Why is it that "whites" are the only race to vote in a diverse manner?

[AvgGuyIA]

I agree with you that that opinion is nonsense. I believe liberals want to help black people, but I disagree with them on how to do it.

What passes a liberal today has no intention of helping anybody. They're all about control.

I'm not a liberal. I certainly don't agree with there policies. I do find it hard to believe however that there's some kind of liberal conspiracy to keep the black man down.

Do you buy into the idea of unintended consequences then?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

WOW! Great point, Grampa! In the 2008 election, Obama would not have been elected if it had not been for the white vote along with the black. Yet, it's a tiny minority of blacks that will vote for a white candidate in a given election. And do I dare say it? If there was such a study, I would say that tiny majority were the most educated.

Okay libs, have at it. but I expect to see links.

Are you joking?

yeah. Corrected. the great majority of blacks will vote for a black candidate of one is available over a white candidate.

If the candidate is anything like Obama, I hope they don't. Skin color is not the qualification for being President. If that is the only reason people vote for one,, then I hope Obama is the last black president this country ever has.

 

[simo5656]

Looks obvious to me that there is no diversity of thought. No looking at things objectively. There simply is no possible way everyone of one particular ethnicity can draw identical solutions to life's very complex issues.

Aside from the fact that you are racist, which is clear by the overtones, I ll answer your question.

People dont vote on race. They vote on wealth.

This is why political parties try to trick people from focusing on issues that really matter and get you to focus on issues, well, like the on you just raised.


Even if you thought blacks only voted for black candidates, then who the **** have they been voting for President the last 80 years.


If you are poor its a little better to have a dem in office. A little. Or at least thats how minorities perceive it.

If you are rich, its a little better to have a repub in office. A little. Democrat will do you just fine too.


Your post at heart is a typical case of I am afraid what I dont understand/encounter. It is cowardly really.

 

[bendog]

Many of those from India, and areas of the Middle East, and Asia, vote both parties.

Now listen here, and listen up good, this can be a decent xenophobic bigoted rant based on stereotypes, and nobody like you is gonna be allowed to change that! Capiche?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

There was a president who was quoted as saying he would have blacks voting for the next 200 years. Sorry. That wasn't our proudest moment in history.

“I’ll have those ******* voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”
- Lyndon B. Johnson

20 great moments in liberal bigotry

Jackson, I'm not sure if that is an authentic quote. I don't think it is TBH.

Liberals caught with their asses hanging out so they change historical records.

 

[simo5656]

There was a president who was quoted as saying he would have blacks voting for the next 200 years. Sorry. That wasn't our proudest moment in history.

“I’ll have those ******* voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”
- Lyndon B. Johnson

20 great moments in liberal bigotry

Jackson, I'm not sure if that is an authentic quote. I don't think it is TBH.

Liberals caught with their asses hanging out so they change historical records.

vs Repubs. The same stupid arguments round and round.

Meanwhile, Reagan called black women welfare queens. Racist idiots vs idiots

 

[jillian]

There was a president who was quoted as saying he would have blacks voting for the next 200 years. Sorry. That wasn't our proudest moment in history.

“I’ll have those ******* voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”
- Lyndon B. Johnson

20 great moments in liberal bigotry

Jackson, I'm not sure if that is an authentic quote. I don't think it is TBH.

Liberals caught with their asses hanging out so they change historical records.

Isn't it amusing that this is the second time today we had to point out that the alleged quote is unsubstantiated.

But it's not like facts matter to rightwingnuts.

 

[Pogo]

The convict came up with another race baiting thread. Maybe if Teaper assholes and racist convicts didn't racialize every issue in the name of (pseudo) conservative politics...blacks could feel welcome if they embraced (true) conservative ideology.

Instead, we get racist felons disguising honest discourse as racial rants.

A low blow, I know of few adults in the USA that at sometime in their lives have not committed some act that could be construed as a crime for which they could be incarcerated. Example: a rent to own microwave is abandoned in the rental housing you left. One payment remains due, you do not pay. FELONY.

