Troubled Parties, Divided by Race

email Email

Republicans draw frequent criticism for their weak performance among blacks, Latinos and Asians, with Donald Trump, like Mitt Romney before him, losing non-white voters by a crushing margin of three to one.

But few observers note that Democrats also perform poorly among the majority of voters who define themselves as white: Obama got only 39% of such voters and Hillary Clinton could well drop even lower in her percentage of the white vote. In fact, no Democratic nominee since Lyndon Johnson 52 years ago managed to win a majority of the white vote, though many of them—including Carter, Clinton and Obama—prevailed with the electorate in general because of overwhelming margins among communities of color.

These numbers don’t so much indicate a problem for Democrats, or a problem for Republicans, but a problem for America—with two great but troubled parties, increasingly divided by race and ethnicity as much as they are by ideology.

email Email

Comments (21)

Leave a comment
  1. Nani  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    Most of us grew up in a world where there was no separate water fountains, no back of the bus, no White privilege. We accepted that these changes were necessary; a result of an ever evolving humanity. Some where a long the line, what had grown out of doing the right thing became demands–and finger pointing for the sins of the past.

    There was NO acknowledgement that slavery could not have ended without WHITES willing to fight a war, no civil rights accomplished without WHITES marching hand in hand in protest, and no voting violations without WHITES willing to first make it against the law and then to enforce it.

    Only anger…and hate…and blame. As though Blacks had never had slaves, never participated in apartheid, never denied rights to other races.

    Fact is that NOTHING can change without the majority. This is one of the reasons behind the Trump support. It is understandable.

    And tragic.

    Because equality is a song that cannot be unsung. But a NEW tune can be created. One I think will take what Blacks have gained. And leave Whites unable to join the choir for a generation.

    • Don  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 4:55 pm

      Nani, I don't understand at all your meaning. You said nothing could have changed without the white majority, but … now whites aren't going to have any voice in what is happening? I don't get it.

      • Rizzo  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 9:51 pm

        Don… If you have read any of Nani's comments, they are all the same. She has no point nor meaning… it's part of her "charm".

      • J_Pole  •  Aug 9, 2016 at 3:03 pm

        I also don't understand it. What does it mean?

    • I couldn't agree more. Why arentJohn Liposky  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 8:10 pm

      I couldn't agree more. Why doesn't this message get more publicity. Republicans don't have talking points like the dems but desperately need to do that.

    • J_Pole  •  Aug 9, 2016 at 4:57 pm

      Nani, I don't really understand your post, either, but I think you might enjoy reading some history about the civil war and the civil rights movement. Whites did not enter the civil war over slavery, for one thing. Also, I'm sure you are aware that white politicians in the South became Republications over their rage at the fact that the civil rights act passed in congress. Perhaps you would enjoy reading about the "Southern Strategy" which is probably explained on Wikipedia.

      • Jason  •  Aug 10, 2016 at 10:46 pm

        Dinesh D'Souza thoroughly debunks this great switch myth in his new documentary on Hillary. The fact is a higher percentage of Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act than Democrats. So if people in the South became Republicans over anger at the bill's passage, I'd say that was a pretty strange response.

  2. David Reynolds  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 4:41 pm

    LBJ's War on Poverty is continuing to take prisoners giving poor people of all races just enough to make what they would earn at entry level jobs unattractive when compared to not working and getting welfare. Consequently, they never make the first step up the economic ladder, feel trapped, and have to blame someone. The system encourages women to have children out of wedlock and single parent homes are simply not as stable as traditional families. The children are not taught self control and consequently cannot succeed in school which limits their potential and prepares the next generation for a life on welfare. We must remember that a person of any color cannot become independent while maintaining their dependency.

    • J_Pole  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 4:53 pm

      David, could you be more specific about what you mean by "the system"?

      • A Krause  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 10:00 pm

        The WELFARE system. It gives out more cash and benefits to non-workers than many can earn on their own.

    • John M. Werlich  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 6:52 pm

      Entitlement frenzy seems to be the sticky wicket. The more that is promised, the more the people want, the more people get the more they are disatisfied. "Where is my fair share, they bark?" And now: "Why do I have to work to get my fair share, after all the rich can give it to us." Right?

      • A Krause  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 10:07 pm

        They are taught that the 1% wealthy could just pay more taxes and support everyone else. There is no understanding of how an economy really works. And once people get handouts, most don't care how it affects others.

      • J_Pole  •  Aug 9, 2016 at 3:11 pm

        To A Krause: The Welfare system encourages women to have babies out of wedlock? Perhaps you can link to some objective factual information that proves women on welfare get more free handouts than they could earn on their own. I do know that the red states receive more money from the rest of us (our taxes) but I don't know if they have more babies out of wedlock.

      • J_Pole  •  Aug 9, 2016 at 3:17 pm

        "But as David Ellwood and Lawrence Summers have shown, welfare benefits could not have played a major role in the rise of out-of-wedlock births because benefits rose sharply in the 1960s and then fell in the 1970s and 1980s, when out-of-wedlock births rose most. A study by Robert Moffitt in 1992 also found that welfare benefits can account for only a small fraction of the rise in the out-of-wedlock birth ratio." The Brookings Institute

      • J_Pole  •  Aug 9, 2016 at 3:23 pm

        I would also refer you to CED.Gov, the article entitled "
        I would also refer you to the following at CC.Gov

        "Recent Declines in Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States"

        It doesn't hurt to back up your assumptions with facts whenever possible.

    • Rizzo  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 9:59 pm

      Amen… This entitlement system robs people of their own ambition.
      It is absolutely criminal. Modern day slavery.

  3. Henry  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 6:14 pm

    A perfectly useless observation by Medved (during his deer-in-the-headlights muddled condition over the Donald, albeit understandable) because it ‘explains’ nothing. The truth is that Republicans cannot win minority and disenfranchised voters simply because the Democrats have won the war with propaganda, hatred, and anger. (Helped, of course, by the universities and the entertainment industry.) In truth, the best hope for minorities and the disenfranchised, is free market capitalism, small government, lower taxes, less regulations on small businesses, and a myriad of other ideals the Democratic Party does NOT represent. But they have mastered the game of “we love you, but the other party—you know, the one that’s mean, corrupt, stupid, and racist—hates you.”

    • John M. Werlich  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 6:45 pm

      So true, unfortunately. Thank you for expressing it Henry.

    • Rizzo  •  Aug 5, 2016 at 9:53 pm

      Henry… God bless you my man. It is comments like yours, that give me hope.
      It makes me believe there are still some people, WHO GET IT!

      Thank you!

    • J_Pole  •  Aug 9, 2016 at 3:06 pm

      Those universities are the work of the devil. They should all be torn down and the professors executed or imprisoned, just like they were in Germany and the Maoist Revolution.

  4. Barbara Barrow  •  Aug 6, 2016 at 2:57 pm

    I totally agree, Henry! Good for you!

Tell Us What You Think

All fields required. The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this website you agree to accept our Terms of Use.


Listen Commercial FREE  |  On-Demand
Login Join
Advertise with us Advertisement

Follow Michael

The Michael Medved Show - Mobile App

Download from App Store Get it on Google play
Listen to the show on your amazon echo devices
Michael Medved's History Store Also available on TuneIn