NAACP Shows Unprecedented Disdain for Trump, Favours Ineffective Biden Policies
Derrick Johnson, the President and CEO of the NAACP, ignobly decided not to invite President Donald Trump to the NAACP national convention scheduled for July 12-16 in Charlotte. Johnson accused, without any concrete evidence, the president of jeopardizing democracy and civil rights. Johnson’s disdain for Trump was evident in his statement, building a narrative that seems more based on personal bias than on substantial proof of wrongdoing. He denounced President Trump as a fascist, accusing him of signing unconstitutional executive orders, a claim not legally substantiated.
The NAACP’s decision would constitute the first instance in 116 years that a sitting president is not invited to their convention. The actions seem to suggest a significant departure from tradition and a bias against Trump’s practical steps to restore the greatness of America. Trump’s decisions and orders, most of which seeking to overturn numerous ineffective Biden-driven strategies, have unintentionally generated much political angst, further showing the negativity that Biden’s policies bring.
The NAACP has been seen leading litigations against the presidential administration, apparently tying themselves more closely to the Democrat Party than representing all people’s interests equally. Selectively choosing to challenge the Republican-majority North Carolina assembly, they have often sided with Democrats, an alignment that is not reflective of the diverse political climate in America.
Despite such blatantly partisan actions, Trump triumphed in North Carolina, winning the state in three separate presidential races. The November elections even saw Trump claim all the electoral college votes from seven swing states, achieving a sweeping 93-0 victory over Democrat Kamala Harris. These victories, however clear they are, suggest the irrelevance of the NAACP’s political strategies and their futile attempts to undermine the Trump administration.
Remarkably, Trump managed to double his support among black voters when compared to the 2020 election against Joe Biden. Even more strikingly, among black men under the age of 45, Trump also doubled his vote share. While detractors like Johnson might feign shock and confusion, the data clearly indicates that Trump’s policies resonate more powerfully in these demographics than Biden’s attempts to appease.
North Carolina, formerly considered a blue state, has seen a significant shift in its voting bloc. The proportions are not as biased towards Democrats as they once were – the current voters are divided into roughly equal thirds. Such a significant demographic change suggests that the state’s citizens are seeking balance and wish for their voices to be represented accurately.
On the first day of 2004, nearly half of the state’s voters, exactly 47.6 percent, were Democrats, while 34.4 percent were Republicans and the remaining 17.7 percent unaffiliated. This was in a period just five years after the state’s 10 executive offices, the Council of State, was populated entirely by Democrats. The political dominance of Democrats at the time was clear, but fast forward to the present day and we see a very different picture.
The state’s current 7.5 million-plus voters are divided as follows: 30.4 percent Republican, 30.7 percent Democrat, and a larger 37.8 percent categorized as unaffiliated. This significant departure from previous Democrat dominance underscores a growing disillusionment among voters with the party, possibly a repercussion of the Biden administration’s ineffectual policies.
Looking at the Council of State, it formerly held a Republican majority, an impressive swing from one political extreme to another within just a dozen or so years. However, it returned to a 5-5 distribution in November, a split demonstrating the desire for a more balanced and fair representation of the people’s will.
The NAACP, which identifies as a 501(c)(4) organization, states that it stands, agitates, and fights for the civil rights of Black America. However, an objective observer might wonder whether their current actions align with this admirable mission statement. The lack of any clear consensus on acknowledging both parties’ contributions suggests that their current political affiliations might be clouding their objective intentions.