93% of Democratic Senate or Governor Candidates Are White

Dan McLaughlin, Red State, September 10, 2014

The last primaries ended last night, and down to defeat in the Rhode Island Governor’s race went Providence Mayor Angel Tavares, the last chance for the Democrats to nominate a Hispanic candidate for one of the two big statewide offices (Senate and Governor)–while Republicans will be running two Hispanic Governors for re-election, Democrats will not have a single Hispanic candidate heading a statewide ticket. We can revisit my analysis from May of the demographic breakdown of the Democrats’ statewide candidates, now that we have final results. In the 71 races they are contesting, 66 of the 71 candidates the Democrats are running (93%) are white, 56 of the 71 (79%) are male, and 53 of 71 (75%) are white males. That could spell trouble for the Democrats’ hopes of turning out a voting base that is disproportionately non-white and female. For all the Democrats’ rhetoric about race, they are running fewer non-white candidates than the Republicans are, and fewer in races they are seriously contesting.

Race by the numbers

{snip} There are 35 Senate races this fall, including a couple of special elections, and 37 Governors races. Republicans are running candidates in all 72. Democrats failed to contest one Senate race (Jeff Sessions is running unopposed in Alabama), and in two other races, the Kansas Senate race and the Alaska Governor’s race, their candidate withdrew (or attempted to withdraw) so the party could back a candidate running nominally as an independent (in Alaska, the Democrats’ candidate is actually running as the “independent” candidate’s running mate). For demographic purposes, I simply counted these latter two races as the Democrats running a white male, since their original candidates were white males and so are the nominal independents.

The Democrats or Democrat-backed candidates in these 71 races break down as:

53 white male candidates
13 white female candidates
2 black male candidates
2 black female candidates
1 Asian male candidate
0 Hispanic candidates
0 South Asian candidates

{snip}

In total, the Democrats are running five non-white candidates, which is fewer than the number of white guys named “Mark” they are running (Senators Udall, Begich, Pryor and Warner, Governor Dayton, and gubernatorial candidate Schauer, all in marquee races). But it gets worse. While non-white candidates lost to white candidates in contested primaries for winnable races like Rhode Island Governor and Hawaii Senate (in the latter case, Colleen Hanabusa, who would have been the lone Asian woman nominated by the Democrats, had to contend with President Obama supporting her primary opponent, Brian Schatz), only three of the five non-white nominees are real candidates–Cory Booker running for re-election, David Ige running for Hawaii Governor after toppling incumbent Neil Abercrombie in a primary, and Maryland Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown running for Governor (despite his disastrous involvement in the state’s healthcare exchange fiasco). The other two, the two black female candidates–Joyce Dickerson in the South Carolina special Senate election and Constance Johnson in the Oklahoma special Senate election–are purely sacrificial candidates in deep-red races the national party will completely ignore. {snip}

The GOP’s 72 candidates in the same races are not a notably diverse bunch, but there are a few more non-white candidates, more of whom are running real campaigns. Republicans are running:

58 white male candidates
6 white female candidates
1 black male candidate
1 Hispanic male candidate
1 Hispanic female candidate
2 Asian male candidates
1 South Asian male candidate
1 South Asian female candidate

The Republican slate is thus 89% white, 88% male, 81% white male, so the Democrats do have an edge in running more women, many of whom are in serious, high-profile races. But of the 7 non-white Republican candidates, four (the two Hispanic candidates, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval and New Mexico Governor Susanna Martinez; South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley; and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott) are incumbents favored for re-election. Two of the other three, former Hawaii Lieutenant Governor Duke Aiona and Cranston, Rhode Island Mayor Allan Fung, are running uphill campaigns, but with RGA backing for open seats following bitterly contested Democratic primaries in blue states where Republicans re-elected a governor as recently as 2006 (in the teeth of that year’s Democratic wave). The other, Neel Kashkari in the California Governor’s race, has little chance against entrenched Democratic incumbent Jerry Brown, but the California Governor’s race, like those in New York and to some extent Texas, is a prestigious and widely-watched race even when it’s not close. None of these candidates is a mere token.

{snip}

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • D.B. Cooper

    If the GOP had half a brain, they would contribute to the campaigns of a minority candidate, and might succeed in unseating the white democrat. Once the minority is in office, then the GOP can go after the white voters wary of diversity.
    The liberals play this game all the time. If they doubt a democrat can win, they will simply get a republican liberal elected. In the end, they get the person they wanted, a yes man.

    • authorizedversion .

      Words cannot adequately describe the spite I have for that one on the left, Senator John McCain.

  • Lewis33

    What I’d like to see is what percentage of this 93% percent send their own kids to “diverse” (Asians don’t count) schools. Hypocrisy on parade for all to see, that’s why we’ll never see those numbers.

  • Dave4088

    It seems the kosher conservatives at “Red State” are crowing that the GOP is more racially diverse than Democrats and hoping this will encourage blacks and browns to vote Republican. But on the other side of their mouths they tell us that race does not matter, so if they really believed their own tripe then the racial breakdown of the candidates would be immaterial.

  • RealisticGuy

    Who cares?

    Washington DC is corrupt to the core, and so is the voting public they represent.

    I give the USA less than 50 years in its current form.

    • John Ambrose

      Unless there’re drastic changes, I wouldn’t give the country half that time

    • Guest

      I do not want the U.S., in its current form, to survive. It’s broken and beyond repair. New ideas are needed to create separate states on this continent, to meet the needs of different population groups.

      • RealisticGuy

        I agree. The United States is done for. The territory cannot be held by one group alone, and it would be beneficial to split up sooner rather than later.

