I would say that the Democratic party is dysfunctional at best. Seems there has been a rift going on for quite some time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

[MADem]

17. Uh, we've done DAMN well in Congress, considering we do NOT have a MAJORITY in the Senate

...really.

We have an asshole who will be attending the GOP convention, and who is supporting the Democratic nominee, caucusing with us, and he is the ONLY reason we were able to get the "majority"--which means we get to set the agenda, enforce the rules, and name the committee chairs. It does NOT mean we have enough of those silly little things called VOTES to get our way.

Your "proof" there of dysfunctiion is a bit, er...DATED. And a bit tangential to the ability of the Congress to move legislation. To say the least. Things move at more than a donkey's clip-clop in politics, donchaknow...

[emilyg]

14. !!!!

[Adelante]

5. This is what irritates me the most

"We keep talking as if it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter that Obama gets 92 percent of the black vote, because since he only got 35 percent of the white vote, he's in trouble," Clyburn said. "Well, Hillary Clinton only got 8 percent of the black vote. . . . It's almost saying black people don't matter. The only thing that matters is how white people respond. And that's what bothered me. I think I matter."

Black people are becoming invisible voters in this primary. It's like the consistent references to the working class as white, as if blacks don't work.

I am white, but this is what I am seeing, too:

"The only thing that matters is how white people respond."

This is what has to change for American society to move forward together.

[WillyT]

6. Agreed !!! - And...

I've been in the Democratic Party since 1974. So please... do not tell me that there are no racists in the Democratic Party. I'm white, and I've met plenty of them.

Not that you were saying that WD, it's just the unsaid implication around here sometimes.

"Democrats aren't racist."

Most aren't, many are.

:shrug:

[Toucano]

21. I disagree with Clyburn and you - TOTALLY!

Winning the election is about the larger number of people, not about the subset of a particular demographic. The only thing that matters is not how white people respond, but rather who gets the most votes - of any and all ethnic groups (and other demographics like age and sex).

No one is suggesting that black votes don't count! Of course they do.

But if black democrats are voting for Obama solely because he's black, is that any different than the white voters who are voting for Clinton largely because she's white? I don't see why one is okay and the other is racism.

The bottom line is this: before Obama even announced, there were people asking "Is America ready for a black president?" Maybe the answer is no. Maybe it's yes. I don't know, but I don't think it's evil to ask the question.

Race can't be ignored, but it also can't be the only consideration.

[bbgrunt]

10. it's like the repukes engineered this dem primary--

their perfect setup to tear the party apart with a circular firing squad. Pit race against gender. What I really have trouble understanding is the weak support for Edwards and others with more experience like Biden and Dodd early on. If experience and inside political battle scars are so important now, why weren't they bigger issues during the earlier primaries?

I can't really see repukes hand in this set up, but have to wonder how it came to be. Why were there so many good candidates early in the race to dilute the vote so that these two rose to the top? One can say that this is a perfectly natural winnowing process, but one that is doomed to end up with winners that do not necessarily reflect the best overall winning stategery.

[WillyT]

11. I Have A Theory About The Experience Thing...

I found it curious that when the Democratic field was winnowed down back in January to three candidates (Clinton, Edwards, Obama) ALL were short-term Senators. And by short-termed, I mean having served in the Senate for one term or slightly more, or slightly less. Senators who had served for decades never really stood a chance. (Biden, Dodd)

I found that curious, because this country in its history has only elected TWO Senators directly from the Senate to be President of the U.S. The theory being that the longer one has served as a Senator, the more votes, and the longer the record for your opponents to pour over and find things to use against you in a campaign.

But this year, with Edwards (not directly from the Senate, but 1 term 1998-2004), Clinton (sitting Senator, 1 term 2 years 2000-Present), and Obama (sitting Senator, 4 years 2004-Present), we had 3 major candidates from the Senate, but ALL with single-digit experience (6, 8, and 4 years).

And I started wondering if this is gonna be the new template for folks from the Senate running for the Presidency. IOW - If you are a Senator, and have Presidential ambitions, it is best to not build up a long list of votes and positions on the record that will come back to bite you. And if I'm right, that means that all future Senators, or at least Senators for the foreseeable future will be lacking in experience by design.

Which I find ironic.

Just thinkin aloud here.

:shrug:

[bbgrunt]

13. it is odd that all the candidates--including McCain--are

senators. But McCain certainly has a record--which doesn't seem to matter since he has the press on his side and can flip flop and deny at will without consequences.

Maybe the predominance of senatorial candidates is more a reflection that "the powers that be" are no longer looking for a strong executive type, but one who can take marching orders more readily.

[WillyT]

16. Well McCain Is A Special Case...

He already has his narrative framed by the MSM... Maverick, War Hero, Straight Talker, etc...

:shrug:

[CTLawGuy]

20. my theory is

that people are disillusioned with government for the past 7 years and thus "experience" is seen as "I was part of the government that pissed you off for the past 7 years" and people might not like that.

[IsItJustMe]

15. Hate to be blunt but I have been making this point over the last several weeks. Democrats, it's

time to wake the fuck up.

[AX10]

18. Here come the Obama surrogates playing the race card again.

Clyburn and Clay have proven their ability to be lowly political hacks.
I will never support either again.

[ej510]

22. Here we go again another KKK Clinton supporter!