I have to give JM a nod here: swing voters are notoriously impressionistic and a bad news cycle -of any sort- will eat into Reid’s positives. But there are substantial offsets: some independents will think the story merits a shrug and moreover this is the kind of thing that tends to blow over after several months. Does anyone think this is grist for a decent attack ad? Now if there are 4 stories of this caliber between now and Nov 4, that could pose a problem.
What won’t make a difference is nuances like who Reid related the remarks to and in what context. Such details are substantively relevant but tend to get missed when somebody is listening to the news while cooking dinner.
In 2002? Please. The Dems were at their absolute nadir at that point, having spent the year cowering behind the GOP and having just had their collective ass handed to them in the election. The idea that they made anybody do anything at that point is ridiculous.
Lott could have survived just fine. The GOP forced him out because Bush wanted someone else in the leadership post, and Lott’s remarks were a good excuse. If they had kept on supporting him like they did initially and waited for the story to die down it would have been a footnote within a week.
Maybe John Mace means voters will decide Reid acted like a taint. Reid was already seen as a vulnerable incumbent for this year, and this can’t possibly help him. But Nevada is 99 percent white and no major black leaders are going after Reid, and I’m guessing he has enough money to get re-elected anyway.
Just to clarify, I didn’t mean to imply that this “scandal” will be a major factor in the next election. The mere fact that it’s 10 months away will make this rather stale news by that time. But I think dismissing it out of hand is rather silly, and might be true if all the voters were as informed as most of us here are. Like MfM says, there’s a large segment of the electorate who don’t delve much below the headlines. And if the Pubbies were able to get Reid booted from his leadership position (a long shot, for sure), that would carry over to the election. You know what they say-- you miss every pitch you don’t swing at.
They’re 8.1% of the general population of Nevada, so they’re almost certainly less than 8% of the electorate (African-Americans are disproportionately likely to be: a) under 18, b)barred from voting, or c) eligible but unregistered).
Harry could easily win those back by limiting senatorial holds on Obama’s nominations and making moves to defang the filibuster.
If Reid wants to stay in office, that milquetoast image he’s got has got to go.
Yeah, it’s totally unfair that Republican leaders can’t say “negroes shouldn’t be able to attend white schools” when Democratic leaders can say “negro dialect”.
No double standard has been demonstrated. Lott said something offensive, Reid did not. If you disagree, please explain what Reid said that was offensive.
And it was the Reoublicans who forced out Lott, not the Democrats.