More Republican scheduling conflicts:
In recent weeks, Republican presidential candidates have found time in their busy schedules to speak or debate before the Republican Jewish Coalition, “Value Voters,” conservative Floridians, even Wyoming Republicans, who hold virtually no sway in the primary race. They’ve also agreed to appear at the CNN/YouTube debate they at one point shunned.
But it appears that some GOP frontrunners are once again letting an opportunity to appear before African-American voters lapse, just as they decided to sit out a black voter forum hosted last month by Tavis Smiley.
2007-10-30-debate.jpgThe Congressional Black Caucus Institute announced in September that it had scheduled a debate for November 4 on Fox News for Republican presidential candidates. But a spokeswoman for the group confirmed to the Huffington Post that it has now been postponed, with no new date set.
“The debate will not take place on November 4, and we’re still considering the debate schedule,” said CBC Institute spokesperson Georgella Muirhead.
Republican candidates have cited scheduling conflicts in resisting new proposed dates, Muirhead said.
In all fairness, the GOP may not need the African-American vote now that we are learning the truly massive size and scope of the closeted not-gay Republican wetsuit lobby.
Via the Carpetbagger by way of the Washington Monthly.
huh-huh. you said ‘massive size’.
It’s hard to look someone in the eye if you know you are stabbing them in the back, like the way the Repubs are successfully suppressing black voters.
In game theory, it is a “Prisoner’s Dilemma” type game.
They could all collectively attend, and share some minor benefits apportioned among them.
But, were some to attend while others stay away, you would see the all-important bigot vote shift to the boycotters – those who break ranks and attend would be punished. None of them will risk that.
Bu-but, the GOP is the Party of Lincoln!
Don’t be silly. Lincoln never wore a wetsuit.
The GOP used to own the Arab vote, but not anymore. Both Republicans and some Democrats avoided a recent Arab-American meeting in Dearborn. Yet Rudy loves to talk to the US-Israelis lobby about bombing Iran.
Iranians are not Arabs.
Point taken, tho.
1) African American voters shunned? Check.
2) Hispanic voters ostracized? Check.
3) Muslims thrown out? Check.
4) Get rid o’ the gays? Check.
5) Still working on removing women from the party.
Mission accomplished for the Republican party. Right?
They will, however, freely declare to anyone who will listen that Martin Luther King was a Republican, Democrats have always been for segregation, and Rice, Powell, and Thomas are proof positive that Republicans care more about black interests than Democrats.
It’s a comedy gold mine and basically a giant bitch-slap to everyone who knows half a page worth of historical politics or black history.
They’ll try to make up whatever they lose by peeling off more of the Jewish vote, especially in Florida where Giuliani’s opposition to the creation of a Palestinian state will go over well.
These people aren’t stupid, but rather sickeningly cynical.
Don’t forget the Hispanics! Oh, okay, forget the Hispanics…
Wiretapping the entire country has paid off. They’ve known their true constituents for a while now. They see the big picture…
It wouldn’t be a bubble if it weren’t lily white.
Yup, this is a calculated decision on their part to court the redneck, racist voter. Forget the black vote, they can pretty much write that off.
‘Dayum Billy Joe Bob! None of them can-did-ates would talk to dem darkies! Ahm cornfused, who do we pick for presdident now?’
Between Le Riverdance and Les Wetsuits, one of ya’ll is gonna make me shoot an entire cup of coffee out of my left nostril.
Call me naive, but I find it hard to believe that any large number of people are so bigoted that they would think less of a candidate for even talking to blacks. Some people, sure, but fewer than would be swayed the other way. But maybe I’m just nitpicking — once they attend, they either have to give answers the audience likes, which does piss off the bigots, or not, which pisses off the audience and more people besides, in which case they might as well not have gone. So never mind.
Cyrus, my take on
is that “they” refers to the candidates, not the debate audience. read it that way and the requisite snark becomes more evident.
Sounds like somebody’s been reading BlogsforBush.
Sadly, no. During the 2006 election cycle a DC-based African-American GOP group ran an ad which claimed MLK Jr. was a Republican.
Needless to say they were shocked and puzzled by the ragefest this triggered. No one involved was run out of town on a rail, but a few people did have to change their phone numbers.
This has been another edition of Truth v. Spoof: The Strange Adventures of the GOP.
On a serious note, there is no upside for a Republican Presidential candidate to appear in front of a black audience. If he presents a perfect speech and delivers his message, the candidates does not get one additional vote from the black voters present or does viewing the debate. However, if the candidates makes a mistake is creates a media driven backlash that hurts the Republican candidate with swing white voters.
The real question is why would a Republican appear in front of a black audience when most blacks have never voted for a Republican candidate in their entire live? There is no platform, no strategy, no issue that is ever going to get blacks to vote for Republicans, so why should the Republican candidate bother?
Congrats Tim & John, you’ve picked up a bull-moose of a troll.