# Why is Christie winning 30% of the black vote? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 11, 2013, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958 "2013-10-11T07:06:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/101 "2013-10-14T04:56:42Z")
Okay, so Republicans would just have to take the lead on certain issues, pass legislation, etc., and that would change some minds. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/102 "2013-10-14T06:35:04Z")
Well, yes it would. Republican minds, for starters. Or they could just appoint **Der Trihs** and myself as main honchos of the Republican Party. Could I order Ann Coulter and Karl Rove to make a porno? I don’t want to _see_ it, or anything, not a deev. Just want to make them do it. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/103 "2013-10-14T06:56:17Z")
I’d rather see Marco Rubio and Sarah Palin, personally. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/104 "2013-10-14T07:28:17Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > So did Thurmond, and sooner than almost anyone else. the self-serving liberal myth tries to have it both ways: the Democrats who stayed true to the faith get a dispensation because they stayed true to the faith, even if it might have take them 10-20 years to repent. Those who became Republicans, even if they abandoned their segregationist views very quickly, they will remain evildoers for eternity. Well, all one of them, since that too, is a myth. > [@adaher](#): > > Helms and Lott may have switched before entering public office, but were first elected as Republicans, putting them in the same class as Reagan, and well, millions of other non-southern Dems who migrated to the GOP between the New Deal and the Reagan revolution. > > Only Strom Thurmond actually switched parties, and he changed as much, if not more, than any southerner who remained a Democrat. > > What the mythology shows is that Democrats do indeed use deception to keep black voters in the fold. Heck, even the media can’t help themselves, every so often they play old videos of George Wallace or Orval Faubus and stick an R next to their names. That’s how deep the myth has become ingrained. > [@adaher](#): > > I was simply arguing against the idea that Republicans had to get rid of their idiot members somehow. Democrats never needed to, when all four those five were still in the Senate, still being racist, they won 90% of the black vote. > > And as far as Wallace goes, the guy was running just a bit too competitively in the 1972 race, even outside the South, for a party base that wasn’t racist anymore because they had supposedly either gone to the Republicans or reformed somehow. You’re still making up a history that didn’t happen. Were there racist Democrats in the past? Hell, yes. Some of the worst racists in the country were Democrats. But when you compare the two parties, the Democrats cleaned up first. In the sixties and early seventies, Democratic politicians either died off, publicly repudiated racism (including their own where appropriate), or switched to the Republican party. The Republican party became a safe haven for the racists who were being driven out of the Democratic party. If the Republican party wants to regain the significant number of black voters it once had, it needs to man up and do what the Democrats did. Acknowledge its racist past and renounce it. And not just lip service - it needs to kick the racists out of the party. When Joe Wurzelbacher says that we should be shooting Mexicans or that white politicians are better than black politicians, then it should be Republicans who are denouncing him. Not telling him to shut up. They should be telling him he’s wrong and they don’t want people like him in the Republican party. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/105 "2013-10-14T07:59:20Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > When Joe Wurzelbacher says that we should be shooting Mexicans or that white politicians are better than black politicians, then it should be Republicans who are denouncing him. Not telling him to shut up. They should be telling him he’s wrong and they don’t want people like him in the Republican party. Except Democrats never did that. Thus the double standard remains. Robert Byrd died an ardent homophobe, Democrats never said a word condemning him and he remained not just a Democrat in good standing, but revered by progressives. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/106 "2013-10-14T08:06:13Z")
Joe the Plumber is just some guy. John Stennis got to head the Appropriations Committee and the Armed Services Committee. That sure is a great example of Democrats practicing what they preach. Stennis was still up to his old tricks as late as 1982, voting against the MLK holiday. The penalty: nothing. No condemnation, no booting from committees, no serious primary challenge, no cutoff of funding from the DNC. Nothing. James Eastland is a particularly interesting and unique case. He changed his views, but never repented from them, saying it was part of the political reality of the times, and saying he never regretted anything he did. > **[James Eastland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Eastland#Views_on_civil_rights_and_race)** > > James Oliver Eastland (November 28, 1904 – February 19, 1986) was an American attorney, plantation owner, and politician from Mississippi. A Democrat, he served in the United States Senate in 1941 and again from 1943 until his resignation on December 27, 1978. Eastland was a leader of Southern resistance against racial integration during the civil rights movement, often speaking of African Americans as "an inferior race." Eastland has been called the "Voice of the White South" and the "Godfa This got him endorsed by the NAACP. Not because his views on race changed, but simply because he remained a Democrat. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/107 "2013-10-14T09:49:13Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Joe the Plumber is just some guy. John Stennis got to head the Appropriations Committee and the Armed Services Committee. > > That sure is a great example of Democrats practicing what they preach. Stennis was still up to his old tricks as late as 1982, voting against the MLK holiday. The penalty: nothing. No condemnation, no booting from committees, no serious primary challenge, no cutoff of funding from the DNC. Nothing. > > James Eastland is a particularly interesting and unique case. He changed his views, but never repented from them, saying it was part of the political reality of the times, and saying he never regretted anything he did. > > [James Eastland - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Eastland#Views_on_civil_rights_and_race) > > This got him endorsed by the NAACP. Not because his views on race changed, but simply because he remained a Democrat. You’re still talking about dead Democrats, while there are live Republicans (like Steve King) who say ridiculous and offensive things without being repudiated by others in their party. Perhaps a good step would be to stop worrying about dead Democrats, and start worrying about live Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/108 "2013-10-14T09:59:47Z")
Really? Your whole premise seems to amount to “Well, the Democrats didn’t have to do that to not appear racist, it’s not fair that the Republicans should have to!” You really believe that a vote against MLK Day, in 1982, is the same as not denouncing racism in the 21st century? Seems like some weak tea to me. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/109 "2013-10-14T10:25:52Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > You’re still talking about dead Democrats, while there are live Republicans (like Steve King) who say ridiculous and offensive things without being repudiated by others in their party. Perhaps a good step would be to stop worrying about dead Democrats, and start worrying about live Republicans. I understand the distinction. Just pointing out that Joe the Plumber doesn’t have to be denounced as part of the process. Unless of course there’s a double standard. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/110 "2013-10-14T10:27:52Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > Really? Your whole premise seems to amount to “Well, the Democrats didn’t have to do that to not appear racist, it’s not fair that the Republicans should have to!” > > You really believe that a vote against MLK Day, in 1982, is the same as not denouncing racism in the 21st century? > > Seems like some weak tea to me. Weak tea is comparing voter ID laws to Jim Crow. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/111 "2013-10-14T11:36:15Z")
Dude, the reason the Republicans are pushing voter ID laws is to suppress the black vote. Call it [the return of Jim Crow.](http://doonesbury.slate.com/strip/archive/2012/7/24) I don’t know why you obsess over dead southern Democratic racists. Yes, John Stennis was a racist. But he’s dead. And if he was alive, he’d be a Republican. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/112 "2013-10-14T11:40:53Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I understand the distinction. Just pointing out that Joe the Plumber doesn’t have to be denounced as part of the process. Unless of course there’s a double standard. Perhaps not a nobody like Joe the idiot, but what about Steve King, Michele Bachmann, Louie Gohmert, Paul Broun, the “You Lie!” guy, and many many more? A party that makes them feel welcome will never get more than a tiny percentage of minority support. That’s who you should be focused on- not complaining about double standards and dead Democrats. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/113 "2013-10-14T11:43:51Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Weak tea is comparing voter ID laws to Jim Crow. What **elucidator** said is correct- brushing it off and shifting focus (and whining about Democratic political tactics on issues like voter ID laws) is not going to help the Republican party. ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/114 "2013-10-14T11:47:11Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > Really? Your whole premise seems to amount to “Well, the Democrats didn’t have to do that to not appear racist, it’s not fair that the Republicans should have to!” > > You really believe that a vote against MLK Day, in 1982, is the same as not denouncing racism in the 21st century? > > Seems like some weak tea to me. The thing is, that’s all the party’s got. Republicans are generally in favor of the policies that alienate black voters, and the party doesn’t _want_ to change them. They want the votes, but not at the cost of changing the way they treat minorities. So **adaher** (and others - it’s not just him) is desperately looking for an easy way to appeal to minorities while continuing the policies that work against them. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/115 "2013-10-14T11:49:15Z")
