Democrats and the Black Community

[TDX27]

Creating this thread because it needs to have its own attention.

To all black people on this board or even white people, what has the Democrat party actually done for you?

We know the Dem party was against the ending of slavery. The KKK started with the Dem party. And, the Dems were mostly against the civil rights movement in the 60's.

The Dem party has been in control of most of the large cities in the US that are doing the worst - NY, Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, etc. These cities and many others have been under Dem rule for decades in some cases. Yet, the black community is doing worse now than ever and much worse under our first black President.

So, why the heck do you vote for Democrats? What have they done for you?

What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same failing thing over and over and over again expecting a different result. Hmmmmm...

So again, what have the Democrats done for you?

 

[IndySteel]

Boma phones man, boma phones!

 

[Lmob0621]

Because the socialists within the democratic party decided they needed the votes of all the people they could not stand while keeping them dependent on the government about 60-70 years ago.

 

[Roy92040]

Well JFK was a democrat. And that's about all I can think of.


Sent from my iPad using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Steelin]

When I was a young, naive dem I thought it was abortion rights, food stamps, peace (in war dissenters), for the people and focused on our youth. Ha. I love the statement ... if you're not a dem when you're young, you have no heart. If you're not a Republican when you're old, you have no head.

 

[MTC]

Empty promises. Here's what gets me is that most sane dems and republicans will get together and come up with ideas to push this country toward actual progress. Both extremist are what are garnering the attention. The dems promise all these poor people free this free that, well guess what? Nothing is free. **** cost money to give out in return creating debt, that most working americans have to pay, and then on top of that the dems push how all these republicans are racist, sexist, bible thumping, etc. NO!

The media is a powerful tool and is dividing this nation. We can thank the Democrats for that

 

[hamster]

Because Obama has got a stash of money, and he will pay for my car, my rent and gas bills.

 

[TDX27]

But even all the free stuff really hasn't helped them. You still have reducing wages, poverty, drugs, crime and murders (black on black mostly). It just makes no sense to me.

 

[Stewey]

When I was a young, naive dem I thought it was abortion rights, food stamps, peace (in war dissenters), for the people and focused on our youth. Ha. I love the statement ... if you're not a dem when you're young, you have no heart. If you're not a Republican when you're old, you have no head.

That quote applies to libs and conservatives, not Dems and Reps. There's a difference.

The actual quote is:

If you are not a liberal at 25, you have no heart. If you are not a Conservative at 35 you have no brain.

 

[Steelin]

That quote applies to libs and conservatives, not Dems and Reps. There's a difference.

The actual quote is:

If you are not a liberal at 25, you have no heart. If you are not a Conservative at 35 you have no brain.

I should have added a paraphrasing disclaimer. I knew it wasn't 100%. Thank you. It is a very good distinction that you pointed out though. Dem and rep so shift able and open to interpretation. Liberal and conservative are much more descriptive of the policy views that they espoused.

 

[Steelin]

But even all the free stuff really hasn't helped them. You still have reducing wages, poverty, drugs, crime and murders (black on black mostly). It just makes no sense to me.

I don't understand this either. I admittedly got one year of college paid for. I paid for the other year and a half. I looked at that as a huge opportunity for my future. One that I didn't want to involve the things that my mother and we kids lived through. Poverty, homelessness and a lack of safety were too painful for me to want to continue that cycle. I was very determined not to have my life go that route. I was also very fortunate and blessed.

 

[steel shinin]

There is a lot to unpack here. I'll do my best to make it simple enough for you.

First of all the Republican party that existed when Lincoln was in office in essence is GONE. You are correct in saying that Democrats were incredibly racist at the time and it stayed that way well into the 20th century. However the party was basically split into two factions of Northern and Southern Democrats. You can take a wild guess as to why.

