Race

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Georgia Senate voters have a moral choice. White Christians are choosing hypocrisy | Steve Phillips

      by

      Georgia Senate voters have a moral choice. White Christians are choosing hypocrisySteve PhillipsEvangelicals show their true colors in voting for a Republican mired in unchristian scandal Why do we have such low expectations for white voters? The midterm elections brought into stark relief just how many white voters are willing to make a mockery of showing any pretense of concern for democracy, good governance or even the barest qualifications for our country’s highest offices. As unfortunate as that behavior is, what’s even more dangerous for the future of the country is how resigned the rest of the country has become to the anti-democratic and intellectually unjustifiable voting patterns of much of white America.How whiteness poses the greatest threat to US democracy | Steve PhillipsRead moreOn one level, we shouldn’t be surprised because white Americans have been voting against whatever political party is aligned with Black people for more than a century – the civil war itself began when seven slaveholding states, all dominated by the Democratic party, refused to accept the outcome of the 1860 election, seceded from the Union and launched a violent and bloody war. While many would like to believe that such whites-first electoral decision-making is a thing of the past, the most recent midterm elections reveal just how little progress has been made.The slew of inexperienced and unqualified candidates elevated by Donald Trump this year was markedly different from prior elections over the past several decades. In Ohio, Pennsylvania, Georgia and other states, Republicans put forward as nominees for the US Senate people who’d never held any elected office or expressed much interest in participating in government at all. And yet, in state after state, the majority of white voters opted to back the candidate with no demonstrable qualification for the office other than that they were endorsed by the former president, who sought and seeks to make America white again.The situation is most stark in Georgia, which has its Senate runoff election on 6 December. After the African American civil rights leader and minister Raphael Warnock was elected to the US Senate from Georgia in 2021, Trump recruited the former Georgia football player Herschel Walker – who lived and may still live in Texas – and persuaded him to throw his hat in Georgia’s 2022 Senate race. Beyond Walker’s blatant lack of qualifications – or for that matter even interest – in government, his candidacy has been repeatedly rocked by scandal. From alleged domestic violence and stalking (including allegedly holding a gun to his ex-wife’s head) to reportedly fathering at least four children he has not publicly acknowledged (while opining in the media about the ills of absentee fathers) to the rank hypocrisy of championing anti-abortion views while having allegedly paid for two abortions of women he impregnated, the scale of Walker’s previously disqualifying revelations is at a truly Trumpian level.The pretense that Georgia’s white voters were conducting a good-faith exercise in democracy is laid bare by looking at the behavior of the those who self-describe as “white born-again or evangelical Christians”. Georgia’s white Christians faced – and still face – a choice between a man who has zero qualifications for the office and a mountain of unchristian immorality and scandal on the one hand, and an incumbent senator who is a Christian minister and the successor to Martin Luther King Jr. (Warnock is the senior pastor at the historic Ebenezer Baptist Church, the faith-based home of Dr King.)The pastor v the football player: can Raphael Warnock tackle Herschel Walker?Read moreWalker’s melanin notwithstanding, he is nonetheless the handpicked errand boy of Trump and all who subscribe to his whites-first view of the world. As Georgia pastor Jamal Bryant put it, “When the Republican party of Georgia moved Herschel Walker from Texas to Georgia so that he could run for Senate, it was because change was taking too fast in the post-antebellum South, and there were some … who were not prepared for a Black man and a Jewish man to go to the Senate at the exact same time.”In deciding between the Christian church leader and the unrepentant and unqualified hypocrite, 88% of white born-again Christians voters chose against the church leader. Which leads to the inescapable conclusion that it was not the Christian part of their identity that determined their political choice. It was their whiteness.Despite the absolute absurdity of this situation, the rest of the country has collectively shrugged its shoulders and moved on without any expressions of outrage or attempts to insist on some shred of fidelity to the notion that we’re supposed to be choosing responsible leaders to serve in our highest governing body. Where are the articles and stories interviewing Georgia’s white Christians about why they are voting for the decidedly unchristian Walker over the Christian pastor Warnock? Where are the calls, tweets and emails to reporters demanding that they ask such questions?The national silence brings to mind the words of Georgia native Dr King in his famous Letter from a Birmingham Jail: “We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.”Beyond the morality of the matter is a question of practical politics. We now know that ignoring white racial preference in elections is ineffective. Letting white people off the hook doesn’t work; what does work is holding the line, insisting on standards and challenging whites to rise above the race-based pandering they are offered by modern-day Republicans.America is built on a racist social contract. It’s time to tear it up and start anew | Steve PhillipsRead moreWhen Barack Obama’s opponents attempted to weaken his support among whites by endless and out-of-context repetition of seemingly controversial comments by his then pastor, Jeremiah Wright, he tackled the challenge head-on with his now-famous “race speech”: “In the white community,” Obama said, “the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that … the legacy of discrimination – and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past – are real and must be addressed, not just with words, but with deeds.”Fears were calmed, and Obama went on to secure the highest percentage of the white vote of any Democrat since Jimmy Carter in 1976.Academic research has also affirmed the effectiveness of this approach. In her book The Race Card, Princeton professor Tali Mendelberg revealed how Republicans’ use of coded racial messages, and their impact on voters, lost power when the implicit was made explicit. She found that “when campaign discourse is clearly about race – when it is explicitly racial – it has the fewest racial consequences for white opinion”.Trump and his electoral success broke many norms of America’s fragile democracy, and we are still trying to pick up the pieces. One norm we should not and must not relinquish is outrage at obvious and unapologetic racist behavior in the electorate. It is imperative that we hold voters to a higher standard.
      Steve Phillips is the founder of Democracy in Color and a Guardian US columnist. He is the author of How We Win the Civil War: Securing a Multiracial Democracy and Ending White Supremacy for Good
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionRaceGeorgiaUS midterm elections 2022commentReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Georgia candidates’ starkly divergent views on race could be key in runoff

      by

      Georgia candidates’ starkly divergent views on race could be key in runoffSenate hopefuls Raphael Warnock and Herschel Walker’s contrasting beliefs will influence how voters turn out As senator Raphael Warnock faces off against Republican challenger Herschel Walker in the most expensive race of the 2022 midterms, they also encounter a historic moment: it’s the first time in modern Georgia history that two Black candidates were nominated by both party’s voters to vie for a US Senate seat in the deep south state.Warnock and Walker both had experiences with poverty and Christianity during their upbringings yet their views on race and racism in society are now in stark contrast.In campaign speeches and previous remarks, Walker, who has been endorsed by former president Donald Trump, has argued racism in America doesn’t exist, asking supporters at an event earlier this year: “Where is this racism thing coming from?” Warnock, meanwhile, has spent years decrying racism, including lambasting Republican efforts at voting restrictions on the Senate floor as “Jim Crow in new clothes”.The pastor v the football player: can Raphael Warnock tackle Herschel Walker?Read morePolitical scientists and historians say that the contrasting views – Walker’s belief of an America “full of generous people” without racism, as he declared in one ad; Warnock’s belief in America dealing with racism as an “old sin” – influence how voters, specifically Black voters, will turn out and who they will support.Exit polling from November’s race showed that Black, Latino and Asian voters supported Warnock while Walker captured 70% of white voters.“When Walker is talking about racism doesn’t exist any more, for most Black people, that’s a non-starter,” said Andra Gillespie, associate professor of politics at Emory University. “On top of it, they look at his lack of qualifications. That is what would give them pause to say that they just put up any old Black person to try to run to this office. He was famous. That could be perceived as a sign of disrespect.”Gillespie says that the racial split in voting “maps on to party identification in the state” – meaning that in Georgia, those who align with the Republican and Democratic parties are “racially polarized”. She noted that Walker’s messaging tactics during the campaign to decry “woke” culture and arguing Warnock believes America is a “bad country full of racist people” shows he isn’t talking to Black voters, an influential voting bloc in a state that’s 30% Black.“When Walker uses Republican talking points and wants to talk about Democrats being divisive when talking about race, he is also signalling to white supporters that he’s not going to upset the applecart if you will,” she said. “The hope is that by hitting on personal issues and saying the same things that other folks would say, you hope to engage and mobilize and excite his supporters, the majority of whom are white.”Warnock and Walker’s life experiences shaped their views on race. Long before he became the senior pastor at Dr Martin Luther King’s Ebenezer Baptist church, Warnock grew up in a public housing complex in Savannah, Georgia, and immersed himself at a young age in the speeches of civil rights figures at his local library. Warnock eventually graduated from Morehouse College, a historically Black institution in Atlanta, in 1991.Before he became a wildly popular running back at the University of Georgia, Walker, who grew up in Wrightsville, more than 140 miles south-east of Atlanta, defied pleas from civil rights leaders who called for him to join racial justice protests in his community in 1980, which saw a group of whites beat Black protesters at the local courthouse, among other acts of racist violence. Walker chose not to get involved.Leah Wright Rigueur, a political historian at Johns Hopkins University, said Walker and Warnock’s contrasting views reflect “a common experience for those coming out of the immediate civil rights era: you either put your head down and shut up or you speak out and you fight”.Even so, Walker’s denial of racism does not reflect what a majority of even Black conservatives believe: a recent Pew Research Center study found that more than half of Black conservatives saw racism and police brutality as “extremely big problems” for Black people in the US. In her book The Loneliness of the Black Republican, Rigueur noted that research found that even conservative Black voters would not support candidates who they believe did not have their best interests at heart.Rigueur argues that the Republican party’s choice to back Walker, whose views are in contrast to even a majority of Black Republicans, represents an attempt to “pull a higher number of Black voters and/or disrupt the solidarity that was coalescing around Warnock”.