League of Southern Voters

A new book is out that is definitely worth taking a look at. It’s titled, Unlocking V.O. Key Jr: Southern politics for the twenty-first century. This book reevaluates VO Key Jr’s political analysis and it also points out problems within Key’s original thought patterns.

In this book, a debate takes place arguing the faults of Key not including participation by African Americans, religion or violence and how they impact politics into his original analysis. Other debates that are within this book look at the lack of gender consideration within Key’s original theories and methodologies. Race  and the new racial influence within politics is carefully examined, race originally wasn’t even considered by Key, most likely a result of his lack of belief that race would ever become an influence in politics. He had lived in a time when it could’ve easily been believed that politics would only be run by white men.

One particular area that is being examined within this book is current immigration trends and southern behavior trends which are then compared to Key’s original analysis. They also briefly debate the possibilities of his conclusions if he had seen where American politics was headed, had he made his conclusions with women, race difference and religious differences as key contributors to his analysis. It’s an interesting book, though it can get a little dry at times. In the end, it makes you wonder how much further Key could have taken his original theories had he been able to see that the America he knew was about to change forever.

Southern voters like other voters across America vote based on which candidate is more likely to cater to their needs through increased or decreased political pull. Based on individual candidate positions, I have for fun created a possible southern voting outcome between candidates based on educational issues. The election trail still has a long way to go and let’s face it anything can happen, if voting took place tomorrow then southern state voters just might lean in the following direction.

On the bases of education we have three candidates taking a concrete position, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. Ron Paul and Rick Santorum are positioning themselves to promote a “Parents Choice” educational philosophy in which parents should be able to determine how and where their children are educated. This could be through private schools, charter schools, homeschooling or any other education version that comes in to play.

Newt Gingrich is pushing for increased educational standards and pin points the importance of competitiveness, accountability and achievements. Furthermore he believes that Pell grants should be provided to ensure that students have the opportunity to attend a better performing school rather than being trapped in a school that is falling behind. He is also promoting student advancement by passing education funds to the student in a form of a scholarship, for any student that excels and graduates early.

On education alone, there are certainly many households that could use a Pell Grant to help out with the cost of education, therefore I can certainly see this as a possible voter swaying point. Homeschooling and charter schools really lack popularity throughout the south as a whole, however there are some southern areas that do tend to have a higher rate of homeschooling parents. In the main southern states, such as Georgia, Florida, Alabama and Mississippi both parents are usually working once children become school age and therefore would lean more in the direction of improved education outside of the home.

All in all I would place Newt First under education. Rick Santorum would be second followed by Ron Paul. Look back over the course of the campaign trail as I break down each issue between candidates one by one.

The 2012 campaign is picking up steam as candidates reach explore old practices. Campaign attack ads are coming out in full force, some similar to the old Lee Atwater ads. This can be tricky, as Lee Atwater was able to deliver attack ads that made a statement yet still balanced the lines that shouldn’t be crossed. Some would even say it was political genius, today politicians should be careful, one wrong delivery can crush them and Lee Atwater is long gone and his genius left with him.

I bring this up after viewing one ad after another that presses into an area that can be risky. Should a candidate go too far, their own ad can be more damaging than anything that was mentioned in the ad regarding the opposing candidate. Lee Atwater had an amazing ability to deliver dirt on a silver platter that kept his candidate squeaky clean in the eyes of the public.

I haven’t seen attack ads like his in a long time and I am suddenly seeing pieces of them now. The problem is that I can already see that they aren’t coming across the same way. The candidates that are putting out these attack ads are already showing ugliness that the Atwater ads would have never shown to the public. My suggestion is that they stop while they’re still ahead.

Already in this campaign Gingrich has put out ads against his opponents. Ron Paul and Romney have done the same. The thing that they are missing that Atwater always kept in place is the voice within the ads, which is loud and dominate whereas Atwater had a soft and sincere voice in his ads, you can even say it was a voice of overall concern. The old Atwater ads expressed concern against the opposing candidates instead of back and forth slamming that we’re seeing today. An attack ad can make or break a candidate, if they can’t pull it off, they may want to consider leaving well enough alone before they ruin their chances once and for all.

The state of South Carolina has been getting a fair share of negative media attention as a result of wanting to request photo identification in order to cast a vote. The Justice Department protects the rights of voters who reside in states that have a previous history of denying the right to vote to specific racial groups. Pass historical events place South Carolina along with many other southern states into that category.

At the risk of being called a racist, I’m placing my quiet argument for South Carolina. I live in a northern/Midwestern state and I have needed to show some form of identification every time that I’ve gone to cast my vote. The state of MN is rather big in their equal rights for all races, so I doubt that the MN voter’s identification law is in any way racist, just as I doubt that South Carolina is trying to push racism and eliminate the right to vote.

In actuality, I appreciate the fact that a photo identification card is required. After all, just think of how easy it would be to steal votes of individuals that weren’t planning on voting. A person can easily walk in with the right information of several people and cast votes, changing their vote from one to several.

I understand the whole point of ensuring that there is ease of access to vote. Technically, if someone doesn’t have an identification card then, I’m sorry but that’s on them. It isn’t the states responsibility to make sure that each individual has identification. It’s not racism it’s simple regulation to ensure that the person voting is who they say that they are.