Ever since Johnson signed a host of civil rights legislation into law during his presidency -- most notably the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 -- the Democrats have seen a steady erosion of support among white voters, especially Southerners, to the Republicans. It is, therefore, imperative for the Democratic nominee to secure the strong support of African-American voters in order to win the November election.
How imperative is that? Look at history: No Democrat has won the White House without strong black voter support since John F. Kennedy in 1960 -- at a time when many African-Americans, particularly in the South, were barred from voting by racist "Jim Crow" segregation laws long since struck down by the courts as unconstitutional.
Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton owe their presidencies to black voters providing them with their margins of victory. Carter lost the white vote in the 1976 election to President Gerald Ford, 51 percent to 49 percent. Clinton garnered only 38 percent of the white vote in 1992, with the majority 62 percent divided between President George H.W. Bush and billionaire Ross Perot.
Hillary Clinton's campaign, by effectively writing off African-American voters -- and by adding insult to injury by insisting that only the former first lady can draw the support of working-class whites -- is committing the same fatal electoral mistake that Michael Dukakis made in 1988.
Dukakis, then governor of Massachusetts, made no attempt to appeal to black voters in the fall campaign after he beat back a challenge by Jesse Jackson for the 1988 Democratic nomination. Like Obama today, Jackson had a lock on the black vote in the primaries leading to the party's convention in Atlanta.
As a result of Dukakis' apparent snub, African-American voters largely stayed home in the fall election, resulting in his loss to the senior Bush.
(Indeed, there was little reason for anyone to vote for Dukakis: He ran a terrible campaign, marked by an awful response to a question on violent crime in the second of three televised debates with the senior Bush and by outraging the anti-war wing of the Democratic Party when he appeared in a campaign TV commercial driving a military tank.)
On the other hand, for former Vice President Walter Mondale, the 1984 Democratic nominee, the support of black voters -- although it was overwhelming -- was of no help to him, as virtually everyone else, not willing to see any member of the Carter administration return to the White House, buried Mondale in Ronald Reagan's 49-state landslide.
Clinton-Obama Contest Also Opens Up Generational Divide
But race isn't the only thing that threatens to split up the Democrats. Even more starkly than race, the Clinton-Obama contest has also driven a wedge between older and younger voters.
Except for Kentucky -- where the former first lady lost only among blacks -- Clinton's most hard-core supporters have come almost exclusively among older voters aged 50 and higher, with Obama attracting an equally hard-core base of younger voters aged 30 and under -- most of them voting for the first time -- while evenly splitting voters between 30 and 50.
Ever since the passage in 1971 of the 26th Amendment of the Constitution, which lowered the voting age (and, consequently, the age of legal majority) from 21 to 18, young people have proven to be the least interested in participating in electoral politics -- until this year.
Obama's "campaign of hope" and his steadfast refusal to play to what the 46-year-old Illinois senator calls the "politics of fear and division" -- not to mention his remarkable background and youthful energy -- have drawn millions of young people to his campaign as no other presidential candidate has since Robert F. Kennedy in 1968.
Clinton, on the other hand, has demonstrated that she's driven by a fierce ambition to take back the White House from President Bush -- even though he's constitutionally barred from seeking a third term -- by any means necessary, including running over a fellow senator of the same party in the process.
Democrats -- and America -- at a Stark Crossroads
But the former first lady knows that her candidacy is also bringing back memories of the darker side of her husband's presidency, and not just among younger voters. For many, the thought of Bill Clinton returning to the White House -- albeit as the nation's first "first gentleman" -- is too much to accept.
(Indeed, there was little reason for anyone to vote for Dukakis: He ran a terrible campaign, marked by an awful response to a question on violent crime in the second of three televised debates with the senior Bush and by outraging the anti-war wing of the Democratic Party when he appeared in a campaign TV commercial driving a military tank.)
On the other hand, for former Vice President Walter Mondale, the 1984 Democratic nominee, the support of black voters -- although it was overwhelming -- was of no help to him, as virtually everyone else, not willing to see any member of the Carter administration return to the White House, buried Mondale in Ronald Reagan's 49-state landslide.
Clinton-Obama Contest Also Opens Up Generational Divide
But race isn't the only thing that threatens to split up the Democrats. Even more starkly than race, the Clinton-Obama contest has also driven a wedge between older and younger voters.
Except for Kentucky -- where the former first lady lost only among blacks -- Clinton's most hard-core supporters have come almost exclusively among older voters aged 50 and higher, with Obama attracting an equally hard-core base of younger voters aged 30 and under -- most of them voting for the first time -- while evenly splitting voters between 30 and 50.
Ever since the passage in 1971 of the 26th Amendment of the Constitution, which lowered the voting age (and, consequently, the age of legal majority) from 21 to 18, young people have proven to be the least interested in participating in electoral politics -- until this year.
Obama's "campaign of hope" and his steadfast refusal to play to what the 46-year-old Illinois senator calls the "politics of fear and division" -- not to mention his remarkable background and youthful energy -- have drawn millions of young people to his campaign as no other presidential candidate has since Robert F. Kennedy in 1968.
Clinton, on the other hand, has demonstrated that she's driven by a fierce ambition to take back the White House from President Bush -- even though he's constitutionally barred from seeking a third term -- by any means necessary, including running over a fellow senator of the same party in the process.
Democrats -- and America -- at a Stark Crossroads
But the former first lady knows that her candidacy is also bringing back memories of the darker side of her husband's presidency, and not just among younger voters. For many, the thought of Bill Clinton returning to the White House -- albeit as the nation's first "first gentleman" -- is too much to accept.
