Possible Black Presidents of US

[Melvin Loh]

This post is an extension of my previous ALTERNATEHISTORY.COM thread on black US presidents. Historically, what about a black US president elected from another significant military figure such as USAF Gen Daniel 'Chappie' James ? OTL Gen James passed away from cancer in 1978, but WI he'd lived ? Would his military record, having served as XO of the 8th TFW over Vietnam in 1966-67, base commander at Wheelus AFB, Libya during the early 70s (where he had to deal with Qaddafi), and as C-in-C, NORAD in 1975, as the 1st African-American promoted to 4-star rank, combined with his strong commitment to God and country, have enabled him to run for president perhaps at some point in the early or mid-80s ?

[Diamond]

Perhaps not as President, but what about this: In early 1984, election year, Vice-President Bush gets entangled in some sort of scandal; not a big enough one to warrant serious criminal or civil investigation, but big enough so that Reagan wants a new VP.

He chooses former General Daniel James, currently serving as a Senator in his home state. It would have taken a hell of a lot to make Reagan lose the '84 election. The bigot votes that he'll lose by choosing James as his running mate will be more than offset by black voters jumping ship from their traditional Dem voting to elect a black man to the second highest office in the land.

I think after this, James will probably be to old to make a run for President, but he will have definitely 'prepped' America for the idea of further black VPs or Presidents, making it very possible for Colin Powell to be a front-runner in the 90s.

Maybe a Presidential timeline would look like this:

1980: Reagan/Bush
1984: Reagan/James
1988: Dole/Quayle
1992: Clinton/Gore
1996: Clinton/Gore
2000: Powell/McCain

[wakie]

Conceivable with one slight change. There is no reason to believe that Dole would have selected Dan Quayle as a running mate. Quayle brought nothing to the ticket.

[wkwillis]

Nixon brings in Senator Brooke as vice president in 1972 after Agnew runs into problems from when he was Governor. Nixon takes lesson of Agnews ATL impeachment to heart and shuts down CREEP before it gets him in trouble and therefore doesn't get impeached. McGovern carries Massachusetts.... and Mississippi. Brooke is elected President in 1976 as the Democrats retain more Dixiecrats and get less crossover Republicans like Hillary Clinton.

[Diamond]

Conceivable with one slight change. There is no reason to believe that Dole would have selected Dan Quayle as a running mate. Quayle brought nothing to the ticket.

You're probably right. I just couldn't think of a viable substitution. Who were the GOP frontrunners 16 years ago? Its all receded into the dim mists of history for me... :)

On another note, if Bush Sr. had been dumped by Reagan in '84, you can probably say goodbye to any chance of a Bush in the White House anytime soon.

[Melvin Loh]

Hey W.K. Willis, I reckon Edward Brooke was another good African-American possible presidential candidate, based on his WWII service with the 92nd BUFFALO Div in Italy, although whether he would've been popular enough to be elected as the 1st black pres in 1976 may've been IMHO questionable given the huge racial tension in such places as Boston (his own constituency IIRC) over school busing and desegregation.

[Michael E Johnson]

OTL Bill Clinton was the first "black president" we had.Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter he was the only president that really empathised with and understood black concerns.Plus they were both comfortable around black people and actually have black friends. JFK and LBJ certainly empathised with and understood black concerns and between the 2 of them helped kill Jim Crow but neither approached the personal comfort level with black people as did Carter and Clinton. As far as an ATL black president the only OTL person thats possible is Colin Powell.In order for him to become president though you'd have to make the Republican party more liberal and the United States as a whole less racist-a pretty tall order.

[zoomar]

"As far as an ATL black president the only OTL person thats possible is Colin Powell.In order for him to become president though you'd have to make the Republican party more liberal and the United States as a whole less racist-a pretty tall order"

I'd agree that the Republican Party would have to become considerably more moderate for Powell to either want the nomination or have a chance at it, but I disagree that the US as whole is too racist to elect a person like Powell as president. Personally, I suspect the majority of white americans would love to vote for somebody like Powell regardless of his race.

[PM Nixon]

What about J.C. Watts? He left the House in 2002 to spend more time with his family; what if he stays in? Maybe this is FH, but maybe he hangs around long enough to get the GOP nomination in 2008....

Or, you could make Andrew Young, who OTL was an American ambassador as well as Mayor of Atlanta, more politically ambitious. He could obtain a seat in the Senate, build up a great political reputation, and he makes his move in the 90s.

[Mark]

Just as Nixon could "open up" China and Clinton could balance the budget, I think the Republicans are more likely to have the first black president than the Democrats. If Powell or Watts decided to go for it, a lot of Republicans would vote for them. Enough to win? That's why we have the elections. Blacks running in the Democratic Party are more likely (based on what I've seen over the years) to be of the Al Sharpton mold and alienate many people because of their politics, not skin pigmentation.

