Republicans would be screwed without racist voters

[OGIS]

Republicans would be screwed without racist votersThe Republican Party can be understood, broadly, as a coalition of people who dislike food stamps because they think the government is too big and discourages people from working, plus people who dislike food stamps because they think black people get them.

For years, Republicans have bristled at these sorts of descriptions, especially because Democrats tend to leave out the first part, painting the party as purely racist. But this election has forced Republicans to confront reality: A healthy chunk of Republican voters don't have a broad objection to big government, but an objection to big government for the wrong people.

So, what can nonracist Republicans do about this? It's a hard question.

http://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-racist-voters-donald-trump-2016-3?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Think hard, fiscal conservatives; you are known by the company you keep.

[Polecat]

Funny how it was a republican that abolished slavery and democrats that have tried their best to keep blacks in the bondage of poverty ever since.

[Common Sense]

Funny how it was a republican that abolished slavery and democrats that have tried their best to keep blacks in the bondage of poverty ever since.

That's sort of a tired old line...Lincoln wouldn't recognize the party today.

[Peter1469]

Democrats practice the soft bigotry of low expectations.

And only to get votes. Then they toss minorities to the side.

[Tahuyaman]

If you repeat cliches and platitudes long enough, the intellecually lazy people fall for it. That's why we have sunk so low that we have the choices we have today.

[Tahuyaman]

Democrats practice the soft bigotry of low expectations.

And only to get votes. Then they toss minorities to the side.

I don't believe they understand what you meant with that one.

[Mac-7]

That's sort of a tired old line...Lincoln wouldn't recognize the party today.

I dont know what its like in canada and dont care

But in America the wipe-every-nose liberal welfare scam keeps black people in the hood where they are addicted to crime and drugs and welfare checks.

so the racism toward blacks is coming from liberals not conservatives.

[Chris]

My only comment on the OP...

http://i.snag.gy/xx9qR.jpg

[Tahuyaman]

That's sort of a tired old line...Lincoln wouldn't recognize the party today.

Well, Democrats like Truman and JFK have nothing in common with the Democrats of today. And it hasnt taken more than100 years for that to happen.

[Tahuyaman]

I dont know what its like in canada and dont care

But in America the wipe-every-nose liberal welfare scam keeps black people in the hood where they are addicted to crime and drugs and welfare checks.

so the racism toward blacks is coming from liberals not conservatives.

Democrats want to keep the underclass in their place no matter what their skin color.

[Mac-7]

Democrats want to keep the underclass in their place no matter what their skin color.

Sure.

democrats work for all the toothless white meth addicts with welfare anchor babies just as much as blacks in the hood.

[Standing Wolf]

Democrats practice the soft bigotry of low expectations.

And only to get votes. Then they toss minorities to the side.

The notion that all racial minority members who vote Democratic need or seek to benefit from anyone's "low expectations" is, itself, racist.

Yes, some people of color will hark to the siren song of promised free money and preferential treatment...but many people of all colors will vote Democratic because Democratic politicians tend to take the positions on social issues that they, themselves, hold. Both parties have their fair share of self-centered, low information voters; it is unquestionably the case that advocates of some of the most reprehensible, short-sighted and bigoted views on the planet identify with and gravitate toward Republican politicians, and there really isn't any denying that fact.

[Peter1469]

The notion that all racial minority members who vote Democratic need or seek to benefit from anyone's "low expectations" is, itself, racist.

It isn't a notion. It is what democrats do with their policies to coddle victim groups of all sorts to include minorities.

As an aside, I don't agree with your assertion that the minorities and victim groups actually seek it. Why do you think so?

[Mac-7]

Yes, some people of color will hark to the siren song of promised free money and preferential treatment...but many people of all colors will vote Democratic because Democratic politicians tend to take the positions on social issues that they, themselves, hold.

sure

poor people who want a government handout vote democrat.

Black, white and hispanic.

[Standing Wolf]

As an aside, I don't agree with your assertion that the minorities and victim groups actually seek it. Why do you think so?

