Wake Up, America! Wake Up! PLEASE!!
- Thread starter Drillher4me
- Start date
- Status
Well, I understand his sensitivity to the topic and the issues around it, I honestly do. But, this, to me, is just another example of denying the obvious. But we can't approach common ground until there is focus on both sides of that issue. I've admitted the "white side" of the issue, but with all the things going on right now about racial issues, there's no willingness to discuss the other side. So, it is what it is.
Ed knows I'm no David Duke ... just a knee jerk reaction to my posts that he really didn't try comprehending what I was trying to point out. But, if he's going to agree that blacks can't be racists, then there's approaching common ground. I'll still get up every morning and eat my cereal, read my paper, and come here when I have time, and comment things that some will like & some won't like. Only big concern I have NOW is this virus going around. My wife & I hare very worried for our parents ... all in their 70s.
This reminds me of the Tea Party Republicans with Obama ... no talks, no negotiations ... and they ****** the moderate Republicans to leave the table. So, I'm sure this is where the racism discussion will go ... no negotiations.
Last edited:
ENOUGH SAID - THERE ARE TIMES WHEN SILENCE IS ABSOLUTELY GOLDEN!!!
I totally agree - 110%
wrong again....see the redheaded skateboarder trying to break the glass in the CNN building.....no....there are some trumptards stirring the pot
I know who in the fuck they...…secret.left wing under trump control
not the trump kool aid....and trying to keep the fire alive
When Colin Kaepernick took a knee during the national anthem against police *******, the republicans, Fox News and of course the President ridiculed, demeaned the issue and found is novel. They relabeled it as being unAmerican and had all of these meaningless I Stand for the Anthem memes and hashtags. Now that anger has boiled over in over 75 cites here, and countries around the world, suddenly people understand we have to change police practices, and know the name of George Floyd.
www.vox.com
Black Lives Matter had peaceful marches over this, police *******, and were ridiculed with Blue Lives Matter, and All Lives Matter. Which of course redefined what they stood for. They were saying Black Lives are the ones that matter, it was Black Lives Matter Too, stop killing us. Now the President comes out of his bunker to say that MAGA loves THE black people.
www.wfmz.com
We all can condemn the looting. Stealing is not a protest. Violence, property damage and anger have been benchmarks of change. Period. You have peaceful court cases and demonstrations in the 1950s and early 60s. There was some change but a lot of violence still coming from the Right. Like Emmitt Till, and the murdering of civil rights workers. When did real change happen? After the Left pushed back. Unfortunately when that happens it includes confrontations, fires, and destruction. I cold give examples of this with every generation going back 200 years.
www.splcenter.org
And don't forget the original violent pushback against the government. Boston Tea Party. This was preceded by the Boston Massacre in 1770 where colonists threw snowballs at British soldiers and the Brits eventually opened fire on them. Demonstrations broke out, there as looting and property damage. Brit raised the tax on certain items, colonists destroyed a million dollars worth of tea, and much more than that the second time. This lead to similar demonstrations of protest across the colonies.Trump King George III, turned a deaf ear to taxation without representation, and the confrontations turned up, eventually our Independence.
www.history.com
www.history.com
So understand, when I hear the same people talking about they understand the issue but ignored the issue when there was peaceful protest, comes across as disingenuous. Especially from the President who is fine at fanning the flames of division and bragging about the 'tough guys' with his MAGA. Change is inevitable.
George Floyd protests go global
Foreign leaders are also reacting to the turmoil in the United States.
www.vox.com
Black Lives Matter had peaceful marches over this, police *******, and were ridiculed with Blue Lives Matter, and All Lives Matter. Which of course redefined what they stood for. They were saying Black Lives are the ones that matter, it was Black Lives Matter Too, stop killing us. Now the President comes out of his bunker to say that MAGA loves THE black people.
TRUMP: MAGA LOVES THE BLACK PEOPLE
President Trump says his supporters love black people.
We all can condemn the looting. Stealing is not a protest. Violence, property damage and anger have been benchmarks of change. Period. You have peaceful court cases and demonstrations in the 1950s and early 60s. There was some change but a lot of violence still coming from the Right. Like Emmitt Till, and the murdering of civil rights workers. When did real change happen? After the Left pushed back. Unfortunately when that happens it includes confrontations, fires, and destruction. I cold give examples of this with every generation going back 200 years.
