Trump as healer: lie of 2016

[buckeye45_73]

And I could go into the democrats, but I've done it before. Only one dixiecrat became a republican, Strom Thurmond. The rest of the gang that opposed the 64 civil rights act on race (Goldwater opposed it on the forcing you to do stuff, different reason) never became republicans.

There were in fact only two Dixiecrats -- Thurmond and his running mate Wright -- who died around 1956.

The "rest of the gang" I don't really know who you mean but I know Jesse Helms switched, and so did Trent Lott.

They did there were a few, but not that many. The 64 civil rightmost actually no voters had one democrat switch out of 23. Guys like george wallace and William fulbright never switched.

Tn didn't have a Republican house until 2008.
And if you want to see racism, work for a black republican, the racism doesn't come from the conservative republicans. I worked for rod deberry 1994 9th congressional district as a college kid and I never saw real racism until then. And it was the nasty from both white and black democrats.

This is the next place I would have gone to make that point from the repost --- that point being that it's about regions and cultures and South versus North, not about political parties ----

CRA vote 1964 (for this purpose "Northern" means "everybody not in the South"):

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
• >>> ALL SOUTHERNERS: 7-97 (6.7%--93.3%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94 – 6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85 – 15%)
• >>> ALL NORTHERNERS: 283-33 (89.6%--11.4%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
• ALL SOUTHERNERS: 1--21 (4.5%--95.5%)
• ALL NORTHERNERS: 72--6 (92.3%--7.7%)

Yes, there is a party pattern in that each line shows slightly more support from the D side than the R side. But again, 94 versus 85 on one side is not at all significant.

But 96 on one side versus 92 on the other side?? You just hit the motherlode.

The numbers don't lie; your pattern is clearly there but it's regional, not political. A

You take the numbers from the North -- both Dems and Repubs are for it.
You take the numbers from the South -- both Dems and Repubs are agin' it.
It's truly bipartisan in both directions. (!)
​

This is where the party-partisan mythology crumbles to dust. This was a regional issue, not a political party one. QED.

Very true. Which is why I laugh at the southern strategy. Very few of those guys changed parties or even voted republican. TN had 2 democrat senators until the 90s, the state house was democrat until the 2000s. The reason it went republican was people like me leaving the north.

Lie all you want, the figures prove you wrong. Trump is a divider and a destroyer of good in America.

No they don't Starkey..

Again name the last democrat more conservative than a republican for president? Once you answer that question, we can continue.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Dems in 1964 beat down the bad side of the party, and in 2016 the GOP is falling to the evil side of the party,

Fallin: Trump 'trying to campaign as a racial healer'

What was bad about Goldwater?

Dipshits try to put him in the category with the Dixiecrats, because he didn't want the Feds to tell you how to run your own business. He was right, we didn't listen and now everything is under federal control.

What makes you think that? Because you can't lynch blacks? Sux to be you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There were in fact only two Dixiecrats -- Thurmond and his running mate Wright -- who died around 1956.

The "rest of the gang" I don't really know who you mean but I know Jesse Helms switched, and so did Trent Lott.

They did there were a few, but not that many. The 64 civil rightmost actually no voters had one democrat switch out of 23. Guys like george wallace and William fulbright never switched.

Tn didn't have a Republican house until 2008.
And if you want to see racism, work for a black republican, the racism doesn't come from the conservative republicans. I worked for rod deberry 1994 9th congressional district as a college kid and I never saw real racism until then. And it was the nasty from both white and black democrats.

This is the next place I would have gone to make that point from the repost --- that point being that it's about regions and cultures and South versus North, not about political parties ----

CRA vote 1964 (for this purpose "Northern" means "everybody not in the South"):

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
• >>> ALL SOUTHERNERS: 7-97 (6.7%--93.3%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94 – 6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85 – 15%)
• >>> ALL NORTHERNERS: 283-33 (89.6%--11.4%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
• ALL SOUTHERNERS: 1--21 (4.5%--95.5%)
• ALL NORTHERNERS: 72--6 (92.3%--7.7%)

Yes, there is a party pattern in that each line shows slightly more support from the D side than the R side. But again, 94 versus 85 on one side is not at all significant.

But 96 on one side versus 92 on the other side?? You just hit the motherlode.

The numbers don't lie; your pattern is clearly there but it's regional, not political. A

You take the numbers from the North -- both Dems and Repubs are for it.
You take the numbers from the South -- both Dems and Repubs are agin' it.
It's truly bipartisan in both directions. (!)
​

This is where the party-partisan mythology crumbles to dust. This was a regional issue, not a political party one. QED.

Very true. Which is why I laugh at the southern strategy. Very few of those guys changed parties or even voted republican. TN had 2 democrat senators until the 90s, the state house was democrat until the 2000s. The reason it went republican was people like me leaving the north.

Lie all you want, the figures prove you wrong. Trump is a divider and a destroyer of good in America.

No they don't Starkey.. Again name the last democrat more conservative than a republican for president? Once you answer that question, we can continue.