According to the premise you established, why else would they vote for Democrats? Some minority members do vote for the guy (or woman) who promises them stuff - so do those who own and operate certain corporations...and so do those bigoted individuals who seek to keep racial minorities, women, gay people, etc., "in their place" - which brings us back to many Republicans.

[Mac-7]

According to the premise you established, why else would they vote for Democrats? Some minority members do vote for the guy (or woman) who promises them stuff - so do those who own and operate certain corporations...and so do those bigoted individuals who seek to keep racial minorities, women, gay people, etc., "in their place" - which brings us back to many Republicans.

Welfare is the biggest hook the Party Of The Free Ride has for the underclass.

[Safety]

That's sort of a tired old line...Lincoln wouldn't recognize the party today.

He would be called a guilt ridden white lib, or a progressive.

These cats lost so much of my respect by trying to pretend otherwise.

[del]

Democrats practice the soft bigotry of low expectations.

And only to get votes. Then they toss minorities to the side.



If you repeat cliches and platitudes long enough, the intellecually lazy people fall for it. That's why we have sunk so low that we have the choices we have today.

yes, they do

i'm surprised you noticed

[Mac-7]

He would be called a guilt ridden white lib, or a progressive.



Opposing slavery makes lincoln a guilt ridden white liberal?

Thats totally partisan and irrational.

[del]

Opposing slavery makes lincoln a guilt ridden white liberal?

Thats totally partisan and irrational.

lincoln never opposed slavery

he opposed the dissolution of the union

[Safety]

lincoln never opposed slavery

he opposed the dissolution of the union

You have to type slow for him.

[Mac-7]

lincoln never opposed slavery

he opposed the dissolution of the union

The republican party opposed slavery and lincoln was their candidate.

its true that lincoln was not very impressed with black people but he never supported slavery.

[Safety]

The republican party opposed slavery and lincoln was their candidate.

its true that lincoln was not very impressed with black people but he never supported slavery.

So, David Duke was to the left of Lincoln?

[Mac-7]

So, David Duke was to the left of Lincoln?

David duke was not born when lincoln was alive

[Safety]

David duke was not born when lincoln was alive

......tell me you just didn't type that.

[Mac-7]

......tell me you just didn't type that.

Why?

[del]

You have to type slow for him.

i did

[del]

The republican party opposed slavery and lincoln was their candidate.

its true that lincoln was not very impressed with black people but he never supported slavery.

the republican party opposed the expansion of slavery; it didn't support abolition

lincoln by his own words appears not to have given a rat's ass about slavery either way.

[del]

Why?

because even for you, it's incredibly dimwitted

[Mac-7]

When libs like del and safety fall behind in the debate they always turn to personsl insults

[del]

When libs like del and safety fall behind in the debate they always turn to personsl insults

when intellectual giants like mac get their asses kicked on the facts, they start to whine.

[Tahuyaman]

So, David Duke was to the left of Lincoln?
David Duke wasn't alive during the Lincoln era. Your question is....... well, let's just say, not smart.

[jimmyz]

Republicans would be screwed without racist voters

The Republican Party can be understood, broadly, as a coalition of people who dislike food stamps because they think the government is too big and discourages people from working, plus people who dislike food stamps because they think black people get them.

For years, Republicans have bristled at these sorts of descriptions, especially because Democrats tend to leave out the first part, painting the party as purely racist. But this election has forced Republicans to confront reality: A healthy chunk of Republican voters don't have a broad objection to big government, but an objection to big government for the wrong people.

So, what can nonracist Republicans do about this? It's a hard question.

http://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-racist-voters-donald-trump-2016-3?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Think hard, fiscal conservatives; you are known by the company you keep.

Yeah. No racist negro people out there. No racist brown dishwasher maid types out there. No racist single white women with empty heads out there. No racist homos or body mutilating trannies out there. No racist elderly hippies out there. No racist FDR remembering geriatrics out there. No racist metro-sexual and hipster white males out there.

I described the DNC base and yep, not a single racist Dem voter to seen anywhere.

[Tahuyaman]

When libs like del and safety fall behind in the debate they always turn to personsl insults

Both are garden variety trolls.

