Pick SC Dem primary winner (2/27)

[Kembal]

Ok, final early primary. This one's probably a gimme.

Pick: Clinton. Margin of victory = 24 points.

If there's interest in trying to guess of all of Super Tuesday, let me know and I'll post a new thread. (there will be 22 contests that day - well, 23 if we want to count the American Samoa Democratic caucus. :) )

[Kembal]

Results after 2/23:

ClydeR: 6-1
Drauz: 4-3
Jarvan: 3-3
Fallen: 5-0
Kembal: 4-1
elcidcannon: 2-2
Wross: 3-0
Parkbandit: 3-0
Ardwen: 2-0
SHAFT: 1-1
Archigeek: 0-2
everan: 0-2
Alanteax: 0-2

[Fallen]

Clinton.

[Archigeek]

It is kind of a gimmie, but I'm going to low ball the margin and say it ends up being 14% margin for Clinton.

[WRoss]

Clinton

[drauz]

*sigh* Clinton

[Jarvan]

What was it.. 47% margin for Clinton?

So... can anyone explain to me exactly why Black people vote for Clinton... or Dems in general. Other then giving them handouts, I can't figure out what Dems ever do for them.

[MikeMC]

What was it.. 47% margin for Clinton?

So... can anyone explain to me exactly why Black people vote for Clinton... or Dems in general. Other then giving them handouts, I can't figure out what Dems ever do for them.

Wow, no racism to see here.

Why would black people vote for Clinton?

We are talking about South Carolina, a state in which black voters have traditionally been a stable Clinton base and white voters have been a stable Bush base. Different Clinton and different Bush, one bloc adhered to tradition.

Black Dems are still Dems and party Dems favor Clinton.

As to why black voters would choose a Dem over a GOP candidate, pick your issues. Economic gaps, justice gaps, voting rights gaps, you name it. Nearly every issue of concern that has a clear negative impact, clear disparities, well they're written off by people like you.

When black people look at the face of the GOP, they see racists like you staring back at them. Why would they vote in a way that is sympathetic to your narrow and bigoted political philosophy?

[Tgo01]

Wow, no racism to see here.

I was just saying to myself the other day, I says to myself, "Self, you know what the PC needs? Another poster that shouts 'racist!' at the drop of a hat."

You are here to answer all of our prayers, aren't you?


When black people look at the face of the GOP, they see racists like you staring back at them.

Hallelujah and praise the lord! Can I get an AMEN my brothers and sisters?!

[MikeMC]

Truth seems to be a painful experience for you, thus the practice of denial.

When it is suggested that black people vote Dem because of "handouts", explain how this is not racist.

I think you protest too much.

[~Rocktar~]

As to why black voters would choose a Dem over a GOP candidate, pick your issues. Economic gaps, justice gaps, voting rights gaps, you name it. Nearly every issue of concern that has a clear negative impact, clear disparities, well they're written off by people like you.

When black people look at the face of the GOP, they see racists like you staring back at them. Why would they vote in a way that is sympathetic to your narrow and bigoted political philosophy?

"Racism" the age old siren song of the Democrat exploiters. Which Party was it who's president said "I'll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years."? Or how about this gem, "“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

The Democrat party has and continues to be the party of racism, race baiting and victimization.

And the sad fact is, after 60+ years of "the Great Society" we have a clearly failed experiment in Socialism and the check is coming due. The largest budget items are mandatory spending on entitlement programs aimed at buying Democrat votes.


Truth seems to be a painful experience for you, thus the practice of denial.

When it is suggested that black people vote Dem because of "handouts", explain how this is not racist.

I think you protest too much.

Explain how it isn't historically true and planned by the godfathers of the Democrat party. They even said so. Pointing out facts based on race is not racism. Facts don't discriminate, Democrats do.

[Tgo01]

Truth seems to be a painful experience for you, thus the practice of denial.

Ah yes, the ol' "truth" argument. Classic.


When it is suggested that black people vote Dem because of "handouts", explain how this is not racist.

Jarvan didn't say blacks vote for Democrats because they want a handout. He said the only thing Democrats do for blacks is give them handouts. You can argue about whether or not his statement is true but he did not state a reason for why blacks vote Democrat, rather he is looking at the point of view from Democrats and looking at what they have done for blacks to continue to earn their support.


I think you protest too much.

You got me, I'm a racist. I can't get anything past you.

http://i0.wp.com/moviessilently.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/muddy-romance-curses.gif?resize=280%2C200

[MikeMC]

Oh how cute, people trying to explain why a racist comment wasn't racist.

Isn't that precious?

This pretty much follows the typical series of events when racism is pointed out on such medium.

Person A posts something that is without a doubt racist and nature. When that racist remark is called out, in charge the rest. This will range from insult to attempts to explain why said statement was not racist to mind numbing counter arguments about why these other people are in fact the real racists.

At some point logic would dictate that people would question their defensive nature in reference to racism. Clearly that point is not today.

Thanks for the show, it did not disappoint.

[Tgo01]

Oh how cute, people trying to explain why a racist comment wasn't racist.

Isn't that precious?

This pretty much follows the typical series of events when racism is pointed out on such medium.

Person A posts something that is without a doubt racist and nature. When that racist remark is called out, in charge the rest. This will range from insult to attempts to explain why said statement was not racist to mind numbing counter arguments about why these other people are in fact the real racists.

At some point logic would dictate that people would question their defensive nature in reference to racism. Clearly that point is not today.

Thanks for the show, it did not disappoint.


I was just saying to myself the other day, I says to myself, "Self, you know what the PC needs? Another poster that shouts 'racist!' at the drop of a hat."

https://daniellovett.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/hallelujah-squirrel-edited.png

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5d/2c/d6/5d2cd63cecff7ac56ab06975f1a24a2f.jpg

http://www.freshsupercool.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/hallelujah.jpg

[MikeMC]

I'll have to add memes to that list.

Still, not disappointing and yet very telling. One has to wonder why so defensive if you don't harbor racist beliefs.

[Tgo01]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/53/f3/b3/53f3b32cbfb1286a33ed0431312bf30d.jpg

Now see THAT is racist, the white cat thinks the black cat needs "healing" because it's black.

[Tgo01]

I'll have to add memes to that list.

You just piss me off because you sound like a complete misogynist. I have read all of your posts here on the PC, yes all 24 of them and you seem to have this deep-seated hatred of women. I really don't get it and as a woman I take extreme offense to your bullshit.

[Jarvan]

Oh how cute, people trying to explain why a racist comment wasn't racist.

Isn't that precious?

This pretty much follows the typical series of events when racism is pointed out on such medium.

Person A posts something that is without a doubt racist and nature. When that racist remark is called out, in charge the rest. This will range from insult to attempts to explain why said statement was not racist to mind numbing counter arguments about why these other people are in fact the real racists.

At some point logic would dictate that people would question their defensive nature in reference to racism. Clearly that point is not today.

Thanks for the show, it did not disappoint.

Since you like it so much....


You Stupid dumb fuck. You are the most idiotic person on the fucking world. The fact that your father's seed somehow was able to reproduce proves Darwin wrong.

Dems offer EVERYONE handouts you stupid fucktard.

Clinton... won SC and is basing her ONLY chance to win on... the BLACK vote you stupid piece of shit. You worthless waste of air.

My point was.. what did SHE, and the DEMS in general DO to earn that kind of devotion.

I mean.. I could understand if the Black Community was growing by leaps and bounds.. if Dems had passed reforms and laws that gave them economic parity...


Ok... lets take this another way....

What exactly are the Dems proposing to do this election? Free college.. Free heathcare... higher wages for no reason...

Ok.. I am sure your massive single digit intellect (by the way, how does your body mange to breath with only 5 working brain cells) will somehow claim these are not handouts.. but responsible things we should do for a better world.

If that is the case... please do us all a favor, and find some draino and drink a good 8 oz because you are helpless.

But.. I am sure everything is the GOP's fault.. the GOP must want all Black people back in the field.. or sweating in sweatshops... or waiting on white people hand and feet. I mean.. they are nothing but evil racists... and if you are Black and in the GOP.. then you are an uncle Tom. I mean... look at DR. Ben Carson... that fucker has no idea that the White GOP man is trying to keep him down. Stupid idiot.


On a side note... you know how they always said that the first person to yell faggot and gay bash generally was a closet homophobic... wonder what that says about you and Racism. Happen to have a white sheet with some eye holes in your closet?

[Jarvan]

Thread: Pick SC Dem primary winner (2/27)

Act like you have a clue about anything. Go ahead. Continue on. - tyrant-201


May as well just sign it you loser.

[tyrant-201]

Thread: Pick SC Dem primary winner (2/27)

Act like you have a clue about anything. Go ahead. Continue on. - tyrant-201


May as well just sign it you loser.

Didn't need to :)

[tyrant-201]

Since you like it so much....


You Stupid dumb fuck. You are the most idiotic person on the fucking world. The fact that your father's seed somehow was able to reproduce proves Darwin wrong.

Dems offer EVERYONE handouts you stupid fucktard.

Clinton... won SC and is basing her ONLY chance to win on... the BLACK vote you stupid piece of shit. You worthless waste of air.

My point was.. what did SHE, and the DEMS in general DO to earn that kind of devotion.

I mean.. I could understand if the Black Community was growing by leaps and bounds.. if Dems had passed reforms and laws that gave them economic parity...


Ok... lets take this another way....

What exactly are the Dems proposing to do this election? Free college.. Free heathcare... higher wages for no reason...

Ok.. I am sure your massive single digit intellect (by the way, how does your body mange to breath with only 5 working brain cells) will somehow claim these are not handouts.. but responsible things we should do for a better world.

If that is the case... please do us all a favor, and find some draino and drink a good 8 oz because you are helpless.

But.. I am sure everything is the GOP's fault.. the GOP must want all Black people back in the field.. or sweating in sweatshops... or waiting on white people hand and feet. I mean.. they are nothing but evil racists... and if you are Black and in the GOP.. then you are an uncle Tom. I mean... look at DR. Ben Carson... that fucker has no idea that the White GOP man is trying to keep him down. Stupid idiot.


On a side note... you know how they always said that the first person to yell faggot and gay bash generally was a closet homophobic... wonder what that says about you and Racism. Happen to have a white sheet with some eye holes in your closet?

Let's play your game.

What do our Repubs offer? I don't necessarily disagree with your qualms. But do we know what Trump, Rubio, or Cruz stand for? Aside from social issues? The irony is no one has a candidate to be confident in. It's a gamed system, if any of us think we have any impact to make or dog in the fight we're kidding ourselves.

[Jarvan]

Let's play your game.

What do our Repubs offer? I don't necessarily disagree with your qualms. But do we know what Trump, Rubio, or Cruz stand for? Aside from social issues? The irony is no one has a candidate to be confident in. It's a gamed system, if any of us think we have any impact to make or dog in the fight we're kidding ourselves.

Actually. I don't believe I have ever posted saying any candidate had any good plans.

My whole post was why Dems think they DESERVE and OWN(hint hint) the Black vote, and why Clinton specifically.

It's actually funny... Hispanics and Blacks tend to be more conservative then liberal (Handouts not withstanding). Hispanics are, generally, very religious and conservative. Yet Dems get most of their vote, and pretty much say they Deserve their vote.

