GOP Afraid of Black Votes? - Page 3 - Political Forum

Dragon Horse · #21 (**permalink**) 10-03-2007, 10:38 PM

Real Stats:

Quote:

The party has nominated African American candidates for senator or governor in Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Maryland, but they all lost. More recently, President Bush has pushed for Hispanic votes, winning 35% in 2000 and 44% in 2004. In 2004, 44% of Asian Americans voted for George W. Bush.[15] In the 2006 House races, The GOP won 51% of white votes, 37% Asian votes, and 30% Hispanic votes, while winning only 10% of African American votes.

Reality is although blacks are 10% of the voting population 18% of blacks voted Republican in Ohio last election if that would have been in the right counties for Dems Kerry would have won.

In certain states blacks are the key swing votes in others it is Hispanics...1-2% means a lot with the past two elections being as close as they have.

panteth4h2o · #22 (**permalink**) 10-04-2007, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodog

HUH? I was simply correcting your erroneous statements. You could have accepted the truth or not. You provided no statistics of minorities being turned off by the Democratic platform whatsoever, but made a biased deduction based on few black people in Bush's Administration and the voting record of one demographic over the course of 2 years. Therefore there was not much to debate in the first place. Its the Republicans who have an image problem right now not the Democrats (or at least not as much), but you and others are free to believe whatever the hell you want (and I'm sure you will).

It's pretty clear that you have an attitude problem and are too busy being a blind partisan to see my point. I am not a loyal partisan at all, which is why I'm not disputing the current image problem of the Republicans. And BTW, if you read over my replies, you'll see that I never claimed a noticeable increase in black voters for the right. I've just simply noticed a few more black candidates running under the Republican banner these last few years.

My opinion is that the Republicans didn't make good on opportunity when they had it back in 2004. According to the media, many people were turned away by the liberal stance on gay marriage and stuff like that during the '04 elections, which is why the Republicans not only won the presidency, but gained control of the House that year. For whatever reason, you've come up with a lame excuse that "They were not turned off by the left, but rather scared batshit crazy by the right."

Gee, could you please show me some statistics that people were scared batshit crazy by the right back in 2004?

panteth4h2o · #23 (**permalink**) 10-04-2007, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodog

That is becuase the Republicans are pushing blacks to run and in the past the refused to allow it just like they banned that one black guy from almost ever republican presidential election.

What "black guy" are you talking about? Do you even know his name, besides just referring to him as "that one black guy"? It'll make you seem more intelligent.

Quote:

You said minorities were turned off by the Democratic platform and I still haven't seen any real proof of that, just antcedotal evidence. I am supposed to assume your point as fact when the only evidence you have are a few black candidates and one demographic voting record over the course of a few years?

LOL I never expected you to accept my opinions as fact, just like you shouldn't expect me to accept your opinions as fact either. This is just a freakin' message board. It just seems you're getting your little pink panties all bunched up over nothing.

Quote:

Um, I have to show statistics to prove that people actually bought into Bush's bullshit about how terrorists were going to appear at every doorstep use toy plans to spread chemical weapons? 40% of the population still believes Saddam had something to do with 9/11. There's a statistic.

Sure, why not? So I guess your little statistic proves that people were "scared batshit crazy" by the right in 2004, and that they still are in 2007? So I suppose that means the right stands a good chance in this upcoming election.

panteth4h2o · #24 (**permalink**) 10-06-2007, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodog

Do you know who he is? I didn't because he was never allowed to any of the debates like I said. Your party didn't allow it. I suppose you responded in this manner to avoid making a real one.

My party?? I may be a conservative, but for some reason, I don't see the Republicans as being my party.

I can't believe you even brought the guy up, but don't even know his name.

I haven't the slightest idea whom you are speaking of. If you don't know names, it makes it seem as though you have no idea what you are talking about.

Quote:

You should have just said you were making a baseless assumption from the beginning. Oh and I didn't make any opinions, the statistics speak for themselves.

Yeah, you said that Americans "weren't turned off by the left, but they were just scared batshit crazy by the right". Gee, I forgot that's not an opinion.

Quote:

I did say that people still think Saddam is responsible for 9/11 didn't I. A growing number of people at the time also felt imminent danger of another attack as the Bush Administration had constantly elevated the terrorist alert rate for no reason whatsoever several times encase you forgot.

The popular opinion was that the democrats lost seats in 2004, mainly because many Americans weren't ready for the social policies of the left. THat's the reason why many folks voted Republican straight across the board, in order to make a statement to the left. Of course, since that time, the Republicans have screwed it up with their scandals, and only have themselves to blame for their recent lack of popularity.

You statistic about Saddam Hussein only shows that many people may have felt falsely justified about invading Iraq. Whatever else you say, based upon that lone statistic, is just an assumption on your behalf.