[Michael E Johnson]

---What about J.C. Watts? He left the House in 2002 to spend more time with his family; what if he stays in? Maybe this is FH, but maybe he hangs around long enough to get the GOP nomination in 2008....----


This raises a larger question-How would a black president do without the majority of the black vote? We know that based on sheer numbers a potential black candidate could easily win the presidency without the majority of black votes.But how would he do politically? For instance imagine if Trent Lott had praised Strom Thurmond under President Powell . The Republican Party still has way too many issues(based on its policies and the kinds of people its got in power and votes for them) with black people for a black candidate put forward by them to be considered anything less than suspect by the majority of the black population.Of course many white-Americans still have too many issues with blacks to be willing to elect them senatorr or Governor much less president. If race didnt still matter so much in America neither of these considerations would matter but we know it does so they both really matter.

[MerryPrankster]

"How would a black president do without the majority of the black vote"

J.C. Watts, being conservative, served well in Congress even though I imagine most African-Americans did not support him b/c of his GOP-ness.

It would probably be a publicity sensation that the black community (or at least its leadership--Jesse, Al, and pals) doesn't think highly of a black Republican President.

[PM Nixon]

If J.C. Watts was elected President without a majority of the Black vote, then maybe the Republicans will gradually gain more minority votes due to him being there. It may help Watts to communicate his conservative agenda from the White House that gets him and the GOP mor black votes; then again, it may backfire and Watts is not seen in a favorable light by African Americans.

[Michael E Johnson]

---It would probably be a publicity sensation that the black community (or at least its leadership--Jesse, Al, and pals) doesn't think highly of a black Republican President.---
And why is that?I guess its possible to assume that many people would be stunned to know that black people are sophisicated enough to know that just because the president is black he could still be in a party thats not in thier best interest.As I said before the Republican party is full of people and strategies that are not what most black people support-which is why you wont only see most black people not support a black Republican you wont see a black Republican nominated.



--If J.C. Watts was elected President without a majority of the Black vote, then maybe the Republicans will gradually gain more minority votes due to him being there. It may help Watts to communicate his conservative agenda from the White House that gets him and the GOP mor black votes; then again, it may backfire and Watts is not seen in a favorable light by African Americans. ---


This is possible PM - maybe raising it to 25% tops. I think you and I both know there are some African-Americans who would vote for Watts or Powell just because they are black ( A brother in the White House ) but most of us wouldnt.Just because Watts and Powell are black that doesnt mean the party and people behind them are in the best interest of blacks (ie from Affirmative Action,War on Drugs to MLK day and the Confederate flag-imagine Republican candiate Watts at Bob Jones University :eek: ) All of this prevents most Africans Americans, many of whom are at least socially conservative, from supporting the Republican party.And since its alot easier to win the presidency with the white South than without it -I dont see any movement here for a long time.

[David Howery]

couldn't Powell win the majority of the black vote? Although nominally a Republican, he's about in the exact center of US politics, and he seems to be admired by a large part of the black population; plus, he had a fairly wide appeal among the moderate white population as well. As a moderate, though, he wouldn't appeal to either conservatives or liberals. Granted, getting him to run at all would take a pretty good POD, but if our AH goal is to have a black president elected, it seems Powell would be the best bet.

[zoomar]

couldn't Powell win the majority of the black vote? Although nominally a Republican, he's about in the exact center of US politics, and he seems to be admired by a large part of the black population; plus, he had a fairly wide appeal among the moderate white population as well. As a moderate, though, he wouldn't appeal to either conservatives or liberals. Granted, getting him to run at all would take a pretty good POD, but if our AH goal is to have a black president elected, it seems Powell would be the best bet.


I think he could, but only if his nomination by the Republican Party reflected a true shift to the center by the GOP and not just a willing "safe" black man being put up by the same right-wingers who support Tom Delay and Strom Thurmond. Otherwise, Powell would have to spend most of his time trying to sound more conservative than he is (and probably lose credibility with blacks and independents) or risk losing the right-wing base he would possibly need to be elected.

Regarding JC Watts, I'm an Oklahoman and know something about him. He's a great speaker, very charismatic, and most of us in his district really liked him...and he got a large segment of the black vote as well. But he would have been a risky presidential or VP candidate. He has some baggage (a child out of wedlock he admits and some questionable real estate deals he doesn't) which would be certainly be used against him, since he makes a big deal about being a moral socially conservative Southern Baptist. Outside of Oklahoma, where being a former QB for the OU Sooners will excuse almost any flaw, he would get crucified by his opponents and the media as a hypocrite. I suspect he knew this, which is why he droped out of politics (at least for now). Also, I think he was fairly miffed by the Bush Adminstration for treating him mainly like a poster boy to be trotted out whenever they needed a charismatic conservative black man to give a stump speech, but not taken particularly seriously in other ways.

[MerryPrankster]

"since he makes a big deal about being a moral socially conservative Southern Baptist"

The illegitimate kid isn't necessarily hypocritical; he could admit he made a mistake and he's sorry for it (as it seems he hasd). After all, the Apostle Paul used to be a violent religious demagogue.