[tyrant-201]

Actually. I don't believe I have ever posted saying any candidate had any good plans.

My whole post was why Dems think they DESERVE and OWN(hint hint) the Black vote, and why Clinton specifically.

Tell me why African Americans would ever vote for anyone else?



It's actually funny... Hispanics and Blacks tend to be more conservative then liberal (Handouts not withstanding). Hispanics are, generally, very religious and conservative. Yet Dems get most of their vote, and pretty much say they Deserve their vote.

I like the qualifier of handouts not withstanding.

I also like the premise that spirituality has anything to do with conservatism. I presume you're talking about Christianity. Let me know the specific passage where Jesus speaks on free market capitalism.

Was it this passage?


44 And all that believed were together, and had all things in common;
45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
Acts 2: 44, 45


13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you.
14 You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.
Luke 14:13, 14

That one?

If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.
Matthew 19:21

This one?

24 You cannot serve both God and Money.
Matthew 6:24.

No no, probably that one.


And before you accuse me of putting Republicans on blast, Hillary is no better. But let's not pretend we live in a system which serves or benefits the poor and disenfranchised. We're all far too concerned with other things.

[Parkbandit]

Truth seems to be a painful experience for you, thus the practice of denial.

When it is suggested that black people vote Dem because of "handouts", explain how this is not racist.

I think you protest too much.

https://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-92ee0a1043675722476564414312915d?convert_to_webp=t rue

[time4fun]

Oh how cute, people trying to explain why a racist comment wasn't racist.

Isn't that precious?

This pretty much follows the typical series of events when racism is pointed out on such medium.

Person A posts something that is without a doubt racist and nature. When that racist remark is called out, in charge the rest. This will range from insult to attempts to explain why said statement was not racist to mind numbing counter arguments about why these other people are in fact the real racists.

At some point logic would dictate that people would question their defensive nature in reference to racism. Clearly that point is not today.

Thanks for the show, it did not disappoint.

You have landed yourself in the angry white conservative dude pit of PC. They spout racist garbage all day long, and then they say it doesn't exist. Jim Crow would be so proud.

[Warriorbird]

"Thread: Pick SC Dem primary winner (2/27)
Worst attempt at imbedding a gif ever award... - Parkbandit"

You don't have to obsessively give everybody hundreds more negative reps than Wrathbringer any more.

Related to the present discussion.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--FcHZLKIj--/wvzx5njwhncqciehzb9g.gif

[MikeMC]

Since you like it so much....


You Stupid dumb fuck. You are the most idiotic person on the fucking world. The fact that your father's seed somehow was able to reproduce proves Darwin wrong.

Dems offer EVERYONE handouts you stupid fucktard.

Clinton... won SC and is basing her ONLY chance to win on... the BLACK vote you stupid piece of shit. You worthless waste of air.

My point was.. what did SHE, and the DEMS in general DO to earn that kind of devotion.

I mean.. I could understand if the Black Community was growing by leaps and bounds.. if Dems had passed reforms and laws that gave them economic parity...


Ok... lets take this another way....

What exactly are the Dems proposing to do this election? Free college.. Free heathcare... higher wages for no reason...

Ok.. I am sure your massive single digit intellect (by the way, how does your body mange to breath with only 5 working brain cells) will somehow claim these are not handouts.. but responsible things we should do for a better world.

If that is the case... please do us all a favor, and find some draino and drink a good 8 oz because you are helpless.

But.. I am sure everything is the GOP's fault.. the GOP must want all Black people back in the field.. or sweating in sweatshops... or waiting on white people hand and feet. I mean.. they are nothing but evil racists... and if you are Black and in the GOP.. then you are an uncle Tom. I mean... look at DR. Ben Carson... that fucker has no idea that the White GOP man is trying to keep him down. Stupid idiot.


On a side note... you know how they always said that the first person to yell faggot and gay bash generally was a closet homophobic... wonder what that says about you and Racism. Happen to have a white sheet with some eye holes in your closet?

It's almost like you wanted to be a RDC but failed.

By all means, keep going. You've almost got yourself convinced.

[MikeMC]

You have landed yourself in the angry white conservative dude pit of PC. They spout racist garbage all day long, and then they say it doesn't exist. Jim Crow would be so proud.

I have to admit, the retaliation was swift. They're practiced, I'll give them that much.

I even got a little red square saying "welcome back", so swift, practiced, and paranoid. Could almost be a motto.

[Gelston]

Ah yes, the ol' "truth" argument. Classic.



Jarvan didn't say blacks vote for Democrats because they want a handout. He said the only thing Democrats do for blacks is give them handouts. You can argue about whether or not his statement is true but he did not state a reason for why blacks vote Democrat, rather he is looking at the point of view from Democrats and looking at what they have done for blacks to continue to earn their support.



You got me, I'm a racist. I can't get anything past you.

http://i0.wp.com/moviessilently.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/muddy-romance-curses.gif?resize=280%2C200

I like when black people are racist against other black people. It is the worst kind of racism.

[Fallen]

Here's an article's take on why black voters are voting the way they are in this election. I'd try to TLDR it, but it's somewhat garbled.


In one stunning swoop, however, black voters in South Carolina have struck a potentially decisive blow for the status quo.

Most obviously, that status quo is the legacy of President Obama. Among South Carolina Democrats who said they wanted the next president to have policies in line with Mr. Obama, Clinton won 81 to 19 percent. And black Americans made up a historically high share of the overall turnout.

It is not that black Americans think prejudice and inequality have disappeared; the rise of Black Lives Matter rejects that view. Rather, black Americans see their position in America improving relative to their parents, who often faced greater prejudice and lack of opportunity, suggests sociologist Andrew Cherlin in a New York Times opinion article (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/22/opinion/why-are-white-death-rates-rising.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=1).Yet Saturday’s vote might also have been connected to a deeper cultural shift. In short, black Americans are more optimistic about America’s future than any other ethnic group,research has shown (http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2015/09/25-surprising-optimism-black-americans-graham). That has led them to be the primary bulwark against white voters’ push for a full-blown political revolution.

That contrasts sharply with the views of many white Americans, who – beset by globalization and the Great Recession – now see the economic security that defined the middle class America of their parents’ generation disappearing.

“Whites are likely to compare themselves to a reference group that leads them to feel worse off,” Dr. Cherlin writes. “Blacks and Hispanics compare themselves to reference groups that may make them feel better off.”

In that way, the presidential election is emerging as a clash of two different worldviews. But in this case, it is the black community that is feeling empowered – at least politically – and the white community that is seeking change.

“National surveys show striking racial and ethnic differences in satisfaction with one’s social standing relative to one’s parents,” Cherlin adds. “Among 25- to 54-year-olds without college degrees, blacks and Hispanics were much more positive than whites…”

Whether or not this optimism was kindled by Mr. Obama’s election in 2008, South Carolina showed signs that the trend could continue beyond the end of his presidency. Indeed, it suggested that it is perhaps Clinton, and not rival Bernie Sanders, who sits atop a Democratic political revolution.

The record-high share of black voters in the South Carolina Democratic primary, together with their 86-to-14-percent backing of her, turned a projected victory into a downright trouncing. Clinton topped Sanders by nearly 50 points.

President Obama rode this coalition of voters to victory in 2008 and 2012, using huge margins of support among minorities and, to a lesser degree, women, to offset his Republican opponents’ advantage among white men.

Clinton’s victory Saturday suggests that Obama’s coalition might not be a fleeting phenomenon connect only to him, but the shape of future Democratic politics. If the trend holds true in coming days, it could also point to a new level of black political engagement.

“This is what Democratic voter turnout looks like – these are its outcomes when black voters are convinced of their ability and authority to fundamentally shape American democracy,” writes Jannell Ross (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/28/what-hillary-clintons-massive-win-among-black-voters-really-says/?tid=pm_politics_pop_b) of The Washington Post. “It is a result that should begin to crush the popular and often repeated myth that black political behavior in 2008 and 2012 was nothing more than a blip, a fleeting kind of emotion-only engagement inspired by a singular and history-making black candidate.”

Though overall turnout in the South Carolina Democratic primary was down 30 percent from 2008, it was down less among black voters. Blacks made up 6 in 10 voters Saturday, their highest-ever share for a South Carolina Democratic primary, according to Ms. Ross. In 2008, the previous high, 55 percent of voters were black.

The question raised by South Carolina is whether that will be enough. While Democratic turnout has been down from 2008 levels in other states, too, Republican voter turnout is hitting record highs, presumably driven at least in part by Trump. Republican turnout in South Carolina last weekend was up 23 percent from 2012, a record.

This fall’s election could be determined by that gap.

Ross adds: “Saturday's South Carolina primary results indicate how essential each element of the so-called ‘Obama Coalition’ remains for any successful Democrat.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/0228/Clinton-win-in-S.C.-highlights-gulf-between-black-white-voters

[Kembal]

Jarvan didn't say blacks vote for Democrats because they want a handout. He said the only thing Democrats do for blacks is give them handouts. You can argue about whether or not his statement is true but he did not state a reason for why blacks vote Democrat, rather he is looking at the point of view from Democrats and looking at what they have done for blacks to continue to earn their support.

Minorities don't forget who politically empowers them and who tries to politically disempower them. There's institutional history with parties that they recognize.

Even now:

For African Americans, it doesn't escape them that the Republicans are neutering the Voting Rights Act. (and, oh, Dems nominating and electing the first black President doesn't hurt either)
For Hispanics, it doesn't escape them that Republicans are taking stances and pushing rhetoric on immigration that make them feel like they're being targeted.

The only minority swing voters left are Asian Americans.

[Gnomad]

Actually. I don't believe I have ever posted saying any candidate had any good plans.

My whole post was why Dems think they DESERVE and OWN(hint hint) the Black vote, and why Clinton specifically.

It's actually funny... Hispanics and Blacks tend to be more conservative then liberal (Handouts not withstanding). Hispanics are, generally, very religious and conservative. Yet Dems get most of their vote, and pretty much say they Deserve their vote.


 You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”

Harvey LeRoy "Lee" Atwater (February 27, 1951 – March 29, 1991) was an American political consultant and strategist to the Republican Party. He was an adviser to U.S. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush and chairman of the Republican National Committee.

[MikeMC]

Then you have Kevin Phillips, Nixon's political strategist, who gave the GOP their "Southern Strategy" that is still largely employed today.

“All the talk about Republicans making inroads into the Negro vote is persiflage. Even 'Jake the Snake' [Senator Jacob Javits of New York] only gets 20 percent. From now on, Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote, and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."

The problem with that strategy, as the GOP has discovered, is the waning stability of a white majority. They have spent the better part of 6 decades catering campaigns and policies to the white majority and now they just can't seem to comprehend that the electorate is rabidly changing.

It won't be a voter revolt if the GOP fails to nominate Trump, it will be an evaporating majority.

[Tgo01]

Minorities don't forget who politically empowers them and who tries to politically disempower them. There's institutional history with parties that they recognize.

You mean like the voting rights act of 1965 which passed both houses of Congress with 75% of the nay votes coming from Democrats? And the civil rights act with 73% of the nay votes coming from Democrats? Or were you talking about something else?