[del]

Yeah. No racist negro people out there. No racist brown dishwasher maid types out there. No racist single white women with empty heads out there. No racist homos or body mutilating trannies out there. No racist elderly hippies out there. No racist FDR remembering geriatrics out there. No racist metro-sexual and hipster white males out there.

I described the DNC base and yep, not a single racist Dem voter to seen anywhere.


i think it's time for your nap, jimmy

grab a battle flag and cuddle up with it

[Safety]

David Duke wasn't alive during the Lincoln era. Your question is....... well, let's just say, not smart.

No shit, he wasn't alive, considering he endorsed Trump a couple of weeks ago. Are you and Mac hung up on the word "was"? I used it because Duke isn't a politician anymore.

[del]

No shit, he wasn't alive, considering he endorsed Trump a couple of weeks ago. Are you and Mac hung up on the word "was"? I used it because Duke isn't a politician anymore.

t y p e s l o w e r

[Mac-7]

the republican party opposed the expansion of slavery; it didn't support abolition

lincoln by his own words appears not to have given a rat's ass about slavery either way.

The republican party opposed slavery.

Its immediate goal was preventing expansion but the ultimste goal was abolition.

[jimmyz]

i think it's time for your nap, jimmy

grab a battle flag and cuddle up with it

You're the elderly prog. Aren't naps in your wheel-house.

[Safety]

i think it's time for your nap, jimmy

grab a battle flag and cuddle up with it

It still stings after all these years. I wonder when they will eventually rise again?

[del]

The republican party opposed slavery.

Its immediate goal was preventing expansion but the ultimste goal was abolition.

no it wasn't- it was more concerned with tariffs and building a railroad than slavery

no party was associated with the abolitionist movement in 1860

keep swinging

[Mac-7]

No $#@!, he wasn't alive, considering he endorsed Trump a couple of weeks ago. Are you and Mac hung up on the word "was"? I used it because Duke isn't a politician anymore.

Duke has absolutely nothing to do with lincoln or donald trump today

i dont know if the racist congressional black caucus uses duke as a boogyman to scare you or if you use him as a boogyman the scare gullible white liberals but he does not scare me

[del]

You're the elderly prog. Aren't naps in your wheel-house.

you really ought to go to bed, jimbo

you're embarrassing the other sons of the confederacy, and i ain't a-whistling dixie

[Tahuyaman]

No $#@!, he wasn't alive, considering he endorsed Trump a couple of weeks ago. Are you and Mac hung up on the word "was"? I used it because Duke isn't a politician anymore.

just analyzing your dumb comment. Nothing more complicated.

[Mac-7]

no it wasn't- it was more concerned with tariffs and building a railroad than slavery

no party was associated with the abolitionist movement in 1860

keep swinging


The republican party opposed slavery

if you dont know that you dont know anything

[Safety]

Duke has absolutely nothing to do with lincoln or donald trump today

i dont know if the racist congressional black caucus uses duke as a boogyman to scare you or if you use him as a boogyman the scare gullible white liberals but he does not scare me

LoL, he finally figured out what I said and is now angry. Better late than never, :rofl:

[Safety]

just analyzing your dumb comment. Nothing more complicated.

I'll use pictures next time.

[del]

The republican party opposed slavery

if you dont know that you dont know anything

they opposed the expansion of slavery into new territories, period.

and if you think it was for altruistic reasons, i've got a bridge for you.

[Mac-7]

LoL, he finally figured out what I said and is now angry. Better late than never, :rofl:

Not so

You have no idea what you are saying and neither do I

[Mac-7]

they opposed the expansion of slavery into new territories, period.

and if you think it was for altruistic reasons, i've got a bridge for you.

Thats wrong.

the republican party opposed slavey period.

[Tahuyaman]

Not so

You have no idea what you are saying and neither do I


He's a troll. just dismiss him.

[Safety]

Not so

You have no idea what you are saying and neither do I

That only works when it's true, just because it took you a minute to see the joke's on you, doesn't count.

[Mac-7]

That only works when it's true, just because it took you a minute to see the joke's on you, doesn't count.

The joke exists only in the liberal fantasy world you live in

[Safety]

He's a troll. just dismiss him.

I think if you repeat it enough times....

Nope, still won't come true.

