Will more black people vote for Republicans this year?

I don't recall any right winger admitting to it either. Most of them just blame it on the EVIL "liberal media", all while the leaders of their own party tap dance all over them.

 

question should be what percentage of black people vote when a black is not on the ballot. From that notorious right wing site The Root

http://www.theroot.com/articles/pol..._all_the_black_voters_go_on_election_day.html

Note to Hillary Clinton fans: She’s not “the one.” The key takeaway for 2016 that resonated the loudest on Tuesday night: Every state through which Bill and Hillary Clinton stumped was lost to Republicans. “Every single person the Clintons worked for is getting beat,” one former elected official asking for anonymity told The Root on Tuesday evening. “Everyone. They didn’t move the base.” And according to that same YouGov poll, only 53 percent of African Americans have a “very favorable” opinion of Hillary—compared with 11 percent who don’t know. “A 60-plus-year-old white woman who has not had a job outside of politics in 30 years will not excite the Obama coalition,” said the elected official.

 

Yeah, but blacks have sat back since 2008 and seen bitter right wingers refer to Obama as a Muslim, an anti white racist, a hater of his own country, and claim he was born in Kenya, etc. Not to mention a hilarious obsession with "black on white crime", and how Obama is actively telling blacks to attack whites.

So it's very possible, and dare I say likely, that black voters in retaliation to all of that may come out in full force and vote for ANY liberal/democrat politician just to stick a big fat collective middle finger in the faces of bitter race baiting right wingers everywhere.

I could be wrong though. Still, why are conservatives even so concerned about black voters any way? At this point you guys are thoroughly convinced that ANY GOP candidate can defeat ANY Democratic candidate, so what does it all matter?

 

Depends on the Democrat and depends on the Republican. Who can excite their base, same as any other election. I don't think Hillary can do that on, nor do I think Jeb Bush can. People want something fresh all the polls show that. It could be a exciting nail biter with maybe Kerry/O'Malley vs Walker/Martinez and yes I know Kerry is a retread too but the bench is narrow on the DNC side. I am not sure why Clinton is bothering, the far left does not like her and neither does the media then add in she is dull as dishwater, has baggage, was a flop in the midterms as a campaign speaker and that folks is what makes the people at the RNC smile so much.

Seriously I expect Kerry to run with Obama's backing if this Iran thing happens

 

I'm betting on a GOP win regardless of the Dem candidate. The pendulum will swing to the right after being on the left for eight years. With a few exceptions of course, that's how it generally goes. That's how American voters roll. For this reason, it's why I know the GOP won't let Cruz be the nominee. They know that he could break the general trend, because he just isn't electable.

 

the republicans are a joke.... the democrats represent the real america the repubs can barely secure the paranoid morbidly obese white supremacist vote. i just dont understand how this political party can exist in 2015

 

I think you're underestimating HRC and her connection to democrats. Look at the 2008 Democratic Primary, that was a nail-biter. Clinton actually won the popular vote and lost the delegate count by less than 2%. She was a major force then and an even bigger one now.

Democrat and Republican Primaries are completely different things. The old adage of "Democrats fall in love and Republicans fall in line" is true more often than not. While we all look at these primaries one plus years out we think HRC most likely has a cakewalk and the GOP is anyone's game, history tells us otherwise. The Democrats are most likely to have a dark horse overtake the front-runner and the Republican reporting the most money first is most likely to win.

Now I'm not saying Clinton will lose the primary again, to the contrary, history repeats itself until it doesn't. Democrats love Hillary Clinton and underestimating her with the base is, well, baseless. Try to remember, she lost an extremely close primary to Obama and more people voted for her in the primary than for Obama.

 

She doesn't excite the youth vote (too old for them) and Blacks are not going to vote for her in large numbers out of fear that if she does become president she will make Barack Obama look even worse than he already does to the nation on the whole in comparison. Psychology at play here.

Whatever Hillary once had that made her seem somewhat exciting to people is gone and this despite the MSM occasionally puffing propaganda smoke up her kilt. The other thing is that at least half of all leftwing pundits and journalists do not like Hillary. Those are the ones who intimated for the Obama camp in 2008 that she and Bill were racists. Those are also the ones nowadays who are helping to reveal all these new Clinton scandals. Oh, and finally, Hispanics have no use for her at all as she has never championed them.

 

Well, nobody really excites the youth vote. Obama did increase youth turn-out but not by much. Elections typically don't hinge on the youth vote, it's usually single women and minorities that swing elections.

However, the youth vote is an interesting cohort because it used to be hard to reach the youth. They don't watch the news or read the newspapers. They used to be too busy to sit down and consider things - youth is wasted on the young, etc. Social media has changed this. They are connected 24-7 now and able to be reached through unconventional means. This benefits democrats, as getting them to vote and educated on issues was difficult because it was hard to connect to them, now they are connected all the time.

Another issue is they are cell phone dependent and not land line. So, it is hard to poll them and their enthusiasm. It really is a changing world. Consider how Obama reached out to them to enroll in healthcare coverage. Facebook and twitter were huge in raising awareness and nontraditional media outlets like buzzfeed and the daily show got them to enroll at healthy levels.

The democrats have a huge social media advantage.

 

Black Americans can be expected to vote for the Democratic candidate as usual despite Angry White Guys' instructing them not to. So will Hispanic and Asian Americans, and most women and younger Americans as well.

Angry White Guys demeaning and maligning Democratic voters for voting Democratic is an especially ineffective strategy for getting them to vote Republican.