For African Americans, it doesn't escape them that the Republicans are neutering the Voting Rights Act. (and, oh, Dems nominating and electing the first black President doesn't hurt either)

You referring to voter ID laws? I don't recall The Voting Rights act saying anything about voter ID laws. I do seem to recall a few Democrat states that have voter ID laws on record though.

I also seem to recall both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton pushing hard for the 1994 crime bill, Mrs. Clinton going so far as referring to people affected as "super predators". A bill which was drafted by our current vice president and which disproportionately affected blacks and other minorities, seeing more and more minorities pushed into overcrowded prisons where as a result they would lose some of their constitutional rights, the bill cut off Pell Grant money to people while in prison, created the sex offenders registry, and all other sorts of goodies that once again disproportionately affected blacks and other minorities.

Let's also not forget all of the cities that are bastions of Democratic awesomeness often see more black poverty, more black high school drop outs, more black unemployment, and more black people in jail.


For Hispanics, it doesn't escape them that Republicans are taking stances and pushing rhetoric on immigration that make them feel like they're being targeted.

You mean like the 1994 crime bill that increased prison terms for illegal aliens who do not leave the country when ordered to do so or enter the country illegally?

You mean like the last Democrat Senate Majority leader not too long ago introduced a bill that would make it so only people born to US citizens would in turn become citizens themselves? Declaring in a speech on the Senate floor:

"If making it easy to be an illegal alien is not enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that is a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?"

Like Senator Hillary Clinton once stated:

"We’ve got to do several things and I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants. I made this exception basically on humanitarian grounds because of the individual story but certainly we’ve got to do more at our borders. And people have to stop employing illegal immigrants. Come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand in the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx – you’re going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work."

Like how both Obama and Hillary Clinton voted on the Dorgan amendment which effectively killed immigration reform in 2006?

How Sanders voted on the same amendment, lamented that there isn't more oversight on businesses hiring illegal aliens, and said he felt immigration was responsible for lower wages in this country?

Don't act like Democrat shit don't stink.

Democrats for decades now have been promising pie in the sky every election cycle, saying "This time we are going to do it! For realsies!" Only to ignore the plight of blacks and Latinos every damn time, even when they controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress. Democrats sure are good at throwing minorities under the bus when it suits their political agenda and they sure are good at pandering to minorities when it suits their agenda.

But that's where the relationship ends.

[Tgo01]

Oh yeah, how could I forget Bill Clinton's signature law "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act", better known as Welfare Reform.

The bill that once again disproportionately affected poor blacks and other minorities by depriving them of much needed cash assistance.

Let's not forget the kicker that it also denied welfare, Medicaid, and other such benefits to LEGAL immigrants to the US for their first 5 year stay.

[Warriorbird]

You mean like the voting rights act of 1965 which passed both houses of Congress with 75% of the nay votes coming from Democrats? And the civil rights act with 73% of the nay votes coming from Democrats? Or were you talking about something else?



You referring to voter ID laws? I don't recall The Voting Rights act saying anything about voter ID laws. I do seem to recall a few Democrat states that have voter ID laws on record though.

I also seem to recall both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton pushing hard for the 1994 crime bill, Mrs. Clinton going so far as referring to people affected as "super predators". A bill which was drafted by our current vice president and which disproportionately affected blacks and other minorities, seeing more and more minorities pushed into overcrowded prisons where as a result they would lose some of their constitutional rights, the bill cut off Pell Grant money to people while in prison, created the sex offenders registry, and all other sorts of goodies that once again disproportionately affected blacks and other minorities.

Let's also not forget all of the cities that are bastions of Democratic awesomeness often see more black poverty, more black high school drop outs, more black unemployment, and more black people in jail.



You mean like the 1994 crime bill that increased prison terms for illegal aliens who do not leave the country when ordered to do so or enter the country illegally?

You mean like the last Democrat Senate Majority leader not too long ago introduced a bill that would make it so only people born to US citizens would in turn become citizens themselves? Declaring in a speech on the Senate floor:

"If making it easy to be an illegal alien is not enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that is a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?"

Like Senator Hillary Clinton once stated:

"We’ve got to do several things and I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants. I made this exception basically on humanitarian grounds because of the individual story but certainly we’ve got to do more at our borders. And people have to stop employing illegal immigrants. Come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand in the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx – you’re going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work."

Like how both Obama and Hillary Clinton voted on the Dorgan amendment which effectively killed immigration reform in 2006?

How Sanders voted on the same amendment, lamented that there isn't more oversight on businesses hiring illegal aliens, and said he felt immigration was responsible for lower wages in this country?

Don't act like Democrat shit don't stink.

Democrats for decades now have been promising pie in the sky every election cycle, saying "This time we are going to do it! For realsies!" Only to ignore the plight of blacks and Latinos every damn time, even when they controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress. Democrats sure are good at throwing minorities under the bus when it suits their political agenda and they sure are good at pandering to minorities when it suits their agenda.

But that's where the relationship ends.

You put so much effort into rationalization.

[Tgo01]

You put so much effort into rationalization.

Rationalizing the way Democrats use and abuse minorities? Not sure you've been reading my posts very clearly.

[Warriorbird]

Rationalizing the way Democrats use and abuse minorities? Not sure you've been reading my posts very clearly.

No. You're trying to reach really hard to pretend the Southern strategy, removing that very same Voting Rights Act, Alabama DMV closings, Florida voter purging, anti Mexican nonsense, and Trump don't exist by pointing to racist Democrats of the past (and present).

[Parkbandit]

"Thread: Pick SC Dem primary winner (2/27)
Worst attempt at imbedding a gif ever award... - Parkbandit"

You don't have to obsessively give everybody hundreds more negative reps than Wrathbringer any more.

Related to the present discussion.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--FcHZLKIj--/wvzx5njwhncqciehzb9g.gif

I give what I want. Don't be such a pussy about it.

You fucked up the imbed. Just own it and move on.

[MikeMC]

You mean like the voting rights act of 1965 which passed both houses of Congress with 75% of the nay votes coming from Democrats? And the civil rights act with 73% of the nay votes coming from Democrats? Or were you talking about something else?

The 65 VRA rolle call for the House

Yea 221 (D) 111 (R)
Nay 62 (D) 23 (R)

Senate

Yea 47 (D) 30 (R)
Nay 16 (D) 2 (R)

Similar totals for the CRA. I love it when people play baseball statistics with congressional votes. Often they focus on a single statistic while ignoring the entirety of the picture simply because the rest of the picture isn't very supportive of their argument.


You referring to voter ID laws? I don't recall The Voting Rights act saying anything about voter ID laws. I do seem to recall a few Democrat states that have voter ID laws on record though.

I love this game.

Please name the Democratic state in which a democratic legislature passed a voter ID law and a Democratic governor signed it into law.

I also love the failed logic. "The VRA didn't say anything about voter ID" It's comical in a way you clearly do not get.


I also seem to recall both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton pushing hard for the 1994 crime bill, Mrs. Clinton going so far as referring to people affected as "super predators". A bill which was drafted by our current vice president and which disproportionately affected blacks and other minorities, seeing more and more minorities pushed into overcrowded prisons where as a result they would lose some of their constitutional rights, the bill cut off Pell Grant money to people while in prison, created the sex offenders registry, and all other sorts of goodies that once again disproportionately affected blacks and other minorities.

The Romney's of the DNC? That's your example? DOMA, DADT, the fight for single payer, so on and so forth? You know the things that they are now against.


Let's also not forget all of the cities that are bastions of Democratic awesomeness often see more black poverty, more black high school drop outs, more black unemployment, and more black people in jail.

White privilege and the institutional and social defense of it is a bitch for minorities isn't it.


You mean like the 1994 crime bill that increased prison terms for illegal aliens who do not leave the country when ordered to do so or enter the country illegally?

Probably has a bit to do with it. Sure.


You mean like the last Democrat Senate Majority leader not too long ago introduced a bill that would make it so only people born to US citizens would in turn become citizens themselves? Declaring in a speech on the Senate floor:

"If making it easy to be an illegal alien is not enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that is a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?"

Like Senator Hillary Clinton once stated:

"We’ve got to do several things and I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants. I made this exception basically on humanitarian grounds because of the individual story but certainly we’ve got to do more at our borders. And people have to stop employing illegal immigrants. Come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand in the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx – you’re going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work."

It is almost as if you are both realizing and ignoring the social shift in the electorate, both pointing out why the DNC is set on a Clinton nomination over Sanders while not fully comprehending it.

Apparently you're hung up on a skewed and pedestrian observation of history while completely ignoring the social shift is occurring as a result of that history.

The light is flickering, it just needs more juice.


Like how both Obama and Hillary Clinton voted on the Dorgan amendment which effectively killed immigration reform in 2006?

How Sanders voted on the same amendment, lamented that there isn't more oversight on businesses hiring illegal aliens, and said he felt immigration was responsible for lower wages in this country?

You act as if the 2006 reform was actually good. You also act as if people in congress voted in ways that seem counter to their current positions, as if those positions actually changed but refuse to admit a context of the vote or an accurate accounting of the bill they were voting on.


Don't act like Democrat shit don't stink.

Oh there's no doubt. I believe the response was in reference to a "the KKK is a Democratic institution" argument that completely ignores the political and social shifts in the party platforms from the 50s to early 70s.

Established political parties always stink. They're political parties whose sole interests rest on the grounds of job security and maintaining power. If that means a Dem puts on a hood up until the 50s, that's what they did. If that means a Rep votes for the VRA and CRA in order to secure the white vote bailing on the Dems in the south, that's what they did.

Just as either party is rallying around their establishment candidates right now, despite what the electorate is showing them.


Democrats for decades now have been promising pie in the sky every election cycle, saying "This time we are going to do it! For realsies!" Only to ignore the plight of blacks and Latinos every damn time, even when they controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress. Democrats sure are good at throwing minorities under the bus when it suits their political agenda and they sure are good at pandering to minorities when it suits their agenda.

But that's where the relationship ends.

You act as if obstruction has nothing to do with it. As if progress barrels forward at break neck speed without hindrance.

That's what cracks me up in all of this. We abandon real world pragmatism tempered with determination to accomplish a goal when we enter the political theater.

"Well, forget space or even the moon, the Soviets got there first and our first attempt at a rocket blew up. It was all just pie in the sky to begin with."

[Parkbandit]

Minorities don't forget who politically empowers them and who tries to politically disempower them. There's institutional history with parties that they recognize.

Even now:

For African Americans, it doesn't escape them that the Republicans are neutering the Voting Rights Act. (and, oh, Dems nominating and electing the first black President doesn't hurt either)
For Hispanics, it doesn't escape them that Republicans are taking stances and pushing rhetoric on immigration that make them feel like they're being targeted.

The only minority swing voters left are Asian Americans.

wut?

Care to explain how Republicans are trying to take away a black person's right to vote? Because I would love to be entertained by it...

[Warriorbird]

I give what I want. Don't be such a pussy about it.

You fucked up the imbed. Just own it and move on.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-27-2015/j7q3do.gif

I had.

Feel like coming up with some commentary on Jarvan's "question?"