[Peter1469]

According to the premise you established, why else would they vote for Democrats? Some minority members do vote for the guy (or woman) who promises them stuff - so do those who own and operate certain corporations...and so do those bigoted individuals who seek to keep racial minorities, women, gay people, etc., "in their place" - which brings us back to many Republicans.

You misstate my postion. Why?

[Safety]

The joke exists only in the liberal fantasy world you live in

You're right, none of this is real....

[The Xl]

The republican party gets the white racists. The democrat party gets the minority racists. It's been this way for a while.

[MisterVeritis]

lincoln never opposed slavery

he opposed the dissolution of the union
Quandary. What to believe?

"Abraham Lincoln and Slaveryhttp://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/lincoln-slavery.jpg
Featured BookMichael Burlingame, Abraham Lincoln: A Life
(Johns Hopkins Press, 2008)
The Morality and Legality of Slavery (http://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/abraham-lincoln-in-depth/abraham-lincoln-and-slavery/#mor)
Opposing the Extension of Slavery (http://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/abraham-lincoln-in-depth/abraham-lincoln-and-slavery/#opp)


“In politics Mr Lincoln told the truth when he said he had ‘always hated slavery as much as any Abolitionist’ but I do not know that he deserved a great deal of credit for that for his hatred of oppression & wrong in all its forms was constitutional – he could not help it,” wrote Attorney Samuel C. Parks, a longtime friend of Abraham Lincoln.1 Contemporary Robert H. Browne recalled Abraham Lincoln telling him in 1854: “The slavery question often bothered me as far back as 1836-40. I was troubled and grieved over it; but the after the annexation of Texas I gave it up, believing as I now do, that God will settle it, and settle it right, and that he will, in some inscrutable way, restrict the spread of so great an evil; but for the present it is our duty to wait.”2
Browne came to know Mr. Lincoln as a teenage assistant in the Bloomington law office of David Davis and Asahel Gridley. “One evening as I sat and talked with him in the office, in order to answer his question as to what was the groundwork on my belief on slavery, I told him what I knew and has seen of it in the mild slaveholding city of St. Louis, and what my father knew about it for several years.” Browne recalled that he “talked an hour, with frequent questions interspersed by Mr. Lincoln, who was deeply interested in every fact and feature of this slavery business in the city of St. Louis, as we saw and understood it for so many years. When I had finished, he was in deep and profound study, and I thought perhaps he had fallen asleep. I said, in the usual way, not louder than ordinary conversation, ‘Mr. Lincoln, do you wonder that my father and myself were Abolitionists, or do you doubt our sincerity?’ This disclosed that he had not been asleep, but in deep thought. He sat firm, with not so much as a muscle of his face relaxed, as he had done through much of my recital. His face and its firm, drawn expression was like one in pain. He made a motion of some kind with his arm or head, and broke the strain, which, I remember, relieved me very much. He drew out a sighing ‘No. I saw it all myself when I was only a little older than you are now, and the horrid pictures are in my mind yet. I feel drawn toward you because you have seen and know the truth of such sorrow. No wonder that your father told Judge [Stephen A.] Douglas he had nothing but contempt for party platforms or technicalities that held and bound a free man in a free State, directly or remotely, to sustain a system of such unqualified cruelties and horrors….'”3
The Morality and Legality of Slavery
Lincoln often said that he had believed slavery was wrong for as long as he could remember. In a speech in Chicago on July 10, 1858 Lincoln said he of slavery: “I have always hated it, but I have always been quiet about it until this new era of the introduction of the Nebraska Bill began.”4 Lincoln scholar Harry V. Jaffa wrote: “For Lincoln…the entire antebellum debate came down to the question of whether the Negro was or was not a human being. If he was a human being, then he was included in the proposition that all men are created equal. If he was included in that proposition then it was a law of nature antecedent to the Constitution that he ought to be free and that civil society has as its originating purpose the security of his freedom and of the fruits of his labor under law.”

[Mac-7]

The democrat party gets the minority racists.

And the guilt ridden liberal white apologists

[OGIS]

It still stings after all these years. I wonder when they will eventually rise again?

