May 20, 2014

On Offer From the GOP Today: Naked Rhetorical Contempt


The RNC/Ebony dustup and subsequent statements from RNC Communications Director Sean Spicer about it, can lead any rational observer to one of two conclusions, which are not mutually exclusive:

A. The Republican National Committee organization has nothing but naked rhetorical contempt for black voters and their intelligence,  or 
B.  Sean Spicer and the RNC's entire communications apparatus are utterly, irrevocably and irredeemably incompetent.  

My vote? All of the above. Let me explain myself.

 Back on March 27th, the lovely Jamilah Lemieux, a senior editor at African-American magazine Ebony, exchanged words with young Republican National Committee staffer Raffi Williams after she voiced her disdain for a new black conservative publication in the offing.  In the course of the exchange, not having examined Raffi's twitter photo very closely, she took the light skinned Raffi for a white guy and dismissed his comments on that basis. 
@Raffiwilliams @BETpolitichick @SistahScholar @orlandowatsonOh great, here comes a White dude telling me how to do this Black thing. Pass.
@JamilahLemieux You are questioning someones blackness.sorry I do not fit your stereotypes @BETpolitichick @SistahScholar@orlandowatson
@Raffiwilliams I was looking at your avi without blowing it up. I apologize for that. However, I care about NOTHING you have to say.

The RNC then made a calculated decision to escalate this rather typical of Twitter exchange into a full fledged liberal media bias attack opportunity. The next morning, party Chairman Reince Priebus let fly with a letter calling on Ebony to apologize for Jamilah's behavior and stated a hope that “we can use this unfortunate episode as a catalyst for greater engagement and understanding between the Republican Party and the black community.” Hours later, Ebony caved and the RNC trumpeted a liberal media takedown to the base and went home to dinner very pleased with itself. 

So that's the background.  After all this goes down,  RNC Communications Director Sean Spicer later tells Buzzfeed that the RNC's decision to escalate the flap with Ebony was meant to show black voters that Republicans took their votes seriously. “This was not meant to be provocative,” Spicer told BuzzFeed. “What this was really about was letting the readers of a very prominent African-American magazine know the Republican Party is fighting for their vote.” 

My one word reaction to Spicer's statement? Horseshit.  

My apologies readers, I generally avoid profanity on my blog, but somethings simply require it. 

This brings me back to conclusions A & B which I began with;

A. The Republican National Committee organization has nothing but naked rhetorical contempt for black voters and their intelligence,  

Truly, what else can it be?  Are we actually supposed to take Spicer's comment seriously? Are we actually supposed to believe that the RNC was trying to open a dialogue with African American voters by attacking a young black female editor and the highly regarded black magazine she works for, because she expressed the opinion that she didn't think black conservatives or a white male had anything to tell her about the expression of her blackness, political or otherwise? It was a nothing exchange, a million like it occur every day, but the RNC decided to make a point with it, so they could trumpet to the base about how they are taking it to liberals over their media bias.  So they leaned on Ebony about it and Ebony caved, which they promptly crowed over and in the process of all of this, simply ticked off the vast majority of black voters who were aware of it.  That's an entirely predictable communications result and not the right one if you are actually trying to tell the black voting constituency that you are fighting for their vote.  That being the case, its nothing but a demonstration of pure contempt for Sean Spicer to claim this was not about being provocative, it was about communicating with black voters.  Letting that ridiculous claim come out of his mouth is a complete insult to the intelligence of black voters and merely confirms the very low regard with which we are held by the RNC and frankly the party more broadly.  His statement is the equivalent of urinating in our faces and telling us its rain showers.  It's naked rhetorical contempt, but if you don't think that's accurate, then the explanation can only be;

B.  Sean Spicer and the RNC's entire communications apparatus are utterly, irrevocably and irredeemably incompetent.  

This is the conclusion I'm drawn to if I'm being charitable, and it's entirely fair.  I'm not being mean to suggest that the RNC's communications team that is dropping $10M large on minority outreach may just be seriously stupid.  What else can I think? Raffi picks a fight with Jamilah over her personal opinion, expressed on her personal account, then the RNC escalates this throwaway twitter exchange into a liberal media attack pressure campaign on a venerated black magazine and Jamilah herself.  And according to Sean Spicer, it did these things so that the the readers of a very prominent African-American magazine know the Republican Party is fighting for their vote.”. I'm sorry, that's just.....stupid.  It's among the stupidest tactical communications actions I've ever seen.  If Spicer truly believed that somehow this would engender a positive disposition of black voters towards the GOP, then he ISa complete incompetent.  My 12 year old son could have done a better job than that.  How black voters would respond to the episode was entirely predictable to anyone with an IQ of 1. 

