Will more black people vote for Republicans this year?

Black voters perceive Trump as racist and Hillary as a supporter of black Americans. It is more of an obstacle than am opportunity.

 

its a perception thing but i still maintain hillary has done more overtly racist things than trump

 

Regardless of who is actually more racist, the black vote is a big strength for Clinton and a big weakness for Trump.

 

The man spoke the truth. You sound like a racist. And you apparently don't realize that Democrats destroyed the black community. But they couldn't have done it without the black community's help....votes for cash, singing the blues for cash, anger for cash. In short, they deserve their troubles with broken families, Fatherless homes, crime, unemployment, unhappiness, etc. Unless of course I'm wrong, and your party has brought them happiness and fulfillment. But we know that's not true. They're miserable. You can thank Hillary, Bernie, Al, Jesse, yourself, all the old white liberals and the whole counter culture movement for that.

 

It did not "spread" to this one". Nobody forced them to adopt the practice of slavery in the USA. They could have used a different model. Maybe the model where all men lived by the sweat of their own brow. Now, there is a nice concept.

 

I think Trump represents an opportunity, but only because he had an established "brand" long before he ran for President. People just don't associate him as a Republican. Particularly when the party itself opposes him like it does. But notice; a celebrity with lots of black friends and acquaintances for decades. with nary an accusation of racism, suddenly becomes Bigot number one on the day he runs for President. Trump may be able to attract a larger percentage of black votes, but only because he's Trump. I don't think he'll bring black people to the Republican Party.

 

A little bit, but not much.

"intellectual honesty to appeal to those constitutes"? Well I don't know what constitutes are, and I don't know how it's intellectually dishonest to not pander, but you do you. The GOP has failed to obtain the black vote because so many blacks stuck in the cycle of poverty have become dependent on government programs that the GOP wants to reform. Others have bought into the idea that the GOP is racist. But, like in so many cases, the Democrats have just beaten the GOP in messaging. Even when polls showed that strong majorities of voters supported letting individuals invest a portion of their own SS contributions, majorities opposed privatizing social security. Why? Because the Democrats won the PR game. Even though the plan called for allowing people to invest a portion of their SS contributions (which, again, a majority supported), PR campaigns convinced the voters that the plan was actually to give your retirement savings in entirety over to private companies who would just mismanage or raid the funds and get rich while screwing you.

- - - Updated - - -

^_- are you actually suggesting that anything which is adopted voluntarily is not something which spreads? So, according to you, Christianity never spread across Europe, because it was voluntarily accepted?

-_-

 

Blacks vote Republican?! Dem's house ni(*)(*)(*)s....not free men. They'd rather stay shackled all up in the shade of the old white democrat, than labor as free men in the heat of liberty. Ain't got no self respect....nothing to call their own. But jealousy and hate, wwhooooooo, they got that plenty. Ain't gonna win them over. They's poisoned. Maybe God even done give up on em.......fer now. Not my call. Just reporting what I sees.

 

https://tsukesthoughts.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/race-traitors/ check out the race traitors supporting trump XD

 

Less than ten percent of blacks vote Republican.

 

This, and the fact that those rates are showing no signs of changing, are the bottom line. All the political theory in the world about why blacks should vote Republican doesn't change fact that they don't and are showing no signs of changing.

What's more, the comments and immigration policies of GOP candidates has been interpreted as a swing towards racism by liberals. Where black voters think there is racism against them, they are unlikely to place their votes.

 

It's their choice. As long as they prefer the slavish whorebed of liberal socialistic mediocrity, unemployment, Fatherlessness, crime, living on the dole, and so forth, to the dignity of being free stewards over their own lives. Then that's all they'll ever be. Funny thing is, I wouldn't counsel a black stranger any differently than my own brother, sister of friend. But liberals would call my counsel racist. I'm sick of them.

 

Well, the topic of the thread is "Will more black people vote Republican this year?" The answer to that question is "no".

Whether they are being clever or silly, the answer is "no".

 

So your grandfather or father never took SSS and you went to private school that was paid for by your parents???

 

The definition of pander is: "to gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire, need, or habit or a person with such a desire, etc.)

There is no overarching political party to arbitrate pandering. All we have is the Constitution, and I don't see in the Constitution where someones race is fodder for policy? Except, it was. Now what? How do you correct the carnage from poorly thought out, racist policies? Nobody cares about make believe money, and whom gets what. Justice is what people want. If you can't define it then you can't be trusted with it. Do you even know what justice is? Not in an extreme case, like I killed you child, but in the descreet case...like; I was never exposed to the opportunity that you had because I look different? Why do we need extreme anecdotes to mete out justice?

