MichaelFauntroy.com

Obama: Yes or No?

The May issue of The Progressive magazine includes a very interesting cover story.  Writer Edwidge Danticat and Professor Adolph Reed, Jr. give their views of Barack Obama's presidential candidacy and what it could mean for the country.  Please check out the articles.  I think you'll find them very interesting.  There's something for Obama supporters and detractors to consider.  Kudos to The Progressive for taking the debate to a new level.

Obama Divorces Wright

In a rather public breakup, Democratic presidential frontrunner Senator Barack Obama took severed ties today with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, contending that his former pastor’s words were outside the bounds of decency, calling them wrong and destructive.  I think Obama’s public denunciation of Wright was a necessary, albeit poll-driven, step that may keep his campaign from being derailed by the controversy surrounding Wright.  However, Obama may be kidding himself if he thinks he’s putting this issue to rest.  While it won’t keep him from the nomination, it will prove to be political poison in November.  Obama runs the risk of being seen as disingenuous by contending that he didn’t know what Wright was about.  After all, he disinvited Wright from his campaign announcement speech in February 2007.  Obama and his campaign knew then, and now, what Wright was about.

This may prove to be a seminal moment in the campaign that may cause a problem for him in the Black community.  Obama has essentially thrown a very popular Black minister under the bus.  That may not mean much to the larger society, but Black, church-going people may see this for what it is: poll-driven political expediency.  That may damage Obama more than we now know.

Michael K. Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University and author of the recently published book Republicans and the Black Vote.  A registered Independent, he blogs at:  www.MichaelFauntroy.com.

Wright Speaks

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright made a few public appearances over the weekend that I am sure left some Barack Obama supporters out there asking “With friends like these, who needs enemies?”  Obama supporters need to understand, however, that Wright’s friendship with Obama doesn’t require the Reverend to crawl under a rock until after the election in the hopes that his presence won’t sink the SS Obama.  Wright has the right to speak.  And he should, given Big Media’s spasm of Wright coverage, launched by some inflammatory clips hurtling through cyberspace.

Wright has no choice but to defend himself against charges that he’s a racist, unpatriotic, conspiracy-theory spouting kook; in the court of public opinion, silence is akin to a guilty plea.  His recent visibility is clearly intended to counter the one-dimensional characterization of him that Big Media ran with.  I’m also willing to bet that there is a part of him that feels his most famous congregant, Obama, didn’t go far enough to defend him.  He may even be offended by the fact that, as the story began to fade, Obama went on the ABC television show “The View” and, as if to shovel dirt on his mentor, noted that he would have left the church if Wright had not retired.  This came after Obama went to great lengths to explain why he hadn’t left the church and had the faint whiff of someone scrambling to put the toothpaste back in the tube.  Wright's words strike me as those of a father who feels like his son didn't come to his defense.  It's akin to a scorned father who decides to take a pound of flesh from his son.

In a speech before the National Press Club, Wright broadened the discussion to contend that the attacks on him are really an attack on the larger Black church.  As The New York Times reported, Wright said that political opponents of Senator Obama were exploiting the fact that the style of prayer and preaching in black churches was different from European church traditions emphasizing that it was “different, but not deficient,” he said.  While I think it’s a bit of a stretch to conclude that it’s about the Black church, there is no doubt in my mind that we too often fear and demonize that which we do not fully understand.  So I won’t summarily dismiss Wright’s larger point.

Of course, this all boils down to one question: How will Wright’s words impact Obama’s quest for the presidency?  I think it will have a very limited impact in the nomination fight; it’s still his to lose.  It would certainly have been a different story had this erupted just before Super Tuesday.  This controversy may still prove to be political poison for Obama in the general election.  Many voters, including some who may have been inclined to support Obama, have seen the video, heard from Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, and people of their unfortunate ilk, and already decided that Obama is unsupportable.  For Obama’s sake, let’s hope that universe of people doesn’t grow as the story continues.  And it will.

Michael Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University and author of the recently published book Republicans and the Black Vote.  An Independent, he blogs at www.MichaelFauntroy.com.