Of course, the shady real estate deals could be a problem. What was the nature of these deals?

[zoomar]

"since he makes a big deal about being a moral socially conservative Southern Baptist"

The illegitimate kid isn't necessarily hypocritical; he could admit he made a mistake and he's sorry for it (as it seems he hasd). After all, the Apostle Paul used to be a violent religious demagogue.

Of course, the shady real estate deals could be a problem. What was the nature of these deals?


About the kid I didn't say He WAS hypocritical, I said he would be accused of it by the Dems and media pundits who don't have a clue about Christian repentance.

I'm not sure of the details, but I believe it supposedly concerns some apartment complexes he's owned and sold for unreasonable profit - presumably a way for supporters to get around contribution limits I guess.

[Michael E Johnson]

---I think he could, but only if his nomination by the Republican Party reflected a true shift to the center by the GOP and not just a willing "safe" black man being put up by the same right-wingers who support Tom Delay and Strom Thurmond. Otherwise, Powell would have to spend most of his time trying to sound more conservative than he is (and probably lose credibility with blacks and independents) or risk losing the right-wing base he would possibly need to be elected.-----


Which is exactly why a black Republican probably wouldnt have much credibility with African-American voters and wouldnt even be nominated by the Republican party to begin with.


---About the kid I didn't say He WAS hypocritical, I said he would be accused of it by the Dems and media pundits who don't have a clue about Christian repentance.----




What is hypocritical here is that the idea of Christian repentance is extended only to other Christians. Not everyone in this nation believes that having kids out of wedlock is wrong or that children from such unions are "illegitimate".But Chrisitans do think it wrongs-except for fellow Christians that "repent" get a pass.As the button I wear on my backpack says-Christians arent perfect-they just want you to be.

[zoomar]

"Which is exactly why a black Republican probably wouldnt have much credibility with African-American voters and wouldnt even be nominated by the Republican party to begin with"

Totally agree


"What is hypocritical here is that the idea of Christian repentance is extended only to other Christians. Not everyone in this nation believes that having kids out of wedlock is wrong or that children from such unions are "illegitimate".But Chrisitans do think it wrongs-except for fellow Christians that "repent" get a pass.As the button I wear on my backpack says-Christians arent perfect-they just want you to be"


Whatever. It would help if your knees didn't jerk so hard whenever the word "Christian" is mentioned.

[Michael E Johnson]

Aaaaaaaaack

[zoomar]

touche' mon ami

[David Howery]

good God, all this sound and fury on here..... we're supposed to be talking about the best chance for a black US president here, not all the reasons why there can't possibly be one... I say Powell is the best bet... anyone have a better candidate?

[Melvin Loh]

Another potential black US pres candidate- could Gen Benjamin O. Davis jnr, based on his outstanding service record as CO of the famed Tuskegee airmen during WWII, have been a viable possibility for a US presidential candidate had he decided to go into politics after WWII ? IIRC, after he left the USAF in the late 50s, he served in the civilian airline industry in Cleveland (I think air safety inspector ?), and he only passed away a couple yrs back now. WI he'd decided to go into politics after he'd undertaken this civilian aviation career ? Could he have made a possible presidential candidate much later down the track form say the late 60s onwards ?

[Melvin Loh]

Hey guys could you plausibly argue that there already has been a black pres of the US, in the form of Warren Harding ? Apparently, Harding had 1 Jamaican grandfather in his family tree, and his racial background was strongly questioned during the 1920 election.

[marl_d]

explain to me what the Dems have done for the Black population in this country over the past 40 years (other than welfare, affrimative acition was something that NIXON got pasted) that makes them think that they're going to do anything for them let alone get a Black man elected Pres.? look what is happening with Sharpton. yeah the guys kinda wacked but he's still a black man, if the Dems where so big on advancing the Minority's dont you think they'd be jumping on his bandwagon...Look at Estrada, a MINORITY JUDICAL caniadate for one of the highest Judgeships in the country and because he wasn't LIBERAL enough for them or a DEMOCRATE they drove his nomiantion into the ground and DEMANED papers that NO ONE has EVER asked to see from any other nominey.
I am such a supporter of Bush that i can't see that some of things he's passed in his term so far are good for the country, CFR, his Education bill, medicare bill just to name a few are NOT bills that any true conserative Pres bills that should have been passed, but they are bills that are taking away things that the Dems have been saying that the GOP hasn't cared about (ie. spend money on) for the pass 40 years...
Personaly i would have loved to see Alan Keyes get the nomination and Pers over Bush, and think he would have been a much better Pres than any of the other nomaineys that ran in 2000.

[Michael E Johnson]

---explain to me what the Dems have done for the Black population in this country over the past 40 years that makes them think that they're going to do anything for them let alone get a Black man elected Pres.?---


THE REPUBLICAN PARTY RECORD ON CIVIL RIGHTS: The History George W. Wants You to Forget
Putting Republican Rhetoric in Perspective

David Greenberg is a Whiting Fellow at Columbia University and a columnist for Slate.com. He is working on a book about Richard Nixon's place in American culture.


