Half Of Americans Want To Take The Country Back To The 1950s

[Mr Natural]

Do they also want to go back to 90 percent tax brackets?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The biggest difference is corporations used to want to help communities now they want their cheap labor and for communities to wither away. Corporate america ain't it great?

That is not correct, America in that period was a nation of company towns, some were generous but many were horrible places to live where the company owned city hall, this was especially true in the southern textile towns. The 50s had some bright spots up north but the south was still a miserable impoverished flood ridden pox on the American dream. They really did not catch up to the North until the late 60s.

Democrats controlled the South in that period. One can assume with many of the same policies we see in Detroit, Baltimore and Chicago today.

Bull Conner kept them in line though, eh?

If you think any southern democrat was a liberal you are fucking retarded. The "Dixiecrats" sounded remarkably like.......you people, especially since Trump came along and stirred up all the little resentments passed down along the generations since all those christian conservatives were dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century.

Oh dear, that old fairy tale again.

Please provide me a list of those Democrat leaders who switched to the Republican Party following passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Be careful.

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

 

[occupied]

That is not correct, America in that period was a nation of company towns, some were generous but many were horrible places to live where the company owned city hall, this was especially true in the southern textile towns. The 50s had some bright spots up north but the south was still a miserable impoverished flood ridden pox on the American dream. They really did not catch up to the North until the late 60s.

Democrats controlled the South in that period. One can assume with many of the same policies we see in Detroit, Baltimore and Chicago today.

Bull Conner kept them in line though, eh?

If you think any southern democrat was a liberal you are fucking retarded. The "Dixiecrats" sounded remarkably like.......you people, especially since Trump came along and stirred up all the little resentments passed down along the generations since all those christian conservatives were dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century.

Oh dear, that old fairy tale again.

Please provide me a list of those Democrat leaders who switched to the Republican Party following passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Be careful.

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard to disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Democrats controlled the South in that period. One can assume with many of the same policies we see in Detroit, Baltimore and Chicago today.

Bull Conner kept them in line though, eh?

If you think any southern democrat was a liberal you are fucking retarded. The "Dixiecrats" sounded remarkably like.......you people, especially since Trump came along and stirred up all the little resentments passed down along the generations since all those christian conservatives were dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century.

Oh dear, that old fairy tale again.

Please provide me a list of those Democrat leaders who switched to the Republican Party following passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Be careful.

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

 

[Moonglow]

As long as there is no dew-op music, it's okay...

 

[Moonglow]

If you think any southern democrat was a liberal you are fucking retarded. The "Dixiecrats" sounded remarkably like.......you people, especially since Trump came along and stirred up all the little resentments passed down along the generations since all those christian conservatives were dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century.

Oh dear, that old fairy tale again.

Please provide me a list of those Democrat leaders who switched to the Republican Party following passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Be careful.

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

At least until the GOP during and after the Civil War changed it.......

 

[occupied]

If you think any southern democrat was a liberal you are fucking retarded. The "Dixiecrats" sounded remarkably like.......you people, especially since Trump came along and stirred up all the little resentments passed down along the generations since all those christian conservatives were dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century.

Oh dear, that old fairy tale again.

Please provide me a list of those Democrat leaders who switched to the Republican Party following passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Be careful.

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So you do espouse the state's rights argument, I thought so, that came directly from the dixiecrats who you think are exactly like today's progressives for some reason. How about the Christian nation argument? That one was theirs too.

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

There is no states rights argument. It comes straight from the Constitution.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Donald Trump’s supporters are far more likely to be nostalgic.

Americans are close to evenly split on whether the U.S. has gotten better or worse in the past 60 years, according to a new survey from the nonprofit organization PRRI.

Fifty-one percent say that American culture and way of life have worsened since the 1950s, while 48 percent say they have changed for the better.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton supporters are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Seventy-two percent of likely Trump voters think things have changed for the worse, while about 70 person of Clinton voters think things have changed for the better.

“This election has become a referendum on competing visions of America’s future,” Robert P. Jones, PRRI’s CEO, said in a statement. “Donald Trump supporters are nostalgic for the 1950s, an era when white Christians in particular had more political and cultural power in the country, while Hillary Clinton supporters are leaning into ― and even celebrating ― the big cultural transformations the country has experienced over the last few decades.”

