Voter suppression

And she was only running for VP while the Democrats nominated someone even more unqualified and more unprepared for the top slot than Palin.

So why do you keep dodging the issue at hand?

How it is you assert they can provide ID to register but not one to vote and that to require one for the former does not discriminated but does so for the latter? Please explain the conflict in your position.

 

try to follow the conversation

he said palin wasn't running and that she didn't lose

what a joke

[video=youtube;mKakxNRxe6g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKakxNRxe6g[/video]

i'm not dodging anything?

there's no conflict, court houses, where many people register to vote, have the ability to verify identities

 

Oh I am and I know, you don't know what you are talking about.

Yes reality is sometimes a joke, it's sometimes call irony. The Democrats elected someone less qualified with less experience than Palin proclaiming she was unqualified and inexperienced.

Yeah you are and stilll waiting.

How it is you assert they can provide ID to register but not one to vote and that to require one for the former does not discriminated but does so for the latter? Please explain the conflict in your position.

And again, why a violation of you civil rights at one and not the other to show an ID?

 

i know exactly what i'm talking about

you, not so much

i already addressed that

try to pay attention and stop spinning in circles

reality is that the world laughs at palin's stupidity

[video=youtube;KjNZSJUYDbA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjNZSJUYDbA[/video]

 

its not anti gay. That is actually ridiculous. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman and suddenly there is this movement to change abnormality into normal and there is this desire to do it with out a law change. Go get a federal law passed if you want to change the law.

 

Those Southern Democrats are now Republicans.

 

Okay then exactly what is it then when you give benefits to one group and not another. Saying it is not anti gay is laughable. Your idea that marriage has always been between a Man and a Woman is also laughable because of laws against it. just like the laws on interracial marriage. I guess this will be the next excuse the right will throw up to justify being a bunch of bigots

- - - Updated - - -

Okay then exactly what is it then when you give benefits to one group and not another. Saying it is not anti gay is laughable. Your idea that marriage has always been between a Man and a Woman is also laughable because of laws against it. just like the laws on interracial marriage. I guess this will be the next excuse the right will throw up to justify being a bunch of bigots

 

I imagine most of them are worm food now, not Republicans.

 

Marriage between a man and a woman with different colored skin is just a normal marriage. Just because a bunch of bigoted Democrats in the South were against it, does not make it "abnormal". However gay marriage is abnormal. Comparing these two things is ridiculous but even if you compare it, blacks were freed from slavery by a law change. So get the law changed and stop whining.

 

Those same bigoted Democrats are now Republicans so stop living in a fantasy land. The had children who have kept up the bigotry long after they went to the nursing home.

 

Those Southern bigoted Democrats are dead. Back in the 50s and 60s when the jim crow laws were being challenged by the Republicans from the North, Some of the Southern Democrat politicians became Republicans and some of them decided to use the Black vote for personal gain as Democrats. Example would be Robert Byrd and LBJ. There are a couple of Southern racists that just played the black vote.

 

The point is that the conservative racist wing of the Democratic party was subsumed into the GOP, as a part of the GOP's Southern Strategy.
That's what really happened.
If you follow politics, and the history of politics, that's what's there.
It was a move that gave the GOP an electoral edge for a while, after they had become almost irrelevant.

The interesting thing is that no political strategy works forever, and the GOP has had a good run from that Southern Strategy, but it's gone sour.

Courting white racists used to get you more than it cost you, that calculus has changed, and the GOP is going to need to change, and they have to grab some demographic away from the Democrats to remain competitive, but to appeal to blacks or hispanics or gays or women, the GOP is going to have to rework the message.
The only part of the message that's real is the part about lower taxes for the wealthy, everything else is just a wedge issue to draw the rubes.
I don't think they make a serious move until they take a Goldwater style beating.
If they lose in 2016, and 2020, expect a big rework of the message, maybe dump abortion, or become all about gay rights, see what I mean, there's not a lot of room to maneuver. But what happens eventually is all the big money goes to the party in power, and what keeps the GOP going is the belief that they remain relevant. let them go 4 years with the Dems in control of the House, the White House and holding a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, and you'll see wholesale changes to the GOP "principles"....

 

No it is what you would like to think happened. Instead the reality is the bigot Southern Democrats by majority stayed Democrats. Like this list of Southern politicians:

Orval Fabus
Benjamin Travis Laney
John Stennis
James Eastland
Allen Ellender
Russell Long
John Sparkman
John McClellan
Richard Russell
Herman Talmadge
George Wallace
Lester Maddox
John Rarick
Robert Byrd
Al Gore, Sr.
Bull Connor

This bunch of senior Southern Democrats stayed Democrat all through the changes in the 60s.

 

For some reason, when the Americans took over control of the South from the DemocRATs, the racism in government stopped.

What a coincidence.

Mean you, and all the other racists infesting the country, elected the most racist president in US history.

What a coincidence.

Do tell the forum about Horst Wessel, okay?

 

Yeah it is a damn shame Bush got elected twice by the racist! So glad McCain picked that twit quitter so we did not have another racist in the White House.

 

The Southern Democrats switched parties though it's true that Byrd did not. In fact, I respect Byrd for seeing the light and changing his ways instead of simply changing parties. You could learn a lot from his example.

- - - Updated - - -

I know Wallace didn't stay Democrat.

 

the longs are close family friends

russell certainly wasn't a conservative

also, not a conservative

"He was the leading sponsor of the federal free lunch program, which was enacted in 1945 and continues; it was a welfare program that helped poor students, black and white alike."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_J._Ellender

 

How do you do that, overlook the mass of data of voter registrations and election results, and pretend a list outweighs actual reality, is it a pill you take?

 

Wow an excuse maker for racists. Byrd was a racist all along and simply figured out how to used blacks for their vote. Wallace did not become a Republican if that is what you are attempting to imply. The Southern Democrats by vast majority stayed Democrats. You are just attempting to propagate a myth.

 

These are all prominent Southern Democrat politicians who all happen to have also been racists. They all stayed Democrat through the 1960s.

 

your bs has already been refuted

 

Yes and thats why the GOP has carried the South ever since Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, reality isn't being very nice to your theory...........

 

What is refuted is the BS that all of the racists that were enacting the jim crow laws suddenly became angels. They didn't. They simply used the black voters for their votes.

 

their leaders are

 

The GOP carrries the vote amongst conservatives north and south. Conservatives believe in freedom of peoples. Conservatives do not believe in Socialism. The north has become more populated with those that believe in socialism.