• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Brother of late civil rights activist Medgar Evers endorses Trump

SouthernDemocrat said:
Ever notice how conservatives always claim credit for liberal causes 2 generations before them?
Click to expand...

Not to mention talk out of both sides of their mouth. When it suits them, like when they try selling Blacks on the GOP, Lincoln was a Republican and one of the greatest president ever because he freed the slaves. But, when it comes to pulling in the racists who worship the Confederate Flag, he was a Unionist and the worst president ever for ignoring state's rights.
 
calamity said:
If you listen to their whine, everything was the fault of liberal Democrats like Barney Frank forcing banks to lend money to Blacks. It's sad how ill-informed that crowd is on basic facts.

They really do deserve Donald Trump.
Click to expand...

The intellectuals on the right have this myth they tell themselves that the Republicans came to power in the 70s and 80s because people wanted small government, when actually their rise was built entirely on cultural issues like white flight following desegregation, Southern White Resentment, Evangelical Christian Nationalism, and the culture war whipping posts of the day (guns, abortion, gay marriage). Trump is the result of it. He doesn't just use coded language for it in his campaigning, he has it front and center.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
The intellectuals on the right have this myth they tell themselves that the Republicans came to power in the 70s and 80s because people wanted small government, when actually their rise was built entirely on cultural issues like white flight following segregation, Southern White Resentment, Evangelical Christian Nationalism, and the culture war whipping posts of the day (guns, abortion, gay marriage). Trump is the result of it. He doesn't just use coded language for it in his campaigning, he has it front and center.
Click to expand...

Reagan certainly channeled the trifecta: racism, Evangelicalism, and patriotism. It was pretty spooky seeing the country go from the peaceful late 70's, where pot was inches away from being legalized, to the war machine 80's with it's massive military build up and the war on drugs.

All of it on borrowed money, of course. Which is the other GOP myth: that they are fiscally conservative. Borrowing instead of taxing is not conservative. Far from it.
 
calamity said:
Nonsense. It was shown that 100% of Southern Republicans voted for segregation, and known segregationists like Thurmond joined them in 1964. None of the people supporting segregation left the GOP to join the Democrats. None.
Click to expand...

Like I said, for any of the ten to move Democrat in 1964 it would be because they had something in common other that segregation since segregation was a dead issue. That handful of Republicans had nothing else in common with Democrats. Since they weren't big government New Dealers there was no more draw for them to join Democrats than there was before CRA was passes.

Thurmond, on the other hand, was not a big government new Dealer so after CRA there was no reason to stay Democrat.

So now explain why Byrd remained Democrat.
 
jmotivator said:
Like I said, for any of the ten to move Democrat in 1964 it would be because they had something in common other that segregation since segregation was a dead issue. That handful of Republicans had nothing else in common with Democrats. Since they weren't big government New Dealers there was no more draw for them to join Democrats than there was before CRA was passes.

Thurmond, on the other hand, was not a big government new Dealer so after CRA there was no reason to stay Democrat.

So now explain why Byrd remained Democrat.
Click to expand...

Byrd disavowed his segregationist past, unlike Thurmond who embraced it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...byrd-apologized-whats-your-excuse-david-duke/

Intersting too is that David Duke now supports Republicans. :lol:
 
calamity said:
Byrd disavowed his segregationist past, unlike Thurmond who embraced it.
Click to expand...

Hah! So what did not. He voted in favor of renewing the voting rights act, voted to honor Martin Luther King in a state holiday, and so on.

Intersting too is that David Duke now supports Republicans. :lol:
Click to expand...

“He was a community activist or a black activist. He’s been in the church for 20 years that — and one of the first principles of that church is that they are, quote, “true to Africa,” loyal to Africa. There is nothing wrong with Barack Obama working and having a long career advancing what he sees as the black community interests or the black perceived interests as a group, collective interest, but I did see it as kind of odd that a man of that stripe would become president of the United States. It seems like — I think I should endorse him for president.” - David Duke
 
BamaBrat said:
It's the "I have a friend who is black!" defense.
Click to expand...

This is your contribution to the discussion of the racist Demokrat Party_

Why the cowardice? Wasn't too long ago the Holder called us a nation of cowards on race discussion.

Seems so, as Demokrats don't like their history upon learning about it.

PS. "Independent"... my ass.
 
zimmer said:
This is your contribution to the discussion of the racist Demokrat Party_

Why the cowardice? Wasn't too long ago the Holder called us a nation of cowards on race discussion.

Seems so, as Demokrats don't like their history upon learning about it.

PS. "Independent"... my ass.
Click to expand...

It was the only comment I felt the need to make at the moment. Mostly I am just reading all the other comments. I never realized there was a debate politics rule that says what you must add to a conversation.

and you are correct... technically I am not a registered independent. Technically, I am a registered Republican and tend to vote that way most of the time. I am just not the type of republican who tows the party line regardless. An ass is an ass, no matter what party he or she belongs to. I vote for the person, not the party. (which is why when I signed up for debate politics, I chose independent). Unfortunately, there is only one person running this year in my part who is worth a vote, and he won't be the winner. But I voted for him nonetheless.
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
His motivation for leaving the Democrats to join the Republicans--you know, him being a segregationist and all--is pretty clear. Not much doubt there, now is there?
Click to expand...

Odd... the Republicans had a perfect history of supporting blacks, and ST decides to join a party where he knows they support blacks every time a vote is cast for their freedom?

The Republicans became overtly racist at that time in history when up to that point every vote in favor of blacks was supported by Republicans.

That makes a lot of sense.

It's like me voting for Demokrats in support of low taxation, family values, strong border control and military.
 
zimmer said:
Odd... the Republicans had a perfect history of supporting blacks, and ST decides to join a party where he knows they support blacks every time a vote is cast for their freedom?

The Republicans became overtly racist at that time in history when up to that point every vote in favor of blacks was supported by Republicans.
Click to expand...
Which reality is that? Certainly it is not the reality where 100% of the Southern Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

That makes a lot of sense.

It's like me voting for Demokrats in support of low taxation, family values, strong border control and military.
Click to expand...

I take it you still expect to be taken serious after writing that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom