So ... ethnic groups vote monolithically? The Dems already got bit in 2016, making that assumption - Trump was the first R Presidential candidate in decades (IIRC) to get more than 10% of "the black vote". People are not ****sheep**** , are not herd animals, are more complex.
So ... ethnic groups vote monolithically? The Dems already got bit in 2016, making that assumption - Trump was the first R Presidential candidate in decades (IIRC) to get more than 10% of "the black vote". People are not ****sheep**** , are not herd animals, are more complex.98% of black women in Alabama, one of the most heavily Republican states in America, voted for the Democrat in the Senate race... so much so that the margin of error suggests an inability to find a single voter in that demographic who voted Republican. Obama won somewhere around 96% of the black vote. Candidates in majority-minority districts routinely win with over 90% of the vote, even if challenged.
So ... ethnic groups vote monolithically? The Dems already got bit in 2016, making that assumption - Trump was the first R Presidential candidate in decades (IIRC) to get more than 10% of "the black vote". People are not ****sheep**** , are not herd animals, are more complex.
So ... ethnic groups vote monolithically? The Dems already got bit in 2016, making that assumption - Trump was the first R Presidential candidate in decades (IIRC) to get more than 10% of "the black vote". People are not ****sheep**** , are not herd animals, are more complex.That's because McCain and Romney were running against a black candidate, and your numbers are wrong. https://time.com/5255909/donald-trump-black-voter-support/
The DEMS succeeded in 2018 and Cruz barely eeked out a win. The demographics have changed in the past 3 years and are continuing to change for two reasons; illegal immigration/asylum and people moving out of higher taxes and cost of living blue states.
The black vote is one thing but the Hispanic vote is quite another. They will decide the vote in the 2020 and future elections; perhaps that is why the reluctance to secure the border. They WILL eventually be the majority in the U.S. Castro is the winning VP if selected. I for one hope not.
The GOP was ascendant from Lincoln to Hoover which gaveThe GOP has conceded a lot of ground from spending to morality, military strength and commerce.
them control of Congress and the Courts for some 70 years.
That has gone away for almost 90 years.
Reality is the GOP is a carcass, needy of internment, which
chooses buffoons such as Trump as leaders.
So ... ethnic groups vote monolithically? The Dems already got bit in 2016, making that assumption - Trump was the first R Presidential candidate in decades (IIRC) to get more than 10% of "the black vote". People are not ****sheep**** , are not herd animals, are more complex.You have the point. The only prayer the pubbies have is to appeal to the common factors among us all who just want to keep more of what we earn, make a decent living, provide for our families, and have reasonably secure homes.
The GOP was ascendant from Lincoln to Hoover which gaveWhat did they want? It wasn't Cruz, more like Kasich or Jebbie. They 'settled' for Trump, figuring they could make deals with him, and then proceeded to not move forward on any of the seminal issues, slow walking until midterms to take the standard beating and have an excuse for not getting anything done.
them control of Congress and the Courts for some 70 years.
That has gone away for almost 90 years.
Reality is the GOP is a carcass, needy of internment, which
chooses buffoons such as Trump as leaders.
The First Black President: Twice as Many Voters Say TRUMP Better for Blacks Than Barack Obama
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/06/the-first-black-president-twice-as-many-voters-say-trump-better-for-blacks-than-barack-obama/ (https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/06/the-first-black-president-twice-as-many-voters-say-trump-better-for-blacks-than-barack-obama/)
‘Not a Single’ Demographic Trend ‘Favors Republicans’ in Elections
So ... ethnic groups vote monolithically? The Dems already got bit in 2016, making that assumption - Trump was the first R Presidential candidate in decades (IIRC) to get more than 10% of "the black vote". People are not ****sheep**** , are not herd animals, are more complex.
The GOP has conceded a lot of ground from spending to morality, military strength and commerce.-----------------------------
However, nature abhors a vacuum and necessity is the mother of invention.
If the rats don't co-opt those issues and the voters motivated by them, then a new party will arise to champion them.
And then the GOP will co-opt those issues from the new party once again, but after they have lost a few elections.
At least that is what my lucky-astrology-mood app tells me
So why then in '18 did the Dems have to 1) spend a boatload of money, 2) run their canidates as moderates, 3) and 'ballot harvest' in CA to win a bunch of thin margin races for a slim majority in the House?The buses that haul around the multidistrict voters broke down?
The buses that haul around the multidistrict voters broke down?
THe question is one of whether the new exodus of Conservatives from Cali has tilted the playing field back in favor of the Dems. Eliminating the Cali conservatives has been an effect of policy there.
