Re: <nettime> The Truth about VoterGate and the Black Electorate

["dan s wang" <danwang@mindspring.com>]

O.-

Yeah, I think that's pretty much true. One of my local papers (the Chicago
Tribune) did an investigation into the final vote count and concluded that
Gore had the votes to win, and that even in several Republican
counties--which went uncontested by Gore--hand recounts for the purposes of
studying the election demonstrated net gains for Gore (albeit sometimes only
a handful). Given the Republican editorializing of the Tribune, it is not
surprising that this was reported not as 'Gore won' but rather as 'Gore got
more votes'. You might want to check out the chicago tribune site for the
details. I think at least a couple of Florida newspapers also went into
recount-as-investigative-journalism mode, and have concluded the same.

But apart from the election theft another way to look at it is this: Gore
would rather have lost to Bush than take on even the least reformist of
Nader's platform. Think about it: Gore actually preferred to have Bush in
power than propose anything that would seriously improve life for the
poorest and most disadvantaged people. Early on he positioned himself to the
right of Bradley, and all along looked to the swing segment who would vote
for either himself or Bush--ie a voting block which is in itself essentially
conservative.

My theory is that Clinton and Gore have been popular among Black Americans
not because of policies, but because the two of them are, on a personal
level, completely comfortable with Black people. Clinton's inner circle has
always included trusted Black friends--that in itself was a first at that
level of power.

That such a demonstrated ease among Black people would be a reason to
support Clinton, despite policies that have actually hurt the Black
population as a whole, says a lot about how overtly racist white politicians
have been and often still are on the personal level. But, if the Clinton
years taught anything, it is that a personal friendliness is by itself not
enough, because the policies do matter. Bush is betting on continuing and
furthering the disconnect by instituting extreme policies that favor the
rich while presenting an array of minority faces around him. He's calling
the bluff: how can we accuse him of being racist when he's got people of
color in key positions? Ah, but of course--it's all in the policies. But the
same logic dictates that Clinton/Gore weren't much better. Which is what the
Nader folks were saying all along.

dan w.
----------
>From: Ododita@aol.com
>To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net
>Subject: <nettime> The Truth about VoterGate
>Date: Wed, Feb 14, 2001, 9:02 AM
>

> To all Nettimers:
>
> I would like to know if the votes in Florida have actually been tallied, but
> not announced in the United States.  I have several friends from overseas in
> Europe who say that the vote count is done, and that Gore won.  Is this true?
 <...>

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net