Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 101 to 110 of 110

Thread: Why? Who do African Americans go 95%+ and Latinos go 70%+ for (D)?

  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    I can firmly deny that rumor. LIPA, Long Island's electric supplier, SUCKS FOR EVERYONE. Several communities along the North Shore of LI that are home to many of those "evil 1%'s" have been without power since the storm.
    A guy that works for me between him and his wife make very good money, live in a nice suburban neighborhood, they've now been without power for 11 days. It's stupid.

    The big debate on what's dividing the country is 24/7 biased news outlets completing for ratings and headlines.
    Last edited by HessStation; 11-08-2012 at 01:47 PM.

  2. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooklyn Jet View Post
    Anecdotal evidence refutes that. My mom is still living in an affluent neighborhood in Nassau, and is still without power.

    LIPA is ****ty across the board.
    Yep gentleman I'm refering to above also lives in Nassau county.

  3. #103
    So . . . nobody cares to comment on the fact that the GOP expressly targeted the "Negrophobe" vote in the 70s, and expressly said they would never need or want more than 10% of the black vote?

  4. #104
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,844
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    So . . . nobody cares to comment on the fact that the GOP expressly targeted the "Negrophobe" vote in the 70s, and expressly said they would never need or want more than 10% of the black vote?
    Before my time.

    Obviously they underestimated the black electorate and the enthusiasm a black candidate would bring. That can explain their faulty reasoning in believing they would never "need" more than 10%. But in fairness the political landscape has changed so it is hard to judge the 1970's Republican Party by today's issues.

    Now the question is whether they were being racists or realists? Saying they never "want more than 10%" sounds racist IMO. Was that an official party platform or was it a handful of members speaking? There is a difference.

    Either way, I do not see them ever cracking 10% of the black vote in the foreseeable future. The Reps have to gain ground with women and Hispanics and Asians, who are overlooked as well. I think it can be done.

    And I do think this is a two way street. Some Dems have pandered to "anti-white" factions of their party. Biden "put y'all back in chains". Obama, "voting is the best revenge".

  5. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    Before my time.

    Obviously they underestimated the black electorate and the enthusiasm a black candidate would bring. That can explain their faulty reasoning in believing they would never "need" more than 10%. But in fairness the political landscape has changed so it is hard to judge the 1970's Republican Party by today's issues.
    Of course. And its unfair to judge the current Republican party by the statements of the 1970s Republican party.

    But I'll give you an analogy. There's an entire generation of Jews - holocast survivors and large numbers of their children - who will never feel comfortable setting foot in Germany. No matter what policies the Germans adopt, no matter how Israel friendly they are (and, the circumcision idiocy aside, Germany is actually quite Israel/Jew friendly these days), the impressions and feelings left by the Holocaust are so strong that they simply cannot be overcome by facts, no matter how presented, no matter how compelling.

    The same applies here. For many African Americans, voting Republican isn't just unlikely - it's unthinkable. Not because of any real deep weighing of particular policies and positions on an election by election basis - but because 40 years ago, Republicans emphatically defined themselves to that community as wholly unacceptable, as the enemy. It's an attitude parents will and have passed on to their children, and its going to take decades more for that effect to fade away.

    Now the question is whether they were being racists or realists? Saying they never "want more than 10%" sounds racist IMO. Was that an official party platform or was it a handful of members speaking? There is a difference.
    It was the Karl Rove of the time, talking about the GOP's election strategy that got Nixon the Presidency, and their plan for future elections.

    And I do think this is a two way street. Some Dems have pandered to "anti-white" factions of their party. Biden "put y'all back in chains". Obama, "voting is the best revenge".
    Except that messaging wasn't about "whites" - it was about Republicans. Rightly or wrongly (and I think wrongly) they are reinforcing the message that black folks can't trust Republicans. It's good politics for them, bad for the country - because the Republicans aren't the "Negrophobe party" any more, and policy differences deserve to be resolved by voters based on analysis, not prejudice. But that's the reality - and it's one the GOP quite literally brought on themselves.

  6. #106
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    19,228
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Of course. And its unfair to judge the current Republican party by the statements of the 1970s Republican party.

    But I'll give you an analogy. There's an entire generation of Jews - holocast survivors and large numbers of their children - who will never feel comfortable setting foot in Germany. No matter what policies the Germans adopt, no matter how Israel friendly they are (and, the circumcision idiocy aside, Germany is actually quite Israel/Jew friendly these days), the impressions and feelings left by the Holocaust are so strong that they simply cannot be overcome by facts, no matter how presented, no matter how compelling.

