Why Blacks and Hispanics Should Not Vote for Trump - The Racial Divide between Democrats and Republicans

If you are Black or Hispanic and you think Trump will fight for you, think again.  Read on.

Historically, there has been a sharp difference in the racial makeup of those voting for the two parties.  During the last 4 federal elections (presidential and midterm) this was again the pattern.  On average during these 4 elections,  62% of Democratic voters were White, 18% Black, and 23% Hispanic ; 87% of Republican voters were White, 1% Black, and 6% Hispanic.

As a point of reference, the national demographic is 62% White, 12% Black, and 19% Hispanic.   So Whites are proportionately represented in the Democratic party, with Blacks and Hispanics overrepresented.  Conversely, Whites are overrepresented in the Republican party, with Blacks and Hispanics underrepresented.

This will be no surprise to most observers.  Pundits note this difference all the time.  But they only talk about it in terms of whether the numbers are changing in a particular election and how this disparity impacts whether a candidate wins election.

The more critical question is what this racial divide indicates in terms of the parties’ reason for  being, their mission, their emphasis.  

As background to answering this question, a little history is necessary.  Prior to 1964 and the passage of civil rights legislation by the Democratic controlled Congress under President Lyndon Johnson, every Congressmen from the southern states was a Democrat.  This was a holdover from Reconstruction days when the Democratic President Andrew Johnson supported Whites in the South and stopped the integration of Blacks into the political and social structure of the South after the Civil War.  These “Dixiecrats” stayed with the Democrats even as the party moved towards more support for Blacks, but they blocked any move for broader civil rights.  

The passage of the CIvil RIghts Act of 1964 was the straw that  broke the camel’s back.  The Dixiecrats defected to the Republican party, thus creating the current dynamic of the clash between the two parties on all racially-related matters (this includes support for the poor who are disproportionately Black).  Prior to the inclusion of the Dixiecrats, the Republican Party was not ideologically against support for Blacks; for example, most of the northern Republicans in Congress (House and Senate) voted for the Civil RIghts Act.

With that as background, it is not surprising that there is not just a racial divide in terms of who votes for the two parties, but there is a real difference in the focus of the two parties, their view of the role of government, and the legislative measures they support.  Even pre-Trump, the Republican party was opposed to any government action to improve the lives of Blacks and the poor in general.  When it came to White “rights” v Black “rights,” their focus was on White rights regardless the impact on Black rights and the greater common good.  

The current Republican stance under the leadership of Donald Trump has taken that perspective and applied it to broader matters such as immigration.  He has also turned this perspective into a battle cry.  

However, with regard to working men, Trump has seen the advantage of taking a vigorous public stance in support of righting their grievances, which would involve government intervention.  But he did nothing while in office to follow through with those promises.  In terms of action, the Republican Party remains the party of business and the rich.  

His public stance is so vigorous, however, his rage in support of the working man so powerful that he has convinced not just White working-class men, but also increasing numbers of Blacks and Hispanics to vote for him.  Interestingly, this despite the fact that he rarely mentions Black or Hispanic causes and just addresses the general fears of the working class.  He has made himself into a populist figure who can do no wrong.

The point of this post is to make Blacks and Hispanics, and even poor and working class Whites, aware that the Republican Party and Donald Trump are not the answer to your problems.  Your best hope of improving your opportunities and status in life is to vote Democratic not just for President but for Congress (Senate and House) and local races as well.  If you elect a Democratic President, but the Senate or House is in Republican control, any effort by the President to pass legislation to improve your lives will be stopped by Republicans in Congress. 

The Hitler - Trump Analogy

Before you say this is over the top, read on.

Germans were very dispirited in the 1920s.  They had lost WWI, the reparations demanded by the victors crippled the economy, inflation was so massive that money was literally worthless.

Then along came Hitler who preached that Germany was great and he wanted to make it great again.  That they only lost the war because Germany was stabbed in the back by the German Jews.  They were the enemy and had to be cleansed from the country.  

