Steele: African-Americans 'Really Don't Have A Reason' To Vote GOP

[nick1985]

What a giant load of shit.

Looking in the mirror?

 

[MJinZ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_demographics_of_the_United_States

Population projections by a Census Bureau report (2008)

Race.................... 2008 2050
Non-Hispanic whites 68% 46%
Hispanic (of any race) 15 % 30%
Non-Hispanic blacks 12% 15%
Asian American 5% 9%

White = approximately 75%. Go to the source:

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFPeople?_submenuId=people_10&_sse=on

http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...US&-search_results=01000US&-format=&-_lang=en

 

[xj0hnx]

White = approximately 75%. Go to the source:

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFPeople?_submenuId=people_10&_sse=on

http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...US&-search_results=01000US&-format=&-_lang=en

United States​

Estimate​

Margin of Error​

Total:​

301,237,703​

*****​

White alone​

223,965,009​

+/-63,750​

Black or African American alone​

37,131,771​

+/-28,694​

American Indian and Alaska Native alone​

2,419,895​

+/-14,633​

Asian alone​

13,164,169​

+/-17,493​

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone​

446,164​

+/-6,518​

Some other race alone​

17,538,990​

+/-58,473​

Two or more races:​

6,571,705​

+/-45,246​

Two races including Some other race​

1,338,960​

+/-20,598​

Two races excluding Some other race, and three or more races​

5,232,745​

+/-33,900​

Hmmmm, I wonder where Hispanics are in the chart from you link? Usually counted as racially white, but ethnically Hispanic, interesting ...no?

http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/rho.txt

Once again, don't let pesky facts get in your way.

 

[Mani]

Yes, as a matter of fact I would dispute it, not dispute that many do, but that the many includes democrats which you seem more than willing to give a pass with statements such as "there's obviously much less", you don't know that, you're just pulling it out of your ass to try defending your party.

The democrats just elected a black president, so yeah, I think most people would give them "a pass" on race-based stereotyping. Are they perfect? Certainly not, but even your own party chairman is owning up to the problems republicans are having in the area.

And why shouldn't I bring up the dems of past? At every turn people like you use actions of republicans past against the present, turn about is fair play, not my problem if you don't like it.

Really? People are using Abraham Lincoln's actions against the current Republican party? Point me to those posts.

 

[classy]

White = approximately 75%. Go to the source:

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFPeople?_submenuId=people_10&_sse=on

http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...US&-search_results=01000US&-format=&-_lang=en

Umm he is right. There are est 301 million people in America. 37 million black, 13 million asian, 45 million hispanic, and 6 million mixed. Thats 101 million right there. And I would guess there are probably another 5 million or so of Eastern nationality here as well. I would also add there are probably another 8-10 million illegals not even accounted for. That first chart you are looking at includes white hispanics. But if you look at the hispanic chart you'll see the real number of hispanics. I don't think it really changes anything, but reality is we are moving quickly to a 50% white and 50% minority population. And when you factor in birth rate of minority and mixed race babies as compared to white babies, in my lifetime I will see a majority minority population in America. I will be old like around 80, but it will happen in my lifetime.

 

[classy]

Hmmmm, I wonder where Hispanics are in the chart from you link? Usually counted as racially white, but ethnically Hispanic, interesting ...no?

http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/rho.txt

Once again, don't let pesky facts get in your way.

I just addressed that. They are on the same page, very last chart.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...o_id=01000US&-search_results=01000US&-format=

 

[xj0hnx]

I just addressed that. They are on the same page, very last chart.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...o_id=01000US&-search_results=01000US&-format=

I know exactly where they are, but it doesn't matter since the 74% includes them, and the real percentage of actual white whites is lower, in the mid 60's.

 

[Darwin333]

Here's the problem. I never said *one* thing about advocating or being pro-any programs. 🙄

However, you want to give incentives to people. I don't. There is incentive enough to want a better life for yourself. The Support programs are in place to give disadvantaged people a security net. If the blacks want to grow up ghetto-fabulous and all be rappers, I really don't give a shit.

But tell me it's a fair playground in the real world, and you'd be wrong. That's why for things like Affirmative Action... I have no problems against. People can choose whatever life they want, I'm not self-righteous enough to be socially engineering their real paths. Who am I to say how they should live their lives?

You are saying they can choose how they should live their lives by controlling where they live, what they eat, the lifestyle their children are raised in, etc (and tend to mimic, like most other children). That is a direct result of how we implement the "social safety nets" that the democrats love to brag about.

On one hand you say you want to level the playing field but on the other hand you don't give a damn if the state helps create generations of minorities with absolutely NO chance. Thats about as uneven a playing field as it gets. There is personal choice involved but at some point down the line (such as the children and the childrens children etc..) they simply don't know anything else.

So just to be clear, is it only a certain "class" of people you want a level playing field for (irrelevant of race) and like the righties "fuck the rest"?

 

[CitizenKain]

Looking in the mirror?

No, I'm not a republican.

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

Before you throw me in with your liberal fantasies, I oppose all but the most basic welfare and affirmative action in its entirety. Still pretty funny that you think the party led by a black dude is trying to keep them down.

Yeah, that clears him of all wrong doing. I forgot black people are always innocent of everything. He does it because I'm white and I forced him to, right?

 

[xj0hnx]

The democrats just elected a black president, so yeah, I think most people would give them "a pass" on race-based stereotyping. Are they perfect? Certainly not, but even your own party chairman is owning up to the problems republicans are having in the area.

Oh wait, I see your problem, you're one of those people that auto lumps people that don't agree with them into the republican party. I don't agree with you so I must be a republican. Bullshit. And a lot of those people that just elected a half white man were adamantly opposed to him before he was the candidate.

Really? People are using Abraham Lincoln's actions against the current Republican party? Point me to those posts.

WOW, I didn't know Lincoln was the only republican in the past!

 

[Fern]

"You really don't have a reason to, to be honest -- we haven't done a very good job of really giving you one. True? True," said Steele, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

Shouldn't a politician (or political party in this case) be concerned with giving (all) 'citizens' a reason to vote for them?

Why should the politician/political party be singling out subsets of citizens and offering them something special?

What type of "reason" is Steele referring to? Some targeted specific advantage or (financial) benefit?

If so, why is that ethical, or desirable from the perspective of our national interest?

I find any notion that our government should 'give' people something, other than good national policy and effective services like interstates and national defense, to be offensive.

Fern

 

[MJinZ]

You are saying they can choose how they should live their lives by controlling where they live, what they eat, the lifestyle their children are raised in, etc (and tend to mimic, like most other children). That is a direct result of how we implement the "social safety nets" that the democrats love to brag about.

On one hand you say you want to level the playing field but on the other hand you don't give a damn if the state helps create generations of minorities with absolutely NO chance. Thats about as uneven a playing field as it gets. There is personal choice involved but at some point down the line (such as the children and the childrens children etc..) they simply don't know anything else.

So just to be clear, is it only a certain "class" of people you want a level playing field for (irrelevant of race) and like the righties "fuck the rest"?

Whether you have class or not is up to you. Not how much money your parents make, what your background is, and where you came from.

I don't want to hear people whining when many people work harder than we Americans can imagine in order to get into college or work and emigrate to the US. They have a dream you see, one of money and power... <- American Dream (lol).

 

[classy]

Shouldn't a politician (or political party in this case) be concerned with giving (all) 'citizens' a reason to vote for them?

Why should the politician/political party be singling out subsets of citizens and offering them something special?

What type of "reason" is Steele referring to? Some targeted specific advantage or (financial) benefit?

If so, why is that ethical, or desirable from the perspective of our national interest?

I find any notion that our government should 'give' people something, other than good national policy and effective services like interstates and national defense, to be offensive.

Fern

Why does it always have to be something derogatory with you clowns? Maybe he wasn't referring to some damn handout. Maybe he was referring to the bs attitude that because someone is black they need to kiss your @ss. Maybe he was referring to not having a bunch of white republicans running around calling black politicians n!gger. Maybe he simply means that some of you need to act like you got some damn class. The next time you wanna know why someone black may not like republicans, look in the flipping mirror. Maybe thats the answer. You and some of the other superstars here can't mention black in a sentence without it being some kind of put down. Then you'll spout some nonsense, followed by blacks don't like us, gee I wonder why?

 

[nick1985]

No, I'm not a republican.

What are you

 

[Darwin333]

Whether you have class or not is up to you. Not how much money your parents make, what your background is, and where you came from.

I don't want to hear people whining when many people work harder than we Americans can imagine in order to get into college or work and emigrate to the US. They have a dream you see, one of money and power... <- American Dream (lol).

You are ignorant of the effects that environment has on animals, including humans.

If I throw you into solitary confinement for the next few years you will not come out the same person that you went in. It is the same for many children who know nothing more than government provided slums. You say they should "dream" to have more, where do they get that dream if they never see what that better life is? How do they achieve it when the moment they try a significant portion of what they have depended on all of their lives is yanked away (such as yanking their childrens healthcare because they got a low paying job)? The system is setup to keep them poor and to keep them mostly in one place. Wouldn't want those undesirables in your neighborhood now would you?

You can say whatever you wish but I am talking about reality. Real people in real situations right now that are purposely kept in those situations by people who care nothing about them other than how they vote. The sickening part is that those same people will brag all day long about how they truly care and are helping them.

Just like you, you don't give a shit that innocent children are disadvantaged from birth because of social programs but you argue that some other program is so necessary to level the playing field for others? Give me a break, in my opinion, you don't give a shit about any of them. I don't have a problem with that, you can believe what you want to in your sheltered life, but don't pretend to care about one poor disadvantaged group of minorities while telling the other much more disadvantaged group to get bent.


PS: Your post quoted above is a great argument against affirmative action. Just thought I would point that out.

 

[MJinZ]

You are ignorant of the effects that environment has on animals, including humans.

If I throw you into solitary confinement for the next few years you will not come out the same person that you went in. It is the same for many children who know nothing more than government provided slums. You say they should "dream" to have more, where do they get that dream if they never see what that better life is? How do they achieve it when the moment they try a significant portion of what they have depended on all of their lives is yanked away (such as yanking their childrens healthcare because they got a low paying job)? The system is setup to keep them poor and to keep them mostly in one place. Wouldn't want those undesirables in your neighborhood now would you?

You can say whatever you wish but I am talking about reality. Real people in real situations right now that are purposely kept in those situations by people who care nothing about them other than how they vote. The sickening part is that those same people will brag all day long about how they truly care and are helping them.

Just like you, you don't give a shit that innocent children are disadvantaged from birth because of social programs but you argue that some other program is so necessary to level the playing field for others? Give me a break, in my opinion, you don't give a shit about any of them. I don't have a problem with that, you can believe what you want to in your sheltered life, but don't pretend to care about one poor disadvantaged group of minorities while telling the other much more disadvantaged group to get bent.


PS: Your post quoted above is a great argument against affirmative action. Just thought I would point that out.

Everyone has a TV. Newspaper. Cellphones. Internet.

No matter what you are born into, welfare is 100x better than the 3rd world countries, from where Engineers and Physicists compete against millions to go to even HIGH school, in order to eventually find their way to the US from the dirt roads and brick roofs they grow up in.

Yea, so I don't give shit what kind of shithole you live in here on Government support. Third-class American slum-hole, which is better than 1st Class Third world country shit-hole.

No one is keeping you in the programs but yourself. You can always choose to move somewhere else, get a job bagging groceries and still not live in a shit neighborhood.

What makes my statement anything but SUPPORT for affirmative action? It means that you worked hard enough and you're intelligent enough to get into that school, against apparent odds of your upbringing, now affirmative action will help you overcome the bias the rest of the majority hold against you.

I'm the last person who should support Affirmative Action. Being Asian, it's the opposite - I'm more likely to be discriminated against unless my scores and repertoire is significantly above the rest.

 

[Rainsford]

Shouldn't a politician (or political party in this case) be concerned with giving (all) 'citizens' a reason to vote for them?

Why should the politician/political party be singling out subsets of citizens and offering them something special?

What type of "reason" is Steele referring to? Some targeted specific advantage or (financial) benefit?

If so, why is that ethical, or desirable from the perspective of our national interest?

I find any notion that our government should 'give' people something, other than good national policy and effective services like interstates and national defense, to be offensive.

Fern

I think the implied argument is that the Republican party is ALREADY targeting white people (although I'd get more specific, but we're just taking about race here)...they're just not saying that's what they are doing. I'd argue that the unspoken part of "The GOP isn't giving black people a reason to vote for them" is "the way they are doing for white people."

I would agree with you that targeted benefits for specific groups in order to garner votes seems a bit unethical, but I think politics (including the Republican party) is overflowing with that already. There is a reason Republican votes drop off significantly once you're no longer in the demographic of white, Christian men, and it's not because people who don't fit that description don't appreciate "good national policy and effective services".

 

[SandEagle]

I think the implied argument is that the Republican party is ALREADY targeting white people (although I'd get more specific, but we're just taking about race here)...they're just not saying that's what they are doing. I'd argue that the unspoken part of "The GOP isn't giving black people a reason to vote for them" is "the way they are doing for white people."

I would agree with you that targeted benefits for specific groups in order to garner votes seems a bit unethical, but I think politics (including the Republican party) is overflowing with that already. There is a reason Republican votes drop off significantly once you're no longer in the demographic of white, Christian men, and it's not because people who don't fit that description don't appreciate "good national policy and effective services".

 

[Mani]

Oh wait, I see your problem, you're one of those people that auto lumps people that don't agree with them into the republican party. I don't agree with you so I must be a republican. Bullshit. And a lot of those people that just elected a half white man were adamantly opposed to him before he was the candidate.

Oh please. One doesn't need to "auto-lump" to know where your political loyalties lie. "Adamantly" opposed to him? Are you familiar with the primary process in this country?

WOW, I didn't know Lincoln was the only republican in the past!

Obviously I didn't even come close to implying that, but by all means keep deflecting.

 

[Lemon law]

As the "white man or woman" becomes an ever smaller majority, it makes it ever more difficult for some potential new GOP Karl Rove types to slice and dice constituencies and wedge issues to craft that bare majority of votes in November. The GOP problem is not only does it not now appeal to blacks, its doing almost as bad with the Hispanic vote everywhere except Florida. And in California, Hispanics are still seething over the actions of Grey Davis and their anger has not cooled against the GOP after 20 years.

 

[piasabird]

White is a figment of your immagination. Everyone is being beat down equally. Only ignorant people dont know this.

 

[Lemon law]

White is a figment of your immagination. Everyone is being beat down equally. Only ignorant people dont know this.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lotsa luck selling that to the ignorants scientific polling folks, they always break their polls into demographic and racial groups. While also using age, sex, family income data as other criteria.

 

[Mani]

Yeah, that clears him of all wrong doing. I forgot black people are always innocent of everything. He does it because I'm white and I forced him to, right?

WTF are you babbling about?

 

[xj0hnx]

Oh please. One doesn't need to "auto-lump" to know where your political loyalties lie.

One really doesn't when they just assume.

"Adamantly" opposed to him? Are you familiar with the primary process in this country?

Hahaha, Are you?

Obviously I didn't even come close to implying that, but by all means keep deflecting.

No, deflecting is what you did, I just turned it back on you.