Civil Rights Martyrs
www.splcenter.org
And don't forget the original violent pushback against the government. Boston Tea Party. This was preceded by the Boston Massacre in 1770 where colonists threw snowballs at British soldiers and the Brits eventually opened fire on them. Demonstrations broke out, there as looting and property damage. Brit raised the tax on certain items, colonists destroyed a million dollars worth of tea, and much more than that the second time. This lead to similar demonstrations of protest across the colonies.
Boston Massacre: Causes, Date & Facts | HISTORY
The Boston Massacre was a deadly riot that occurred on March 5, 1770, on King Street in Boston between American colonists and British soldiers. It helped pave the way for the American Revolution.
www.history.com
Boston Tea Party ‑ Definition, Dates & Facts | HISTORY
The Boston Tea Party was a political protest staged on December 16, 1773 at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston, Massachusetts. American colonists, frustrated at Britain for imposing “taxation without representation,” dumped 342 chests of British tea into the harbor. The event was the first major act of...
www.history.com
So understand, when I hear the same people talking about they understand the issue but ignored the issue when there was peaceful protest, comes across as disingenuous. Especially from the President who is fine at fanning the flames of division and bragging about the 'tough guys' with his MAGA. Change is inevitable.
Usa continues to hand global leadership role to other countries.
'China calls US a 'habitual quitter' after WHO withdrawal
President Donald Trump
Getty ImagesCopyright: Getty Images
China's foreign ministry has hit out at the US for cutting ties with the World Health Organization (WHO) and called for the international community to increase support for the agency.
The foreign ministry said on Monday that the US has "revealed its pursuit of power politics and unilateralism". It also described America as a "habitual quitter".
President Trump said on Friday that the US was withdrawing from the WHO, accusing it of failing to hold Beijing to account over the coronavirus pandemic.
"China has total control over the World Health Organization," the president declared.
The WHO's Director-General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has promised a review of its response to the pandemic and defended its independence.
The EU has led calls for the Trump administration to reconsider its decision, warning it could hamper global efforts to tackle Covid-19.'
'China calls US a 'habitual quitter' after WHO withdrawal
President Donald Trump
Getty ImagesCopyright: Getty Images
China's foreign ministry has hit out at the US for cutting ties with the World Health Organization (WHO) and called for the international community to increase support for the agency.
The foreign ministry said on Monday that the US has "revealed its pursuit of power politics and unilateralism". It also described America as a "habitual quitter".
President Trump said on Friday that the US was withdrawing from the WHO, accusing it of failing to hold Beijing to account over the coronavirus pandemic.
"China has total control over the World Health Organization," the president declared.
The WHO's Director-General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has promised a review of its response to the pandemic and defended its independence.
The EU has led calls for the Trump administration to reconsider its decision, warning it could hamper global efforts to tackle Covid-19.'
When Colin Kaepernick took a knee during the national anthem against police *******, the republicans, Fox News and of course the President ridiculed, demeaned the issue and found is novel. They relabeled it as being unAmerican and had all of these meaningless I Stand for the Anthem memes and hashtags. Now that anger has boiled over in over 75 cites here, and countries around the world, suddenly people understand we have to change police practices, and know the name of George Floyd.
George Floyd protests go global
Foreign leaders are also reacting to the turmoil in the United States.
Black Lives Matter had peaceful marches over this, police *******, and were ridiculed with Blue Lives Matter, and All Lives Matter. Which of course redefined what they stood for. They were saying Black Lives are the ones that matter, it was Black Lives Matter Too, stop killing us. Now the President comes out of his bunker to say that MAGA loves THE black people.
TRUMP: MAGA LOVES THE BLACK PEOPLE
President Trump says his supporters love black people.
We all can condemn the looting. Stealing is not a protest. Violence, property damage and anger have been benchmarks of change. Period. You have peaceful court cases and demonstrations in the 1950s and early 60s. There was some change but a lot of violence still coming from the Right. Like Emmitt Till, and the murdering of civil rights workers. When did real change happen? After the Left pushed back. Unfortunately when that happens it includes confrontations, fires, and destruction. I cold give examples of this with every generation going back 200 years.
Civil Rights Martyrs
And don't forget the original violent pushback against the government. Boston Tea Party. This was preceded by the Boston Massacre in 1770 where colonists threw snowballs at British soldiers and the Brits eventually opened fire on them. Demonstrations broke out, there as looting and property damage. Brit raised the tax on certain items, colonists destroyed a million dollars worth of tea, and much more than that the second time. This lead to similar demonstrations of protest across the colonies.TrumpKing George III, turned a deaf ear to taxation without representation, and the confrontations turned up, eventually our Independence.
