Race, ethnicity, and the vote:
Josh Marshall has this to say about the way we talk about certain groups of voters:
But their underlying assumption pretty clearly seems to be that blacks or Indians or whoever aren't quite real voters, and that Democrats who can't quite get the job done with ordinary white voters have to resort to them as a sort of electoral padding.
He rightly points out, however, that both sides, Reeps and Dems, frame the discussion this way. Of course, it doesn't held that as minorities we - if you'll allow me to slip on one of my many hats - help this by holding ourselves out to be THE group - the sleeping giant, the lynchpin, the key, the swing, the solution. But, wait, maybe it is okay if we frame it that way. Just depends what side you're on - the losing side argues that we're padding. We just like to prove a point either way.
Everyone wants to be THE voter, though, don't they? Soccer moms, Sleeping fields of soon-to-be-necessary Latino voters, the black vote, and recently the single-gal vote. How about the angry white male vote? Hell, how about the Iowan? The New Hampshire voter?
We, as voters, love to find a hook by which to entice candidates to "woo us! woo us! what have you done for ME lately?" What you have done for us lately, of course, doesn't matter half as much as what you WILL do for us tomorrow, the next day, next week . . . . .
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition, but at election time, our ambition is usually just to be needed. How chick flicky . . . .