Yes, Trump is a divider not a unifier. Your question makes no sense. The Klan were conservatives then, now, and always will be.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

 

[buckeye45_73]

There were in fact only two Dixiecrats -- Thurmond and his running mate Wright -- who died around 1956.

The "rest of the gang" I don't really know who you mean but I know Jesse Helms switched, and so did Trent Lott.

They did there were a few, but not that many. The 64 civil rightmost actually no voters had one democrat switch out of 23. Guys like george wallace and William fulbright never switched.

Tn didn't have a Republican house until 2008.
And if you want to see racism, work for a black republican, the racism doesn't come from the conservative republicans. I worked for rod deberry 1994 9th congressional district as a college kid and I never saw real racism until then. And it was the nasty from both white and black democrats.

This is the next place I would have gone to make that point from the repost --- that point being that it's about regions and cultures and South versus North, not about political parties ----

CRA vote 1964 (for this purpose "Northern" means "everybody not in the South"):

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
• >>> ALL SOUTHERNERS: 7-97 (6.7%--93.3%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94 – 6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85 – 15%)
• >>> ALL NORTHERNERS: 283-33 (89.6%--11.4%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
• ALL SOUTHERNERS: 1--21 (4.5%--95.5%)
• ALL NORTHERNERS: 72--6 (92.3%--7.7%)

Yes, there is a party pattern in that each line shows slightly more support from the D side than the R side. But again, 94 versus 85 on one side is not at all significant.

But 96 on one side versus 92 on the other side?? You just hit the motherlode.

The numbers don't lie; your pattern is clearly there but it's regional, not political. A

You take the numbers from the North -- both Dems and Repubs are for it.
You take the numbers from the South -- both Dems and Repubs are agin' it.
It's truly bipartisan in both directions. (!)
​

This is where the party-partisan mythology crumbles to dust. This was a regional issue, not a political party one. QED.

Very true. Which is why I laugh at the southern strategy. Very few of those guys changed parties or even voted republican. TN had 2 democrat senators until the 90s, the state house was democrat until the 2000s. The reason it went republican was people like me leaving the north.

Lie all you want, the figures prove you wrong. Trump is a divider and a destroyer of good in America.

No they don't Starkey..

Again name the last democrat more conservative than a republican for president? Once you answer that question, we can continue.

3 posts and still didn't answer the question, you dodge that like a mofo, because you are completely full of shit.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We do believe in the Constitution, unlike you that just gets the courts to do whatever they want.

 

[JakeStarkey]

They did there were a few, but not that many. The 64 civil rightmost actually no voters had one democrat switch out of 23. Guys like george wallace and William fulbright never switched.

Tn didn't have a Republican house until 2008.
And if you want to see racism, work for a black republican, the racism doesn't come from the conservative republicans. I worked for rod deberry 1994 9th congressional district as a college kid and I never saw real racism until then. And it was the nasty from both white and black democrats.

This is the next place I would have gone to make that point from the repost --- that point being that it's about regions and cultures and South versus North, not about political parties ----

CRA vote 1964 (for this purpose "Northern" means "everybody not in the South"):

The original House version:

• Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
• >>> ALL SOUTHERNERS: 7-97 (6.7%--93.3%)

• Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94 – 6%)
• Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85 – 15%)
• >>> ALL NORTHERNERS: 283-33 (89.6%--11.4%)

The Senate version:

• Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
• Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
• Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
• Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
• ALL SOUTHERNERS: 1--21 (4.5%--95.5%)
• ALL NORTHERNERS: 72--6 (92.3%--7.7%)

Yes, there is a party pattern in that each line shows slightly more support from the D side than the R side. But again, 94 versus 85 on one side is not at all significant.

But 96 on one side versus 92 on the other side?? You just hit the motherlode.

The numbers don't lie; your pattern is clearly there but it's regional, not political. A

You take the numbers from the North -- both Dems and Repubs are for it.
You take the numbers from the South -- both Dems and Repubs are agin' it.
It's truly bipartisan in both directions. (!)
​

This is where the party-partisan mythology crumbles to dust. This was a regional issue, not a political party one. QED.

Very true. Which is why I laugh at the southern strategy. Very few of those guys changed parties or even voted republican. TN had 2 democrat senators until the 90s, the state house was democrat until the 2000s. The reason it went republican was people like me leaving the north.

Lie all you want, the figures prove you wrong. Trump is a divider and a destroyer of good in America.

No they don't Starkey..

Again name the last democrat more conservative than a republican for president? Once you answer that question, we can continue.

3 posts and still didn't answer the question, you dodge that like a mofo, because you are completely full of shit.

Bucky, ask meaningless questions all you want. You simply can't handle the truth. Trump is a loser. The far right is being forced to its knees and will confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law as its masters.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We do believe in the Constitution, unlike you that just gets the courts to do whatever they want.

No, you don't. Not in the slightest. That is why the far right is being broken this year.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The Dems in 1964 beat down the bad side of the party, and in 2016 the GOP is falling to the evil side of the party,

Fallin: Trump 'trying to campaign as a racial healer'

What was bad about Goldwater?

Dipshits try to put him in the category with the Dixiecrats, because he didn't want the Feds to tell you how to run your own business. He was right, we didn't listen and now everything is under federal control.