[Tgo01]

don't exist by pointing to racist Democrats of the past (and present)

That's funny because I could have sworn what I was seeing in this thread was "Republicans are racists! Democrats are the party of the people!" So when I address the bullshit narrative by showing how Democrats have been screwing over minorities for decades now, even ending my post with "Don't pretend Democrats shit don't stink", that was an attempt on my part to show Republicans don't engage in racist bullshit?

Both parties are responsible for some pretty shitty shit in this country, let's not pretend one party has a monopoly on this so we can feel better about ourselves when we tick the name on the ballot with the person who has the letter D after their name.

Who was it that was responsible for some massive Native American slaughtering and "relocating" in this country? I believe that was Democrat Andrew Jackson.

Who was the first and only president to issue an executive order to have American citizens rounded up and thrown in concentration camps based on nothing but their ancestry? Pretty sure that was Democrat Franklin Roosevelt.

Who was it that died as a US Senator in 2010 that was a member of the KKK? I believe that was Democrat Robert Byrd.

The rest of your post is mostly nonsense as well but the Alabama DMV closings really caught my eye because as it turns out most of the closings happened in predominantly white districts with white Republican representatives.

That's one thing I'll give credit to Democrats for, they sure are much better than Republicans at creating manufactured racial outrage over entirely bogus shit. Gotta get minorities to the polls somehow after all, right? It sure as shit isn't because Democrats do a whole lot to help minorities.

[Parkbandit]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-27-2015/j7q3do.gif

I had.

Feel like coming up with some commentary on Jarvan's "question?"

Do you "think" I am required to comment on everyone's questions?

http://i.imgur.com/YFPb6x5.gif?noredirect

[tyrant-201]

That's funny because I could have sworn what I was seeing in this thread was "Republicans are racists! Democrats are the party of the people!" So when I address the bullshit narrative by showing how Democrats have been screwing over minorities for decades now, even ending my post with "Don't pretend Democrats shit don't stink", that was an attempt on my part to show Republicans don't engage in racist bullshit?

Both parties are responsible for some pretty shitty shit in this country, let's not pretend one party has a monopoly on this so we can feel better about ourselves when we tick the name on the ballot with the person who has the letter D after their name.

Who was it that was responsible for some massive Native American slaughtering and "relocating" in this country? I believe that was Democrat Andrew Jackson.

Who was the first and only president to issue an executive order to have American citizens rounded up and thrown in concentration camps based on nothing but their ancestry? Pretty sure that was Democrat Franklin Roosevelt.

Who was it that died as a US Senator in 2010 that was a member of the KKK? I believe that was Democrat Robert Byrd.

The rest of your post is mostly nonsense as well but the Alabama DMV closings really caught my eye because as it turns out most of the closings happened in predominantly white districts with white Republican representatives.

That's one thing I'll give credit to Democrats for, they sure are much better at Republicans at creating manufactured racial outrage over entirely bogus shit. Gotta get minorities to the polls somehow after all, right? It sure as shit isn't because Democrats do a whole lot to help minorities.

I agree with you completely. This is one of the many reasons why the whole construct of REPUB V. DEMOCRAT argument is a fallacy. Both of them are shitty, yet we all waste time yelling at each other defending them.

[Warriorbird]

That's funny because I could have sworn what I was seeing in this thread was "Republicans are racists! Democrats are the party of the people!" So when I address the bullshit narrative by showing how Democrats have been screwing over minorities for decades now, even ending my post with "Don't pretend Democrats shit don't stink", that was an attempt on my part to show Republicans don't engage in racist bullshit?

Both parties are responsible for some pretty shitty shit in this country, let's not pretend one party has a monopoly on this so we can feel better about ourselves when we tick the name on the ballot with the person who has the letter D after their name.

Who was it that was responsible for some massive Native American slaughtering and "relocating" in this country? I believe that was Democrat Andrew Jackson.

Who was the first and only president to issue an executive order to have American citizens rounded up and thrown in concentration camps based on nothing but their ancestry? Pretty sure that was Democrat Franklin Roosevelt.

Who was it that died as a US Senator in 2010 that was a member of the KKK? I believe that was Democrat Robert Byrd.

The rest of your post is mostly nonsense as well but the Alabama DMV closings really caught my eye because as it turns out most of the closings happened in predominantly white districts with white Republican representatives.

That's one thing I'll give credit to Democrats for, they sure are much better at Republicans at creating manufactured racial outrage over entirely bogus shit. Gotta get minorities to the polls somehow after all, right? It sure as shit isn't because Democrats do a whole lot to help minorities.

You go on the attack to avoid self analysis.

[Parkbandit]

You go on the attack to avoid self analysis.

lolirony.

[Warriorbird]

lolirony.

Out to you too buddy. How's it like still beating Wrathbringer at grinding rep?

[Tgo01]

The 65 VRA rolle call for the House

Yea 221 (D) 111 (R)
Nay 62 (D) 23 (R)

Senate

Yea 47 (D) 30 (R)
Nay 16 (D) 2 (R)


Did you think you somehow proved my assertion wrong? Most of the "nay" votes came from Democrats, yes?


Please name the Democratic state in which a democratic legislature passed a voter ID law and a Democratic governor signed it into law.

Hawaii for one. Got any smart aleck retorts for that one?


I also love the failed logic. "The VRA didn't say anything about voter ID" It's comical in a way you clearly do not get.

Well that's one way to win an argument, I guess. "You're wrong because I say so!" Seriously, like all of your posts basically amount to this. At least your new "everyone is racist!" buddy time4fun sometimes tries to make an actual argument. But you? Your arguments generally consist of shit you just make up off the top of your head and when someone comes back with actual arguments and facts and reasoning you just make up more shit off the top of your head and think you're making some sort of awesome point.


That's your example? DOMA, DADT, the fight for single payer, so on and so forth? You know the things that they are now against.

So like I said, Democrats have a history of throwing minorities (and gays! Thanks for reminding me) under the bus when it suits them politically and using minorities when it suits them politically. Thanks for backing me up there.


Apparently you're hung up on a skewed and pedestrian observation of history while completely ignoring the social shift is occurring as a result of that history.

Please. You're acting like this shit is ancient history. We are talking about shit that happened within the last two decades.


You act as if the 2006 reform was actually good. You also act as if people in congress voted in ways that seem counter to their current positions, as if those positions actually changed but refuse to admit a context of the vote or an accurate accounting of the bill they were voting on

More bullshit you just spout off the top of your head with no facts or substance. Explain why the immigration reform "wasn't good"? It was championed by Kennedy, I'm sure he was just a hack though.


Oh there's no doubt. I believe the response was in reference to a "the KKK is a Democratic institution" argument that completely ignores the political and social shifts in the party platforms from the 50s to early 70s.

Yeah yeah, Democrats can absolve themselves of all sins because the parties somehow switched right before civil rights, right? That proves Democrats are on the side of minorities, right?


You act as if obstruction has nothing to do with it. As if progress barrels forward at break neck speed without hindrance.

Right. Sure. In states and cities where Democrats have had complete control of all branches of the government for decades it's just because of those darn Republican obstructionists! You do know there is a lot of government out there besides the federal government, right?

[Warriorbird]

Right. Sure. In states and cities where Democrats have had complete control of all branches of the government for decades it's just because of those darn Republican obstructionists! You do know there is a lot of government out there besides the federal government, right?

They started out Democrats and became Republicans. You haven't spent much time in the South for a while have you? Same people are in charge.

[Back]

How about we acknowledge that black people are smart enough to make their own choices how they want to vote? One party seems to have a slight edge over the other in terms of being attractive enough to vote for. Even if it is nothing more than the lesser of two evils.

[Parkbandit]

Out to you too buddy. How's it like still beating Wrathbringer at grinding rep?

You still so mad bro?

You're hilarious.. in a Backlash type of way.

[tyrant-201]

How about we acknowledge that black people are smart enough to make their own choices how they want to vote? One party seems to have a slight edge over the other in terms of being attractive enough to vote for. Even if it is nothing more than the lesser of two evils.

No no no. Obviously they're all too dumb to recognize they're being hoodwinked by the liberal right.

[Warriorbird]

You still so mad bro?

You're hilarious.. in a Backlash type of way.

Mad? No. Astounded and amused by your obsession? Certainly. And I didn't think those feelings could get any greater but they did.

[Tgo01]

You go on the attack to avoid self analysis.

Self analysis of what? Oh, right, that I'm really racist. Man you and this Mike guy see right through me :(


They started out Democrats and became Republicans. You haven't spent much time in the South for a while have you? Same people are in charge.

What? States like California, New York, Washington, cities like Flint, Chicago, Detroit, LA, Oakland, those are all places where Democrats were in charge but the same people are now Republicans which is why nothing is done for minorities in these areas? You been drinking too much of your family's wine?


How about we acknowledge that black people are smart enough to make their own choices how they want to vote? One party seems to have a slight edge over the other in terms of being attractive enough to vote for. Even if it is nothing more than the lesser of two evils.

Did anyone say or imply blacks weren't smart enough to make their own choices? The question asked was why do Democrats continue to enjoy such broad support. Perhaps you've missed it lately sitting up there in your ivory tower but there is a pretty sizable movement among blacks who are asking that very same question of Hillary. Did you see how those black protesters interrupted a Hillary rally to confront her for her part in all of the shit going on in the black community? Sanders also has Killer Mike and Spike Lee endorsing him, making pretty much the same arguments against Hillary.

It's not just racist whites who are asking these questions, it's the very people who are being affected by the Clinton legacy who are asking these questions.

[Warriorbird]

What? States like California, New York, Washington, cities like Flint, Chicago, Detroit, LA, Oakland, those are all places where Democrats were in charge but the same people are now Republicans which is why nothing is done for minorities in these areas? You been drinking too much of your family's wine?

You did note the key term South in what I wrote, didn't you? I know it's tough to touch ground mid rant. I sometimes have that problem myself.

Please continue to be so balanced.

Heck, you might've not been aware that all those people you've been going on about were from the South either.

As for self analysis? Of your party. Of the actual state of the current Republican Party that you love so much you have to excoriate Democrats (theoretically the party of so many ideas you claim to love) for.

[Tgo01]

You did note the key term South in what I wrote, didn't you?

Why yes, I did notice your red herring there which is why I was trying to bring the conversation back to the topic at hand. Notice how I never once said these areas only happen in the South, mostly happen in the South, or shit, not once did I even mention the South, so why do you feel it was a relevant piece of information to even mention the South?

[Warriorbird]

Why yes, I did notice your red herring there which is why I was trying to bring the conversation back to the topic at hand. Notice how I never once said these areas only happen in the South, mostly happen in the South, or shit, not once did I even mention the South, so why do you feel it was a relevant piece of information to even mention the South?

Because it's the heart of the entire discussion and you purposefully ignore it to make all sorts of claims like in this post.

It helps you tune out reality like voter disenfranchisement and the removal of the Voting Rights Act (by conservatives) too.

[Tgo01]

Because it's the heart of the entire discussion and you purposefully ignore it to make all sorts of claims like in this post.

No, it's really not. My point was Democrats do shit to help blacks and other minorities. I point to cities completely run by Democrats for decades as proof, you know, for decades after Democrats became the "good" guys. So why the hell are you talking about the south? Oh, right, red herring. Man, cook that fish already!


