Your cadillac has got a wheel in the ditch and a wheel on the track

August 25, 2006 10:46 AM

Patricia Todd won a tight Democratic party runoff in District 54 in Alabama. Patricia Todd is also gay and would be the first gay representative in Alabama's history. Gaynell Hendricks doesn't understand why she lost, but maybe it has to do with the race baiting . Hendricks' mother-in-law contests the election for numerous reasons including "illegal votes were given to Todd" and said that "I want this controversy settled.This is happening like when Bush and Gore were running for president. I don't like it." Unsurprisingly, "Hendricks said she is pleased that someone challenged the results. " Weeks go by and the results don't get certified. A five member committee is appointed and bickers. Eventually the committee refrerences an old by law that has apparently not been enforced since 1988 to disqualify Todd. Although it does not seem quite over, it should be by tommorrow. Interestingly enough, Todd said she believes the challenge has nothing to do with the fact she is gay, but is about the fact that she is white and won in a majority black district.
posted by dig_duggler (38 comments total)

Full disclosure, I live in this district and voted for Todd.
posted by dig_duggler at 10:46 AM on August 25, 2006

You live in Crestwood? I have friends there. My sister sent me a link to this story this morning.

The Alabama Dems are sure in a pickle with this little injustice. I hope they eventually come around and let Todd run.
posted by owhydididoit at 10:51 AM on August 25, 2006

Two important points not above:

1). There is not republican candidate, so this would have almost assured her election

2). No other candidate is having this by-law enforced, including the Democratic candidate for governor.
posted by dig_duggler at 10:54 AM on August 25, 2006

Those bigots there should be removed themselves--this is disgusting, and wholly undemocratic (both big D and small d) and unAmerican.
posted by amberglow at 11:00 AM on August 25, 2006

and what dig said--they're not enforcing this old law across the board at all--they're just using it to remove "undesirables".
posted by amberglow at 11:02 AM on August 25, 2006

Imagine that! Alabama, of all states, decided to use an outdated and unused law to boot out a gay canadite. The only reason the others are getting the same shaft is because it would be too obvious if they _only_ did this to Todd.

God Bless America. Because I won't.
posted by triolus at 11:11 AM on August 25, 2006

Where is the evidence that this is actually about her lesbianism, aside from the general assumption of that being the way things go down in Alabama? It could easily be about race as much as anything else, or it could be that the party is just using scorched-earth methods on infighting.

Also, they really should enforce financial disclosure across the board. I can't understand why that could slide for eighteen years.
posted by Navelgazer at 11:22 AM on August 25, 2006

triolus writes "Imagine that! Alabama, of all states, decided to use an outdated and unused law to boot out a gay canadite."

Note that this wasn't an action on the part of the state government, but rather on the part of the state Democratic party.
posted by mr_roboto at 11:25 AM on August 25, 2006

Triolus, you're from Lithia Springs, GA, and you are insulting Alabama? This does not compute.

Plus, what the heck is a "canadite"? Is that a really small canadian?

Additionally, the "outdated law" you refer to is not a law, it is a party bylaw which is not the same thing at all. Plus, I don't think 1988 is "outdated". Maybe 1888.

This is merely a reflection on the Democratic Party. No one should be surprised that they follow rules only when it suits their needs; they've been doing this for quite some time now. This has absolutely nothing to do with the State of Alabama.
posted by tadellin at 11:28 AM on August 25, 2006

Typical.
posted by Smedleyman at 11:33 AM on August 25, 2006

A bright point being lost here (at least for me, I live here).

An openly gay candidate was elected in Alabama.
posted by dig_duggler at 11:35 AM on August 25, 2006

Third-party options have never been stronger, or more appealing, than now.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:38 AM on August 25, 2006

I just wanted to note that both candidates have been booted. From the last link: "While I was aware this was a contentious issue, I did not expect that a unanimous decision disqualifying both candidates would be reached using an archaic party by-law." Joe Turnham, Alabama Democratic Party Chair.
posted by MrZero at 11:48 AM on August 25, 2006

Third-party options have never been stronger, or more appealing, than now.