Television Interview: Michael Fauntroy on Voice of America TV

Here is a clip from an interview I did on Monday, 28 April on Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

McCain's Gamble

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Senator John McCain is trying hard not to get lost in all the attention the country is devoting to the hard-fought Democratic presidential nomination contest. He is taking an unusual step in this regard for someone from the Grand Old Party (GOP): he’s touring mostly Black, poverty-ridden communities, such as last week’s trip to the Lower Ninth Ward in New Orleans, to speak out against poverty and other societal ills. These are the kinds of communities that most Republicans couldn’t find with a map and a Sherpa, so his “It’s Time for Action” tour is notable. While he should be commended for trying to address these issues and reach out to Black voters, the reality is that he is fighting against two important factors: history and his own Senate record.

Historically, Republican policy makers have not been particularly interested in the economic realities of the poor. From tax cuts to wealthier Americans on the mistaken notion that those new funds would be invested in America for the benefit of all, to vociferous fights against social programs that helped the poor, the GOP earned its reputation as the party for the rich. And McCain was there virtually every step of the way. The Reagan-driven massive shift of jobs to cheaper labor markets abroad took place on McCain’s watch. He supported the supply-side economic policies, also known as Reaganomics, that gave $750 billion in tax cuts and reduced support for human service programs by $280 billion. African Americans and the poor were disproportionately and negatively impacted by the economic policies of the 1980s, so there is a certain irony that McCain is touring areas and decrying poverty while his congressional history supported some of the policies that exacerbated the problem.

The GOP has also antagonized Black voters over the years through public policy and political symbolism, so it’s no surprise to me that McCain has a steep hill to climb. From Willie Horton to “reverse discrimination” to voter purge programs to the “welfare queen” to the “Southern strategy,” and beyond, his party has perversely used race to demonize African Americans and Black candidates to win elections. As I note in my book Republicans and the Black Vote, the Republican Party built its rise to national dominance during the 1980s and 1990s on racial animus and symbolism. Add to that McCain’s vote against both the Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Bill, and a relatively weak Civil Rights Act, and it’s difficult to see how McCain or any Republican can now be taken seriously on these important issues.

So, given party history and McCain’s record, you’ll have to forgive me for skeptically viewing McCain’s tour as a serious attempt to raise attention to the issue of poverty and reach out to Black voters. I see it, first and foremost, as a well-choreographed attempt to neutralize Independent voters who may move to the Democratic nominee if the GOP is seen as gratuitously hostile to minorities and the poor. Secondarily, it may be seen as an attempt to win Black support, particularly so if Senator Hillary Clinton emerges as the Democratic nominee. Clinton, in the eyes of many Black voters, can only win the nomination by stealing it from Senator Barack Obama. A Clinton nomination, then, could provide McCain with an opportunity to peel off some Black support and that of of White Independents.

McCain can travel to Selma, Alabama, Youngstown, Ohio, or New Orleans, Louisiana in an attempt to soften his image and that of his party, but history suggests that he won’t get very far in the process.

Michael K. Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University and author of the recently published book Republicans and the Black Vote. A registered Independent, he blogs at: www.MichaelFauntroy.com.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright on Bill Moyers Journal

Here is a link to the Bill Moyers' interview with Rev. Jeremiah Wright that aired Friday, April 25 on PBS' Bill Moyers' Journal.  Wright will also hold a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on Monday, April 28.

Paperback Book Release: Republicans and the Black Vote

I'm happy to let you know that a new, updated paperback version of my most recent book, Republicans and the Black Vote, has just been published.  You can get from the publisher for $19.95.  The book explores how the Republican Party has used public policy and racial symbolism to demonize African Americans to fuel the party's rise to political dominance.  It's a timely topic, as presumptive Republican nominee Senator John McCain has at least voiced an interest in trying to win African American support.   His recent tour of Selma, Alabama and New Orleans, Louisiana have sparked interest in just how seriously he will pursue the Black vote.  Obviously, I'm biased, but I'm proud of the book and think you'll learn something if you read it.

Here are some book jacket comments --

"An illuminating analysis of how the Republican Party has strayed from African American voters and how much ground there is to make up."—Keith Reeves, Political Science Quarterly

"A balanced and nuanced discussion of race-party intersections.... I recommend this book highly."—Peter W. Wielhouwer, Perspectives on Politics

"Tackling a topic that has not received nearly as much attention as it merits, Fauntroy's timely work provides a comprehensive overview of the GOP in relationship not only to black voters, but to racial politics writ large."—Linda Faye Williams, University of Maryland

"A comprehensive and much-needed analysis of party identification among African Americans since passage of the 15th and 19th Amendments.... Fauntroy does a great job assessing the obstacles plaguing the Republican Party."—Maruice Mangum, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

Pennsylvania Observations

After six weeks of campaigning, mudslinging, and silly questions to candidates befitting a B-level reality show, Pennsylvania Democrats finally had their say handing Senator Hillary Clinton a major victory over Senator Barack Obama.  The win may well be the worst of both worlds.  On the one hand, it gives Clinton added momentum and justification to continue in the race.  On the other hand, it raises legitimate questions about Obama’s ability to close the door on the nomination and lets fester concerns about his toughness.  That’s bad news for Democrats seeking closure in the nomination contest.

