Evangelicals and Politics

[Leftfield 3,307]

49 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

The party that led the rebranding of so many things that were associated with racism/slavery, yet clings to the foundation of it through the ultimate legacy. Yes, the Democratic Party 

To be clear, you're saying the name is the ultimate legacy? And that without changing it they're still unwittingly owning it?

[AuCivilEng1 11,809]

48 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

The Dems have waaaay more minorities than the  the current gop.  Not even close. The gop is the home of the kkk for goodness sakes. Theres a million stats on it. 

Youre living in la la land.

They’re living in 1952. Which kind of explains why they all still act like they’re living in 1952. 

The Republican Party likes to pretend that all the southern racist didn’t flock to their side. They just happen to have started winning the Deep South all of a sudden. But it doesn’t help their cause when the KKK and Neo Nazi’s endorse their candidates 😂

[homersapien 12,172]

I'll give you persistence.  

Where did all those racist Democrats go???  

Edited July 23 by homersapien

[AuCivilEng1 11,809]

Just now, homersapien said:

I'll give you persistence.  

Where did all those racist Democrats go???  

They all moved to California and New York where they vote Democrat. Duh! All the progressive anti racisits moved to Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi😂

[arein0 1,101]

22 minutes ago, AuCivilEng1 said:

They all moved to California and New York where they vote Democrat. Duh! All the progressive anti racisits moved to Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi😂

Also known as the Great Migration that we all learned about in US History

[JMWATS 253]

4 hours ago, Leftfield said:

Did it say in the article where they supported a candidate or Party? All I saw was they were encouraging people to vote. 

if you think that an effort by democratic activists to organize african americans and get them to the polls so they may vote is not intended to benefit democratic candidates you are dumber than a fence post and there is no help for you.  

 

Edited July 23 by JMWATS

[Leftfield 3,307]

10 minutes ago, JMWATS said:

if you think that an effort by democratic activists to organize african americans and get them to the polls so they may vote is not intended to benefit democratic candidates you are dumber than a fence post and there is no help for you.  

Did I imply otherwise?

Do you think Republican measures to get people to the polls are intended to be even-handed?

[homersapien 12,172]

9 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Did I imply otherwise?

Do you think Republican measures to get people to the polls are intended to be even-handed?

What measures to "get people to the polls"?  

[JMWATS 253]

7 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Did I imply otherwise?

Do you think Republican measures to get people to the polls are intended to be even-handed?

I certainly think that Republican voter turnout measures are intended to increase Republican voting.  In fact, the so called "Christian Nationalist" movement is the same or similar to politically active present day African American churches.      

[autigeremt 7,131]

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

To be clear, you're saying the name is the ultimate legacy? And that without changing it they're still unwittingly owning it?

Just like all the other names that were (and should've been) erased. Bragg, Gordon, Benning, etc. to name just a few. Democrats, and their activists (including some here) called for these things to take place. Yet.....that bastion of slavery and racism still exists as a reminder that they are a bunch of hypocrites. Association (as used on this platform a TON) is the ultimate bridge. 

[Leftfield 3,307]

41 minutes ago, JMWATS said:

I certainly think that Republican voter turnout measures are intended to increase Republican voting.  In fact, the so called "Christian Nationalist" movement is the same or similar to politically active present day African American churches.      

So why is this organization different? 

[Leftfield 3,307]

57 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

Just like all the other names that were (and should've been) erased. Bragg, Gordon, Benning, etc. to name just a few. Democrats, and their activists (including some here) called for these things to take place. Yet.....that bastion of slavery and racism still exists as a reminder that they are a bunch of hypocrites. Association (as used on this platform a TON) is the ultimate bridge. 

To a certain extent I can understand what you're saying, but you're talking about individuals and not an organization. Not every person in that organization was racist, just as not every current Republican is racist.

If the problem with racists being a large percentage of the Democratic Party were still an issue, I could understand it, but it's obvious it's not. Desperate Republicans are attempting to define the modern Democratic Party as such, but it's ridiculous. It's like saying "your great grandparents were racists, so you are, too."

Likewise, the Party of Lincoln, or even Reagan, doesn't exist anymore. Both Parties seem content to redefine, rather than rename, themselves, which I believe is more effective. I obviously don't like what's happened to the Republican Party, but, for better or worse, they own the name now and will have to deal with the fallout in the future.

