What was the vote count and the breakdown?
The Republican Party is Dying. Old, Racist, and Cannot Grow.
- Thread starter blackascoal
- Start date
What was the vote count and the breakdown?
cawacko
Well-known member
The five progressives voted for Farrell.
It's a partisan weapon and its real. Stop handing us so many bullets.
This is some serious smallball here. What's the Chron saying? Is there a serious outcry from people of racism? Was someone more funded, better, and liberal than the other?
What's this a city counsel thing? How do 5 people select a mayor?
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
A bit of history that most Americans aren't aware of.
When Martin Luther King Jr. and Richard Nixon Were Friends
Martin Luther King and Richard Nixon had one of the most unlikely political friendships, but it came apart over an arrest.
I’ve had a hard time coming to terms with RN, as Richard Nixon liked to refer to himself in his more imperial moods. It may sound odd, but the more I immersed myself in his pre-presidential life in the course of writing a book (in other words, before Watergate, Vietnam, and China), the more annoyed I became with him. Sometimes I had an urge to scold him—to tell him to do what he surely knew was right rather than go for the quick political advantage. This urge was never stronger than when it involved his relationship with Martin Luther King Jr., whose birthday (he would have been 84 on Jan. 15) is commemorated this month as a federal holiday—the same month as Nixon’s centennial was marked. There once was a real connection between the two men, but it more or less ended with RN’s spineless behavior during the 1960 presidential campaign, after Dr. King was arrested on phony charges stemming from a traffic violation. Coretta Scott King had been terrified; she worried with good reason that her husband might be killed en route to Georgia State Prison in Reidsville, and she appealed to the Nixon and John F. Kennedy campaigns to intervene.
Nixon, however, demurred; he said that it would be “grandstanding” to speak out, according to his aide William Safire. Nixon’s real motive, though, seems clear: it was a close election and he was willing to lose black support if it meant gaining a new harvest of white votes in the once-Democratic south. Eight years later, this approach became the carefully considered “Southern strategy.”
What was most bothersome wasn’t simply that Nixon knew better, although he certainly did. It was rather that he’d rejected a kind of friendship with Dr. King and turned away from his own civil-rights record, which was excellent and far more genuine than President Eisenhower’s. King, when he was 28 and famous for his role in the Montgomery bus boycott,met Nixon in March 1957, in Africa, when Ghana celebrated its independence. They agreed to stay in touch and met three months later in Nixon’s office at the Capitol to discuss among other topics the 1957 Civil Rights Bill. That summer Nixon worked to strengthen the bill, taking on such powerful Southern Democrats as Richard Russell, who opposed it, and the Senate Majority Leader, Lyndon Johnson, who had been pushing for a weaker version of the voting-rights section.
“I will long remember the rich fellowship which we shared together and the fruitful discussion that we had,” Dr. King later wrote to the vice president, telling him “how deeply grateful all people of goodwill are to you for your assiduous labor and dauntless courage in seeking to make the Civil Rights Bill a reality… This is certainly an expression of your devotion to the highest mandates of the moral law.” Nixon replied in much the same spirit: “I am sure you know how much I appreciate your generous comments. My only regret is that I have been unable to do more than I have. Progress is understandably slow in this field, but we at least can be sure that we are moving steadily and surely ahead.” They talked frequently after that, and in September 1958, after a deranged black woman in Harlem stabbed Dr. King almost fatally, Nixon was among the first to write to him. He praised King’s “Christian spirit of tolerance,” which he said would ultimately win over “the great majority of American for the cause of equality and human dignity to which we are committed.”
What were you thinking? I found myself asking my imagined RN when I thought about his response to the arrest. In an oral history a few years later, Dr. King seemed to ask the same question: “I always felt that Nixon lost a real opportunity to express … support of something much larger than an individual, because this expressed support of the movement for civil rights in a way. And I had known Nixon longer. He had been supposedly close to me, and he would call me frequently about things, getting, seeking my advice. And yet, when this moment came, it was like he had never heard of me, you see.”
Even as a matter of practical politics, Nixon made a bad bet. John and Robert Kennedy helped to win Dr. King’s release, and soon enough their campaign distributed two million copies of a pamphlet titled “‘No Comment’ Nixon Versus a Candidate With a Heart, Senator Kennedy” to well chosen voters. It can’t be proved that this made the difference in an election in which the popular vote turned out to be the closest ever (Nixon and Kennedy were separated by about 112,000 votes out of sixty-nine million cast), but it’s a fact that President Eisenhower in 1956 got some 40 percent of the black vote and that Nixon in 1960 won just 32 percent—not bad by modern Republican standards, but still a steep drop. Four years later, facing Barry Goldwater, Lyndon Johnson won 94 percent of the black vote, which set a demographic pattern that endures.
If Richard Nixon could have seen past his political calculus and spoken forthrightly—had been true to his own record—the view of the centennial RN might be altogether different. With more black support, Nixon in 1960 might have won three or four more states—and the presidency—and would have assumed the office with an obligation to strengthen civil-rights laws. In that counterfactual world, Watergate would be known only as the name of a hotel-and-condo complex being built close to Washington’s new performing arts center. Instead of being celebrated this month as Dr. King is, the centennial Nixon became, and remains, the perplexing figure who more than once had a chance to do what he surely knew was right and then went wrong.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/when-martin-luther-king-jr-and-richard-nixon-were-friends
How is that germane to this conversation?
In my opinion, Nixon wasn't truly a racist, but he was indeed driven .. driven to be a great and powerful president .. and consumed by power and politics.
Nixon's health care plan in 1974 was far better, and more liberal than Obamacare. But it was attacked by democrats because they didn't believe it went far enough.
Nixoncare vs. Obamacare: U-M team compares the rhetoric & reality of two health plans
Few people today would dare call President Richard Nixon a radical liberal. But 44 years ago, he proposed a health plan that went far beyond what today’s Affordable Care Act includes. After the first plan failed, he did it again three years later.
And just like today’s heated rhetoric from opponents of the ACA, also called “Obamacare” after the president who introduced it, Nixon’s plans were met with inflamed opposition from the other party.
http://ihpi.umich.edu/news/nixoncar...am-compares-rhetoric-reality-two-health-plans
Had Nixon followed his heart, not his terminally flawed political analysis, he not only would have beaten JFK, he would not have put republicans on a path to doom by inviting in a festering cancer that is eating the Republican Party alive today.
When Martin Luther King Jr. and Richard Nixon Were Friends
Martin Luther King and Richard Nixon had one of the most unlikely political friendships, but it came apart over an arrest.
I’ve had a hard time coming to terms with RN, as Richard Nixon liked to refer to himself in his more imperial moods. It may sound odd, but the more I immersed myself in his pre-presidential life in the course of writing a book (in other words, before Watergate, Vietnam, and China), the more annoyed I became with him. Sometimes I had an urge to scold him—to tell him to do what he surely knew was right rather than go for the quick political advantage. This urge was never stronger than when it involved his relationship with Martin Luther King Jr., whose birthday (he would have been 84 on Jan. 15) is commemorated this month as a federal holiday—the same month as Nixon’s centennial was marked. There once was a real connection between the two men, but it more or less ended with RN’s spineless behavior during the 1960 presidential campaign, after Dr. King was arrested on phony charges stemming from a traffic violation. Coretta Scott King had been terrified; she worried with good reason that her husband might be killed en route to Georgia State Prison in Reidsville, and she appealed to the Nixon and John F. Kennedy campaigns to intervene.
Nixon, however, demurred; he said that it would be “grandstanding” to speak out, according to his aide William Safire. Nixon’s real motive, though, seems clear: it was a close election and he was willing to lose black support if it meant gaining a new harvest of white votes in the once-Democratic south. Eight years later, this approach became the carefully considered “Southern strategy.”
