Republican party needs to attract more black voters

That's why I think this is such a great example, and I'm always grateful when a Democratic partisan stupidly brings this up, since there is a near identical Democratic example, which got about 1/100th of the press coverage. What the Republican said was wrong, but what the Democrat senate leader said was worse since we aren't talking about a mere segregationist, but a recruiter for the Klan, who, was being held up as a leader during the Civil War!

The Republican lost his job. The Democrat...nothing happened. I guess when you have such a lock on the black vote, you can afford to treat them with contempt.

And to prove how much contempt you have, you have an actual serving Vice President making racist statements every couple of weeks and you're fine with it.

 

In the polls, black people consistently identify poverty, education, racism, gun violence and health care as their top priorities. On all four of those issues, the GOP's answer is "do nothing." On education, they have a terrible idea- vouchers. But, at least they have an idea on that one. And, they've found that they gained a fair amount of black support for that. They need to do something similar on the others. Come up with some kind of way that they can at least have something to offer on the issue.

 

The GOP fights against every attempt thus far to address economic racial inequality. They oppose AA, they oppose anti-employment discrimination laws, they oppose poverty amelioration programs, they oppose urban renewal projects, the oppose "workfare" programs like Americorps, etc.

They dropped off all resumes in person. I am wondering if you are reading about one of the other studies that they summarize in the intro instead of reading about this experiment. There are oodles of studies of the issue using many different approaches and they all find pretty much the same thing, so I don't think we can write it off as some kind of quirk about the study.

Same list as above.

Everybody always fares better under Democrats:


GDP Performance- Divided and Unified Government

 

apples and oranges. We would be a better country TODAY if America had elected a segregationist racist in 1948. That is a statement about where we are as a country and a statement about where the speaker feels we would be if something else had happened. That's powerful. Trent Lott thought that America would be a better place in 2002 if we had turned our backs on civil rights and, instead, moved toward MORE segregation and more inequality and more bigotry and more racism. Trent Lott felt that America would be BETTER if we had kept separate but equal in place... if we had had a president that ENDORSED and CHAMPIONED inequality. Black people in America heard the senior republican in our congress say that... is it any wonder they distrust the GOP?

Commenting on Robert Byrd's leadership qualities is nothing like that. If Trent Lott had merely said that ol' Strom was a great senator and a great leader and would have been a great leader at a point in our distant past, we wouldn't be having this discussion. No one would have made a big deal of that.

Oh, and Tom Daschle, the democratic leader, was not the senator who praised Byrd... it was Chris Dodd.... but why let a little thing like the truth spoil your argument, eh?

 

I would urge you to watch this movie and then, perhaps, revise your statement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Place_at_the_Table

 

ROFL what do you think I'm doing here and have done previously?

They were Populist, learn the difference.

And ran to the party that DID support Civil Rights, DID support Voting Rights and nominated the first Governor to racially integrate the state National Guard even before Truman integrated the federal military? Want to explain that? Why would they do that?

Ran to the party whose President ordered that desegregation and enforced it with the military?

It's what I know I lived it. Desegregation died because the country as a whole, including the South, was getting fed up with it and saw how wrong it was and don't try to pretend that segregation ONLY existed in the South. The segregationist who had a home in the Democrat party were dying out and no one supported them anymore especially the younger generations who were taking over the political power.

 

No right, he was a very good recruiter.

When it came time to elect the top officer (Exalted Cyclops) in the local Klan unit, Byrd won unanimously.[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Ku_Klux_Klan

Which was not about segregation.

Ahh he defended his KKK membership and lied about it in the process..

“He once had a fleeting association with the Ku Klux Klan, what does that mean? I’ll tell you what it means. He was a country boy from the hills and hollows from West Virginia. He was trying to get elected,” former President Bill Clinton said of Sen. Robert Byrd.

Apparently more than Byrd.

And lost and went right back into the Democrat party where segregationist found a home and was reelected as a Democrat and served in high positions as a Democrat.

 

He said "we wouldn't be in the mess were are in today" and what was that mess to which he was referring? The year was 1980 with Reagan running against Carter, was race the issue or the economy?

 

the year was 2002, not 1980.

"I want to say this about my state. When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either."

we'd be a better country today if we had followed Strom's plan and platform and stayed a racist segregationist country.

 

It was Chris Dodd, you're right. But I don't see how you think they are an apple an oranges situation. The situations are virtually identical. Unless of course you think that Dodd meant to send Byrd back in time to be a civil war leader. Otherwise, why use that example? Why, would a Klan leader be an exceptionally good leader during the civil war, of all the periods of American history? Maybe you have some talking points for that?

But Black people never heard that. It was barely covered. However if a county commissioner sends a watermelon email, that will be covered on all networks.

 

He first said it in 1980

" "You know, if we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today.""

and reiterated in 2002 when guess what, the "mess we were in" was an economic mess as in 2002 which also had the foreign policy mess, but neither a racial mess.

