The republican party and racism, will it collaspe the party?

[Kapalika]

No such thing as the "alt left" it's just a made up thing to make right wingers feel better about themselves. At the very least any fringe element in the left isnt nearly as popular as the right.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

No. The Republican party is fine. The Democrats clearly can be considered a party of racists however, givin it's history.

Misleading.

Everything in this video is true. But the most recent fact presented in the video is still 50 years old.

Southern democrats had racist platforms. But those same people who called themselves Democrats then are now members of what party?

If you want take more than 6 minutes to learn some history, this is a good place to start:

Southern Democrats - Wikipedia

 

[bobhikes]

No such thing as the "alt left" it's just a made up thing to make right wingers feel better about themselves. At the very least any fringe element in the left isnt nearly as popular as the right.

Trump said it so it must exist, besides it is as valid as Alt Right. There are some on the left far more extreme to the point of the Alt right extremism.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No such thing as the "alt left" it's just a made up thing to make right wingers feel better about themselves. At the very least any fringe element in the left isnt nearly as popular as the right.

You touch on a valid point here by which people are focusing and getting worked up too much on the fringe elements, and far less attentions on the parties as a whole and yes that includes the Democrats.

When was the last time of recent where a major party figure actually represented the philosophy and mission statements by which respective parties are formed for which BOTH parties ran with canadates that were not regarded as first choices.

 

[Kemosloby]

Except that racists never know they are racists. They always think they're just "realists". So really, they don't know anything.

LOL...Libs have us boxed in huh? I don't think anyone but a lib is going to believe that one.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Misleading.

Everything in this video is true. But the most recent fact presented in the video is still 50 years old.

Southern democrats had racist platforms. But those same people who called themselves Democrats then are now members of what party?

If you want take more than 6 minutes to learn some history, this is a good place to start:

Southern Democrats - Wikipedia

I think Democrats have a public face and a behind the scenes face far out of the public eye. Democrats are still among the most racist people around for which I don't think it has really changed much from it's past history. They have just done a very good job at hiding that into letting people think they are not.

 

[Sanzbir]

Is there a way for the Republican party to come out of this as a valid contender to the Democratic party for future elections or is America going to be a one party system for a while?

Sure there is. The two parties colluded to make the current election commission setup which pretty much ensures that these two parties will be the only viable parties as long as that commission setup is in place. And as long as the DNC keeps trying to double down on pushing candidates no one likes people are going to continue the habit of voting for the other party just to spite the one they hate more.

As long as the third parties remain unviable because of the setup of the commission the two will remain. The two will keep each other live and in control for as long as possible.

 

[HonestJoe]

Nixion was singled out from the party but it did cost them the next election. Trump's base is included in his loss, they are still ravidly supporting him. Trumps base is a major part of the Republican base. It is the swing voters that are being effected.

Costing an election isn’t the same as “collapsing the party” though. I’ve no doubt that if Trump continues in the manner he has been, any half-decent Democratic candidate is likely to beat him at the next election nut a half-decent alternative Rebublican could also win, if not then, certainly in the following election.

The fact remains that the specifics of the current row over the events in Charlottesville aren’t going to be at the forefront of voter’s minds in November 2020, more recent events (and anything more significant to come) will have the limelight. I mean, when was the last time you heard anyone use the phrase “Muslim Ban”?

 

[bobhikes]

I think Democrats have a public face and a behind the scenes face far out of the public eye. Democrats are still among the most racist people around for which I don't think it has really changed much from it's past history. They have just done a very good job at hiding that into letting people think they are not.

At the High levels I believe you are right but the common people in the Democratic camp are not. The common people have been sold the we are one theme a racist would never by into that. The republican claim to reduce government spending plays into the common racist beliefs.

 

[bobhikes]

Costing an election isn’t the same as “collapsing the party” though. I’ve no doubt that if Trump continues in the manner he has been, any half-decent Democratic candidate is likely to beat him at the next election nut a half-decent alternative Rebublican could also win, if not then, certainly in the following election.

The fact remains that the specifics of the current row over the events in Charlottesville aren’t going to be at the forefront of voter’s minds in November 2020, more recent events (and anything more significant to come) will have the limelight. I mean, when was the last time you heard anyone use the phrase “Muslim Ban”?

Its the labels that he is getting for the Republican Party that will stick in peoples minds or easily be reminded. Trump said this, did this and the Republicans supported him the republicans refused to speak negative about him. As to the muslim ban it is still in the courts and being shot down, it still doesn't exist why would it be used.

 

[bobhikes]

Sure there is. The two parties colluded to make the current election commission setup which pretty much ensures that these two parties will be the only viable parties as long as that commission setup is in place. And as long as the DNC keeps trying to double down on pushing candidates no one likes people are going to continue the habit of voting for the other party just to spite the one they hate more.

