I'll Never Vote for Hillary Clinton

I just read about twenty or so news items Saturday and Sunday morning, and this is one of five or so that caught my attention.

I've believed and stated here many times that black Americans were used and excused by the Dems, and I'm happy as hell that voting bloc finally took action!! Wooohoooo!

It's just a part of the huge changes taking place in the US. NOBODY can be taken for granted. Let the political parties respond to the people.

Lovely excerpt of the article I linked previously:

“What we clearly see in the focus groups is they don’t regret what they did.”

“They” are millennials of color who either didn’t vote or voted third party. And for Cornell Belcher, the president of Brilliant Corners Research & Strategies, who was the pollster for the Democratic National Committee under then-Chairman Howard Dean and for both of Barack Obama’s campaigns for the White House, this makes them the new swing voters the Democratic Party should be trying to win over.

Belcher came to this conclusion after conducting focus groups, commissioned by the Civic Engagement Fund, in Milwaukee and Fort Lauderdale in May. The goal was to find out why young voters who previously voted for Obama either sat out the 2016 election or voted for one of the third-party candidates. The results were sobering.

“They are so outraged at the broken politics that they see on both sides,” Belcher told me, “that they really think that them protesting their vote … makes both parties have to pay attention.”

And there is pointed ire at the Democratic Party. One participant was particularly blunt. “You’re damn right, I don’t have any loyalty to Democrats,” a person of color said in a focus group in Fort Lauderdale. “If Republicans want to get real about s--t that’s happening in my community, I would vote for every one of them. Then maybe Democrats would take us serious, too.”

IN OTHER NEWS
'We have to protect the integrity of the vote': Trump

The Democratic Party had better be paying attention now. When you look at the third-party vote margins in Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, the missed opportunity jumps off the page.

“They’re not necessarily Democratic voters,” Belcher told me, “but they are Obama voters.” This is an echo of what former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele told me about Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton immediately after the election. “There’s no connection to her. Black folks have not had a connection to her. They’ve not had a real substantive feel for her,” Steele said. How could that be when she is the wife of the still-revered former president Bill Clinton and was the secretary of state for the beloved Obama? Steele broke it down. “If I have a connection with your friend over here in the corner through you,” he said, “it’s not the same as my connection with you.”

“We spend a lot of time talking about blue-collar white voters and Reagan Democrats. Reagan Democrats are dead,” said Belcher, who believes effort should be placed on winning back millennials of color and young progressive whites. “Bringing that coalition back together would seem to make a lot more sense to me than trying to, in fact, bring in voters who have not been voting Democrat for quite some time.”

JONATHAN CAPEHART IS A MEMBER OF THE WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL BOARD. HE HOSTS “CAPE UP,” A WEEKLY PODCAST TALKING TO KEY FIGURES BEHIND THE NEWS AND CULTURE.

(c) 2017, The Washington Post



Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article162406578.html#storylink=cpy

Progressives and millennials of color are at least two groups who are in the long game to win it.

🤹🏻‍♂️
Hillary actively, intentionally gave a **** you to millennials and Bernie progressives and instead courted Reagan Republicans.

She got what she and her myopic sycophants so richly deserved.

Late to the party but... no he doesn't. Your "fixation" with HRC is no worse than any other here and better than most

maporsche simply doesn't want to see criticism of HRC and particularly aggressive criticism such as yours. He also doesn't want to see posts of a length over several paragraphs at the most. I'm sure there are other topics and techniques found on A2K that annoy him which is all well and good though, because we each find sources of annoyance here.

The difference between him and most others here though is that he feels compelled to instruct members who annoy him to cease and desist with their annoying topics and techniques rather than simply ignoring them (with or without using the "ignore" feature). This too is all well and good as those of us whom he feels compelled to instruct can ignore him as well...or not.

What is ironic and amusing though is that he has become "fixated" on instructing you to cease and desist in your criticism of HRC...even in a thread of which the titular topic is criticism of her. There has hardly been and instance where you have criticized HRC without him popping up to defend her and tell you that your are being obsessive and...annoying.