What was most bothersome wasn’t simply that Nixon knew better, although he certainly did. It was rather that he’d rejected a kind of friendship with Dr. King and turned away from his own civil-rights record, which was excellent and far more genuine than President Eisenhower’s. King, when he was 28 and famous for his role in the Montgomery bus boycott,met Nixon in March 1957, in Africa, when Ghana celebrated its independence. They agreed to stay in touch and met three months later in Nixon’s office at the Capitol to discuss among other topics the 1957 Civil Rights Bill. That summer Nixon worked to strengthen the bill, taking on such powerful Southern Democrats as Richard Russell, who opposed it, and the Senate Majority Leader, Lyndon Johnson, who had been pushing for a weaker version of the voting-rights section.
“I will long remember the rich fellowship which we shared together and the fruitful discussion that we had,” Dr. King later wrote to the vice president, telling him “how deeply grateful all people of goodwill are to you for your assiduous labor and dauntless courage in seeking to make the Civil Rights Bill a reality… This is certainly an expression of your devotion to the highest mandates of the moral law.” Nixon replied in much the same spirit: “I am sure you know how much I appreciate your generous comments. My only regret is that I have been unable to do more than I have. Progress is understandably slow in this field, but we at least can be sure that we are moving steadily and surely ahead.” They talked frequently after that, and in September 1958, after a deranged black woman in Harlem stabbed Dr. King almost fatally, Nixon was among the first to write to him. He praised King’s “Christian spirit of tolerance,” which he said would ultimately win over “the great majority of American for the cause of equality and human dignity to which we are committed.”
What were you thinking? I found myself asking my imagined RN when I thought about his response to the arrest. In an oral history a few years later, Dr. King seemed to ask the same question: “I always felt that Nixon lost a real opportunity to express … support of something much larger than an individual, because this expressed support of the movement for civil rights in a way. And I had known Nixon longer. He had been supposedly close to me, and he would call me frequently about things, getting, seeking my advice. And yet, when this moment came, it was like he had never heard of me, you see.”
Even as a matter of practical politics, Nixon made a bad bet. John and Robert Kennedy helped to win Dr. King’s release, and soon enough their campaign distributed two million copies of a pamphlet titled “‘No Comment’ Nixon Versus a Candidate With a Heart, Senator Kennedy” to well chosen voters. It can’t be proved that this made the difference in an election in which the popular vote turned out to be the closest ever (Nixon and Kennedy were separated by about 112,000 votes out of sixty-nine million cast), but it’s a fact that President Eisenhower in 1956 got some 40 percent of the black vote and that Nixon in 1960 won just 32 percent—not bad by modern Republican standards, but still a steep drop. Four years later, facing Barry Goldwater, Lyndon Johnson won 94 percent of the black vote, which set a demographic pattern that endures.
If Richard Nixon could have seen past his political calculus and spoken forthrightly—had been true to his own record—the view of the centennial RN might be altogether different. With more black support, Nixon in 1960 might have won three or four more states—and the presidency—and would have assumed the office with an obligation to strengthen civil-rights laws. In that counterfactual world, Watergate would be known only as the name of a hotel-and-condo complex being built close to Washington’s new performing arts center. Instead of being celebrated this month as Dr. King is, the centennial Nixon became, and remains, the perplexing figure who more than once had a chance to do what he surely knew was right and then went wrong.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/when-martin-luther-king-jr-and-richard-nixon-were-friends
How is that germane to this conversation?
In my opinion, Nixon wasn't truly a racist, but he was indeed driven .. driven to be a great and powerful president .. and consumed by power and politics.
Nixon's health care plan in 1974 was far better, and more liberal than Obamacare. But it was attacked by democrats because they didn't believe it went far enough.
Nixoncare vs. Obamacare: U-M team compares the rhetoric & reality of two health plans
Few people today would dare call President Richard Nixon a radical liberal. But 44 years ago, he proposed a health plan that went far beyond what today’s Affordable Care Act includes. After the first plan failed, he did it again three years later.
And just like today’s heated rhetoric from opponents of the ACA, also called “Obamacare” after the president who introduced it, Nixon’s plans were met with inflamed opposition from the other party.
http://ihpi.umich.edu/news/nixoncar...am-compares-rhetoric-reality-two-health-plans
Had Nixon followed his heart, not his terminally flawed political analysis, he not only would have beaten JFK, he would not have put republicans on a path to doom by inviting in a festering cancer that is eating the Republican Party alive today.
