2012 POTUS Election: America Detroit-ed

Coleman Young -- no matter how bad for Detroit -- was elected for his blackness

Rumors were rampant that black people wouldn't vote in the 2012 election for Barack Obama, based on their "Christian" duty to oppose homosexual marriage [African-American Christians waver over vote, AP, 9-20-2012]; of course, their duty to blackness trumps all others, even the first black president hasn't exactly delivered the goods to the black community. 

Jim Goad noted [The Blacklash against Stacey Dash, TakiMag, 10-15-2012] the only redeeming quality of an Obama presidency for black people; he's black like them!:

Has Barack Obama’s tenure been good for American blacks? Well, yes, if you’re interested in having them not disciplined for acting like animals in school, if you think a president’s main job is to give shout-outs to black musical performers, or if you feel a Chief Executive’s primary task is to give the impression that he “cares” about you and thus somehow raises your “self-esteem.” But he’s not so swell if you’re concerned about trifles such as black unemployment, black poverty, black median household income, or the number of black American prisoners. But who cares about that stuff as long as the president’s black?

So what happened on November 6, 2012 when black people went to the polls and, once again, voted as monolith? Black voters did exactly what they have done in cities like Birmingham, Detroit, Atlanta, Cleveland, Memphis, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Gary (Indiana); no matter how poor the economy is under black executive rule, they re-elect the person simply because they're black [Presidential, social votes show changing mindsets, CBS Atlanta, 11-7-12]:

The exit polls showed that voters mirrored the makeup of the electorate four years ago, when Obama shattered minority voting barriers and drove young voters to the polls unlike any candidate in generations. 

White voters made up 72 percent of the electorate - less than four years ago - while black voters remained at 13 percent and Hispanics increased from 9 percent to 10 percent. 

That flew in the face of GOP assumptions that the fierce economic headwinds of the past three years and the passing of the novelty of the first African-American president would trim Obama's support from black voters, perhaps enough to make the difference in a close election.

However, Obama carried Virginia, the heart of the Old South, in part by having increased his record support from black voters there in 2008, which reached 18 percent, to more than 20 percent, according to Obama campaign internal tracking polls. 

It was also reflected in turnout that matched his 2008 totals in places like Cleveland, which helped Obama carry Ohio solidly despite Romney's all-out effort there in the campaign's final weeks. 

"Republicans have been saying for months" that Obama's black support would slip, Democratic pollster Paul Maslin said. "And what happens? When African-Americans had the chance to affirm him, they came out in droves."

Just as Richmond, Birmingham, Detroit, Gary, Memphis, Baltimore, and - potentially - Atlanta, will never have a white mayor again, the unanimity between black voters to secure a stranglehold on City Hall means casting aside worries about ones individual position in life and focusing on the collective black good --- now, we see this strategy play out for Barack Obama on the national stage.

The ghettoization of the presidency has transpired, the same process that doomed Detroit once Coleman Young took control in 1973 and was continually re-elected, not on his merits, but on his blackness.

Just look at how black people in Philadelphia voted - it should be noted that Philadelphia, 43 percent black, has seen 9,000 public sector jobs cut in the past year (what % were black do you think?) - for Obama, with the only positive attribute of his presidency being his blackness [Vote was astronomical for Obama in some Philadelphia wards, Philadelphia Inquirer, 11-8-2012]:

In a city where President Obama received more than 85 percent of the votes, in some places he received almost every one. In 13 Philadelphia wards, Obama received 99 percent of the vote or more. Those wards, many with large African American populations, also swung heavily for Obama over John McCain in 2008. 

But the difficult economy seemed destined to dampen that enthusiasm four years later. Not to worry. Ward leaders and voters said they were just as motivated this time. "In this election, you had to point out to the people what was at stake. And in many cases, they felt that the Romney doctrine was not going to favor the working man," said Edgar "Sonny" Campbell. Campbell is leader of West Philadelphia's Fourth Ward, where Obama received 9,955 votes. Romney? 

Just 55. That's five fewer than McCain in 2008. Campbell acknowledged that the odds are stacked in his favor in Philadelphia, where Democrats outnumber GOP voters by nearly 7-1. "You are looking at black neighborhoods where you have 1,000 voters in a division and maybe seven Republicans," he said. "We are shocked if Romney got any votes." Even so, Randall Miller, a history professor at St. Joseph's University, said politicians almost never get 99 percent of the votes anywhere except, perhaps, the towns where they were born.

Odds are those votes for Romney were cast because the person making the choice was intellectually incapable of figuring out how to vote for Obama? 100 percent.

What about in Chicago, where black people are 33 percent of the city's population, but are largely concentrated in neighborhoods and communities that are close to 100 percent black?

I went over to the Chicago Elections site and found this:

[Information accessed here at Chicago Elections Web site] In the City of Chicago, 11 of the 50 wards saw 98% or greater votes cast for Barack Obama; 19 of the 50 wards saw 90% or greater votes cast for Obama; 34 of the 50 wards saw 80% or more of the votes cast go to Obama. 

 For the time being, the United States of America joins the ranks of cities like Buffalo, Harrisburg (Pennsylvania), Gary, Memphis, Baltimore, Cleveland, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Birmingham, Rochester, Shreveport, Newark... and, of course, Detroit, that have been Detroit-ed.

In a racially homogeneous democracy, you can look at an incumbent's record and decide if he (or the obligatory she) deserves another opportunity to be the elected executive leader representing your city, county, state, etc.

In a multiracial democracy, once black people gain majority population status, regardless of how poorly the elected black person performs in office they will always be re-elected because of loyalty to blackness. This makes a farce of democracy (already, a farcical form of government), and as we have seen with Birmingham and Detroit, the continued election of ineffective blackness produces rapid white disengagement from the city.

Just read this:

According to ABC polls, 96 percent of African American voters were predicted to vote for Obama. These African American votes came at very low political and marketing cost, with no direct promises to Black America. The black votes were based on our faith for something more in the second term. This allowed Obama to focus on other votes that did require promises, and not be spread thin. Obama has energized the streets to take part in politics, leading gang members, drug dealers and hip hop stars to turnout to the polls in hopes of something better to come in the future in ways we had not seen prior. 

Now, toss in an ever-growing latino/Hispanic population...