Possess twenty grams or more marijuna, FELONY. Get a prescription pain pill from your sister, not presrcibed for you, FELONY.

The first...isn't a felony. The rest...depends what state you live in; nonetheless, each one of those offenses alone don't land you in prison...especially if you are white.

Felons that go to the penitentiary deserve it.

Oh...and I bet he has German ancestry!

Take your black/white dichotomy thinking and cram it up your ass. The OP may be a dick, may even be a racist. But his legal history is irrelevant here. There but for fortune go you or I.

 

[jillian]

Looks obvious to me that there is no diversity of thought. No looking at things objectively. There simply is no possible way everyone of one particular ethnicity can draw identical solutions to life's very complex issues.

Aside from the fact that you are racist, which is clear by the overtones, I ll answer your question.

People dont vote on race. They vote on wealth.

This is why political parties try to trick people from focusing on issues that really matter and get you to focus on issues, well, like the on you just raised.


Even if you thought blacks only voted for black candidates, then who the **** have they been voting for President the last 80 years.


If you are poor its a little better to have a dem in office. A little. Or at least thats how minorities perceive it.

If you are rich, its a little better to have a repub in office. A little. Democrat will do you just fine too.


Your post at heart is a typical case of I am afraid what I dont understand/encounter. It is cowardly really.

People don't vote based on wealth or the rightwingwers who have the poorest, least educated states would be democrats since they would stop voting against their own self-interest.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Who have turned the South from Blue to Red

Yeah, two generations later. These aren't the same people that were there 50 years ago.

Oh Really? The defection of Southern Democrats to the Republican party began in 1960s and gained momentum in 70's and 80's with such noted segregationist as:
David Duke, Grand Wizard of KKK
Strom Thurmond, US Senator from South Carolina
Harry F. Byrd, Senator from Virginia
Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr, US Senator from North Carolina
James F. Byrnes, Governor of South Carolina
Trent Lott, US Senator from Mississippi

Yes, conversion of the South did take generations. Even with Eisenhower's milk toast support of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, William H. Buckley Jr's out right support for southern segregationist, and Barry Goldwater's opposition to the 1965 Civil Rights's Act and the Voter's Right Act of 1965, Democrats in the South were slow to abandon the party they had solidly supported for a hundred year. However, when Kennedy and Johnson crammed integration down the throat of southerns, there was no doubt, Democrat control of the South was over.

The coup de gras came with the great communicator Ronald Reagan. Reagan had openly opposed the Civil Rights and the Voter's Rights Act and gave the legislation credit for instigating the urban riots. When he declared war on the big bad federal government which had destroyed segregation in the South, it was music to ears to southern segregationist. Southern whites hated Johnson's welfare programs that were pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the pockets of poor blacks, so when Reagan attacked Welfare programs, Republicans made even more gains in the South.

Once more a liberal pushing a lie. The Dixiecrats remained Democrats to the day they died, except Strom Thurmond who became a republican. And as a republican he wasn't an enemy of blacks. Bigotry against minorities started and remains with the Democrat Party to this day.

 

[jillian]

What passes a liberal today has no intention of helping anybody. They're all about control.

I'm not a liberal. I certainly don't agree with there policies. I do find it hard to believe however that there's some kind of liberal conspiracy to keep the black man down.

Do you buy into the idea of unintended consequences then?

There aren't any. Well, unless you consider those coming from the so-called war on drugs. We all know how those affect blacks.

What's your excuse for the poor whites in the red states?

 

[Pogo]

We really can't go into the Tea Party because that is going off topic. Would you like to start a thread?

It is on topic.....as much as Jeremiah Wright is.

You won't call him reverend? Is that a feel good move? He's a reverend.

First sentence, you are right again. Last sentence, I cannot in good conscience call that man a Man of God. He is a divisive, judgmental man who spouts ugliness opposite from what we learn from the Bible.

I don't know if that's true or not but since you do ----- how do you know this?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Jackson, I'm not sure if that is an authentic quote. I don't think it is TBH.