It helps you tune out reality like voter disenfranchisement and the removal of the Voting Rights Act (by conservatives) too.

The voting rights act was removed? I learn something new everyday here on the PeeCee.

[Warriorbird]

No, it's really not. My point was Democrats do shit to help blacks and other minorities. I point to cities completely run by Democrats for decades as proof, you know, for decades after Democrats became the "good" guys. So why the hell are you talking about the south? Oh, right, red herring. Man, cook that fish already!



The voting rights act was removed? I learn something new everyday here on the PeeCee.

Your point was "DEMOCRATS R BAD TO MINORITIES AND BAD EVERYWHERE! LET ME CITE THE SOUTH LIKE 900 TIMES AND CLAIM ALL THE HISTORICAL STUFF R NOWWWW!"

Followed by "BUT THESE DEMOCRATIC CITIES ARE BAD!" to deflect away from the folks who actually control the South now.

It's all about deflection.

The Roberts Court (after a long campaign/case funded by our favorite Republicans from Texas, including some of the backers of Citizens United) removed the operative functions of the Voting Rights Act, clearing the way for massive voter disenfranchisement across the South by guess what, Republicans!

This ties into you purposefully ignoring the Southern Strategy, dog whistling, and what Trump does for pretty much your entire tenure here in a massive burst of "BUT ROBERT BYRD ZOMG!"

Robert Byrd's existence doesn't remove the Republican Party from doing all sorts of fucked up shit. Sorry buddy.

You sure love to talk about the South's past but sure don't want to look at the present.

[Tgo01]

Your point was "DEMOCRATS R BAD TO MINORITIES AND BAD EVERYWHERE! LET ME CITE THE SOUTH LIKE 900 TIMES AND CLAIM ALL THE HISTORICAL STUFF R NOWWWW!"

When did I cite the south? Be specific please, preferably with quotes.


Followed by "BUT THESE DEMOCRATIC CITIES ARE BAD!" to deflect away from the folks who actually control the South now.

Is that what I was doing?


The Roberts Court (after a long campaign/case funded by our favorite Republicans from Texas, including some of the backers of Citizens United) removed the operative functions of the Voting Rights Act

So by "the removal of the Voting Rights Act (by conservatives)" you meant one provision of the Voting Rights Act that required only certain states to get federal approval before changing their voter laws was struck down judicially. Glad we got that cleared up, for a minute there I thought literacy tests were on the rise again!

[Warriorbird]

When did I cite the south? Be specific please, preferably with quotes.



Is that what I was doing?



So by "the removal of the Voting Rights Act (by conservatives)" you meant one provision of the Voting Rights Act that required only certain states to get federal approval before changing their voter laws was struck down judicially. Glad we got that cleared up, for a minute there I thought literacy tests were on the rise again!

When did you cite the South? Go back and analyze all your "EVIDENCE OF PAST DEMOCRATIC EVIL" and tell me.

And wait for it. Which states are those that're doing all the fucked up shit to voters now again? But you don't want to talk about that.

[Parkbandit]

Mad? No. Astounded and amused by your obsession? Certainly. And I didn't think those feelings could get any greater but they did.

Astounded?

Lol.

For someone who isn't mad, you sure seem to be quite upset by this.

It'll be ok, little fella.

[Tgo01]

When did you cite the South? Go back and analyze all your "EVIDENCE OF PAST DEMOCRATIC EVIL" and tell me.

No no, that's not how this works. You made the assertion so you provide the proof. Unless of course...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SWF9i3Vzpac/TTysCkJ4kaI/AAAAAAAABFY/NreKH_-adAI/s1600/Chicken+McFly-BTTF.gif


Which states are those that're doing all the fucked up shit to voters now again?

Which "fucked up shit" are you referring to exactly? Again, please be specific, preferably with quotes and sources.

[Warriorbird]

No no, that's not how this works. You made the assertion so you provide the proof. Unless of course...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SWF9i3Vzpac/TTysCkJ4kaI/AAAAAAAABFY/NreKH_-adAI/s1600/Chicken+McFly-BTTF.gif



Which "fucked up shit" are you referring to exactly? Again, please be specific, preferably with quotes and sources.

It's amazing the lengths you'll go to to avoid talking about what's actually going on in the South right now or your own party.

http://img.hareruyamtg.com/img/goods/L/3902.jpg

Good job proving my initial theory.

Not exactly sure why I'm supposed to vote for demagogue nutjob the Republicans are going to be putting up as opposed to the sellout the Democrats are putting up. Not really sure why any black voter would either.

At the heart she represents actually working within the system, as fucked as it is, as opposed to constant extreme nonsense said by a man who doesn't even agree with all of what he says. But, then again, as a person who believes in liberal positions on many topics yet steadfastly hates on liberals (maybe also for attention) I suppose Trump resonates deeply for you.

[WRoss]

Where are the super Tuesday picks?

[Warriorbird]

Where are the super Tuesday picks?

Mostly Hillary and Trump. Cruz getting Texas helps him though.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/texas-republican/

[Tgo01]

It's amazing the lengths you'll go to to avoid talking about what's actually going on in the South right now or your own party.

I suppose that's one way to deal with the situation when someone calls you out for a lack of facts and sources and hell even examples of what you're talking about, just tell the other person they don't understand.

[Warriorbird]

I suppose that's one way to deal with the situation when someone calls you out for a lack of facts and sources and hell even examples of what you're talking about, just tell the other person they don't understand.

Lack of facts? You posted them yourself. What's the point of putting them up to have you whine about them and try to rationalize?

For starters you ought to look at the region of the Democrats who voted against the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights act after I point out who the largest number of yes votes were for each (Democrats.)

Then reflect on what state Bill Clinton is from. Then Andrew Jackson, Lyndon Johnson, and Robert Byrd.

What region were most of the Democrats who did questionable stuff to black people under FDR from? Do those folks often match up to the people who voted against the Civil Rights act? Wow.

You reached out for all of the above and then dodged HARD because you don't want to talk about what the Republican Party is doing now. You've already tried to minimize it all away because you just GOT to spin man.

CUE whining and rationalization attempts.

I don't expect you to ever seriously discuss the fucked up shit the Republicans are doing. It just isn't in your nature.

[Fallen]

I think you could make the argument that the voter ID laws are being put into place to disenfranchise Democrats as opposed to black people in general. Multiple Republican politicians have admitted to that as a motive.

[Warriorbird]

I think you could make the argument that the voter ID laws are being put into place to disenfranchise Democrats as opposed to black people in general. Multiple Republican politicians have admitted to that as a motive.

I could ride with that in the vein of:

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/221265/SIMPSONSFOXNEWS.jpg

...but I think the Alabama DMV closings were actually racist.

Thankfully they realized how bad it looked, though "limited basis" still has issues.

http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/drivers-license-offices-will-reopen-on-limited-basis.html

I don't dig disenfranchisment. I helped more than 80 Republican teens register to vote (and vote in their primary) this year alone.

[Back]

Did anyone say or imply blacks weren't smart enough to make their own choices? The question asked was why do Democrats continue to enjoy such broad support. Perhaps you've missed it lately sitting up there in your ivory tower but there is a pretty sizable movement among blacks who are asking that very same question of Hillary. Did you see how those black protesters interrupted a Hillary rally to confront her for her part in all of the shit going on in the black community? Sanders also has Killer Mike and Spike Lee endorsing him, making pretty much the same arguments against Hillary.

It's not just racist whites who are asking these questions, it's the very people who are being affected by the Clinton legacy who are asking these questions.

I don't understand the point you are trying to make. Your argument is all over the place. Perhaps you can simplify it for me. Why do democrats continue to enjoy such broad support? I think Kembal summed it up pretty succinctly but you seem to have a lot to say about it.

And yes I have been following along with current events. Yes I am aware, to the extent that I can be, of all the protests and the dialogue that people are still struggling to elevate into the mainstream. But were you aware how much of the black vote Hillary won just last night in SC?

[Tgo01]

Lack of facts? You posted them yourself. What's the point of putting them up to have you whine about them and try to rationalize?

For starters you ought to look at the region of the Democrats who voted against the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights act after I point out who the largest number of yes votes were for each (Democrats.)

Then reflect on what state Bill Clinton is from. Then Andrew Jackson, Lyndon Johnson, and Robert Byrd.

What region were most of the Democrats who did questionable stuff to black people under FDR from? Do those folks often match up to the people who voted against the Civil Rights act? Wow.

You reached out for all of the above and then dodged HARD because you don't want to talk about what the Republican Party is doing now. You've already tried to minimize it all away because you just GOT to spin man.

CUE whining and rationalization attempts.

I don't expect you to ever seriously discuss the fucked up shit the Republicans are doing. It just isn't in your nature.

Your projection skills are getting impressive. If only we can find a way to harness your power for good.

[Warriorbird]

Your projection skills are getting impressive. If only we can find a way to harness your power for good.

Your list of politicians. Not mine.

I'm not thrilled by Hillary. I'm much less thrilled by "THE WALL JUST GOT TALLER!"

I'm puzzled at anybody who's puzzled by that concept.

[Parkbandit]

I don't understand the point you are trying to make. Your argument is all over the place. Perhaps you can simplify it for me.

I'm not sure that is possible without crayons and big, bright paper.


Why do democrats continue to enjoy such broad support?

That's pretty crude to talk about females in such a manner.



I think Kembal summed it up pretty succinctly but you seem to have a lot to say about it.

And yes I have been following along with current events. Yes I am aware, to the extent that I can be, of all the protests and the dialogue that people are still struggling to elevate into the mainstream. But were you aware how much of the black vote Hillary won just last night in SC?

Who else did they have to pick from? Sanders?

lol.

[Parkbandit]

I'm not thrilled by Hillary. I'm much less thrilled by "THE WALL JUST GOT TALLER!"


You're crazy. I laughed my ass off at that line. Plus you forgot the "Believe me" at the end.

[Tgo01]

I'm puzzled at anybody who's puzzled by that concept.

You're puzzled why someone doesn't want to support a liar who is under federal investigation for mishandling government secrets? Someone who is accused of accepting money for her foundation in exchange for political favors while secretary of state? Someone whose husband pardoned Marc Rich after his wife donated money to the Clinton Library and over a million dollars to Democrat campaigns? Someone who lied and attempted to cover up the Benghazi shit? Someone who turns her support on and off like a switch for minority rights and gay rights depending on which way the political wind is blowing? Someone who takes millions of dollars in campaign contributions from big banks with the promise that she's really really going to go after big banks? Someone who bemoans money in politics while enjoy millions of dollars in contributions from billionaires? Someone who is directly and indirectly responsible for ruining the lives of millions of people via shit I have already mentioned in this thread? Someone who is a habitual liar and even lies about coming under sniper fire because she has no real substance or firm ideological policies? Someone who claims to understand the plight of working class Americans yet tries to prove this with phony shit like "carrying" her own luggage after flying first class everywhere and having to remind everyone every 2 seconds she's a woman and that she's just like Latinos' own grandmother?

Oh but wait, Trump says stupid shit. I'll take someone who says stupid shit but has firm beliefs and some good ideas any day of the week over someone who has proven time and time again they can't be trusted and they only care about themselves.