Edited July 23 by Leftfield

[homersapien 12,172]

54 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

Just like all the other names that were (and should've been) erased. Bragg, Gordon, Benning, etc. to name just a few. Democrats, and their activists (including some here) called for these things to take place. Yet.....that bastion of slavery and racism still exists as a reminder that they are a bunch of hypocrites. Association (as used on this platform a TON) is the ulmtimate bridge. 

I agree that in a perfect world the name of the party would have been changed - even though you have to admit it's a good name for a political party.

I disagree that makes Democrats "hypocrites".    The transformation is now complete.  And I seriously doubt that many people are even aware of the history.

And Republicans - aka "GOP" - haven't changed their name and they have completely departed from what Republicans used to stand for, even just a couple of decades ago.

Edited July 23 by homersapien

[Leftfield 3,307]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I disagree that makes Democrats "hypocrites".  

Forgot to address that. I don't understand that characterization at all.

[homersapien 12,172]

Just now, Leftfield said:

Forgot to address that. I don't understand that characterization at all.

It attaches more significance on the name than the actual history.

[autigeremt 7,131]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

It attaches more significance on the name than the actual history.

I’m sorry but not that long ago there was a Byrd in the party that was a grand dragon/wizzard/loon in the klan. 

[homersapien 12,172]

50 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

I’m sorry but not that long ago there was a Byrd in the party that was a grand dragon/wizzard/loon in the klan. 

See my reference to "history".

Using examples that are long obsolete is not a rational chain of logic when discussing politics.

Edited July 23 by homersapien

[Leftfield 3,307]

30 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

I’m sorry but not that long ago there was a Byrd in the party that was a grand dragon/wizzard/loon in the klan. 

You neglect to mention that Byrd renounced that part of his life, and condemned racism and segregation.

People change. So do Parties.

[autigeremt 7,131]

2 hours ago, Leftfield said:

You neglect to mention that Byrd renounced that part of his life, and condemned racism and segregation.

People change. So do Parties.

I’m sorry but if you’re going to “whitewash” America you need to do it all. Defend it all you want, but the party is directly tied to the worst events in our history. 

[autigeremt 7,131]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

See my reference to "history".

Using examples that are long obsolete is not a rational chain of logic when discussing politics.

Logic says you set the standard by setting the mark. I’m not changing my mind on this one. 

[Leftfield 3,307]

26 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

I’m sorry but if you’re going to “whitewash” America you need to do it all. Defend it all you want, but the party is directly tied to the worst events in our history. 

Who's whitewashing? I don't think anyone in the Party denies it. They just rightly point out it's no longer the case. You are in the vast majority that don't see it that way.

[autigeremt 7,131]

8 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Who's whitewashing? I don't think anyone in the Party denies it. They just rightly point out it's no longer the case. You are in the vast majority that don't see it that way.

It’s obvious that there’s a lack of seriousness about the historical significance of slavery, Jim Crow and racism within the history of the Democratic Party. 

[homersapien 12,172]

45 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

I’m sorry but if you’re going to “whitewash” America you need to do it all. Defend it all you want, but the party is directly tied to the worst events in our history. 

Good grief man.  Focus on the present and the future.

And those Democrats are the modern day Republicans. 

Why do you deny actual history? This line of thinking is a pathetic attempt to deny it. Read up.

Do you need references???

Edited July 24 by homersapien

[homersapien 12,172]

12 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

It’s obvious that there’s a lack of seriousness about the historical significance of slavery, Jim Crow and racism within the history of the Democratic Party. 

By whom ? You?

Everyone understands that history.  It's well-documented.  

It's not relevant to present day politics.  Otherwise, black people wouldn't be be a major pillar of the Democratic Party. Right?

You are embarrassing yourself with this line of argument.

 

Edited July 24 by homersapien

[Leftfield 3,307]

1 hour ago, autigeremt said:

It’s obvious that there’s a lack of seriousness about the historical significance of slavery, Jim Crow and racism within the history of the Democratic Party. 

Man, you're weird. This is just a bizarre way of thinking.

Should everyone whose ancestors owned slaves change their last name?