Democrats, millennials, black Americans and people who aren’t affiliated with any religion ― all groups that are largely backing Clinton ― are among the most likely to think that things have improved. Republicans, white evangelical Protestants and members of the white working class ― groups that have shown more support for Trump ― are the most likely to express nostalgia for the 1950s.

PRRI

“We argue over whether we’re divided by race, class, gender or religion,” columnist E.J. Dionne said Tuesday at a panel discussing the poll’s release. “What’s really scary about this poll is that we are divided by all of the following: class, race, gender and religion. We are deeply divided by these things.”

A similar survey question from Pew Research found that Trump and Clinton supporters are also divided over how life has changed specifically for “people like them” ― Clinton supporters say by a 40-point margin that it has gotten better over the past 50 years, but Trump supporters say by a 70-point margin that it’s gotten worse.

More: Half Of Americans Want To Take The Country Back To The 1950s

I miss a lot of things from the good ole days - and a lot of things I don't miss. It's no surprise that whites in the above chart perceive things as worse. I guess they are afraid - because they'll soon be a minority. Hispanics are slowly reclaiming their stolen birthright and rising up as a powerful political force. We Native Americans are just watching the show.

Like I just commented if that 51% all get out and vote, Hillary loses, however Hillary has other potential problems also, read below, I've bolded the most important parts and the part about black voters and Hillary is in red, she also has problems with younger voters who hate her and still are loyal to Bernie Sanders, of course they won't forget how nasty the Hillary Campaign was to Bernie either.

"The outcome of the U.S. election hinges on one simple question: which electorate will show up to vote?

- Snip -

The polls conducted by ABC, FoxNews, CNN, NBC, CBS and Quinnipiac all use some variant of the 2012 turnout model. But those by Rasmussen, Investors Business Daily and the Los Angeles Times use a newer turnout model that portends an emerging electorate very different from that which elected Barack Obama.

Polls are good at determining how people would vote. But they are not at figuring out who will vote — mainly because the very voters who might, or might not, stay home don’t themselves know what mood will strike them on election day.

- Snip -

Meanwhile, a parallel drama is unfolding in reverse among African-Americans. They suffer from a post-Obama hangover. When Obama first ran in 2008 and, again in 2012, they turned out in record numbers, casting 13 per cent of the U.S. vote (compared to 10 per cent to 11 per cent in normal years). But Clinton is no Obama. While blacks will dutifully vote for her as the Democratic candidate, they cannot summon the enthusiasm for her that they did for him.

Polls suggest that blacks are 28 per cent less enthusiastic about voting than they were in 2012. Since they vote overwhelmingly Democratic, any falloff in turnout comes right out of Hillary’s vote. Trump has been careful not to catalyze fear among African-Americans about his candidacy. His efforts to promote school choice — letting parents send their child to the public or private school of their choice with state funding to pay for it — may not have garnered him a lot of black votes, but it has reassured African-Americans that he is no racist and no threat.

Will blacks cast 10 per cent to 11 per cent of the vote in 2016 or the 13 per cent they cast in 2012? A big part of Clinton’s margin hangs in the balance.

Her problems among younger voters are even more severe. The Democratic Party is almost totally dependent on under-35 voters. In 2012, had all voters been over 35, Mitt Romney would have won. But it is precisely these voters who overwhelmingly backed Bernie Sanders over Clinton in the Democratic primaries. They don’t like her and never have. Yet it is among these voters that she must craft her victory coalition.

Polling suggests that young voters are 10 points less enthusiastic than they were in 2012 and even less than that compared to 2008.

Finally, Clinton faces the threat of defections to the third and fourth candidates — Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Jill Stein of the Greens. She has done little to elucidate a positive rationale for her candidacy and is appealing to voters to keep Trump out of the White House. Such a two-candidate, zero sum strategy is vulnerable to defections, impelled by discontent over the Trump-Clinton choice. Again, polling suggests a higher level of intensity among Trump supporters than among Clinton’s backers, making third party defections more likely among Democrats this year.

Put it all together and the potential is still there for a close election and a Trump victory."

Here's the rest of the article.

Dick Morris: Where Hillary Clinton can lose

Dick "Toe Sucker" Morris? Damn, it must be true...

Was there an argument here ?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Oh dear, that old fairy tale again.

Please provide me a list of those Democrat leaders who switched to the Republican Party following passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Be careful.

