But, here's the thing. The entire Op/Ed highlights differences in voters based on skin color and origin. These two traits should have nothing to do with picking a president. The very fact that a journalist is using those two qualities to form a theorem as to how these differences will effect this and other elections is...well...racist...insulting...and, unfortunately, reflective of the very minorities he is trying to highlight.
I truly believe there to be much more racism on the Left. Minorities seem to portray excessive amounts of racism especially when picking a candidate in an election.
Just ask yourself this:
How many folks with more melanin in their skin tone are going to vote for Obama simply because he has more melanin in his skin tone than Romney?
Excuse me for raising a sensitive subject, but reality requires it: The reelection of America's first black president is imperiled because he's doing so badly with white voters.
I won't dwell on whether, or to what degree, his white deficit may be attributable to overt or unconscious racism. That debate is ongoing, and I'll leave it to others. Today, I'm simply interested in the racial math. The math alone tells us plenty about Barack Obama's prospects - and about how heavily he's banking on minorities to propel him across the finish line.
America is more racially diverse than ever, and that accelerating trend will resonate politically in the 21st century. Down the road, the overwhelmingly white GOP may find itself on the wrong side of history. But the big question in this election is whether the diverse Democratic electorate is sizable enough, and motivated enough, to get Obama rehired.