Memo To Romney
By Raynard Jackson
Now that Romney is the defacto nominee for the Republican Party, I have been reflecting on the state of the presidential race as it enters the final stretch. As a political strategist, I understand the necessity to run to the right during the Republican primary and then migrate to the center during the general election.
It is common knowledge that Romney has no intention of focusing on the Black vote during the general election. From a raw political perspective, I agree with his approach, but from a strategic perspective, I totally disagree. Below I will detail why this is a terrible strategy!
There is absolutely no question that Obama will get in excess of 90% of the Black vote (in 2008 he received 96%). But this time he will receive 90+ % of a smaller number of Blacks—there will be fewer numbers of Blacks voting because they are disillusioned with Obama. The first Obama run was history, his governing is a mystery when it comes to Blacks!
Obama’s recent endorsement of homosexual marriage and support for amnesty for illegals has infuriated the Black community. The NAACP, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, etc. have not represented the views of the average Black for decades. The NAACP will continue to hemorrhage support from within the Black community. Many Blacks are publically withdrawing their memberships and support from this group.
Under skilled Blacks are livid that Obama wants to legalize over 1 million new people into the workforce to compete with them for jobs. It’s hard enough competing with Americans for jobs, now you have to compete with those in the country illegally for jobs? Who in their right minds feeds the neighborhood while their own children are starving? Nobody, but Obama.
These issues give Romney an opportunity, by engaging with the Black community, to reach out to white, suburban, middle class women voters to let them know that the Republican Party is OK to support. In other words, these are the Independent voters who will determine the outcome of the election.
These voters want to support a candidate and party that are not “perceived” as racist or mean spirited. So, by reaching out to Blacks, they are signaling to these Independent voters that it is OK to vote Republican.
These voters don’t support homosexual marriage or amnesty for illegals, but they don’t want to see or hear harsh rhetoric either.
Romney, are you aware that Obama has never met with any Black entrepreneurs to discuss the high unemployment rate within the Black community? When will you meet with Black entrepreneurs to listen to them, not to preach to them?
Romney, when will you sit with Black ministers who are with you in your opposition to homosexual marriage and under-skilled Blacks who will be hurt by giving work permits to illegals?
Why are you going to address the NAACP and the National Urban League at their respective annual conventions this summer without obtaining concessions from them? Do you have any Blacks on your campaign or consultants who can negotiate concessions on behalf of your campaign? For example, if these groups want you to speak before their membership, then they must have Black Republicans as speakers and panelists or you won’t agree to speak.
Because Republicans typically have no diversity on their staffs, they don’t know to extract these types of concessions, nor can they afford to send a white staffer to do this. Republicans are the only people I know who will send a white male to speak to a group of women about women’s issues!
Romney, when you go before these Black groups, will you also have a white speechwriter to draft your remarks? Anyone can write a great speech, but do you understand the nuances when talking with the Black community? A white speechwriter can’t help you with that.
This is why Republicans typically receive tepid responses when speaking before a Black audience. “Meanings are in people, not in words.”
So, what I am saying to you, Romney, is that by engaging with the Black community, you are simultaneously engaging Independent voters. You get a twofer out of this approach and you, being the businessman that you are, should see the potential for a nice return on your investment of time.
I would welcome your thoughts on this approach as a first step towards substantive engagement with the Black community.
Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a D.C.-public relations/government affairs firm. His website is: www.raynardjackson.com.
Black Men In America 
July 2, 2012 at 3:46, am
Mr. Jackson. I welcome your Blog on this subject. I am very pleased to know that others feel exactly as I on POTUS Obama’s total lack of engagement with “his” community. If it were not for the GOP’s wholesale write-off of the AfAm voter; its strident policies toward women, voter suppression laws – I could go on and on – I would at least listen to Romney. Mind you, I said listen. His tenure and policies at Bain Capital affected my family “up close and personally,” so that is another strike against him. But I am so aggrieved at POTUS Obama’s treatment of AfAm that had a respectable 3rd party candidate rose to the fore, I would gladly have voted for that ticket; knowing full well that Mr. Obama would certainly lose his bid for re-election. Many vilified Tavis Smiley and his co-hort, but they spoke truths. Granted, had he displayed overt efforts to help the AfAm community, he would have suffered ill-willed of most of the White electorate. Even those so-called swing voters – those suburban married white women. Dare I say it, even the elite Democratic establishment would have rebelled at the polls. But he could have thrown the AfAm community a “bone.” As I have hinted in my response, the AfAm has no other option regarding whom to vote for in our 2012 Presidential Election. That’s if they want to stand even a sliver of a chance of regaining some of the lost economic ground that was pulled from under them in the “Great Recession of 2008.” Oh, I suppose great numbers of AfAm could choose not to vote in protest. And far too many AfAm don’t vote as a matter of course. So I would not condone such an action.
So, what to do? Throw a tantrum! Hold one’s breath until POTUS Obama “gets it!” Or, do you think his grand plan, if he is re-elected, is to throw caution to the wind (since he won’t have anything to lose)
and mention 13% of the American populace – 40-million of his closest friends – and offer something meaningful to them in the way of “Hope and Change?”
Personally, I think he is more concern with imagery, legacy, and lack of courage. Someone needs to walk be back from this viewpoint.