Can The Democrats Win In 2020 Without A Candidate of Color?

[Asclepias]

Frederick Douglass and Shirley Chisholm.

Unfortunately Frederick Douglass doesn't count...…...namely because of society's stance on anyone of color at that time. Not to mention, most blacks were still slaves then and had no rights, including the right to vote.


Shirley Chisholm is/was to be admired for the work she had done...….but again timing is important here. She ran in 1972, when most women of any color were still fighting for our rights of equality

Sounds like more excuses which actually highlights my point.

Not excuses, but facts..... Sounds like you know darn well your options were lame to begin with.

How in the heck would you or anyone expect a black man in the early 1800's, long before blacks were even considered 'citizens' much less free, be voted in as President??????

And what was society's stance on both people of color and women in general in 1972??? It hadn't been all that long after girls were allowed to wear pants to school for goodness sake. I will give her credit for becoming the first black woman in Congress.

And if you haven't noticed......there hasn't yet been a woman President regardless of race

No. Its just an excuse. You didnt like my two people so you made an excuse why they "Don't count" as you put it. If you keep moving the goal posts no one I pick will count and I wont let you do that. Your criteria was someone that had a solid plan. Those two had solid plans.

ok be a prick for all I care. but to name a black man that ran for President in 1818, when slavery was at it's height and blacks had no rights whatsoever, very few even had an education and nearly all whites were racist...…...and then cry because he didn't win. If you want to count him go for it

Similar with Chisolm though more because she was a woman during a time when women weren't even considered for top jobs (CEO, Executives, etc) much less President. And as I said before, there still hasn't been a woman President......but you go ahead and count her too if it makes you feel any better.


Granted racism sucks and always has, not just in this country but around the world and from the beginning of the world as well. So does being a woman in a mans world. But you can't let it keep you down& out, but to propel you up and forward

See? Youre moving the goal posts again. I simply pointed out that the dems put a Black man in office which is something the repubs have never done or will do as long as they are in the control of racists. Until Obama most Black people would have never dreamed one of their own would even be considered a serious candidate let alone win. When I looked at the numbers however, I realized it was non whites that voted for Obama. Whites never got over 39% in their support for him.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

Seems like the most important qualification for the OP is the color of the person's skin!

How many of our presidents have been non white? I think the problem is that to white people skin color is the most important qualification.

How many of our presidents have been non white? I think the problem is that to white people skin color is the most important qualification.

Considering that in the 200+ year history of this country, blacks have only been lawfully allowed to vote in every state for 55 years, that is obvious.

Furthermore, there has never been a president of Asian, Native American or Hispanic decent.

So can either of you come up with how many non-whites have ever ran for President, that actually had a solid plan on the issues of this country??????? Instead of complaining why they haven't won?

Solid plan according to whom?

ok skip the 'solid plan'...….can you come up with anyone??????

Well that 'solid plan', I was thinking Hillary......she didn't have one, she never came up with any details on how she was going to 'fix' the problems facing the country, even though she's not 'of color'

Also, Ben Carson (hey there's one for ya) was a lame candidate

Yes she did. That's why she got the majority of the national vote.

So just what was her plan for Healthcare? Economy? Immigration? Jobs?

 

[JustAnotherNut]

Unfortunately Frederick Douglass doesn't count...…...namely because of society's stance on anyone of color at that time. Not to mention, most blacks were still slaves then and had no rights, including the right to vote.


Shirley Chisholm is/was to be admired for the work she had done...….but again timing is important here. She ran in 1972, when most women of any color were still fighting for our rights of equality

Sounds like more excuses which actually highlights my point.

Not excuses, but facts..... Sounds like you know darn well your options were lame to begin with.

How in the heck would you or anyone expect a black man in the early 1800's, long before blacks were even considered 'citizens' much less free, be voted in as President??????