At the Republican convention in Philadelphia last month, George W. Bush made a strong bid for black votes. GOP leaders, resurrecting their proud label of "the Party of Lincoln," suggested that wooing black voters would mean little more than returning to an admirable history from which the party had only recently deviated. The truth is rather different. In 1854, the Republican Party was founded in large part to end slavery, and for two decades it honorably promoted African-American equality. Its first presidential nominee, pioneer James C. Frémont, took a staunch anti-slavery stand in 1856; his strong showing paved the way for Abraham Lincoln's election four years later.

Lincoln was no radical. He believed white men superior to blacks and opposed the outright abolition of slavery. But he wanted to stop slavery's westward expansion in the hope that it would die out -- a position that won him endorsements from leading African-Americans such as Frederick Douglass and 40 percent of the overall vote, enough for victory in a four-way race.

After the Civil War, the "Radical Republicans," who oversaw the Reconstruction of the South, brought blacks into electoral politics. Blacks naturally joined the GOP rather than the white supremacist Southern Democrats. In these golden years, black Republicans got the vote and even won elective office. (Mississippi elected the nation's first African-American senator in 1870.) Led by the GOP, the nation ratified the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, which ended slavery and gave black men full citizenship and the franchise.

The GOP's abandonment of African-Americans began with the presidential election of 1876. The party had already been subordinating its agenda of black equality to that of cultivating Northern industrialists when Ohio Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, to resolve a contested election, agreed to the notorious Compromise of 1876. In exchange for the support of Southern Democrats, Hayes promised to withdraw federal troops from the South and stop supervising the treatment of blacks. White supremacist, or "redeemer," Democrats quickly regained power, commencing the bloody reign of Jim Crow.

The compromise of 1876 crippled black Republicanism in the South. State Republican parties, to compete for white votes, engaged in racial me-tooism. They purged blacks from the party or shunted them into "Black and Tan" delegations, which for decades had to compete with "Lily White" delegations for recognition by national Republican leaders.

By the Progressive Era, both the Republicans and the Democrats were showing little interest in helping African-Americans. One issue that couldn't be ignored -- though the parties tried -- was the horror of lynching, which had become rampant in the post-Reconstruction South. Anti-lynching laws marked the last major civil rights issue on which Republicans were out in front.

In 1920 Congressman Leonidas Dyer, a Missouri Republican from a largely black St. Louis district, introduced an anti-lynching bill. The new Republican president, Warren Harding, endorsed it. And the House passed it in January 1922, with support from all but seventeen Republicans.

Yet even though they controlled the Senate as well, the GOP couldn't, or wouldn't, pull out the stops to pass the bill into law. While Majority Leader Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts supported the bill, the powerful Idaho Republican William Borah opposed it. Borah believed the measure amounted to interference with the states' autonomy and he helped Southern Democrats kill it. Eventually, Borah's states' rights ideology would come to dominate the GOP, at the expense of Lodge's racial liberalism.

Meanwhile, blacks were fleeing the South for Northern cities. There, the Democrats' political machines delivered services and patronage to immigrants in exchange for their votes, and Democratic bosses shrewdly absorbed blacks into their system. The Republicans, in contrast, failed to do so. Their machines reacted coolly to black voters' demands and to black politicians' ambitions -- leading many to leave the party. A shift in party loyalties was beginning.

The realignment crystallized under President Franklin Roosevelt. In 1932, FDR won just 23 percent of the black vote. Yet he swiftly moved to bolster his black support. Gestures such as consulting a "black cabinet" of unofficial African-American advisers surely helped, but more important were his economic relief programs. The Depression hit black Americans disproportionately hard, and FDR's relief programs, such as the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Public Works Administration, gave them much-needed aid and jobs.

In Congress, meanwhile, Northern and Western Democrats took the lead on progressive racial legislation; it was two Democrats who in 1934 introduced the next major anti-lynching bill. Between 1932 and 1936, writes historian Nancy J. Weiss in Farewell to the Party of Lincoln: Black Politics in the Age of FDR, "Roosevelt and the New Deal changed the voting habits of black Americans in ways that have lasted to our own time." Some Republicans still groped for black ballots. In a polarized party, liberal leaders, such as presidential nominees Wendell Willkie and Thomas Dewey, incorporated pro-civil-rights language into the platforms, temporarily besting the conservative Old Guard.

But even they could not match the new Democratic President, Harry Truman, on civil rights. Truman won 70 percent of the black vote in 1948 with a bold, progressive racial agenda. He supported a Fair Employment Practices Commission to fight job discrimination and desegregated the military by executive order. In 1948 he ran on a civil rights platform that drove South Carolina's Strom Thurmond to run as a "Dixiecrat" and many Southerners to support him.