And he apologize to any one who mistakenly took it to mean racial.

Sad you would jump on a birthday praise for a man who had repented his ways from the 30 years passed as some sort of indictment for the entire Republican party.

 

There is no doubt that some blacks (like Latinos and other minorities) are influenced to vote Democrat because of outrageously racist comments made by people like him and Ann Coulter. But overall, they do so because of the policies and politics of the GOP and its elitist bent that is the real reason why they vote as they do.


Consider this:



http://sheppardpost.com/the-top-ten-reasons-not-to-vote-republican-in-the-mid-terms/


THE TOP TEN REASONS NOT TO VOTE REPUBLICAN IN THE MIDTERMS




This Republican House has the least public mandate of any Congress in history. In the 2012 elections, the Republicans won 234 seats to the Democrats 201. But the Democrats won 48.8% of the popular vote, to the Republican’s 47.6%. The Democrat’s vote tally was nearly one-and-a-half-million higher. There is no precedent for this, not even close – never has the legitimate preference of the voters been so distorted.

If the Democrats had won – because they got the most votes – the Tea Party would be far less influential. There would have been no debt ceiling crisis, roiling markets and shaking consumer confidence, and no government shutdown lasting sixteen days.

With the Senate having passed a bi-partisan Immigration bill with more than two-thirds of the chamber voting yea, the house would, by now, have followed suit, with a final bill coming out of conference, bound for the president’s desk.




Republicans through their gerrymandering and other laws in the various states do all they can to limit black/minority voting. This is an issue that is largely ignored by the controlled right wing media and needs to be discussed openly. I would venture to guess that if it was, minorities would be even less inclined to vote Republican.

 

Why join up with a political party that hates you based on your skin color or ethnic/religious background?

Why join a political party in the first place? Better to be an independent and vote how want to? That way your beholden to no one.

 

I have no reason to believe the vast majority of blacks even know who Ann Coulter is and are cluesless to what Lott said 24 years ago at Thurmond's birthday party.

It what state has black/minority voting been limited by Republicans? If you want to talk, gerrymandering, talk Democrat abuse of the Voting Rights Act. I have to drive past my neighborhood firestation several miles to the civic center to vote because of government gerrymandering to produce a black voting district, yes because of race I face this "suppression and limiting".

So you support districts created based on race which is what happens and Republicans oppose. The city in which I grew up and live next to, under federal court order, has 7 city council districts as opposed to the previous at large city commission. Any vote of significance, budget or tax or other significant issue has to have at least one of the purposely created black districts to vote for it in order to pass. In other words blacks have more voting power in the city than whites. So spare me the Republicans are the ones suppressing votes and denying equal representations.

- - - Updated - - -

Platitude noted.

 

you, somehow, know what "mess" Trent Lott was referring in both instances. wow. you must have a rare gift. If we had elected Strom Thurmond for ANY reason in 1948, he, as president, would have nominated judges and set policies that conformed to the Dixiecrat platform. Trent Lott, it seems, on two different occasions, twenty two years apart, believed that America would have been better off if that had happened.

 

I think they are much less clueless than you seem to be... the birthday party in question was a mere 12 years ago. But why worry about getting facts straight when you're on a rhetorical roll, eh?

 

I wonder what would happen if these responses were adjusted for socio-economic levels. No matter how justified your allocation of resources is - if someone has few, they'll have a problem with that social order.

So how much of that 51% is due to them not liking their current position, and how much is due to actual rational thought about the merits of private ownership.

 

No I have a good memory and know that race and segregation wasn't an issue when Reagan was running against Carter and have no reason to believe the vast majority of blacks today even know who Lott was, who Thurmond was and what Lott said on those two occasions.

 

No I don't think so and in fact have no reason to believe the vast majority of Americans in general know who Ann Coulter is or who Lott is or what he said and certainly don't go into the voting booth thinking about it anymore than Clinton praising Byrd anymore than they reflect on the fact the Democrats were the party that welcomed and gave a home to the segregationist.

 

That explanation doesn't work. The poorest whites in the country are typically the most conservative. Blue collar working class poor whites aren't calling for socialism to take from others.

 

Because they are told by Republicans that the reason they are poor....is due to minorities.

 

Or they don't view the Government as a redistribution machine like poor blacks do.

 

Here is a fact: just because YOU personally have no reason to believe something, does not mean that it isn't true.

...And what party celebrated the birthday of the segregationist, racist, statutory rapist dixiecrat presidential candidate?

- - - Updated - - -

so...racial discrimination and racist beliefs and behaviors had disappeared from the American political landscape in 1980? Who knew????

 

And if you want to state for the record that reason blacks don't vote for Republicans today is because of Trent Lott I am more than happy to watch you publicly state that and then watch everyone laugh.

Segregation had certainly was not a topic of that day but if you want to prove Reagan was advocating segregation and that is what he and the others there were talking about when they were talking about the mess we were in have at it, I'd like to see that.