GOP house gains in 2012?

[cinyc]

I think people are putting a little too much faith in the Obama Justice Department.

I think people are putting a little too much faith in the Obama Justice Department. Supreme Court not to strike down this racist, anachronistic, incumbent-protection law once and for all.   We have a black President.  It's time.

[cinyc]

I think people are putting a little too much faith in the Obama Justice Department. Supreme Court not to strike down this racist, anachronistic, incumbent-protection law once and for all.   We have a black President.  It's time.

It's not racist at all, the law is to prevent minority votes from being diluted. In fact, Republicans benefit from it more because it packs Democrats together and prevents competitive races. Republicans have pushed it more than anyone.

The assumptions of that section of the Voting Rights Act are inherently racist because they assume race is the most important, overriding factor of all when it comes to creating districts.  Blacks vote for blacks.  Whites vote for whites.  Nothing else matters except race.  It's demeaning, actually.

With the election of a black President, those provisions are well past their due date.  I don't care which party benefits.  Less incumbent protection and more competitive elections are good things.  And that would be one good side effect from getting rid of it.

[cinyc]

Black votes used to be very diluted in the South, deliberately so and it's a protection to assure that overly ambition legislatures don't attempt to dilute voters.

It's 2010, not 1965.  Louisiana and South Carolina both have a minority Governor/Governor-Elect.  The President is black.   Those provisions of the Voting Rights Act have run their course.  Its only purpose now is to automatically keep incumbents in power in heavily Gerrymandered districts - which is a bad thing.

[cinyc]

Blacks vote for blacks.  Whites vote for whites.  Nothing else matters except race.  It's demeaning, actually.

More like black voters vote for black and white candidates (every recent Dem pres nominee before Obama), whites vote for whites. But, see the third chart... and imagine what the outcome is when one side significantly outnumbers the other.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/states/exitpolls/alabama.html

Ah yes, the old "whites are racist, but blacks cannot possibly be racist" canard.  

But, see the third chart... and imagine what the outcome is when one side significantly outnumbers the other.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/states/exitpolls/south-carolina.html

Which candidate won SC-01 in that horrible, "racist" state of South Carolina, which is subject to the relevant provisions of the Voting Rights Act?  What percentage of SC-01 is white?  75%?  I guess all those closet racists voted against Scott, right?  Especially those "racist" Republicans who voted for Scott 68%-32% in the primary runoff, right?

And which candidate won in FL-22, again?  What percentage of that district is white?

[cinyc]

Why do you keep putting racist in quotes when I never used that word? Thanks.

Anyway, it's nice if every 15 years when there's a big wave election a majority white district in the South (and this one which nearly elected a lesbian Democrat in '08!) will elect a single black Republican congressman, that's a sign that we've come a ways toward race being less of an issue, but I don't buy that a single example counteracts decades of history and current electoral dynamics that you seem to be outraged by people acknowledging the existence of. I'm sorry this makes you so extremely angry, generally when people come here it's for a love of data, and sometimes that crosses over into issues that stoke intense personal emotion.

There are tens of millions of white voters across the country who have never voted for a black candidate, and for many of them, the race is a factor. How many black voters do you think have never voted for a white candidate, since you view the two situations as equivalent?

I put "racist" in quotes because the people of SC-01 - who voted for an African-American congressman and Indian-American governor - are far from it.

Again, there is far more than one example of minorities getting elected in white areas of the South.  FL-22 is another.  And you may dismiss the Louisiana and South Carolina Gubernatorial elections because you think some people aren't minority enough to be considered a minority.   (Never mind that there is little reason to think that Louisiana and South Carolina wouldn't elect a competent, conservative Republican black governor, too.)  But the fact remains that those states did elect a governor who is a minority - which is more than can be said of many so-called "progressive" states north of the Mason-Dixon line.

There are tens of millions of white voters who have not had the opportunity to vote for a black candidate other than Barack Obama - who many viewed as unfit not because of his race but because of his lack of experience and liberal politics.  Can you say the same thing about most black voters - that they've never had the opportunity to vote for a white candidate with prior political experience who reflected their political views?  No.