Donald Trump rightly poses the question to the Afro-American community ... what have the Democrats done to deserve the massive support your voting demographic gives them ... why not give the Republicans a chance to prove we can make a difference?
Certainly it can be argued that in recent years the Black community can show very little gains from having 'their' man in the White-house. Unemployment in the Afro-American community is up; the numbers receiving food stamps increases by the week; welfare is a growth industry; the ghettoisation of the inner cities continues apace; drugs and crime are rampant; the light at the end of the tunnel remains dim at best.
Yet since 1964 no Republican running for President has scored more than 15% of the Black vote. The worst result was in 2008 when John McCain scored just 4%. Why so given the Republicans are the Party of Lincoln that freed the slaves while the Democrats for the next 70 years resolutely opposed the granting of rights to the Black community and it was not until 1924 that Afro-Americans were even allowed to attend the Democratic National Convention.
Up until the late 1920s the Black vote was pretty evenly divided between both parties. A seismic shift occurred in 1936 with the election of FDR and the New Deal. HST reinforced this during his Presidency when he ended segregation in the armed forces while JFKs New Frontier and LBJs Great Society further cemented in Black support. But in the half century since then and under a slew of Presidents from both sides of the political divide nothing much has changed. Dreams remain just that. The Afro-American vote remains wedded to the Democratic Party ... for what and why?
There is a certain synergy between Afro-American and Maori politics. The mid 1930s saw the election of the first Labour Government. Some years earlier that Party had forged a crucial alliance with TW Ratana (Pira Wiri Tua ... The Campaigner) and by 1943 had captured all four Maori seats. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion the alliance benefited Labour far more than it did Maori. Their four MPs were treated as electoral cannon fodder while the advent of social welfare convinced many in Maoridom that all they had to do was sit back and that Government would provide in the manner of a Cargo Cult of the John Frum variety.
The inevitable outcome was as Sir Apirima Ngata feared when he warned of the danger to Maori in relying on the State for everything. Maoridom stopped thinking for itself and lost its way. Labour threw the odd bone including the 1985 Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act which allowed for the airing of grievances dating back to 1840 and spurned the treaty grievance industry which remains today alive and flourishing. Add to that, the quality of Labour's Maori MPs could hardly be described as standout.
Many can and do argue that Maoridom is better served by governments of the right rather than the left. Certainly National has a far better record than Labour in settling 'legitimate' Treaty claims. In simple terms the Right prefers a hand-up approach rather than the Lefts hand-out. Whanu Ora is a way forward. Charter Schools are making a difference. Both are opposed by Labour simply because they don't fit Labour's one glove fits all approach.
Modern Labour (a misnomer if ever there was one) has failed Maori just as the Democratic Party had failed Afro-Americans. While I don't hold any great candle for the Kingitanga movement the Maori King got it about right recently when he said that Labour had forfeited their trust ... that he would never vote Labour again.
To the question, a fair one, what has the Black community got to lose in voting for Trump?
33 minutes ago