What makes you think that? Because you can't lynch blacks? Sux to be you.

Goldwater wanted to lynch blacks? You're either stupid or unbelievable dishonest.

 

[my2¢]

I don't see Trump tied to any ideology and so he is more likely than any politician to play role of healer.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Dems in 1964 beat down the bad side of the party, and in 2016 the GOP is falling to the evil side of the party,

Fallin: Trump 'trying to campaign as a racial healer'

What was bad about Goldwater?

Dipshits try to put him in the category with the Dixiecrats, because he didn't want the Feds to tell you how to run your own business. He was right, we didn't listen and now everything is under federal control.

What makes you think that? Because you can't lynch blacks? Sux to be you.

Goldwater wanted to lynch blacks? You're either stupid or unbelievable dishonest.

The dishonesty is all yours. I was talking about you, and you tried to pass it of as Goldwater wanting to lynch blacks. Nope that's you.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The Dems in 1964 beat down the bad side of the party, and in 2016 the GOP is falling to the evil side of the party,

Fallin: Trump 'trying to campaign as a racial healer'

What was bad about Goldwater?

Dipshits try to put him in the category with the Dixiecrats, because he didn't want the Feds to tell you how to run your own business. He was right, we didn't listen and now everything is under federal control.

What makes you think that? Because you can't lynch blacks? Sux to be you.

Goldwater wanted to lynch blacks? You're either stupid or unbelievable dishonest.

The dishonesty is all yours. I was talking about you, and you tried to pass it of as Goldwater wanting to lynch blacks. Nope that's you.

No dipshit, you quoted my post about Goldwater. you got caught and now you just have to take it up the ass....it's ok, just relax Starkey.

PS Still waiting on that answer to the question.....you know which one....don't be an rdean and bitch out.

 

[Pogo]

I don't see Trump tied to any ideology and so he is more likely than any politician to play role of healer.

That's impossible. Healing requires compassion.

So until this book comes out...

​

.... ain't hap'nin'.

 

[Pogo]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We do believe in the Constitution, unlike you that just gets the courts to do whatever they want.

Rump doesn't.

​

He can't even take the Oath of Office. That's Thing One.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We do believe in the Constitution, unlike you that just gets the courts to do whatever they want.

Rump doesn't.

​

He can't even take the Oath of Office. That's Thing One.

Anytime the left bitches about the first amendment, I just laugh and point to safe rooms, speech codes and people losing their job for posting on twitter....

 

[Pogo]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We do believe in the Constitution, unlike you that just gets the courts to do whatever they want.

Rump doesn't.

​

He can't even take the Oath of Office. That's Thing One.

Anytime the left bitches about the first amendment, I just laugh and point to safe rooms, speech codes and people losing their job for posting on twitter....

Actually that's Rump bitching about the First Amendment. Don't you recognize the orange blur?

Surely you remember Rump --- the little bitch who stayed up all night sending desperate tweets because mean ol' Megan Kelly asked him about stuff he's actually said? The one who cries the blues because "the judge is Mexican"? The whiny cheese who sues people for not saying he's as rich as he wants them to say?

 

[buckeye45_73]

I don't see Trump tied to any ideology and so he is more likely than any politician to play role of healer.

That's impossible. Healing requires compassion.

So until this book comes out...

​

.... ain't hap'nin'.

Compassion isn't how much government money you spend

 

[buckeye45_73]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We do believe in the Constitution, unlike you that just gets the courts to do whatever they want.

No, you don't. Not in the slightest. That is why the far right is being broken this year.

You say that every year. You're not even a moderate republicans, even they believe in capitalism

 

[Pogo]

I don't see Trump tied to any ideology and so he is more likely than any politician to play role of healer.

That's impossible. Healing requires compassion.

So until this book comes out...

​

.... ain't hap'nin'.

Compassion isn't how much government money you spend

I didn't mention "money" of any kind. I responded to the word "healing".

And on yours I responded to "we do believe in the Constitution". Perhaps we should clarify who "we" is, because it sure ain't the Orange Crush.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The far right is being forced to its knees and forced to confess the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

We do believe in the Constitution, unlike you that just gets the courts to do whatever they want.

Rump doesn't.

​

He can't even take the Oath of Office. That's Thing One.

Anytime the left bitches about the first amendment, I just laugh and point to safe rooms, speech codes and people losing their job for posting on twitter....

Actually that's Rump bitching about the First Amendment. Don't you recognize the orange blur?

Surely you remember Rump --- the little bitch who stayed up all night sending desperate tweets because mean ol' Megan Kelly asked him about stuff he's actually said? The one who cries the blues because "the judge is Mexican"? The whiny cheese who sues people for not saying he's as rich as he wants them to say?

He said the media is dishonest, which is true.
He wants to open libel laws so yo uh can sue them when they slander you,
The media is full of leftists that love to sue, for stupid warning labels, gay marriage, pretty much every liberal gain of the last 50 years was through the courts, now it's time they get sued.

But they want the right to lie about politicians, nope, they need to be held accountable. They are an arm of the Democrat party, now they have to prove shit, yay!!!!!!