[Warriorbird]

You're puzzled why someone doesn't want to support a liar who is under federal investigation for mishandling government secrets? Someone who is accused of accepting money for her foundation in exchange for political favors while secretary of state? Someone whose husband pardoned Marc Rich after his wife donated money to the Clinton Library and over a million dollars to Democrat campaigns? Someone who lied and attempted to cover up the Benghazi shit? Someone who turns her support on and off like a switch for minority rights and gay rights depending on which way the political wind is blowing? Someone who takes millions of dollars in campaign contributions from big banks with the promise that she's really really going to go after big banks? Someone who bemoans money in politics while enjoy millions of dollars in contributions from billionaires? Someone who is directly and indirectly responsible for ruining the lives of millions of people via shit I have already mentioned in this thread? Someone who is a habitual liar and even lies about coming under sniper fire because she has no real substance or firm ideological policies? Someone who claims to understand the plight of working class Americans yet tries to prove this with phony shit like "carrying" her own luggage after flying first class everywhere and having to remind everyone every 2 seconds she's a woman and that she's just like Latinos' own grandmother?

Oh but wait, Trump says stupid shit. I'll take someone who says stupid shit but has firm beliefs and some good ideas any day of the week over someone who has proven time and time again they can't be trusted and they only care about themselves.

I'm not the one who asked the question. There all sorts of reasons why someone would support Trump, just like, with honest reflection, why somebody would support Hillary.

[Latrinsorm]

What was it.. 47% margin for Clinton? So... can anyone explain to me exactly why Black people vote for Clinton... or Dems in general. Other then giving them handouts, I can't figure out what Dems ever do for them.For one thing, Democrats very rarely say the black vote is based on handouts.
That's one thing I'll give credit to Democrats for, they sure are much better than Republicans at creating manufactured racial outrage over entirely bogus shit. Gotta get minorities to the polls somehow after all, right? It sure as shit isn't because Democrats do a whole lot to help minorities.Or dismiss black outrage as manufactured and entirely bogus.
Yeah yeah, Democrats can absolve themselves of all sins because the parties somehow switched right before civil rights, right? That proves Democrats are on the side of minorities, right?https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/ElectoralCollege1956.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1956.svg.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/ElectoralCollege1964.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1964.svg.png
Whether this counts as a realigning election depends on the technical definition of realigning election. Whether the parties changed ideologies at this time is beyond dispute. It didn't "somehow switch", it was explicit and intentional on both sides.

[Gelston]

I remember when my great state used to have 10 electoral votes. :(

[Tgo01]

...but I think the Alabama DMV closings were actually racist.

Once again you are relying on Democrat manufactured racist outrage bullshit.

http://www.snopes.com/2015/10/01/alabama-drivers-license/

Shit, from your very own link:


The affected offices issued or renewed less than 9,000 driver's licenses and identification cards in 2014; the counties had just over 551,000 active or inactive voters that year. The number represented less than one-half of one percent of the voting population.

The totals were slightly higher in the 12 Black Belt counties that lost examiners: there, the offices issued or renewed 2,702 licenses and identifications in counties with 128,788 active and registered voters, or about 2.1 percent of voters.

Less than one-half of one percent of the voting population and 2.1 percent of voters in predominately black areas were affected by the DMV closures, not to mention the fact that getting a license from a DMV in Alabama is not required to vote.

This whole thing was a joke to get the left's base riled up and shit did it work.

Talk about using minorities to further one's own political agenda.

[Warriorbird]

Once again you are relying on Democrat manufactured racist outrage bullshit.

http://www.snopes.com/2015/10/01/alabama-drivers-license/

Shit, from your very own link:



Less than one-half of one percent of the voting population and 2.1 percent of voters in predominately black areas were affected by the DMV closures, not to mention the fact that getting a license from a DMV in Alabama is not required to vote.

This whole thing was a joke to get the left's base riled up and shit did it work.

Talk about using minorities to further one's own political agenda.

Mobile unit workers for non license voter ids show up at where though? The DMV.

I knew the rationalizing would come in. It's just popped up elsewhere!

2.1% in 12 counties would've given Al Gore the Presidency.

In state level races, the likely actual target, it could have a much greater impact.

...and you're just hiding from Latrin's post.

[Gelston]

I knew the rationalizing would come in. It's just popped up elsewhere!

2.1% in 12 counties would've given Al Gore the Presidency.

In state level races, the likely actual target, it could have a much greater impact.

...and you're just hiding from Latrin's post.

Racist.

[Warriorbird]

Racist.

Absolutely. I even got called it by a whole squad of Hillary Clinton canvassers recently. I'm not even sure most Republicans can keep up with that.

[Godsanvil]

I do not understand how anyone would vote for Clinton. She and her husband are horrible people. People just stick head up ass and ignore all the evil shit they have done the last 50 years.

[Warriorbird]

I do not understand how anyone would vote for Clinton. She and her husband are horrible people. People just stick head up ass and ignore all the evil shit they have done the last 50 years.

http://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_585w/Boston/2011-2020/2015/11/19/BostonGlobe.com/National/Images/Hillary%20Rodham%20Clinton-6396687.jpg

High school graduate Hillary is coming for you!

(50 years ago)

[Latrinsorm]

I do not understand how anyone would vote for Clinton. She and her husband are horrible people. People just stick head up ass and ignore all the evil shit they have done the last 50 years.It seems pretty unlikely Hilary was actively committing evil when she was 18.

[Gelston]

It seems pretty unlikely Hilary was actively committing evil when she was 18.

You'd be surprised.

[Tgo01]

Whether this counts as a realigning election depends on the technical definition of realigning election. Whether the parties changed ideologies at this time is beyond dispute. It didn't "somehow switch", it was explicit and intentional on both sides.

Well that's interesting. Didn't the "Southern Strategy" start with Goldwater and continued on with Nixon and Reagan and blah blah blah, right? So that means starting with Goldwater we should see "traditional" Southern states go for Republicans and "traditional" states go towards Democrats.

Looks have a look see at the election after Goldwater.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ElectoralCollege1968.svg

(apparently the image didn't load but you know what it looks like)

Hmm. Look at all of those traditional northern states going for Nixon while most Southern states didn't. But maybe Nixon just sucked at this Southern Strategy thing so let's move on.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/ElectoralCollege1972.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1972.svg.png

Whoops. Never mind. Nothing to see here.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/ElectoralCollege1976.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1976.svg.png

Look at the good ol' southern boy Carter gobbling up all of those Southern states while Ford grabs most of the of traditional norther states.

That just must be an anomaly though.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/ElectoralCollege1980.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1980.svg.png

Again, nothing to see here! Avert your gaze!

[Tgo01]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/ElectoralCollege1984.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1984.svg.png

Same thing! Save yourself if the truth burns your retinas with the power of a thousand suns!

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/ElectoralCollege1988.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1988.svg.png

This is absolute madness!

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/ElectoralCollege1996.svg/800px-ElectoralCollege1996.svg.png

Clinton picking up Georgia, Louisiana, AND Michigan. All states affected by section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Not to mention Arkansas and Tennessee.

So when did the parties "switch" again?

[Gelston]

There is a free bloomin onion at outback tomorrow.

[Warriorbird]

So... showing the start of Lee Atwater's employment equaling the climax of success of the Southern strategy equals what again? If we actually wanted to be quantitatively serious we could show the rise in Southern Republican percentages in Presidential, Congressional, gubernatorial, and state legislative races, Tgo?


There is a free bloomin onion at outback tomorrow.

Way more exciting than hearing what everybody already told Tgo presented as shocking.

[Tgo01]

Mobile unit workers for non license voter ids show up at where though? The DMV.

Are you just making shit up now? What am I saying, what do I mean by "now"?


I knew the rationalizing would come in. It's just popped up elsewhere!

Calling out your belief in manufactured outrage bullshit is me "rationalizing"? Well you got that argument tied up in a neat little bow.


2.1% in 12 counties would've given Al Gore the Presidency.

And you call me racist. So you're assuming A) Those 2.1% of people were all poor black people. B) Those people all would have voted for Gore. C) Those people didn't have other means of obtaining an ID at a different DMV. D) Didn't have a plethora of other options available to them other than obtaining an ID at a DMV.

That's more assumptions than you can shake a stick at.

Oh yeah I forgot, E: The 5 times LARGER number of people affected in counties that were NOT predominantly black. F) That 2.1% of people represented a whole 2700 people which is one tenth of one percent of the total population of Alabama, it did not represent 2.1% of the entire state's population. Now if Bush had won Alabama by less than 2700 people then maybe you would be onto something there.

[Tgo01]

There is a free bloomin onion at outback tomorrow.

It's all about Texas Roadhouse's onion petal thingie...whatever they call it!

I'm in the mood for some Texas Roadhouse now...I'm inviting everyone to come join me this weekend! My treat!

[Gelston]

It's all about Texas Roadhouse's onion petal thingie...whatever they call it!

I'm in the mood for some Texas Roadhouse now...I'm inviting everyone to come join me this weekend! My treat!

Last tiem I went to the Texas Roadhouse, they were out of the damn Roadhouse Steak.

[Tgo01]

Last tiem I went to the Texas Roadhouse, they were out of the damn Roadhouse Steak.

I always get the bone in ribeye. Steak sticks to the lining of your gut for decades you know.

[Warriorbird]

Are you just making shit up now? What am I saying, what do I mean by "now"?

Calling out your belief in manufactured outrage bullshit is me "rationalizing"? Well you got that argument tied up in a neat little bow.

And you call me racist. So you're assuming A) Those 2.1% of people were all poor black people. B) Those people all would have voted for Gore. C) Those people didn't have other means of obtaining an ID at a different DMV. D) Didn't have a plethora of other options available to them other than obtaining an ID at a DMV.

That's more assumptions than you can shake a stick at.

Oh yeah I forgot, E: The 5 times LARGER number of people affected in counties that were NOT predominantly black. F) That 2.1% of people represented a whole 2700 people which is one tenth of one percent of the total population of Alabama, it did not represent 2.1% of the entire state's population. Now if Bush had won Alabama by less than 2700 people then maybe you would be onto something there.

I'm suggesting you're not actually familiar with Alabama law or the broader ramifications of the 12 counties with the highest black percentages in the state not having DMV access to get licenses for voting.

County registrars often refer voter id acquisition out to "mobile unit workers" who go to DMVs. There is no "plethora of other options."

I didn't call you racist in this instance. I merely said you rationalized. Your clinging to it is basically playing a race card though.

If this didn't look bad and have an actual impact I doubt that the Republican governor would have backtracked quite so hard.

To break down the rest for your willfully obtuse and rationalizing brain, the issue isn't mostly the Presidential election (though 2.1% in 12 counties of Florida would've swung THAT election). It's about congressional and state legislative elections that may not have anything to do with all of those other predominately non white counties and I tend to believe that mobile unit workers would've been readily available for their ID cards.

...that and you trying to wriggle away from and spin any of the bad stuff that Republicans do. And now dodging a deeper analysis of the Southern Strategy too. SPIN SPIN!