‘Death by a thousand cuts’: Georgia’s new voting restrictions threaten midterm electionRead more“Walker does none of the things required to garner Black support: he’s not well-spoken, not well-versed in policy. He denies racism is an issue. He marches in lockstep with whatever the party line is,” she said, adding that Walker had alienated some white voters as well, particularly white women, who typically vote Republican.The scandals surrounding him, including that he paid for abortions for women, dismantle the “veneer of respectability of what it means to be a Republican”, Rigueur said. His lack of outreach and his decision not to campaign over Thanksgiving during a crucial early voting period, paired with his denial of racism’s existence, also relegates potential Black voters, who Republicans need to win in a changing electorate like Georgia. Rigueur added: “There has been no indication that he respects Black voters or that he actually is interested.“He is precisely the kind of candidate you don’t want to run in a place like Georgia,” she added. “You can no longer delude yourself or the public of these ideas that he’s a hometown hero with great conservative values and happens to be Black. You can’t buy into any of those things because he doesn’t live it and practice it.”What’s unique in the Warnock and Walker case isn’t so much that two Black men are facing off. That often happens in mayoral and state elections, and even at the federal level, just six years ago, South Carolina’s Tim Scott won re-election against Thomas Dixon, a Democratic Black pastor from north Charleston.But in Georgia, where Black voters often overwhelmingly vote Democrat, Warnock’s opponent is a Black Republican at a time when a record number of Black Republican candidates – 28 – ran for office during this year’s midterms and as there are three Black Republicans in Congress, the most since the Reconstruction era. Historically, when it comes to elections to national office, Black candidates have struggled to obtain the institutional backing from national parties and the financial investment needed to run successful national campaigns, Rigueur said.Recent efforts from grassroots, Black women-led civil rights groups in Georgia such as the New Georgia Project and Black Voters Matter who have been able to build an influential voting bloc through registration and outreach campaigns but also national investment in Black candidates from donors who see that growing influence.Republicans’ efforts to invest in Black candidates speaks to efforts to persuade a demographically changing electorate but the endorsement of Walker by Donald Trump “doesn’t negate the rest” of Trump’s “racially divisive presidency” nor does it negate Republican party’s “record on race in the last half century”, Gillespie said.“Herschel’s African American, yes, he is a revered native son of the state. But he’s also really inexperienced,” Gillespie said. “He has a lot of political baggage that in an earlier era would have been disqualifying right off the bat. To nominate somebody like that because he shares an identity with the other opponent, to some people, that looks like tokenism. It is something that a lot of voters are going to be turned off by.”Since 1870, just 11 Black Americans have served in the US Senate. If either Warnock or Walker win in Tuesday’s runoff, they would join the Democratic senator Cory Booker of New Jersey and Republican senator Tim Scott as the only current Black members of the 100-person US Senate.“The fact that we’ve only ever had three at any given point still demonstrates that there’s a long way to go in terms of proportional representation by race,” Gillespie said.TopicsGeorgiaUS midterm elections 2022US politicsRaceDemocratsRepublicansfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      US is failing to address ‘persistent and lethal threat’ of domestic terrorism, report finds