"Be more like us!" is not an attractive proposition.

​

.

A Tea Party Rally​

There are some perfectly respectable Republican politicians - e.g., Gov. Baker in Massachusetts - but the rabid attention-seeking wacko birds befoul the brand name.

 

And then get screwed by them if they win..........as usual.

 

That's the Angry White Guy line, of course, but only Angry White Guys seem to buy it.

Every American gets to vote for the candidate he prefers, and those who differ demeaning him for it is a particularly ineffective form of sniveling.

 

Angry 'white' guys [?].................

http://goo.gl/RMFVPI
------------------------------------------------

Blacks voting for dems all the time and getting more of the same when they win makes them snivel. They have themselves to blame.
So how did you feel about those who mocked Bush voters? I figured.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein

 

Right. That tactic is using hyperbole to win the argument and conceding the issue. I think the Republican Party, as a whole, as falling into this dark pit. They no longer argue the issue. Take immigration for example, we have something in the order of 11 million people here illegally, many with American children and there is no credible policy coming from the right but they will say the nastiest things about these people here illegally and trump up democratic motives for addressing this issue. The fact of the matter is without a credible policy change, Republicans are simply endorsing the status quo - which nobody thinks is a good idea, not even them. So they say all of these nasty things in lieu of policy. And,, this is a problem because despite all of the anger based rhetoric people know the difference between something and nothing. This is why immigration is a losing issue for them, even though the hate filled rhetoric wins the argument, they've lost the majority of people because there is no credible policy coming from the right.

To further expand on this problem, I remember when The Heritage Foundation was a policy institute, rather than a super-pac. They used to come out with some really interesting stuff but that has died. The traditional idea factories of the Republican Party are dying off, they've simply become bankrupt of legitimate ideas to manage the government.

 

Yes, that is Republican Senator Lindsey Graham's apt characterization:

 

Here? LOL!

http://goo.gl/RMFVPI

 

It was the Heritage Foundation (I used to contract to do work for them) that endorsed and praised Romney's individual-mandate idea to achieve universal health care coverage - back when Newtie was trying to take credit for the concept and TP superstar Jim DeMint was touting it as "something we should do for the whole country."

I am confident that the GOP will overcome their TP infestation as an existential necessity. The party's 90% White, older, male base is shriveling up as the nation's electorate becomes more diverse.

Instead of whining about "Liberals!", Gays, Blacks, Hispanics, etc., they'll just have to learn to cope with ineluctable reality if they want to participate in America.

 

I agree, Dems are definitely on the decline and I don't think Obama's courtship with Iran is going to help any

 

Dem's do not own the youth anymore. Exit polls showed a 21.5% turnout , or about the same as 2010 however

in 2008, an exceptionally strong year for Democrats, when youth support for Barack Obama set the all-time record in presidential elections. The change from an extraordinary presidential year to a rather typical midterm year hurt the Democratic Senate incumbents. Their advantage among youth voters shrank compared to 2008 in some key states, such as North Carolina (down from 71% in 2008 to 54% in 2014) and Virginia (down from 71% to just 50%). And in some states that had been expected to be competitive this year, the Republican Senatorial candidate won the youth vote along with all older groups–Arkansas and Alaska being examples.


http://www.civicyouth.org/21-3-yout...-estimate-comparable-to-recent-midterm-years/

and the Dems expect a 60+ white woman to excite the blacks and the youth ? Just saying that sounds ridiculous. It is not 2008 and Hillary is not Obama, the libs need to accept reality

 

I think as more blacks become middle class and better they will wake up and see just how much of their hard earn money the progressive want to take from them. Once they see the left wing attack on the middle class they will change their minds. Or at least really start to question why the progressive politicians protect wealthy corps and hate the middle class.

 

I'm curious why you keep trying to tag a conservative or liberal label on him? That had nothing to do with my comment. My point was that as a Democrat, he could attract Black votes even though he was a segregationist. And it was because of his party, the Democratic Party. Going back decades or longer to try to pin conservative or liberal labels on people is a pointless exercise. It only has meaning in the broadest meaning of those terms. I'm sure if you went back in time to say, 1962 and asked Wallace and JFK their thoughts on gay marriage, you would probably get answers that would cause you to label them conservative bigots.

Wallace while he was alive was considered a Populist, so he's politically more like Perot than William F Buckley.

 

Progressives support the rich over the poor and middle class? Have I entered a bizarre mirror universe?

 

Progressive obama allowed poor and middle class payroll taxes to increase by allowing tax breaks for the poor and middle class to expire.
Obamacare is a middle class tax increase. The courts agreed.
Regulation pushed by the progressive left only hurts the middle class small business owners. Not their global tax dodgers like facebook and GM and GE and monsanto etc.
bringing in low wage workers putting small businesses like mom and pop Sheetrockers out of work. So many black owned companies are out of work around here because of the cheap labor progressives welcomed here to get votes. Brickers, Sheetrockers, painters, etc. can't compete with these cheap labor. Resulting in higher black unemployment.
Progressive attack on the middle and lower class must stop.

 

On the decline for now...

All it takes is another horrendous GOP presidency like the last one for the Dems to gain back full power.

 

I already addressed the black vote. I believe by the time he got it, it was at a time when he was claiming to have "changed" his views on race. Not saying he really was, as he was likely pandering to get votes, but there you go.

Simple question Mike. If Wallace were alive today, where would he find a better home? The Republicans or the Democrats?