The Southern White Man's Party

Cancel7

Banned
"And both Hispanics and Asians, another growing force in the electorate, are getting the message. Last year they voted overwhelmingly Democratic, by 69 percent and 62 percent respectively".

But that's stupid! If they start voting as heavily Democratic as black people do, than the Democratic party will take them for granted! I'm concerned. I have concern for black and hispanic people. They should vote for Republicans who won't go to their debates and either want to kick them out of the country or put them in jail. Because otherwise the Democrats will take them for granted! I'm concerned. Did I mention how concerned I am?



Politics in Black and White
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Last Thursday there was a huge march in Jena, La., to protest the harsh and unequal treatment of six black students arrested in the beating of a white classmate. Students who hung nooses to warn blacks not to sit under a “white” tree were suspended for three days; on the other hand, the students accused in the beating were initially charged with second-degree attempted murder.

And one of the Jena Six remains in jail, even though appeals courts have voided his conviction on the grounds that he was improperly tried as an adult.

Many press accounts of the march have a tone of amazement. Scenes like those in Jena, the stories seemed to imply, belonged in the 1960s, not the 21st century. The headline on the New York Times report, “Protest in Louisiana Case Echoes the Civil Rights Era,” was fairly typical.

But the reality is that things haven’t changed nearly as much as people think. Racial tension, especially in the South, has never gone away, and has never stopped being important. And race remains one of the defining factors in modern American politics.

Consider voting in last year’s Congressional elections. Republicans, as President Bush conceded, received a “thumping,” with almost every major demographic group turning against them. The one big exception was Southern whites, 62 percent of whom voted Republican in House races.

And yes, Southern white exceptionalism is about race, much more than it is about moral values, religion, support for the military or other explanations sometimes offered. There’s a large statistical literature on the subject, whose conclusion is summed up by the political scientist Thomas F. Schaller in his book “Whistling Past Dixie”: “Despite the best efforts of Republican spinmeisters to depict American conservatism as a nonracial phenomenon, the partisan impact of racial attitudes in the South is stronger today than in the past.”

Republican politicians, who understand quite well that the G.O.P.’s national success since the 1970s owes everything to the partisan switch of Southern whites, have tacitly acknowledged this reality. Since the days of Gerald Ford, just about every Republican presidential campaign has included some symbolic gesture of approval for good old-fashioned racism.

Thus Ronald Reagan, who began his political career by campaigning against California’s Fair Housing Act, started his 1980 campaign with a speech supporting states’ rights delivered just outside Philadelphia, Miss., where three civil rights workers were murdered. In 2000, Mr. Bush made a pilgrimage to Bob Jones University, famed at the time for its ban on interracial dating.

And all four leading Republican candidates for the 2008 nomination have turned down an invitation to a debate on minority issues scheduled to air on PBS this week.

Yet if the marchers at Jena reminded us that America still hasn’t fully purged itself of the poisonous legacy of slavery, it would be wrong to suggest that the nation has made no progress. Racism, though not gone, is greatly diminished: both opinion polls and daily experience suggest that we are truly becoming a more tolerant, open society.

And the cynicism of the “Southern strategy” introduced by Richard Nixon, which delivered decades of political victories to Republicans, is now starting to look like a trap for the G.O.P.

One of the truly remarkable things about the contest for the Republican nomination is the way the contenders have snubbed not just blacks — who, given the G.O.P.’s modern history, probably won’t vote for a Republican in significant numbers no matter what — but Hispanics. In July, all the major contenders refused invitations to address the National Council of La Raza, which Mr. Bush addressed in 2000. Univision, the Spanish-language TV network, had to cancel a debate scheduled for Sept. 16 because only John McCain was willing to come.

If this sounds like a good way to ensure defeat in future elections, that’s because it is: Hispanics are a rapidly growing force in the electorate.

But to get the Republican nomination, a candidate must appeal to the base — and the base consists, in large part, of Southern whites who carry over to immigrants the same racial attitudes that brought them into the Republican fold to begin with. As a result, you have the spectacle of Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, pragmatists on immigration issues when they actually had to govern in diverse states, trying to reinvent themselves as defenders of Fortress America.

And both Hispanics and Asians, another growing force in the electorate, are getting the message. Last year they voted overwhelmingly Democratic, by 69 percent and 62 percent respectively.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/opinion/24krugman.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
 
This kinda bums me out, because it's so true.

