Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Proof-Variation7005 t1_j5zqiuq wrote

Reply to comment by itsonlyastrongbuzz in Boston has never elected a Black mayor. A quiet experiment could change that. by _Hack_The_Planet_

I have to ask......Did you just read the headline and that's it? Cause this definitely isn't about merely trying to check off bingo boxes at all.

It's pretty clearly a piece about increasing voter turnout among underrepresented groups at the polls, primarily african americans and what impact that could have about future elections.

−1

itsonlyastrongbuzz t1_j5ztziv wrote

The whole assumption is that “black voters will vote for a black candidate” is comically racist.

Roxbury and Mattapan are overwhelmingly African American, and low turnout or not, overwhelmingly voted for Michelle Wu over Essaibi-George, who’s African American.

To think we somehow haven’t made progress because we haven’t specifically elected an African American mayor would be hilarious if it didn’t have soo much traction.

11

Proof-Variation7005 t1_j5zxbdk wrote

Hey buddy, remember that question about if you read anything beyond the headline? Thank you for answering it.

−3

itsonlyastrongbuzz t1_j600r2h wrote

I did.

It’s absurd.

> But Campbell did not finish in the top two in the preliminary election in September and advance to the final election in November. She did not get what she needed: strong turnout in Black Dorchester and Roxbury and Mattapan, neighborhoods she was promising to elevate.

Roxbury and Mattapapan are overwhelmingly black and overwhelmingly voted for Wu.

Campbell thinks that those black voters aren’t representative of the whole?

“Is it my campaign? No, the constituents are wrong!”

This is like the red wave FoxNews talked about.

> An analysis for Ideas by Murmuration, a nonprofit that focuses on building data-driven political and advocacy campaigns, found that roughly 30 percent of white Boston voters cast ballots in Boston’s 2021 mayoral preliminary, but only 25 percent of Black voters and 14 percent of Latino voters participated.

White and Latino voters didn’t vote for a white or Latino candidate but black ones are obligated to vote for black candidates, especially when they pander.

Stupid, and offensive.

10

Proof-Variation7005 t1_j609uel wrote

I think you're maybe focusing a bit too much on the specific example here? Nobody is suggesting that black voters automatically would vote for the black candidate. That assertion is never even hinted at even a teeny little bit once in that article. It's absurd.

It's also absurd to pretend it doesn't play into voter habits. There's more than enough data to show that black voters are more likely to support a black candidate. Finding a way to capitalize on that increase turnout is probably going to help, even if that advantage with voters of the same race is slight.

Campbell in particular is irrelevant. She wasn't a distant 3rd who never had a shot. I think she just barely finished ahead of Janey.

This isn't about 2021. And it sure as shit isn't about fucking bingo spaces. It's about how improving turnout and reach might impact future races where the the difference between 1st place and 4th place was 14,000. In a city with half a million registered voters.

−3

treeboi t1_j614kvm wrote

Did you even read the article? It was all about Andrea Campbell failing to get enough black voters to win mayor of Boston.

Are we even talking about the same Andrea Campbell?

You know, the Andrea Campbell who became the 45th Attorney General of Massachusetts just a year later?

Looks like she realized she fucked up the Boston election, got her shit together & put in a much better campaign for state AG.

That whole article was about the most stupid piece of reporting I've ever seen. That white male reporter obviously had his own agenda to write about & even then, he, like you, seems to not pay attention to the fact that Campbell used lessons from her defeat to win the race for state AG.

5

Proof-Variation7005 t1_j615uyc wrote

>It was all about Andrea Campbell failing to get enough black voters to win mayor of Boston.

No, it really wasn't. She was the hook used to set up a much larger point. Her failed mayoral campaign was setup.

Campbell was never better than a distant 3rd longshot mayor candidate in terms of profile and prospects. You can't fuck up an election you had virtually no chance of winning.

−1

treeboi t1_j69d9ft wrote

Andrea Campbell faced off against Michelle Wu, literally the worst matchup.

Wu worked for Warren's 2012 senate race, heading up Warren's outreach group to get votes from the black, LGBT & women communities, particularly in Boston.

Thus, Wu had a strong black outreach a full 3 years before Campbell even ran for city council.

If you wonder why the Boston black community voted overwhelmingly for Wu over Campbell & Janey, it's because Wu has done a lot more outreach with the black community than either Campbell or Janey, for a longer period of time, as Wu started her black outreach campaigning a full 3 years before Campbell ran for city council, a full 5 years before Janey ran for city council & Wu started her outreach under Warren's hugely funded first senate race.

So when Wu ran for mayor, she already had 9 years of black outreach, a larger ground team & had the support of Senator Warren's team too.

You're complaining that there was a mere 14,761 vote difference between Wu & Campbell, but fail to state that Wu had 36,060 votes vs Campbell's 21,299 votes, meaning that Wu had a 69% lead over Campbell. Campbell needed to almost double her votes in order to match Wu. A 14,761 vote lead wasn't a small lead - in the Boston mayor race, it was an enormous lead.

1