[Latrinsorm]

Well that's interesting. Didn't the "Southern Strategy" start with Goldwater and continued on with Nixon and Reagan and blah blah blah, right? So that means starting with Goldwater we should see "traditional" Southern states go for Republicans and "traditional" states go towards Democrats.This is incorrect. What we should see is Republicans get a higher % in Southern states than they otherwise would have had they not employed the Southern strategy. Whether a particular state ends up going for Republicans (and whether a particular northern one goes for Democrats) depends on how close the election otherwise would have been in that state. 1968 has the added complication of being a three party election. If we look at the biggest strongholds such as Alabama and Mississippi, we see them go Democrat in every two party election from 1876 to 1956 and Republican in all but one from 1964 to 2012, or 0% (0 of 17) to 91% (10 of 11). For further reading see here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South).

[Warriorbird]

This is incorrect. What we should see is Republicans get a higher % in Southern states than they otherwise would have had they not employed the Southern strategy. Whether a particular state ends up going for Republicans (and whether a particular northern one goes for Democrats) depends on how close the election otherwise would have been in that state. 1968 has the added complication of being a three party election. If we look at the biggest strongholds such as Alabama and Mississippi, we see them go Democrat in every two party election from 1876 to 1956 and Republican in all but one from 1964 to 2012, or 0% (0 of 17) to 91% (10 of 11). For further reading see here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South).

Ha ha ha. I knew that would come out eventually but I hoped he'd try to rationalize more before he got called on it.

[Tgo01]

I'm suggesting you're not actually familiar with Alabama law or the broader ramifications of the 12 counties with the highest black percentages in the state not having DMV access to get licenses for voting.

Well as long as you say so.


County registrars often refer voter id acquisition out to "mobile unit workers" who go to DMVs. There is no "plethora of other options."

Here is a link to the 10 forms of ID Alabama accepts:

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/validIDatPolls.aspx

And here is a link to a list of all of the locations where one may receive a free voter ID card:

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/permanentLocations.aspx

Not to mention as was already stated in the link I provided earlier "every probate judge in the state has the authority to renew driver's licenses"

So, yes, a "plethora" of options. Thank you and God bless.


the issue isn't mostly the Presidential election

You're the one who mentioned presidential elections, now you're giving me shit for specifically countering the argument you yourself put forth? There is just no pleasing you.


though 2.1% in 12 counties of Florida would've swung THAT election

Good thing we're not talking about Florida. Focus, WB. FOCUS!


It's about congressional and state legislative elections that may not have anything to do with all of those other predominately non white counties

Of course. In an effort to ensure fewer Democrats get elected into office the state of Alabama closed DMVs in several counties, including counties with a large black population and counties with a large white population, and they were hoping that the ~2200 people who used the DMVs to renew/receive their license spread out over 12 counties with a high black population wouldn't be able to get another photo ID and that this would be enough to tip the scales to the Republican side, even though the state is providing other ways for one to receive a voter ID card or even renew their license by a probate judge.

I get it now.

That certainly makes more sense than this just being another case of manufactured bullshit outrage from Democrats.


This is incorrect. What we should see is Republicans get a higher % in Southern states than they otherwise would have had they not employed the Southern strategy. Whether a particular state ends up going for Republicans (and whether a particular northern one goes for Democrats) depends on how close the election otherwise would have been in that state. 1968 has the added complication of being a three party election. If we look at the biggest strongholds such as Alabama and Mississippi, we see them go Democrat in every two party election from 1876 to 1956 and Republican in all but one from 1964 to 2012, or 0% (0 of 17) to 91% (10 of 11). For further reading see here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South).

Wait a minute, weren't you the one who posted up two maps, one from 1956 showing the Democrat receiving the vote from the Southern states, and one from 1964 showing the Republican receiving the vote from Southern states and then said, and I quote:


Whether the parties changed ideologies at this time is beyond dispute. It didn't "somehow switch", it was explicit and intentional on both sides.

But now you're trying to explain away all of the times the vote didn't turn out the way you described after this point in time which was, according to your very own words, when the parties "changed ideologies" and claimed it was "beyond dispute"? Do I have this right?

You and WB must be colluding together with your bullshit argument theory. Both of you say one thing to prove your point, I counter your point (quite splendidly I might add), then you both come back and say "Well yeah, dipshit! But there's more to it than that!"

I'm about ready to take my ball and go home if you two can't play nice.

[Warriorbird]

Well as long as you say so.



Here is a link to the 10 forms of ID Alabama accepts:

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/validIDatPolls.aspx

And here is a link to a list of all of the locations where one may receive a free voter ID card:

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/permanentLocations.aspx

Not to mention as was already stated in the link I provided earlier "every probate judge in the state has the authority to renew driver's licenses"

So, yes, a "plethora" of options. Thank you and God bless.



You're the one who mentioned presidential elections, now you're giving me shit for specifically countering the argument you yourself put forth? There is just no pleasing you.



Good thing we're not talking about Florida. Focus, WB. FOCUS!



Of course. In an effort to ensure fewer Democrats get elected into office the state of Alabama closed DMVs in several counties, including counties with a large black population and counties with a large white population, and they were hoping that the ~2200 people who used the DMVs to renew/receive their license spread out over 12 counties with a high black population wouldn't be able to get another photo ID and that this would be enough to tip the scales to the Republican side, even though the state is providing other ways for one to receive a voter ID card or even renew their license by a probate judge.

I get it now.

That certainly makes more sense then this just being another case of manufactured bullshit outrage from Democrats.



Wait a minute, weren't you the one who posted up two maps, one from 1956 showing the Democrat receiving the vote from the Southern states, and one from 1964 showing the Republican receiving the vote from Southern states and then said, and I quote:



But now you're trying to explain away all of the times the vote didn't turn out the way you described after this point in time which was, according to your very own words, when the parties "changed ideologies" and claimed it was "beyond dispute"? Do I have this right?

You and WB must be colluding together with your bullshit argument theory. Both of you say one thing to prove your point, I counter your point quite splendidly I might add, then you both come back and say "Well yeah, dipshit! But there's more to it than that!"

I'm about ready to take my ball and go home if you two can't play nice.

After the unholy asskicking (with numbers) that Latrin gave to your central thesis I understand why you might want to quit, but you double down and try to dig more.

You didn't actually think about the difficulty that poor and often marginally employed people of any race might have at getting those forms of ID.

Or note the bit about registrars referring id applicants out to "mobile workers" from the current rather than 2014 version of the law, did you?

Then you devote a bit of time to trying to pretend that 2.1% of 12 counties doesn't matter when there are only 67 counties in Alabama. Good try!

The Republicans could count on their voters getting IDs in the other counties by sending out enough "mobile workers" to fill their needs so it was a really slick move with good cover.

Why could they count on that? Oh right. That pesky Southern strategy article that you probably closed up right away after Latrin smashed you with it.

Thankfully they got called on it.

This was fun.

Added note?

I love the bit on the page where they try to intimidate people by saying that if they had one of those other types of ID and didn't remember it they were committing a felony. Very Republican, that. Totally not trying to scare or intimidate anybody.

[Gelston]

I rate this thread 1 star(s).

[Godsanvil]

It seems pretty unlikely Hilary was actively committing evil when she was 18.
I said for the last 50 years not 50 years ago. Learn some reading comprehension.

[Gelston]

I said for the last 50 years not 50 years ago. Learn some reading comprehension.

Uh what? The start of the last 50 years was 50 years ago.

[Warriorbird]

I rate this thread 1 star(s).

Pretty accurate. High school Hillary showing up was kind of hilarious though. It was a very long time ago.

[Tgo01]

You didn't actually think about the difficulty that poor and often marginally employed people of any race might have at getting those forms of ID.

Or note the bit about registrars referring id applicants out to "mobile workers" from the current rather than 2014 version of the law, did you?

The Republicans could count on their voters getting IDs in the other counties by sending out enough "mobile workers" to fill their needs so it was a really slick move with good cover.

This all sounds like the rantings of a conspiracy theory nut. Don't suppose you have any links?


I love the bit on the page where they try to intimidate people by saying that if they had one of those other types of ID and didn't remember it they were committing a felony.

Dude, can you fucking read? Unless you're referring to something else entirely the only mention of felony I see on either of the two links I provided is this:

"Please note that applicants are instructed not to complete the application if they already possess one of the valid forms of photo identification and that any falsification or fraud in completing the application shall constitute a Class C felony. "

That doesn't say trying to obtain a free photo voter ID is a felony if they already possess a different ID. It says, quite plainly I might add, that FALSIFYING or committing FRAUD in completing the application is a felony. But I guess just making it a felony to falsify information for a voter ID card or committing fraud is racist now.


Then you devote a bit of time to trying to pretend that 2.1% of 12 counties doesn't matter when there are only 67 counties in Alabama. Good try!

I hereby crown you KING of Deflection! All hail our new King!

But no, seriously. I didn't say 2.1% "didn't matter", I questioned the efficacy of targeting 2700 people spread out over 13 counties by closing the DMV offices under the assumption that those 2700 people even voted much less all voted Democrat and that they had no other means to renew their license or receive another form of government ID, all in an effort to either suppress minority votes or get fewer Democrats elected into office. If you could, I don't know, actually explain your position for why all of this is more feasible than the simple explanation that there is no conspiracy and these are all just manufactured bullshit outrages coming from the left? I can't help but notice that Hillary and other Democrats rushed to the scene to explain how racist Republicans were for doing this.

[Warriorbird]

This all sounds like the rantings of a conspiracy theory nut. Don't suppose you have any links?



Dude, can you fucking read? Unless you're referring to something else entirely the only mention of felony I see on either of the two links I provided is this:

"Please note that applicants are instructed not to complete the application if they already possess one of the valid forms of photo identification and that any falsification or fraud in completing the application shall constitute a Class C felony. "

That doesn't say trying to obtain a free photo voter ID is a felony if they already possess a different voter ID. It says, quite plainly I might add, that FALSIFYING or committing FRAUD in completing the application is a felony. But I guess just making it a felony to falsify information for a voter ID card or committing fraud is racist now.



I hereby crown you KING of Deflection! All hail our new King!

But no, seriously. I didn't say 2.1% "didn't matter", I questioned the efficacy of targeting 2700 people spread out over 13 counties by closing the DMV offices under the assumption that those 2700 people even voted much less all voted Democrat and that they had no other means to renew their license or receive another form of government ID, all in an effort to either suppress minority votes or get fewer Democrats elected into office. If you could, I don't know, actually explain your position for why all of this is more feasible than the simple explanation that there is no conspiracy and these are all just manufactured bullshit outrages coming from the left? I can't help but notice that Hillary and other Democrats rushed to the scene to explain how racist Republicans were for doing this.

There's no reason to include IF YOU HAVE ONE OF THESE FORMS OF ID BUT GET OUR FREE CARD YOU'VE COMMITTED A FELONY! unless you're trying to intimidate people.

Hilarious how you've thrown in an attempt to call me a "conspiracy theorist" when the decision to close the DMVs actually got overturned and I had nothing to do with it.

Then you're like "It's unbelievable!" but we're dealing with politicians here. A 2.1% swing in several counties and plausible deniability at the same time? It's a no brainer for the Republican Party. Trying to pretend it hasn't been a Republican strategy is just about as daft as being the guy who tries to pretend the Southern Strategy didn't exist/happen.

Oh wait. You're that guy.