Liberals caught with their asses hanging out so they change historical records.

Isn't it amusing that this is the second time today we had to point out that the alleged quote is unsubstantiated.

But it's not like facts matter to rightwingnuts.

You can lie all you want but it doesn't change what he said.

 

[jillian]

Liberals caught with their asses hanging out so they change historical records.

Isn't it amusing that this is the second time today we had to point out that the alleged quote is unsubstantiated.

But it's not like facts matter to rightwingnuts.

You can lie all you want but it doesn't change what he said.

I'm not. But you are. The sad part, of course, is you can't tell the difference.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Looks obvious to me that there is no diversity of thought. No looking at things objectively. There simply is no possible way everyone of one particular ethnicity can draw identical solutions to life's very complex issues.

Aside from the fact that you are racist, which is clear by the overtones, I ll answer your question.

People dont vote on race. They vote on wealth.

This is why political parties try to trick people from focusing on issues that really matter and get you to focus on issues, well, like the on you just raised.


Even if you thought blacks only voted for black candidates, then who the **** have they been voting for President the last 80 years.


If you are poor its a little better to have a dem in office. A little. Or at least thats how minorities perceive it.

If you are rich, its a little better to have a repub in office. A little. Democrat will do you just fine too.


Your post at heart is a typical case of I am afraid what I dont understand/encounter. It is cowardly really.

People like you are the very reason the term racist is meaningless anymore. You all throw it around so carelessly & without any context or thought.

 

[Desperado]

When you take a group of people and purposely keep them impoverished and uneducated and feed each generation bullshit rhetoric about how oppressed they are, that is the result.

Who is keeping them impoverished and uneducated?

Politicians who want their dependency.

And those Politicians would be Democrats

 

[Pogo]

Yeah, two generations later. These aren't the same people that were there 50 years ago.

Oh Really? The defection of Southern Democrats to the Republican party began in 1960s and gained momentum in 70's and 80's with such noted segregationist as:
David Duke, Grand Wizard of KKK
Strom Thurmond, US Senator from South Carolina
Harry F. Byrd, Senator from Virginia
Jesse Alexander Helms, Jr, US Senator from North Carolina
James F. Byrnes, Governor of South Carolina
Trent Lott, US Senator from Mississippi

Yes, conversion of the South did take generations. Even with Eisenhower's milk toast support of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, William H. Buckley Jr's out right support for southern segregationist, and Barry Goldwater's opposition to the 1965 Civil Rights's Act and the Voter's Right Act of 1965, Democrats in the South were slow to abandon the party they had solidly supported for a hundred year. However, when Kennedy and Johnson crammed integration down the throat of southerns, there was no doubt, Democrat control of the South was over.

The coup de gras came with the great communicator Ronald Reagan. Reagan had openly opposed the Civil Rights and the Voter's Rights Act and gave the legislation credit for instigating the urban riots. When he declared war on the big bad federal government which had destroyed segregation in the South, it was music to ears to southern segregationist. Southern whites hated Johnson's welfare programs that were pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the pockets of poor blacks, so when Reagan attacked Welfare programs, Republicans made even more gains in the South.

Once more a liberal pushing a lie. The Dixiecrats remained Democrats to the day they died, except Strom Thurmond who became a republican. And as a republican he wasn't an enemy of blacks. Bigotry against minorities started and remains with the Democrat Party to this day.

The reason he bolted (for the second time, the first being '48) was because the Democrats wouldn't play ball with his bullshit any more. Which was the same reason he bolted in '48. That he came back to the DP for 16 more years is testament to the power of tradition.

He was the first (1964, following the CRA) but it wasn't easy; to even utter the word "Republican" in the South for the century up to that time was tantamount to a vulgarity -- let alone actually joining that party. His fellow racists followed, though it took a few years. The RP was ready willing and able to court them, and did so brazenly, thus crawling into the same hole -- pandering to racists for the sake of votes -- that the DP occupied, however nervously, for so long.