That he compares you to camlok is an indication of just how annoying he finds criticism of HRC, but such a comparison is ridiculous. Approx 65% of camlok's posts are devoted to harshly criticizing the US (including those that attempt to make the case for 9/11 being carried out by US government). Another 33% or so are devoted to harshly criticizing his fellow A2K members (largely for their refusal to join him in condemning the US) Perhaps 1% are devoted to specifically condemning the UK with another 0.25% covering general criticism of the rest of the West. In the remaining 1.75% he addresses totally unrelated topics that are somehow able to intrude upon his preoccupation with the crimes of America and the horrid character of A2K members. Word usage seems to be, by far, the most prevalent of such topics, and in the totality of his participation, a not insignificant portion of that 1.75% was dedicated to the attempted tutelage of the young girl who called herself "Gracie" and spent a few months interacting here several years ago. Although much of his mentoring was focused on educating her on the crimes of the US, I have to say that it appeared that his affection for her was genuine (and almost endearing) and he never employed his routine tactics of insult and browbeating while endeavoring to show her the way. (It is the manner in which he responded to gracie that has caused me to think "he" is really a "she,")

In any case, no matter how focused you have been on criticizing HRC, it doesn't amount to a "fixation" and bears no resemblance whatsoever to the contributions of camlok/JTT. Besides, I've enjoyed every one of them, and look forward to more.

Now if you would just cease and desist with your obsession with telling us how wonderful Bernie Sanders is...

Bernie2020--coming to a thread near you soon.
💕😁🍄🌈🇺🇸

Bernie and Trump trading insults on the campaign trail! That would ROCK! Unfortunately for Bernie, there aint no way he can out-flame Trump.

Let's just say those two men have different skill sets, and I'd enjoy it immensely.

I've read something similar and left the article and the link on your other thread last week. I agree, it is the younger black and younger progressives which didn't vote for Hillary. We have some work to do in that area.

In church there are two kinds of preachers. One preacher is the kind which spends the entire sermon being very negative towards the church members usually harping on sexual sins and homosexuality in particular and the other kind spends the sermon reading from good examples from the Bible and how we are to emulate them. Which one you think would do more to turn church members back towards their first love (God?)

It's a good thing that more establishment democrats are realizing they must change to earn enough voters to be competitive. I'm glad to read your comments about this.

One of the reasons I left the church is because enticing people to live the way others want them to with fear, condemnation, or stylistic rhetoric and empty promises is sad and wrong.

People are manipulated with their own emotions, and brought under control. You know a lot about it. I've heard you talk about how you enjoyed Obama's preacher's cadence - though I never heard it. People in church communities are lauded when they conduct themselves in ways the group approves. They are censured when they do not.

Remind you of anything?

I prefer reason. I prefer dialogue. I prefer individualism. I prefer diversity of thought, opinion, lifestyle.

I prefer telling the truth as I see it, and letting people choose their own paths.

So, I tell the truth as I recognize it to be. I follow it where it leads me. The truth is my first love. Never found it or its friends in any church or in any monolithic church.

And, yes. It's a good metaphor.

My unassailable socialist Jew would throw out the money changers, too.

This is encouraging news.

I don't necessarily expect black and young Americans to vote Republican, although I believe conservatives can make a case for why they should vote for Republicans who promote conservative/libertarian principles, but it's good to see that the near blind allegiance they have had to the Democrat Party is under stress if not disintegrating.

Young people become middle aged people and eventually (if they are lucky) old people. Their interests and their thinking changes and often their party affiliation. Blacks, on the other hand, far less frequently make a shift to the GOP regardless of other transitions they experience in their lives.

Personally, I think the Democrats have not only failed black Americans but have harmed their families and communities, but, obviously, others (including plenty of black Americans) think otherwise. Nevertheless, by being such a totally reliable voting bloc for Democrats they have, over time, ceded the political leverage they should have. No matter how much Democrat politicians may disappoint them, something like 90+% of them come back for more with the next election. If they react negatively it is to refrain from casting a vote for anyone. Ironically, this further diminishes their leverage.

For obvious reasons, Obama was able to mobilize black Americans and expand the size of their bloc. If Democrats thought that HRC or any white candidate could duplicate this result in 2016, they were foolish, but we can be certain that they took for granted that regardless of how many black Americans voted, the lion's share of those votes was going to go for her. Just running another black candidate (Corey Booker, Eric Holder or Kamala Harris) in 2020, however,is not going to duplicate Obama's success. Having already voted once or even twice for a black candidate, a great many whites who were motivated by the historical nature of his candidacy will feel like they have proven their character and return to an examination of the issues.

I don't recall in detail the extent to which Clinton's campaign efforts targeted black voters, but I don't believe it was a primary area of focus. Despite all the blather about Trump being a racist, blacks didn't have a special distrust or hatred of him and so her primary campaign message of "Trump is horrible. I'm not Trump. I'm a woman. Vote for me" wasn't going to uniquely resonate with them and thereby mobilize them to vote. (I very much doubt the incredibly patronizing and cringe-worthy crap about her carrying hot sauce in her pocketbook stimulated a wave of excited new black voters who thought "Damn! She loves hot sauce as much as we do. We have got to get her into the White House!" It probably, I'd like to think, even lost her a few votes from blacks who saw the comment for what it was: Insulting)

I hope that Republicans have the good sense and vision to take this opportunity to attempt to win these disaffected constituencies away from the Democrats. To do so they will have to be careful not to try and simply replace the Dems as Governmental Sugar Daddies buying votes with discriminatory social programs. Leveraging political power is certainly about extracting favors, but Republicans can't win a bidding war for black votes if the only consideration is massive tax spending and special programs,( i.e. transforming into Democrats); and they will risk the loss of their traditional constituencies if they do.

Conservatives have long argued for equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome and they have to find ways to make this real for minorities and young Americans. It's tough, but that's what Think Tanks are for. School choice is very popular within black communities and that's a foundation upon which Republicans can build and which they can carry into other areas.

Conservatism isn't inherently racist or anti-youth. The notions of liberty, individual rights, freedom from an overreaching government and even property rights are not principles which young people and people of color can't embrace...they already do, they simply don't associate them closely enough with the GOP and that isn't just because the News and Entertainment industries have done a great job of painting them as bogeymen. One of the first things they need to do is make a quite firm and obvious withdrawal from crony capitalism. This can be done without adopting the cynical and phony ploy of Democrats: Demonizing Big Business while hungrily taking its contributions. Put an end to corporate welfare like agricultural subsidies and if it makes sense to provide incentives to companies in the form of tax breaks and participation in R&D then they need to do a much better job of explaining why such things are good for large swathes of Americans in all economic classes.

Infusing the party with a greater measure of libertarianism will go a long way towards attracting young people as was shown by the Pauls, father and son, and need not focus on legalized drugs (although there's nothing wrong with that)

First and foremost they need to root out the corruption and cynicism of Establishment politics. Leave the Democrats to play in that mud puddle. And they need new blood. Young conservatives who grew up in integrated neighborhoods and served in the integrated military and don't carry with them the residue of the Jim Crow days. Among those young men and women need to be conservatives of color. To the extent there is any barriers to advancement within the party, not only do they need to be torn down, efforts to showcase these members need to be made, not as tokens, but as representatives and spokespersons for how conservative principles are not incompatible with being black, hispanic or female. This too is a tough row to how because the Left fears such people and its propaganda arm the MSM not only reliably refuses to highlight their race, ethnicity or gender, as they will always do when the person is a Democrat, but they participate in the vile tactic of insinuating that these folks are somehow either not authentic members of a minority or, worse, traitors to their race, ethnicity, gender or age group. (Witness Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, Joni Ernst, and Elise Stefanik)

Unfortunately I just don't see the creative leadership the party needs to take advantage of the awakening of blacks and young people to the perfidy of the modern American Left, so this will likely be a missed opportunity.

The good news though is that this makes the Democrats vulnerable to 3rd Party candidates.

LBJ knew just how to play black folk, eh?:





"Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference."

LBJ wasn't no damn fool. His strategy worked for about 50 years.

This brother knows what's goin down, eh?:

That's debatable.




That'll change if your pals down in D.C. don't get their act together and continue as they are. Their plans on the budget, if approved and plans for ending the ACA, will have you scraping the bottom of barrels looking for morsels of food more quickly than you can say Paul Manafort or Steve Bannon.

...but maybe that's what'll really spark your heels...

I could only watch a few minutes of that video Layman. That is a pretty big distortion of history. When he started claiming that the KKK was trying to get Black people to vote... I couldn't keep watching.

I was hoping for a little better.

Typical for you, Max. That aint what he said. You listen about as well as you read, I guess.

Just for the record, he said that the KKK didn't want blacks to vote at all but IF they did, they wanted them to vote for democrats, not the party of Lincoln.

It is indeed possible to debate reality, but it is generally futile. Your inability to point out anything that I am wrong about demonstrates quite clearly that my facts are all in order.

Oralloy boldly stating that you cannot refute any of his "points" seems to me much like a man, dressed in a feces - smeared tutu and standing in the middle of traffic on a busy street, shouting "tell me where I'm wrong!"

It's just kinda hard to know where to start...

If I was someone who liked to dress in a shitty tutu and scream at traffic I'd be really offended by what you just said. Really offended.

😜

What more would you want in the way of oratorical skills? This guy is composed, articulate, well-informed, good at vocal impersonations, witty, and humorous. And he has his facts straight.

Wait, I think I get it. You don't like him cause he aint no cheese-eater, eh?

If I was a cheese-eater, I would simply say it's because you're RACIST!!