Who do you think is primarily to blame for the Trump administration?

Who do you think is primarily to blame for the Trump administration?

  • Total voters
    37
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
don't forget to mention that you oppose civil rights because you'd just "hate 'em more now".
Click to expand...
New Left liked to make up quotes rather than easily use the sites linkable quote function.

This way the casual reader must rely on him rather than simply read for themselves.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
New Left liked to make up quotes
Click to expand...
i asked you point blank if you thought it was a good idea for the federal government to end racist practices that states were refusing to end on their own and you said "i don't think it's a good idea" and "i hate em more now", referring to "purples" (a known codeword racists use to refer to black people).

this is factually indisputable, since it is what you said.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
i asked you point blank if you thought it was a good idea for the federal government to end racist practices that states were refusing to end on their own and you said "i don't think it's a good idea" and "i hate em more now", referring to "purples" (a known codeword racists use to refer to black people).

this is factually indisputable, since it is what you said.
Click to expand...
My avi is purple. If you put on a cape you'd be super liar.

The only indisputable fact is that you fail to quote, substituting you own version..............I keep it on copy paste for you:
UncleBuck said:
what say you? do you agree that it was a good idea for the federal government to mandate that private business owners whose businesses were 'open to the public' serve the entire public?
Click to expand...
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
the nazis were further right than the furthest right party in germany at the time.

spare us the neo-nazi propaganda you dumb racist.
Click to expand...
Stalin, Mao, Chavez and Che, all righties as well huh. They certainly were nationalists so lets not cherry pick.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Remember that time @UncleBuck went around calling everyone a snowflake then decided that was racist for everyone else? That was hilarious.

If you were a turtle, and put on a cape; you would be super turtle. Quite innocent, but those on the New Left say its a super nefarious Illuminati Flat earth conspiracy at racism.

Then they post actual racist terms LOLZ too fucking dumb the truth is stranger than fiction.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
DiogenesTheWiser said:
By the 1950s and 1960s, the liberal tendencies of the Democratic Party began to take hold over the nation--right around the same time that African Americans began voting Democratic where they could vote. I could go on and on, but I can tell that you're not very well read, and that you're intentions on political history lie more with the present than understanding that political past for what it really was.
Click to expand...
So the black vote actually went Democrat in the 30s. So in keeping spirit whit your codebook do you contend that you read people well therefore you're well read?
 
DiogenesTheWiser

DiogenesTheWiser

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
If you would follow this discussion from the beginning, the "gotcha" part of history is that the parties somehow switched sides. The "gotcha" part is substantiated by nothing but Strom Thurmond when viewing the legislation. Then lets move on to the Executive votes which are even less evidential.

Now into the depths of the individual voters mind with "dog whistles" and so this is quickly becoming a paranormal discussion, its that silly.

Speaking of Dog Whistles that was about the time the New Left infiltrated the Democrats and everyone knows it. Your views on the supremacy clause kind of put you there as well, your supporting the interpretation of a clause that gives federal government unlimited power in a document intended to limit federal government and all.

So I'm a pro pot, pro choice southerner. The argument is that I don't realize where my interest lie, as is the same argument I hear time and time again against Black Republicans today bandied about with "uncle toms" and "coons". It's just business as usual but your civility in discussion is appreciated.
Click to expand...
Realignment is as much about voters switching parties, and for that, we have the data. By the 1952, and 1956 elections, far more southern whites were voting for Republican candidates. Reason was Ike (wanted to ignore civil rights), and Barry Goldwater believed that states' rights was sacrosanct. Richard Nixon promised to lock them up, and Reagan said "government is THE problem." All coded words that said to voters "hey, I'm a white supremacist like you, vote for me and blacks will suffer." That didn't always happen because these coded tactics were just meant to put people into office, plying their racial fears.

You can put me in any camp you want to--especially if that makes you feel better. The U.S. Constitution creates and sustains the federal government. Read it. There was no federal government before its creation.

Here's a primary source: http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa45.htm

Oh, what's the use? you don't read anything but forums and Glenn Beck or Rush or Fox. There's nothing I can say to point out the errors of your reasoning. Your mind is made up. You play gotcha history and that's your prerogative.
 
DiogenesTheWiser

DiogenesTheWiser

Well-Known Member
After reading the other two pages of this thread, I see that TwoNuts is somebody who likes to conflate all totalitarianisms together. They're all Leftists. Yeah, right.

So we're dealing with somebody who hasn't even had ninth grade civics class. Or if they have, then they didn't study very much. Political science and history aren't rocket science.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
DiogenesTheWiser said:
Realignment is as much about voters switching parties, and for that, we have the data. By the 1952, and 1956 elections, far more southern whites were voting for Republican candidates. Reason was Ike (wanted to ignore civil rights), and Barry Goldwater believed that states' rights was sacrosanct. Richard Nixon promised to lock them up, and Reagan said "government is THE problem." All coded words that said to voters "hey, I'm a white supremacist like you, vote for me and blacks will suffer." That didn't always happen because these coded tactics were just meant to put people into office, plying their racial fears.

You can put me in any camp you want to--especially if that makes you feel better. The U.S. Constitution creates and sustains the federal government. Read it. There was no federal government before its creation.

Here's a primary source: http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa45.htm

Oh, what's the use? you don't read anything but forums and Glenn Beck or Rush or Fox. There's nothing I can say to point out the errors of your reasoning. Your mind is made up. You play gotcha history and that's your prerogative.
Click to expand...
Where is your data that shows what code words mean? Where is your data that shows who recognizes and digests code words?
You are ghost hunting for the most part on this issue.

Constitutional semantics.

"The State governments will have the advantage of the Federal government, whether we compare them in respect to the immediate dependence of the one on the other; to the weight of personal influence which each side will possess; to the powers respectively vested in them; to the predilection and probable support of the people; to the disposition and faculty of resisting and frustrating the measures of each other."

You remember back when Hillary was a "Goldwater Girl"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top