He spoke as a person of towering strength and force.  And Germans were ready for a strong leader to lift up Germany and make them feel good about themselves again.  

The conservative leaders of Germany thought that Hitler was a maniac but that he could be controlled and wouldn't last long, so they supported him to advance their cause.

Hitler did make Germany powerful again, but only for a short time.  Ultimately, he deceived the German people and plunged them into a nightmare (the physical destruction of Germany by bombing) that they could not have imagined.   And those who thought they could control him found that they could not because he had the devoted support of the people.

Many Americans, mainly white middle-class workers, were dispirited as the 21st century began.  Their lives had been turned upside down by globalization, the loss of jobs, and if they had one, stagnant wages; prices were rising.  They saw the government paying attention to and drafting programs to help the poor and people of color, but nothing was being done to help them; they felt neglected.

Then along came Donald Trump.    He wanted to make America great again and restore the middle class to what was rightfully their's.  He blamed illegal immigration for taking away their jobs and bringing crime into their communities, ruining America.  And so he planned to deport millions of them.  He said that if he lost the 2024 election, the Jews would be to blame.  

Trump spoke as a person of towering strength and force.  He sounded outraged by what had happened to the middle-class worker and gave powerful voice to their grievances.  The middle-class worker had lost all trust in the government and were ready to follow a powerful leader who would restore their rights.  And he made then feel good about themselves again.

And so Trump could do no wrong.  Whatever he said, they believed.

Other Republican leaders and officials realized his instability and failings, but they thought they could ride to power on Trump's coattails.  Or they were scared of him.  And upper class conservatives didn't care whether he had no character and was an inveterate liar because he espoused policies that they favored.

And so we are once again in an election season where the country and the world waits with breathless anticipation of the results, with either dread or hope.  If Trump wins, there is no question in my mind that he will destroy the fabric of America and do great damage to our institutions of government.  And that all those who supported him will come to realize what a mistake they made.

If and when that happens, they will say what Pastor Niemöller said about his enabling of the Nazi's in Germany: "First they came to get the Communists and I said nothing.  Then they came to get the Jews and I said nothing.  Now they have come to get me and there is no one left to speak out for me."

I hope Americans planning on voting for Trump see the truth before it's too late and vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. 

Middle-Class/Working-Class Trump Voters - Beware!

I feel your pain.  I understand your anger.  And that anger is justified because your life has changed as your wages have not risen much over the past 40-50 years while prices have risen astronomically. I know that you feel that the government and the Democratic party have let you down by not doing something about this; you feel they neglected you, took you for granted..  And they did.

And so you have turned to Donald Trump because he voices your anger and frustration and promises to take measures that will improve your lives.  Indeed, the strength of his rage empowers you; you feel stronger, vindicated.

But beware!  Donald Trump is not your savior.  He is instead the devil; he is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Donald Trump talks the talk, but he does not walk the walk.  He has promised you many things, both during his first presidential campaign and term of office, as well as more recently.  But in every instance, he has not done anything that has made a difference in your financial situation.

Trump promised you a tax cut.  Well, you got a tax cut but it was very small. The main benefit of the tax cut went to the super rich who saved millions of dollars.

Trump promised that his trade war with China would bring back jobs and lower the price of products you buy.  Instead, jobs did not come back and there was a spike in the price of Chinese products which increased your costs.

And as a result of Trump’s mismanagement of COVID, COVID became a pandemic and was a drain on the economy.  As a result, working class Americans suffered economically and were worse off.

Finally, Trump proposed massive cuts to basic assistance that millions of families struggling to get by needed to help pay the rent, put food on the table, and get health care. The cuts would have affected both people of color and white, both urban and rural. These cuts were not enacted because of the Democratic majorities in Congress.

What Trump did do during his term of office benefited the rich and big business.  His tax cut provided the super rich with millions of dollars while providing you with small change.  His rolling back of environmental regulations meant to protect the public - you - benefited big business and corporate agriculture.  These are just two examples of things Trump did to benefit the traditional Republican base - the rich and big business.

You have every right to say, “OK, but why should I go back to the Democrats given the way I was treated?”  The answer is that there has been a change in the Party, in the politicians who are leading it.  They too feel your pain and understand your anger.  They may not speak with the rage of Trump, but they have every intention to do specific things that will improve your life.  

Listen to Kamala Harris and Tim Walz and I’m sure you will like what you hear.  They understand you because they come from the same stock as you.  And they will follow through on their commitments to you - that is unless the Republicans in Congress block progress, as they have always done in the past.  Whether it was Medicare, Social Security, or more recently the AGENCY, Republicans have tried to block legislation that was meant to help the average American.

Republicans have never done anything to help the working men or women of this country.  Neither has Trump.  When Republicans say they are the party of the people, of the working man, their noses should grow as long as Pinocchio’s.  They are hypocrites - now exposed.

Reject Trump, not just because he has not done and will not do anything to help you, but because he is destroying the fabric of America.  “Make America Great Again” is a great slogan.  Unfortunately, everything Trump does and stands for makes America small and weakens America.  Most importantly, America will not be great again unless its people are united - not of one mind - but united as Americans.  We are further from that goal now than ever before, except for the Civil War, because of Trump’s hateful disdain of many Americans.

Protect your and your family’s future by voting for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz as well as the rest of the Democratic ticket this November.\

Attention Veterans!

I've read several articles noting the support that Trump continues to have among veterans, despite his spoken disrespect of veterans and his not having ended the "forever wars" as promised by the end of his term as President.  He apparently gets your/their support because he voices support for peace through strength and for bringing many troops home.

But is his approach likely to bring peace?   Trump's basic approach to foreign conflicts is either to say, "it's your problem; you fight," or to flatter autocrats and, because he thinks they like him, the U.S. will then have nothing to fear from them and can let them do what they will.

That approach may in the short-term bring peace and bring many soldiers home, but in the long-term it is more likely to lead to escalating problems abroad with the resulting deployment of troops.  Let's examine this with two specific examples.

Trump thinks that by flattering autocrats, who he amazingly admires (I guess because he would like to be one), he feels that he is developing a personal relationship with them that will result in their not doing anything against American interests, at least while he is in office.  But when looking at his relationships with Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, and Xi Jinping, they have just played him for the fool that he is.  Putin invaded the Ukraine, not because Trump was not in office, but because he felt that the US was no longer an implacable adversary given Trump's actions while in office.  Kim Jong Un did not follow through on any potential agreements with Trump.  And US relationships with China were bad during the Trump presidency, largely due to Trump's tariffs.

In Afghanistan, Trump's attitude of "it's your problem," led him to make an agreement with the Taliban that the US would pull out by a date certain.  And Biden was forced to follow through on that commitment, resulting in a disaster which Trump is now blaming Biden for.  For the people of Afghanistan, the actions of Trump throughout his presidency were not good.  And while his agreement did result in bringing the troops home, it was not a positive mark on our international record.

As with all things, Trump will spin any situation to say that he did great, that he is brilliant.  Even regarding his debate performance against Vice President Harris.  He never takes any responsibility, never says he made a mistake (granted, this is true of many politicians).  He is an inveterate liar.  

If you're a veteran and thinking of voting for Trump, please check out the real truth about his record.  You can't believe anything he says.  During his term, he made the world more dangerous for the US, not safer. 

Trump and Vance Aren’t Weird, They’re Mendacious, Deceitful

Yesterday’s comments by JD Vance show without any question that he and Trump don’t care what the truth is, what the facts are, they will say what they think “the people need to know,” or perhaps what they think will keep their base enraged and so totally committed to them.

First, they continued to say that the Haitians in Springfield, OH eat their neighbors pets.  This despite the Republican mayor of Springfield and the Republican governor of Ohio saying their statement was basekess.

Second, he continued to say that the Haitians were illegals despite being told that they were here legally.  His response was that the fact that the Biden administration (his words were “Kamala Harris”) had granted them permission to come here to work does not make them legal.