As long as the third parties remain unviable because of the setup of the commission the two will remain. The two will keep each other live and in control for as long as possible.

Thats saying that the Republicans can get swing voters back. Neither party can win without there core and the majority of swing voters. The Republicans kept there core this year and got a few swing voters. The bulk of the swing voters went third party. The Democrats lost some of there core and got no swing voters yet still won the popular vote, that doesn't ring well for the Republicans.

 

[Augustus]

Is there a way for the Republican party to come out of this as a valid contender to the Democratic party for future elections or is America going to be a one party system for a while?

If you are confident in this, you can currently get odds of 9/10 on the Dems winning the next Presidential election (5/4 on the Republicans). Can almost double your money.

If the Republicans really are dead in the water, there would be no reason not to pile money on this.

The bookies tend not to get things too wrong though...

 

[Sanzbir]

Thats saying that the Republicans can get swing voters back. Neither party can win without there core and the majority of swing voters. The Republicans kept there core this year and got a few swing voters. The bulk of the swing voters went third party. The Democrats lost some of there core and got no swing voters yet still won the popular vote, that doesn't ring well for the Republicans.

And the popular vote doesn't mean anything because of how the system that was set up. And the Democrats lost a ton of swing states, which are far more important in the system than swing voters. They somehow lost Wisconsin, which while officially classed as a swing state, voted Democratic on presedential choice for nearly thirty years. Even during a year where the Republican VP candidate was a Wisconsin native. And the DNC somehow bungled the last election so poorly that a thirty-year Democrat-voting loyal state flipped to the Republican Party!!

Both parties are screwing up horrendously, but they've organized the system in a way where they cannot die or loose power. It just oscillates between Red and Blue. The whole thing is set up so that Green and Yellow can't even be a possibility.

 

[bobhikes]

If you are confident in this, you can currently get odds of 9/10 on the Dems winning the next Presidential election (5/4 on the Republicans). Can almost double your money.

If the Republicans really are dead in the water, there would be no reason not to pile money on this.

The bookies tend not to get things too wrong though...

Odds are made up by how people gamble not by accuracy. The bookies want profits off the bets and attempt to get a 50/50 spilt on betting. So what that is saying is that the betting base of each party is sure there party is going to win. The non-base is predicting a democratic win.

Unfortunately, I gave up Gambling other then the Stock Market.

 

[metis]

But everybody who voted for Trump and is not a racist knows better.

Apparently they don't know much of anything about Trump's past or present. Maybe look some of his history up.

 

[Sanzbir]

The bookies tend not to get things too wrong though...

Did you pay attention to the bookie rates for the last election?? I don't like the results of the election, but it pretty much destroyed the idea that polls or gambling sites, especially early on in the election, can give you any meaningful idea on what will happen!! Three years before the election you'd be better suited to just use a dart board to decide who will win.

 

[Kemosloby]

Apparently they don't know much of anything about Trump's past or present. Maybe look some of his history up.

Must have had the bourgeoisie blues. If you notice in the song by Leadbelly, the great black blues musician and songwriter, The door swung both ways. Whether Trump was a little bourgeoisie in the past I don't see it today.

 

[Augustus]

Odds are made up by how people gamble not by accuracy. The bookies want profits off the bets and attempt to get a 50/50 spilt on betting. So what that is saying is that the betting base of each party is sure there party is going to win. The non-base is predicting a democratic win.

There's absolutely no market at the moment, so the odds are set by the bookies rather than reacting to market pressure. 3 years out, there's a whole lot of water to pass under the bridge though, which is why the odds are not far off a toss up.

Bookies are as non-base as you can get.

Unfortunately, I gave up Gambling other then the Stock Market.

So you are pretty much certain that the 'pubs are done for, yet consider the stock market to be more likely to give you a 90c profit on $1 over 3 years?

For you not to take that bet, you'd have to consider the 'pubs have a realistic chance of winning or be wildly irrational.

 

[metis]

Whether Trump was a little bourgeoisie in the past I don't see it today.

Because you're obviously not looking nor listening.

BTW, does your brand of Christianity allow for racism, anti-Semitism, calling people names, making fun of people's handicaps, adultery and affairs, lewd conduct, bragging about your daughter's breast size, refusing to pay people what you owe them, violating federal laws, running a money scam at a university, etc.?

 

[Augustus]

Did you pay attention to the bookie rates for the last election?? I don't like the results of the election, but it pretty much destroyed the idea that polls or gambling sites, especially early on in the election, can give you any meaningful idea on what will happen!! Three years before the election you'd be better suited to just use a dart board to decide who will win.

The bookies were far more accurate than many of the 'expert' political science predictions who gave Hillary as much as 98% chance of victory.

Betting markets saw it as a pretty close race. They were correct.

To make it clear, I'm not saying Trump will win, I'm saying there is a realistic possibility that whoever the Republican candidate is will win.