Probably watching that black tranny porn that gets major, major views in the South. It appears that lots of southern white guys dig seeing a black chick with a dick plowing a white guy. Probably residual guilt over the cotton days.

[Mac-7]

Probably watching that black tranny porn that gets major, major views in the South. It appears that lots of southern white guys dig seeing a black chick with a dick plowing a white guy. Probably residual guilt over the cotton days.

Thats sick

You are even more twisted than average liberals.

[Chris]

lincoln never opposed slavery

he opposed the dissolution of the union


the republican party opposed the expansion of slavery; it didn't support abolition

lincoln by his own words appears not to have given a rat's ass about slavery either way.


no it wasn't- it was more concerned with tariffs and building a railroad than slavery

no party was associated with the abolitionist movement in 1860

keep swinging


they opposed the expansion of slavery into new territories, period.

and if you think it was for altruistic reasons, i've got a bridge for you.


Have to agree with del. The Civil War was not fought over slavery.

[OGIS]

I'll use pictures next time.

Use crayon so he will relate.

[del]

Quandary. What to believe?

"Abraham Lincoln and Slavery

http://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/lincoln-slavery.jpg
Featured Book

Michael Burlingame, Abraham Lincoln: A Life
(Johns Hopkins Press, 2008)
The Morality and Legality of Slavery (http://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/abraham-lincoln-in-depth/abraham-lincoln-and-slavery/#mor)
Opposing the Extension of Slavery (http://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/abraham-lincoln-in-depth/abraham-lincoln-and-slavery/#opp)


“In politics Mr Lincoln told the truth when he said he had ‘always hated slavery as much as any Abolitionist’ but I do not know that he deserved a great deal of credit for that for his hatred of oppression & wrong in all its forms was constitutional – he could not help it,” wrote Attorney Samuel C. Parks, a longtime friend of Abraham Lincoln.1 Contemporary Robert H. Browne recalled Abraham Lincoln telling him in 1854: “The slavery question often bothered me as far back as 1836-40. I was troubled and grieved over it; but the after the annexation of Texas I gave it up, believing as I now do, that God will settle it, and settle it right, and that he will, in some inscrutable way, restrict the spread of so great an evil; but for the present it is our duty to wait.”2
Browne came to know Mr. Lincoln as a teenage assistant in the Bloomington law office of David Davis and Asahel Gridley. “One evening as I sat and talked with him in the office, in order to answer his question as to what was the groundwork on my belief on slavery, I told him what I knew and has seen of it in the mild slaveholding city of St. Louis, and what my father knew about it for several years.” Browne recalled that he “talked an hour, with frequent questions interspersed by Mr. Lincoln, who was deeply interested in every fact and feature of this slavery business in the city of St. Louis, as we saw and understood it for so many years. When I had finished, he was in deep and profound study, and I thought perhaps he had fallen asleep. I said, in the usual way, not louder than ordinary conversation, ‘Mr. Lincoln, do you wonder that my father and myself were Abolitionists, or do you doubt our sincerity?’ This disclosed that he had not been asleep, but in deep thought. He sat firm, with not so much as a muscle of his face relaxed, as he had done through much of my recital. His face and its firm, drawn expression was like one in pain. He made a motion of some kind with his arm or head, and broke the strain, which, I remember, relieved me very much. He drew out a sighing ‘No. I saw it all myself when I was only a little older than you are now, and the horrid pictures are in my mind yet. I feel drawn toward you because you have seen and know the truth of such sorrow. No wonder that your father told Judge [Stephen A.] Douglas he had nothing but contempt for party platforms or technicalities that held and bound a free man in a free State, directly or remotely, to sustain a system of such unqualified cruelties and horrors….'”3
The Morality and Legality of Slavery
Lincoln often said that he had believed slavery was wrong for as long as he could remember. In a speech in Chicago on July 10, 1858 Lincoln said he of slavery: “I have always hated it, but I have always been quiet about it until this new era of the introduction of the Nebraska Bill began.”4 Lincoln scholar Harry V. Jaffa wrote: “For Lincoln…the entire antebellum debate came down to the question of whether the Negro was or was not a human being. If he was a human being, then he was included in the proposition that all men are created equal. If he was included in that proposition then it was a law of nature antecedent to the Constitution that he ought to be free and that civil society has as its originating purpose the security of his freedom and of the fruits of his labor under law.”


i'd believe lincoln

“I would save the Union. … If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it. … What I do about Slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save this Union.”-lincoln's letter to horace greeley, august 22, 1862

*shrug

[Tahuyaman]

I think if you repeat it enough times....

