I do, however, intend it to sound mean about the reactionary, prejudice-infested place she comes from. A toothless dog is a figure of sympathy. A vet who takes pleasure in gassing it is not. And that is what Louisiana, and almost the entire South, has become. The victims of the particular form of euthanasia it enforces with such glee are tolerance, compassion, civic decency, trans-racial community, the crucial secular values on which this country was founded… I could keep this list going. But I think you get the idea. Practically the whole region has rejected nearly everything that’s good about this country and has become just one big nuclear waste site of choleric, and extremely racialized, resentment. A fact made even sadder because on the whole they’re such nice people! (I truly mean that.)
The specter of Sen. Mary Landrieu dragging the carcass of her hopeless campaign around Louisiana was nothing if not bad political kabuki theater. Her defeat in this past weekend’s runoff, which almost every informed observer accepted as inevitable, was the last domino to fall in the South. With Landrieu’s departure, there will not be a single Democratic senator from the Deep South. The GOP’s clean sweep is indicative of a region that’s given itself over the the dark side of the American experience- racism, rage, xenophobia, gun addiction, religious intolerance, science denial…I could keep going, but I suspect you get the point.
My observation isn’t born of sour grapes. All one need do is pay attention to what’s going on south of the Mason-Dixon line these days. It ain’t pretty…and that’s nothing if not an understatement. Not since the Civil Rights era has ignorance, racism, and a generalized sense of malevolence been so prevalent. The question becomes how Democrats could possibly hope to appeal to an electorate so thoroughly given over to darkness and reaction…and Michael Tomasky has while I think is a brilliant plan- let ‘em go. Why should Democrats devote resources and energy to a region so thoroughly hostile to reason and humanity when they can win a Presidential election without their electoral votes? Sure, having Florida’s 29 electoral votes is always a good thing, but in 2012, they provided padding to President Obama’s margin of victory, not the crucial votes that pushed him over the top.
Lest anyone suspect me of gratuitously bashing the South, I’ll say in my defense that after living in Texas for 10+ years and traveling throughout the South, I have a pretty good idea of which I speak. No reasonable person could claim to be surprised that the Deep South isn’t exactly a bastion of tolerance and open-mindedness. Ignorance and hyper-religiosity are virtually core values…and how could you hope to appeal to a mind long since closed?
There’s an argument to be made that Democrats would be best served by writing off the Deep South altogether and concentrating their efforts in parts of the country where people are more likely to approach issue with an open mind and a less racially-chareged persepctive. Though the Far West still carries the “Sagebrush Rebellion” aura from the Reagan years, the current reality is somewhat different- f’rinstance, both senators from Montana are Democrats.
It’s come to pass, and really a lot of white Southerners vote on gays and guns and God, and we’re not going to ever be too good on gays and guns and God.
That being the case, I think Democrats would be best served to focus on issues and regions where they are good. If that means ceding the Deep South, so be it. Why waste resources beating your head against the well when you know that all you’ll get out of it is a headache and a bloody forehead? The White House and control of Congress is eminently achievable without those electoral votes, so perhaps it’s time we simply cede the Deep South to the Dark Side.
Let ‘em go. Democrats- and America- can win without having to formulate a strategy for appealing to those steep in ignorance, racism, hyper-religiosity, and xenophobia. We’re better than that.