 

You tried to argue that it is intellectually dishonest to NOT pander. I still haven't heard you make a sound argument for why that is the case.

As far as the correcting the results of previous policies, you're obviously under the flawed assumption that that is something that we do, especially as you're referring to private discrimination. Where are the reparations for the Irish who suffered under racist hiring policies? And don't even try to suggest that they've recovered because they can pass for white - we also have Chinese and Japanese-Americans here who, despite being horribly discriminated against in the past by both private and public parties, and not being able to pass for white, yet they have actually exceeded whites by most measures. They dominate graduate schools, are 1-2% of the population but make up more than a fifth of Harvard, are over represented in high positions of government, far out earn whites, etc.

What, have we been racist in favor of Asians?

People are responsible for their own lot, and we need to stop making excuses for people who fail. My success doesn't come from my skin color - I didn't inherit much. I didn't inherit money (my parents gave me a Bible at graduation), I didn't inherit a tradition of education (neither my father nor step-father ever graduated high school), I didn't come from a nuclear family, I grew up poor (I was put in cloth diapers because we couldn't afford them at the store). I'm sick and tired of this bs excuse that people try to make that they weren't successful because of their skin color. That's absolute horse crap! I served with people of all different races - and many of them, who were black, are doing great. Why? What separates them from other blacks who didn't make it? Is it that someone gave them a hand up to overcome a history of racism that their grandparents faced? No, the demarcation is quite clear - it's those who made different choices.

 

Which party do most whites like?

 

Arguing is fundamentally pandering, by nature. It's in the definition. There real question is what are you pandering for?

Ok, here we go with the old historical false equivalency. In American history, when was skin color not accounted for in policy making? Whether inclusive or exclusionary?

 

The Dictionary disagrees.

Argue: to give reasons for or against something : to say or write things in order to change someone's opinion about what is true, what should be done, etc.

Pander: to do or provide what someone wants or demands even though it is not proper, good, or reasonable

No, I didn't make a false equivalency. Your inference is not my implication.

And you're the one who said:

Are you suggesting that there is only one group of people that has ever been subjected to racist policies? Or are you actually taking "only whites can be racist" a step further to suggest that "only blacks can be racist?

 

Ignore. Not relevant. Deflecting is the go to argument for defenders of preservation of historical racial supremacy. Next.

I have never filled out a form that asked: "White, Non-Continental Irish", nor "Asian, Non-Japanese".

Seriously, if I have to point out 2+2 to you...don't argue that it can't be 4. You're wasting your own time.

 

Are you kidding? This whole issue started because you said it's intellectually dishonest to not pander, and then you insisted the dictionary being wrong. And then, after being shown that you were arguing with the dictionary, you suddenly decide that it's irrelevant, and that I'm defending racial supremacy?

I can't remember the last time I saw such desperate straw men.

So now you're actively denying that whites or asians can be negatively affected by

And you just suggested that I have been defending racism?

 

There is basically a Godwin's Law for providing a dictionary definition out of context. You satisfied that law's requirement. The context here is in regards to American politics, you started the topic so I don't know why I need to explain to you? Contextually, pandering is a passive argument against someone else's political position. Easy peasy.

Let me connect the dots for you. The entire edifice of the 'need' for those questions is based off of the ideology of white skinned people being intrinsically superior to black skinned people. That is the only reason.

Defending the GOP's position of completely neglecting black constituents (and constitutes), aka the strategy of overpowering them in numbers or just wishing they'd go away, is inherently racist. I don't think that is something you'd defend by any dictionary's definition.

 

So now you're making up fallacies?

Well I won't make up any fallacies, but you are here committing both the straw man fallacy and Godwin's Law. Which is why it's so funny that you'd bring up Godwin's Law hahaha

The GOP hasn't neglected black voters, it just hasn't pandered to them. And so your assertion here is, again, that NOT pandering to black voters is equal to racism and white supremacy. This is where you started, with a non sequitur that is so blatantly laughable.

 

Yes that is basically what I said. I'm sorry if you can't connect the facts on your own. Maybe you could learn more about the topic? That might help you out.

 

If you're more educated on the topic, which you seem to imply, yet are unable to articulate the view in coherent manner, then the problem is not with me. You've articulated your view without actually defending it - since telling someone else to do your own research isn't a defense.