I would prefer to see 2 very competitive, broad-based parties in this country. I think the GOP is in real danger of becoming a long-term minority unless they wake up soon.

I always think the Democrats' worst instincts take over when they get too comfortable...
 
This kinda bums me out, because it's so true.

I would prefer to see 2 very competitive, broad-based parties in this country. I think the GOP is in real danger of becoming a long-term minority unless they wake up soon.

I always think the Democrats' worst instincts take over when they get too comfortable...


Maybe I haven't been able to witness that, I'm not sure when it was. I have seen their worst instincts taking over when they are uncomfortable. Pandering, cowering little apoligists and kiss-asses.

How much worse could it get?
 
Is the GOP literally trying to self destruct?

No. "The GOP" is trying not to. And coupled with big business whoring, this is why Rove and Bush were so committed to easing Immigration.

But, even though Rove is supposed to be a visionary genius, they didn't factor in that regardless of what the national part of the party want, individual congressmen need to get reelected. And since they got elected by being good ole white boys, there is only one way they are getting reelected.

Surprising that the visionary genius didn't see that one coming.
 
im sure another independent party will emerge that pulls votes away from the dems. The Dems have already proven that left unchecked they are untrustworthy and will move towards socialism. the country as a whole would not allow for that. Guys like bloomberg would step in run independent and offset the net increase from this group of people.
 
im sure another independent party will emerge that pulls votes away from the dems. The Dems have already proven that left unchecked they are untrustworthy and will move towards socialism. the country as a whole would not allow for that. Guys like bloomberg would step in run independent and offset the net increase from this group of people.

When and how did the Democrats prove that?
 
im sure another independent party will emerge that pulls votes away from the dems. The Dems have already proven that left unchecked they are untrustworthy and will move towards socialism. the country as a whole would not allow for that. Guys like bloomberg would step in run independent and offset the net increase from this group of people.


The Dems have already proven that left unchecked they are untrustworthy and will move towards socialism.

What Democratic candidate has ever advocated for government ownership and control of the production, manufacturing, and distribution elements of the economy?
 
Republicans suck on racial issues. They are never going to figure it out...

They jump all over AA and make a big deal out of it as if white's are losing their jobs due to AA. Most companies don't even pay much attention to AA when they are hiring, they just hire the best person for the job. But its like they always assume that whites are better equipped for any job and minorities just take them due to policy.

They sit there and cheer cheap Mexican labor when it benefits them, but show their hatred for the Mexican people constantly. They find a Mexican that did something stupid, use him/her as a scapegoat and paint this picture as if all illegal-immigrants are criminals. It's obvious they just don't like anyone other than white people.
 
It is the whiney nature of Republicans Dave.

the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but if it squeaks too long it gets replaced.
 
I love how Cypress always grabs the furthest definition of Communism when he's trying to defend against allegations of socialism.

Even Chavez, a self-identified Communist, hasn't taken all of the drastic steps which Cypress apparently sees as essential to be even slightly socialist.

Are you ever going to admit to yourself that your party does support socialist policies?
 
I love how Cypress always grabs the furthest definition of Communism when he's trying to defend against allegations of socialism.

Even Chavez, a self-identified Communist, hasn't taken all of the drastic steps which Cypress apparently sees as essential to be even slightly socialist.

Are you ever going to admit to yourself that your party does support socialist policies?


Warren has mentioned Chavez in a post. I believe Chavez, the current US Presidential contender and rallying point and poster child for the US left, is ahead in our informal and very scientific polls.
 
I love how Cypress always grabs the furthest definition of Communism when he's trying to defend against allegations of socialism.

Even Chavez, a self-identified Communist, hasn't taken all of the drastic steps which Cypress apparently sees as essential to be even slightly socialist.

Are you ever going to admit to yourself that your party does support socialist policies?


My party supports social programs, that virtually the rest of the entire developed word, and much of the undeveloped world already has: universal healthcare, public pensions, a modest social safety net, and strong public education.

If that's socialism, then socialism as an ideology has been far more incredibly succcessful than I ever imagined. Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands must be socialist paradises.
 
Of course not that would be juvenile and immature - but feel free to bring up Chavez in the form of faux rage every time something happens in Venezuela.

I don't understand why you believe those who do not like Chavez are somehow faking these feelings?
 
Back
Top