Boston Massacre: Causes, Date & Facts | HISTORY
The Boston Massacre was a deadly riot that occurred on March 5, 1770, on King Street in Boston between American colonists and British soldiers. It helped pave the way for the American Revolution.Boston Tea Party ‑ Definition, Dates & Facts | HISTORY
The Boston Tea Party was a political protest staged on December 16, 1773 at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston, Massachusetts. American colonists, frustrated at Britain for imposing “taxation without representation,” dumped 342 chests of British tea into the harbor. The event was the first major act of...
So understand, when I hear the same people talking about they understand the issue but ignored the issue when there was peaceful protest, comes across as disingenuous. Especially from the President who is fine at fanning the flames of division and bragging about the 'tough guys' with his MAGA. Change is inevitable.
see the "chump" had to be moved to a bunker for a while last night?
Trump is not only racists he leads a party that has been racists...….see them on here all the time.....trump supporters...but not racists?....if it looks like a duck......
How Racist Is Trump’s Republican Party?
And how do you determine that in the first place?
Is the modern Republican Party built on race prejudice, otherwise known as racism?
Has it become, as Stuart Stevens — a media consultant with an exceptionally high win-loss record who was a lead strategist for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 — puts it, the “white grievance party”?
Stevens has impeccable Republican credentials. In addition to Bush, his clients have included Mitt Romney and other current and former senators — Roger Wicker, Roy Blunt, Chuck Grassley, Rob Portman, Thad Cochran, Dick Lugar, Jon Kyl, Mel Martinez and Dan Coats — and current and former governors: Larry Hogan, Haley Barbour, Bill Weld, Tom Ridge and Bob Riley.
Nonetheless, Stevens’s forthcoming book, “It Was All A Lie,” makes the case that President Trump is the natural outcome of a long chain of events going back to the 1964 election when Barry Goldwater ran for president as an opponent of the Civil Right Act passed earlier that year.
“As much as I’d love to go to bed at night reassuring myself that Donald Trump was some freak product of the system — a ‘black swan,’” Stevens writes, “I can’t do it”:
What were the lies? That the Republican Party “espoused a core set of values: character counts, personal responsibility, strong on Russia, the national debt actually mattered, immigration made America great, a big-tent party.”
And what is the truth? The Republican Party is “just a white grievance party.”
Race, Stevens writes,
Darren Davis is a political scientist at Notre Dame and a co-author, with David C. Wilson, a political scientist at the University of Delaware, of “Re-examining Racial Resentment: Conceptualization and Content” and “Racial Resentment and Targeted Anger at Barack Obama and the Federal Government.” In 2017, Davis delivered a lecture at Washington University in St Louis, “The Continuing Significance of Old Fashioned Racism: Skin Color & Implicit Racial Attitudes Among Survey Interviewers.”
In an email, Davis offered a succinct definition of racism and racist:
He suggested a fourfold definition:
“Attitudes or behavior that assert that one race is superior to another, or that is intended to promote fear, anger or hatred toward a racial group.” “Favoritism that results in denial of equal treatment under the law to people with regard to race.” “Race essentialism: the belief that races have biologically sharp boundaries; a belief in racial purity”; along with “structural racism: institutional practices put in place for racist reasons which have not been modified” and “where non-racist people behave in a racist way to fit into an institutional norm/peer pressure which applauds racism.”
LaFleur Stephens-Dougan, a political scientist at Princeton and the author of “Race to the Bottom: How Racial Appeals Work in American Politics,” wrote me in an email:
Ryan Enos, a political scientist at Harvard, applies what he calls the “ ‘Golden Rule of Intergroup Relations’ — which means that if you would be upset if somebody did something to or said something about your own group, then it is bigotry if you say it about or do it to another group.”
Ashley Jardina, a political scientist at Duke and the author of “White Identity Politics,” put it this way:
Davis stresses that, in his view, “not all racialized behavior and expressions stem from racial hatred or hating African Americans.” He is cautious in his wording:
Chloe Thurston, in turn, cited as specific examples
Like Davis, Thurston sought to address “the more difficult question” of “when it is legitimate to use that label for everyday behaviors.”
Her answer:
Kam notes that she worries “about excessive use of these labels” because describing someone or some action as racist “can easily escalate conflict beyond the point of return.”
Eric Kaufmann voiced similar caution, noting that racism and racist are highly charged words, the deployment of which can in some cases prove damaging to liberals and the left. He cited the “unwillingness to talk about immigration for fear of being labeled racist,” giving free rein to populists who do address immigration “and thus get elected. Trump’s election is exhibit A.”