      by

      US is failing to address ‘persistent and lethal threat’ of domestic terrorism, report findsFederal government has continued to focus ‘disproportionately’ on international terrorist threats despite spate of racist shootings The FBI and the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are failing to properly address the threat of domestic terrorism, predominantly from white supremacist and anti-government extremists, according to a Senate committee report released on Monday.The Senate homeland security and governmental affairs committee spent three years investigating domestic terrorism and the federal response.Biden vows to combat ‘venom and violence’ of white supremacy Read moreIt found that the FBI and the DHS have “failed to systematically track and report data on domestic terrorism” and have not allocated sufficient resources to countering the threat.The report comes after a spate of racist shootings in 2022. On Monday, a white man who shot 10 Black people to death in a Buffalo grocery store in May pleaded guilty to murder and hate-crime charges.Both the FBI and the DHS have identified domestic terrorism, in particular white supremacist violence, as the “most persistent and lethal terrorist threat” to the US, the committee said.But the federal government has continued to focus “disproportionately” on international terrorist threats, it found.“Despite this acknowledgement and multiple analyses, plans, and national strategies across multiple administrations, this investigation found that the federal government has continued to allocate resources disproportionately aligned to international terrorist threats over domestic terrorist threats,” the report said.The report added that the federal government “still fails to comprehensively track and report data on domestic terrorism despite a requirement from Congress to do so”.According to the Anti-Defamation League there have been 333 “right-wing extremist-related killings” in the last 10 years, with 73% of those at the hands of white supremacists.Black Americans have increasingly found themselves the target of hate crimes. Between 2019 and 2020, hate crimes against Black Americans rose by 46%, the New York Times reported. Earlier this year, 57 historically Black colleges and houses of worship were targeted by bomb threats.The Senate committee report cites a 2021 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which found there were 110 domestic terrorist plots and attacks in 2020, compared with 65 such cases in 2019 and 70 in 2017 – the previous high.The report found that the FBI and DHS have “different definitions for ‘domestic terrorism’, which could lead to the two agencies categorizing the same event as different types of terrorism”.It said that in 2019 the FBI changed its reporting procedures to combine all forms of racially motivated extremism, including the pre-existing category of “white supremacist violence”, into one category called “racially motivated violent extremists”.“This change obscures the full scope of white supremacist terrorist attacks, and it has prevented the federal government from accurately measuring domestic terrorism threats,” the report said.TopicsUS newsUS politicsRaceUS crimeFBInewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      How Republicans and Democrats are missing the mark with Latino voters