    The same applies here. For many African Americans, voting Republican isn't just unlikely - it's unthinkable. Not because of any real deep weighing of particular policies and positions on an election by election basis - but because 40 years ago, Republicans emphatically defined themselves to that community as wholly unacceptable, as the enemy. It's an attitude parents will and have passed on to their children, and its going to take decades more for that effect to fade away.



    It was the Karl Rove of the time, talking about the GOP's election strategy that got Nixon the Presidency, and their plan for future elections.



    Except that messaging wasn't about "whites" - it was about Republicans. Rightly or wrongly (and I think wrongly) they are reinforcing the message that black folks can't trust Republicans. It's good politics for them, bad for the country - because the Republicans aren't the "Negrophobe party" any more, and policy differences deserve to be resolved by voters based on analysis, not prejudice. But that's the reality - and it's one the GOP quite literally brought on themselves.
    Ironically, for over 100 years prior to the "Southern Strategy", the opposite was true. Southerners would not vote Republican because the GOP was the party of Lincoln. At some point (the 70s basically), they swapped.

    People like Phil Gramm initially started out as Democrats.

  7. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    So . . . nobody cares to comment on the fact that the GOP expressly targeted the "Negrophobe" vote in the 70s, and expressly said they would never need or want more than 10% of the black vote?
    Nothing to say tbh. You were so clear and factual in your reply, and the logic made so much sense......and obviously, there is no action (R) can thus take to fix it......that I was, rare for me, rather reply-less.

    One of the best answers I've read since election day on this issue.

  8. #108
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,519
    Peaceful Germans of 2012 should be shunned because of the acts of their forebears in 1940? We are told we should ignore Muslim atrocities
    against America that happened last month and not hate Muslims by some of the same doofuses!

    Even though no party historically has done more to hurt blacks than (D),
    (R), the party of Lincoln is now worse than (D). Blacks werent even invited to the (D) convention until 1924.
    (R) never had Blacks in chains.

    Ill give a few clues out for the benefit of the usual suspects who need some. Blacks have voted predominantly (D) since 1936 and been predominantly (D) registered since 1950. All that even though (D) was the Jim Crow party through the 1960s, supposedly because (D) rolled back their own Teens Wilson segregation policies in the 30s and 40s-FEPC etc.

    Nevertheless, Eisenhower and Nixon received as much as 40% of Black support but the turning point was 1964 when MLK a GOPer told blacks to vote against Goldwater (who was against the CRA) and vote for LBJ (a virulent racist also against the CRA). No matter that GOP Congressmen voted the CRA/VRA in MLK said to vote against GOP then, so ever it must be so.

    As for the sub-cipher B. Hussein-strictly Identity Politics all the way. Real wages and income down, more so for Blacks, Black UE up, but, he is one of "us"! He'll eventually get it done, maybe his 3rd term...
    Last edited by Jungle Shift Jet; 11-08-2012 at 04:26 PM.

  9. #109
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    The Big Apple, USA
    Posts
    22,163
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    Peaceful Germans of 2012 should be shunned because of the acts of their forebears in 1940? We are told we should ignore Muslim atrocities
    against America that happened last month and not hate Muslims by some of the same doofuses!

    Even though no party historically has done more to hurt blacks than (D),
    (R), the party of Lincoln is now worse than (D). Blacks werent even invited to the (D) convention until 1924.
    (R) never had Blacks in chains.

    Ill give a few clues out for the benefit of the usual suspects who need some. Blacks have voted predominantly (D) since 1936 and been predominantly (D) registered since 1950. All that even though (D) was the Jim Crow party through the 1960s, supposedly because (D) rolled back their own Teens Wilson segregation policies in the 30s and 40s-FEPC etc.

    Nevertheless, Eisenhower and Nixon received as much as 40% of Black support but the turning point was 1964 when MLK a GOPer told blacks to vote against Goldwater (who was against the CRA) and vote for LBJ (a virulent racist also against the CRA). No matter that GOP Congressmen voted the CRA/VRA in MLK said to vote against GOP then, so ever it must be so.

    As for the sub-cipher B. Hussein-strictly Identity Politics all the way. Real wages and income down, more so for Blacks, Black UE up, but, he is one of "us"! He'll eventually get it done, maybe his 3rd term...
    Seek help



    Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

  10. #110
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,519
    Quote Originally Posted by sg3 View Post
    Seek help



    Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
    Talking to yourself again Skippy?

    Let me know what I said was incorrect.

    You won nothing except your own death panel, congrats

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us