This carried on into the 60's and you have to look no further than the JFK/LBJ ticket to see that these two factions of Democrats only joined forces to get into the White House. JFK and LBJ famously hated each other. JFK gets assassinated (draw your own conspiracy here) and LBJ pushes forward with the civil rights legislature that would shape the party until today. Southern Democrats crucified LBJ for it and Johnson himself had voted against almost every single piece of civil rights legislation he could up until that point until the late 50's when he started to set his sights on the White House but knew he could not get there without making some compromises.

So you have black voters who were supposed to have had the right to vote for 100 years but were subject to all forms of violence and discrimination. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was landmark, along with the Civil Rights Act for reinforcing rights that black people should have already been allowed to go forth with.

So let's get back to the Democrats. Where do you think many of those southern Democrats went that opposed Johnson? To the Republican party.

So of course blacks were going to be beholden to the Democratic party from this point on for a number of reasons. I won't disagree that black people have been exploited by the party or that they need to reconsider supporting a more fair and active coalition of politicians but there's no ******* way that many blacks will even consider the Republican party in the state it's in today.

Ronald Reagan was a great man. I don't agree with a lot of his policy of how the CIA worked as a wing of his administration but he was not even close to be the hate mongerer that Donald Trump is. I could say the same for Nixon. He was really one of the last true progressive conservatives and even had some liberal leaning ideas. That's the balance you want from a candidate. Be conservative on the things that you need to be and liberal on those that you don't. The problems really started for this party once fringe people in the party started getting real power. No one said **** because it was working in the booth once the rest of the party realized that their massive coalition of voters was diversifying and some were leaving the party or that new voters were not coming.

Both parties to varying degrees have devolved into this move to the fringes. There's a ton of voters left in the middle trying to decide if they'll side with a party who openly courts and harbors racists and zealots or the party that openly promotes over spending, overreaching policy.

It's not hard to figure out what the problem is here.

 

[Steelin]

Party politics do not define me though. I've been both in my lifetime. Democrats aren't the answer and RINOS surely aren't the answer. Conservatives offer the only true chance of liberty and prosperity.

 

[TDX27]

Hell, safety nets are a good thing. I have no problem with that. My wife became disabled and I got laid off. We lost pretty much everything. I needed a little help and took it. But, the 2nd I didn't think I needed it, I cut it off. I didn't wait to be cut off. I did it myself. It's called pride. I was at the bottom but I worked and clawed my way back up.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

You can ask a similar question to US Jews. Obama and the dems are contemptuous of Israel generally, and still the dems get the large majority of the Jewish vote. The liberal mind does not work properly.

 

[Stewey]

There is a lot to unpack here. I'll do my best to make it simple enough for you.

First of all the Republican party that existed when Lincoln was in office in essence is GONE. You are correct in saying that Democrats were incredibly racist at the time and it stayed that way well into the 20th century. However the party was basically split into two factions of Northern and Southern Democrats. You can take a wild guess as to why.

This carried on into the 60's and you have to look no further than the JFK/LBJ ticket to see that these two factions of Democrats only joined forces to get into the White House. JFK and LBJ famously hated each other. JFK gets assassinated (draw your own conspiracy here) and LBJ pushes forward with the civil rights legislature that would shape the party until today. Southern Democrats crucified LBJ for it and Johnson himself had voted against almost every single piece of civil rights legislation he could up until that point until the late 50's when he started to set his sights on the White House but knew he could not get there without making some compromises.

So you have black voters who were supposed to have had the right to vote for 100 years but were subject to all forms of violence and discrimination. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was landmark, along with the Civil Rights Act for reinforcing rights that black people should have already been allowed to go forth with.

So let's get back to the Democrats. Where do you think many of those southern Democrats went that opposed Johnson? To the Republican party.

So of course blacks were going to be beholden to the Democratic party from this point on for a number of reasons. I won't disagree that black people have been exploited by the party or that they need to reconsider supporting a more fair and active coalition of politicians but there's no ******* way that many blacks will even consider the Republican party in the state it's in today.