In addition, according to Kaufmann, the
LaFleur Stephens-Dougan does not share Kaufmann’s view:
In addition, she continued,
Three Harvard political scientists — Meredith Dost, Enos and Jennifer L. Hochschild — conducted a survey in September 2017 that asked 2,296 American adults to rank, on a five point scale ranging from racist to not racist, 10 statements. These statements included “wanting to wave the Confederate flag,” “saying immigrants commit too many crimes,” “agreeing that welfare recipients should have to take a job to receive benefits,” and “voting for Donald Trump.”
The gulf between Democrats and Republicans was 20 percentage points or more on seven out of ten questions. At the extreme, 82 percent of “strong Republicans” said it was “not racist” to vote for Trump, compared with 22 percent of “strong Democrats.” who said it was, a 60-point difference.
The powerful tendency of Democrats to perceive racism has a significant, if unintended, adverse effect on minority candidates seeking to be nominated in Democratic primaries, according to a new study, “Perceptions of Explicit Prejudice and Electability.”
The authors, three social psychologists, Brett Mercier and Jared B. Celniker at the University of California-Irvine, and Azim F. Shariff of the University of British Columbia, write that Democrats underestimate “the percentage of Americans who say they would vote for presidential candidates from disadvantaged groups.”
The result? Believing themselves to be realists, Democrats actually foreclose some outcomes they would favor:
With the 2020 election approaching, one of the most relevant questions before the electorate is whether voters agree with Stuart Stevens on whether Donald Trump is a racist.
The answer to that question, according to a July 2019 Quinnipiac University national poll, is that 51 percent say Trump is a racist; 45 percent say he is not.
There are huge racial, partisan, gender and religious differences:
whites say Trump is not racist 50-46; blacks say he is racist 80-11;
Democrats 86-9 say yes, Republicans 91-8 say no;
men 55-41 say no, women 59-36 say yes;
white evangelicals say no 76-21, Catholics 50-48 say no;
the unaffiliated say yes, 63-30.
What this boils down to is that racism is detected, determined and observed through partisan and ideological lenses. This is hardly shocking. Yet what is still quite striking is how much the perception of the importance of racism has changed in recent years. How else is it that the United States, a nation that declared 244 years ago that “all men are created equal,” has a president seen as a racist by a majority of the electorate?
How Racist Is Trump’s Republican Party?
And how do you determine that in the first place?
Is the modern Republican Party built on race prejudice, otherwise known as racism?
Has it become, as Stuart Stevens — a media consultant with an exceptionally high win-loss record who was a lead strategist for George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 — puts it, the “white grievance party”?
Stevens has impeccable Republican credentials. In addition to Bush, his clients have included Mitt Romney and other current and former senators — Roger Wicker, Roy Blunt, Chuck Grassley, Rob Portman, Thad Cochran, Dick Lugar, Jon Kyl, Mel Martinez and Dan Coats — and current and former governors: Larry Hogan, Haley Barbour, Bill Weld, Tom Ridge and Bob Riley.
Nonetheless, Stevens’s forthcoming book, “It Was All A Lie,” makes the case that President Trump is the natural outcome of a long chain of events going back to the 1964 election when Barry Goldwater ran for president as an opponent of the Civil Right Act passed earlier that year.
“As much as I’d love to go to bed at night reassuring myself that Donald Trump was some freak product of the system — a ‘black swan,’” Stevens writes, “I can’t do it”:
“I have no one to blame but myself,” he declares on the first page. “What I missed was one simple reality: it was all a lie.”
What were the lies? That the Republican Party “espoused a core set of values: character counts, personal responsibility, strong on Russia, the national debt actually mattered, immigration made America great, a big-tent party.”
And what is the truth? The Republican Party is “just a white grievance party.”
Race, Stevens writes,
In fact, Stevens told me, “race is the original sin of the modern Republican Party:”
Stevens’s comment demonstrates the difficulty many analysts have pinning down the meaning of racism and the distinction — if there is one — between being a racist and voting for a racist. To further examine this complexity, I questioned a range of experts.
Darren Davis is a political scientist at Notre Dame and a co-author, with David C. Wilson, a political scientist at the University of Delaware, of “Re-examining Racial Resentment: Conceptualization and Content” and “Racial Resentment and Targeted Anger at Barack Obama and the Federal Government.” In 2017, Davis delivered a lecture at Washington University in St Louis, “The Continuing Significance of Old Fashioned Racism: Skin Color & Implicit Racial Attitudes Among Survey Interviewers.”
In an email, Davis offered a succinct definition of racism and racist:
Chloe Thurston, a political scientist at Northwestern and the author of “Black Lives Matter, American political development, and the politics of visibility,” wrote that
Eric Kaufmann, a political scientist at the University of London and the author of “Whiteshift: Populism, Immigration, and the Future of White Majorities,” voiced similar caution, noting in an email that racism must “be defined rigorously."
He suggested a fourfold definition:
“Attitudes or behavior that assert that one race is superior to another, or that is intended to promote fear, anger or hatred toward a racial group.” “Favoritism that results in denial of equal treatment under the law to people with regard to race.” “Race essentialism: the belief that races have biologically sharp boundaries; a belief in racial purity”; along with “structural racism: institutional practices put in place for racist reasons which have not been modified” and “where non-racist people behave in a racist way to fit into an institutional norm/peer pressure which applauds racism.”
LaFleur Stephens-Dougan, a political scientist at Princeton and the author of “Race to the Bottom: How Racial Appeals Work in American Politics,” wrote me in an email:
It is important, Stephens-Dougan argues, to ask people why they think black and Latino neighborhoods struggle with poor school and higher levels of crime. “If one’s answer,” she continued, “is that those neighborhoods are under-resourced because blacks and Latinos are less smart, less hardworking or less disciplined, etc., then that answer is racist.”
Ryan Enos, a political scientist at Harvard, applies what he calls the “ ‘Golden Rule of Intergroup Relations’ — which means that if you would be upset if somebody did something to or said something about your own group, then it is bigotry if you say it about or do it to another group.”
Ashley Jardina, a political scientist at Duke and the author of “White Identity Politics,” put it this way:
Let’s turn back to Darren Davis of Notre Dame. I asked Davis and other scholars whether Asian-American protests in New York City against the potential elimination of entrance exams as the sole determinant of entry into selective high schools like Stuyvesant or Bronx Science were racist. Likewise, is the opposition of well off suburbanites to affordable housing in their neighborhoods racist? Is the number of African-Americans in prison evidence of racism? And is white opposition to the decarceration movement, or to the prison abolition movement, racist?
Davis stresses that, in his view, “not all racialized behavior and expressions stem from racial hatred or hating African Americans.” He is cautious in his wording:
Davis argues that the debate has become clouded, that even though individual and group motives may not be racist, the outcomes achieved can be identical to the ones that racists would seek:
Chloe Thurston, in turn, cited as specific examples
While both Trump and King, an anti-immigrant congressman from Iowa, “balk at the label ‘racist,’ she continued, “it is descriptively accurate and necessary from the standpoint of keeping track of the role and uses of racism in American society and politics.”
Like Davis, Thurston sought to address “the more difficult question” of “when it is legitimate to use that label for everyday behaviors.”
Her answer:
Cindy Kam — a political scientist at Vanderbilt, and a co-author with Camille Burge, a political scientist at Villanova, of “Uncovering Reactions to the Racial Resentment Scale Across the Racial Divide” — added another element to the discussion: wariness about how the word is used in political and policy debates:
Because of the wide variety of possible motivations, Kam wrote in her email, she “would hesitate to label an action as ‘racist’ — unless racial considerations seem to be the only or the massively determinative consideration at play, based upon statistical modeling or carefully calibrated experiments.”
Kam notes that she worries “about excessive use of these labels” because describing someone or some action as racist “can easily escalate conflict beyond the point of return.”
Eric Kaufmann voiced similar caution, noting that racism and racist are highly charged words, the deployment of which can in some cases prove damaging to liberals and the left. He cited the “unwillingness to talk about immigration for fear of being labeled racist,” giving free rein to populists who do address immigration “and thus get elected. Trump’s election is exhibit A.”
In addition, according to Kaufmann, the
None of the examples I cited, in Kaufmann’s view, “are racist” unless it could be explicitly demonstrated “in a survey that those espousing the policies were mainly motivated by racism.” If not, he said, the “principle of charity should apply.”
LaFleur Stephens-Dougan does not share Kaufmann’s view:
This is nothing new, she continued, arguing that
Ashley Jardina wrote me that
Jardina joined others in calling for caution in the use of the word racist because it
In addition, she continued,
There is, in fact, a huge partisan divide over what is considered racist and what is not.
Three Harvard political scientists — Meredith Dost, Enos and Jennifer L. Hochschild — conducted a survey in September 2017 that asked 2,296 American adults to rank, on a five point scale ranging from racist to not racist, 10 statements. These statements included “wanting to wave the Confederate flag,” “saying immigrants commit too many crimes,” “agreeing that welfare recipients should have to take a job to receive benefits,” and “voting for Donald Trump.”
