• 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!

Black Voters Aren't Turning Out for the Dems

Its clear the Democrats are shifting in their support from African Americas towards Hispanics due to the vast number of illegal Hispanics in our nation. If they can possibly get them legalized, they will have a gigantic voting bloc for generations to come.
 

Obama was the most pro-Israel president since Truman. Trump, on the other hand, will drive a stake through hopes of peace
Lmao, I don't even support how much we tend to do for Israel and this has got to be one of the dumbest things I've read on this site.
Thanks for your review, that makes no argument at all.

If you bothered to read the article, which clearly you did not, you would have read that "The Obama administration allowed the resolution [2334] to be adopted because by their lights it was not anti-Israeli but, on the contrary, essential for preserving Israel as a Jewish and democratic country. For them this was a last-ditch attempt to arrest Israel’s slide towards apartheid and to preserve the possibility of a peaceful solution. In this respect the resolution was entirely consistent with US policy since 1967 in viewing Israeli settlements on occupied land as illegal and as an obstacle to peace.
...
Obama’s actual record over his eight years in office makes him one of the most pro-Israeli American presidents since Harry S Truman. Obama has given Israel considerably more money and arms than any of his predecessors. He has fully lived up to America’s formal commitment to preserve Israel’s “qualitative military edge” by supplying his ally with ever more sophisticated weapons systems. His parting gift to Israel was a staggering military aid package of $38bn for the next 10 years. This represents an increase from the current $3.1 to $3.8bn per annum. It is also the largest military aid package from one country to another in the annals of human history.

Netanyahu invariably repaid Obama’s generosity with ingratitude and abuse. He never missed an opportunity to attack Obama; he intervened crudely in the 2012 presidential elections by backing the Republican candidate; he abused the privilege of an address to a special session of both houses of Congress to insult their president; and he conducted the most vociferous public campaign to sabotage the nuclear agreement with Iran. One is hard put to think of a more blatant example of biting the hand that feeds you. Netanyahu’s conduct marks him out as the special ally from hell."
 
What's truly hilarious is that their own leadership in Congress is selling them out for their own self-interests. Black voters are gonna be lost in the wilderness with nowhere to go in 10-15 years.

That's already happening here in Southern California.

Compton used to be known as the bright example of Black majority run cities in California. Today, it is 65% Latino.
 
Clinton lost the election to a candidate that was a reality star and just decided to run for office on a whim. That should make Democrats worry significantly. Just wait till the next time the Republicans put up a candidate that 90% of their base can get behind instead of someone like Trump.

I think by then it will be the party of Trumpism
 
Thanks for your review, that makes no argument at all.

If you bothered to read the article, which clearly you did not, you would have read that "The Obama administration allowed the resolution [2334] to be adopted because by their lights it was not anti-Israeli but, on the contrary, essential for preserving Israel as a Jewish and democratic country. For them this was a last-ditch attempt to arrest Israel’s slide towards apartheid and to preserve the possibility of a peaceful solution. In this respect the resolution was entirely consistent with US policy since 1967 in viewing Israeli settlements on occupied land as illegal and as an obstacle to peace.
...
Obama’s actual record over his eight years in office makes him one of the most pro-Israeli American presidents since Harry S Truman. Obama has given Israel considerably more money and arms than any of his predecessors. He has fully lived up to America’s formal commitment to preserve Israel’s “qualitative military edge” by supplying his ally with ever more sophisticated weapons systems. His parting gift to Israel was a staggering military aid package of $38bn for the next 10 years. This represents an increase from the current $3.1 to $3.8bn per annum. It is also the largest military aid package from one country to another in the annals of human history.

Netanyahu invariably repaid Obama’s generosity with ingratitude and abuse. He never missed an opportunity to attack Obama; he intervened crudely in the 2012 presidential elections by backing the Republican candidate; he abused the privilege of an address to a special session of both houses of Congress to insult their president; and he conducted the most vociferous public campaign to sabotage the nuclear agreement with Iran. One is hard put to think of a more blatant example of biting the hand that feeds you. Netanyahu’s conduct marks him out as the special ally from hell."

I'm going to take an opinion piece on the Guardian with as little weight as possible. Seems you got fooled into thinking what you were reading was anything other than a cyber version of sucking Obama's dick, while making up a bunch of bull****.
 
I'm going to take an opinion piece on the Guardian with as little weight as possible. Seems you got fooled into thinking what you were reading was anything other than a cyber version of sucking Obama's dick, while making up a bunch of bull****.
So far, you haven't written anything substantive in at least your last two posts. Insults and attacking the source doesn't count as debate.
 
So far, you haven't written anything substantive in at least your last two posts. Insults and attacking the source doesn't count as debate.

I'm sorry in order to debate with you am I supposed to just agree with your opinion piece bull****?
 
I'm sorry in order to debate with you am I supposed to just agree with your opinion piece bull****?
You don't have to agree. You just need to bring arguments to the discussion more than 'I don't like your source' and 'your post is just BS.'
 
You don't have to agree. You just need to bring arguments to the discussion more than 'I don't like your source' and 'your post is just BS.'

Obama left the Middle East in a far worse condition than when he became President. He also severely underestimated Islamic terrorism and ISIL which also has caused mass havoc across the entire planet. Islam is fundamentally opposed to the state of Israel and Obama is an apologist for Islam.
 
Obama left the Middle East in a far worse condition than when he became President. He also severely underestimated Islamic terrorism and ISIL which also has caused mass havoc across the entire planet. Islam is fundamentally opposed to the state of Israel and Obama is an apologist for Islam.
I don't know the metric you are using to assert that "Obama left the Middle East in a far worse condition than when he became President."

When Obama took office there was a war in Iraq and Afghanistan that was getting over 100 American soldiers killed each month. I also see no evidence that "Obama is an apologist for Islam." When Mr. Trump was campaigning, he made a big deal about Obama not using the term "radical Islamic terrorism." On Mr. Trump's recent trip to the Middle East he also didn't use that term once.

I am not sure what actual policy you wanted Obama to take. He withdrew from Iraq, using the Bush timetable, that was an agreed upon schedule. There were ten times more air strikes in the covert war on terror during President Barack Obama’s presidency than under his predecessor, George W. Bush. I don't know what policy you wanted Obama to follow. Should he have started a ground war in Syria?
 
Post-Obama, Democrats have a problem. They're not getting enough African-American votes to make their coalition victorious. What happens now?

SPECIAL ELECTIONS
Black Voters Aren’t Turning Out For The Post-Obama Democratic Party

By Patrick Ruffini





The special election in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District is the first major test of the Democratic resistance to President Trump. In one sense, the results of the first round in April were promising for the party. Thanks to an impressive Democratic turnout, Jon Ossoff, the Democrat who advanced to this month’s runoff, almost cracked 50 percent of the vote in a district that’s nearly 10 percentage points more Republican than the nation as a whole.[SUP]1[/SUP]
The result, moreover, was a reversal of some turnout trends we saw in 2016, when President Trump outperformed the polls on the back of higher turnout in Republican-leaning areas. And if the runoff election on June 20 features a similar electorate, the race will be too close to call.
But the Georgia 6 April primary was a continuation of some 2016 turnout trends too — trends that should worry Democrats. In 2016, turnout among whites was up across the country, and in highly educated areas like the 6th District in the suburbs of Atlanta. This redounded to Democrats’ advantage. At the same time, black turnout was down precipitously, from 66 percent in 2012 to 59 percent in 2016. This black-white turnout gap continued in the first round of Georgia’s special election, where the Democrats got impressive turnout levels from all races and ethnicities — except African-Americans. . . .

Here's the latest on that race.

http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2017/0...-handel-neck-and-neck-in-6th-district-runoff/

The fact Ossoff might win should be disturbing. Price won last November 61-39. Handel, the GOP candidate isn't all that popular either. The race has been if one watches the ads, Ossoff against Trump instead of Handel. Gravis Marketing also tends to slant toward the Republicans by about 2 points.