Ronald Reagan was a great man. I don't agree with a lot of his policy of how the CIA worked as a wing of his administration but he was not even close to be the hate mongerer that Donald Trump is. I could say the same for Nixon. He was really one of the last true progressive conservatives and even had some liberal leaning ideas. That's the balance you want from a candidate. Be conservative on the things that you need to be and liberal on those that you don't. The problems really started for this party once fringe people in the party started getting real power. No one said **** because it was working in the booth once the rest of the party realized that their massive coalition of voters was diversifying and some were leaving the party or that new voters were not coming.

Both parties to varying degrees have devolved into this move to the fringes. There's a ton of voters left in the middle trying to decide if they'll side with a party who openly courts and harbors racists and zealots or the party that openly promotes over spending, overreaching policy.

It's not hard to figure out what the problem is here.

That old switcheroo is a myth, and like most myths there are bits and pieces that are true.

You already know the only way Johnson was able to get the Civil Rights Act passed (keeping them niggers voting democrat for the next 200yrs) was because of the Republican support in congress. Many democrats in congress opposed it.
So what you're saying is that the Southern democrats joined the Republicans who were staunch supporters of black civil rights just because they were mad at LBJ? That makes sense.

So let's get back to the Democrats. Where do you think many of those southern Democrats went that opposed Johnson? To the Republican party.

Its not that simple, and quite complex.

You also missed a step in your revisionist history lesson. A bunch of democrat congressmen pissed at Johnson and those Democrats who did support civil rights left the democrat party and founded a party known as the Dixiecrats. A couple names you are probably familiar with...Robert Byrd , Strom Thurman, and Jesse helms. After the Dixiecrats went defunct Thurmond and Helms abandoned their racist ideology and joined the Republicans. Byrd and the rest remained racist democrats.


Surprisingly you only touched upon a vital player of the Southern Strategy. Every source on this subject points to Richard Nixon as the one that really got things rolling. He allegedly devised methods the Republican Party used to gain political support in the South by appealing to racist white voters. Which of course is false..

A New York Times article heading:
"For the first time since President Richard M. Nixon's divisive 'Southern strategy' that sent whites to the Republican Party and blacks to the Democrats ..."

Nixon was an avid supporter of black civil rights, yet leftists paint him as pandering to racists.

To borrow from an article by Pat Buchannan:

In 1956, as vice president, Nixon went to Harlem to declare, "America can't afford the cost of segregation." The following year, Nixon got a personal letter from Dr. King thanking him for helping to persuade the Senate to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Nixon supported the civil rights acts of 1964, 1965 and 1968.

In the 1966 campaign, as related in my new book "The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority," out July 8, Nixon blasted Dixiecrats "seeking to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice."

Nixon called out segregationist candidates in '66 and called on LBJ, Hubert Humphrey and Bobby Kennedy to join him in repudiating them. None did. Hubert, an arm around Lester Maddox, called him a "good Democrat." And so were they all -- good Democrats.

While Adlai chose Sparkman, Nixon chose Spiro Agnew, the first governor south of the Mason Dixon Line to enact an open-housing law.

In Nixon's presidency, the civil rights enforcement budget rose 800 percent. Record numbers of blacks were appointed to federal office. An Office of Minority Business Enterprise was created. SBA loans to minorities soared 1,000 percent. Aid to black colleges doubled.

Nixon won the South not because he agreed with them on civil rights -- he never did -- but because he shared the patriotic values of the South and its antipathy to liberal hypocrisy.

When Johnson left office, 10 percent of Southern schools were desegregated. When Nixon left, the figure was 70 percent.

Richard Nixon desegregated the Southern schools, something you won't learn in today's public schools.

God I wished Trump would have used this info about Nixon when he spoke to black people.