Many of those same folks will go to places like Texas where they will be considered liberal by the locals....
Point is they had to go all out to eke out a slim majority on slim margin races.Well, I hope the effects are so profound that it will give those conservatives left the incentive to remain and fight. Not to be unkind, but those selfsame folks who have become accustomed to Cali politics as they are often result in the purpling of serious red districts elsewhere because they are used to so much significantly more liberal policy that is in serious contrast to local politics elsewhere.
Now they've jumped into the fruit loop patch, and do they think the swing voters are going to follow?
Indies generally vote far below the party registered, but their numbers nearly double from gubanatorial to presidential elections.
Right now Dems are tanking 20+ points with Indies, well enough to get smoked in those same districts this time around.
Well, I hope the effects are so profound that it will give those conservatives left the incentive to remain and fight. Not to be unkind, but those selfsame folks who have become accustomed to Cali politics as they are often result in the purpling of serious red districts elsewhere because they are used to so much significantly more liberal policy that is in serious contrast to local politics elsewhere.
Cali worries me. With their 'ballot harvesting' fraud crap, and I agree that conservatives are likely fleeing the state, Cali has enough seats via all their illegals to make it difficult to have a majority in the House.That's what really ticks me off about this crap with the illegals.
That's what really ticks me off about this crap with the illegals.
To count people who aren't citizens in the census, at all, can throw off the number of Representatives in the House, and if even by one seat, I have been deprived of legitimate representation (mine has less weight, being diluted by the shift in representatives) by people who aren't even Americans. That's unconstitutional.
But for Cali, to do so in state, deprives their Citizens of Representation, and sure enough they're taxed.
That's a familiar theme....
Taxation without Representation...
That's what really ticks me off about this crap with the illegals.
To count people who aren't citizens in the census, at all, can throw off the number of Representatives in the House, and if even by one seat, I have been deprived of legitimate representation (mine has less weight, being diluted by the shift in representatives) by people who aren't even Americans. That's unconstitutional.
But for Cali, to do so in state, deprives their Citizens of Representation, and sure enough they're taxed.
That's a familiar theme....
Taxation without Representation...
Unfortunately, I wouldn't call it unconstitutional. Sect 2 of Am 14, specifically uses "person" for representation, and separately uses "citizen" for penalizing states for interfering with voting rights. To me, that makes a clear distinction between "person" and "citizen", and specifies that representatives are NOT based only on citizens. Which sucks, but it's what it says, IMO.I seriously doubt that the Founders would have anticipated that a signatory to the Compact that is the US Constitution would have such contempt for the laws of the land as to willingly and openly accept a large enough population of persons here in violation of our laws as to affect the balance of representation for the rest of us.
I seriously doubt that the Founders would have anticipated that a signatory to the Compact that is the US Constitution would have such contempt for the laws of the land as to willingly and openly accept a large enough population of persons here in violation of our laws as to affect the balance of representation for the rest of us.
With that in mind, how about an Amendment allowing the rest of us to kick a State out?
Jan. 31, 2007
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."
— Joe Biden, describing fellow candidate Barack Obama. The remark was made the same day Biden filed the official paperwork to launch his presidential campaign
The 'Country Club' Party has to break that image, get in the trenches with ordinary folks who get dirty when they work, and can't afford to get snooty, ever, much less to be painted as 'racist', or it is going to lose.
You have the point. The only prayer the pubbies have is to appeal to the common factors among us all who just want to keep more of what we earn, make a decent living, provide for our families, and have reasonably secure homes.
The 'Country Club' Party has to break that image, get in the trenches with ordinary folks who get dirty when they work, and can't afford to get snooty, ever, much less to be painted as 'racist', or it is going to lose.
One has to get more of the black vote, even 5 MORE percentage points will do... and the same thing goes with Hispanics. Just seek their vote. It's the only thing that will really work.
Tell, ask them, "aren't things better now?"
They never do, and yet ...... :laugh:
You have the point. The only prayer the pubbies have is to appeal to the common factors among us all who just want to keep more of what we earn, make a decent living, provide for our families, and have reasonably secure homes.
The 'Country Club' Party has to break that image, get in the trenches with ordinary folks who get dirty when they work, and can't afford to get snooty, ever, much less to be painted as 'racist', or it is going to lose.
That's because demographics is NOT destiny! That's what those obsessed with identity politics want you to believe, but a successful GOP will understand that what voters want from government policy are those things benefits them as individuals - peace, prosperity, jobs, the ability to keep more of what one earns and opportunity to succeed on a level playing field.