I am actively following U.S politics, what are the policies the Democrats are pushing for 2018?

[John Shaw]

It's possible that the anti-Trump message would be enough for 2018, and possibly 2020, but I wouldn't bet on it, and in any case it's a very poor long-term strategy. Just like the republicans completely scrapping their interest in inclusiveness to pander to old white guys. It might work for a little while, but the clock is ticking.

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

Many in the GOP are against illegals coming to this country. There is nothing wrong with that. There is no coded languages for black people. That's the media and liberals that constantly try to make conservatives seem racist which in many cases, race wasn't even part of the subject.

The protesters in Charlottesville were merely trying to preserve history and were trouble free until ANTIFA showed up. They applied for a permit to protest and did exactly that, just like any other group who legally holds protests.

You have a right to your opinion, but I don't think most people, especially black people, would agree with it. The whole "save a statue" thing was just an excuse to go on a tear, yelling nazi and KKK slogans and waving torches around. Plus, the only person who died was a counter-protester.

You mean everybody that protested were screaming Nazi and KKK slogans? I must have missed that part.

Many blacks are ignorant to politics which is why they vote Democrat.

Ask a black man how he votes, and he will tell you Democrat.
Ask him why, and he will tell you because Republicans are for the rich white people.
Ask who told him that, and he will tell you the Democrats.

If blacks ever started to take an interest in politics, the Democrat party is screwed when blacks learn what Democrats have done to them the last several generations.

I can't account for EVERYONE who was there doing it, but yeah; there are videos online that show a pretty sizable number of people taking part. I'm sure you know that already, though.

The discussion of whether democrats have been good to black folks is something else. I'm inclined to vote "no", though I don't know what republicans have to offer them either, other than a sort of supercilious scorn, as one can find regularly on here.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Of the hundreds of hours of interviews, discussions, debates, press conferences, I am still unaware of the policies that the Democrats are promoting.

All of the alt-left celebrities and supporters always say how could anyone vote for Trump?" I ask the same thing, "just what is it you are apparently voting for"? Just as many on the alt-left didn't know why they were protesting, I assume most don't know why they are supposed to be voting for the democrats.

"Well, people tell me to vote for them because they are better"?

Restoring Constitutional checks and balances to our government since the GOP is awol in their responsibility there

Which check and balance have they been awol on?

Approving totally unqualified judges, not doing ANYTHING to stop his profiting from office with his business, obstructing the investigations into his possible treasonous behavior, not calling him out for his obvious unfitness for office

Approving judges that you decree to be unqualified isn't a breach of constitutional checks and balances. It's just something that you don't like.

Trump's refusal to cease the operations of his businesses while in office is a breach of recent tradition, but again, not a breach of constitutional checks and balances. Just something that you don't like.

Where has Donald Trump obstructed the investigations? Are you aware that he could, without violating the constitution in the slightest, fire Mueller and order the Justice Department to fuck right off? He hasn't. Thus, not only has he not violated any constitutional provisions in this regard, he's actually stayed out of the way of the investigation to a degree that is leaps and bounds beyond what the constitution would require.

The fact that you believe Trump to be mentally unfit doesn't ACTUALLY qualify as a constitutional imperative to remove him from office. If you could pull out of your bubble and your ego long enough to recognize that your beliefs don't constitute fucking FACTS, you might see how ridiculous it is to claim that not impeaching a man who you believe to be crazy isn't a breach of the constitution.

Now, do you have anything to offer that's an actual breach of the separation of powers, or just a bunch of examples of things about the president that you don't like? Keep in mind, these concepts aren't synonymous.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

I started a thread on this the other day. Democrats don’t have anything

I think the Democratic strategy is summed up in simple terms.."Dump Trump".

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

What numbers are these? And has it become old white people vs everybody else, or has it become the left vs old white people?

