|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On July 21 2016 12:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:40 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
Sorry to interrupt the convention talk, but seriously...
I suppose the silver lining is now when people say "Hands up, Don't shoot" the "all lives" crowd can shut up and presume they are referring to this man. Someone's not going to be a cop much longer Unless the system fucks up On July 21 2016 12:31 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Incidentally, the Republican party platform supports gay conversion therapy. This is even after Trump removed every reference from Russia from the Ukraine section. I mean when 90% of blacks are democrats for example, what do you expect? Do you think we should see 50% blacks in the crowd when roughly 1% of the U.S. population are republican blacks? Maybe actually do something that helps the black community and you'll start getting more black people to vote Republican? The black community is, as a whole, rather socially conservative. The problem is that Republicans have done jack squat to help race relations in any way for generations. I don't think you need to police people to vote for your party based on their race or gender or religion. If one party happens to better represent a demographic then they should vote for that party and force the other party to make more accommodations or else suffer in the voting booth. It's funny though because you seem to think the democrat party is much better. Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. You're such a shameless Republican/Trump shill that it's amusing. It's also sad that you cite one bizarre, obscure, and irrelevant example when trying to paint the Democratic party in a bad light, while simultaneously ignoring the last 60+ years of history where most significant positive social and political movements for race relations and minority livelihoods were supported by the left and opposed by the right.
I'm not even a Republican I supported Obama over both McCain and Romney.
Trashy internet posting 101: Resort to personal attacks and call who you disagree with a shill
You seem to have not been following the conversation if you think I'm trying to offer a historical analysis of the Republican Party vs the Democratic Party 60 years ago. I'm talking about this election and you've entirely failed to demonstrate an understanding of my point
|
On July 21 2016 12:43 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Chris Christie, who prostituted himself in the vain hope of being VP (or at least AG). Ha!
Another great thing to watch as the election rolls on.
|
On July 21 2016 12:52 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:44 Plansix wrote:On July 21 2016 12:36 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Are you saying people, in this case minorities specifically, just vote based on the inertia of how they see their peers voting? No, its the Republicans literally give no fucks about minorities, so they don't vote for Republicans. They've been voting blue for a few decades to no avail, so if it's true that neither party really cares, it would just be inertia.
It's always a calculation of "which type of raycism do you prefer" at least Democratic raycism comes with food, healthcare, and housing. Republican's want to take all of that away AND be more overtly racist. It's not inertia, it's self-preservation.
|
On July 21 2016 12:56 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:40 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GreenHorizons wrote:Sorry to interrupt the convention talk, but seriously... https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480I suppose the silver lining is now when people say "Hands up, Don't shoot" the "all lives" crowd can shut up and presume they are referring to this man. Someone's not going to be a cop much longer Unless the system fucks up On July 21 2016 12:31 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Incidentally, the Republican party platform supports gay conversion therapy. This is even after Trump removed every reference from Russia from the Ukraine section. I mean when 90% of blacks are democrats for example, what do you expect? Do you think we should see 50% blacks in the crowd when roughly 1% of the U.S. population are republican blacks? Maybe actually do something that helps the black community and you'll start getting more black people to vote Republican? The black community is, as a whole, rather socially conservative. The problem is that Republicans have done jack squat to help race relations in any way for generations. I don't think you need to police people to vote for your party based on their race or gender or religion. If one party happens to better represent a demographic then they should vote for that party and force the other party to make more accommodations or else suffer in the voting booth. It's funny though because you seem to think the democrat party is much better. Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. You're such a shameless Republican/Trump shill that it's amusing. It's also sad that you cite one bizarre, obscure, and irrelevant example when trying to paint the Democratic party in a bad light, while simultaneously ignoring the last 60+ years of history where most significant positive social and political movements for race relations and minority livelihoods were supported by the left and opposed by the right. I'm not even a Republican I supported Obama over both McCain and Romney. Trashy internet posting 101: Resort to personal attacks and call who you disagree with a shill You seem to have not been following the conversation if you think I'm trying to offer a historical analysis of the Republican Party vs the Democratic Party 60 years ago. I'm talking about this election and you've entirely failed to demonstrate an understanding of my point
And you spout off useless vagaries about "missing the point" instead of actually stating what I supposedly missed.
Your continued lack of intellectual integrity still demonstrates why I can't take you seriously.
