LoL. Well I am a non-conformist after all :)57Coastie wrote: Your observations are at the same time reasonable, rational and credible, Mr.72, contrasting sharply with a couple of others we see here.
If I understand your mathematical hypothesis correctly, then I think it is flawed because it assumes the unlikely scenario that each ethnic voting bloc is proportionately represented in the vote count. This is highly unlikely, and certainly cannot be verified. There is another trend in voting that conservatives are less likely to go to the polls for a number of reasons.The obvious invalid extremism of my assumption makes it apparent that substantially more than 34,000 members of that ethnic group actually voted for Mrs. Jackson-Lee. Indeed, 34,000 would be the bare minimum number of White/Caucasian voters voting for Mrs. Jackson-Lee.
Now considering the minority vote statistics nationally for the House, and taken with the roughly by-thirds distribution of ethnic blocs in the 18th District and taking every other element out of the equation (personality, race, gender, qualification, reputation etc. of the candidates, etc.) then the math is really obvious:
non-white voters choose Democrats ~75% of the time
Hispanic voters choose Democrats ~70% of the time
Black voters choose Democrats ~80% of the time
Caucasians vote for Democrats only ~45% of the time
So if we sum all of that up and assume equal representation by voting bloc (which like I said is a fundamentally-flawed assumption) then just based on math we would assume about 65% of the vote to be in favor of the Democrat candidate in this district. However, if Jackson-Lee received more than 65% of the vote then I think other things are the likely cause:
1. People tend to vote along gender and minority lines to some small extent (minorities vote more heavily in favor of minority candidates all else being equal) then the fact that there is a minority candidate favors that candidate regardless of party
2. Historically white Republican voters do not turn out in high numbers compared with other voting blocs, particularly in a district where the Democrat candidate is guaranteed to win due to the basic math
3. Incumbents typically win House elections unless there is a scandal, redistricting, or other major point of inflection
So I would conclude that unless a very strong Democrat contender opposes Sheila Jackson Lee in that district, then she will basically be running un-opposed for all intents and purposes. The numbers are mostly irrelevant due to the ethnic makeup of the district and well-known voting trends in those ethnic groups. No real Republican contender is going to run in that district since the odds of winning are virtually insurmountable. Maybe Arnold Schwartzenegger or Rudy Giuliani could win that district, or a "RINO" with extremely good name recognition such as the one currently running for president could compete but the odds would still be slim and it would be a real waste of campaign funds. That's the trick with this kind of gerrymandering. You cross one district off of the map and then ignore it from now on, just let the Dems have it and you make other battles more easily winnable.
Well, perhaps. Her race and gender do not hurt her chances with minority voters, and they do not help her chances with the small number of white voters. But her party affiliation and consistent party-line voting record are far and away the biggest factor.These numbers certainly argue that Mrs. Jackson-Lee's success at the polls is based on a more general political viewpoint, for whatever reasons, than they are on racial mark-step.