Nope, still won't come true.

if you had even a shred of credibility, you'd admit that you are just a troll. I know it and you know it, so that all the really matters.

[OGIS]

i'd believe lincoln

“I would save the Union. … If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it. … What I do about Slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save this Union.”-lincoln's letter to horace greeley, august 22, 1862

*shrug

Lol, and (unlike most of the Lincoln and Founding Father quotes that emanate from the Right) this one is legit. Yeah, I'll believe Lincoln, too.

But I'm sure that MisterVeritas will be able and willing to tell us what Lincoln MEANT to say.

[OGIS]

I think if you repeat it enough times....

Nope, still won't come true.

He has to click the heels of the Ruby Slippers together when he says it.

[decedent]

Funny how it was a republican that abolished slavery and democrats that have tried their best to keep blacks in the bondage of poverty ever since.

Yep, and Republicans today support affirmative action, fair voting, and claim that black lives matter. I'm sure that the Democrats wanted the Confederate flag to stay up last year.

It's opposite day... infinity... plus one... no take backs.

[OGIS]

Thats sick

You are even more twisted than average liberals.

http://maisonbisson.com/files/2014/07/gay-state-searches-by-state-us-map.png

I'm not in the habit of saving this stuff as it isn't important to me, so I can't find the map that showed the TG views. But it is similar, except higher in the southern states. Texass is YUUUGE into TG.

[Safety]

Have to agree with del. The Civil War was not fought over slavery.

Yea, he is correct the North didn't go to war to end slavery, the South went to war to keep it.

[Mac-7]

http://maisonbisson.com/files/2014/07/gay-state-searches-by-state-us-map.png

I'm not in the habit of saving this stuff as it isn't important to me, so I can't find the map that showed the TG views. But it is similar, except higher in the southern states. Texass is YUUUGE into TG.

What is tg and what do you think your picture proves?

[Mac-7]

Lol, and (unlike most of the Lincoln and Founding Father quotes that emanate from the Right) this one is legit. Yeah, I'll believe Lincoln, too.

But I'm sure that MisterVeritas will be able and willing to tell us what Lincoln MEANT to say.

And to you this proves that lincoln supported slavery?

it certainly does not prove that.

it only means that his highest priority was saving the union.

[del]

And to you this proves that lincoln supported slavery?

it certainly does not prove that.

it only means that his highest priority was saving the union.


no one said lincoln supported slavery, sparky

untwist your panties

[Safety]

if you had even a shred of credibility, you'd admit that you are just a troll. I know it and you know it, so that all the really matters.

That's pretty funny coming from a guy that responds with...."liberals.....", or "trolling".

[Mac-7]

no one said lincoln supported slavery, sparky

untwist your panties

I said lincoln was against slavery and you have been trying to disprove that.

which you cant do no matter how much twisted thinking you apply

[Standing Wolf]

You misstate my postion. Why?

You wrote:


Democrats practice the soft bigotry of low expectations.

And only to get votes. Then they toss minorities to the side.

You state that Democrats pander to "minorities", and you further imply that they do it because it works.

How have I misstated your position?

[MisterVeritis]

i'd believe lincoln

“I would save the Union. … If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it. … What I do about Slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save this Union.”-lincoln's letter to horace greeley, august 22, 1862

*shrug
This tells me you are confused. *shrug.

You claimed that Lincoln never opposed slavery. I have proven that your statement is wrong. Then you foolishly offer a quote that does not disprove my evidence. In fact, your statement shows that saving the union was more important to Lincoln than resolving the slavery issue.

[Tahuyaman]

Once people forgure out that they are clueless, they try to re-write history.

[MisterVeritis]

Lol, and (unlike most of the Lincoln and Founding Father quotes that emanate from the Right) this one is legit. Yeah, I'll believe Lincoln, too.