Anyway, I've followed Trump very closely throughout this election, and I think he's by far the most pro-LGBT, least workplace discrimination, and least racist Republican nominee ever... He's pro-choice, not driven by religion, and naturally he has to claim certain stuff to appeal to some of the Republican party. But I think anyone who really spent some time looking at Trump would think the same thing.
I feel like we've gotten to some kind of conservative Stockholm Syndrome.
Just because Trump was marginally better than the rest of the field in this election cycle doesn't make him comparable to Republican candidates of past elections.
|
On July 21 2016 12:51 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:49 Stratos_speAr wrote:
The problem is that there's a big disconnect between what Republicans want and what they do.
Republicans want to attract minorities because the U.S. electorate is evolving to the point where you can't be politically competitive without 1) appealing to minorities or 2) shameless gerrymandering. The problem is that they think putting a new face on the same old crap will attract the minority vote, instead of, you know, actually putting forward policies to help the minority communities in the country. It's notable that basically the only people here who believe Trump is centrist when it comes to minorities are the conservatives I recognize from 2012.
-awkwardly raises hand-
On July 21 2016 12:55 m4ini wrote:Because as we know, "the system" as an amazing track record of punishing trigger happy or outright criminal/murderous cops. Oh wait. That was another country. Any other country.
Does it anger you that I agree with you that the system is failing in ways it shouldn't be?
On July 21 2016 12:55 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. He was currently in the KKK? This was brought up a week or two ago and I asked for a clarification and no one did. So here it is again and I am asking again. Is this the FORMER KKK member? Or is it someone else? That's an awfully big difference- former vs current. Unless you believe people cannot change ever change.
He was a former KKK member.
|
On July 21 2016 12:55 FiWiFaKi wrote:
In the same way that the Democrats hope that all the young people show up?
Anyway, I've followed Trump very closely throughout this election, and I think he's by far the most pro-LGBT, least workplace discrimination, and least racist Republican nominee ever... He's pro-choice, not driven by religion, and naturally he has to claim certain stuff to appeal to some of the Republican party. But I think anyone who really spent some time looking at Trump would think the same thing.
That would be a stupid strategy, young people don't show up to elections. All the Democrats have to do is wait for Trump to open his mouth and further drive minorities from the Republican Party.
I'm not here to convince you that your memory is incorrect; Trump says a lot of things. However, you may want to consider how the Democrats brainwashed every minority group in America to consistently vote against their own interests over the last two decades. The rich minorities, the poor minorities, the educated minorities, the uneducated minorities, the religious minorities, the nonreligious minorities: every minority group in America. Why progressive, unracist, mild centrist Trump is even lower in the polls with every minority group than the lowest of the low.
And the general election hasn't even started yet.
|
On July 21 2016 12:57 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:52 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:44 Plansix wrote:On July 21 2016 12:36 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Are you saying people, in this case minorities specifically, just vote based on the inertia of how they see their peers voting? No, its the Republicans literally give no fucks about minorities, so they don't vote for Republicans. They've been voting blue for a few decades to no avail, so if it's true that neither party really cares, it would just be inertia. It's always a calculation of "which type of raycism do you prefer" at least Democratic raycism comes with food, healthcare, and housing. Republican's want to take all of that away AND be more overtly racist. It's not inertia, it's self-preservation.
What you're talking about there wouldn't apply to what was noted on the previous page as minorities better off than whites, like Asians and Jews.
|
On July 21 2016 12:58 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:56 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:40 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GreenHorizons wrote:Sorry to interrupt the convention talk, but seriously... https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480I suppose the silver lining is now when people say "Hands up, Don't shoot" the "all lives" crowd can shut up and presume they are referring to this man. Someone's not going to be a cop much longer Unless the system fucks up On July 21 2016 12:31 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Incidentally, the Republican party platform supports gay conversion therapy. This is even after Trump removed every reference from Russia from the Ukraine section. I mean when 90% of blacks are democrats for example, what do you expect? Do you think we should see 50% blacks in the crowd when roughly 1% of the U.S. population are republican blacks? Maybe actually do something that helps the black community and you'll start getting more black people to vote Republican? The black community is, as a whole, rather socially conservative. The problem is that Republicans have done jack squat to help race relations in any way for generations. I don't think you need to police people to vote for your party based on their race or gender or religion. If one party happens to better represent a demographic then they should vote for that party and force the other party to make more accommodations or else suffer in the voting booth. It's funny though because you seem to think the democrat party is much better. Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. You're such a shameless Republican/Trump shill that it's amusing. It's also sad that you cite one bizarre, obscure, and irrelevant example when trying to paint the Democratic party in a bad light, while simultaneously ignoring the last 60+ years of history where most significant positive social and political movements for race relations and minority livelihoods were supported by the left and opposed by the right. I'm not even a Republican I supported Obama over both McCain and Romney. Trashy internet posting 101: Resort to personal attacks and call who you disagree with a shill You seem to have not been following the conversation if you think I'm trying to offer a historical analysis of the Republican Party vs the Democratic Party 60 years ago. I'm talking about this election and you've entirely failed to demonstrate an understanding of my point And you spout off useless vagaries about "missing the point" instead of actually stating what I supposedly missed. Your continued lack of intellectual integrity still demonstrates why I can't take you seriously.