So much of Republican’s “efforts” and statements about why they don’t get more minority votes is the same kind of whining and focus-shifting that you’re doing, **adaher**. Rand Paul actually believed that he was educating those black students by pointing out that Lincoln was a Republican… he really thought they didn’t know! Republicans need to realize that black people know all about the history of the two parties with regards to civil rights and race. They don’t need to be educated. Thinking they just need to “educate” black voters about the _real_ history of the Democrats is patronizing, condescending, and counter-productive. And you’re doing the same thing. Quit assuming that black voters’ perceptions are wrong- assume they are valid, and change the party. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/116 "2013-10-14T13:31:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Helms and Lott may have switched before entering public office They did. Helms was a leading Republican and a race-baiter throughout his Senate career and Trent Lott was the Republican majority leader until 2002, when he quit after saying America would have been better off if Thurmond had been elected president when he ran on a segregationist platform in 1948. Again: the party gave up on vocal racism but kept a lot of policies the racists supported and guys like this were Republican leaders. That’s just not the same as Democrats who left office 30 or more years ago. > [@adaher](#): > > Robert Byrd died an ardent homophobe, Democrats never said a word condemning him and he remained not just a Democrat in good standing, but revered by progressives. I’m not sure that they never said a word, but you may have noticed that things have changed a lot on that issue recently. Even so, gay voters had reason to pick the Democrats over the Republicans. In the 1990s Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act and (while I was disgusted) it wasn’t really controversial. In the 2000s a lot of states passed amendments banning same-sex marriage and Bush supported a Constitutional amendment to the same effect, and the general view is that it helped him get re-elected. By the middle of Obama’s first term, a lot of Democrats were frustrated that he hadn’t done more to advance the same-sex marriage cause. And guess what? As things changed, Democrats again led the way and Republicans were split between not wanting to alienate moderates and younger voters and playing to a very conservative base, and most of them went with the latter. In the end, even if it was 50% accidental, Obama wound up supporting same-sex marriage and you will probably never again see a major Democratic candidate who opposes same-sex marriage. Meanwhile Republicans in Congress are still trying to defend DOMA and Christie, who you might call the great moderate hope, is also trying to use the courts to block recognition of same-sex marriage in New Jersey. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > What **elucidator** said is correct- brushing it off and shifting focus (and whining about Democratic political tactics on issues like voter ID laws) is not going to help the Republican party. Indeed. It’s so unfair when voters consider history and context and not cherry picked bits of trivia. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/117 "2013-10-14T14:51:43Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I think part of that is that when they “leave the plantation” they get attacked viciously. Democrats get away with some pretty awful racial epithets when attacking minority Republicans. Or they get away with basically just saying that minority Republicans aren’t “really” black or Hispanic or Jewish or whatever. > > While I think comparisons to slavery are overwrought, Democrats do sometimes act as if they are entitled to African-American support and those that do not support them are traitors. > [@adaher](#): > > Why, all the Democrats had to do was pass one stinkin’ bill and the game was over. It would be like Republicans sponsoring a gay marriage law and suddenly getting 90% of the gay vote. > [@adaher](#): > > Including ONE Republican. Go ahead, name another. Also, I said already that African-Americans voted Democrats long before the Civil Rights Act. THe Civil Rights act is where the margins went up to 90%. > > My point was that Democrats get a benefit of the doubt among black voters that the Republicans do not get, and I don’t think it has anything to do with race. It has to do with the 10th amendment. African-Americans trust the federal government more than state governments, so the party of a strong federal government will tend to win their allegiance. > [@adaher](#): > > False. Oh wait, since you’ve given me a hard time, I’ll give you one: name them. > > Actually, that’s too open-ended: name as many as you can, and I’ll counter with segregationist Democrats who remained in good standing in the party, without necessarily changing their views. I’ll bet I can name more off the top of my head than you can searching the internet. I’ll start: JW Fulbright, George Wallace, John Stennis, Al Gore Sr, Richard Russell. > > The New Deal, which fundamentally changed the way relationship between the federal government and the states. > > I agree with this. I just wonder how far we can get. Although even getting to 20% would be a game changer. > [@adaher](#): > > So did Thurmond, and sooner than almost anyone else. the self-serving liberal myth tries to have it both ways: the Democrats who stayed true to the faith get a dispensation because they stayed true to the faith, even if it might have take them 10-20 years to repent. Those who became Republicans, even if they abandoned their segregationist views very quickly, they will remain evildoers for eternity. Well, all one of them, since that too, is a myth. > [@adaher](#): > > Helms and Lott may have switched before entering public office, but were first elected as Republicans, putting them in the same class as Reagan, and well, millions of other non-southern Dems who migrated to the GOP between the New Deal and the Reagan revolution. > > Only Strom Thurmond actually switched parties, and he changed as much, if not more, than any southerner who remained a Democrat. > > What the mythology shows is that Democrats do indeed use deception to keep black voters in the fold. Heck, even the media can’t help themselves, every so often they play old videos of George Wallace or Orval Faubus and stick an R next to their names. That’s how deep