      by

      How Republicans and Democrats are missing the mark with Latino votersStrategists, pollsters and advocacy groups say both parties continue to treat Latino voters like a monolithic group In the 2022 midterms, Latino voters reinforced their power as the second-largest voting bloc in the United States.These voters, who account for nearly 35 million people, or 14%, of the US voting electorate, both tilted the balance for Democrats in key battleground state Senate races in Pennsylvania, Arizona and Nevada and secured a Republican hold in Florida. Since 2018, the number of Latino voters has grown by nearly 5 million people, accounting for more than 60% of newly eligible voters.But Latino strategists, pollsters and advocacy groups say both parties are still missing the mark. They argue Democratic and Republican campaigns continue to treat Latino voters like a monolithic group, failing to contact and reach out to voters early and invest in ads grounded in what communities themselves care about. As Latino operatives ascend the ranks in independent political action committees and campaigns, that’s steadily changing. But those who plan to continue with the status quo could make or break party election results in 2024.Bar chart of battleground states’ total and Latino population growth.Beyond politicsCampaigns need to take a page from independent groups, according to Latino political strategists, pollsters and voter mobilization groups. They said political parties need to build trust with voters, listen to what they care about and use that data to tailor culturally relevant messaging to different communities in different states.According to the 2022 Midterm Election Voter Poll, a comprehensive exit polling of thousands of voters led by the African American Research Collaborative and other groups, nearly two-thirds of Latino voters voted with Democrats. Even as Republicans gained ground, the data shows that there wasn’t a drastic shift in Latino voters’ support for political parties.But that doesn’t mean the party will maintain its popularity.“Hispanic voters are sending a message to both parties: they see their own values and policy positions align with the Democratic side but the message to Democrats isn’t so much that they are treating it as a bloc. They are neglecting it,” Clarissa Martinez de Castro, vice president of the Latino vote initiative at UnidosUS, says.Meanwhile, De Castro says that if Republicans want to maintain and grow Latino support they need to realize they’re “radically out of step with what Latinos want”.As the number of Latinos in the United States nearly doubled in the last two decades, strategists say reaching out and contacting Latino voters, and uplifting Latino consultants who are mindful of the electorate’s nuance, will be key to critical elections. “We’re outpacing everyone,” Colin Rogero, a Democratic strategist and partner of the political consulting firm 76 Words, says. “There’s no choice. If you want to win campaigns in the future, the Latino electorate has got to be a significant portion of who you are targeting and communicating with.”But Chuck Rocha, a longtime Democratic political strategist focused on Latino voters and founder of Solidarity Strategies, says that the lack of diversity in the ranks of political consultants – and the predominant whiteness – frames how Latino voters are often seen.“When you start talking about ‘the Latino vote’, there aren’t Latinos in the room to make the corrective,” said Rocha, a former senior adviser to Senator Bernie Sanders in his presidential bid. He argued that the political strategies from consultants have not adjusted to speaking to Latino voters in culturally or regionally specific ways, despite the fact that these voters have been the fastest growing group within the American electorate for decades.That work, however, was on display from independent advocacy groups that supported Democratic candidates, and civic mobilization organizations that focused on galvanizing Latino voters, Rocha said. They invested in showing up in communities, even during off-election years, and built trust over time. He pointed to Nevada, where super Pacs and groups like the Culinary Workers Union and Somos Votantes canvassed neighborhoods across the state and spent millions of dollars in ads that specifically targeted Spanish-speaking voters.“Our universe wasn’t just reaching Democrats. We were reaching eligible voters. It was about turning out Latinos to vote,” Cecia Alvarado, executive director of Somos Votantes’ Nevada division, says. Issues and immigration patternsClaudia Lopez, who volunteered with the Culinary Workers Union and voted for the first time in Nevada’s midterms. She frequently heard about the rising costs of rents in Las Vegas and heard fears of being evicted. That focus became a centerpiece of the union’s messaging in the weeks ahead of the election.“I care about a change in a good way. I don’t care who’s elected. I don’t care who wins I just want it changed for the for the better,” she told the Guardian in October.Lopez’s perspective – caring less about party politics and more about candidates’ actions – reflects a common thread among Latino voters, said Gabe Sanchez, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and vice president of research at BSP Research.“Because so many Latinos are first-time voters and US born with foreign born parents, you don’t have the same party loyalists,” Sanchez says. “A lot of people describe party politics like sports in the US. I just don’t think that fits the majority of Latino voters.”Beeswarm chart of policy priorities of Latino’s in battleground statesMaría Teresa Kumar, president and CEO of Voto Latino, says that there is a generational divide: Latino voters are, on average, younger than the rest of the electorate, consisting of people who are newer to the country as immigrants and migrants compared to other voters of color. And Sanchez found that two-thirds of Latino voters under age 40 supported Democrats compared to 60% of Latino voters over that age. That will play a key role in the upcoming presidential race as campaigns attempt to figure out how to court young voters and make sure they turn out.Kumar said her group addressed this in the midterm by investing in registration in eight battleground states in 2020, registering 650,000 voters. But she said that campaigns did not invest in the same way because Democratic donors and campaigns internalized the idea that they were losing Latino support to Republicans.