But I'm sure that MisterVeritas will be able and willing to tell us what Lincoln MEANT to say.
You are as goofy as del.

The quote shows that Lincoln, roughly a year into a civil war valued preserving the union over resolving the slavery problem. Like del, your thinking is soft, shallow, and superficial.

[Polecat]

That's sort of a tired old line...Lincoln wouldn't recognize the party today.

Tired? Do you believe JFK would recognize the democrats? The republican party represents itself as dose the democrat party. Neither represent voters. In fact I believe voting is nothing more than a placebo. Our next president (if we get that far) was already selected years ago.

[del]

Once people forgure out that they are clueless, they try to re-write history.

how's that working out for you?

[Cigar]

Let revisit this Thread on November 9th ... well those of you will still be around that day. :laugh:

[del]

This tells me you are confused. *shrug.

You claimed that Lincoln never opposed slavery. I have proven that your statement is wrong. Then you foolishly offer a quote that does not disprove my evidence. In fact, your statement shows that saving the union was more important to Lincoln than resolving the slavery issue.

that's nice, honey.

now go outside and play; the fresh air will do you good

[Cigar]

that's nice, honey.

now go outside and play; the fresh air will do you good


But Mommy, it's cold (48) and damp and rainy out today. :grin:

[donttread]

Republicans would be screwed without racist voters

The Republican Party can be understood, broadly, as a coalition of people who dislike food stamps because they think the government is too big and discourages people from working, plus people who dislike food stamps because they think black people get them.

For years, Republicans have bristled at these sorts of descriptions, especially because Democrats tend to leave out the first part, painting the party as purely racist. But this election has forced Republicans to confront reality: A healthy chunk of Republican voters don't have a broad objection to big government, but an objection to big government for the wrong people.

So, what can nonracist Republicans do about this? It's a hard question.

http://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-racist-voters-donald-trump-2016-3?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

Think hard, fiscal conservatives; you are known by the company you keep.

So then by your own definition the democrats would be screwed without people voting themselves more free benefits?

[Mac-7]

Let revisit this Thread on November 9th ... well those of you will still be around that day. :laugh:

There are so many liberals who depend on government for their next meal that it will be no surprise if Hillary gets elected

its sad but true

[Peter1469]

That is the democrat's goal. Get enough people dependent on them and they have no option but to vote (D).

[Safety]

Well, the GOP doesn't help matters by placating to a part of the base that disparages minorities every chance they get.

[MisterVeritis]

Well, the GOP doesn't help matters by placating to a part of the base that disparages minorities every chance they get.
Do you have some examples?

[Safety]

Do you have some examples?

If you need evidence of people who self-identify as conservative saying derogatory or prejudicial comments towards minorities, especially on the Internet, then I think I'd rather waste my time putting m&m's in alphabetical order.

[MisterVeritis]

If you need evidence of people who self-identify as conservative saying derogatory or prejudicial comments towards minorities, especially on the Internet, then I think I'd rather waste my time putting m&m's in alphabetical order.
In other words....your claim is weak.

[Standing Wolf]

So then by your own definition the democrats would be screwed without people voting themselves more free benefits?

Name a demographic - any demographic, favoring either major Party - that is not self-interested.

Yes, if all of those people for whom the major "draw" of the Democratic Party is that it promises them some financial benefit were to suddenly drop out of the process, the Republicans would win every national election - and the same could be said about those who vote Republican because they believe that doing so benefits them, personally, in some way.

Some people, however, vastly overestimate the number of Democratic voters who are just looking for "free stuff". Though not a registered Democrat, I tend to vote that way, but not because I'm looking for a handout - for myself or anyone else. For me and many tens of millions of others, there are important ideological issues involved...and while I don't go along with every plank on the Democratic platform, every traditionally Liberal position, in general and where it counts the most I have to vote for the individual whom I believe feels and thinks as I do about those issues.

[Hal Jordan]

You wrote:



You state that Democrats pander to "minorities", and you further imply that they do it because it works.

How have I misstated your position?

Well, for one thing, you take it to the extreme that it's the only reason people vote Democrat.