the myth has become ingrained. > [@adaher](#): > > I was simply arguing against the idea that Republicans had to get rid of their idiot members somehow. Democrats never needed to, when all four those five were still in the Senate, still being racist, they won 90% of the black vote. > > And as far as Wallace goes, the guy was running just a bit too competitively in the 1972 race, even outside the South, for a party base that wasn’t racist anymore because they had supposedly either gone to the Republicans or reformed somehow. > [@adaher](#): > > That’s a little better, but did the Democrats actually do that? There at least the record seems to be a little muddier. Seems more like they just benignly ignored them, while still letting them keep their leadership posts. > [@adaher](#): > > Okay, so Republicans would just have to take the lead on certain issues, pass legislation, etc., and that would change some minds. > [@adaher](#): > > Except Democrats never did that. Thus the double standard remains. Robert Byrd died an ardent homophobe, Democrats never said a word condemning him and he remained not just a Democrat in good standing, but revered by progressives. > [@adaher](#): > > Joe the Plumber is just some guy. John Stennis got to head the Appropriations Committee and the Armed Services Committee. > > That sure is a great example of Democrats practicing what they preach. Stennis was still up to his old tricks as late as 1982, voting against the MLK holiday. The penalty: nothing. No condemnation, no booting from committees, no serious primary challenge, no cutoff of funding from the DNC. Nothing. > > James Eastland is a particularly interesting and unique case. He changed his views, but never repented from them, saying it was part of the political reality of the times, and saying he never regretted anything he did. > > [James Eastland - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Eastland#Views_on_civil_rights_and_race) > > This got him endorsed by the NAACP. Not because his views on race changed, but simply because he remained a Democrat. > [@adaher](#): > > I understand the distinction. Just pointing out that Joe the Plumber doesn’t have to be denounced as part of the process. Unless of course there’s a double standard. > [@adaher](#): > > Weak tea is comparing voter ID laws to Jim Crow. Stop this endless nonsense. All you have to do is ask minorities the only question that matters politically: What have the Republicans done for me lately? The answer is: spew hatred toward me, try to stop me from voting, cut any and all programs that might benefit me, and prop up all the people who try to demonize me. When have they done this? Lately. In fact, today. Right now. And every day until the next election. Where I will prove I’ve been listening. Your nonsense is part of the hate campaign. You’re not helping your professed cause. You are instead reinforcing the reality. Nothing will ever change unless you realize that you’re part of the problem. You and the millions like you. You’re an addict to your hate. Maybe when you hit bottom you’ll seek help. But I doubt it. Conservian hasn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/118 "2013-10-14T15:10:50Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Stop this endless nonsense. All you have to do is ask minorities the only question that matters politically: > > What have the Republicans done for me lately? > > The answer is: spew hatred toward me, try to stop me from voting, cut any and all programs that might benefit me, and prop up all the people who try to demonize me. > > When have they done this? Lately. In fact, today. Right now. And every day until the next election. Where I will prove I’ve been listening. That’s really what it boils down to. GOP state legislatures are trying to prevent minorities from voting. Romney uses constant dog whistles in his campaign. GOP House blocks things like the food stamp bill that disproportionately affects minorities. Each election, some minority neighborhood mysteriously receives fliers and phone calls giving the wrong date/location for voting… But then some conservative says “But what about Byrd?” and acts legitimately confused about why most minorities vote Democratic, especially in national elections. I’ve met people who honestly just can’t understand why the Southern Strategy means more today than what political party Abraham Lincoln belonged to. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/119 "2013-10-14T15:20:57Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > You’re an addict to your hate. Maybe when you hit bottom you’ll seek help. But I doubt it. Conservian hasn’t. This is too personal for this forum, **Exapno Mapcase**. It’s OK to talk about another poster’s views and how they relate to the outlook of a party, but saying a poster is addicted to hate and needs help isn’t appropriate for Elections. Save that for the Pit. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958/120 "2013-10-14T15:33:41Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Joe the Plumber is just some guy. Your entire base is “just some guys” exactly like Joe the Plumber. You refuse to understand this. You are the party of the rural, the white, the old and the religious. The answer to winning minorities (and to stop losing women also) is to stop being the party of those people. Which you can’t do because it would take generations to win back enough minorities to replace your racist, homophobic, sexist base. Your historical delusions in no way affect the party you support now, just look at how Christie is doing among the republican base and you’ll find your answer. Christ Christie is winning 30% of the black vote by losing all the white, rural, old, religious vote. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-christie-winning-30-of-the-black-vote/670958.md?page=7)