• 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!

Obama threatened, called 'monkey' by ex-Carson council candidate

apdst said:
I want evidence that supports the claim that, "tons", od Southern Democrats switched to the Republican party for racist reasons and that the Republican party was made up of racists at the time the CRA was passed. Those are the claims that have been made, I'm asking for proof; how you prove it is your business.
Click to expand...

Would this be proof enough for you?

1- a list of politicians who switched from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party during the period of the Civil Rights Movement and the implementation of the Southern Strategy.
2- a mathematical analysis of that list which shows an inordinate percentage of Southern politicians making that jump as opposed to any other area of the nation.
3- a list of politicians who at the same time switched from the Republican party during the same period
4- a mathematical analysis of that same list and a comparison to show that it dwarfs the opposite list
5- representative statements from the architects of the Southern Strategy

Would all or a significant part of any of that constitute the proof you are looking for?
 
haymarket said:
A link to what? Do you understand what I am explaining to you? You are a layperson with no training in methodology of historical research. I am attempting to educate you on the basic errors and mistakes you have made and continue to make in the evaluation of what you call primary sources.
Click to expand...

Instead of trying to insult my intelligence by waving your highfalutin degree in my face, you need to go back to the two-bit college you got it from and demand your money back, because they ripped you off.
 
haymarket said:
Would this be proof enough for you?

1- a list of politicians who switched from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party during the period of the Civil Rights Movement and the implementation of the Southern Strategy.
2- a mathematical analysis of that list which shows an inordinate percentage of Southern politicians making that jump as opposed to any other area of the nation.
3- a list of politicians who at the same time switched from the Republican party during the same period
4- a mathematical analysis of that same list and a comparison to show that it dwarfs the opposite list
5- representative statements from the architects of the Southern Strategy

Would all or a significant part of any of that constitute the proof you are looking for?
Click to expand...

You don't know? :lamo
 
Moderator's Warning:
Knock off the personal attacks, people.
 
apdst said:
Instead of trying to insult my intelligence by waving your highfalutin degree in my face, you need to go back to the two-bit college you got it from and demand your money back, because they ripped you off.
Click to expand...

apdst - It has been very obvious that you have made some fundamental mistakes in the methodology of historical research because of the repeated errors you make on the matter of Southern states secession and what explains it.



Please try to put your own feelings and emotions to the side for a moment and read the articles I linked to. I do think they would be of great help to you in understanding the basic mistakes you are making in evaluating historical sources and what proper weight to give each.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
You don't know? :lamo
Click to expand...

I am asking you if this would be proof enough to satisfy you.

1- a list of politicians who switched from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party during the period of the Civil Rights Movement and the implementation of the Southern Strategy.
2- a mathematical analysis of that list which shows an inordinate percentage of Southern politicians making that jump as opposed to any other area of the nation.
3- a list of politicians who at the same time switched from the Republican party during the same period
4- a mathematical analysis of that same list and a comparison to show that it dwarfs the opposite list
5- representative statements from the architects of the Southern Strategy
 
I've already explained what claims I'm asking to be supported. I'll not do it again, because obviously, the people who made those claims can't come up with the evidence to do so.

Until that evidence is put forward, I'm done with it.
 
Hatuey said:
Did apdst seriously deny that the Southern Strategy is a fact for 4 pages? The sheer insanity posted on this board from time to time.

sisko-facepalm.jpg
Click to expand...

No, it's how people on the right roll. It's sort of like blaming black people and democrats because they won't vote for Republicans. They couldn't possibly accept the fact that blacks - or hispanics - aren't going to vote for a political party than considers them second class citizens. Therefore, it must be their fault.

As I said, the demographics are going to kill them politically in the end. They've already lost the black vote through their asinine policies and they're about to kiss goodbye to hispanic voters with their insane war on anybody with a brown skin.

As a Democrat, I couldn't be happier.
 
Wiggen said:
No, it's how people on the right roll. It's sort of like blaming black people and democrats because they won't vote for Republicans. They couldn't possibly accept the fact that blacks - or hispanics - aren't going to vote for a political party than considers them second class citizens. Therefore, it must be their fault.

As I said, the demographics are going to kill them politically in the end. They've already lost the black vote through their asinine policies and they're about to kiss goodbye to hispanic voters with their insane war on anybody with a brown skin.

As a Democrat, I couldn't be happier.
Click to expand...

What war is that? :lamo
 
apdst said:
I've already explained what claims I'm asking to be supported. I'll not do it again, because obviously, the people who made those claims can't come up with the evidence to do so.

