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.
Your choice... Continue to struggle... Or start opening your eyes to the truth. But if you choose to continue to struggle, STOP complaining about having to struggle. That was YOUR choice.
Black and other poor minorities vote for the Democrats because the Dems throw them crumbs from the big table. They realize that is better than not being allowed to be in the room if the Republicans were in charge.
I suggest these folks support Senator Sanders because he will make the changes needed to reduce poverty for all races while Clinton will only cut the few crumbs available. The Republicans will just keep the money for themselves and the rest of the wealthy while trying to force their God on everyone.
Oh, they might be in the room. They'd just be serving the food while the Republicans talked about how they could never get the black vote because all they cared about was welfare bennies. Oh, and how great was it that they'd bailed out GM unlike that unpatriotic liberal Obama who sent them to bankruptcy court. Repulicans. Oorah.
Funny thing is as a fiscal conservative, I really dislike both parties. They're both mixed though. Democrats did implement PAYGO in 2010. Republicans did run with that as CUTGO when they took over majority. That's a welcome change in direction for Republicans from the command economy policies of Nixon and Bush years when they were spending money like drunken sailors. My problem now is the Republican party is going isolationist and anti-trade. As an actual capitalist, much like the GM bailouts or communist-esque command economy policies of Nixon, I'm not pro-isolationist or anti-freetrade or anti-immigration. Politics on both sides is mostly puffery though, so it's very hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. TPP is a good example of that. Republicans mostly have been the driving force for TPP. Lately, however, they're been more mixed on that. Partly it's substantive where they're not liking some of the provisions. The pharmaceutical lobby paid them a lot of money and from what's leaked of TPP it's not looking like a good bill. Then there's the fact that they have to reconcile their position with the incredible amount of public opposition to TPP.
Really, that's always been the case. The core support hasn't much changed. Republicans have always been "conservative," what's changed is what conservative wants. Conservative (big, established businesses) in the 1880-1940ish period wanted a regulated environment, protectionism, tariffs, and so on. Since then that's changed hence the so-called reversal of Republicans as the big government party and Democrats as the limited government party to what it is now. Today it's the opposite. Big business, mostly, wants limited government. The exception is things like patents which is why that's proving difficult with TPP or command economics they wanted under Nixon. Then there's the difficulty of balancing big business interests versus the interests of Joe Republican. Joe Republican doesn't much like TPP or lots of low wage immigrants in the country. Big business does.
There's just been a huge fundamental shift in what the role of government is. Back when the Republicans were big government, what government did was regulate things. Today they do that but the bigger role is direct financial aid, welfare. Medicare, Social Security, food stamps, TANF, EITC. We're a welfare state now. We spend for more money on these welfare programs than on anything else. Maybe less of a welfare state than most of the rest of the developed world but none the less a welfare state. Republicans are kind of wish-washy on all of that. Bush in particular expanded the welfare state remarkably. Medical Part D, Republican bill signed into law by Bush, was a HUGE expansion of the welfare state. It's $60ish billion per year in new welfare. Also one of those bills that big business really got behind. ObamaCare was more mixed in that outside of the medical field and big pharma business really doesn't like the bill. H.W. Bush and Bush 2.0 both expanded EITC. Many of the 2016 candidates also propose further expanding it. And as long as CUTGO, the Republican implementation of PAYGO, remains in effect I'm actually for it. EITC still has adverse effects but it's one of the better forms of welfare. I side with the Republicans there as opposed to raising the minimum wage. Expansion of EITC under CUTGO would most likely be a replacement of other welfare programs with more EITC. The biggest issue with EITC is that it generally isn't counted as income. The only time it affects other means-tested welfare like food stamps or TANF or Section 8 is it you actually act responsibly and save it rather than running out and immediately spending it. That's dumb. It should count as income. Asset tests should either be done away with entirely or raised, most states already have done that though so it's less important. Also it should be spread out over the year rather than a one-time payment, maybe quarterly or maybe 50/50 one-time and monthly.
for asians, the democrats (not sanders) are more beneficial to the republicans. on issues like race and immigration, the republican party doesn't benefit asians. many immigrants also have families they want to bring to this country. anyone who is against or is critical of immigration will not be welcomed.
asians are quite unique in that they also are well to do as a group, with big internal differences. so, many of them will vote republican because of economic issues. that'll be more true if sanders becomes the democratic nominee, as sanders is not as liberal on immigration and too socialist on economics.
the best candidate for asians are libertarian democrats who support loose immigration laws and the free market.
Black folks need to split the vote how Asians do. They're about 60/40 Democratic, which is close enough to push them either way if they don't agree with certain policies.
Last edited by Ibginnie; 02-22-2016 at 08:54 AM..
Reason: deleted quoted post
What exactly is it that the Dem party do to help the black population?
They re-write history (which most Dems are completely ignorant of; hurrah for public education) and scaremonger them, saying the GOP's "gonna put you back in chains".
And they swallow the propaganda hook, line, and sinker because Democrats love to take advantage of an open secret: people want others to do the thinking for them, and to be told how to think about certain subjects, without having to do any of the hard work themselvess. SNL mocks politics (mostly GOPers) but it should frighten any reasonable-thinking person just how many Democrats get all of their political know-nothing from watching only SNL, Comedy Channel, etc.
Hence, why the Democrat Party is full of young college-education people but very few intellects with critical thinking skills.
Two of the most racist presidents in US history were Democrats (LBJ and WW). That's not counting all of the other overtly-racist Democratic presidents.
KKK were historically Democratic, screw Stormfront (I'm not sure what "leadership role" they have since their numbers are a drop in the bucket compared to even the black US population), Trump is a mixed bag.
.
Here we go again, the same old mantras.
When Strom Thurmond switched to the Republican Party, the whole "Dems were the party of the KKK!!" thing went out the window. Do right wingers really think they are going to trick somebody with this stuff? Apparently so, because it comes up pretty much every week here.
60% of Democratic voters are non-Hispanic whites, which would also make them predominately white.
True.
Quote:
Black folks need to split the vote how Asians do. They're about 60/40 Democratic, which is close enough to push them either way if they don't agree with certain policies.
When Strom Thurmond switched to the Republican Party, the whole "Dems were the party of the KKK!!" thing went out the window. Do right wingers really think they are going to trick somebody with this stuff? Apparently so, because it comes up pretty much every week here.
It isn't working.
So you're just gonna ignore the existence of Lyndon B. Johnson and Woodrow Wilson? And history in general? Ok.
Money and welfare. Blacks think the Democrats will continue to give them more and more money and welfare.
What they don't know is Democrats couldn't care less about them. They are about to import 70 million illegals to eat their pie.
But that's my point. Welfare isn't something you should be proud of. And, I would venture to bet, that a vast majority of those on welfare aren't going to the voting booths anyway.
Just like I would say to a poor white welfare recipient, "do something about your situation. Don't wait for the govt to take care of you".
I would think that black folks would say the same to other blacks.
I mean, what % of blacks are going to believe reliance on the govt is a good thing?
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.
