New York Times Reveals Black Democrats Don’t Support Mayor Pete, But Refuse To Say The Real Reason

Mayor Pete Buttigieg is apparently “surging” in the polls, but there seems to be a major problem for the only openly-gay candidate in the race: black Americans don’t support him.

The New York Times pointed out this fact without alluding to why that may be:

Mr. Buttigieg’s weakness with voters of color — he registered zero percent among black South Carolina Democrats in a Quinnipiac University poll released Monday — limits his potential in the 2020 campaign. A donor-class favorite who draws capacity crowds across Iowa, Mr. Buttigieg counts as his highest-profile black supporter either the man who lost a 2018 election to be Florida’s attorney general or the former mayor of Kansas City, Mo.

No Democrat in modern times has won the party’s nomination without claiming majorities of black voters, the most crucial voting bloc in South Carolina and in an array of delegate-rich Southern states.

The American Thinker points out in a piece that within the articles 41 paragraphs, only one mentions Mayor Pete’s sexuality, and there’s a reason for that.

Black Americans aren’t quite as accepting of homosexuality as white liberals. That’s not my opinion. That’s what the Human Right’s Campaign says on their website:

Black survivors were also twice as likely to experience any physical violence, twice as likely to experience discrimination and 1.4 times more likely to experience threats and intimidation during acts of hate violence. Additionally, Black transgender women face the highest levels of fatal violence within the LGBTQ community and are less likely to turn to police for help for fear of revictimization by law enforcement personnel.

The New York Times reports that the main reason black Americans don’t support Mayor Pete is because they just don’t know who he is… You know, like black people don’t have televisions or something…

For now, Mr. Buttigieg has so few black elected officials and former elected officials backing him that they could all fit into a single S.U.V. The issue emerged during a meeting he held this summer with Congressional Black Caucus members who pressed him about why he did not have black officials from South Bend vouching for him on the campaign trail.

Of the black elected officials and former elected officials who have endorsed him, only Sean Shaw, a former one-term Florida state representative who lost his statewide race last year, has been to South Carolina on his behalf.

Hmmmm, I wonder why black elected officials don’t want to support Mayor Pete…

“I welcome the challenge of connecting with black voters in America who don’t yet know me,” Mr. Buttigieg said during Wednesday’s debate. “As mayor of a city that is racially diverse and largely low income, for eight years I have lived and breathed the successes and struggles of a community where far too many people live with the consequences of racial inequity that has built up over centuries but been compounded by policies and decisions from within living memory.”

I would like to know what these “successes” Pete speaks of. More importantly, my family living in South Bend would like to know as well.

The American Thinker puts it perfectly as to why The Times can’t give the real reason Mayor Pete isn’t getting support from black democrats:

This is willful blindness, based on an aversion to facing a fundamental fissure among the various identity groups to whom the Democrats pander. The concept of “intersectionality” was invented to paper over the very real conflicts among factions basing their claims on victimhood, attempting to unite them against their “oppressors.”

African-Americans occupy a unique status as victims owing to the history of slavery and its aftermath. For sanctimonious outlets like the Times, criticizing blacks as a group for negative characteristics that are more predominant than among other groups is unthinkable. Thus, labeling African-Americans, including the clergy who play a prominent role in shaping politics and thinking, as “homophobic” is out of the question — at least for now.

Mayor Pete is very popular with rich, white liberals. This is for numerous reasons. First of all, he’s gay. That’s it. That’s all the reasons.

The New York Times doesn’t want to openly shame black people for being “homophobic”. They know the left would turn on them in a heartbeat if they did. That’s what happens when you constantly cater to people who refuse to live in reality. Not “my reality”, just reality.

For people who are aware of the cultures of others, this shouldn’t come as a surprise. As stated by pro-LGBT sources, black LGBT folks face the highest rates of violence.

It’s easy to say white Trump supporters are racist. Liberals eat that up. When you start suggesting that black people might not be super pro-gay, well, safe to say SOMEONE on the left is going to come after you.

Pete definitely didn’t do himself any favors at the debate when he suggested that gay people were facing the same struggles black people went through during the civil rights movement. Fellow democrat Kamala Harris called him out for it.

“Those of us who’ve been involved in civil rights for a long time, we know that it is important that we not compare our struggles,” Harris said during a Black Women Power Breakfast hosted by Higher Heights, a national political organization for black women. “It is not productive, it is not smart and strategically, [and] it works against what we need to do which is build coalition.”

“We know that in our ongoing fight for civil rights if any one of us starts to differentiate ourselves in a certain way and, in particular, what he did on the stage,” she continued. “It’s just not productive and I think it’s a bit naïve.”

Corey Booker also called out Pete for his needing a focus group of black people so he could “relate”. It sounds like something from a bad sitcom, but that’s the reality for the South Bend mayor.

“I have a lifetime of experience with black voters,” Booker said. “I’ve been one since I was 18. Nobody on this stage should need a focus group to hear from African-American voters.”

While those are some damning criticisms of Buttigieg, they don’t address how the black community as a whole feels about having a gay president. The New York Times completely ignores it, as have most outlets. They don’t want to even consider it to be a possibility that black people might not be gung-ho for homosexuals.

I guess the only way to find out if this is the case is to see if Mayor Pete can succeed in states with higher minority populations than pasty white Iowa and Vermont.