Cawacky stop!
He's the interim Mayor.
The people will vote for who they want to represent the city.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
You're in denial brother.
The republican agenda and ideology is rooted in racism, hate and greed.
YOU support that. Stop trying to drag the dems along with you.
cawacko
Well-known member
Ok:
""At a national political moment when, for the first time, black women have been elected mayors in New Orleans and Charlotte, N.C.—two moderately liberal American cities—San Francisco, for all its stubborn reputation as a wacky, anything-goes progressive stronghold, just exposed the diet racism at its core. Breed could have relinquished her title of board president and remained in an acting-mayor capacity while also campaigning for the seat, much as Feinstein did.""
https://www.theroot.com/london-breed-had-a-clean-shot-at-becoming-san-francisco-1822369280
cawacko
Well-known member
Yes, capitalism is hate and greed and if we could all be socialists it would the summer of '67 all over again across the world.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
.. serious denial.
What crap. Racism has no party. Racism dwells in the mind and hearts of its adherents.
Chron ran a great long piece on it, I read it all.
Cawacko, Did you report to the group here that she is the moderate and the temp acting mayor white guy is the uber progressive one? If not, why not.
It mostly undoes your point, that's why. She wqas ousted from the temp job. Sounds like she will liekly win in June, and she already was wearing a couple
hats in public sphere.
Cawacko, Did you report to the group here that she is the moderate and the temp acting mayor white guy is the uber progressive one? If not, why not.
It mostly undoes your point, that's why. She wqas ousted from the temp job. Sounds like she will liekly win in June, and she already was wearing a couple
hats in public sphere.
Yep, he is a better read than most on the right here, however.
My take on him is that he/she? doesn't want Republicans to be racist, is not racist himself/herself and
so goes tilting at that peculiar windmill.
Yes, there are some Republicans who are not racists. Cawacko is living proof.
But many many many are. Trump is even bigger proof.
So when a conservative majority votes for a white conservative guy over a black liberal, then he’s not racist, right? Or a white male conservative, over a female liberal means they are not misogynistic either- correct?
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Thanks, I agree with all of that.
He and I have had lots of good conversations over the years. He's not racist, and usually stays away from comments about race because he's in denial about it.
Being a non-racist in a racist party I'd imagine he's have to be in denial.
cawacko
Well-known member
Ed Lee died. The next election isn't until June so they need an interim Mayor. London Breed is head of the Board of Supervisors so she should have been appointed. It's what they did with DiFi when Moscone was killed. But because Breed is considered a "moderate" the progressives on the board didn't want her to have the advantage of "interim Mayor" as a title during the election. So because they had the votes the progressives appointed Mark Farrell. Anywhere else in the country Farrell is a liberal but in SF because he's a rich white male (he represents my district) he's considered conservative.
So the optics are the progressives voted for a conservative rich white male for Mayor instead of the first black woman who happened to grow up in public housing. There's not a large black community in SF but they were out in force at City Hall for the vote and the chamber erupted when it was announced. Black people were pissed and chanting racism. A pretty wild scene.
cawacko
Well-known member
See response below.
Seems to me you'll feel better by June if you wanted her to be mayor. Reading between the ines it appears she will win.
If you'd like an olive branch, yes some democrats are racists. What is lacking though is the numbers of racists to make
Trump's get out the racist vote strategy work in the Democratic party. Proofs in the pudding. You have so many racists
in the Republican party, it actually works to harvest them. Who'd have thunk being an overt KKK appeasing racist was
a get over the top formula across the USA. Trump didn't just touch that rail and survive, he licked it and made love to it
and it rewarded him with Potus.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
New poll shows London Breed way out in front in SF mayor’s race
1/29/18
http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...London-Breed-way-out-in-front-in-12529502.php
You don't like progessives and you're always trying to demonstrate their 'racism' .. which is ridiculous by every measure .. but common sense should tell you that they supported the most progressive candidate. The most progressive candidate was not the black candidate .. thus, you assume that progressives should support any black candidate, else they be guilty of racism.
That makes no sense.