Clinton’s win was expected, but the margin exceeded most forecasts.  The punditocracy seemed to coalesce around the notion that a 10 percent or larger Clinton victory would be meaningful, contending that anything below that number would be a psychological win for Obama (Don’t you just love it when round numbers taken out of the sky are bandied about as rational?)  Her performance will temporarily quiet those who have called upon her to exit the race.  While it is still very unlikely she can win the nomination, her Keystone State win allows her to continue to craft an argument that she’s best positioned to win the states that Democrats will need in November.  She has won the popular vote in eight of the nine largest states (North Carolina, ranked 10th, will vote on May 6).  While two of those states – Florida and Michigan – require an asterisk, the reality is Clinton has done much better than Obama in the states that matter most to Democrats.

The Clinton coalition was as it has always been.  She won nearly 70 percent of votes from Catholics, 53 percent from Jewish voters, 56 percent of Protestants, and 63 percent of seniors (Pennsylvania is the second-oldest state in the country).  She carried late deciders, churchgoers of all frequencies, rural voters, and those without college degrees.  An interesting exit poll finding is that Iraq seems to be receding as an issue.  A New York Times exit poll indicated that 55 percent of voters identified the economy as the most important issue facing the country, nearly doubling the 28 percent of voters who identified the Iraq War as most important.  That statistic suggests that the ground may be shifting in a way that works against Obama’s campaign rationale.  What good is being a strong opponent of the war if it no longer matters as much to voters?

Obama has some reasons for optimism.  He won nearly two-thirds of 18-24 year old voters and, in what has to be an encouraging sign going forward, he also won a big majority of newly registered voters.  His ability to expand the electorate is amazing and presents a great base going into the general election, should he get that far.  He continued his overwhelming support among African Americans, winning 92 percent of the Black vote, and carried self-identified liberals.  An ominous sign, however, could be his showing among churchgoers; he won 56 percent of those who never attend church, while losing in all other categories.

While Obama is still the overwhelming favorite to win the nomination, he now has some nagging questions to answer.  Is his bulging war chest a cover for inherent weakness that could be exploited in a general election?  Why is he unable to close the deal in some of the biggest states?  Will he have to go negative to close out the race in North Carolina and Indiana on May 6?  What would going negative mean to his image as a “new” politician?

For all that we think we know after months and months of campaigning, in many ways, things are still unsettled.

Michael K. Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University and author of the recently released book Republicans and the Black Vote.  A registered Independent, he blogs at: www.MichaelFauntroy.com.

Obama's Strategy Proves We Haven't Come That Far

Supporters of Senator Barack Obama’s presidential campaign have consistently underscored the belief that because he transcends race he can bring people together like no other candidate.  This argument took on particular momentum after the Iowa caucuses, as everyone seemed to marvel at the extent to which Obama won support from Whites.  Obama supporters  pointed to his cross-racial appeal as proof that the country has come a long way to overcome racism.  There is no question that America infinitely better now than it has ever been on the issue of race.  However, as I look at the campaign’s response to three biggest controversies it has faced, I can only conclude that we haven’t come as far as some think.  Indeed, it’s not a stretch to contend that his campaign is largely dedicated to not scaring White voters.

The first controversy cropped up at the victory party following Obama’s Wisconsin primary win. Michelle Obama took to the microphone and made a comment that went over like a lead balloon.  Her statement that she, for the first time in her life, felt proud of her country gained her significant enmity and put her on the road to isolation as she was portrayed as the stereotypical angry Black woman.  Once lauded as the campaign “closer” and secret weapon, other than one national television appearance a week before the Pennsylvania primary, she seems to have gone missing-in-action and you might need a GPS and a Sherpa to find her.  I guess even the wife of the candidate can be muzzled for the cause.