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

At least until the GOP during and after the Civil War changed it.......

I will agree with that, but unamended it is still the law of the land, as the text is written.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Oh dear, that old fairy tale again.

Please provide me a list of those Democrat leaders who switched to the Republican Party following passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Be careful.

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So you do espouse the state's rights argument, I thought so, that came directly from the dixiecrats who you think are exactly like today's progressives for some reason. How about the Christian nation argument? That one was theirs too.

There is no argument. It is part of the BOR, written in plain English and unamended.

 

[Moonglow]

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

At least until the GOP during and after the Civil War changed it.......

I will agree with that, but unamended it is still the law of the land, as the text is written.

Some adjust, others sublimate...

 

[occupied]

Do you really want to attempt the oldest troll on the internet again? If you really seriously think today's progressive democrat is anything like a 50s-60s dixiecrat you are simply too stupid to live. I prefer to think all you trolls know better but enjoy the incredulous response it always gets when the stupidest political opinion in American history gets trotted out yet again. How about we talk instead about the secession of the southern states and the reconstruction amendments where you take the exact same position all those dixiecrats had on state's rights?

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

At least until the GOP during and after the Civil War changed it.......

I will agree with that, but unamended it is still the law of the land, as the text is written.

The civil war amendments were the last word in that argument. The surrender at Appomattox was the next to last word in that argument.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

So you cannot provide me with such a list. I thought not.

Today's Progressive is demonstrably worse than the Democrat of the 50s and 60s, because today's Progressive seeks to replace the slavery of black-to-white with the slavery of all to the State.

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

At least until the GOP during and after the Civil War changed it.......

I will agree with that, but unamended it is still the law of the land, as the text is written.

The civil war amendments were the last word in that argument. The surrender at Appomattox was the next to last word in that argument.

What?

'splain Lucy

 

[francoHFW]

It'd all be uphill since the fifties without the GOP- Nixon's secret plan and un-Americanism, Reaganism's pander to the rich, bs hate propaganda, ME meddling, corrupt world depression, and obstruction of progress in all things. See sig pp 1.

 

[anotherlife]

Too bad, to take America back to the 1950s you would need to make every computer disappear and a few countries too such as China.

 

[occupied]

Bullshit, the very fact that you almost certainly share the dixiecrat view of state's rights is proof enough that republicans absorbed their ideology along with their votes. I suppose you have not even considered that the state's rights argument was once the exclusive domain of these people you try so very hard disavow while your party is carrying on their nasty habit of voter suppression, racial scapegoating and preaching politics from the pulpit. If you want to really disavow them then quit acting just like them.

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

At least until the GOP during and after the Civil War changed it.......

I will agree with that, but unamended it is still the law of the land, as the text is written.

The civil war amendments were the last word in that argument. The surrender at Appomattox was the next to last word in that argument.

What?

You said "unamended". You cannot ignore the amendments in your constitutional arguments. Many Dixiecrats also considered all the post civil war Amendments to be invalid.

 

[deltex1]

Donald Trump’s supporters are far more likely to be nostalgic.

Americans are close to evenly split on whether the U.S. has gotten better or worse in the past 60 years, according to a new survey from the nonprofit organization PRRI.

Fifty-one percent say that American culture and way of life have worsened since the 1950s, while 48 percent say they have changed for the better.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton supporters are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Seventy-two percent of likely Trump voters think things have changed for the worse, while about 70 person of Clinton voters think things have changed for the better.

“This election has become a referendum on competing visions of America’s future,” Robert P. Jones, PRRI’s CEO, said in a statement. “Donald Trump supporters are nostalgic for the 1950s, an era when white Christians in particular had more political and cultural power in the country, while Hillary Clinton supporters are leaning into ― and even celebrating ― the big cultural transformations the country has experienced over the last few decades.”

Democrats, millennials, black Americans and people who aren’t affiliated with any religion ― all groups that are largely backing Clinton ― are among the most likely to think that things have improved. Republicans, white evangelical Protestants and members of the white working class ― groups that have shown more support for Trump ― are the most likely to express nostalgia for the 1950s.

PRRI

“We argue over whether we’re divided by race, class, gender or religion,” columnist E.J. Dionne said Tuesday at a panel discussing the poll’s release. “What’s really scary about this poll is that we are divided by all of the following: class, race, gender and religion. We are deeply divided by these things.”

