The white people’s party?

Please tell me that you're joking.

Exactly what is this mysterious 'oppressive' mechanism? Please elaborate.

BTW, bizarre how some of the largest charitable funds were set up by the richest 'oppressors'. Eh?

 

delete

 

by candidate, not by voters, which is what we were talking about

 

I'm afraid he honestly believes this. He's from Sweden, so he may not know any better. If he's as ignorant about the US political system as he sounds, he should shut his mouth. It sounds like all the information he has in his brain was fed to him by the socialist and ultra-left wing media outlets in northern Europe. Not exactly a good education on US politics.

 

Oversimplification? absolutely, you can't discuss issues like these without oversimplifying. I don't thing you need a statistics class to learn that.

I'm not making a statistical argument, I'm making an economic argument. People act rationally and pursue their own interests. The interests of Republicans, are promoted above all, whether conscious, coincidence, or both.

Does the article go a bit overboard?
Sure, but to throw your hands up in shock and dismay at the suggestion that a party that has pioneered and exploited the racial divide in this countryfor political gain (willie horton, the "southern strategy", etc.) overtly or covertly promotes the intersts of whites above others is disingenuous.

 

Another content rich post from Trader Texxx.


I found it funny that this article said Bush was fluent in Spanish. Anyone who is fluent knows that Bush's Spanish is pretty terrible. The Republican Party will be up that famous creek if they don't change their attitudes and their agenda. As the Hispanic populartion rises and the white population decreases, they'll have to continue winning a larger portion of the white vote to have a chance at the Presidency. Since wealth in this country is distributed almost entirely along racial lines with white/asian at the top and latino/black at the bottom, the Republican Party is in serious trouble unless that changes in the next 10-20 years.

 

I'll wager that he knows more about US politics than most of us know about French, German, Russian, or Iraqi politics, but that didn't seem to stop many of us from passing judgment.

 

Thx for the compliment, Timing.

A slightly tangent view would be to look at these racial voting trends as does Quannel X. He mentioned that blacks are the real losers here. Since their vote is guaranteed to go to whoever the democrat is, what incentive do democrats have to act on their behalf? The black vote is a given, so the democrats don't have to work to earn it.

Please post a link to your study that shows the division of wealth in the US. The results you posted seem to have some interesting implications, if true...

 

Originally posted by bigtexxx
Thx for the compliment, Timing.

I'm sure it won't be the last one like that you'll be receiving.


In 2000, the household median net worth was $79,400 for households with a non-Hispanic White householder, $7,500 for households with a Black householder, and $9,750 for households with a Hispanic householder. Hispanic households and Black households had significantly lower net worth than non-Hispanic White households, but the difference between Hispanic and Black households was not statistically significant.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/wealth/1998_2000/highlights.html#N_2_


A slightly tangent view would be to look at these racial voting trends as does Quannel X. He mentioned that blacks are the real losers here. Since their vote is guaranteed to go to whoever the democrat is, what incentive do democrats have to act on their behalf? The black vote is a given, so the democrats don't have to work to earn it.

Well that's an opporunity for Republicans that they refuse to take advantage of isn't it? You're not going to get the black vote by trashing Democrats, you'll get it by taking issues in the black community seriously and showing concrete steps to address them. Stocking Republican Party leadership with bigots probably isn't going to help much either.

 

I found it funny that this article said Bush was fluent in Spanish. Anyone who is fluent knows that Bush's Spanish is pretty terrible.

Thank you. I was hoping someone would point that out. Only non-Spanish speakers or someon who never has heard his attempts at Spanish would ever claim that Bush is fluent. His claim to fluency or consistently allowing his promoters to claim it is but another example of his dishonesty.

I would say he is at the level of about an average student with two to three years of highschool Spanish.

 

I would say that the Republican Party caters to those of the upper class -- a group which overlaps significantly with whites, specifically white men. But, you might ask, how does this account for their strong showing in the poorer "red states" of the South? For one, the Republicans do implicitly use racist ideology there -- Bush's speech at Bob Jones University, where interracial dating was prohibited, was one of those gestures that purposely encodes solidarity with white racists without explicitly stating it. And whites in the South who vote Republican probably feel that minorities are obstacles to their social and economic advancement -- taking their jobs, living off the dole, etc. Or so the myth goes.

 

There is of course some truth to the premise of this article. But what is the point? The Democratic Party is the black party? So what? Each ethnic group has its own interests. Is it surprising that one party serves some ethnic group's interests better than the other? Again, so what? In fact, do you really want both parties to serve equally well to every segment of the population? Partisanship would lose all meanings then.

To put fuel under the racial divide, imo, serves no purpose other than making that divide ever bigger. The message is pretty simple: the GOP is the white man's party, so don't vote for it if you're not white. What does that message do to the society?

I've said it before, as a minority myself. The best way to better your ethnic group's status is not through politics, although political activism has its place. Minority leaders should focus on reforming their people's education, family structure, cultural weaknesses, work ethics, etc. Playing the victim card is never gonna help.