Here is a link for the truth about the Southern Strategy:
http://www.redstate.com/diary/Dan_M...southern-strategy-myth-and-the-lost-majority/

And if you don't approve of the source, then perhaps try reading this one...a book written by two northern college professors, so they must be liberals.
The shift from Dem to Republican in the south was due to economic growth.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html

 

[IndySteel]

 

[steel shinin]

That old switcheroo is a myth, and like most myths there are bits and pieces that are true.

You already know the only way Johnson was able to get the Civil Rights Act passed (keeping them niggers voting democrat for the next 200yrs) was because of the Republican support in congress. Many democrats in congress opposed it.
So what you're saying is that the Southern democrats joined the Republicans who were staunch supporters of black civil rights just because they were mad at LBJ? That makes sense.


Its not that simple, and quite complex.

You also missed a step in your revisionist history lesson. A bunch of democrat congressmen pissed at Johnson and those Democrats who did support civil rights left the democrat party and founded a party known as the Dixiecrats. A couple names you are probably familiar with...Robert Byrd , Strom Thurman, and Jesse helms. After the Dixiecrats went defunct Thurmond and Helms abandoned their racist ideology and joined the Republicans. Byrd and the rest remained racist democrats.


Surprisingly you only touched upon a vital player of the Southern Strategy. Every source on this subject points to Richard Nixon as the one that really got things rolling. He allegedly devised methods the Republican Party used to gain political support in the South by appealing to racist white voters. Which of course is false..

A New York Times article heading:
"For the first time since President Richard M. Nixon's divisive 'Southern strategy' that sent whites to the Republican Party and blacks to the Democrats ..."

Nixon was an avid supporter of black civil rights, yet leftists paint him as pandering to racists.

To borrow from an article by Pat Buchannan:

In 1956, as vice president, Nixon went to Harlem to declare, "America can't afford the cost of segregation." The following year, Nixon got a personal letter from Dr. King thanking him for helping to persuade the Senate to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Nixon supported the civil rights acts of 1964, 1965 and 1968.

In the 1966 campaign, as related in my new book "The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority," out July 8, Nixon blasted Dixiecrats "seeking to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice."

Nixon called out segregationist candidates in '66 and called on LBJ, Hubert Humphrey and Bobby Kennedy to join him in repudiating them. None did. Hubert, an arm around Lester Maddox, called him a "good Democrat." And so were they all -- good Democrats.

While Adlai chose Sparkman, Nixon chose Spiro Agnew, the first governor south of the Mason Dixon Line to enact an open-housing law.

In Nixon's presidency, the civil rights enforcement budget rose 800 percent. Record numbers of blacks were appointed to federal office. An Office of Minority Business Enterprise was created. SBA loans to minorities soared 1,000 percent. Aid to black colleges doubled.

Nixon won the South not because he agreed with them on civil rights -- he never did -- but because he shared the patriotic values of the South and its antipathy to liberal hypocrisy.

When Johnson left office, 10 percent of Southern schools were desegregated. When Nixon left, the figure was 70 percent.

Richard Nixon desegregated the Southern schools, something you won't learn in today's public schools.

God I wished Trump would have used this info about Nixon when he spoke to black people.

Here is a link for the truth about the Southern Strategy:
http://www.redstate.com/diary/Dan_M...southern-strategy-myth-and-the-lost-majority/

And if you don't approve of the source, then perhaps try reading this one...a book written by two northern college professors, so they must be liberals.
The shift from Dem to Republican in the south was due to economic growth.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html

I was pretty clear in what I said as far as Nixon is concerned. Go back and read it. I didn't throw him under the bus. I'm actually fond of a lot of what he did. I in no way blamed him for the Southern Strategy individually. I didn't even mention 68 and forward other than to acknowledge that the Republican presidents right after weren't deplorable human beings.

I am also aware of the what became of the Dixiecrats but I just but to the chase there.

The shift in the Democratic party was why it took 20 years to rebuild. It is also why the only two Democratic presidents to get elected after the 60's before Obama still needed the south to do it. Before states like California shifted demographic wise the Democratic party still need the south.