In his defence, I do think that the stances this election are very different than previous ones.
I don't blame people struggling to put it into words, it's just the culmination of following the process, and I would think that anyone who's been following it pretty extensively this year would agree with the notion. There's no specific event to pinpoint, but Trump, especially earlier on in the primaries, always seemed to let some of his democratic values slip out, and in a good way.
Would anyone who has been following this election extensively come out and tell me that they think Trump is the traditional conservative we've seen in the last 4 elections? I say with absolute certainty, no.
|
On July 21 2016 13:01 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:55 FiWiFaKi wrote:
In the same way that the Democrats hope that all the young people show up?
Anyway, I've followed Trump very closely throughout this election, and I think he's by far the most pro-LGBT, least workplace discrimination, and least racist Republican nominee ever... He's pro-choice, not driven by religion, and naturally he has to claim certain stuff to appeal to some of the Republican party. But I think anyone who really spent some time looking at Trump would think the same thing. That would be a stupid strategy, young people don't show up to elections. All the Democrats have to do is wait for Trump to open his mouth and further drive minorities from the Republican Party. I'm not here to convince you that your memory is incorrect. However, you may want to consider how the Democrats brainwashed every minority group in America to vote against their own interests over the last two decades. And why Trump is even lower in the polls with minorities than the lowest of the low.
It wasn't so much "brainwashing" as firmly establishing decades ago that it was in both Democrats and Republicans interest to prevent a new party emerging that took the sensibility of the right and combined it with the equity of the left and actually represent the people who vote and not the people who pay for the campaigns.
There was a concerted effort to squash groups that could have emerged as alternatives to the two parties who both didn't respect PoC. It's not a "plantation mindset" or any of that non sense. It's the desired result of intentional efforts to trap black people in the Democratic party.
|
On July 21 2016 12:58 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:56 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:40 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GreenHorizons wrote:Sorry to interrupt the convention talk, but seriously... https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480I suppose the silver lining is now when people say "Hands up, Don't shoot" the "all lives" crowd can shut up and presume they are referring to this man. Someone's not going to be a cop much longer Unless the system fucks up On July 21 2016 12:31 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Incidentally, the Republican party platform supports gay conversion therapy. This is even after Trump removed every reference from Russia from the Ukraine section. I mean when 90% of blacks are democrats for example, what do you expect? Do you think we should see 50% blacks in the crowd when roughly 1% of the U.S. population are republican blacks? Maybe actually do something that helps the black community and you'll start getting more black people to vote Republican? The black community is, as a whole, rather socially conservative. The problem is that Republicans have done jack squat to help race relations in any way for generations. I don't think you need to police people to vote for your party based on their race or gender or religion. If one party happens to better represent a demographic then they should vote for that party and force the other party to make more accommodations or else suffer in the voting booth. It's funny though because you seem to think the democrat party is much better. Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. You're such a shameless Republican/Trump shill that it's amusing. It's also sad that you cite one bizarre, obscure, and irrelevant example when trying to paint the Democratic party in a bad light, while simultaneously ignoring the last 60+ years of history where most significant positive social and political movements for race relations and minority livelihoods were supported by the left and opposed by the right. I'm not even a Republican I supported Obama over both McCain and Romney. Trashy internet posting 101: Resort to personal attacks and call who you disagree with a shill You seem to have not been following the conversation if you think I'm trying to offer a historical analysis of the Republican Party vs the Democratic Party 60 years ago. I'm talking about this election and you've entirely failed to demonstrate an understanding of my point And you spout off useless vagaries about "missing the point" instead of actually stating what I supposedly missed. Your continued lack of intellectual integrity still demonstrates why I can't take you seriously. Show nested quote +Anyway, I've followed Trump very closely throughout this election, and I think he's by far the most pro-LGBT, least workplace discrimination, and least racist Republican nominee ever... He's pro-choice, not driven by religion, and naturally he has to claim certain stuff to appeal to some of the Republican party. But I think anyone who really spent some time looking at Trump would think the same thing. I feel like we've gotten to some kind of conservative Stockholm Syndrome. Just because Trump was marginally better than the rest of the field in this election cycle doesn't make him comparable to Republican candidates of past elections.