Third, they continued to generally disparage the Haitians.  This despite both the Republican mayor and governor again saying very explicitly that the Haitians were critical to the revival of Springfield’s manufacturing economy the past few years.  That they were hard working, etc.

Finally, they continue their anti-Haitian rants despite the fact that their words have created a security problem in Springfield, with bomb scares closing schools and hospitals, and the community being very scared.

Vance said quite bluntly that if he has to make up stories to tell people what they need to know, he will do that.  That’s pretty irresponsible even for a politician.  But the truth is probably worse.  He doesn’t really think people need to know this garbage, but he does think that if people hear this and believe it, it will inflame people’s anti-immigrant feelings, which will increase their commitment to Trump.

Unfortunately, even if Trump supporters knew the truth, it probably wouldn’t sway their vote.  Witness Governor Dewine writing an impassioned opinion piece in the New York Times stating the truth about Haitians and Springfield and saying how sad it is that Trump and Vance keep making these statements despite being told that it’s not the truth.  But he indicated very clearly that he will nonetheless vote for Trump in November.

Governor Dewine apparently does not take this instance as a warning that Trump does this routinely on every subject.  He likes Trump’s positions on policy matters, and what he says to get there Governor Dewine doesn’t seem to care.  He will vote for Trump.  This is an abdication of his ethical responsibility as an elected official.

What Is a Liberal?

In the past few decades, "liberal" has become a dirty word to almost half the population because the way in which Republicans, and especially Trump, have defined it and spoken of it.  But "liberal" is quite different from their definition.

A liberal is someone who believes that all citizens – men and women – should be treated equally and that all have the right, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Whether you are rich, middle class, or poor; whether you are a person of color or white; whether you were born here or are an immigrant – you have that right.

And the role of government, again as stated in the Declaration, is to ensure those rights.  What does that mean?

It means that government must do what is necessary to ensure that all citizens have an equal opportunity to pursue those rights.  It may require laws, regulation of business, or funding measures.  But the goal is always to ensure that all citizens have a meaningful equal opportunity, – that is, not just stated on paper.

The goal is not to make everyone equal because that is not the goal of a democracy.  That would be communism.  Rather the goal of a liberal and of our democratic government is just to ensure each person has an equal opportunity to pursue their rights.  What people make of that opportunity is their own responsibility.

Further, a liberal does not just believe that all citizens have equal rights, he or she also believes that all people have obligations that flow from citizenship.  Under the American social contract that developed in the early 1900s, each citizen has an obligation to support the common good.  Each citizen has an obligation to do nothing that takes away another citizen's rights. Each citizen has a responsibility to support the government financially in its performance of its functions, each according to his means. 

And, yes, I am a liberal and proud of it. 

Is There a Solution to the Ongoing Middle East Crisis?

For more than 75 years, since the founding of the State of Israel, there has been conflict in the Middle East, not just between Israel and Palestinians, but between Israel and most of the Arab countries surrounding it.  The cause of the ongoing conflict boils down to the following:  The Arabs who have lived there for centuries understandably consider the entire area their homeland, while Jews, Zionists, consider the land to be their homeland, it being the land of Israel in Biblical times.

Politically, the land was not part of any modern state.  Prior to WWI the land was part of the Turkish Caliphate.  After WWI, the area became a British mandate called Palestine, which after WWII, the British proposed dividing into two states - Jewish and Arab.  In 1948 Jewish Zionist leaders unilaterally declared the creation of the State of Israel within the boundaries set by the British.  The Arabs countries rejected the division and launched an attack against the new Israeli state.

Ever since that time, Israel has claimed its right to the land and has defended it, while the surrounding Arab countries and Palestinians living in the territory outside Israel claimed it was their land and sought to drive Israel back to the sea and eliminate its existence.  

All the wars that have occurred during this period - 1948, 1967, 1973, and present - were started by the Arab countries and/or the Palestinians in an attempt to destroy the State of Israel, wipe it off the map.   I should note that Egypt and Jordan signed peace agreements with Israel in 1976 and 1994 respectively.  Most recently, the UAR and Bahrain entered into a normalization of relations agreement with Israel in 2020.

