The idea that Americans would vote along racial lines in a presidential election is a fairly new concept. Primarily because before 2008's race, they did not have the opportunity (unless they opted out of voting at all for this reason, which is an entirely different discussion). Many black democrats are familiar with the accusation that they voted for Obama because of his race; while this may have been true of some people (including whites who were anxious for change), I must ask myself how accurate is Romney's statement and should I be as offended by it as I am?
According to a Fox News Latino Poll, 34 percent of Latino voters would vote Republican if there was a Latino vice president. Would this figure (if accurate) be any higher for a Latino president? Probably. However, the assumption that one race by another race will act a certain way, particularly when it comes to voting, and without any analysis or evidence for the statement, is dangerous ground to walk on.
My primary problem with the statement is that it suggests that Latinos, especially Mexicans, would be more likely to vote for a candidate because he or she was Mexican than because he or she had their best interests at heart. If Romney wants the Latino vote, he need not change his heritage, but make a convincing argument that he cares more about this minority group than Obama and will take actions that empower it and improve its place in society. What won't help is blanket and baseless statements about Latino voting patterns in rooms where the group isn't meaningfully (or at all) represented.
While we can never know people's motives with certainty when election time comes, we can assume that Americans (black, white, brown, purple) will cast votes that reflect their self-interest. Hopefully when they do, there will be more in it for them than a president who is their same race. However, if there's not, it says more about society than the electorate anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment