Posted on 07/15/2019 7:48:16 PM PDT by GuavaCheesePuff
When exactly did racism become acceptable again?
Anti-white racism has been a motivating force on the Left for a while now, but until recently they tried to hide it. Just a few years ago, you had to parse their language to decode their racism. Our colleges and universities concocted new phrases such a white privilege to express their hatred for people based upon the color of their skin. When challenged, they denied that the term white privilege was used to denigrate whites, but rather was simply a way to refer to social power inequality.
(Excerpt) Read more at markpantano.com ...
What about Hollywood whites, or white people that work in office buildings or Silicon Valley?
_____________________________________________________
It’s easy to be self-loathing and to promote policies that destroy parts of the country that you don’t have to live near.
Forget the SouthAl Gore's failing in 2000, they say, was not that he couldn't win in the South, but that he couldn't nail down New England. If Gore had been able to muster a few thousand more votes in New Hampshire, he would have won the presidency without a single Southern state. For some Democrats, this insight has led to a heretical theory about next year's presidential election: Forget the South. The Forget-the-South argument has little to do with anti-Dixie bias. Instead, it is based on simple mathematics. Consider the numbers. Democrats and Republicans agree that Bush and his eventual rival will each start the race with an ironclad base of states that are virtually unwinnable for the other party. Bush's base is rooted in the South, plains and interior West of the country, while the Democratic nominee can take for granted most of New England, the West Coast and a smattering of the Midwest.
by Ryan Lizza
December 14, 2003
(originally www.nytimes.com/2003/12/14/magazine/14FORGET.html)Will Democrats Retire From the Battle for the South?The announcement by Sen. John Breaux (D-LA) that he will retire from the Senate when his third term expires next year was not unexpected, but it is still an unhappy development for his state and his country. Breaux has long since earned a post-Congressional career after more than 30 years in the House and the Senate, but his political and policy skills will be missed all the same... For many years Republicans have claimed that the only real obstacle to their total domination of the South -- and consequently a big permanent advantage for the GOP in presidential and Congressional elections -- was the stubborn endurance of a handful of bigger-than-life centrist Democrats, especially in the Senate. When they finally retire, Republicans said, the South will fall to the GOP like an overripe apple... Aside from Breaux, Democratic Senators are retiring in Florida (Bob Graham), Georgia (Zell Miller), South Carolina (Fritz Hollings), and North Carolina (John Edwards)... [E]arly polls show Democratic contenders Erskine Bowles and Betty Castor running ahead of potential Republican rivals in North Carolina and Florida, respectively. If Rep. Chris John decides to run for Breaux's seat in Louisiana, he, too, would be an early favorite, especially given the recent victories of two Democrats, Sen. Mary Landrieu and Governor-elect Kathleen Blanco, in that state... Democrats won't succeed in the South, in presidential or in Senate elections, just by showing up. It will require local candidates and a national ticket that's determined to advance a tough, positive message on national security; that convinces middle-class voters that Democrats have a vision and a plan for restoring the broad-based economic and social progress, along with the fiscal responsibility, of the Clinton years; and that addresses the cultural concerns about Democrats that conservatives have spent so much time and money instilling and exploiting... If Democrats write off the South in 2004, or pretend they can remain competitive in the region with a left-bent national message, then they will make the uphill climb to a durable national majority far steeper than it has to be.
New Dem Daily
December 16, 2003
SlateJohn Kerry's Forget-the-South Strategy?Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., is discounting notions that any Democratic candidate would have to appeal to Southern voters in order to win the presidency, calling such thinking a "mistake" during a speech at Dartmouth College. Kerry's remarks Saturday were so starkly antithetical to how many southern Democrats feel their party should campaign for the presidency, that a former South Carolina state Democratic chairman told ABCNEWS that Sen. Ernest "Fritz" Hollings, D-S.C., who endorsed Kerry last week, perhaps "ought to reconsider his endorsement."
by Jake Tapper
January 26, 2004Forget-the-South Strategy? page 3In his 2003 book, A National Party No More: The Conscience of a Conservative Democrat, Miller wrote, "Once upon a time, the most successful Democratic leader of them all, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, looked South and said, 'I see one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished.' Today, our national Democratic leaders look South and say, 'I see one-third of a nation and it can go to hell.'" Merle Black, a professor at politics at Emory University in Atlanta and co-author of the 2002 book, The Rise of Southern Republicans, said the "Forget the South" strategy is feasible as long as the Democratic nominee also wins 70 percent of the electoral college votes from the remaining states. But Black questioned the wisdom of making such remarks publicly.
by Jake Tapper
January 26, 2004Forget the South, DemocratsFor 40 years, the Democratic Party begged Southern Democrats to return to the fold. Always undignified, this pleading eventually became futile as well, like Shirley Booth calling for her dead puppy in Come Back, Little Sheba. Now John Kerry, winner of the New Hampshire primary, is taking some heat for saying so. But it's about time somebody did. "Everybody always makes the mistake of looking south," the Massachusetts Democrat said in a Jan. 24 appearance at Dartmouth. And so they have. For two decades, it's been axiomatic that Democratic presidential candidates couldn't win unless they were Southerners. It worked once for Jimmy Carter and twice for Bill Clinton; Walter Mondale's and Mike Dukakis' defeats reinforced the logic. But it didn't work in 2000 for Al Gore -- or rather, it didn't work well enough to counterbalance the Supreme Court's decision to hand over Florida's electors to George W. Bush. Gore lost every Southern state, including his home state of Tennessee. Thus Lesson 1: Southerners won't vote for you just because you're a Good Ole Boy.... For Democrats, the South has become the Sahara of the Electoral College. Give it up.
Stop coddling the spoiled brat of presidential politics
by Timothy Noah
Tuesday, Jan. 27, 2004
Slate
The democrat black base doesn't like Hispanics...
Plus Hispanics have conservative family values, strong work ethics, and many have seen the horrors of socialism up close. So yeah, they're a better fit with us than with democrats - they belong on our team.
Gee, I wonder who predicted this.
Back in obama’s day, I believe that it was 2012, Limbaugh said that the Democrat Party had left the White workers and Unions along with the White Retirees and ordinary Whites. That was and is true. The problem is that the White Workers, the Unions, the white Retirees,and ordinary Whites have not abandoned The Democrat Party. Their support is as strong or stronger than it was in 2012. I believe that it is stronger.
As much as they pretend otherwise, the largest democratic voting bloc is still non college educated whites... They surrender that bloc to the Republicans they won’t win a national election for another 40 years.
LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.