The second controversy was the firestorm created by the response to parts of sermons by Rev. Jeremiah Wright that were revealed on the Internet. Wright was long seen as a problem for the campaign for some time, which helps explain why he was disinvited from giving the invocation at Obama’s candidacy announcement in February 2007.  But Wright’s long relationship with the presidential candidate couldn’t easily be brushed under the rug.  He was Obama’s pastor for 20 years, conducted the Obama’s wedding ceremony, and baptized their children.  But Obama was so shocked and chagrined by some of Wright’s publicized words (and the attendant firestorm) that he had to give an address on race to allay White concerns.  The speech was universally praised not for what it said, but what it didn’t.  The speech did not make White voters afraid that he was some closet “race man” fully prepared to remind them of the history of American racism.  Even though the speech was well-received, it wasn’t enough, so he went further and said in a television interview that he would leave the church if Wright remained as pastor. 

The third controversy has two parts.  Part one was in February, when Obama declined an invitation to the 9th annual State of the Black Union symposium hosted by Tavis Smiley and held in New Orleans.  This symposium brings together some of the finest educators, practitioners, and analysts who work on uniquely Black issues from housing to education to health care and beyond.  Part two was the recently held commemoration of the death of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Memphis.  Obama declined to attend the event choosing to campaign in Indiana.  The campaign tried to spin the absence by noting Obama was speaking in the same location in which Bobby Kennedy broke the news that Dr. King was assassinated.  Both absences speak of a candidate trying hard to avoid overtly Black events.

It seems to me if we really have made the progress the campaign and its supporters says we have, then White voters would not have felt threatened or offended by Michelle Obama, would have listened more carefully to what Wright said, not just how he said it, and would not have thought twice that the first African American presidential candidate with a real chance at winning going to such public majority-Black events as the State of the Black Union and the King memorial (Who in their right mind would object to Obama attending the King commemoration?)  The Obama campaign’s response to these events tells the story of an operation that doubts the country has come as far as it argues the country has.  Indeed, the campaign’s response to these candidates demonstrates a lack of faith in the notion that America is really ready for a Black president.

Michael K. Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University and author of the recently published book Republicans and the Black Vote.  A registered Independent, he blogs at: www.MichaelFauntroy.com.

Thank You, Tavis

It was announced Friday morning, April 11, that Tavis Smiley will leave his twice-weekly perch as a commentator on the Tom Joyner Morning Show (TJMS).  I think this is a big loss (disclosure:  I've appeared on Smiley's PBS television show).  His departure is disappointing and reveals what happens when one has the audacity of independent thought. Tavis has the temerity to think for himself, ask Black people difficult questions, and avoid the temptation to look at matters through rose-colored glasses.  But, alas, no good deed goes unpunished and Smiley's prize has been blistering, often off-based criticism from some longtime TJMS listeners who think that Tavis crossed the line for not joining the fawning over Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign.  I can't help but believe that listener reaction to his position pushed him out of the door.  I know it's being played as a scheduling thing, but the reality is that Smiley speaks to more people on the TJMS than on his radio and television shows combined.  It's a valuable outlet, so I don't believe that he wanted to give up access to such a large audience.

There are plenty of people who can do commentary -- but very few who can do it intelligently -- and I'm sure they are salivating at the opportunity to fill a plumb vacancy (disclosure:  I've been a weekly commentator on WVON-AM in Chicago and the Cliff Kelley Show since June 2005).  The reality is, however, that Tavis is an original and almost singlehandedly created this role for Black commentators on national radio.  Black-formatted radio shows all over the country have taken the TJMS lead and now have regular commentators/analysts talking politics.  That's an important contribution in an arena where such talk has been sorely needed.  He used his notoriety to branch out into his own television and radio shows, which he has used to bring much needed Black voices to America's ears and, for that, he should be commended. In this way, he's the embodiment of DuBois' "Talented Tenth."

Bon voyage, Tavis. You've done well. You were brave to take the stances that you have over the years, including your wait-and-see approach to Obama.  You were right not get caught up in the hype and seek accountability from all, regardless of color.  Too bad your people didn't appreciate what you were trying to do.  Worse, still, is that they took your approach for hatin' on Obama or, ridiculously, that you're in the Clintons' pocket. Sadly, one of the lessons of the Democratic presidential nomination fight is that we can't have objective conversations about Obama; you get fired when you try.

I know better, Nupe, and wish you well.

Michael Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University and author of the book, Republicans and the Black Vote, which was recently updated and released in paperback.  He blogs at MichaelFauntroy.com