As far a black voters are concerned, even nationwide blacks dropped from 13% of the electorate in 2012 down to 12% in 2016
 
However, in the 2016 Dem primary, black voters came out heavily to support HRC against Sanders only to stay home in a greater proportion on election day.

The OP forgets to mention the gutting of the VRA in 2013. The OP forgets to mention the illegal actions of the GOP with voter purges, voter suppression laws; the OP also forgets to mention the same thing is being done by GOPs in Latino American CDs .
 
I guess it helps when the Republicans suppress voting rights of black people.

As well as Latino and Asian Americans. GOPs are losing in court, having to rewrite maps, but getting away with it through elections where laws are still in court .
 
In the areas where black turnout dropped the most, Repubs were not in charge.

GOPs were in charge of 12 swing states where they wrote the illegal voter suppression laws and conducted voter purges illegally.

You got caught admitting that it happened. Would you like to know those 12 GOP states and further the DEM African and Latino American CDs ?
 
Here's the latest on that race.

Georgia 6th District: Poll has Jon Ossoff, Karen Handel neck-and-neck | Political Insider blog

The fact Ossoff might win should be disturbing. Price won last November 61-39. Handel, the GOP candidate isn't all that popular either. The race has been if one watches the ads, Ossoff against Trump instead of Handel. Gravis Marketing also tends to slant toward the Republicans by about 2 points.

As far a black voters are concerned, even nationwide blacks dropped from 13% of the electorate in 2012 down to 12% in 2016

Nothing disturbing with millenial Ossoff winning .
 
Nothing disturbing with millenial Ossoff winning .

He couldn't be bothered to live in the district he was supposed to represent. I wish such carpetbagging opportunism were illegal, but liberals had no qualms with allowing such traitorous actions and I find that very disturbing.
 
Nothing disturbing with millenial Ossoff winning .

I meant to say if I were a Republican I would be very disturbed and worried about this. This is a district in which Price wins by 20 points every election cycles. Two things here, there are Republicans down here who don't like Trump and never have. They view him as an interloper, an opportunist, but not a Republican. I don't know how many, there never has been a survey done. CD-6 Republican advantage is probably as big as it going to get here in Georgia. In a normal election, around 20%. Hence the constant 60-40 voting results over the last decade in favor of the GOP.

Even if Ossoff wins at the end of June, I fully expect him to lose the next election. For him to keep his seat he would have to vote pretty much along the Congressional Republican lines. Notice I didn't say for things Trump wanted, but as a normal congressional Republican. One thing I noticed, a lot of state Republican leaders worked their butts off to re-elect Johnny Isakson, but didn't lift a finger to help Trump. In the end, it didn't matter as Trump won Georgia with the normal amounts of votes. But it was more those anti-Trump Republicans still voting for Trump due to their hatred of Hillary Clinton. Anti-Clinton won out over any and all and all anti-Trump feelings.

According to the exit polls, nationwide half of all Americans who voted for Trump was anti-Clinton voters. In other words they weren't necessarily votes for Trump, any Tom, Dick or Harry would have done. They were votes against Clinton, Trump just happened to be the other name on the ballot. I would imagine the percentages were about the same here. With a decent candidate, the Democrats could have won Georgia and the election nationwide. Such was the anti-Trump feelings, only those were over ridden by anti-Clinton feelings.

The Democrats didn't blink an eye when a poll came out in February of last year showing 56% of all Americans wanted the Democrats to nominate someone else other than Clinton. No problem with all of Americans during the primaries. All Americans didn't vote in them, just Democrats. But they did in the general.
 
GOPs were in charge of 12 swing states where they wrote the illegal voter suppression laws and conducted voter purges illegally.

You got caught admitting that it happened. Would you like to know those 12 GOP states and further the DEM African and Latino American CDs ?

I'm not "caught" at anything because I'm not advocating or defending anything.
 
Back
Top Bottom