And what was society's stance on both people of color and women in general in 1972??? It hadn't been all that long after girls were allowed to wear pants to school for goodness sake. I will give her credit for becoming the first black woman in Congress.

And if you haven't noticed......there hasn't yet been a woman President regardless of race

No. Its just an excuse. You didnt like my two people so you made an excuse why they "Don't count" as you put it. If you keep moving the goal posts no one I pick will count and I wont let you do that. Your criteria was someone that had a solid plan. Those two had solid plans.

ok be a prick for all I care. but to name a black man that ran for President in 1818, when slavery was at it's height and blacks had no rights whatsoever, very few even had an education and nearly all whites were racist...…...and then cry because he didn't win. If you want to count him go for it

Similar with Chisolm though more because she was a woman during a time when women weren't even considered for top jobs (CEO, Executives, etc) much less President. And as I said before, there still hasn't been a woman President......but you go ahead and count her too if it makes you feel any better.


Granted racism sucks and always has, not just in this country but around the world and from the beginning of the world as well. So does being a woman in a mans world. But you can't let it keep you down& out, but to propel you up and forward

See? Youre moving the goal posts again. I simply pointed out that the dems put a Black man in office which is something the repubs have never done or will do as long as they are in the control of racists. Until Obama most Black people would have never dreamed one of their own would even be considered a serious candidate let alone win. When I looked at the numbers however, I realized it was non whites that voted for Obama. Whites never got over 39% in their support for him.

So even the white Democrats failed to vote for him?

 

[Asclepias]

Sounds like more excuses which actually highlights my point.

Not excuses, but facts..... Sounds like you know darn well your options were lame to begin with.

How in the heck would you or anyone expect a black man in the early 1800's, long before blacks were even considered 'citizens' much less free, be voted in as President??????

And what was society's stance on both people of color and women in general in 1972??? It hadn't been all that long after girls were allowed to wear pants to school for goodness sake. I will give her credit for becoming the first black woman in Congress.

And if you haven't noticed......there hasn't yet been a woman President regardless of race

No. Its just an excuse. You didnt like my two people so you made an excuse why they "Don't count" as you put it. If you keep moving the goal posts no one I pick will count and I wont let you do that. Your criteria was someone that had a solid plan. Those two had solid plans.

ok be a prick for all I care. but to name a black man that ran for President in 1818, when slavery was at it's height and blacks had no rights whatsoever, very few even had an education and nearly all whites were racist...…...and then cry because he didn't win. If you want to count him go for it

Similar with Chisolm though more because she was a woman during a time when women weren't even considered for top jobs (CEO, Executives, etc) much less President. And as I said before, there still hasn't been a woman President......but you go ahead and count her too if it makes you feel any better.


Granted racism sucks and always has, not just in this country but around the world and from the beginning of the world as well. So does being a woman in a mans world. But you can't let it keep you down& out, but to propel you up and forward

See? Youre moving the goal posts again. I simply pointed out that the dems put a Black man in office which is something the repubs have never done or will do as long as they are in the control of racists. Until Obama most Black people would have never dreamed one of their own would even be considered a serious candidate let alone win. When I looked at the numbers however, I realized it was non whites that voted for Obama. Whites never got over 39% in their support for him.

So even the white Democrats failed to vote for him?

39% of whites voted for him. No doubt a vast majority of that 39% were dems.

 

[IM2]

Since that did not happen, try again.

Sounds like you've never read a history book.

I've read more of them than you have. That's why I said what I did.

Republicans back then were racists.

And nobody in todays republican party had anything to do with emancipation.

Well duh...….how can anyone in todays party have anything to do with emancipation......d or r??

And back then......pretty much everyone was 'racist' because that was the way of life at that time...….


if you haven't heard......we've come along way baby

Why do you republicans keep trying to take credit for shit none of you have done?

And so just because pretty much everyone was wrong back then makes it OK?

if you haven't heard...... we have not come all the way.

