Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Republicans have largely given up on the black vote given the entrenched party affiliation.
Decmocrats only have to pay the black vote token lip service as there is no point spending political capital when someone will vote for you anyway. (see union vote despite NAFTA being passed when the dems controlled the house, senate and presidency)
So the black vote goes to the guys that at least pay them an occasional gesture.
This leads to why African Americans have reduced political power as opposed to swing-voting groups like latinos.
I didn't say anything at all about whites, but I believe that in general, whites are more likely than blacks to believe the fiction that they can become rich.
What's your definition of "rich"? Do you mean Oprah Rich, Cosby Rich or only Tiger Woods rich? Or are we talking wayyyy poorer like "Lamar Odom rich".
Republicans have largely given up on the black vote given the entrenched party affiliation.
Decmocrats only have to pay the black vote token lip service as there is no point spending political capital when someone will vote for you anyway. (see union vote despite NAFTA being passed when the dems controlled the house, senate and presidency)
So the black vote goes to the guys that at least pay them an occasional gesture.
This leads to why African Americans have reduced political power as opposed to swing-voting groups like latinos.
1) Republican candidates do not campaign in Black neighborhoods, they do not speak to Black churches and organizations (as they do for practically ALL other groups in this country), they either ignore (or vilify) Black Americans and simply do not ask for the Black vote, therefore they do no want the Black vote.
1) Republican candidates do not campaign in Black neighborhoods, they do not speak to Black churches and organizations (as they do for practically ALL other groups in this country), they either ignore (or vilify) Black Americans and simply do not ask for the Black vote, therefore they do no want the Black vote.
#2 is obviously bad, but not a strong excuse, since Democrats were the direct oppressors and killers during that same period. Neither party has it's hands clean if we examine the entire history, but if I had to choose in the late 19th century and early 20th century then I wouldn't align with those who were lynching my friends and family.
#2 is obviously bad, but not a strong excuse, since Democrats were the direct oppressors and killers during that same period. Neither party has it's hands clean if we examine the entire history, but if I had to choose in the late 19th century and early 20th century then I wouldn't align with those who were lynching my friends and family.
I think rather than #2, I would point towards the Southern strategy and the political realignment that occurred concomitantly with the Civil Rights Movement.
I think rather than #2, I would point towards the Southern strategy and the political realignment that occurred concomitantly with the Civil Rights Movement.
Dunks,
I've already written about the Southern Strategy above and used it in my justification for why AA's vote Democratic. If you read the previous pages you wouldn't have felt the need to reply with that line since we already agree on that point.
My points were referring to this Lily White movement that occurred during the late 19th and early 20th century, when the Dems were terrorizing my ancestors in the South. It has nothing to do with the Southern Strategy since it wasn't during the same time period.
If you're going to try to mold completely separate time periods to fit your counter to my post, then obviously you shouldn't be supporting the party that started the KKK and lynched our people.
I think rather than #2, I would point towards the Southern strategy and the political realignment that occurred concomitantly with the Civil Rights Movement.
Another person suggesting that the democrats turned into republicans and the republicans turned into democrats. Except that the good democrats stayed democrats and the evil republics stayed republicans. Everyone who was bad went R and all the good people went D, and the "political realignment" was complete.
I've already written about the Southern Strategy above and used it in my justification for why AA's vote Democratic. If you read the previous pages you wouldn't have felt the need to reply with that line since we already agree on that point.
My points were referring to this Lily White movement that occurred during the late 19th and early 20th century, when the Dems were terrorizing my ancestors in the South. It has nothing to do with the Southern Strategy since it wasn't during the same time period.
If you're going to try to mold completely separate time periods to fit your argument, then obviously you shouldn't be supporting the party that started the KKK and lynched our people.
I understood your point, it was more of a response to calipoppy than you, sorry you felt so aggrieved by my comment.
Another person suggesting that the democrats turned into republicans and the republicans turned into democrats. Except that the good democrats stayed democrats and the evil republics stayed republicans. Everyone who was bad went R and all the good people went D, and the "political realignment" was complete.
What a load of revisionist horse crap.
Excellent rambling comment from one of our more vitriolic and inane posters. Go play somewhere else, especially since you completely strawmanned my post. I have no illusions about the magnitude of the shift, but it certainly happened. It's not about bad or good, as you so childishly put it, it's about choosing to win over certain electoral populations. The Republicans made their decision, and they are dealing with the consequences.
I understood your point, it was more of a response to calipoppy than you, sorry you felt so aggrieved by my comment.
If that's the case, I apologize for my quick rebuttal. Since you quoted my post, it seemed as if you were attempting to negate my point about two separate time periods.
I have no team here, I see ill in both parties and can support neither. I just have to say something if weaker counter points (in comparison) get thrown out to keep a certain "team" from looking bad.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