Just for kicks, I'll throw in a bonus exit thought.  Jamilah, then Ebony, was attacked for expressing perfectly valid opinions.  She was attacked for expressing the opinion that she didn't think a white male had anything to tell her about the expression of her blackness, political or otherwise.  As a black female, that's a perfectly valid opinion and entirely reasonable point of view for her to have.  It's irrelevant that Raffi is actually black. Focusing on that ducks the issue. She's entitled to hold that opinion, and can do so with justification. When she realized her ethnic identification of Raffi was mistaken, she stopped dismissing him because he was white and then dismissed him as a black conservative, which she clearly also regarded as having nothing to tell her about the expression of blackness.  That's certainly a more debatable position than her first, but still a quite defensible point of view.

RNC, if you would like some help with your messaging tactics to black voters, I have a 12 year old you can borrow. 








Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments (4)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
I'm not going to claim sincerity or astuteness on the part of the RNC when it comes to minority outreach, but I will make an observation about Jamilah's tweet -- she was going to be dismissive of this guy's opinion regardless of race. Her initial claim that she was being dismissive because of his whiteness was pretextual. I'm sure she did think he was white when she made the comment, but she didn't like what he had to say regardless of his race. I don't think there was good cause to make race the basis of her response.
1 reply · active 567 weeks ago
Interesting take, but I actually think Jamilah, like many black voters are indeed open to giving conservative views a hearing. She was not even a part of a direct conversation with Raffi. She responded to a tweet chain Raffi was on that she got sucked into about some new conservative media play. Raffi looked at who she was and decided to engage her with a critical tweet about her not being open to diversity of thought. That's what she responded to with her comment.

The way Raffi approached her is typical of the way the party approaches communication with black voters. You cannot open a dialogue with voters when you start with assumptions about what they think and taking the position that they are not only wrong, but foolish to think as they do in the first place. It will never work.

The fact that the GOP keeps doing it that way reveals that the true intent isn't having actual dialogue with black voters, it's just trying to look as though they are. There is a real conversation to be had, and black voters are game to have it, but the GOP can't insult their way into a conversation with black voters.
I know I bump older threads a bit, but the Republican brand has been toxic with black voters for a long time going back to the 60's. It's not just with black voters, but a lot of demographics that don't feel comfortable (the obvious doesn't need to be stated)

I understand you say the Republican Party is not interested in a dialogue with black voters. But I think people have to remember how it became this way and it goes back 50 years ago heck even back in the 30's when blacks were voting Democrat but it was split 60-40 to 70-30. In order to understand how to solve a problem that's been here for a while, you have to understand how it happened.

I could go into the history of the relationship starting with the Civil War and end to now but that would take a very long post and people have a short attention span. It goes back to nominating Goldwater an extremist (at that time) and a different strategy to win over disenchanted New Deal voters (mostly ethnic whites and Southern whites)

The GOP had a hard time winning in the 60's and winning over parts of the New Deal coalition with Kennedy in office. Around the time the Civil Rights Act was passed, some Dixiecrats (but not all) like Strom Thurmond switched to the GOP. Also, the party nominated the person who didn't support the 1964 CRA (not because of bigotry, but because he felt it was too much government interference). Despite most Republicans supported it in the House and Senate, Goldwater's nomination felt like a big middle finger to the black community. After 1964, the Southern Strategy along with focusing on the newly disenchanted New Deal Voters like the Italian and Irish communities while writing off black voters won elections for the party now. Every Republican winning the White House only gets 5-11% of the black vote now. The media never gave the Republicans the credit for their support instead praising it as a Democratic accomplishment.

It pretty much as one person stated destroyed their credibility on civil rights and why they don't get the majority of minority groups now. I think the leadership is still stuck in the era where white voters were the key to winning. George W Bush, as flawed as he was, at least tried to reach out but the base resisted.

With the black community now, it's going to be difficult in the Obama era but not impossible regardless of some Republicans and Democrats think.

JC Watts in 2007 once said he believed in a chunk (30-40%) of the black community doesn't feel either party speaks for them. I think honestly with the demographic groups that are growing, there is a good chunk that doesn't feel welcome in either party. I think this chunk also agrees with the GOP on most things, but don't feel comfortable voting for them because of the crazies who say insulting things.

The Democrats are thinking Latinos and Asians will be like the ethnic whites but that's a mistake. The Latino and Asian communities are very diverse and not monolithic like the Italians, Polish or Irish.

But the Republican leadership is still stuck on "Go after whites and screw the rest of the voters" regardless of that report made in 2013. The Republicans who believe in reaching out are few and far and tend to be called RINO's by the base and get purged. I think these Republicans (mostly of pragmatic conservatives, moderates and progressives) don't have the courage to take the party back so the Democrats may have the White House after Obama has office for a long time.

How exactly can the party reach out without alienating a chunk of their base (Southern Whites)? That's the million dollar question there.

I don't believe in a permanent majority after I saw the results of that in rural and urban areas. Things change, I just hope it doesn't come decades later because that would suck.

Keep up the good work!
Thank for sharing topic.

Post a new comment

Comments by