How the 2016 Vote Broke Down by Race, Gender, and Age – Decision Desk HQ

As I said, I don't like the idea of categorizing people based upon characteristics that are beyond their control, but ... the numbers don't lie. Even among whites, Clinton and Trump were pretty much even in the 30 - 44. It wasn't until you get beyond 44 that it becomes really lopsided in Trump's favor.

Ah, I see what you're getting at. I took your meaning as there being some conflict between the demographics mentioned, you're just referring to their voting breakdown regarding Trump.

That bit I find largely unsurprising. Most people aren't into politics to the point that they run down footage and quotes to fact check what the headlines and the evening news claims people said or did. You couple that with the fact that your initial claims, heated rhetoric against "Mexicans" (as opposed to illegal aliens, which is who he was actually typically referring to, as opposed to all Mexicans), coded language about black people being savages (and I've still yet to see a remotely convincing example of any of this), the emphasis on Roy Moore's stances on gay marriage and abortion in relation to Donald Trump's last minute endorsement (as though A - Donald Trump has ever expressed a lack of support for gay marriage or B - There's even the slightest, most remote chance that the congress would pass bans on either of these things, or that those bans would hold despite the supreme court having ruled both of these things to be constitutional rights), Trump "taking too long" to condemn the Charlottesville racists (sorry, was he supposed to have all the knowledge about that incident instantly? If the president hears the press claim that people are bad, should he just condemn them without looking into the matter for himself?), these things are all the narrative of the VAST majority of the press, particularly the news-lite sources from which most people get their info. If you're one of these people who don't spend time digging into this shit, it's very easy to assume that the news people are giving you the news, and therefore Trump must have a big problem with non white people. If that rubs you the wrong way, of course you're going to vote against him, and most people, particularly those falling into non white demographics, as well as most people born in the '60's or later, find racial bigotry rightly abhorrent.

Old white people are less likely to get bent out of shape about these claims for several reasons, old people in general are more likely to vote conservative than are the rest of us, and old people in general are more likely to have the spare time to actually pay attention to politics, rather than breezing over some NY Times and the evening news, or worse getting their info from Trevor Noah and John Oliver.

 

[Norman]

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

What numbers are these? And has it become old white people vs everybody else, or has it become the left vs old white people?

How the 2016 Vote Broke Down by Race, Gender, and Age – Decision Desk HQ

As I said, I don't like the idea of categorizing people based upon characteristics that are beyond their control, but ... the numbers don't lie. Even among whites, Clinton and Trump were pretty much even in the 30 - 44. It wasn't until you get beyond 44 that it becomes really lopsided in Trump's favor.

Good point.

Those numbers won't be upheld as the leftist indoctrination centers called universities are losing credibility day after day. People want them to just focus on their jobs and not on indoctrination.

Part of history education nowadays: Gauge your white privilege.



Of course I would have to question your sanity if you are sending your kids into these facilities.

 

[Votto]

Of the hundreds of hours of interviews, discussions, debates, press conferences, I am still unaware of the policies that the Democrats are promoting.

All of the alt-left celebrities and supporters always say how could anyone vote for Trump?" I ask the same thing, "just what is it you are apparently voting for"? Just as many on the alt-left didn't know why they were protesting, I assume most don't know why they are supposed to be voting for the democrats.

"Well, people tell me to vote for them because they are better"?

Democrats wish list.

More Mexicans
More Muslims
More taxes
More welfare
More regulation
More control
Ban guns
Crush old people
More fees
more imports
More free stuff
Less free - dom
More police murdered
Cripple military
More LGBTQFYRTHENDD

You forgot:

Kill more babies via abortion
Kill the economy with more carbon emission hysteria.
Kill the free economy in any way possible cuz making money is evil.
Kill more conservative Supreme court justices like Scalia who was found in bed dead with a pillow over his face.

It's what they call the culture of death

 

[John Shaw]

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

What numbers are these? And has it become old white people vs everybody else, or has it become the left vs old white people?