That is the only satisfactory outcome.

what are you talking about taking credit for shit none of you have done????? I wasn't taking credit for anything

Never said it was ok...….it was just that time in this country's history......it was what is was.

Again, I didn't say we came all the way...…..but we had come a long way.....there is a difference. Though I will agree that since Obama was President, this country has been losing much of the ground that had been gained against racism.

Yep, there is a difference between a finished job and a half done job some white people want a pat on the back for. We did not lose ground since or because of Obama. Whites like you live in a delusional state relative to racism.

 

[Asclepias]

Since that did not happen, try again.

Sounds like you've never read a history book.

I've read more of them than you have. That's why I said what I did.

Republicans back then were racists.

And nobody in todays republican party had anything to do with emancipation.

Well duh...….how can anyone in todays party have anything to do with emancipation......d or r??

And back then......pretty much everyone was 'racist' because that was the way of life at that time...….


if you haven't heard......we've come along way baby

Why do you republicans keep trying to take credit for shit none of you have done?

And so just because pretty much everyone was wrong back then makes it OK?

if you haven't heard...... we have not come all the way.

That is the only satisfactory outcome.

what are you talking about taking credit for shit none of you have done????? I wasn't taking credit for anything

Never said it was ok...….it was just that time in this country's history......it was what is was.

Again, I didn't say we came all the way...…..but we had come a long way.....there is a difference. Though I will agree that since Obama was President, this country has been losing much of the ground that had been gained against racism.

The country hasnt been losing ground. It was just exposed for what it truly is. A country founded and ingrained in racism and one that has never received the counseling it needs to deal with the consequences of racism. There is a reason white hate groups swelled during Obamas terms and it wasnt because because Obama was shooting white people.

 

[Google_Yourself]

Why do you republicans keep trying to take credit for shit none of you have done?

And so just because pretty much everyone was wrong back then makes it OK?

if you haven't heard...... we have not come all the way.

That is the only satisfactory outcome.

I'm not taking credit for shit that I haven't done. I'm taking credit for being in the party that cared enough to get it done.

 

[IM2]

Like republicans see past skin color.

Are you crazy? Who the hell do you think you are talking to?

I'm not a Republican. Far from it. I see them as wimps and without political conviction. Much as I see the Dems actually. But the DIFF IS -- the Repubs don't have a complicated playbook that PANDERS and smooth-talks every fucking demographic with platitudes. It's an open invitation. And yeah -- IMO --- they RUN PLENTY of black candidates.

But as I said in the other thread -- you just don't VOTE FOR THEM in primarily black districts. Otherwise it's a statistical thing. Nationwide, the representation should mathematically achieve 12 or 13%. But the gerrymandering of black districts is gonna determine if that gets met. Because there's PROPORTIONALLY far more Blacks that won't vote for a Republican, than whites that won't vote for a Democrat.

Who the hell do you think you are talking to? Republicans have openly ran on a racist platform since Goldwater. Republicans do not address our concerns. Until they start, we will be voting anything but republican

Now since you are not a republican, why should we listen to your opinion?

Because I'm cleanly NOT aligned with either party. Like the GROWING "big middle" of the entire population. And within a few years -- WE'LL be bigger than both your inept, corrupt, arrogant parties put together.. Because we THINK FOR OURSELVES, not for a captive demographic of ONE party politics.. That's why...

I didn't tell you to vote Repub. If I ever do that -- you have permission to trash me. I was telling you that Repubs don't HAVE a lot of "speciality outreach".. But that doesn't mean they are any more racist than a lot of Dems are.

I think I am better qualified than you to say that the republican party is far more racist than the democratic party. And what you call middle, I call the extremist right. You don't think for yourself and I don't vote straight ticket. Vey few people In this country do. It's always been that way. Hate to tell you, but you are not into anything new or unique.

However the candidates you vote for should represent your concerns. So if republicans are not getting black votes they aren't doing so. That's why, not some silly ass crazy mess like groupthink.