[Tgo01]

There's no reason to include IF YOU HAVE ONE OF THESE FORMS OF ID BUT GET OUR FREE CARD YOU'VE COMMITTED A FELONY! unless you're trying to intimidate people.

I just got finished explaining how you completely misread that and here you are, repeating your bullshit again. I kind of feel bad now, seriously do you have a reading problem perhaps? It's the only explanation for how you misread it, then misread my clarification of it, then misread the original statement yet again.

[Warriorbird]

I just got finished explaining how you completely misread that and here you are, repeating your bullshit again. I kind of feel bad now, seriously do you have a reading problem perhaps? It's the only explanation for how you misread it, then misread my clarification of it, then misread the original statement yet again.

Us disagreeing on an implication is far different from me "misreading it."

Either way, its far different from trying to debate the historical record though. Hats off to you.

[Tgo01]

Us disagreeing on an implication is far different from me "misreading it."

"Please note that applicants are instructed not to complete the application if they already possess one of the valid forms of photo identification and that any falsification or fraud in completing the application shall constitute a Class C felony. "

No, really, there is only one way to interpret that and it sure isn't what you said.

[Warriorbird]

No, really, there is only one way to interpret that and it sure isn't what you said.

It's tough when you encounter moments like that. There's this guy who ignores two major strategies of his own party on the PC. I try really hard but it's like he can't even see it.

[Gelston]

"Please note that applicants are instructed not to complete the application if they already possess one of the valid forms of photo identification and that any falsification or fraud in completing the application shall constitute a Class C felony. "

No, really, there is only one way to interpret that and it sure isn't what you said.

Falsification/fraud is what gives the felony. I imagine one of the questions is "Do you already posses a valid form of photo ID?" Answering this falsely would be falsification and be subject to a felony charge, as with all Government paperwork.

[Latrinsorm]

Wait a minute, weren't you the one who posted up two maps, one from 1956 showing the Democrat receiving the vote from the Southern states, and one from 1964 showing the Republican receiving the vote from Southern states and then said, and I quote:I did say what is factually correct, yes.
But now you're trying to explain away all of the times the vote didn't turn out the way you described after this point in time which was, according to your very own words, when the parties "changed ideologies" and claimed it was "beyond dispute"? Do I have this right?One important clarification is that I said the parties changed ideologies. I did not say the vote universally followed that ideological switch, or that all party members changed ideologies, or anything else similar to but different from what I said. One important correction is all of the time, singular. There is 1 two party election out of 28 that doesn't follow the model I proposed. I am satisfied with that accuracy.

[Tgo01]

Falsification/fraud is what gives the felony. I imagine one of the questions is "Do you already posses a valid form of photo ID?" Answering this falsely would be falsification and be subject to a felony charge, as with all Government paperwork.

That's what I thought at first because I wanted to give WB the benefit of the doubt, but here is the form in question:

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/downloads/ApplicationForFreeALPhotoVoterIdCard.pdf

The instructions state that you can't receive a voter ID card if you possess one of the valid forms of ID, but the actual form does not ask if you possess one of the valid forms of ID.

So this quote:

"Please note that applicants are instructed not to complete the application if they already possess one of the valid forms of photo identification and that any falsification or fraud in completing the application shall constitute a Class C felony."

Is stating two different things.

1) Do not fill out this application if you already possess a valid form of voter ID.
2) If you falsify the form or commit fraud it's a felony.


I did not say the vote universally followed that ideological switch

You're right, you just posted a map saying "See all of those Southern states that are blue? Now watch as they turn red 4 years later!" followed by evil laughter and thunder roaring in the background. You then said "Whether the parties changed ideologies at this time is beyond dispute. It didn't "somehow switch", it was explicit and intentional on both sides."

If you weren't heavily implying that the two maps proved that the ideologies changed "at that time" then I don't know what the fuck you were doing.

[Warriorbird]

That's what I thought at first because I wanted to give WB the benefit of the doubt, but here is the form in question:

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/downloads/ApplicationForFreeALPhotoVoterIdCard.pdf

The instructions state that you can't receive a voter ID card if you possess one of the valid forms of ID, but the actual form does not ask if you possess one of the valid forms of ID.

So this quote:

"Please note that applicants are instructed not to complete the application if they already possess one of the valid forms of photo identification and that any falsification or fraud in completing the application shall constitute a Class C felony."

Is stating two different things.

1) Do not fill out this application if you already possess a valid form of voter ID.
2) If you falsify the form or commit fraud it's a felony.

You're correct, though it's pretty easy to misread at a quick look and might intimidate someone.

I'm not expecting you to offer a similar mea culpa on the Southern Strategy or the use of voter id laws to attempt to reduce Democratic votes though.

[Gelston]

That's what I thought at first because I wanted to give WB the benefit of the doubt, but here is the form in question:

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/downloads/ApplicationForFreeALPhotoVoterIdCard.pdf

The instructions state that you can't receive a voter ID card if you possess one of the valid forms of ID, but the actual form does not ask if you possess one of the valid forms of ID.

So this quote:

"Please note that applicants are instructed not to complete the application if they already possess one of the valid forms of photo identification and that any falsification or fraud in completing the application shall constitute a Class C felony."

Is stating two different things.

1) Do not fill out this application if you already possess a valid form of voter ID.
2) If you falsify the form or commit fraud it's a felony.

Yes and no. Just getting the ID isn't a felony, but filling out the form if you already have one is. This comes simply from it being a felony to falsify or commit fraud on any Government form. I imagine that no one would ever be prosecuted for filling one of these out if they already have another form of ID though. They'd just be denied. Infact, the form itself has a "Reason for Denial" location.

The bigger concern, I think, is someone having two different identities and therefore voting more than once.

[Gelston]

reading the form more, no where does the form itself say or have a signed area to state that you will receive a felony if you already have one. They'd just deny you. Nothing more.

[Tgo01]

I'm not expecting you to offer a similar mea culpa on the Southern Strategy or the use of voter id laws to attempt to reduce Democratic votes though.

Of course the Southern Strategy exists, I never said it didn't. I said the parties didn't simply "switch places" suddenly sometime before the Civil Rights act. This is often the go to response from Democrats when pointing out the party's checkered history. Oh Lincoln freed the slaves? Well he was really a Democrat because the parties switched places in the 1950's.

Oh more Democrats than Republicans voted against the Civil Rights act? Well that's because the parties switched places after the Civil Rights act.

Oh the KKK was founded by Democrats? Well they were really Republicans because the parties switched places in the 1960's.

It's fucking bullshit. Latrin even tried to imply this sudden switch with his maps then backtracked and is now trying to claim that yes, the parties did indeed switch places but it took around 4 decades for the electorate to catch up.

[Warriorbird]

Of course the Southern Strategy exists, I never said it didn't. I said the parties didn't simply "switch places" suddenly sometime before the Civil Rights act. This is often the go to response from Democrats when pointing out the party's checkered history. Oh Lincoln freed the slaves? Well he was really a Democrat because the parties switched places in the 1950's.

Oh more Democrats than Republicans voted against the Civil Rights act? Well that's because the parties switched places after the Civil Rights act.

Oh the KKK was founded by Democrats? Well they were really Republicans because the parties switched places in the 1960's.

It's fucking bullshit. Latrin even tried to imply this sudden switch with his maps then backtracked and is now trying to claim that yes, the parties did indeed switch places but it took around 4 decades for the electorate to catch up.

Read his link and his most recent posts again.

[Godsanvil]

Of course the Southern Strategy exists, I never said it didn't. I said the parties didn't simply "switch places" suddenly sometime before the Civil Rights act. This is often the go to response from Democrats when pointing out the party's checkered history. Oh Lincoln freed the slaves? Well he was really a Democrat because the parties switched places in the 1950's.

Oh more Democrats than Republicans voted against the Civil Rights act? Well that's because the parties switched places after the Civil Rights act.

Oh the KKK was founded by Democrats? Well they were really Republicans because the parties switched places in the 1960's.

It's fucking bullshit. Latrin even tried to imply this sudden switch with his maps then backtracked and is now trying to claim that yes, the parties did indeed switch places but it took around 4 decades for the electorate to catch up.

Mr Abe Lincoln wasn't any great person to be claimed by any party. He may have freed the slaves but he also wanted to send them all back to Africa. He also hung 39 Indians when they had an uprising over not wanting to eat rancid meat given to them by the government and die in the squalid cold shit hole they where put in. Yeah he was a great guy.

[Tgo01]

Mr Abe Lincoln wasn't any great person to be claimed by any party. He may have freed the slaves but he also wanted to send them all back to Africa. He also hung 39 Indians when they had an uprising over not wanting to eat rancid meat given to them by the government and die in the squalid cold shit hole they where put in. Yeah he was a great guy.

He could still kick your ass.

[Gelston]

Mr Abe Lincoln wasn't any great person to be claimed by any party. He may have freed the slaves but he also wanted to send them all back to Africa. He also hung 39 Indians when they had an uprising over not wanting to eat rancid meat given to them by the government and die in the squalid cold shit hole they where put in. Yeah he was a great guy.

He didn't free the slaves. Congress did.

[Kembal]

He didn't free the slaves. Congress did.

Pretty sure the Emancipation Proclamation was an executive order. It didn't free slaves in slave states that stayed part of the Union, of course, but it set the basis for the 13th Amendment.

[Gelston]

Pretty sure the Emancipation Proclamation was an executive order. It didn't free slaves in slave states that stayed part of the Union, of course, but it set the basis for the 13th Amendment.

Well, I suppose I misspoke. He freed slaves, he didn't end slavery.

[GS4Pirate]

My grandpa used to use the term "That's Lincoln poop" in place of saying, that's nonsense. Pretty amazing how long lasting the effects of the civil war had on our culture. I'm not sure if that term is still used or not.

From what I recall, didn't Lincoln have a fit when Texas released it's slaves? For some reason I remember reading this.

[Warriorbird]

He didn't free the slaves. Congress did.

Thaddeus Stevens deserves way more credit.

[Gelston]

Thaddeus Stevens deserves way more credit.

He looks kinda like Lincoln... A very angry Lincoln.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Thaddeus_Stevens_-_Brady-Handy-crop.jpg

[Warriorbird]

He looks kinda like Lincoln... A very angry Lincoln.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Thaddeus_Stevens_-_Brady-Handy-crop.jpg

I liked that they got Tommy Lee Jones to play him. The Radical Republicans were awesome.

[Latrinsorm]

You're right, you just posted a map saying "See all of those Southern states that are blue? Now watch as they turn red 4 years later!" followed by evil laughter and thunder roaring in the background. You then said "Whether the parties changed ideologies at this time is beyond dispute. It didn't "somehow switch", it was explicit and intentional on both sides." If you weren't heavily implying that the two maps proved that the ideologies changed "at that time" then I don't know what the fuck you were doing.I explicitly stated the parties' ideologies changed at that time. Anything you have said that is not that, I neither said nor implied.
It's fucking bullshit. Latrin even tried to imply this sudden switch with his maps then backtracked and is now trying to claim that yes, the parties did indeed switch places but it took around 4 decades for the electorate to catch up.You have categorically misunderstood what I have posted, as well as the history in question.

[Tgo01]

You have categorically misunderstood what I have posted, as well as the history in question.

You categorically suck but I forgive you.