The Republican Party is Dying. Old, Racist, and Cannot Grow.

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.

That's the irony, it will probably only help her even more.

As we know there is different kinds of racism. You have idiots here that are blatant racists that drop the N word openly etc. My guess is those are the types that don't have much going for them in life and just lash out. An anonymous forum like this is a perfect place. But people like them generally have no power in the real world.

Then you have policy racism. Housing being one of the biggest ones where certain groups couldn't buy or live in certain areas. Fortunately the gov't made that illegal but its remnants still remain in coding and zoning laws. That's a more subtle racism. We hear about how segregated many areas of the country are where we live well this is a major reason why. And it transcends Democrat and Republicans.

This issue goes much further than those two tiny paragraphs as we know.
 
given that in the last ten years the Republicans have shifted close to 2500 political offices from Democrat to Republican either....
1) the trend isn't because of race, or.....
2) the country is a whole lot more racist than anyone has realized.....
 
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.

I wasn't the one chanting racism in City Hall. I wasn't the one posting on Facebook how racist this was as many did. I wasn't writing on the internet that this was racist as many did. I'm not the enemy here, I'm just saying what happened.

They couldn't get the most progressive so they appointed the conservative white male? How does that work? And as a result it gave Breed a huge advantage. So great job the progressives did there. They're going to lose at the ballot box and in public opinion.
 
I wasn't the one chanting racism in City Hall. I wasn't the one posting on Facebook how racist this was as many did. I wasn't writing on the internet that this was racist as many did. I'm not the enemy here, I'm just saying what happened.

They couldn't get the most progressive so they appointed the conservative white male? How does that work? And as a result it gave Breed a huge advantage. So great job the progressives did there. They're going to lose at the ballot box and in public opinion.

I'm not calling you the enemy .. but your fervor to paint progressives as racist is misguided as usual.

Is the conservative white male you mentioned on the ballot? How about no, he isn't. They appointed him because he wouldn't be on the ballot, thus, not giving any candidate who will be on the ballot any advantage. How is that racist?

Here's the problem, with all the racism running rampant in your own party, here you are once again looking for racism in progressives .. who support all races .. which is why they're called progressives, not conservatives.
 
I'm not calling you the enemy .. but your fervor to paint progressives as racist is misguided as usual.

Is the conservative white male you mentioned on the ballot? How about no, he isn't. They appointed him because he wouldn't be on the ballot, thus, not giving any candidate who will be on the ballot any advantage. How is that racist?

Here's the problem, with all the racism running rampant in your own party, here you are once again looking for racism in progressives .. who support all races .. which is why they're called progressives, not conservatives.

BAC people were chanting racism at City Hall. People were calling it racism on Facebook. There were multiple articles online calling it racist. (I posted the one from the root).

These weren't Republicans saying this. I'm just saying what happened.
 
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.

he has known for over a decade about how the republican party cheats voters of color to win races.



I know because I told this whole board for years and showed them the FACTS


anyone who supports the republican party supports racists


that makes him a racist
 
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.

Sorry I disagree.

How can you support racism and not be racist?
 
You certainly support the facts about republicans and their outdated racist agenda. Now go back to your momma's basement, you're tv dinner is getting cold.

What in the world are you smoking that makes you type something so incoherent? Keep on hating, can't wait for the second term.
 
given that in the last ten years the Republicans have shifted close to 2500 political offices from Democrat to Republican either....
1) the trend isn't because of race, or.....
2) the country is a whole lot more racist than anyone has realized.....

Going back the other way starting November .... it was a good run, be we all knew it wouldn't last.
 
BAC people were chanting racism at City Hall. People were calling it racism on Facebook. There were multiple articles online calling it racist. (I posted the one from the root).

These weren't Republicans saying this. I'm just saying what happened.


why do you not care about republican racism?
 
he has known for over a decade about how the republican party cheats voters of color to win races.



I know because I told this whole board for years and showed them the FACTS


anyone who supports the republican party supports racists


that makes him a racist

I don't understand how that works. He votes in support of every right wing racist policy. He defends dump and the republican party at every turn.......but yet, he's not racist.

That's like dump saying there are good people in the KKK.
 
cawacky's post in this very thread is defending republicans. It's why he deflected to the CA mayors race.
 
he has din it f9r over a decade


they all pretended I was insane for years due to those facts i pummeled them with
 
That's the irony, it will probably only help her even more.

As we know there is different kinds of racism. You have idiots here that are blatant racists that drop the N word openly etc. My guess is those are the types that don't have much going for them in life and just lash out. An anonymous forum like this is a perfect place. But people like them generally have no power in the real world.

Then you have policy racism. Housing being one of the biggest ones where certain groups couldn't buy or live in certain areas. Fortunately the gov't made that illegal but its remnants still remain in coding and zoning laws. That's a more subtle racism. We hear about how segregated many areas of the country are where we live well this is a major reason why. And it transcends Democrat and Republicans.

This issue goes much further than those two tiny paragraphs as we know.

929.jpg
 
I don't understand how that works. He votes in support of every right wing racist policy. He defends dump and the republican party at every turn.......but yet, he's not racist.

That's like dump saying there are good people in the KKK.

Oh and I sure he doesnt vote for republicans for office


want

wan


wan

wan
 
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.

Again, we disagree...or at least I disagree with this Oped/article.

Nixon was a racist piece of shit who ascended the imprisonment of Black males in America.

His "heart" is still attached to the racist mind that would do such a thing.

That's all I need to know about him.
 
Back
Top