Do you agree the Republicans have more white racist and white supremacist supporters?

[Unkotare]

It’s a settled, accepted fact beyond dispute that bigots and racists find refuge among the ranks of Republicans......

...says the ridiculous, leftist bigot.

 

[katsteve2012]

I will answer this one yes.

In past threads I have talked about the flip in parties after the Wallace event and it seems folks from both sides do not want to claim George Wallace.

So I'll simply ask if it seems more white racists support the Republican party.

If anyone has links or studies on this I'd love to read them.

Its a well known fact there are more racists in the Repub party. They fashioned an agenda to recruit racists and they even admitted it not long ago.

If you have access to Netflix, this new documentary provides some very interesting commentary on the Republican party and it's history, as well as how they have come full circle from the civil war to today.

https://www.google.com/amp/collider.com/13th-clip-donald-trump-netflix/amp/

 

[Eloy]

I suspect far fewer than the Democrats have Communist and anarchist supporters.

You will not be taken seriously if you make silly statements like that. The United States has a two-party system and while the Republicans support a radical laissez faire attitude of unregulated markets while Democrats see a rôle for government in influencing the economy especially with regard ameliorating social problems caused by the free market, no self-respecting communist or anarchist would want to belong to either.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I suspect far fewer than the Democrats have Communist and anarchist supporters.

You will not be taken seriously if you make silly statements like that. The United States has a two-party system and while the Republicans support a radical laissez faire attitude of unregulated markets while Democrats see a rôle for government in influencing the economy especially with regard ameliorating social problems caused by the free market, no self-respecting communist or anarchist would want to belong to either.

We are not talking purists here. "Communism" has been for decades the catch-all term for all things Marxist in origin.

"Anarchists unite!" They simply go where they can cause the most trouble.

 

[Eloy]

I suspect far fewer than the Democrats have Communist and anarchist supporters.

You will not be taken seriously if you make silly statements like that. The United States has a two-party system and while the Republicans support a radical laissez faire attitude of unregulated markets while Democrats see a rôle for government in influencing the economy especially with regard ameliorating social problems caused by the free market, no self-respecting communist or anarchist would want to belong to either.

We are not talking purists here. "Communism" has been for decades the catch-all term for all things Marxist in origin.

"Anarchists unite!" They simply go where they can cause the most trouble.

Free market capitalism is supported by both American parties. Neither have roots in Marxism.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I suspect far fewer than the Democrats have Communist and anarchist supporters.

You will not be taken seriously if you make silly statements like that. The United States has a two-party system and while the Republicans support a radical laissez faire attitude of unregulated markets while Democrats see a rôle for government in influencing the economy especially with regard ameliorating social problems caused by the free market, no self-respecting communist or anarchist would want to belong to either.

We are not talking purists here. "Communism" has been for decades the catch-all term for all things Marxist in origin.

"Anarchists unite!" They simply go where they can cause the most trouble.

Free market capitalism is supported by both American parties. Neither have roots in Marxism.

Even Communists realize that capital is necessary to their survival.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I will answer this one yes.

In past threads I have talked about the flip in parties after the Wallace event and it seems folks from both sides do not want to claim George Wallace.

So I'll simply ask if it seems more white racists support the Republican party.

If anyone has links or studies on this I'd love to read them.

There was never any such 'flip."

Only the most abject morons believe that lie.
Raise your paw.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I will answer this one yes.

In past threads I have talked about the flip in parties after the Wallace event and it seems folks from both sides do not want to claim George Wallace.

So I'll simply ask if it seems more white racists support the Republican party.

If anyone has links or studies on this I'd love to read them.

".....it seems more white racists support the Republican party."

Ah!
Those five or six 'white racists.'


Is this the reason you didn't simply say 'racists:'

In the thread...
"There Are Black Folks, And There Are Folks Who Are Black"

I quote Liberal/Democrat Eric Holder, in his statement
"… I am not the tall U.S. attorney, I am not the thin United States Attorney. I am the black United States attorney. And he was saying that no matter how successful you are, there’s a common cause that bonds the black United States attorney with the black criminal or the black doctor with the black homeless person.”

"....black law enforcement officers are expected to show this solidarity toward their racial compatriots, including black criminals.”