How the 2016 Vote Broke Down by Race, Gender, and Age – Decision Desk HQ

As I said, I don't like the idea of categorizing people based upon characteristics that are beyond their control, but ... the numbers don't lie. Even among whites, Clinton and Trump were pretty much even in the 30 - 44. It wasn't until you get beyond 44 that it becomes really lopsided in Trump's favor.

Ah, I see what you're getting at. I took your meaning as there being some conflict between the demographics mentioned, you're just referring to their voting breakdown regarding Trump.

That bit I find largely unsurprising. Most people aren't into politics to the point that they run down footage and quotes to fact check what the headlines and the evening news claims people said or did. You couple that with the fact that your initial claims, heated rhetoric against "Mexicans" (as opposed to illegal aliens, which is who he was actually typically referring to, as opposed to all Mexicans), coded language about black people being savages (and I've still yet to see a remotely convincing example of any of this), the emphasis on Roy Moore's stances on gay marriage and abortion in relation to Donald Trump's last minute endorsement (as though A - Donald Trump has ever expressed a lack of support for gay marriage or B - There's even the slightest, most remote chance that the congress would pass bans on either of these things, or that those bans would hold despite the supreme court having ruled both of these things to be constitutional rights), Trump "taking too long" to condemn the Charlottesville racists (sorry, was he supposed to have all the knowledge about that incident instantly? If the president hears the press claim that people are bad, should he just condemn them without looking into the matter for himself?), these things are all the narrative of the VAST majority of the press, particularly the news-lite sources from which most people get their info. If you're one of these people who don't spend time digging into this shit, it's very easy to assume that the news people are giving you the news, and therefore Trump must have a big problem with non white people. If that rubs you the wrong way, of course you're going to vote against him, and most people, particularly those falling into non white demographics, as well as most people born in the '60's or later, find racial bigotry rightly abhorrent.

Old white people are less likely to get bent out of shape about these claims for several reasons, old people in general are more likely to vote conservative than are the rest of us, and old people in general are more likely to have the spare time to actually pay attention to politics, rather than breezing over some NY Times and the evening news, or worse getting their info from Trevor Noah and John Oliver.

I think you make some good points. Actually, some of them are points that I've made in the past (about the distinction between illegals and Mexicans). However, sometimes it isn't so much the actual message, but the way it's presented. It comes off as hostile at worst and ignorant and condescending at best. His comments about how blacks live in poverty and violence, painting the picture that black people are some monolithic society of inner city dwellers that have nothing to lose. There is some truth in there; black people tend to have more issues with poverty and crime, statistically. It was just delivered very poorly, and received poorly. He has had some other issues specific to blacks in the past, but I'll leave that alone for now.

If the GOP wants to be more than the party for old white people, they need to dramatically change how they address these sensitive issues. They are not coming across well to anyone who isn't already inclined to think negatively of minorities, I promise you that.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

I'm guessing you wouldn't go that far because you don't have any hard examples. That guess is based largely on this "coded language" shit. From what I've seen in the last few years coming out of the far left, "coded language", "dog whistle", and similar terms essentially mean "Nothing wrong was actually said, but if you take my thoroughly uncharitable assumptions about this person's character as fact, and then run their statement through the lenses of my ideology with that assumption firmly in the foreground, you'll see that the speaker in question is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic hater of the poor, and the sick, and babies, and puppies, and they probably squeeze their toothpaste from the middle of the tube and park in handicapped stalls."

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

What numbers are these? And has it become old white people vs everybody else, or has it become the left vs old white people?

How the 2016 Vote Broke Down by Race, Gender, and Age – Decision Desk HQ

As I said, I don't like the idea of categorizing people based upon characteristics that are beyond their control, but ... the numbers don't lie. Even among whites, Clinton and Trump were pretty much even in the 30 - 44. It wasn't until you get beyond 44 that it becomes really lopsided in Trump's favor.

Ah, I see what you're getting at. I took your meaning as there being some conflict between the demographics mentioned, you're just referring to their voting breakdown regarding Trump.

That bit I find largely unsurprising. Most people aren't into politics to the point that they run down footage and quotes to fact check what the headlines and the evening news claims people said or did. You couple that with the fact that your initial claims, heated rhetoric against "Mexicans" (as opposed to illegal aliens, which is who he was actually typically referring to, as opposed to all Mexicans), coded language about black people being savages (and I've still yet to see a remotely convincing example of any of this), the emphasis on Roy Moore's stances on gay marriage and abortion in relation to Donald Trump's last minute endorsement (as though A - Donald Trump has ever expressed a lack of support for gay marriage or B - There's even the slightest, most remote chance that the congress would pass bans on either of these things, or that those bans would hold despite the supreme court having ruled both of these things to be constitutional rights), Trump "taking too long" to condemn the Charlottesville racists (sorry, was he supposed to have all the knowledge about that incident instantly? If the president hears the press claim that people are bad, should he just condemn them without looking into the matter for himself?), these things are all the narrative of the VAST majority of the press, particularly the news-lite sources from which most people get their info. If you're one of these people who don't spend time digging into this shit, it's very easy to assume that the news people are giving you the news, and therefore Trump must have a big problem with non white people. If that rubs you the wrong way, of course you're going to vote against him, and most people, particularly those falling into non white demographics, as well as most people born in the '60's or later, find racial bigotry rightly abhorrent.

Old white people are less likely to get bent out of shape about these claims for several reasons, old people in general are more likely to vote conservative than are the rest of us, and old people in general are more likely to have the spare time to actually pay attention to politics, rather than breezing over some NY Times and the evening news, or worse getting their info from Trevor Noah and John Oliver.

I think you make some good points. Actually, some of them are points that I've made in the past (about the distinction between illegals and Mexicans). However, sometimes it isn't so much the actual message, but the way it's presented. It comes off as hostile at worst and ignorant and condescending at best. His comments about how blacks live in poverty and violence, painting the picture that black people are some monolithic society of inner city dwellers that have nothing to lose. There is some truth in there; black people tend to have more issues with poverty and crime, statistically. It was just delivered very poorly, and received poorly. He has had some other issues specific to blacks in the past, but I'll leave that alone for now.

If the GOP wants to be more than the party for old white people, they need to dramatically change how they address these sensitive issues. They are not coming across well to anyone who isn't already inclined to think negatively of minorities, I promise you that.

I'll give you that, definitely. One of my problems concerning how Trump presents himself is that his mouth seems to move faster than his brain. He says a lot of things that represent statistical truths, but he's got such a sensationalist way of presenting everything that he tends to over exaggerate and over generalize and it makes a lot of his statements inaccurate when the message they're meant to convey is accurate. Then you couple that with a sensationalist press and the over exaggerated and over generalized characterization of quotes that already lean heavily in that direction and suddenly the streets are filled with people who think they need to break out their sticks and shields and fight the 4th Reich.

 

[John Shaw]

I am not fond of identity politics, actually, but it's pretty clear that it has become old white people vs. everyone else. Whether that was the intention or not (I'm assuming it was, since I don't think the GOP is quite that incompetent), that is how it's ended up. The numbers don't lie.

What numbers are these? And has it become old white people vs everybody else, or has it become the left vs old white people?

How the 2016 Vote Broke Down by Race, Gender, and Age – Decision Desk HQ

As I said, I don't like the idea of categorizing people based upon characteristics that are beyond their control, but ... the numbers don't lie. Even among whites, Clinton and Trump were pretty much even in the 30 - 44. It wasn't until you get beyond 44 that it becomes really lopsided in Trump's favor.

Ah, I see what you're getting at. I took your meaning as there being some conflict between the demographics mentioned, you're just referring to their voting breakdown regarding Trump.