 

[IM2]

Why do you republicans keep trying to take credit for shit none of you have done?

And so just because pretty much everyone was wrong back then makes it OK?

if you haven't heard...... we have not come all the way.

That is the only satisfactory outcome.

I'm not taking credit for shit that I haven't done. I'm taking credit for being in the party that cared enough to get it done.

Except they got nothing done.

In 1863, the President of the United States signed the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves but really freeing them only on states held by the confederacy. On January 31, 1865, the 13th Amendment was proposed which ended slavery officially in the United States, yet it took until March 16, 1995 for the last state to ratify this amendment. On June 13, 1866, the 14th Amendment was proposed whereby American citizenship was supposed to be granted to every citizen regardless of race or former condition of servitude. Yet it took until March 18, 1976, for the last state to ratify this amendment. On February 26, 1869, the first right to vote was granted to black men only but it took until 1997 for the last state to ratify. I present these 3 amendments because of what they were supposed to end. That would be the end of white racism by practice, law and policy. But that did not happen. Instead whites created a new way to practice racism and it started with the decisions made in cases during the late 1800’s.

A 1883 Supreme Court opinion states that “when a man has emerged from slavery … there must be some stage in the progress of his elevation when he takes the rank of a mere citizen and ceases to be the special favorite of the laws.” That was two decades after emancipation. I think the supreme court was a little ahead of itself. Even still that shows us a purposeful blindness to reality by whites which carries over into today. To ignore the special favorite of the law status whites had perpetually enjoyed to that point is another early example of the history of psychosis that has existed in parts of white America to be frank.

When it is said we talk about a history of racist laws and policy many do not understand the full extent of what is meant. According to the 13th Amendment, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, nor any place subject to their jurisdiction."I think people really need to understand the impact of the underlined words. After emancipation, Blacks were arrested, tried, found guilty and sent to prison for crimes such as vagrancy, cussing in front of whites, jaywalking and other minor or non offenses for whites. Because of this, they could be returned to slavery and were. This free labor was called convict leasing. There has been no amendment to change this part of the 13th Amendment meaning that in reality slavery could still exist in America today. After slavery ended:

Employment was required of all freedmen; violators faced vagrancy charges

•Freedmen could not assemble without the presence of a white person

•Freedmen were assumed to be agricultural workers and their duties and hours were tightly regulated

•Freedmen were not to be taught to read or write

•Public facilities were segregated

•Violators of these laws were subject to being whipped or branded.

And sent back into slavery.

 

[Google_Yourself]

Yeah, they're so racist that they freed the slaves from the Democrats.

Since that did not happen, try again.

Sounds like you've never read a history book.

I've read more of them than you have. That's why I said what I did.

Republicans back then were racists.

And nobody in todays republican party had anything to do with emancipation.

If Republicans back then were racist then why did they free the slaves from the Democrats?
Emancipation is Republican history. Of course no Republican today had anything to do with emancipation, just like no Democrat today had anything to do with inventing the wheel.

They freed the slaves from the confederates not the Dems dummy. If they werent racists why didnt they free all the slaves in the states that were loyal to the Union? Come to think of it, if they werent racists why did Lincoln say this?...

The Democrats were the Confederates
Then after the lost the war war they created the KKK..

 

[Asclepias]

Since that did not happen, try again.

Sounds like you've never read a history book.

I've read more of them than you have. That's why I said what I did.

Republicans back then were racists.

And nobody in todays republican party had anything to do with emancipation.

If Republicans back then were racist then why did they free the slaves from the Democrats?
Emancipation is Republican history. Of course no Republican today had anything to do with emancipation, just like no Democrat today had anything to do with inventing the wheel.

They freed the slaves from the confederates not the Dems dummy. If they werent racists why didnt they free all the slaves in the states that were loyal to the Union? Come to think of it, if they werent racists why did Lincoln say this?...

The Democrats were the Confederates
Then after the lost the war war they created the KKK..

Of course some of the dems were confederates but I guarantee you there were some republican confederates as well. Matter of fact the last president to own slaves was a republican.

 

[IM2]

Since that did not happen, try again.

Sounds like you've never read a history book.

I've read more of them than you have. That's why I said what I did.

Republicans back then were racists.

And nobody in todays republican party had anything to do with emancipation.

If Republicans back then were racist then why did they free the slaves from the Democrats?
Emancipation is Republican history. Of course no Republican today had anything to do with emancipation, just like no Democrat today had anything to do with inventing the wheel.

They freed the slaves from the confederates not the Dems dummy. If they werent racists why didnt they free all the slaves in the states that were loyal to the Union? Come to think of it, if they werent racists why did Lincoln say this?...

The Democrats were the Confederates
Then after the lost the war war they created the KKK..

“The lily-white movement was an all-white faction of the Republican Party in the Southern United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It battled and usually defeated the biracial element called the Black-and-tan faction.

During Reconstruction, following the U.S. Civil War, black leaders in Texas and around the country gained increasing influence in the Republican Party by organizing blacks as an important voting bloc. Conservative whites attempted to eliminate this influence and recover white voters who had defected to the Democratic Party. The effort was largely successful in eliminating African-American influence in the Republican Party leading to black voters predominantly migrating to the Democratic Party for much of the 20th century.

The term lily-white movement was coined by Texas Republican leader Norris Wright Cuney, who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party.[1] The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century,[2] including through the administration of Herbert Hoover. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.” “This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.”

Michael K. Fauntroy - Republicans and the Black vote

 

[Google_Yourself]

Yeah, they're so racist that they freed the slaves from the Democrats.

Since that did not happen, try again.

Sounds like you've never read a history book.

I've read more of them than you have. That's why I said what I did.

Republicans back then were racists.

And nobody in todays republican party had anything to do with emancipation.

If Republicans back then were racist then why did they free the slaves from the Democrats?
Emancipation is Republican history. Of course no Republican today had anything to do with emancipation, just like no Democrat today had anything to do with inventing the wheel.

Since that didn't happen why do you continue repeating it?

Why do you hate the people who freed the black people from their slave masters?
I'm guessing that you're one of those white Democrats that are still pissed of over Republicans freeing the slaves.

Sorry but you white Democrats are going to have to pick your own cotton from now on.

 

[IM2]

Since that did not happen, try again.

Sounds like you've never read a history book.

I've read more of them than you have. That's why I said what I did.

Republicans back then were racists.

And nobody in todays republican party had anything to do with emancipation.

If Republicans back then were racist then why did they free the slaves from the Democrats?
Emancipation is Republican history. Of course no Republican today had anything to do with emancipation, just like no Democrat today had anything to do with inventing the wheel.

Since that didn't happen why do you continue repeating it?

Why do you hate the people who freed the black people from their slave masters?
I'm guessing that you're one of those white Democrats that are still pissed of over Republicans freeing the slaves.

Sorry but you white Democrats are going to have to pick your own cotton from now on.

I'm guessing that you're wrong. Try a new line pod-nuh.



Why Aren’t There More Black Republicans?
Conservatives must embrace the GOP’s once proud legacy on civil rights.
By Musa Al-Gharbi

Today up to 95 percent of African-American voters are aligned with the Democratic Party, and the GOP has largely abandoned its legacy of civil rights activism.

It’s tough to assert being the party of Lincoln while some Republican legislators court Neo-Confederates and other ethnic nationalist movements. They further distance themselves by advocating for voter ID laws, which disenfranchise primarily low-income and legal minority voters. (There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud by illegal or ineligible voters, let alone a single example of when such voting has actually turned an election).