The gulf between Democrats and Republicans was 20 percentage points or more on seven out of ten questions. At the extreme, 82 percent of “strong Republicans” said it was “not racist” to vote for Trump, compared with 22 percent of “strong Democrats.” who said it was, a 60-point difference.
The powerful tendency of Democrats to perceive racism has a significant, if unintended, adverse effect on minority candidates seeking to be nominated in Democratic primaries, according to a new study, “Perceptions of Explicit Prejudice and Electability.”
The authors, three social psychologists, Brett Mercier and Jared B. Celniker at the University of California-Irvine, and Azim F. Shariff of the University of British Columbia, write that Democrats underestimate “the percentage of Americans who say they would vote for presidential candidates from disadvantaged groups.”
The result? Believing themselves to be realists, Democrats actually foreclose some outcomes they would favor:
Clearly, there is a large divide not only over the definition of racism, but also over the level of racism in the nation.
With the 2020 election approaching, one of the most relevant questions before the electorate is whether voters agree with Stuart Stevens on whether Donald Trump is a racist.
The answer to that question, according to a July 2019 Quinnipiac University national poll, is that 51 percent say Trump is a racist; 45 percent say he is not.
There are huge racial, partisan, gender and religious differences:
whites say Trump is not racist 50-46; blacks say he is racist 80-11;
Democrats 86-9 say yes, Republicans 91-8 say no;
men 55-41 say no, women 59-36 say yes;
white evangelicals say no 76-21, Catholics 50-48 say no;
the unaffiliated say yes, 63-30.
What this boils down to is that racism is detected, determined and observed through partisan and ideological lenses. This is hardly shocking. Yet what is still quite striking is how much the perception of the importance of racism has changed in recent years. How else is it that the United States, a nation that declared 244 years ago that “all men are created equal,” has a president seen as a racist by a majority of the electorate?
“It’s been said many times that not all Republicans are racists, but virtually all racists belong to the Republican party today. And I’ll make the point as well that these people used to be Democrats. The Democrat party used to be the party of the south. And now the Republicans are the party of the south,” he said. “A lot of people refuse to admit there’s been any change. I feel sorry for establishment Republicans, people like Ed Gillespie, who I used to work with in the 1980s or Mitt Romney or others who have to be silent. They’re afraid to speak out in their own party for fear of being excommunicated.”
All the racists are Republicans - Personal Liberty®
personalliberty.com
all-the-racists-are-republicans
Oct 30, 2017 · “Virtually all racists,” he claimed are now members of the GOP. “It’s been said many times that not all Republicans are racists, but virtually all racists belong to the Republican party today. And I’ll make the point as well that these people used to be Democrats. The Democrat party used to be the party of the south.
All the racists are Republicans - Personal Liberty®
Personal Liberty® - Conservative News and Political Commentary For Your Personal and Financial Freedom
Conservative News and Political Commentary For Your Personal and Financial Freedom
Oct 30, 2017 · “Virtually all racists,” he claimed are now members of the GOP. “It’s been said many times that not all Republicans are racists, but virtually all racists belong to the Republican party today. And I’ll make the point as well that these people used to be Democrats. The Democrat party used to be the party of the south.
More than 150 years after the 13th Amendment abolished slavery in the United States, most U.S. adults say the legacy of slavery continues to have an impact on the position of black people in American society today. More than four-in-ten say the country hasn’t made enough progress toward racial equality, and there is some skepticism, particularly among blacks, that black people will ever have equal rights with whites, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.
Views on Race in America 2019 | Pew Research Center
www.pewsocialtrends.org
race-in-america-2019
Apr 09, 2019 · The survey includes an oversample of blacks, Hispanics and Asians. For more details, see the Methodology section of the report.; The question on Trump’s handling of race relations was asked on both telephone and online surveys in 2019 and no significant mode differences were found. The numbers reported here are from the online survey.
Views on Race in America 2019 | Pew Research Center
April 9, 2019 ’s Social & Demographic Trends Project
www.pewsocialtrends.org
Apr 09, 2019 · The survey includes an oversample of blacks, Hispanics and Asians. For more details, see the Methodology section of the report.; The question on Trump’s handling of race relations was asked on both telephone and online surveys in 2019 and no significant mode differences were found. The numbers reported here are from the online survey.
In January, a CBS News poll found nearly 6 in 10 Americans saying race relations in the country are generally bad.