Nary a quibble from all Democrat racists.....millions!!!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

I won't go to racist sites--don't know how, to be honest. But I think it would be easy enough to check and see who is endorsing whom. We know David Duke, former Klan Grand Poobah, endorses Trump. The skinhead rally for Trump in California that resulted in some broken heads was in concert with the Klan.
It would be hard to imagine a white supremacist feeling comfortable in the Democratic Party, with their political correctness and all.

"We know David Duke, former Klan Grand Poobah,..."
This David Duke?

State Senator, 1975 (Baton Rouge Area)[edit]
Threshold > 50%

First Ballot, November 1, 1975

Louisiana State Senate, 1975
Party Candidate Votes %
Democratic Kenneth Osterberger 22,287 66
Democratic David Duke 11,079 33
N/A Others 1
Total 100
State Senator, 10th District, 1979 (Suburban New Orleans)[edit]
Threshold > 50% First Ballot, October 27, 1979

Louisiana State Senate, 10th District, 1979
Party Candidate Votes %
Democratic Joseph Tiemann 21,329 57
Democratic David Duke 9,897 26
N/A Others 6,459 17
Total 37,685 100
Democratic Nomination for United States Presidential Candidate, 1988 (Louisiana results)[edit]
Threshold = Plurality

1988 Democratic Presidential primary in Louisiana
Party Candidate Votes %
Democratic Jesse Jackson 221,522 35
Democratic Al Gore 174,971 28
Democratic Michael Dukakis 95,661 15
Democratic Dick Gephardt 67,029 11
Democratic Gary Hart 26,437 4
Democratic David Duke 23,391 4
Democratic Others 16,008 3
Total 625,019 100
Electoral history of David Duke - Wikipedia


Seems to have run on the same party with this racist:

1. a. Governor Clinton was among three state officials the NAACP sued in 1989 under the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965. “Plaintiffs offered plenty of proof of monolithic voting along racial lines, intimidation of black voters and candidates and other official acts that made voting harder for blacks,” the Arkansas Gazette reported December 6, 1989.
   
   
   
   
   b. Bill Clinton had a Confederate flag-like issue, every year he was governor: 1979-1992 Arkansas Code Annotated, Section 1-5-107, provides as follows:
   
   (a) The Saturday immediately preceding Easter Sunday of each year is designated as ‘Confederate Flag Day’ in this state.
   
   (b) No person, firm, or corporation shall display an Confederate flag or replica thereof in connection with any advertisement of any commercial enterprise, or in any manner for any purpose except to honor the Confederate States of America. [Emphasis added.]
   
   (c) Any person, firm, or corporation violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000).
   
   Bill Clinton took no steps during his twelve years as governor to repeal this law.
   Hillary Clinton's Confederacy Hypocrisy | The Gateway Pundit

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2007/02/hillary-clintons-confederacy-hypocrisy/

 

[PoliticalChic]

I suspect far fewer than the Democrats have Communist and anarchist supporters.

I'll take that bet any day of the week.

And just as everything else in your life, you'd be a loser.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I won't go to racist sites--don't know how, to be honest. But I think it would be easy enough to check and see who is endorsing whom. We know David Duke, former Klan Grand Poobah, endorses Trump. The skinhead rally for Trump in California that resulted in some broken heads was in concert with the Klan.
It would be hard to imagine a white supremacist feeling comfortable in the Democratic Party, with their political correctness and all.

Byrd?

I don't think that's a current endorsement, TN, unless all they say about the Democratic Dead voting is true....

The CLintons praised him and he was a Democrat.
It would be hard to imagine a white supremacist feeling comfortable in the Democratic Party

He stopped being a white supremacist. He voted for Obama for crissakes.

The thread title is in present tense.

Present?

Like this?

"Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'"
Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'

 

[Eloy]

I suspect far fewer than the Democrats have Communist and anarchist supporters.

You will not be taken seriously if you make silly statements like that. The United States has a two-party system and while the Republicans support a radical laissez faire attitude of unregulated markets while Democrats see a rôle for government in influencing the economy especially with regard ameliorating social problems caused by the free market, no self-respecting communist or anarchist would want to belong to either.

We are not talking purists here. "Communism" has been for decades the catch-all term for all things Marxist in origin.

"Anarchists unite!" They simply go where they can cause the most trouble.

Free market capitalism is supported by both American parties. Neither have roots in Marxism.

