[Bret L]

Sailer Strategy Supplement: Rebrand Democrats As The Black Party

By Steve Sailer

" Two weeks ago, I noted that the Republican Party has been digging itself an ever deeper electoral hole by tolerating (when not exacerbating) the lax immigration policies of the last four-plus decades. These caused demographic changes that are indisputably and inevitably deleterious to the GOP.

Yet, I pointed out, there remains a logical possibility that the
country can avoid one-party Democratic rule even as far out as the
middle of the 21st century. If all else remains equal, I calculated,
Republican candidates could win in the 2048-2052 era simply by 1)
increasing the GOP’s share of the white vote, from McCain’s 55 percent
to 70 percent, and by 2) raising the white turnout level back to that
seen in 1992.

At VDARE.COM, this fairly obvious but apparently unmentionable option
is called the “Sailer Strategy”.

Of course, this arithmetic raises some difficult questions.

For example, how could the GOP go about deserving to get 70 percent of
the white vote? That’s a question I can’t fully answer yet. But at
least I’m thinking about it, which, I suspect, is more than you can
say for anybody connected to the Republican Party in any official
capacity.

Another difficult question is: How can the GOP keep “all else equal”
while raising the white share of the vote?

For example, the blogger The Cold Equations reflected thusly on the
possibility of the GOP getting about 70 percent of the white vote:

“This is not out of the question. Other races vote in blocs. But, I'm
not sure how it could be done, especially without alienating other
races and making the target even higher, high enough that you'd have
to get white hardcore liberals, which isn't going to happen.”

On this reading, the Republican Party can’t just have a positive
strategy of attracting and mobilizing white voters. There has to be a
supplementary tactic. Republicans must also drive voters away from the
Democrats by using wedge issues and shrewd rhetoric to aggravate the
inevitable fault lines in the Democrats’ unwieldy coalition.

Even if this doesn’t convert anyone to the GOP, it would lower turnout
among potential voters who lean Democrat.

In 2008, McCain let Obama position himself to blacks as the black
candidate, to other nonwhites as the nonwhite candidate, and to whites
as the postracial candidate. Yet, unless treated as timidly as McCain
handled his opponent in 2008, a black-led four-race coalition is an
inherently fragile thing.

The good news for the GOP about black voters: it really can’t get much
worse than 2008. McCain ran as gingerly as imaginable on topics even
remotely related to race, and still lost 95-4 among blacks.

And black turnout was very high. Indeed, the highest turnout rate
among any group was among black women—which is quite remarkable
considering that turnout typically correlates positively with income,
education, and age. This is a tribute to the intense politicization of
blacks.

Imagine that the GOP starts finally advocating and delivering on
policies that are beneficial for America’s white majority, and in
response the Republican Party drops a stunning three-fourths of its
black support. Instead of losing among blacks 95-4, the GOP would then
lose 98-1.

Big deal!

The more important question is: What about the growing immigrant
groups, the Hispanics and the Asians, who, together, cast 9.9 percent
of the vote in 2008?

Karl Rove labored mightily to convert Hispanics into Republicans, with
minimal success and catastrophic side effects. There simply are
fundamental reasons why a low-income group will always be more
attracted to the Democrats, with their proud tax-and-spend tradition.
(Asians might be a different story, but there’s no evidence of it as
yet and anyway nobody has paid them much attention.)

A more plausible Republican strategy, one with much history on its
side, is to work to make Hispanics and Asians less enthusiastic about
voting Democrat.

Maybe they could get so disgusted with the Democrats that they convert
to Republicans. Or maybe not. Maybe they’ll just vote less. Half a
loaf (or a non-cast vote from your opponent’s base constituency) is
better than none.

Traditionally, Hispanics and Asians have been good at not voting.
Hispanics tend to find politics a bore and Asians find it a
distraction. Even in 2008, with the excitement of voting for a non-
white candidate, neither group saw even half of its citizens turn out,
versus 66 percent of whites and 65 percent of blacks. And lots of
permanent residents (especially Mexicans) never bother becoming
citizens.

