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.
Once upon a time, Most African Americans voted Republican and so did hispanics. Then the GOP went on a bigoted binge against women, blacks, hispanics, gays, hell just about anyone excluding white men.
"Well, the Commission on Presidential Debates gets the vast majority of its money from major businesses that support it. Anheuser-Busch is far and away the biggest contributor to the commission. So, by and large, our presidential debates are brought to you by Bud Light. And if you actually go to some of these debate sites — I don’t know how it is this year, but in the past there have been Anheuser-Busch tents where scantily clad women are passing out pamphlets denouncing beer taxes. The CEOs of these companies get access to the debates, they sit in the audience, they’re invited to receptions to meet with campaign staff. They get a wonderful benefit because they are able to simultaneously demonstrate their support for both major parties, hit two birds with one stone and get a tax deduction to boot. Back when the League of Women voters used to sponsor these events, they struggled to raise $5,000 contributions from companies, it was very difficult. But, because they are now perceived as a sort of soft money donation, this is yet another avenue for businesses with regulatory interests before Congress to influence our political process."
It's true, by experience and fact, that minorities (Asians, Black and Hispanic) are mostly Democratic.
But why? Is it because of their race?
Obviously minorities support civil rights (although Asians would not for affirmative action). However, they don't seem anymore socially liberal than Whites. In fact, Blacks disapprove homosexuality more than Whites.
Fiscally, of course, Blacks and Hispanics are more liberal, like Democrats. But that's because as mostly low income groups residing in the inner city, they favour social welfare.
Not all low income groups favour social welfare. In the Appalachians, some of the poorest people (mostly White) are strongly Republican; but I believe this is due to their Protestant faith and work ethic.
Thus I believe that Blacks and Hispanics are heavily Democratic only because they are disproportionately clustered in the low income group more than because of racial solidarity (although that is very evident as well.)
One would be hard-pressed to find a blue collar White person living in the inner city who is Republican. (Try that in Portland). You may find a blue collar White person who is Republican, but not one who also lives in the inner city.
Conversely, a wealthy Black or Hispanic would probably gravitate to fiscally conservative ideology just as much as a wealthy White.
Your last paragraph is a good topic, many wealthy blacks are conservative by far because to be successful you need to know how to save and handle money however most blacks vote dem based soley on respect and the fact thr republicans are too disrespectful when dealing with minorities. They've secured the white vote and they're paying the price for it. I'm far more conservator than liberal but ill never vote republican due to being black and not liking the disrespectful nature the republicans give us. If Romney loses you'll know why.
And the below is yet another example of why I believe Independents will be the ones to save America from the idiocy that fanatical partisanship mass produces.
Quote:
Famous black people such as Nicki minaj and Stacy Dash have recieved so much hate for suppoedly endoring Romney.
"There has been a fashionable attempt to diminish or dismiss the impact of independent voters in recent years. Professional partisans try to argue that there are no true independents, subdividing this plurality of the electorate into smaller groups and arguing that most independents are in effect “closet partisans.”
This ignores the fact that the ranks of independent voters have grown from 15 percent of the electorate in 1945 to 40 percent today—over the same period that the two parties have grown more ideologically and geographically polarized.
Contrary to widespread Beltway beliefs, even independent “leaners” are distinct from “weak partisans,” according to a new study by Stanford political scientist Morris Fiorina and co-authored by Sam Abrams of Sarah Lawrence College.
Leaning independents vary much more in their partisan leanings from election to election than weak partisans do, apparently reacting to the particular issues and candidates more than partisans, who tend to fall back on the crutch of party affiliation. Independents, according to Fiorina and Abrams, are much more likely to vote for a third party or independent candidate running for office. In other words, they are not simply “closet partisans.” They are genuinely more independent, even if their choice in many elections is limited to the Democrat or the Republican on the ballot."
"Well, the Commission on Presidential Debates gets the vast majority of its money from major businesses that support it. Anheuser-Busch is far and away the biggest contributor to the commission. So, by and large, our presidential debates are brought to you by Bud Light. And if you actually go to some of these debate sites — I don’t know how it is this year, but in the past there have been Anheuser-Busch tents where scantily clad women are passing out pamphlets denouncing beer taxes. The CEOs of these companies get access to the debates, they sit in the audience, they’re invited to receptions to meet with campaign staff. They get a wonderful benefit because they are able to simultaneously demonstrate their support for both major parties, hit two birds with one stone and get a tax deduction to boot. Back when the League of Women voters used to sponsor these events, they struggled to raise $5,000 contributions from companies, it was very difficult. But, because they are now perceived as a sort of soft money donation, this is yet another avenue for businesses with regulatory interests before Congress to influence our political process."
Once again Ms. Goodman never fails to deliver, whereas the MSM once again drops the ball. The VP candidates the mainstream will NEVER let you hear.
"Expanding the VP Debate: Third-Party Candidates Challenge Biden & Ryan on War, Economy, Healthcare"
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.