It wasn’t always that way. Positive views of the state of race relations in the country peaked with President Barack Obama’s inauguration, after which 66% of Americans said race relations were generally good in an April 2009 CBS News/New York Times poll. But views started to sour in 2014 following a number of high-profile shootings of black men by police officers and have continued to be more negative than positive in the Trump era.
And Americans think Trump is contributing to the problem. A Pew Research Center poll earlier this year showed 56% of Americans saying Trump has made race relations worse.
Americans gave similarly poor assessments of the president’s impact on specific racial, ethnic and religious minorities. Nearly 6 in 10 considered Trump’s actions to be bad for Hispanics and Muslims, and about half said they were bad for African Americans, according to a February 2018 poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research .
That poll also found that 57% of Americans considered Trump to be racist.
Polls show sour views of race relations in Trump's America
apnews.com
Jul 16, 2019 · Polls show stark differences in assessments of the state of race relations and Trump’s impact by party identification, along with racial and ethnic identity and educational attainment. In Pew’s poll, fully 84% of Democrats said Trump has worsened race relations, while only about 2 in 10 Republicans agreed.
It wasn’t always that way. Positive views of the state of race relations in the country peaked with President Barack Obama’s inauguration, after which 66% of Americans said race relations were generally good in an April 2009 CBS News/New York Times poll. But views started to sour in 2014 following a number of high-profile shootings of black men by police officers and have continued to be more negative than positive in the Trump era.
And Americans think Trump is contributing to the problem. A Pew Research Center poll earlier this year showed 56% of Americans saying Trump has made race relations worse.
Americans gave similarly poor assessments of the president’s impact on specific racial, ethnic and religious minorities. Nearly 6 in 10 considered Trump’s actions to be bad for Hispanics and Muslims, and about half said they were bad for African Americans, according to a February 2018 poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research .
That poll also found that 57% of Americans considered Trump to be racist.
Polls show sour views of race relations in Trump's America
Polls show sour views of race relations in Trump's America
Even before President Donald Trump's racist tweets toward four Democratic congresswomen of color, Americans considered race relations in the United States to be generally bad — and said that Trump has been making them worse.
apnews.com
The disturbing data on Republicans and racism: Trump backers are the most bigoted within the GOP
Racists are more likely to be Republicans — and the most extreme among them are Donald Trump supporters
Presumptive 2016 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is a bigot. He wants to ban Muslims from entering the United States, believes that Hispanic and Latino immigrants come to America in order to ******* and ******* white women, uses anti-Semitic imagery to slur Hillary Clinton, and has been endorsed by white supremacists.
At present, the Republican Party is the United States’ largest white identity organization. There is a mountain of evidence in support of this claim. The Republican Party nurtures and cultivates hostility towards non-whites among its voters for the purpose of electoral gain. What is known as “The Southern Strategy” of racist “coded appeals” against African-Americans and other people of color has dominated Republican politics since (at least) the end of the civil rights movement. And during the Age of Obama, American politics has been poisoned by racist conspiracy theories such as “Birtherism," lies that Barack Obama is a type of Manchurian candidate who actually hates America and wants to destroy it from within, efforts to rollback the won in ******* gains of the Black Freedom Struggle, as well as unprecedented efforts by the Republican Party to abandon its basic responsibilities of governance in order to delegitimize the country’s first black president.
Donald Trump is not an outlier or aberration. In many ways, he perfectly embodies the racist attitudes and beliefs of the Republican Party in the post civil rights era. Likewise, Donald Trump’s supporters have enthusiastically embraced the Republican Party’s racism towards people of color, in general, and against black Americans, in particular.
As reported by a recent Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll, Donald Trump supporters possess extreme levels — even as compared to other Republicans — of antipathy towards African-Americans:
These findings are not surprising. They are but one more example of how the Republican Party and its voters have shifted farther to the right in the post civil rights era, as well as the deep connections between political polarization and white racism.
[African-Americans clearly understand the racist nature of Donald Trump’s campaign and his voters’ hostility towards people of color. To wit: As reported in a recent Quinnipiac University public opinion poll, only 1 percent of African-Americans support Donald Trump.]
For example, recent research by Michael Tesler has shown how “old fashioned racism”, what was once thought to be all but vanquished from American society, is resurgent among white voters in the Age of Obama. David Sears has also demonstrated how “modern racism” now predicts party identification for Republican voters in former Confederacy. Other researchers have shown that the Republican Party’s ostensibly “race neutral” talking points about “small government” and “personal responsibility” are in fact signals to white racial resentment.
