"Conservatives" obsess over ethnic identity politics.  Heck, it is the raison d'etre of Pat Buchanan.  I don't deny the existence of ethnic identity in individuals voting preferences, but evangelicals vote for other evangelicals.  There are other binding characteristics other than race.  So, what is the difference.  But, I do find it distasteful when "conservatives" use ethnic identity politics as a sword to rally whites to their cause and to undermine the legitimacy of black elected officials.  Look how Matt Towery details the Atlanta mayoral race:

Political machines thrive, only to die one day. Witness what's happening in Atlanta. Based on both our own InsiderAdvantage surveys, and on a poll by the highly regarded SurveyUSA, it appears that one of America's most powerful municipal political machines is sputtering to a halt -- that of the nearly 40-year reign of African-American mayors in this town.

So, African-Americans are a political machine that needs to be broken.  It gets better:

Race is always a factor in elections like this. Atlanta has large blocs of both white and black voters, plus a burgeoning tide of other minorities. But race doesn't look to be the determining factor this time. In my judgment, the Nov. 3 vote for Atlanta mayor may well be determined with neither of the two major African-American candidates even making it into a runoff, which would be held three weeks after the initial vote.

Here is the gist of the "conservative" argument, and why I find it is distasteful, and just plain wrong.  Blacks only vote for other blacks because they are blacks.  Whites do not do the same.  Just look at Obama's number against Clinton.  While there may be some blacks who vote for other blacks because they are black, there are just as many whites who will vote for other whites because they are not black.  Got that?  I believe it to be a wash.  Further, when you look at Obama's victories against Clinton in states that almost entirely white, the voting differences based on race is way more complicated than "conservatives" make it out to be.

"Conservatives" do not say so directly, but the implication is clear - blacks win elections because they are black and whites win elections because they deserve to.  What other conclusion can you draw when you take a complex issue of trying to determine why people vote and put it into a 1000 word column.  There is no real thought and analysis, just conclusions and obsession on race.  The average reader might not get that point but the cues are there for the intended audience.