A similar survey question from Pew Research found that Trump and Clinton supporters are also divided over how life has changed specifically for “people like them” ― Clinton supporters say by a 40-point margin that it has gotten better over the past 50 years, but Trump supporters say by a 70-point margin that it’s gotten worse.

More: Half Of Americans Want To Take The Country Back To The 1950s

I miss a lot of things from the good ole days - and a lot of things I don't miss. It's no surprise that whites in the above chart perceive things as worse. I guess they are afraid - because they'll soon be a minority. Hispanics are slowly reclaiming their stolen birthright and rising up as a powerful political force. We Native Americans are just watching the show.

Like I just commented if that 51% all get out and vote, Hillary loses, however Hillary has other potential problems also, read below, I've bolded the most important parts and the part about black voters and Hillary is in red, she also has problems with younger voters who hate her and still are loyal to Bernie Sanders, of course they won't forget how nasty the Hillary Campaign was to Bernie either.

"The outcome of the U.S. election hinges on one simple question: which electorate will show up to vote?

- Snip -

The polls conducted by ABC, FoxNews, CNN, NBC, CBS and Quinnipiac all use some variant of the 2012 turnout model. But those by Rasmussen, Investors Business Daily and the Los Angeles Times use a newer turnout model that portends an emerging electorate very different from that which elected Barack Obama.

Polls are good at determining how people would vote. But they are not at figuring out who will vote — mainly because the very voters who might, or might not, stay home don’t themselves know what mood will strike them on election day.

- Snip -

Meanwhile, a parallel drama is unfolding in reverse among African-Americans. They suffer from a post-Obama hangover. When Obama first ran in 2008 and, again in 2012, they turned out in record numbers, casting 13 per cent of the U.S. vote (compared to 10 per cent to 11 per cent in normal years). But Clinton is no Obama. While blacks will dutifully vote for her as the Democratic candidate, they cannot summon the enthusiasm for her that they did for him.

Polls suggest that blacks are 28 per cent less enthusiastic about voting than they were in 2012. Since they vote overwhelmingly Democratic, any falloff in turnout comes right out of Hillary’s vote. Trump has been careful not to catalyze fear among African-Americans about his candidacy. His efforts to promote school choice — letting parents send their child to the public or private school of their choice with state funding to pay for it — may not have garnered him a lot of black votes, but it has reassured African-Americans that he is no racist and no threat.

Will blacks cast 10 per cent to 11 per cent of the vote in 2016 or the 13 per cent they cast in 2012? A big part of Clinton’s margin hangs in the balance.

Her problems among younger voters are even more severe. The Democratic Party is almost totally dependent on under-35 voters. In 2012, had all voters been over 35, Mitt Romney would have won. But it is precisely these voters who overwhelmingly backed Bernie Sanders over Clinton in the Democratic primaries. They don’t like her and never have. Yet it is among these voters that she must craft her victory coalition.

Polling suggests that young voters are 10 points less enthusiastic than they were in 2012 and even less than that compared to 2008.

Finally, Clinton faces the threat of defections to the third and fourth candidates — Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Jill Stein of the Greens. She has done little to elucidate a positive rationale for her candidacy and is appealing to voters to keep Trump out of the White House. Such a two-candidate, zero sum strategy is vulnerable to defections, impelled by discontent over the Trump-Clinton choice. Again, polling suggests a higher level of intensity among Trump supporters than among Clinton’s backers, making third party defections more likely among Democrats this year.

Put it all together and the potential is still there for a close election and a Trump victory."

Here's the rest of the article.

Dick Morris: Where Hillary Clinton can lose

Dick "Toe Sucker" Morris? Damn, it must be true...

Injuns no suck toe kimosabe?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This is chopped liver?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

At least until the GOP during and after the Civil War changed it.......

I will agree with that, but unamended it is still the law of the land, as the text is written.

The civil war amendments were the last word in that argument. The surrender at Appomattox was the next to last word in that argument.

What?

You said "unamended". You cannot ignore the amendments in your constitutional arguments. Many Dixiecrats also considered all the post civil war Amendments to be invalid.

A surrender does not amend the Constitution.

 

[Timmy]

Ahhh the 50s! You could beat your wife when she got mouthy , drive drunk, watercannon blacks if they dared to be equal , no asians , no Hispanics . No gays. White men running everything .

Oh yeah, the republican dream!