By the 1950s racial liberalism in the GOP was fading fast. Dwight Eisenhower was a conservative (though not a reactionary) on race who opposed Truman on key issues. In 1945 Eisenhower testified before Congress against integrating the military, and as president he resisted reviving the FEPC. He opposed the 1954 Supreme Court decision Brown vs. Board of Education, which ruled that segregated public schools were unconstitutional. (Bowing to the inevitable, the 1956 GOP platform endorsed Brown.) Ike remarked that "you cannot change people's hearts merely by laws" -- repeatedly justifying his inaction in the face of rising demands for civil rights laws.

Entering the 1960 election, the Democrats, behind such leaders as Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota and Herbert Lehman of New York, had become the unquestioned party of civil rights. Richard Nixon, who always overestimated his own popularity with blacks, still expected to fare well -- Jackie Robinson, for one, endorsed him -- and he probably had a stronger civil rights record than John F. Kennedy. But JFK courted the black vote, famously phoning Martin Luther King Jr.'s wife, Coretta, when the civil rights leader was jailed. While the importance of that gesture has been overstated, it highlighted the Democrats' realization that blacks constituted a key part of their base.

Racial liberalism within the GOP enjoyed its last hurrah during the battle over the 1964 Civil Rights Act. President Lyndon Johnson and his congressional allies decided the time was ripe to pass a meaningful bill, their Southern party-mates be damned. While the Republican leadership took a wait-and-see position, younger GOP congressmen such as New York's John Lindsay (who later became a Democrat) and Maryland's Charles Mathias worked on the bill, helping it to passage in the House over Southern opposition.

In the Senate, Southern Democrats undertook a filibuster, which boded ill; never had civil rights advocates mustered the two-thirds supermajority needed to close off debate. At first, few Republican senators were willing to vote to end the filibuster. But behind the scenes Vice President Hubert Humphrey negotiated with Republican leader Everett Dirksen of Illinois, a supporter of the bill. Dirksen promised to round up enough Republican holdouts if Humphrey would attach amendments paying lip service to state and local control. After more than two months the Senate voted 71-29 for cloture, with six Republicans joining twenty-three Southern Democrats in opposition (forty-four Democrats and twenty-seven Republicans voted aye).

Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, the Democrat who led the opposition, said Dirksen had "killed off a rapidly growing Republican Party in the South." But Russell had it backwards. Significantly, the opponents of the 1964 law included the GOP's future leaders, including Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater and Texas Senate aspirant George H.W. Bush. They knew their electoral success depended on conservative support in the South and West.

Goldwater's "Operation Dixie" in his 1964 presidential race may have meant surrendering the black vote; LBJ won 94 percent that year. But it bore fruit four years later. Richard Nixon's successful "Southern Strategy" of 1968 became the blueprint for Ronald Reagan's Southern inroads and Lee Atwater and George Bush's Willie Hortonism. Indeed, for the last thirty-five years, the GOP strategy has been to write off the black vote and seek white support by (among other methods) subtly playing on racial fears.

If, then, George W. Bush, running under the guidance of Atwater's protégé Karl Rove, can reverse that trend it will be more than a change in his party's line. He will be declaring, truly, that this is not his father's Republican Party.


Published: Aug 22 2000




Any questions?

[Michael E Johnson]

--If, then, George W. Bush, running under the guidance of Atwater's protégé Karl Rove, can reverse that trend it will be more than a change in his party's line. He will be declaring, truly, that this is not his father's Republican Party.


Published: Aug 22 2000---


The answer to this is below. GWB and GOP you got alot of splannin' to do :o



June 3, 2003

Pickering nomination reflects GOP's attitudes on race
By David A. Love

Since the resignation of Sen. Trent Lott as Senate majority leader for racially divisive remarks, the Republican Party has continued to show its insensitivity towards civil rights and people of color.

President Bush has decided to renominate the controversial Charles W. Pickering to the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Pickering, a federal district judge in Mississippi and a protege of Lott, has a record of opposition to civil rights and should not be confirmed to the nation's second-highest court.

Last year, amidst protest from civil-rights groups, the Democratic-controlled Senate rejected Pickering for the bench, and with good reason.

As a college student at the University of Mississippi, Pickering wrote a law journal article on how the state of Mississippi could get around a court decision invalidating the age-old ban on interracial marriages.

In 1964, Pickering left the Democratic Party and joined the GOP when the Democrats tried to integrate the all-white Mississippi delegation to the national convention. And Pickering was once a law partner of an avowed segregationist, former Mississippi Lt. Gov. J. Carroll Gartin.

What's more, Pickering was linked to the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission, a now-defunct state agency that supported white supremacy and blocked the enforcement of federal desegregation and voting-rights laws after the Brown vs. Board of Education decision. The notorious commission spied on, and infiltrated, civil-rights groups and labor organizations, and harassed African Americans. In 1963, the commission helped screen potential jurors in the trial of Byron de la Beckwith, the self-proclaimed racist who twice escaped punishment for the murder of civil-rights activist Medgar Evers before he was finally convicted in 1994.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Judiciary Committee, said Pickering demonstrated "glaring racial insensitivity" in his handling of a 1994 cross-burning case. Pickering sought a lighter sentence for a defendant who burned a cross on the lawn of an interracial couple.

