The demographics may be changing, but the economics favor the whites. The political system has been deliberately skewed over the past 30 years to reflect the power of their dollars. Voters can vote all they like, but for a long time to come they’ll be voting the issues and the candidates that the wealthy (mostly white) segment of the population chooses as relevant to their needs. My two bits, your mileage may vary.
You still don’t understand. It doesn’t matter if the Democrats have policies which have helped blacks. It only matters that blacks THINK that Democrats have policies that have helped them. And that is what they think, by and large, whether that perception is true or not.
This isn’t true just for blacks, of course. Everybody votes for the party that thinks serves them best, and would need convincing to change their minds. It’s a little condescending to say that blacks don’t know what’s best for themselves.
I don’t know about the rest of them, but Eva Longoria? Who considers her white?
They’re white AND Hispanic. Race and Hispanic/non-Hispanic are orthogonal. As the US Census Bureau says, a Hispanic person can be of any race.
[Obligatory* Bulworth* quote]
“All we need is a voluntary, free-spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction. Everybody just gotta keep fuckin’ everybody 'til they’re all the same color.”
[/Obligatory* Bulworth* quote]
No, many vote for the party they think serves their ideas best.
What reason?
It’s entirely true, based on my past experience in the Young Dems, and occasional party involvement since then. Never encountered a whisper of cynicism or insincerity in that area.
The Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, for starters. Neither could’ve happened without LBJ.
Finding hidden cyborgs?
Hmm prisoner#95440 hasn’t eaten anything in three weeks, move in team!
Why wouldn’t she be considered white?
Would you argue that Jennifer Esposito and Marisa Tomei aren’t white?
Because she’s Mexican and doesn’t look white? I know there are white Mexicans, but most aren’t, and she doesn’t look like one who is.
I have no idea. I don’t know anything about them or what they look like.
For the specific things I mentioned?
A lot of problems start in mess halls and yards because it’s where you’ve got the biggest crowds gathered. If there are rumors that two rival gangs are heading for a confrontation, other prisoners who don’t want to get involved will avoid those areas. So if we see a drop-off in the number of prisoners eating meals or going to the yard, we’d investigate why.
A similar thing existed with sick calls. You look for patterns. If an unusually large number of prisoners are calling in sick in one particular area, like the laundry for example, if may be because they’re trying to avoid some situation in that area.
You watch the amount of packages because prisoners try to stock up on food if they expect there’s going to be a problem.
What I described above was the group numbers. We had a separate system for watching individuals. If a prisoner refused nine meals in a row he was considered to be on a hunger strike and there was a whole procedure set up for that.
This could be a fair point, but trying to extend it into the future too far fails on historical evidence.
Consider the Reagan Democrats. Outside the South, they were composed of all the ethnic Europeans with strong Catholic roots who had consistently voted Democrat from before the time of Wilson–and became an absolute lock by the Democrats from the time of FDR. Changes in politics, changes in economics, changes in world views all came together to shift them, almost en masse, into the Republican sphere. Once Reagan’s personal charm had passed, the economy suffered following the First Gulf War, and Clinton brought his own brand of popularity to the political arena, many of them wandered back toward the Democrats, but a very large number of them never shifted away from the Republican Party. The same thing will quite possibly occur again in the future. All politics are local and the constituencies that appear to be cast in concrete, today, can often be found moving when specific issues bring pressure on them.
The notion, (asserted and disputed, above), that the “Hispanic vote” is a monolith fails spectacularly when it is subjected to any sort of examination. While there is a fair amount of suppoprt for the Left among immigrants and their children from Mexico and Central America, Hispanics from Cuba tilt very strongly to the Right. Puerto Ricans may tend Left, but their specific issues tend to differ from those from those of Central America and may fracture in local politics. Immigrants from Venezuela who are trying to avoid the socialism of Chavez and immigrants from Colombia or Bolivia who are trying to put the drug wars behind them are likely to tilt Right, as well.
Hispanic voters may trend Left by the current numbers if one simply looked at a simplistic analysis by majority vote, based on the locations of the greatest numbers of immigrants, but those aggregatre numbers do not reflect the ways in which the positions change on a state by state basis and ignore the fact that the numbers are not cast in concrete and can change with local conditions.
I happen to be Jewish and Jews, by and large, are solidly Democratic voters. I registered for the Democratic Party in the lobby of my high school during May 1975, a month after I turned 18. I voted for Jimmy Carter in both 1976 and 1980, and for Hugh Carey for governor in 1978. Then, Reagan happened.
While I did not approve of everything he did or wanted to do, but he accomplished certain things I felt needed doing:
[ol]
[li]Breaking the power of organized labor through the handling of the PATCO strike;[/li][li]Breaking the Communist empire; and[/li][li]Eliminating many tax loopholes in the Tax Reform Act of 1986.[/li][/ol]
Thus, I voted for Reagan in 1984 and Bush in 1988, and Bush II in 2004. Other elections I voted for the Democrats, though I may have voted for Dole in order to hold Clinton’s numbers down in his inevitable re-election.
Thus, no political alignment of an ethnic group should be considered permanent or universal.
None of this matters if the non-white babies don’t grow up to become non-white voting adults.
Anyone wishing to discuss these points, either to challenge them or affirm them, please open a new thread to do so.
[ /Moderating ]
Why wouldn’t they?
That comment is moronic.
First of all, she’s not “Mexican” her family has been living in the US for centuries. Secondly please explain how she “doesn’t look white”.
She’s rather obviously of 100% or nearly 100% European descent.
I won’t argue JBGUSA’s claims but I think his (her?) post illustrates a common phenomena. A charismatic figure like FDR or JFK or Reagan can persuade a lot of voters to change their party allegiance. And once they do that they often show the proverbial faith of the converted and become the most devoted members of their new party.
So I don’t think major political shifts are caused by demographic trends as much as they’re caused by the random appearance of charismatic leaders. You can’t predict it in advance because nobody can predict when these individuals will appear of which party they will belong to.