It is similarly difficult for Republicans to trumpet their role in passing Civil Rights Acts while the Republican National Committee is spearheading efforts to dismantle affirmative action (Former GOP chairman Michael Steele struck a good balance on this). And perhaps most importantly, the conservative emphasis on personal responsibility sounds disingenuous to many blacks when Republicans refuse to acknowledge the profound and continuing effects of slavery, Jim Crow and segregation—let alone the persistence of overt racism, institutional and systemic discrimination, and unconscious racial bias.

There is an assumption that these issues do not need to be addressed head-on because a strong economy will raise up all Americans. Hence Republicans focus on fiscal matters over social justice. But if a particular social arrangement fundamentally privileges one group or marginalizes others, then economic growth tends to exacerbate disparities between groups rather than “lifting all boats.” Or put another way, a system has to be fair before it can be color blind.

Black families have, on average, 5 percent of the wealth of their white counterparts. African Americans have limited access to the credit used to acquire property or start a business—and they have been largely excluded from social networks that enhance mobility. Meanwhile, whites receive 76 percent of all merit-based scholarships and grant funding. There have been myriad studies demonstrating that, regardless of their credentials, people with “ethnic” names are far less likely to get accepted into schools or called for job interviews. And even when hired, women and people of color are not promoted as often or as quickly as their white male counterparts—helping to explain why blacks earn only 60 cents for every dollar that white people earn in salary and wages.

Addressing these challenges will require both blacks and whites to own up to the roles they have played, and continue to play, in perpetuating these unfortunate dynamics.

Diversity v. Tokenism

During virtually every election cycle, the RNC goes out of its way to elevate some black candidate onto the national stage. But diversity isn’t about seeing an African American advocating the exact same positions as their white counterparts. Instead, with often dramatically different life experiences, one would expect substantive differences in how black candidates view and approach policy problems. Yet most of the black voices elevated by the Republican Party reflect little of this more meaningful diversity—and to make matters worse, they aren’t strong candidates to begin with.

Consider some recent black Republican presidential candidates. While Herman Cain and Ben Carson are examples of great personal success in the face of adversity, they are painfully ill-informed on matters related to foreign policy, seem to lack a good grasp of many domestic issues, and have virtually no experience in government (although this latter characteristic is supposed to be part of their charm).

In 2008, Alan Keyes jumped on the “birther” bandwagon and refused to acknowledge President Obama’s election as legitimate, in the process providing cover for what most black Americans viewed as a ridiculous and racially-motivated witch-hunt. He would go on to warn that under Obama “we shall all become slaves on the government’s plantation.”

Cain described the American tax code as “the twenty-first century version of slavery,” despite the fact that people are still enslaved in many parts of the world. Carson has similarly referred to the Affordable Care Act as “slavery.” Meanwhile, Keyes, Cain and Carson all consistently downplay the significance of historical disadvantages or institutionalized racism. Cain and Carson have both insisted that it isn’t appropriate for the White House or presidential candidates to comment on the controversy surrounding the Confederate flag flying above some government buildings.

Perhaps the only serious black candidate for president suggested by Republicans has been Colin Powell. And he has consistently refused to run.

Why Aren’t There More Black Republicans?

When Republicans emphasize social trust, personal freedom and autonomy, except when it comes to the poor, they imply that the disadvantaged are in some sense not worthy of equal dignity or respect. While this discrimination is essentially class based, many blacks view these policies as racist.

If “big government” is the approach offered by Democrats, consider that Republican efforts are largely aimed at eliminating aid programs, or at the very least, rendering them less generous and the application process more burdensome. Worse, the typical Republican “solution” to poverty entails not just dramatic cuts in benefits to the poor, but raising their taxes as well (“broadening the base”), while lowering the rate for the wealthy and corporations—all under the ahistorical and empirically falsified notion that this fortune will eventually “trickle down” of its own accord.

Neither of these approaches hold much promise for the disadvantaged to actually escape poverty, but at least the Democrats promise to partially alleviate (even at the cost of perpetuating) their suffering. This leaves them as the least-worst option.

Why Aren’t There More Black Republicans?