That bit I find largely unsurprising. Most people aren't into politics to the point that they run down footage and quotes to fact check what the headlines and the evening news claims people said or did. You couple that with the fact that your initial claims, heated rhetoric against "Mexicans" (as opposed to illegal aliens, which is who he was actually typically referring to, as opposed to all Mexicans), coded language about black people being savages (and I've still yet to see a remotely convincing example of any of this), the emphasis on Roy Moore's stances on gay marriage and abortion in relation to Donald Trump's last minute endorsement (as though A - Donald Trump has ever expressed a lack of support for gay marriage or B - There's even the slightest, most remote chance that the congress would pass bans on either of these things, or that those bans would hold despite the supreme court having ruled both of these things to be constitutional rights), Trump "taking too long" to condemn the Charlottesville racists (sorry, was he supposed to have all the knowledge about that incident instantly? If the president hears the press claim that people are bad, should he just condemn them without looking into the matter for himself?), these things are all the narrative of the VAST majority of the press, particularly the news-lite sources from which most people get their info. If you're one of these people who don't spend time digging into this shit, it's very easy to assume that the news people are giving you the news, and therefore Trump must have a big problem with non white people. If that rubs you the wrong way, of course you're going to vote against him, and most people, particularly those falling into non white demographics, as well as most people born in the '60's or later, find racial bigotry rightly abhorrent.

Old white people are less likely to get bent out of shape about these claims for several reasons, old people in general are more likely to vote conservative than are the rest of us, and old people in general are more likely to have the spare time to actually pay attention to politics, rather than breezing over some NY Times and the evening news, or worse getting their info from Trevor Noah and John Oliver.

I think you make some good points. Actually, some of them are points that I've made in the past (about the distinction between illegals and Mexicans). However, sometimes it isn't so much the actual message, but the way it's presented. It comes off as hostile at worst and ignorant and condescending at best. His comments about how blacks live in poverty and violence, painting the picture that black people are some monolithic society of inner city dwellers that have nothing to lose. There is some truth in there; black people tend to have more issues with poverty and crime, statistically. It was just delivered very poorly, and received poorly. He has had some other issues specific to blacks in the past, but I'll leave that alone for now.

If the GOP wants to be more than the party for old white people, they need to dramatically change how they address these sensitive issues. They are not coming across well to anyone who isn't already inclined to think negatively of minorities, I promise you that.

I'll give you that, definitely. One of my problems concerning how Trump presents himself is that his mouth seems to move faster than his brain. He says a lot of things that represent statistical truths, but he's got such a sensationalist way of presenting everything that he tends to over exaggerate and over generalize and it makes a lot of his statements inaccurate when the message they're meant to convey is accurate. Then you couple that with a sensationalist press and the over exaggerated and over generalized characterization of quotes that already lean heavily in that direction and suddenly the streets are filled with people who think they need to break out their sticks and shields and fight the 4th Reich.

Yeah, I think that about sums it up. The president dramatizes and the press is there to sensationalize.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When was the GOP not inclusive? I don't know anybody that's been refused to join.

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

Many in the GOP are against illegals coming to this country. There is nothing wrong with that. There is no coded languages for black people. That's the media and liberals that constantly try to make conservatives seem racist which in many cases, race wasn't even part of the subject.

The protesters in Charlottesville were merely trying to preserve history and were trouble free until ANTIFA showed up. They applied for a permit to protest and did exactly that, just like any other group who legally holds protests.

You have a right to your opinion, but I don't think most people, especially black people, would agree with it. The whole "save a statue" thing was just an excuse to go on a tear, yelling nazi and KKK slogans and waving torches around. Plus, the only person who died was a counter-protester.

You mean everybody that protested were screaming Nazi and KKK slogans? I must have missed that part.

Many blacks are ignorant to politics which is why they vote Democrat.

Ask a black man how he votes, and he will tell you Democrat.
Ask him why, and he will tell you because Republicans are for the rich white people.
Ask who told him that, and he will tell you the Democrats.

If blacks ever started to take an interest in politics, the Democrat party is screwed when blacks learn what Democrats have done to them the last several generations.

I can't account for EVERYONE who was there doing it, but yeah; there are videos online that show a pretty sizable number of people taking part. I'm sure you know that already, though.