Political parties are invented to acquire power. As Ronald Reagan used to note, they are the politics equivalent of prostitution. Simple ethical dilemmas like racism aren't going to hold them back from their Prime Directive.

 

[Pogo]

Liberals caught with their asses hanging out so they change historical records.

Isn't it amusing that this is the second time today we had to point out that the alleged quote is unsubstantiated.

But it's not like facts matter to rightwingnuts.

You can lie all you want but it doesn't change what he said.

Doesn't make it take shape in reality either. If LBJ ever made this quote, it's curious that no one heard it.

 

[Pogo]

While the entire town of Cleveland, OH goes nuts over LeBron James's return to Cleveland, can anyone name a white athlete celebrated by large groups of blacks? Entire sections of the stadium populated almost exclusively by whites at Friday night's Indians game were chanting 'L-B-J' (LeBron James) during the Indians baseball game.
Meanwhile, blacks have abandoned baseball while MLB goes out of its way to pander to attracting black athletes and obsesses with the legacy of Jackie Robinson.
I think that illustrates where the problem of racial division lies. Blacks mostly self-identifying by skin color and refusing to assimilate while non-blacks tend to transcend race.

Wow. Thanks for the setup. Here we go.

What exactly is it, this legacy of Jackie Robinson? What's his significance?

He was the first black player to play in Major League Baseball, right?

Nope. Nor does MLB phrase it that way -- they deliberately and particularly note that he "broke the color barrier". Nobody ever says he was the first black player, because he wasn't. That would be catcher Moses "Fleetwood" Walker -- in 1884, 130 years ago.

Why the gap from 1884 to 1947?

Because the United States of 1884 was a racist hellhole, not twenty years removed from the Civil War, with the racist side of that war in abject denial of their defeat, the terrorist Ku Klux Klan only recently disbanded, and with lynchings quickly rising to a peak. Baseball, among other institutions, instituted and kept a "gentlemen's agreement" that blacks would be kept out, reflecting the mood of the country proper. An era that gave us not only rampant lynchings everywhere as far away from the South as Duluth (see "Desolation Row" by Bob Dylan), but the Tulsa race riots (and others), the film "Birth of a Nation", the birth of the (second) Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow laws and Alabama Literacy Tests, and ongoing entrenched racial division in every part of society that became a legacy so deep it took World War II to even begin its unraveling. A "gentlemen's agreement" kept in place by guys like Kennesaw Mountain Landis and Hall of Famer Cap Anson --- white people.

That's a history. That's several generations of Emmett Tills and Dick Rowlands and Medgar Everses persecuted. Meaning not just oneself but one's parents, one's grandparents, and on back as far as memory and oral tradition goes. And all this after Emancipation. Those pictures of people being hosed and bitten by dogs in Birmingham posted earlier? Somebody living right now can point to one of those people and say, "this is my grandmother" or "that's my father". And their parents and grandparents before them suffered the same in their time, or far worse. That's a legacy.

The world of 50 years ago is the world where we come from. It's exactly what today is made of. It's not some historical door that closes on December 31st; it lives in the memory; it's part of the makeup of people walking around right now. Just as the strife of the Civil War was where Moses Walker's world of 1884 came from; the recent past. So when you think you see an ethnic bloc "refusing to assimilate", what you're seeing is a legacy of mistrust. And when entity A doesn't trust entity B, the former will do what any other entity feeling mistrust will do -- they close ranks. When baseball shut them out, no pun intended, blacks were forced to form their own teams. Black teams, made up of those who weren't allowed on the white ones. They didn't do that because they decided to "refuse to assimilate"; they did it because the doors to the general greater world were CLOSED.

What you're trying to say here is tantamount to saying, "I don't know why Joe Smith won't assimilate and sit at our lunch table -- what, because we torched his house and raped his sister and murdered his son? Hell, that was a whole month ago. It's in the past. What the ****'s his problem?".

 

[g5000]

Yet when the race card is played on the issue of elections it's played against them?

Also how can an entire ethnicity all vote the same and not be considered mind numb robots?

Minorities are not going to vote for a party overflowing with people who so clearly hate them.