I don't really take you seriously either when all you do it insult me.
My meaning was in the original post you had a chance to read it then and instead wanted to flame me over falsities.
Then you post to complain that I didn't reiterate my original point, which still remained in the post you chose to insult me over rather than actually read the first time.
People are complaining that it's a problem that there are very few black people in the crowd at the RNC. This is not the problem. This is a natural symptom of the problem.
I brought up the fact that maybe 1% of the U.S. population are Black Republicans. 90% of blacks vote democrats 10% republicans - this is the problem.
Further, it ought to be a self-correcting problem in a functioning democracy. The Republican party is the one that suffers from blacks disproportionately voting democrat, and so the republicans must adjust their platform to better accommodate a platform and message that better promotes racial equality. Until they do this, the will suffer in the voting booths for it. It acts as an incentive to progress the Republican party on racial equality issues, something I've seen far more this cycle than in 2008 and 2012. I expect when all is said and finished the black vote will be more equally distributed than in 2008/2012.
I already think part of the issue, as someone else noted, was due more to 'inertia' than the democratic party having a good contemporary track record on promoting racial equality and fighting for minorities.
|
On July 21 2016 13:01 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:55 FiWiFaKi wrote:
In the same way that the Democrats hope that all the young people show up?
Anyway, I've followed Trump very closely throughout this election, and I think he's by far the most pro-LGBT, least workplace discrimination, and least racist Republican nominee ever... He's pro-choice, not driven by religion, and naturally he has to claim certain stuff to appeal to some of the Republican party. But I think anyone who really spent some time looking at Trump would think the same thing. That would be a stupid strategy, young people don't show up to elections. All the Democrats have to do is wait for Trump to open his mouth and further drive minorities from the Republican Party. I'm not here to convince you that your memory is incorrect; Trump says a lot of things. However, you may want to consider how the Democrats brainwashed every minority group in America to consistently vote against their own interests over the last two decades. Why progressive, unracist, mild centrist Trump is even lower in the polls with minorities than the lowest of the low. And the general election hasn't even started yet.
I'm counteracting your statement, by saying that obviously every party wants the demographics they're winning with to come out and vote, and secretly hoping the ones where they are weak will come out less.
Anyway, I think he is a good choice for minorities, but naturally people have their social perceptions from past campaigns, and also an effective strategy by the democrats. Like others, I suspect the number will be shifting in his favor in the months to come.
|
Let us not forget that Republicans cast this die decades ago when they adopted the southern stratagem, catered to angry racists after civil rights, created the war on drugs(Blacks and liberals and crime(Blacks) under Nixon. There is a reason blacks never vote for them. Its because the GOP have catered to the people who seek to repress them for decades.
Interestingly, "Under god" was also added to the pledge of allegiance during Nixon's term, in the slow push for GOP to become less secular.
|
Canada11373 Posts
On July 21 2016 12:59 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:55 Falling wrote:Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. He was currently in the KKK? This was brought up a week or two ago and I asked for a clarification and no one did. So here it is again and I am asking again. Is this the FORMER KKK member? Or is it someone else? That's an awfully big difference- former vs current. Unless you believe people cannot change ever change. He was a former KKK member.
