We’re being told by Democrats that Republicans have a white-male
problem. But what about Democrats’ white-male problem?
Think about it: What about the Democratic Party’s extraordinary
loss of white males? It was white males who built the
Democratic Party, and built America, and stormed the beaches of
Normandy, and defeated Hitler, and much more. I’m a white male.
Many of us are actually decent people. My Christian white-male
ancestors fought for the north in the Civil War and freed black
Americans from slavery. A lot of them died for that. I’m proud of
what they did.
Why make fun of us? Why are so many liberals seemingly so
contemptuous of white males? Why do they hate us?
Moreover, why wouldn’t Democrats want to try to win back some
white males? And why are white males so solidly Republican, a trend
that started 30 years ago?
The Democrats have ceded this huge voting bloc to Republicans.
Every four years, Democrats start with that major disadvantage.
It’s like Republicans starting with Electoral College losses of
California, New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois.
For that matter, why aren’t Democrats appealing to married
women? Married women voted for
Mitt Romney handily. Obama got single women in a landslide,
but, last I checked, there are tens of millions of married women in
America—and they didn’t vote Democrat.
Furthermore, why are Democrats losing people over the age of 45?
Those aged 45-64 (men and women both) voted Romney over Obama
51-47, and those 65 or older went Romney 56-44. I understand there
will be a lot more of these voters going forward. These are the
Social Security and
Medicare recipients that Democrats have been banking on for 50
years.
Another good question that ought to concern Democrats: Why did
nearly 60 percent of
churchgoing Catholics vote for
Mitt Romney? Year-by-year, faithful Catholics have faithfully
moved away from the Democratic Party. They once formed the backbone
of the party. They were a slam-dunk for Democrats. Not anymore.
They’re gone. Why aren’t Democrats trying to appeal to them?
Even more striking, why did nearly 80 percent of evangelicals
vote for Mitt Romney, a Mormon, over Barack Obama, a Christian?
In fact, why are religious people in general fleeing the
Democratic Party like the plague? If you describe yourself as
churchgoing, you tend to vote Republican. This has been true for at
least 20 years now. To the contrary, those who describe themselves
as “not very” or “not at all” religious vote overwhelmingly for the
Democratic nominee. Sure, the country is getting more secular, but
the vast majority of Americans still believe in God.
Once upon a time, the Democrats were a very religious party.
Populists like
William Jennings Bryan were the heart and soul of the party.
Not anymore.
Gay marriage and
abortion — two new planks liberals have eagerly embraced —
will continue to drive away devoutly religious people.
And what about pro-lifers? Do Democrats want only radical
abortion advocates in their tent? If you’re pro-life, you vote
Republican — period. As the Democrats expand their abortion
frontier to include forced taxpayer funding of everything from
Planned Parenthood to
contraception (their new “entitlement”) they will further repel
any and all pro-lifers.
While we’re at it, have the Democrats looked at a county map
lately? Basically, every state is colored red, with the exception
of the scattered dots that comprise big cities. Take away
Philadelphia, and Mitt Romney easily wins my state of Pennsylvania.
What are Democrats doing to reach out to the vast landscape that
consistently votes Republican?
Speaking of which, what about the South? It’s a guarantee for
Republicans every four years. It didn’t used to be that way. Just a
few decades ago, the entire swath of the South was more Democratic
than Massachusetts. What are the Democrats doing to attract
Southerners?
Now, that said, I’m not ignorant to certain demographics that
concern me as a conservative Republican. For one, it’s both
disconcerting and absurd that 71 percent of Hispanics voted for
Obama,
up from 67 percent in 2008. Hispanics are socially
conservative. They are devoutly Catholic, pro-life, pro-family, and
likely not big advocates of gay marriage. Republicans must pay them
much greater attention. I felt from the outset that Marco Rubio was
a better political pick than Paul Ryan for this reason. Republicans
need not alter their message or jettison conservatism to reach
Latinos, quite the contrary. They simply need to be more
strategic.
Few groups of Americans are as hard-working as Hispanics. They
have defied the odds and made it in this country. They are natural
conservatives. (So are black Americans, who are not liberals and
should not be voting so overwhelmingly for
this radically liberal and secular modern Democratic
Party.)
The GOP needs to think carefully about reaching these groups.
Conservatism
need not change its principles. It can’t. By definition, it
can’t.
That’s what progressivism does.
But before we get lectured from liberal Democrats about our
side’s problems, I suggest they consider their own. In truth, they
will not be doing so publicly, and neither will their media. Their
attack on the GOP’s “white-male problem” is just that: an attack.
It’s a political campaign that the liberal media will gleefully aid
and abet. The goal isn’t to help the Republican Party but to
caricature and undermine it in order to advance Democrats. Forgive
me if I find their concern insincere.