In many ways, Donald Trump’s voters are the 2008 and 2012 Tea Party faction rebooted for the 2016 presidential election. Like the John Birch Society of the 1950s and 1960s, the Tea Party maintained its influence over the Republican Party while remaining under the radar of the so-called “liberal” corporate news media. As social scientists Christopher Parker, Eric Knowles, and others have extensively documented, Tea Party supporters possess high levels of racial hostility and antipathy towards people of color.
The finding by Reuters and Ipsos that “Nearly one-third of Clinton supporters described blacks as more "violent" and "criminal" than whites, and one-quarter described them as more "lazy" than whites” should also not be a surprise.
Political attitudes, values, and beliefs are often contradictory. While racial attitudes are often cited as an exception to this pattern (they are remarkably stable and consistent), the non-ideological nature of many voters in the American electorate can still help to explain why some Democrats may believe pernicious and ugly stereotypes about black people as a group, but still vote for Barack Obama, the individual.
Racists are more likely to be Republicans — and the most extreme among them are Donald Trump supporters
Presumptive 2016 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is a bigot. He wants to ban Muslims from entering the United States, believes that Hispanic and Latino immigrants come to America in order to ******* and ******* white women, uses anti-Semitic imagery to slur Hillary Clinton, and has been endorsed by white supremacists.
At present, the Republican Party is the United States’ largest white identity organization. There is a mountain of evidence in support of this claim. The Republican Party nurtures and cultivates hostility towards non-whites among its voters for the purpose of electoral gain. What is known as “The Southern Strategy” of racist “coded appeals” against African-Americans and other people of color has dominated Republican politics since (at least) the end of the civil rights movement. And during the Age of Obama, American politics has been poisoned by racist conspiracy theories such as “Birtherism," lies that Barack Obama is a type of Manchurian candidate who actually hates America and wants to destroy it from within, efforts to rollback the won in ******* gains of the Black Freedom Struggle, as well as unprecedented efforts by the Republican Party to abandon its basic responsibilities of governance in order to delegitimize the country’s first black president.
Donald Trump is not an outlier or aberration. In many ways, he perfectly embodies the racist attitudes and beliefs of the Republican Party in the post civil rights era. Likewise, Donald Trump’s supporters have enthusiastically embraced the Republican Party’s racism towards people of color, in general, and against black Americans, in particular.
As reported by a recent Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll, Donald Trump supporters possess extreme levels — even as compared to other Republicans — of antipathy towards African-Americans:
These findings are not surprising. They are but one more example of how the Republican Party and its voters have shifted farther to the right in the post civil rights era, as well as the deep connections between political polarization and white racism.
[African-Americans clearly understand the racist nature of Donald Trump’s campaign and his voters’ hostility towards people of color. To wit: As reported in a recent Quinnipiac University public opinion poll, only 1 percent of African-Americans support Donald Trump.]
For example, recent research by Michael Tesler has shown how “old fashioned racism”, what was once thought to be all but vanquished from American society, is resurgent among white voters in the Age of Obama. David Sears has also demonstrated how “modern racism” now predicts party identification for Republican voters in former Confederacy. Other researchers have shown that the Republican Party’s ostensibly “race neutral” talking points about “small government” and “personal responsibility” are in fact signals to white racial resentment.
In many ways, Donald Trump’s voters are the 2008 and 2012 Tea Party faction rebooted for the 2016 presidential election. Like the John Birch Society of the 1950s and 1960s, the Tea Party maintained its influence over the Republican Party while remaining under the radar of the so-called “liberal” corporate news media. As social scientists Christopher Parker, Eric Knowles, and others have extensively documented, Tea Party supporters possess high levels of racial hostility and antipathy towards people of color.
The finding by Reuters and Ipsos that “Nearly one-third of Clinton supporters described blacks as more "violent" and "criminal" than whites, and one-quarter described them as more "lazy" than whites” should also not be a surprise.
Political attitudes, values, and beliefs are often contradictory. While racial attitudes are often cited as an exception to this pattern (they are remarkably stable and consistent), the non-ideological nature of many voters in the American electorate can still help to explain why some Democrats may believe pernicious and ugly stereotypes about black people as a group, but still vote for Barack Obama, the individual.
Took ya a whole minute to start the last great claim of the Dem party the racist racist racist ploy - truth is both political parties have their racists - the Dems just USE the claim to their advantage CONSTANTLY!!!!!
posted several article on both threads.....facts are you are a racist!...….what is your view on immigration again?
you trumptards are just in denial....you can not support a known racist or party......and then say you are not part of that....and then with every post defend what you are supporting
you people never did like the printed facts
Last edited:
- Status