Right, so it's one and the same person I was thinking: Robert Byrd
Okay, so then why did you say "who just so happened to be in the KKK". Do you believe people cannot change? Because if you do believe people can change that is such a deliberate misrepresentation/ character assassination, an outright falsehood because it's quite clear to me that what Clinton valued was his change of heart/ who he was after he left the KKK, not his KKK membership, which in 1952 Byrd "After about a year, I became disinterested [in the KKK], quit paying my dues, and dropped my membership in the organization,"
|
On July 21 2016 12:56 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:46 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:40 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GreenHorizons wrote:Sorry to interrupt the convention talk, but seriously... https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480I suppose the silver lining is now when people say "Hands up, Don't shoot" the "all lives" crowd can shut up and presume they are referring to this man. Someone's not going to be a cop much longer Unless the system fucks up On July 21 2016 12:31 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 21 2016 12:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Incidentally, the Republican party platform supports gay conversion therapy. This is even after Trump removed every reference from Russia from the Ukraine section. I mean when 90% of blacks are democrats for example, what do you expect? Do you think we should see 50% blacks in the crowd when roughly 1% of the U.S. population are republican blacks? Maybe actually do something that helps the black community and you'll start getting more black people to vote Republican? The black community is, as a whole, rather socially conservative. The problem is that Republicans have done jack squat to help race relations in any way for generations. I don't think you need to police people to vote for your party based on their race or gender or religion. If one party happens to better represent a demographic then they should vote for that party and force the other party to make more accommodations or else suffer in the voting booth. It's funny though because you seem to think the democrat party is much better. Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. You're such a shameless Republican/Trump shill that it's amusing. It's also sad that you cite one bizarre, obscure, and irrelevant example when trying to paint the Democratic party in a bad light, while simultaneously ignoring the last 60+ years of history where most significant positive social and political movements for race relations and minority livelihoods were supported by the left and opposed by the right. I'm not even a Republican I supported Obama over both McCain and Romney. Trashy internet posting 101: Resort to personal attacks and call who you disagree with a shill You seem to have not been following the conversation if you think I'm trying to offer a historical analysis of the Republican Party vs the Democratic Party 60 years ago. I'm talking about this election and you've entirely failed to demonstrate an understanding of my point
How can you vote for Obama over Romney but not for Clinton over Trump?
|
On July 21 2016 13:03 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 21 2016 12:52 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:44 Plansix wrote:On July 21 2016 12:36 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Are you saying people, in this case minorities specifically, just vote based on the inertia of how they see their peers voting? No, its the Republicans literally give no fucks about minorities, so they don't vote for Republicans. They've been voting blue for a few decades to no avail, so if it's true that neither party really cares, it would just be inertia. It's always a calculation of "which type of raycism do you prefer" at least Democratic raycism comes with food, healthcare, and housing. Republican's want to take all of that away AND be more overtly racist. It's not inertia, it's self-preservation. What you're talking about there wouldn't apply to what was noted on the previous page as minorities better off than whites, like Asians and Jews.
I think each minority group has their own particular reasons, but I think most PoC don't feel like a part of either party at this point. That they vote a particular way is usually based more on a issue basis as opposed to any party affiliation. Hence how "Asians" (I really hate referring to the very diverse groups lumped into "Asian" that way), went from Republicans to overwhelmingly supporting Obama.
Republicans do a shit job at earning PoC votes, that's the beginning and end of it.
|
On July 21 2016 13:16 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 13:03 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 21 2016 12:52 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:44 Plansix wrote:On July 21 2016 12:36 oBlade wrote:On July 21 2016 12:23 acker wrote:On July 21 2016 12:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I mean if you guys think LGBT and racial equality issues would have ever been allowed by speakers at the RNC by any other candidate than Trump you're seriously delusional. Or a NASA mission commander advocating for a renewal of space funding. Let alone an islamic speaker being given a timeslot as well.
Trump is doing his best at moving the Republican party out of the stoneage with the base he's working with The Republicans parade out minority speakers every year to pander to an increasingly non-white voter population. Zero minorities believe it. Presumably because the camera keeps panning out to a crowd so white it reflects the spotlights. Are you saying people, in this case minorities specifically, just vote based on the inertia of how they see their peers voting? No, its the Republicans literally give no fucks about minorities, so they don't vote for Republicans. They've been voting blue for a few decades to no avail, so if it's true that neither party really cares, it would just be inertia. It's always a calculation of "which type of raycism do you prefer" at least Democratic raycism comes with food, healthcare, and housing. Republican's want to take all of that away AND be more overtly racist. It's not inertia, it's self-preservation. What you're talking about there wouldn't apply to what was noted on the previous page as minorities better off than whites, like Asians and Jews. I think each minority group has their own particular reasons, but I think most PoC don't feel like a part of either party at this point. That they vote a particular way is usually based more on a issue basis as opposed to any party affiliation. Hence how "Asians" (I really hate referring to the very diverse groups lumped into "Asian" that way), went from Republicans to overwhelmingly supporting Obama. Republicans do a shit job at earning PoC votes, that's the beginning and end of it.