"We are deeply concerned that Judge Pickering's record reflects a continuing judicial insensitivity -- even hostility -- toward key principles and remedies that safeguard the civil rights of all Americans," said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, D-Md., chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus.

But the Bush administration dismisses criticism of the Pickering nomination. "This controversy, if there is one, about Judge Pickering, I submit to you, this has nothing -- nothing -- to do with race and everything to do with the ideology of a few liberal Democrats," said White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. "This is not about race. It's about ideology."

But Bush and the Republicans can't have it both ways. They can't claim that they want to reach out to blacks, Latinos and other minority groups on the one hand, and then on the other embrace outdated notions about race and promote anti-civil-rights candidates and agendas.

Unfortunately, many Republicans seem like they cannot wean themselves off of a Southern Strategy, which encourages them to race-bait and exploit the racial paranoia of white voters.

On Martin Luther King's birthday, Bush declared his opposition to affirmative action and his support for white plaintiffs in a Supreme Court case that could strike down diversity policies at the University of Michigan.

Now, in an effort to stack the federal courts with ultraconservatives who oppose civil rights, he has renominated Pickering and 30 other judicial candidates who were rejected by the Senate last year.

If Bush and the Republicans are allowed to place people such as Pickering on the federal bench, they set the clock back on civil rights.

David A. Love is a recent graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where he was the president of the Black Law Students Association. He can be reached at pmproj@progressive.org.

[ninebucks]

I think the best potential for a Black president at any point during any point of American Alternate History would have been a temporary slave revolt pretty early on.

Say some point before the Civil War, there is a president elected with very pro-slavery views, very white supremacist views and who himself was a slave-owner.

This president is sitting in his office, when he is victim to a bloody coup d'etat forced by a gang of grievant northern blacks, helped into the White House by insiders (i.e. the presidents own slaves who are in his attendence), carrying concealed duelling pistols, dispensing of anyone who attempts to stop them on the way they march into the president's office, place a single bullet into his head and claim control of the union.

Meanwhile, word is spread as quickly as possible that there is a Negro in the oval office, race riots seize the streets (probably mostly against the 'president'). This hypothetical president, let's call him Eunis A. Jackson (I am a big believer in naming hypothetical AH figures), begins making a bunch of declarations to the hostaged white house staff ordering the abolition of slavery, black franchise, etc. etc.

Of course, none of these would be carried out, and 'President' Jackson would be either killed by the authorities as they retake the White House, or executed for treason shortly thereafter. The sole consequence of his 'office' being the deaths of black citizens killed in the riots following his coup.

Of course, constitutionally, he was never president at all. But still, I believe that is as likely as any black president could have been in US (alternative) history.

[TechRat]

Mona Clee wrote an alternate history/time travel novel called Branch Point.
About four young people going back into the past to prevent the Cuban Missle Crisis from going nuclear.
One side effect of time travel in this story is the ablity to sense the past or future hot spots or people. one memerable one is The Red Square in Moscow; with Russia's long history of killing a better future time after time.


While jogging with the President (Clinton), they meet a mother and son; Bill shakes the boy's hand, and the main character sense a major shift in the future; from poverty and crime for the young family to a world of amazing achievements, including being the first black president.
Then the main character looks towards the White House and "sees" a mushroom cloud risinging the background, blowing everything away; not anything that the future president did, but because of the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

The rest of the novel deals with Main Charactor's plans for a fourth, and final, jump into the past to prevent the creation of nuclear weapons.

[1940LaSalle]

"As far as an ATL black president the only OTL person thats possible is Colin Powell.In order for him to become president though you'd have to make the Republican party more liberal and the United States as a whole less racist-a pretty tall order"

I'd agree that the Republican Party would have to become considerably more moderate for Powell to either want the nomination or have a chance at it, but I disagree that the US as whole is too racist to elect a person like Powell as president. Personally, I suspect the majority of white americans would love to vote for somebody like Powell regardless of his race.

If the Republican party of 2000 had been as accommodating of progressive/moderate views as it was when Rockefeller was a serious candidate for the White House, Powell would have likely been the front-runner. Indeed, he was thought of well in OTL, but the biggest obstacle: some single-digit IQ yahoos making death threats purely because of his race which in turn led his wife to squelch any presidential notions.

Remove those yahoos and Colin Powell would probably be finishing his second term--and I for one would have stood in line to vote for him. How the hell could you NOT vote for someone with that outstanding a record of service to one's country and that leadership experience?

[Wozza]

OTL Bill Clinton was the first "black president" we had.Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter he was the only president that really empathised with and understood black concerns.Plus they were both comfortable around black people and actually have black friends. JFK and LBJ certainly empathised with and understood black concerns and between the 2 of them helped kill Jim Crow but neither approached the personal comfort level with black people as did Carter and Clinton. As far as an ATL black president the only OTL person thats possible is Colin Powell.In order for him to become president though you'd have to make the Republican party more liberal and the United States as a whole less racist-a pretty tall order.

Yeah, it's not like George W Bush has any black friends. Wouldn't it be great if he had a friend, say a black woman, who he said was "like part of his family", and ya' know, maybe in a thoughtless moment she could even make a Freudian slip and call him "my husband."

It's a great shame that Bush doesn't have any friend like that.:rolleyes:

[Tielhard]

How about President Robeson? Has a certain ring to it and if politics had gone a different way in the USA a distinct possibility.

[Johnnyreb]

People are talking airily about a black candidate winning with the majority of black votes, but has anyone bothered to check the USA population statistics, which are freely available from the Census website?

I'm a foreigner, but I feel it curious that so many Americans feel that because a person was a general, or had a good war record, then he is a viable candidate. It helps, but it nowhere near gives a person full viability.

A presidential candidate only gets viability once he has smacked several millions of dollars into the campaign fund.

The Onion magazine wasn't being serious when they asked "Will a rich white male be our next President?"

The same goes for the next female President too.

[Grimm Reaper]

A few corrections to Michael E Johnson:

1) Lincoln would have been elected even if the Democratic Party had not split as he would still have carried the electoral college.

2) Lincoln supported the abolition of slavery, he simply held the survival of the nation to take precedence, particularly if the act of abolition made the collapse of the nation more likely, thereby rendering abolition meaningless to most of the slaves no longer inside the borders of the US.

3) On the issue of slavery's westward expanion Lincoln simply believed in avoiding future crimes like Kansas and allowing the settlers to choose their own path. Since the pro-slavery faction proved woefully inept in actually getting slave owners to move to new territories...

4) The description of the South following 1876...
A) The GOP was inert in the South from the time of Lincoln to the 1960s.
B) It was purely the actions of the Democrats who stripped the African-Americans of the vote. You appear to be blaming the people who did not act for the crimes of those who acted wrongly.
C) Jim Crow was already in effect in eight of the eleven former CSA state prior to 1876 and to some degree in the remaining three.

5) As regards the progressive era, again you complain that the GOP was only overwhelmingly in favor of justice but not universally so when it was the unified Democratic Party which blocked the measure.

6) It was Eisenhower who made Brown vs Topeka Board of Education reality by sending soldiers to enforce it in Arkansas and elsewhere.

7) The Civil Rights Act passed due to GOP support, receiving a rather higher percentage of Republicans in both Houses than Democrats. By your own figures it was 81% Republicans but only 65% Democrats.

Next a response to the official Democratic talking points maligning Judge Pickering...

[Grimm Reaper]

Now on to Charles Pickering, as promised...

1) Strange that a man with an alleged record of opposition to civil rights would be endorsed by so many African-Americans in his state, particularly the Mississippi branch of the NAACP and members of Medger Evers's own family.

2) Is it now fair to hold every candidate for judicial positions responsible for the ideologies of all members of those law firm(s) he/she belonged to in the past? Why no evidence of Pickering actually agreeing with the man, as opposed to sharing an office building?

3) Pickering was first elected to the Mississippi State Senate in 1972, assuming office in January of 1973. The Sovereignty Commission was dissolved forever that same year. Again, will any evidence of his ties to the commission over those few weeks be presented? Plenty of charges against the commission which was dissolved with good reason but literally nothing against Pickering.

4) In 1967 Pickering openly testified against the top KKKer in the state, Sam Bowers, at a time when Bowers and the Klan were actually using dynamite against uncooperative businesses. Strange position for a bigot to take.

Thus far we have a school paper from the 1950s standing as the only actual evidence against Pickering, which is more than offset, in my opinion, by publicly testifying against the Klan at its most violent.



Now on to a certain court case in 1994...Personally I am astounded that the Democrats would even mention the case, since Pickering was certainly on the right side of this case. Allow me to summarize the case and the overall situation involved:

1) Three men, on January 9 of 1994 burned a cross on the lawn of a married couple(mixed race, if it matters).

2) Prosecutors from the Justice Department under Janet Reno offered a plea bargain to the youngest of the three men(age 17) involving no prison time.

3) Judge Pickering noted that the other two men involved were a known drunk and a man who was mentally retarded. The one perpetrator not of reduced faculties was the one given a pass.

4) The 17 year old, alone, attacked the same household with a gun. His plea bargain meant he would be tried as a juvenille, facing dramatically reduced punishment a second time, as it was not possible to try him as an adult without either a prior offense or other pattern of criminal behavior which could be admitted in court. Neither of which could be done unless the Justice Department rescinded the plea bargain, as Pickering requested without success.

5) On the issue where Pickering sought a reduction in sentence, this was because the Justice Department made a request for two separate prison terms based on mutually contradictory court decisions. Legally one of the two requests could not lawfully be considered unless the other one was dropped. In response to Judge Pickering letter of inquiry, this was confirmed by the Justice Department which dropped one of the two proposed sentences.

6) Had this not taken place a drunkard, regardless of his personal character, would have spent up time in prison for a law which the Justice Department admitted could not apply to him. A lawsuit would certainly have followed.

[1940LaSalle]

Hey guys could you plausibly argue that there already has been a black pres of the US, in the form of Warren Harding ? Apparently, Harding had 1 Jamaican grandfather in his family tree, and his racial background was strongly questioned during the 1920 election.

I'm surprised that this legend surfaced. It was no more than a whispering campaign in 1920. In what is often considered the definitive Harding biography, The Shadow of Blooming Grove, Harding was quoted from an interview conducted at the time on the subject as saying (and I paraphrase here, not having the reference at hand), "How the hell do I know? Maybe one of my ancestors did jump the fence at some time."

[Paul Spring]

I read that there was some speculation that William Henry Harrison, who briefly served as president in 1841 before dying of pneumonia, had a small amount of African ancestry. If that's true, Benjamin Harrison, president from 1889-1893, would have been a tiny bit African because he was W H Harrison's grandson (only grandfather-grandson presidential combination in US history).

To answer the original question, though, Jesse Jackson ran for the Democratic nomination in 1984 and 1988, but I think the odds of him being elected president were extremely low - the odds were against him being the Democratic nominee.

Colin Powell is probably the first likely black president of the US, or rather would have been likely if he had run at a time when the Republican party was more moderate.

[Thermopylae]

Jesse Jackson might have become President, if it weren't for that whole "Himeytown" remark. :rolleyes:

[Wendell]

Jesse Jackson might have become President, if it weren't for that whole "Himeytown" remark. :rolleyes:

Well, that would harm him for good reason, but I doubt that would be his only fault. Nonetheless, he'd carry Washington, D.C. in the election:mad:

[Hapsburg]

Here's an interesting scenario:
Henry Wallace becomes President in 1948 on the Progressive Party ticket. How or why doesn't matter. He makes Paul Robeson, a famous and very popular Black singing sensation on the era, his Vice President (many thought Robeson would be Wallace's running mate, and he certainly have enough clout to do so).
Wallace dies in office somehow in 1949 or 1950. VP Robeson becomes the first Black POTUS.
Probably gets assassinated by some racist nut before his term is out, but he'll probably show that it can be done, a black man can become president. He'll probably try to get some Civil Rights laws passed, and could actually some through.

[Derek Jackson]

In OTL Robeson's support for Stalinist Russia was hugely damaging. If he took a different view or Russian events were different I wonder.

Robeson overall was incredibly impressive. On the other hand America prior to 1950 was incredibly racist.

(I still suspect that the best chance of a Black US President in the 20th century requires PODs from 1864 to 1884

[Hapsburg]

In OTL Robeson's support for Stalinist Russia was hugely damaging. If he took a different view or Russian events were different I wonder.
Or perhaps different Russian events...maybe a much more democratic/republican/federalist USSR (Trotsky instead of Stalin, or perhaps Mensheviks take power instead of the Bolsheviks?) which seeks alliance with the US (another democratic federal republic) rather than antagonism. Thus, any support he has for the USSR would be seen as pro-US as well, and skyrocket his popularity.
As for the commonly-strewn racism thing...yeah, that would be a big-ass problem. Perhaps changing attitudes begin after WW1 instead of after WW2? Earlier mass-CRM would make Robeson's presidency more acceptable by the populace.

A more closer-to-home possibility is Colin Powell running as President. The ticket probably wouldn't matter all too much, though Democrat in 2008 would probably win him the office, considering the sudden slump in the Republican's popularity as of late. I'd actually quite like to see Powell as pres. That would be interesting.

[Zen Redneck]

Maybe: Philippa Schuyler survives her helicopter crash. Ford picks her as VP, beats Carter. She's in line to follow Ford to the Presidency.

[general_tiu]

Maybe Powell was indeed nominated for the Republican ticket...

[Beowulf2005]

I still like my "Bush picks Condi as VP in 2000" scenario.

[Wendell]

Maybe we could make Edward Brooke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke) President?

[Glen]

I'd be impressed if anyone could get Booker T. Washington as the first black president.

[Wendell]

I'd be impressed if anyone could get Booker T. Washington as the first black president.

As would I. But, I don't think that would be likely to occur without a POD at least in the 1860's.

[strangeland]

OTL Bill Clinton was the first "black president" we had.Other than perhaps Jimmy Carter he was the only president that really empathised with and understood black concerns.Plus they were both comfortable around black people and actually have black friends. JFK and LBJ certainly empathised with and understood black concerns and between the 2 of them helped kill Jim Crow but neither approached the personal comfort level with black people as did Carter and Clinton. As far as an ATL black president the only OTL person thats possible is Colin Powell.In order for him to become president though you'd have to make the Republican party more liberal and the United States as a whole less racist-a pretty tall order.

or make Powell a Democrat.

or maybe a Reform party supporter:rolleyes: