Trump's First 100 Days

[Dill]

(02-18-2017, 01:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It's almost like the Dems pushed the Civil Rights Act. Nah, that wasn't them as they already had the right to vote before that.

But stand by for: "The parties switched". Even though a republican has never gotten more than 40% of the Black vote since they started keep stats (1930s)

LOL, "40% since they started keeping stats." 

Give it up, Bfine. Limbaugh Letters and such like aren't going to help you here.

You don't know the history of black voting or civil rights, as it exists outside the bubble.

When that history trips you up, you'll just claim we "repeating ourselves" and duck off to let people "decide for themselves who is right."  

[Dill]

(02-18-2017, 05:22 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Today our president told us the media was our enemy. And not long after quoted Rush Limbaugh to prove he was awesome.

We are screwed big league. Im talking russian hooker water sports type screwed.

We are screwed over the short term, for sure. 

People will learn from this, but there will be a heavy price first--in foreign, education, environmental, and tax policy.

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2017, 02:25 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL, "40% since they started keeping stats." 

Give it up, Bfine. Limbaugh Letters and such like aren't going to help you here.

You don't know the history of black voting or civil rights, as it exists outside the bubble.

When that history trips you up, you'll just claim we "repeating ourselves" and duck off to let people "decide for themselves who is right."  

Instead of displaying a condescending attitude how about you just tell me the last time a GOP Presidential candidate got the majority of the black vote?

I'm inside my bubble and do not know the right answer; as I have been tripped up by history.

Save the long winded dissertation and simply answer the question posed for I'll know a little more about the history of black voting.  

[Dill]

(02-18-2017, 03:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Instead of displaying a condescending attitude how about you just tell me the last time a GOP Presidential candidate got the majority of the black vote?

I'm inside my bubble and do not know the right answer; as I have been tripped up by history.

Save the long winded dissertation and simply answer the question posed for I'll know a little more about the history of black voting.  

No dissertation?  ok  Herbert Hoover.

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2017, 03:38 PM)Dill Wrote: No dissertation?  ok  Herbert Hoover.

Which happened in the 1930s. I should have said since 1930s (wait a minute). What's that you say: "LOL". I used the term since they kept stats; as I considered Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies to be they. Who did you use for your stats?

WTS, definitely on a tangent better suited for another thread.

[Dill]

(02-18-2017, 04:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Which happened in the 1930s. I should have said since 1930s (wait a minute). What's that you say: "LOL". I used the term since they kept stats; as I considered Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies to be they. Who did you use for your stats?

WTS, definitely on a tangent better suited for another thread.

Outside the bubble, Hoover was elected in 1928, which was not in the 1930s. 

Your "stats" are polls, which Gallup began in 1936. I was using the historical record, debates at time, NCAAP, scholarly dissertations, books, etc.  Before Gallup, people determined demographics by things like voter registration and whom black newspapers and churches were endorsed--or did not.

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2017, 04:58 PM)Dill Wrote: Outside the bubble, Hoover was elected in 1928, which was not in the 1930s. 

Your "stats" are polls, which Gallup began in 1936. I was using the historical record, debates at time, NCAAP, scholarly dissertations, books, etc.  Before Gallup, people determined demographics by things like voter registration and whom black newspapers and churches were endorsed--or did not.

,,,and your stats are arbitrary. Hoover also ran in '32. I can see this going nowhere and to state that no GOP candidate has earned more than 40% since the 30s was LOL worthy, so carry on. 

[Dill]

(02-18-2017, 05:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ,,,and your stats are arbitrary. Hoover also ran in '32. I can see this going nowhere and to state that no GOP candidate has earned more than 40% since the 30s was LOL worthy, so carry on. 

No one was disputing your 40% stat, only your implication that voters, black and white, don't or haven't switched parties over racial policies built into party platforms. That is why the Democrats now regularly receive 90% of the African American vote now, when it used to be the other way around. That is why white segregationists went Republican after the Civil Rights Act.

Your asked a direct question --"how about you just tell me the last time a GOP Presidential candidate got the majority of the black vote?    And you got a direct answer--in 1928. To which I must now add, even though Hoover ran 1932.   

You don't want a "dissertation," but claim my stats are "arbitrary." 

Unable to say or show why, you run for the bubble.

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2017, 06:04 PM)Dill Wrote: No one was disputing your 40% stat, only your implication that voters, black and white, don't or haven't switched parties over racial policies built into party platforms. 

No doubt. Apparently they did so just 90 years ago. I'm going back to my bubble now. 