The discussion of whether democrats have been good to black folks is something else. I'm inclined to vote "no", though I don't know what republicans have to offer them either, other than a sort of supercilious scorn, as one can find regularly on here.

For one, Republicans are against illegal immigration which are killing job opportunities for blacks. Republicans fought hard to continue the School Voucher program specifically designed to get blacks with an aptitude for learning out of those public schools and gives the parents a choice on where to send them. Democrats fought heavily to stop school vouchers and in fact, DumBama got rid of it in DC.

However the only way to keep our country divided is to treat different people differently instead of treating everybody the same (equally) across the board. How do we ever come a united country when we have politicians pandering to this group or that group?

For instance, Republicans support fracking. Fracking not only brought down our fuel prices, but helped clean up the environment at the same time. Blacks shared in the savings just as much as whites and I'm sure it helped their economic conditions. In other words, we did something for everybody and blacks benefited too. Some even credit our first black President with the price decreases even though he was against fracking.

Republicans promote family values. One of the greatest tragedies to the black community are out of wedlock births. Out of wedlock births are directly related to poverty. Promoting family values is something Republicans have done for all people in this country, and if blacks were to follow the message, it would greatly benefit their societies around the country.

 

[John Shaw]

I think we both know it's a little bit more subtle than that. From threats and heated rhetoric toward Mexicans, to coded language implying blacks are lawless savages who need Trump to ride in and save them, to supporting freaks like Moore who are trying to dig back up old losing issues (gay marriage and abortion), and making direct appeals to majority white evangelicals by these means that are abhorrent to many ... plus the mysteriously delayed condemnation of the Charlottesville racists, and I think it's pretty obvious that the GOP is now low key hostile toward non-white people. Some might even call them overtly hostile, though I wouldn't go that far.

Many in the GOP are against illegals coming to this country. There is nothing wrong with that. There is no coded languages for black people. That's the media and liberals that constantly try to make conservatives seem racist which in many cases, race wasn't even part of the subject.

The protesters in Charlottesville were merely trying to preserve history and were trouble free until ANTIFA showed up. They applied for a permit to protest and did exactly that, just like any other group who legally holds protests.

You have a right to your opinion, but I don't think most people, especially black people, would agree with it. The whole "save a statue" thing was just an excuse to go on a tear, yelling nazi and KKK slogans and waving torches around. Plus, the only person who died was a counter-protester.

You mean everybody that protested were screaming Nazi and KKK slogans? I must have missed that part.

Many blacks are ignorant to politics which is why they vote Democrat.

Ask a black man how he votes, and he will tell you Democrat.
Ask him why, and he will tell you because Republicans are for the rich white people.
Ask who told him that, and he will tell you the Democrats.

If blacks ever started to take an interest in politics, the Democrat party is screwed when blacks learn what Democrats have done to them the last several generations.

I can't account for EVERYONE who was there doing it, but yeah; there are videos online that show a pretty sizable number of people taking part. I'm sure you know that already, though.

The discussion of whether democrats have been good to black folks is something else. I'm inclined to vote "no", though I don't know what republicans have to offer them either, other than a sort of supercilious scorn, as one can find regularly on here.

For one, Republicans are against illegal immigration which are killing job opportunities for blacks. Republicans fought hard to continue the School Voucher program specifically designed to get blacks with an aptitude for learning out of those public schools and gives the parents a choice on where to send them. Democrats fought heavily to stop school vouchers and in fact, DumBama got rid of it in DC.

However the only way to keep our country divided is to treat different people differently instead of treating everybody the same (equally) across the board. How do we ever come a united country when we have politicians pandering to this group or that group?

For instance, Republicans support fracking. Fracking not only brought down our fuel prices, but helped clean up the environment at the same time. Blacks shared in the savings just as much as whites and I'm sure it helped their economic conditions. In other words, we did something for everybody and blacks benefited too. Some even credit our first black President with the price decreases even though he was against fracking.