Unlax, Mr. Lieberman. Blazecock is just kidding.
posted by hal9k at 11:55 AM on August 25, 2006

Triolus, you're from Lithia Springs, GA, and you are insulting Alabama? This does not compute.

I'm from the south, and I can insult the south all I want. Just because I'm from a certain place doesn't mean I have to cherish their ideals.

Plus, what the heck is a "canadite"? Is that a really small canadian?

Oh, thanks for correcting my spelling. I forgot to hit the spell check button before submitting my post. I'll do that this time.

Additionally, the "outdated law" you refer to is not a law, it is a party bylaw which is not the same thing at all. Plus, I don't think 1988 is "outdated". Maybe 1888.

Party bylaw, laws, and the like are all rules. Also, 1988 is so last century. I agree this is a reflection of the Democratic party. The democratic party of ALABAMA.
posted by triolus at 12:01 PM on August 25, 2006

Where is the evidence that this is actually about her lesbianism?

Her opponents mother-in-law filed a complaint because she thought that a gay org's contribution to Todd's campaign was being hidden from the voters.
posted by owhydididoit at 12:03 PM on August 25, 2006

This is merely a reflection on the Democratic Party. No one should be surprised that they follow rules only when it suits their needs; they've been doing this for quite some time now. This has absolutely nothing to do with the State of Alabama.

You can't seriously be insinuating that the Republican Party is not corrupt here. Fob James was not that long ago. Not as long as 1988.
posted by dig_duggler at 12:05 PM on August 25, 2006

I agree this is a reflection of the Democratic party. The democratic party of ALABAMA.

Right, because party in-fighting and "scorched earth" politics don't exist anywhere else. ;)
posted by jca at 12:05 PM on August 25, 2006

...A party panel has voted to overturn Patricia Todd’s historic election to the State House in Alabama, but the Victory Fund has vowed to fight on . “Patricia got the most votes in two separate elections—the primary and the runoff—but party bosses didn’t like the outcome, so now they want to simply handpick a candidate. ...
posted by amberglow at 12:19 PM on August 25, 2006

1988 isn't that long ago. Also, 59 votes out of what? How many votes were cast? For an election at that level you could see something like 500 votes.
posted by delmoi at 12:23 PM on August 25, 2006

This is merely a reflection on the Democratic Party. No one should be surprised that they follow rules only when it suits their needs; they've been doing this for quite some time now. This has absolutely nothing to do with the State of Alabama.

What, you think Howard Dean, DNC chairman was up in DC ordering this race-based attack or whatever? Preposterous. There really are state parties, and they operate almost entirely independently of each other on local matters. This is true of both Democrats and Republicans.
posted by delmoi at 12:28 PM on August 25, 2006

Reading up a bit more, this appears to just be a case of two people wrestling for control of the party, Reed and Turnham. Unfortunately it seems Todd is in the crossfire.

I can't wait for the great publicity out state gets out of this! Way to go guys!

“If this is the state we’re in, then the Democratic Party is going to hell,” former councilor Aldrich Gunn said.
posted by dig_duggler at 1:05 PM on August 25, 2006

This is merely a reflection on the Democratic Party. No one should be surprised that they follow rules only when it suits their needs; they've been doing this for quite some time now. This has absolutely nothing to do with the State of Alabama.

What, you think Howard Dean, DNC chairman was up in DC ordering this race-based attack or whatever? Preposterous. There really are state parties, and they operate almost entirely independently of each other on local matters. This is true of both Democrats and Republicans.