[Dill]

(02-18-2017, 06:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt. Apparently they did so just 90 years ago. I'm going back to my bubble now. 

It's safer there.

Whenever you want to test bubble-knowledge, though. I'll be there for you.

[GMDino]

(02-18-2017, 03:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Instead of displaying a condescending attitude how about you just tell me the last time a GOP Presidential candidate got the majority of the black vote?

I'm inside my bubble and do not know the right answer; as I have been tripped up by history.

Save the long winded dissertation and simply answer the question posed for I'll know a little more about the history of black voting.  

(02-18-2017, 03:38 PM)Dill Wrote: No dissertation?  ok  Herbert Hoover.

(02-18-2017, 04:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Which happened in the 1930s. I should have said since 1930s (wait a minute). What's that you say: "LOL". I used the term since they kept stats; as I considered Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies to be they. Who did you use for your stats?

WTS, definitely on a tangent better suited for another thread.

(02-18-2017, 05:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ,,,and your stats are arbitrary. Hoover also ran in '32. I can see this going nowhere and to state that no GOP candidate has earned more than 40% since the 30s was LOL worthy, so carry on. 

(02-18-2017, 06:04 PM)Dill Wrote: No one was disputing your 40% stat, only your implication that voters, black and white, don't or haven't switched parties over racial policies built into party platforms. That is why the Democrats now regularly receive 90% of the African American vote now, when it used to be the other way around. That is why white segregationists went Republican after the Civil Rights Act.

Your asked a direct question --"how about you just tell me the last time a GOP Presidential candidate got the majority of the black vote?    And you got a direct answer--in 1928. To which I must now add, even though Hoover ran 1932.   

You don't want a "dissertation," but claim my stats are "arbitrary." 

Unable to say or show why, you run for the bubble.

Here Dill...just follow these guys until they settle on where to leave the goal posts.

[NATI BENGALS]

Almost a month in and we are back to campaign rallies.

Is this real life?

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2017, 08:22 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Here Dill...just follow these guys until they settle on where to leave the goal posts.

Yep, I stated a GOP Presidential candidate had not gotten over 40% of the black vote since the 1930s despite the Urban Legend that the parties changed after the CRA. Dill comes up with one from 1928 and somehow this is me moving the goalpost. 

[*bfine32*]

(02-18-2017, 08:41 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Almost a month in and we are back to campaign rallies.

Is this real life?

Hell, the lady that thinks Russia is invading Korea wanted to impeach him before the completion of his 3rd week; yet you choose this as a circumstance to question reality.

[GMDino]

(02-18-2017, 09:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell, the lady that thinks Russia is invading Korea wanted to impeach him before the completion of his 3rd week; yet you choose this as a circumstance to question reality.

She sure is stupid and partisan.  

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-18-2017, 09:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell, the lady that thinks Russia is invading Korea wanted to impeach him before the completion of his 3rd week; yet you choose this as a circumstance to question reality.

You are right. A propaganda rally at this point shouldnt have been a surprise. And even John McCain was quoted today about the attacks on the media... That is how dictators get started.

Silly me forgetting the comparisons that have been made over and over slowly playing out and proving to be correct.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-17-2017, 07:50 AM)GMDino Wrote: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/16/flynn-replacement-harward-rejects-offer/98016616/

Apparently, Trump wants to run the NSC like Mike Brown runs his coaching staff. But, then again Trump knows more than the generals so why should those dumb asses be allowed to pick their own staff? After all, Trump's daddy sent him to a boarding school for rich, entitled, spoiled brats. 

[Belsnickel]

(02-18-2017, 08:41 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Almost a month in and we are back to campaign rallies.

Is this real life?

Yeah, I won't bother listing other world leaders that held rallies after being elected, or "elected" for that matter.

Hint: it ain't a great list to be on.

[Belsnickel]

(02-18-2017, 10:39 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Apparently, Trump wants to run the NSC like Mike Brown runs his coaching staff. But, then again Trump knows more than the generals so why should those dumb asses be allowed to pick their own staff? After all, Trump's daddy sent him to a boarding school for rich, entitled, spoiled brats. 

His appointment of a political advisor to the NSC, which has historically been a place where politics are checked at the door, shows where the attitude is. People have been dressed down in NSC meetings for mentioning an election, but now a political strategist has prominance over the DNI and chair of the joint chiefs.

[GMDino]

(02-18-2017, 11:01 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, I won't bother listing other world leaders that held rallies after being elected, or "elected" for that matter.

Hint: it ain't a great list to be on.

"Give him a chance" ™

"Comparison don't matter because some things are different" ™