Republicans promote family values. One of the greatest tragedies to the black community are out of wedlock births. Out of wedlock births are directly related to poverty. Promoting family values is something Republicans have done for all people in this country, and if blacks were to follow the message, it would greatly benefit their societies around the country.

I get you.

 

[deanrd]

Democrats promoted the same policies during the last election they have promoted for years.

Affordable education.

Job Training and retraining for those whose jobs have been automated.

School lunches for children.

Healthcare for children.

Affordable healthcare for all of America.

Equal Pay for Equal Work.

Consumer protection.

Credit card reform.

Women's rights.

Advancing American Democracy around the world.

Environmental protection.

Infrastructure investment.

Protecting companies from unfair trade practices (see all Obama's wins in the WTO)

Daycare for working parents.

A path to citizenship for the children of immigrants who came here through no fault of their own and became educated.

There is so much more.

And what do Republicans stand for?

A massive redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the super wealthy.

Fuk the average American.

Cut daycare and school lunches.

Die quickly.

Make enemies all around the world.

Voter suppression.

Poison children (see Flint)

The confederacy.

If Republicans stand for something else, let us know. I'm interested.

Can't imagine it's something you are proud of. We know Republicans like Nazi's and the Alt White.

 

[TheDude]

Incite racism

Incite feminism

Incite victimization, protest something

Protect illegals instead of legals

Diagnose and misconstrue every fucking word from the right, especially those from Trump

Invent excuses and make a frenzy of everything

Reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator

Question everything no matter how absurd to do so

Make a mockery of American traditions and invite multi-culturism and chaos

Suck in more taxes and spend the money on stupid shit to weaken national security and the economy

Introduce confusion into the mainstream for LGBT

Divide the country and blame the right for it

 

[deanrd]

Incite racism

Incite feminism

Incite victimization

Protect illegals instead of legals

Diagnose and misconstrue every fucking word from the right, especially those from Trump

Invent excuses and make a frenzy of everything

Reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator

Question everything no matter how absurd to do so

Make a mockery of American traditions and invite multi-culturism and chaos

Suck in more taxes and spend the money on stupid shit to weaken national security and the economy

Introduce confusion into the mainstream for LGBT

Divide the country and blame the right for it

When you repeat such nonsense, then you are correct, the right deserves the blame for telling their base such ignorance.

Incite feminism? What does that mean? Take away a woman's rights over how own body? Against equal pay for equal work?

Victimization? Republicans, with their tax cuts for the rich, have victimized their own base. You can't deny it.

Protect illegals instead of legals? That doesn't even make sense. Everyone should be equal under the law.

Invent excuses and make a frenzy of everything????????? WTF is that?

We are a land of immigrants. That's the very definition of multiculturalism. Sorry you Nazi's don't like it.

I know your kind hates gays. But gays actually come from American families. Hopefully, you don't have any in your family because it's cruel when your kind drive children to suicide.

Instead of attacking Liberals, what are your kind for? And you better be ready to prove it. Because I can prove everything I said.

And when it comes to a party that's 90% white, then you have already divided the country.

 

[william the wie]

Trump is both annoying and effective. His annoying seemingly halfwitted twits dominate the news cycle and drowns out his opponents making his policies and administrative actions more effective. Watching this soap opera drives the Ds to ever more idiotic and insane positions. Take the big two tax deductions the SALT cap only affects people so rich that they can afford to write off their blue state homes. This is the D donor base. Like all politicians the Ds need votes far more than they need bribes. Cuomo and Moonbeam plus other Ds are up in arms over SALT

The mortgage cap is much more important to leftist voters. Can you hear the political crickets? Folks who watch CNN, MSNBC and similar crap are being told by their political leaders that their concerns don't matter. The people who tune in to Trump's carefully scripted rants and raves may very well think he is crazy but they also know his claimed aims begin and end with helping the little guy. That sells better than the D crap.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Oprah Winfrey for president. We never had a black woman president. If you don't vote for her you are racist and sexist.