But let’s be realistic. Being, in essence, the white party makes the
GOP uncool. And that’s only going to get worse as the impact of
decades of indoctrination in the uncoolness of white people by the
school system and Main Stream Media continue to pile up.

Further, contra Karl Rove, the GOP will never be able to shake its
white party image. It will either increase its share of the white vote
or it will go out of business as a party capable of winning national
power.

My suggestion: the only long-term option for the Republicans, the de
facto white party, is to rebrand the Democrats as the de facto black
party.

Not the Minority Party or the Cool, Hip, Multicultural Party—but the
Black Party. Go with the flow of the fundamental Manichaeism of
American thought: Black versus White.

Sure, it’s kind of retarded, but Americans, especially American
intellectuals and pundits, aren’t good at thinking in terms of shades
of brown. You can’t beat it, so use it.

Hispanics and Asians certainly will never be terribly happy with the
idea of being junior partners in the white party. (Indeed, lots of
white people have an allergy to belonging to the white party.) Hence,
the alternative must be framed that if Hispanics and Asians don’t want
to be junior partners in the white party, they get be junior partners
in the black party.

Black or white: choose one.

Or they can not choose and stay home on Election Day.

The subtle cunning of the tactic of rebranding the Democrats as the
black party is not to criticize the Democrats for being the vehicle of
African-American political activism, but to praise them for it, over
and over, in the most offhand “everybody-knows” ways.

Republicans can hurry along the coming Democratic train wreck by, for
example, lauding blacks as the “moral core” of the Democratic Party.
Respectfully point out that the Democratic Party is the rightful agent
for the assertion of African-American racial interests, and that
advancing black interests is central to the nature of the Democratic
Party. Note that, while individual blacks wishing to vote for the good
of the country are more than welcome in the GOP, black racial
activists have their natural home in the Democratic Party. That’s what
the Democrats are there for.

Don’t argue it. Just treat it as a given.

Moreover, Republican rhetoric should encourage feelings of
proprietariness among blacks toward their Democratic Party. It’s not
all that hard to get blacks to feel that they morally deserve
something, such as, for example, predominance in the Democratic Party.
African-Americans are good at feeling that others owe them deference.

This kind of subtle language, casually repeated, puts Democrats in a
delicate spot. Either they insult blacks by denying this presumption,
or they alarm their Asian, Hispanic, and white supporters by not
denying it. As everybody knows, but seldom says, black political
control hasn’t worked out well for places as far apart as Detroit and
Zimbabwe.

For instance, 2016 on the Democratic side will be interesting. If
Obama wins re-election in 2012, blacks will argue, not unreasonably,
that they’ve brought the Democrats political prosperity and therefore
a black deserves a spot on the 2016 national ticket. If Obama loses re-
election, the media will relentlessly blame it on white racism, and
blacks in 2016 will demand a black candidate to fight the scourge of
anti-black feelings.

Even if blacks are rebuffed by the Democrats in the 2016 nominating
process, they aren’t going to vote Republican in the fall. But without
a black on the ballot, they won’t show up to vote in quite the huge
numbers seen in 2008.

Conversely, if the Democrats pander to blacks in 2016, thus
establishing a precedent of a permanent black spot on the national
ticket, that will raise severe questions in the rest of this awkward
alliance.

As the black sense of rightful ascendancy in the Democratic Party
becomes more pronounced, Hispanics will be demanding that their
burgeoning numbers mean that it’s now their turn. Meanwhile, more
Asians will wonder why they are supporting an agglomeration dominated
by blacks who don’t share their values. And white Democrats will
wonder how exactly they can prosper in a party where everybody else is
allowed to speak out in internal disputes as representatives of a
legitimately aggrieved racial group, but they aren’t.

The GOP faces a daunting future of their own making. Then, again, so
do the Democrats. All Democrats should be helpfully assisted to
confront this."

http://vdare.com/sailer/091004_rebrand_democrats.htm