Until that evidence is put forward, I'm done with it.
Click to expand...

You have made it quite clear that nothing anyone could present here would satisfy you. I gave you conditions that could me met with evidence and you repeatedly refused to say if you would accept that or not. One can only reasonably conclude that you do not want to say in advance that such evidence would indeed prove the point only to be handed that same evidence in a later post.
 
haymarket said:
You have made it quite clear that nothing anyone could present here would satisfy you. I gave you conditions that could me met with evidence and you repeatedly refused to say if you would accept that or not. One can only reasonably conclude that you do not want to say in advance that such evidence would indeed prove the point only to be handed that same evidence in a later post.
Click to expand...

The only thing that has been presented so far, is an oped. Now, I don't have any paper hanging on the wall, but I have enough research skills to know that an oped isn't a primary source document.

You've failed to post a single link; only insult my intelligence.
 
apdst said:
The only thing that has been presented so far, is an oped. Now, I don't have any paper hanging on the wall, but I have enough research skills to know that an oped isn't a primary source document.

You've failed to post a single link; only insult my intelligence.
Click to expand...

no my friend, by constantly disregarding evidence being presented to you, YOU are insulting your intelligence.
 
Wiggen said:
No, it's how people on the right roll. It's sort of like blaming black people and democrats because they won't vote for Republicans. They couldn't possibly accept the fact that blacks - or hispanics - aren't going to vote for a political party than considers them second class citizens. Therefore, it must be their fault.

As I said, the demographics are going to kill them politically in the end. They've already lost the black vote through their asinine policies and they're about to kiss goodbye to hispanic voters with their insane war on anybody with a brown skin.

As a Democrat, I couldn't be happier.
Click to expand...

the only policy in place that considers Blacks and Hispanics second class citizens is affirmative action that clearly states to blacks and hispanics they are not smart enough to compete with whites and asians.

and sadly some legal hispanic immigrants as well as some hispanic citizens think that cracking down on ILLEGAL hispanics (who make up the VAST VAST MAJORITY of illegal aliens) is an attack on LEGAL hispanic immigrants as well as hispanic citizens
 
TurtleDude said:
the only policy in place that considers Blacks and Hispanics second class citizens is affirmative action that clearly states to blacks and hispanics they are not smart enough to compete with whites and asians....
Click to expand...

great, this old lie.
 
Thunder said:
no my friend, by constantly disregarding evidence being presented to you, YOU are insulting your intelligence.
Click to expand...

No evidence has been presented.
 
Thunder said:
great, this old lie.
Click to expand...

so tell me thunder-what is a program that says blacks and hispanics need to get special consideration to get into a good school or a competitive job saying to recipients?

or saying a "test" is unfair because none of the blacks scored as high as ANY whites
 
TurtleDude said:
so tell me thunder-what is a program that says blacks and hispanics need to get special consideration to get into a good school or a competitive job saying to recipients?

or saying a "test" is unfair because none of the blacks scored as high as ANY whites
Click to expand...

what would I call it?

poorly thought out & way too generalized.

AA should take into account income & socio-economic status, not simply race.
 
Thunder said:
what would I call it?

poorly thought out & way too generalized.

AA should take into account income & socio-economic status, not simply race.
Click to expand...

LOL...AA was supposed to help white folks get a job, too? :rofl
 
Thunder said:
what would I call it?

poorly thought out & way too generalized.

AA should take into account income & socio-economic status, not simply race.
Click to expand...

true, but for the great majority of its application and history black/hispanic=disadvantaged and needing of help while white/Asian=advantaged and subject to discrimination

telling black students that being black gives them a 130 points on the LSAT (when it was on the 800 scale) and a .5 boost of their GPA (a black with a 3.2 is seen the same as a white with a 3.7) is clearly telling blacks they don't have the ability to compete with white or asian students
 
TurtleDude said:
...telling black students that being black gives them a 130 points on the LSAT (when it was on the 800 scale) and a .5 boost of their GPA (a black with a 3.2 is seen the same as a white with a 3.7) is clearly telling blacks they don't have the ability to compete with white or asian students
Click to expand...

I agree, that a highly biased, willfully-ignorant & agenda-driven interpretation of this practise would see it as merely racist.
 
Thunder said:
I agree, that a highly biased, willfully-ignorant & agenda-driven interpretation of this practise would see it as merely racist.
Click to expand...

which sadly was the common implementation of the program
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom