The Washington Post has a new section, About US: About US is a new initiative by The Washington Post to cover issues of identity in the United States. Trouble is, it assumes that the readers will all think the same way as the writers:
by Vanessa Williams | November 23, 2018
White female voters in Georgia showed little interest in helping black women fulfill their dream of electing Stacey Abrams as governor, which would have made her the first African American woman to head a state in the nation’s history.
Seventy-five percent of white women voted for Republican Brian Kemp, who was declared the winner late last week, more than 10 days after disputes over absentee and provisional ballots.
Among black women, 97 percent supported Abrams, who is the first black woman to win a major party’s nomination for governor.
Although white suburban women were praised for helping flip the U.S. House from Republican to Democratic control, liberal political pundits and activists criticized them for backing Kemp over the female Democratic candidate.
But the shocking, shocking! part is that black male voters just didn’t do as they were told. CNN’s exit polling guesstimated that 11% of black male voters cast their ballots for Mr Kemp, while the Associated Press’ VoteCast put the number at 8%.
American blacks have long been the Democratic Party’s most loyal voting demographic, giving, over time and many elections, roughly 90% of their votes to Democrats. And, in the Georgia gubernatorial race, that same thing happened again among black male voters.
You can read the rest at the link, but the whole thing is based on the author’s unspoken assumption that black voters simply must vote for black candidates. That between 89 and 92% of black male voters voted for Miss Abrams simply isn’t good enough.
White women voters were similarly criticized, for not giving 100% of their votes to Miss Abrams, and instead gave most of their votes to the male candidate.
There are the obvious rejoinders: if all black voters are simply supposed to vote for a black candidate, then surely the opposite is true, and all white voters should be expected to vote for the white candidate. Yet while any conservative would see that as a reasonable point, to the left it is the epitome of raaaaacism. If all female voters are expected to vote for the female candidate, why wouldn’t all male voters be expected to vote for the male candidate? Again, using the logic of the left, conservatives can see the sense in a “Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander” argument, but to the left, it’s the rankest sexism ever!
How can you even talk to such people? Their logic, their mindset, their preconceived notions are simply so different from those of conservatives that we are speaking a different language.