After their defeat in the 1967 "6-day war" and Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza (it had been under the control of Jordan since the 1948 war), the Arab League made clear its stand once again:  no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel.

The conflict worsened when, after the 6-day war and the Arab League statement, Israel began to build settlements in the occupied territory.  Initially the Labor Party government established a small number of settlements in the West Bank for security reasons.  But the conservative/ultra-right parties that have governed for most of the time since 1977 have considered the occupied land part of Israel (it was part of the Biblical Jewish land) and have through aggressive settlement building in the West Bank, especially in the past 2 decades, made the West Bank de facto part of Israel and have made a Palestinian state almost impossible to configure.

During the late 1990s, international diplomatic efforts resulted in the PLO - the Palestine Liberation Organization headed by Yasser Arafat, the recognized voice of Palestinians for decades - removing the offending clause calling for the elimination of Israel from its charter so that the two-state process could move forward.  

Israel in fact made two offers, in 2000 and 2008, to end their occupation and for the creation of a Palestinian State, but those offers were rejected by the PLO.  Regardless, in 2005 Israel unilaterally - that is to say with no conditions or agreement - evacuated all Israeli settlements in Gaza and the army withdrew.  

That action did not result in any lessening of the conflict.  While the PLO still maintains its stance accepting Israel, Hamas, which has become the more prominent Palestinian movement, seeks nothing less than the destruction of Israel. The peace offers in fact resulted in more hostile actions by the Palestinians led by Hamas - suicide bombings, etc. with more than 1000 Israelis killed.

This ongoing conflict is an example of extremism on one side breeding extremism on the other.  As much as I understand the desperate need after WWII for Jews to finally create their own nation, to do so in a land already inhabited by Arabs, without their agreement, was an extreme action. And that extreme action was met by an extreme reaction by the Arabs – their wanting to erase Israel from the map.  

Israel's aggressive settlement building in the West Bank, which accelerated in the past two decades, has been a further extreme aggravating action by Israel, which was in turn partially a reaction to the extreme actions of the Arabs in repeatedly trying to destroy Israel.  

I should note that regardless how much I question the wisdom of the creation of the State of Israel unilaterally, once it was in existence, I certainly support its right to defend itself.  But in the current Gaza War, Israel under Netanyahu has gone beyond defense to seeing a chance to destroy Hamas regardless the civilian toll.

As a side note, Israel's aggressive actions in the Gaza War have provoked large-scale protests in the West.  However, this war is not an example, as many protesters and Palestinians claim, of genocide.  Israel is trying to eradicate Hamas and unfortunately has no concern if in the process tens of thousands of civilians are killed and homes reduced to rubble.  But Israel has no intent or desire to eliminate the Palestinian people.  Also, people need to be reminded that the war was a reaction to the invasion of Israel by Hamas on October 7.  If that had not occurred, and if Hamas' actions - rape, killing, kidnapping - not been so horrendous, the war would not be occurring and the tens of thousands of civilians and their homes would not have been destroyed.  Israel is guilty of overreach, and stopping the war is critical, but the immediate situation was caused by Hamas' action.

So to answer the question posed in this post's title, there is no solution to this conflict so long as the Arab countries and the Palestinians do not accept Israel's right to exist.  Only then is the 2-state solution imaginable.  Because, understandably, only then will Israel feel secure in turning the occupied territory over to a Palestinian state.  

As has always been the case, the ball is in the Palestinians' hands - either they truly accept Israel and seek to live in peace next to Israel or they maintain their position and be subjected to the eternal enmity of Israel.  There is nothing Israel can do other than once again being on record as being in favor of the 2-state solution (that is not currently the case) on condition that the Palestinians and surrounding Arab states accept the right of Israel to exist and cease all hostile actions.  At such time, Palestinian citizens of Israel should no longer be second-class citizens but be given equal rights and responsibilities with Jewish citizens.