Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Coug
I will take a look at your exit polls, though it is amusing that you have already admitted they don't say what you claim they say. You claimed that "No other demographic ... not religion, race, gender, or age ... approached the monolithic vote of the black "community" in 2000." I bring up one obvious religious body, and you can't say whether they were more "monolithic" or not.
Even as "monolithic" as the LDS voting bloc is, can you imagine a Democratic president refusing to meet with LDS leaders? Clinton met with Hinckley and other members of the First Presidency multiple times, and he came in third in Utah.
Dole got 14% of the black vote in 1996, and he was running against "America's First Black President." Bush lost 3% of that vote just 4 years later. Could it be that Republicans are doing more to alienate black voters than you want to admit? If you want things to change, defending your party's actions in avoiding the NAACP is not a good start.
|
While the LDS membership might indirectly constitute a Republican voting block, it's certainly not at the behest of the LDS leadership. That's a poor example.
If Clinton used that meeting as a ploy to get votes (which I doubt), it was a colossal waste of his time.
The NAACP is not an organization to be taken seriously if you're really interested in courting the black vote, IMO.