    • nBmnp

      No way it will take so long.

      Of course you would have to define what you mean by “current form”, but if you think about “No Child Left Behind”/”Common Core” and Obamacare, there are already fundamental changes underway right now. Obama’s warmongering in Ukraine and elsewhere can act as a catalyst in the self-destruction.

      The absolute deadline of the USA is when the Dollar is no longer “world currency”. Bush/Obama destroyed Saddam and Gaddhaffi for going away from the Dollar, but they seem to have given up on Iran (they have left the Western monetary system and are not coming back and Iran has fallen off the news-radar for some time) and they have no chance when trying to force Russia and China on the topic. Putin is also building an alliance with Brazil and India (“BRIC”) and that is enough to unseat the Dollar.

      My pick is the year 2020.

  • Publius Pompilius Quietus

    The GOP doth protest too much. Perhaps they realize that conservatism almost exclusively appeals to white people, so they give rise to incessant versions of non-white republicans to distract from that. They are fooling only themselves.

  • Tim_in_Indiana

    The party of multiculturalism and “anti-racism” is running fewer non-whites than the Republicans?? Bizarre…what could explain this puzzling paradox? Could it be…hypocrisy???

  • The race of the Democrat whites is less important than their beliefs.

    Those white Democrats surely support more of everything destructive:
    — more taxes, more amnesty, more affirmative action, more section 8, more Eric Holders, more Sonya Sotomayors, etc.

    There are too many whites who for personal gain have signed on as anti-whites, under the guise of “social justice.” I like social justice too–the kind that Mike Brown and Trayvon got.

  • Shadow

    Is that your attempt at humor?

  • Shadow

    Win what? The contest to see which token candidate will keep their base away from the polls on election day?

  • Jo

    The GOP has 1 black candidate while Democrats have 4. The fewer black legislators supporting anti-White coalitions, the better.

  • HJ11

    I’m disgusted by weak seed Whites in any party or in no party who try to have more non-Whites elected, whether those non-Whites are Blacks or Browns or Yellows or Reds.

    Such stupid weak seed Whites are just helping non-Whites replace Whites. What absolute sickos. They should be shunned (at a minimum) and they should be called out at their implicit White hate and shamed for it.

  • HJ11

    Win? What, the replacement of Whites? That’s not a win for Whites, and that is all that matters.

  • Xerxes22

    In order for the Republicans to win, she would have to look like Selma Hayak.

    • Usually Much Calmer

      Oh, a pinup for president.
      And we will default on our bonds just like Argentina, too.

      • Lion’s Mane

        There’s an idea! Have one of Playboy Magazine’s centerfolds run for President in 2016 on the Democratic ticket! That’s about what the country deserves at this point.

    • a multiracial individual

      Did that strategy work for the McCain and his pretty vice presidential candidate?

  • Conrad

    Democrats are running fewer non-whites than Republicans.
    Proof positive that the Republicans are anti-white & treasonous.

  • 4321realist

    “93% of Democratic Senate or Governor Candidates Are White”

    It should be 100%.

    All the non-whites in Congress do is concern themselves with their own tribe and things pertaining only to their tribe. They have no interest in anything else. This is just a place for them to make money.

  • Paleoconn

    I’d rather have inconmpetent blacks than the capable yet traitorous anti-White caucasians who are there now.

    • Ngati Pakeha

      In a perverse sort of way you are right. At least with Shaniqua and Latrell you know what you’re going to get – usually incompetence and truculence in differing measures. Too many of our own leaders remind me of that old Roman maxim: e tu Brute!

  • vitodanelli

    WOW!! So the good-and-wonderful Republicans are running more “non-white” candidates for office than those two-faced Democrats. Golly Gee, doesn’t this just prove that Republicans really, really like minorities?? Please, non-white people, vote Republican – we like you, we really, really like you. xoxoxoxoxo

    Only a web-rag like Red State, operated by GOP stooge Erick Erickson, would make a story out of absolute mental mush. This reminds me of a Talking Point fellow GOP stooge Sean Hannity likes to make about Al Gore’s FATHER voting against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Got that? Since Al Gore’s FATHER voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Al Gore’s FATHER is a Democrat, then it follows that Democrats are racists.

    The Dunce Hannity doesn’t seem to know that the 1964 Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater also voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act as did George W Bush’s FATHER, congressman George H W Bush.

  • ATBOTL

    This kind of nonsense is so maddening. Conservatards think that calling the Democrats “racist” will do what? All this does is legitimize the idea that everyone should be scrutinized constantly for signs of racism. It’s both ineffective as a tactic and feeds into the other side’s narrative.

  • The other stupid part about boasting about this, Crud State, the same website that won’t run any of Daniel Horowitz’s immigration articles anymore, is that it amounts to virtually nothing in the way of political dividends to the red team from non-white voters. If this news convinces even one non-white voter to change their vote from Democrat to Republican, I’ll eat my favorite hat.

  • Leon NJ

    He wasn’t a senator, but I liked Allen West who was in congress. He was booted a few years back with new redistricting.

  • none of your business

    Is there something wrong with being White?
    With all the diverse sucking up the repubidiots do the non Whites will still vote demorat.

  • Raymond Kidwell

    This is something I have been saying for a long time: there are probably more minorities that support white nationalism than there are whites. More minorities against affirmative action than whites etc. The people that actually live in the ghetto know how to cure the ghetto. The people pushing their own brand of radical leftism are mostly out of touch rich kids or people who profit off the racism industry

  • Paleoconn

    These blacks get heat from the layabout herd for ‘acting White’. They have to deal with derogatory names like Uncle tom or house ni88er.