The race smear will only get worse

Donald Trump’s naming of a new campaign chief linked to a fiercely outspoken far-right movement is a dangerous step, Hillary Clinton is set to warn in a speech

Looks like a bum rap.

Why talk about issues?

Democrats accuse Trump and his allies of racism, while Republicans want to talk about Hillary's emails and the Clinton Foundation.

The attacks would be substantially the same no matter who the GOP candidate, but for any other candidate the GOP would have fought back, denying the charge and counter-charging, from the beginning.

But the GOP really wanted no part of Trump, from the beginning, and so far from defending him they have from time to time even legitimated the attacks, sometimes adding their own.

Remember, in today's American political climate, there is no forgivable manner of asserting pride in the white race or its history, or of embracing white identity.

That is to say, there is no forgivable way for white people to reject race shaming.

But not everybody is happy with that.

Update.

Here is Janell Ross, young black woman, explaining at WAPO today that the GOP has been making shameful racial appeals to whites for sixty years.

So if you are white and voted Republican at any time these last six decades, well, we've got your number.

But the reality is, white voters -- particularly white, college-educated Republicans -- have also voted habitually, for Republican presidential candidates who have made white protectionism, racial fear mongering and scapegoating features of their campaigns for most of the last 60 years. 

Most have simply done it more artistically than Trump. 

Now Trump is trying to mimic that which has worked.

Nonwhites support politics and policies that advance equality for all, she explains.

Whites not so much.

Black voters include a collection of people who, when locked out of the political system, have consistently championed the expansion of equality and opportunity of all kinds of Americans. 

Black voters, as a group, moved en masse from one party to another in support of making the Constitution's promises of equality real and tangible. 

A black-dominated civil rights movement made possible and then real many of the rights that women of all races, immigrants and other people of color enjoy. 

And the number of candidates who can claim they won over a large share of black votes with promises to remove immigrants from the country or restrict the human or civil rights of others is small. 

It is very small. 

History -- distant and recent -- tells us that. 

Latino voters have a similar history.

However, white voters -- as a group -- are a different story.

There is no moral equivalence here, according to her, and white voters who support whatever she labels racism are inexcusable.

She ignores that blacks and Latinos as groups are generally more in need of the economic benefits that the redistributive features of progressivism offer, exactly as Romney pointed out, and how far that goes to explain the overwhelming loyalty of those groups to the Democrats.

On the other hand, it does seem to me that, considering economic benefit to themselves, too many whites vote Republican.

But there are plenty of other explanations for this than racism - think of libertarian convictions, God, guns, and strong national defense - , and in any case I am pretty sure she regards as racist any number of agenda items (voter ID, rejection of affirmative action, rejection of school busing come to mind as possibilities) that are not that or nor necessarily motivated by that.

Frankly, I agree white people need to ignore and are generally right to resent charges and definitions of racism emanating from the left and, generally speaking, from politically interested and racially hostile nonwhites.

How exactly would the left malign the right if America were racially uniform?

Even the Trumpist right, if illegals were of the same race as everybody else?

Race is a propaganda windfall to the left.