“For politics, it’s important to think about the issues that are driving individuals and the life experiences they are having in pockets that were once not Latino,” Kumar says.“We are a holistic fabric of all these aspirations, wants and needs but if we are living in a society where our policy issues are not being met that allow our children to thrive, it doesn’t matter if I like arepas or pupusas if I have a politician enacting bad legislation if I have a politician say ‘I can’t invest in you because you’re not a monolith.’”Matt Barreto, a political science professor at UCLA and co-founder of BSP Research, notes that in public opinion polling, Latinos often express shared culture, values, language and customs but politically, they vary depending on the political environment they live in.The 2022 Midterm Election Voter Poll, which Barreto worked on, found that Latino voters described sharing similar issues of concern: cost of living, gas prices, reproductive rights, healthcare costs and gun violence. But when broken down by Latino voters in states polled, those issues vary depending on the state, with the consensus concern over the economy.Midterm resultsThe midterm results offer a roadmap of how parties approached different Latino communities.Carlos Odio, co-founder of EquisResearch, a data firm focused on Latinos, wrote on Twitter that Republicans failed to make the projected “Latino red wave” a reality. It took Dems a great deal of toil & treasure to battle to a point of stability with Latino voters. Right now they should celebrate. Next week they should start putting in the work to strengthen their coalition for the ‘24 election. FL shows what happens when you don’t.— Carlos Odio (@carlosodio) November 21, 2022
      In key races in Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Michigan and Pennsylvania, Latino voter support for Democrats played a significant role. In Arizona, where two-thirds of Latino voters supported Senator Mark Kelly, he capitalized on an already influential long-term investment in Latino voter outreach by grassroots groups to capture wins in Maricopa and Pima counties.“In Arizona, it’s a dual community effort,” Sanchez said. “They’ve been working with these communities and building trust. It’s not something you can just do when the election cycle happens.”Alvarado, of Somos Votantes, said the group spent $14m on digital, TV and radio ads and voter outreach such as canvassing neighborhoods in support of Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto, the first Latina in Congress who narrowly won re-election.Alvarado, the daughter of Costa Rican immigrants who moved to the US as a teenager, says that without Latino voters, “you don’t win elections in Nevada”. In the state, 64% of Latino voters supported Cortez-Masto over Republican Adam Laxalt, according to the 2022 Midterm Election Voter Poll.In Colorado, where the Latino population has grown 72% since 2000, Sanchez worked with the Latino Victory Fund to survey Latino voters about their concerns, particularly in rural areas. That influenced voter outreach efforts and aided in Yadira Caraveo becoming the first Latina to be elected to Congress from the state.In New Mexico, Rogero, who worked with Democratic campaigns in several states, says his team worked with Democratic congressman-elect Gabe Vasquez’s campaign against Republican incumbent Yvette Herrell to invest heavily and early in Spanish-language ads, particularly in the district’s southern region, framed around Vasquez’s upbringing. That, Rogero says, was key to “not lose a majority” of Latino voters in the state’s largest Latino district, Vasquez edged out a win, and flipped the seat by just over 1,000 votes.Florida represented an outlier, where Latino voters made a shift toward supporting Republicans, with the largest gains among Cuban and non-Puerto Rican voters, allowing incumbents Governor Ron DeSantis and Senator Marco Rubio to win re-elections by wide margins. But Baretto points out that the strategy remained the same: Long-term investment from Republicans in Florida in English and Spanish ads targeting Latinos since 2020.Rogero, who grew up in south Florida and worked on several races in the state, argued that Democrats’ losses there were a “direct reflection of investment”, He pointed to the recent loss by Democratic incumbent Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, the first South American immigrant elected to Congress, against former Miami-Dade county mayor Carlos Giménez. In that race, Powell became one of the few Democrats nationally to outperform Biden among Latino voters, crediting voter outreach, ad investment, and door-knocking.“I don’t think the [Democratic] national infrastructure, the donors, the major party committees understands Florida because it’s a complicated place,” Rogero said. “Miami is not a lost cause. It’s just Republicans have been spending a lot of money there where Democrats have not.”That investment strategy among Latino voters could become important in the Georgia runoff between Senator Raphael Warnock and Republican candidate Herschel Walker, where the Latino population is on the rise. While white voters largely supported Walker and Black voters overwhelmingly supported Warnock, Warnock captured 67% of Latino voters, according to exit polling.Somos Votantes, the national Latino mobilization group that supported Cortez-Masto in Nevada, announced it would invest $2m in the runoff.“It used to be that one side would neglect it and would take it for granted, and the other one would just simply ignore it,” Clarissa Martinez de Castro of UnidosUS says. “We’ve seen signs of progress of more outreach happening. But I think there’s still some way to go.”TopicsUS politicsUS midterm elections 2022RepublicansDemocratsRacefeaturesReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      'This is our time': Democrat Wes Moore becomes first Black governor of Maryland – video