Even Communists realize that capital is necessary to their survival.

Not exactly; capitalists believe that free market forces make for an efficient economy whereas communists believe in a demand economy where products and services are under the control of the state which prioritizes how the wealth of a nation is invested in enterprises that serve the common good.

 

[ptbw forever]

I will answer this one yes.

In past threads I have talked about the flip in parties after the Wallace event and it seems folks from both sides do not want to claim George Wallace.

So I'll simply ask if it seems more white racists support the Republican party.

If anyone has links or studies on this I'd love to read them.

does this mean the democrats have all the non-white racists?....

If only every day Republicans had the guts to make this argument every time they are guilt tripped by the media and government.

 

[ptbw forever]

Which party is more racist...which party is the party of racism...blah blah blah. This topic has come around so many times.

I don't think either one is. Both have a history of racism in their party's actions - the Democrats pre-Civil Rights, the Republicans post-civil rights when they welcomed the racists in order to gain the southern states. But neither party is racist nor do they have racist platforms. Given that you can only go by individuals.

So...does either party attract racists? Certain stances attract certain groups and those stances don't have to be racist in nature.

The Republicans in general are: anti-immigration, anti-affirmative action, anti-big government, anti-entitlement. Those are positions that also tend to be held by white supremicists and other anti-government type fringe groups. Those positions however are not racist positions in and of themselves. What you are seeing now is NOT an attraction to the Republican Party but an attraction to Donald Trump, fanned largely by his rhetoric which strongly appeals to those groups who feel disenfranchised, largely ignored by "big government" and think they now have a platform to legitimize their message where before they were marginalized.

Racism is not limited to just one race however and similar things can be said about the Democrats. In general, they are: pro-minority protections, pro-big government, pro-immigration, pro-entitlement. I think that can attract it's own brand of racist and anti-white fringe groups that some politicians pander to.

Your last paragraph pretty much outweighs the rest of your post, and outright contradicts the point you tried to make in the middle of your 2nd paragraph.

You can't be the "progressive" party and pander to any "anti-white fringe groups", but Democrats have done so repeatedly while spewing the 'progressive' mantra. The Democrats actually are much worse than the Republicans at even their own progressive principles.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

This all depends on your definitions of racist and white supremacist.

I'd have to say that I believe the Democrats have more racist supporters, in that they're the party that caters to the intersectional philosophy that, by virtue of their redefinition of the very term "racism", has unintentionally (I hope!) given license to a lot of overt anti-white bigotry among the ranks of the party, and regardless of social justice's ill conceived model of a static power dynamic that's based on skin color and gender and uniform across all of apparent existence, I still consider any bigotry based on race to be racism.

With white supremacists in particular, this depends on whether you're talking about the people who believe that white people are genetically superior and should be supreme, or the people who believe that white people are supreme and need to willingly relinquish their supremacy to non whites via top-down legislative processes. It's most likely that you're referring to the traditional white supremacists, though, KKK types and what have you. Those folks, I'd have to say, are probably far more likely to support republicans than democrats these days, for a few obvious reasons. Compared to the democrats, the republicans, at least in their public rhetoric, support tighter border restrictions. Since one of our borders is shared with a country largely populated by people of color (and I loathe using a term that appears to have been invented specifically to divide us all into white and non white, thanks for that weird binary, social justice. I'm sure your version of Hotel Rwanda will be way more righteously satisfying than the last one), it only stands to reason that American white supremacists, who are largely segregationist, would be drawn to policies that would mean less brown people migrating north. There's also a perception that the republican party champions Christian values as well as the perpetuation of traditional and largely Eurocentric points of emphasis in our public schools' historical teachings, and since even the white supremacist groups that don't self identify as overtly Christian tend to value these things, the republican party seems to be the obvious choice between the two mainstream parties.

All that said, this question is really irrelevant. The fact that someone supports or admires you doesn't mean that you share all of that supporter's views. The Unabomber was an environmentalist, that doesn't mean Greenpeace should be associated with terrorism. Recent bombshell studies have shown that 100 percent of serial killers drank water regularly throughout their childhood, that doesn't mean I'm gonna start obsessively murdering people if I don't swear the stuff off. I still might, though. Swear off water, I mean. Disgusting stuff really. Fish fuck in it.