Sometimes people forget that votes are earned and don't exist in a default binary state.
|
On July 21 2016 13:11 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 12:59 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:55 Falling wrote:Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. He was currently in the KKK? This was brought up a week or two ago and I asked for a clarification and no one did. So here it is again and I am asking again. Is this the FORMER KKK member? Or is it someone else? That's an awfully big difference- former vs current. Unless you believe people cannot change ever change. He was a former KKK member. Right, so it's one and the same person I was thinking: Robert Byrd Okay, so then why did you say "who just so happened to be in the KKK". Do you believe people cannot change? Because if you do believe people can change that is such a deliberate misrepresentation/ character assassination, an outright falsehood because it's quite clear to me that what Clinton valued was his change of heart, not his KKK membership, which in 1952 Byrd "After about a year, I became disinterested [in the KKK], quit paying my dues, and dropped my membership in the organization,"
People can change. I suppose it would have been more clear to have said 'former KKK member' but I think what I said is incompatible with that either; it was just ambiguous on that point.
He was an adult when he joined the KKK wasn't he? He rose to very high ranking offices in the democrat party as an ex-KKK member.
It's just something I just find horribly ironic when people try to say 'republicans are racists and minorities should vote democrat because they are'
That is what I find to be deliberate misrepresentations of the truth
|
On July 21 2016 13:18 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2016 13:11 Falling wrote:On July 21 2016 12:59 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 21 2016 12:55 Falling wrote:Hillary Clinton literally held a memorial funeral where she and Bill praised her close friend and mentor, who just so happened to be in the KKK. I have a feeling Trump is going to do far better with minorities come November than early polling indicates. He was currently in the KKK? This was brought up a week or two ago and I asked for a clarification and no one did. So here it is again and I am asking again. Is this the FORMER KKK member? Or is it someone else? That's an awfully big difference- former vs current. Unless you believe people cannot change ever change. He was a former KKK member. Right, so it's one and the same person I was thinking: Robert Byrd Okay, so then why did you say "who just so happened to be in the KKK". Do you believe people cannot change? Because if you do believe people can change that is such a deliberate misrepresentation/ character assassination, an outright falsehood because it's quite clear to me that what Clinton valued was his change of heart, not his KKK membership, which in 1952 Byrd "After about a year, I became disinterested [in the KKK], quit paying my dues, and dropped my membership in the organization," People can change. I suppose it would have been more clear to have said 'former KKK member' but I think what I said is incompatible with that either; it was just ambiguous on that point. He was an adult when he joined the KKK wasn't he? He rose to very high ranking offices in the democrat party as an ex-KKK member. It's just something I just find horribly ironic when people try to say 'republicans are racists and minorities should vote democrat because they are' That is what I find to be deliberate misrepresentations of the truth
From Byrd himself:
"In 1997, Byrd told an interviewer he would encourage young people to become involved in politics but also warned, "Be sure you avoid the Ku Klux Klan. Don't get that albatross around your neck. Once you've made that mistake, you inhibit your operations in the political arena."[22] In his last autobiography, Byrd explained that he was a KKK member because he "was sorely afflicted with tunnel vision — a jejune and immature outlook — seeing only what I wanted to see because I thought the Klan could provide an outlet for my talents and ambitions."[23] Byrd also said, in 2005, "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."
The man regretted it for the rest of his life and admitted it was a mistake of his youth. The sad part is that he clearly saw errors of his ways, but all you can do is use this as a way to attack Clinton and Democrats. No insight or reflection on who Byrd was, just a way to beat them.
Also this was decades before the GOP decided to pander to racists and never try to attract black voters.
|
|
|
On July 21 2016 13:25 acker wrote:
Do conservatives have some sort of collective amnesia over the Southern Strategy?
Most are unaware it exists. Though I have pointed it out over and over, many choose to see it as a thing from a long time ago and therefore not relevant. Even though it has shaped politics for decades and continues to do so. Some see blacks as voters that just follow the trend or herd, rather than accept that the Republicans decided after the civil rights movement that they would pander to southern racist. They they popularized term "states rights" as code for racism. And that the GOP has always got back to that easy to pander to southern well of voters when they started to lose the grip on government. Stoking those flames.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