Don't I know it! My cuz, Tom McLintock, ran for CA guv in 2004 and sealed the GOP nomination when Arnold Schwarznegger stepped forward. Tom was dropped from the ticket faster than you could say hasta la vista.
posted by parmanparman at 1:28 PM on August 25, 2006

parman - How did he (Tom McClintock) "seal the nomination"? He ran in the General and got 13.5% of the vote - there was no primary as I recall.
posted by swell at 5:04 PM on August 25, 2006

From the article:

By arguing that the majority black district should be represented by a black legislator, Hendricks all but told white voters to go to hell: You are good enough to vote for me, but you’re the wrong color to ever hold this office. It was the equivalent of telling a black person “You’re good enough to cook in my kitchen, but you can’t eat at my table.”

Hmmm, I dunno. This seems like stretching. The whole point with the old Jim Crow laws was that there were actual legal limits on who could (whites) and who couldn't (blacks) do things in certain places. Instead, here we have someone suggesting (gasp!) that a mostly black area should be represented by someone who looks like a majority of the population.

C'mon people, blacks have maybe a couple dozen seats in the House? None in the Senate? Give 'em a break. If white people are going to subconsciously vote against black people (and studies show this is invariably the case) then at least these black people are being up front about it.
posted by Deathalicious at 7:11 PM on August 25, 2006

MSN offers what I feel is a more balanced view of the race issue here
posted by Deathalicious at 7:36 PM on August 25, 2006

I dunno, I think a mostly Todd-preferring area should be represented by someone who looks like Todd.
posted by slimbob at 8:18 PM on August 25, 2006

Yeah, because an MSN beat writer has a much better feel for Alabama politics than a local writer that lives here.

Come to Birmingham. We have a very corrupt local government which extends to any seat from this area. It may seem odd because it's the south, but the mayor and a majority of the city council are African American and (gasp) they learned how to be just as corrupt as any good old white politician. That's just politics, but race baiting is a standard in the city.
posted by dig_duggler at 8:36 PM on August 25, 2006

I dunno, I think a mostly Todd-preferring area should be represented by someone who looks like Todd.

Unless, of course, they didn't vote for Todd.
posted by bradth27 at 7:49 AM on August 26, 2006

Unless, of course, they didn't vote for Todd.

But they did, twice.
posted by amberglow at 8:23 AM on August 26, 2006

oh - sorry. got my candidates wrong there. I was thinking Todd was the other wacko.
posted by bradth27 at 9:54 AM on August 26, 2006

Depressing story. I hate how politicians in trouble (here, Hendricks, but true of many others) seem willing to appeal to the worst in people at the drop of a hat.

I don't exactly get what happens now, if both candidates are "disqualified." I guess I'll go off to google.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 10:14 AM on August 26, 2006

Okay I guess the issue is at the State Democratic Executive Committee today (Saturday). There's "semi-live blogging" by Birmington Blues. Apparently the scuttle-butt is that the Committee will nominate neither candidate but instead George Perdue, the current Representative (who had been scheduled to retire). (And check out this tidbit: "Joe Reed managed to get Gaynell’s attorney elected to the SDEC this morning, so that’s one more vote in her favor." One of the committee members who will vote is Gaynell's attorneys??!!!)

What an astonishingly corrupt power play! I hope that the party bosses all go down in flames, both in public opinion and in the courts.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 10:34 AM on August 26, 2006

A victory for Todd : >
posted by amberglow at 1:21 PM on August 26, 2006

oop--better link and more info
posted by amberglow at 1:23 PM on August 26, 2006

sassy molassy my vote counts!

Nice to have this in Alabama. Really. My neighboor up the street seems to have been heavily involved in the campaign. Perhaps I'll bring him some cookies tomorrow.

Thanks for the interest and link amberglow.
posted by dig_duggler at 8:11 PM on August 26, 2006

we have so few openly gay and lesbian officeholders anywhere i always pay attention : >
posted by amberglow at 8:30 PM on August 26, 2006

So Alabama has an openly gay representative. Al a bama. I cannot wait to play that card in all future Alabama bashing mefi threads (although very possibly well deserved) in the future.
posted by dig_duggler at 9:36 PM on August 26, 2006