In the aftermath of President Obama’s re-election, much has been written about diversity. Efforts to explain Mitt Romney’s loss have focused attention on his inability to muster significant support from Asians, Blacks, Latinos, gays and lesbians, women, and youth. As a matter of fact, Romney’s support amongst these groups was pathetic, and that has led to some serious soul searching among Republicans.
Was Romney a weak candidate who had a difficult time relating to diverse constituencies? Yes. Did Romney make tactical mistakes during the campaign? Yes. Is the Republican party too old, too male, and too white, as one commentator suggests? Yes. Did Hurricane Sandy play a part in all of this? Yes, but its role was minor. Was Romney’s lack of diversity consciousness a contributing factor? Yes.
I raise these questions for a reason. Many political pundits blame Romney’s loss on Romney, the individual. Others have argued that any analysis has to look at structural reasons; namely, the fact that Republicans are out of step with the changing cultural landscape in the U.S. today. How about all of the above? Blaming the loss on Romney ignores the platform on which he was running. And yet, Romney was not a strong candidate. His ability to engage and communicate with the American public paled in comparison to Obama. His lack of diversity consciousness was in full display when he addressed, or did not address diversity issues. And yet, I believe that anyone who ran on the Republican platform, even if it had been Obama, would have lost.
Given the economic climate of this country, the Republicans had a golden opportunity to win this election. While it is easy to find scapegoats for their poor showing, they have only themselves to blame. At this point, their number one priority should be seeing, understanding, expanding, and leveraging their diversity and the diversity of this great country of ours.