      by

      Democrat Wes Moore has made history after becoming the first Black governor of Maryland. He replaces Republican Larry Hogan, a moderate who managed to twice win election in what is otherwise a solidly blue state. 
      The newly elected official assured the electorate ‘I hear you’ and ‘this is our time’ in his victory speech. Referencing his time in the army, Moore said ‘leave no man behind’. Joe Biden joined Moore in a pre-election rally in Maryland the evening before election day

      Midterm elections 2022: Democrats beating expectations as John Fetterman wins crucial US Senate race – live
      Future of Congress hangs in balance as many races still too close to call More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Midterm elections: the candidates who will make history if they win

      by

      Midterm elections: the candidates who will make history if they winElections could usher in a younger and more diverse Congress in the House and governor’s mansions across the US American voters will head to the polls on Tuesday to cast ballots in the crucial midterm elections, and a number of candidates will make history if they prevail in their races.In particular, the departure of 46 members from the House of Representatives has created an opening for a new class of young and diverse candidates to seek federal office.Two House candidates, Democrat Maxwell Frost of Florida and Republican Karoline Leavitt of New Hampshire, would become the first Gen Z members of Congress if they win their elections. Leavitt would also set a record as the youngest woman ever elected to Congress if she can defeat Democrat Chris Pappas in their hotly contested race, which is considered a toss-up by the Cook Political Report.In Vermont, Democrat Becca Balint is favored to win her House race, which would make her the first woman and the first openly LGBTQ+ politician to represent the state in Congress. If Balint wins, all 50 US states will have sent at least one woman to Congress, as Vermont became the sole outlier on that metric in 2018.Some House races will even make history regardless of which party’s candidate prevails. In New York’s third congressional district, either Democrat Robert Zimmerman or Republican George Devolder-Santos will become the first openly gay person to represent Long Island in the House.As Republicans look to take back the House, their playbook has relied upon nominating a diverse slate of candidates in battleground districts that will probably determine control of the lower chamber. The strategy builds upon the party’s momentum from 2020, when Republicans flipped 14 House districts where they nominated a woman or a person of color.Overall, Republicans have nominated 67 candidates of color in House races, according to the National Republican Congressional Committee. Those candidates could allow the party to dramatically expand its ranks of members of color, given that just 19 non-white Republicans serve in the House now. With Republicans heavily favored to take back the House, many of those candidates of color could join the new session of Congress in January.Latina Republicans have performed particularly well in primary races, with several of them expected to win their general elections as well. The nominations of candidates like Anna Paulina Luna in Florida’s 13th congressional district and Yesli Vega in Virginia’s seventh district, which is another tossup race, led Vox to declare 2022 to be “the year of the Latina Republican”.“Republicans have an all-star class of candidates who represent the diversity of our country,” Tom Emmer, chair of the NRCC, said late last month. “These candidates are going to win on election day and they will deliver for the American people.”Republicans’ strategy of nominating people of color in some key House races comes even as members of the party continue to make headlines for their racist comments on the campaign trail. For example, Republican senator Tommy Tubberville of Alabama was widely denounced last month after he suggested Democrats support reparations for the descendants of enslaved people because “they think the people that do the crime are owed that”.And while Republicans boast about the diversity of this year’s class of candidates, Democrats’ House caucus remains much more racially diverse. Fifty-eight Black Democrats serve in the House currently, compared to two incumbent Black Republicans. Similarly, House Republicans hope to double their number of Latino members, which now stands at seven, but 33 Latino Democrats currently serve in the lower chamber.Beyond Congress, several gubernatorial candidates are eying the history books. Two Democratic gubernatorial candidates, Maura Healey in Massachusetts and Tina Kotek in Oregon, would become the first openly lesbian women governors in US history if they are successful on Tuesday. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the former White House press secretary under Donald Trump, will also likely be the first woman to win the Arkansas governorship.Stacey Abrams had hoped to make her mark as the first Black woman to serve as Georgia’s governor, but incumbent Republican Brian Kemp has pulled ahead in the polls. Other candidates like Oklahoma Democrat Madison Horn, who would be the first Native American woman to serve in the US Senate, also face long-shot odds of prevailing on Tuesday.But even if certain historic candidates do not succeed, it appears certain that the halls of Congress and governor’s mansions across America will look a bit different after 8 November.TopicsUS midterm elections 2022US politicsHouse of RepresentativesRaceLGBTQ+ rightsnewsReuse this content More

    • 250 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      America is built on a racist social contract. It’s time to tear it up and start anew | Steve Phillips

      by

      America is built on a racist social contract. It’s time to tear it up and start anewSteve PhillipsFrom the civil war to the January 2021 insurrection, the white nationalist response to democratic defeat has been to attempt to destroy US institutions and our national agreements. We shouldn’t tolerate this The current social contract in America is not an expression of our deepest values, greatest hopes and highest ideals. Quite the contrary, it is the result of a centuries-long series of compromises with white supremacists.Republicans are trying to win by spreading three false talking points. Here’s the truth | Robert ReichRead moreIn his original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson included a forceful denunciation of slavery and the slave trade, condemning the “execrable commerce” as “cruel war against human nature itself”. The leaders of the states engaged in the buying and selling of Black bodies balked at the offending passage, and Jefferson explained the decision to compromise, writing, “The clause … was struck out in complaisance to South Carolina & Georgia who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who on the contrary still wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also I believe felt a little tender under those censures; for tho’ their people have very few slaves themselves yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to others.”The Constitution itself, the governing document seeking to “establish justice” and “secure the blessings of liberty”, is replete with compromises with white supremacists’ demands that the nascent nation codify the inferior status of Black people. The “Fugitive Slave Clause” – Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution – made it illegal for anyone to interfere with slave owners who were tracking “drapetomaniacs” fleeing slavery.And, of course, there was Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, which contains the quintessential compromise on how to enumerate the country’s Black population, resulting in the decision to count individual human beings – the Black human beings – as three-fifths of a whole person.The whites-first mindset about citizenship and immigration policy that still roils American politics to this day is not even really the result of compromise. It is in essence a complete capitulation to the concept that America is and should primarily be a white country. The 1790 Naturalization Act – one of the country’s very first laws – declared that to be a citizen one had to be a “free white person.” That belief was sufficiently uncontroversial that no compromise was necessary, and the provision was quickly adopted.In a unanimous opinion in the 1922 Ozawa v United States case, the supreme court ruled firmly and unapologetically that US law restricted citizenship to white people because “the words ‘white person’ means a Caucasian”, and Ozawa “is clearly of a race which is not Caucasian, and therefore belongs entirely outside the zone” of citizenship. The racial restriction was official law until 1952, and standard practice until adoption of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act. This centuries-long, whites-first framework for immigration policy was most recently articulated by Donald John Trump – the man for whom 74 million Americans voted in 2020 – when he asked in 2018, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?”The sweeping social programs of the New Deal were the result of compromises with Confederate congressmen working to preserve white power. In a Congress that prized seniority, many of the most senior and influential members came from the states that barred Black folks from voting. In his book When Affirmative Action Was White, Ira Katznelson breaks down how “the South used its legislative powers to transfer its priorities about race to Washington. Its leaders imposed them, with little resistance, on New Deal policies.”Social Security is perhaps the signature policy of the New Deal era, but in deference to white Southerners, the program explicitly excluded farmworkers and domestic workers. As Katznelson explains, “These groups – constituting more than 60 percent of the black labor force in the 1930s and nearly 75 percent of those who were employed in the South – were excluded from the legislation that created modern unions, from laws that set minimum wages and regulated the hours of work, and from Social Security until the 1950s.”Even the cornerstone of democracy – the right to vote – remains to this day the result of a creaky compromise with white nationalists. Most constitutional rights don’t require regular legislation to be renewed. There are no Freedom of Speech or Right to Privacy or Right to Bear Arms acts. We don’t revisit those fundamental rights every 10 or 20 years. When it comes to the fifteenth amendment, however, the right to vote has necessitated further legislation to guarantee enforcement, and the opposition has been so intractable and longstanding that the Voting Rights Act has to be regularly renewed by Congress, necessitating negotiation and compromise with those who fear the power-shifting implications of letting everyone of all races actually cast ballots.Even after extracting a cavalcade of compromises over the centuries, Confederates have consistently demonstrated that they do not feel obligated to honor any agreements or democratic institutions if those agreements or institutions fail to adequately protect whiteness. From the civil war itself to the January 2021 insurrection, the white nationalist response to democratic defeat has been to attempt to destroy American institutions and shred our national agreements. In contract law, a contract becomes null and void if one party did not enter into it in good faith, or if one party breaches the agreement and walks away from its mutual commitments. Given the clear bad faith and contempt for any allegiance to the common good, why do we have to cling to the old frameworks?The answer is we don’t. We do not have to stifle our dreams and surrender our principles. We can now craft a new, fundamentally different social contract.
      Steve Phillips is the founder of Democracy in Color and a Guardian US columnist. This is an extract from his latest book, How We Win the Civil War: Securing a Multiracial Democracy and Ending White Supremacy for Good (New Press, October 2022)
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionRaceDonald TrumpcommentReuse this content More