African Americans -- 3/4 Democratic. Why?

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts
Can anyone here explain to me why exactly, African Americans are mostly Democratic?
Avatar image for LS07
LS07

945

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 LS07
Member since 2007 • 945 Posts
because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rights
Avatar image for Omni-Slash
Omni-Slash

54450

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#3 Omni-Slash
Member since 2003 • 54450 Posts
easy.....the New Deal....created a welfare state and once you're reliant upon government you're vote goes to who butters your bread.....
Avatar image for Omni-Slash
Omni-Slash

54450

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#4 Omni-Slash
Member since 2003 • 54450 Posts
because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsLS07
actually....not at all....just look at Senator Byrd....former KKK leader.....
Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts
By being Democratic, they're siding with the KKK.
Avatar image for MattUD1
MattUD1

20715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 MattUD1
Member since 2004 • 20715 Posts

By being Democratic, they're siding with the KKK. msoftburney

What?

Avatar image for LS07
LS07

945

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 LS07
Member since 2007 • 945 Posts

[QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsOmni-Slash
actually....not at all....just look at Senator Byrd....former KKK leader.....

obviously not every one of them, but overall they were much better about it than the republicans were I mean look at the legislation that got passed by kennedy and johnson

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 LJS9502_basic  Online
Member since 2003 • 180138 Posts
Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.
Avatar image for PannicAtack
PannicAtack

21040

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 PannicAtack
Member since 2006 • 21040 Posts
because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsLS07
Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>
Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts
Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.LJS9502_basic
Do you agree with Social Security then and follow Huey Long's ideas? Ahem. Socialism.:|
Avatar image for PannicAtack
PannicAtack

21040

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 PannicAtack
Member since 2006 • 21040 Posts

[QUOTE="msoftburney"]By being Democratic, they're siding with the KKK. MattUD1

What?

That might have been true... seventy years ago >_>
Avatar image for wemhim
wemhim

16110

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 wemhim
Member since 2005 • 16110 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.msoftburney
Do you agree with Social Security then and follow Huey Long's ideas? Ahem. Socialism.:|

It's a socialist concept, but it doesn't cancel out all the capitalist methods of the USA. Ever heard of a mixed economy?
Avatar image for MattUD1
MattUD1

20715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 MattUD1
Member since 2004 • 20715 Posts
[QUOTE="MattUD1"]

[QUOTE="msoftburney"]By being Democratic, they're siding with the KKK. PannicAtack

What?

That might have been true... seventy years ago >_>

If he's talking about Democrats being KKK members, I'm sure most =/= all.
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 LJS9502_basic  Online
Member since 2003 • 180138 Posts

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.msoftburney
Do you agree with Social Security then and follow Huey Long's ideas? Ahem. Socialism.:|

What? Social Security in and of itself is fine...it's the government using it for other things that is not.

Avatar image for LS07
LS07

945

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 LS07
Member since 2007 • 945 Posts

[QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsPannicAtack
Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>

But what I was talking about was the work in the 60s, where kennedy and johnson really got stuff done, thats where the biggest work got done, I'm not saying its a fair justification I'm just saying it is what people think of when they think of civil rights

Avatar image for PannicAtack
PannicAtack

21040

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 PannicAtack
Member since 2006 • 21040 Posts

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsLS07

Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>

But what I was talking about was the work in the 60s, where kennedy and johnson really got stuff done, thats where the biggest work got done, I'm not saying its a fair justification I'm just saying it is what people think of when they think of civil rights

That is true. Kennedy in particular was concerned about Civil Rights.
Avatar image for Wilfred_Owen
Wilfred_Owen

20964

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 34

User Lists: 0

#17 Wilfred_Owen
Member since 2005 • 20964 Posts

Ronald Reagan.

Avatar image for crusher2002000
crusher2002000

645

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 crusher2002000
Member since 2004 • 645 Posts
barack obama
Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts

[QUOTE="msoftburney"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.LJS9502_basic

Do you agree with Social Security then and follow Huey Long's ideas? Ahem. Socialism.:|

What? Social Security in and of itself is fine...it's the government using it for other things that is not.

I wasn't talking Social Security being socialist, only Huey Long's ideas of 'Robinhood' -- (Tax the rich, give to the poor).

By the way. Social Security is NOT FINE. Those of you morons who think of it as fine are idiots. Our generation is being screwed right now and will be screwed in the future. It needs to be fixed -- but nothing happens because, hey, if the republicans say something -- the 60 million elderly people who do nothing, who vote, hurt the republicans.

Avatar image for SilentFireX
SilentFireX

1956

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 SilentFireX
Member since 2005 • 1956 Posts

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsLS07

Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>

But what I was talking about was the work in the 60s, where kennedy and johnson really got stuff done, thats where the biggest work got done, I'm not saying its a fair justification I'm just saying it is what people think of when they think of civil rights


So you're saying freeing the slaves was a less imporant milestone in Civil Rights than Kennedy's work in the 60's?
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 LJS9502_basic  Online
Member since 2003 • 180138 Posts

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsLS07

Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>

But what I was talking about was the work in the 60s, where kennedy and johnson really got stuff done, thats where the biggest work got done, I'm not saying its a fair justification I'm just saying it is what people think of when they think of civil rights

To be honest...the Republicans of Lincolns day have more in common with the Democrats than they do with the current Republican Party.

Avatar image for SilentFireX
SilentFireX

1956

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 SilentFireX
Member since 2005 • 1956 Posts
[QUOTE="LS07"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsLJS9502_basic

Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>

But what I was talking about was the work in the 60s, where kennedy and johnson really got stuff done, thats where the biggest work got done, I'm not saying its a fair justification I'm just saying it is what people think of when they think of civil rights

To be honest...the Republicans of Lincolns day have more in common with the Democrats than they do with the current Republican Party.

I'm going to have to agree with you there.

Avatar image for wemhim
wemhim

16110

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 wemhim
Member since 2005 • 16110 Posts
[QUOTE="LS07"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsSilentFireX

Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>

But what I was talking about was the work in the 60s, where kennedy and johnson really got stuff done, thats where the biggest work got done, I'm not saying its a fair justification I'm just saying it is what people think of when they think of civil rights


So you're saying freeing the slaves was a less imporant milestone in Civil Rights than Kennedy's work in the 60's?

I'm sure black people today are more familiar with things that happend in the century they grew up. Lots of important things happend in100 BC and below, but people think about things closer to their time.
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 LJS9502_basic  Online
Member since 2003 • 180138 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="msoftburney"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.msoftburney

Do you agree with Social Security then and follow Huey Long's ideas? Ahem. Socialism.:|

What? Social Security in and of itself is fine...it's the government using it for other things that is not.

I wasn't talking Social Security being socialist, only Huey Long's ideas of 'Robinhood' -- (Tax the rich, give to the poor).

By the way. Social Security is NOT FINE. Those of you morons who think of it as fine are idiots. Our generation is being screwed right now and will be screwed in the future. It needs to be fixed -- but nothing happens because, hey, if the republicans say something -- the 60 million elderly people who do nothing, who vote, hurt the republicans.

That's two flames in one sentence. The concept of Social Security is fine.....now read the rest of my post before spouting insults.:roll:

Avatar image for LS07
LS07

945

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 LS07
Member since 2007 • 945 Posts


So you're saying freeing the slaves was a less imporant milestone in Civil Rights than Kennedy's work in the 60's?SilentFireX

No I'm saying the general public has a short memory

Avatar image for PannicAtack
PannicAtack

21040

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 PannicAtack
Member since 2006 • 21040 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="msoftburney"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.msoftburney

Do you agree with Social Security then and follow Huey Long's ideas? Ahem. Socialism.:|

What? Social Security in and of itself is fine...it's the government using it for other things that is not.

I wasn't talking Social Security being socialist, only Huey Long's ideas of 'Robinhood' -- (Tax the rich, give to the poor).

By the way. Social Security is NOT FINE. Those of you morons who think of it as fine are idiots. Our generation is being screwed right now and will be screwed in the future. It needs to be fixed -- but nothing happens because, hey, if the republicans say something -- the 60 million elderly people who do nothing, who vote, hurt the republicans.

Huey Long was a nut. That guy wasn't just a Socialist, he was in favor of Totalitarianism. >_>
Avatar image for wemhim
wemhim

16110

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 wemhim
Member since 2005 • 16110 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="msoftburney"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Democratic Party caters to the poor and the working class. The Republican Party is for the wealthy and big business.msoftburney

Do you agree with Social Security then and follow Huey Long's ideas? Ahem. Socialism.:|

What? Social Security in and of itself is fine...it's the government using it for other things that is not.

I wasn't talking Social Security being socialist, only Huey Long's ideas of 'Robinhood' -- (Tax the rich, give to the poor).

By the way. Social Security is NOT FINE. Those of you morons who think of it as fine are idiots. Our generation is being screwed right now and will be screwed in the future. It needs to be fixed -- but nothing happens because, hey, if the republicans say something -- the 60 million elderly people who do nothing, who vote, hurt the republicans.

It's called ideology. I don't believe in Social Security, but others do. That's life...
Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts

That's two flames in one sentence. The concept of Social Security is fine.....now read the rest of my post before spouting insults.:roll:LJS9502_basic
Yes, a long time ago it was a great concept. Now? No. Why was it back then? Because the elderly died in their sixties.

By 2013. Whoops. We need money. Time for some taxes...

By 2023. Crap. It's dead.

Avatar image for SpaceDragonMan
SpaceDragonMan

1502

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 SpaceDragonMan
Member since 2007 • 1502 Posts

barack obamacrusher2002000

If I was black, I'd be offended by that statement...

Avatar image for quiglythegreat
quiglythegreat

16886

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 quiglythegreat
Member since 2006 • 16886 Posts
[QUOTE="LS07"]because a long time ago democrats were the ones who pushed for civil rightsPannicAtack
Actually, no. It was the Republicans who first issued the Emancipation Proclamation, under the Lincoln Administration. Initially, the KKK was comprised of Southern Democrats. Even into the 1900s, Woodrow Wilson, a Democratic President, did not push for Civil Rights. Oddly, none of the "Progressive Presidents," (Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson), pushed for Civil Rights. It wasn't until later that the Democrats started going for Civil Rights. Of course, nowadays, they still push that, example being Affirmative Action,though some (particularly conservatives) argue that it gives more favor to minorities than whites. >_>

You know, the GOP and the Democrats are the exact same compared to how they used to be. This is due to the unchanging nature both of political issues and geopolitical boundaries.
Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts
It's called ideology. I don't believe in Social Security, but others do. That's life...wemhim
You mean only the sixty million elderly people who want their checks?
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 LJS9502_basic  Online
Member since 2003 • 180138 Posts

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]That's two flames in one sentence. The concept of Social Security is fine.....now read the rest of my post before spouting insults.:roll:msoftburney

Yes, a long time ago it was a great concept. Now? No. Why was it back then? Because the elderly died in their sixties.

By 2013. Whoops. We need money. Time for some taxes...

By 2023. Crap. It's dead.

No..it's because Social Security is given out for reasons other than retirement.

Avatar image for wemhim
wemhim

16110

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 wemhim
Member since 2005 • 16110 Posts
[QUOTE="wemhim"] It's called ideology. I don't believe in Social Security, but others do. That's life...msoftburney
You mean only the sixty million elderly people who want their checks?

Yes, because social security only goes to the eldery...Hence why it's called, "Elderly security", oh wait, it's not...
Avatar image for Putzwapputzen
Putzwapputzen

4462

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#34 Putzwapputzen
Member since 2005 • 4462 Posts
beats me, it will change it always does
Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts

[QUOTE="msoftburney"][QUOTE="wemhim"] It's called ideology. I don't believe in Social Security, but others do. That's life...wemhim
You mean only the sixty million elderly people who want their checks?

Yes, because social security only goes to the eldery...Hence why it's called, "Elderly security", oh wait, it's not...

Funny. Really, I got a laugh from that. As these elderly, baby boomers --call them whatever you ****ing like whatever, start retiring; Social Security will be in the red by, 2016 maybe 2017. Medical, starts bleeding in 2013, and completely goes under by 2019. This means it's FLAWED; CORRECT? So why change it? Why not fix it? Because those ****ing elderly want their money!

Avatar image for bigdcstile
bigdcstile

2236

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 bigdcstile
Member since 2004 • 2236 Posts

Despite the Republican's push to free the slaves in the 1800's, most blacks will side with Democrats because they seem to, falsely, have their best interests in mind. At least, lately. It's a community thing, but, when you think about it, neither party really cares. Dems will throw terms like "Affirmative Action" around as teasers to get your ears perked when, in actuality, it has no true affects on employment and, truthfully, do not benefit racial minorities. To tell you the truth, I think it's a wholesale decision to choose the lesser of two evils. The lesser, in this case, being Democrats who try to sing and dance their way to a minority vote as opposed to Republicans ready to line the pockets of the upper class at the expense of the working class.

[QUOTE="crusher2002000"]barack obamaSpaceDragonMan

If I was black, I'd be offended by that statement...

I don't see why. I surely am not.

Avatar image for crusher2002000
crusher2002000

645

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 crusher2002000
Member since 2004 • 645 Posts

[QUOTE="crusher2002000"]barack obamaSpaceDragonMan

If I was black, I'd be offended by that statement...

there r alot of stupid ppl in this world. don't act like some black ppl won't vote him in because of his colour. especially in the poverty areas where some believe that the only reason they r poor is because of their race. its the same with clinton im sure some women will vote her in just because of her gender. its very stupid yes but there r ppl like that, that blame their problems on their race/gender and feel that if they vote a person in like them that it will change

Avatar image for gameguy6700
gameguy6700

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 gameguy6700
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="msoftburney"][QUOTE="wemhim"] It's called ideology. I don't believe in Social Security, but others do. That's life...msoftburney

You mean only the sixty million elderly people who want their checks?

Yes, because social security only goes to the eldery...Hence why it's called, "Elderly security", oh wait, it's not...

Funny. Really, I got a laugh from that. As these elderly, baby boomers --call them whatever you ****ing like whatever, start retiring; Social Security will be in the red by, 2016 maybe 2017. Medical, starts bleeding in 2013, and completely goes under by 2019. This means it's FLAWED; CORRECT? So why change it? Why not fix it? Because those ****ing elderly want their money!

That's easily fixed: Just emancipate Florida from the union.

Avatar image for msoftburney
msoftburney

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 msoftburney
Member since 2007 • 219 Posts
That's easily fixed: Just emancipate Florida from the union. gameguy6700
:lol: Brilliant! No, seriously. WHAT? :lol:
Avatar image for cornlockes
cornlockes

1852

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 cornlockes
Member since 2006 • 1852 Posts
why not?
Avatar image for _Celldweller_
_Celldweller_

940

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 _Celldweller_
Member since 2007 • 940 Posts
Civil Rights
Avatar image for Maaarrrz
Maaarrrz

182

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 Maaarrrz
Member since 2007 • 182 Posts

Ronald Reagan.

Wilfred_Owen
I think it dates back to at least Nixon.
Avatar image for -Serpahim-
-Serpahim-

1627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 -Serpahim-
Member since 2007 • 1627 Posts
I think its because alot (dare i say the majority) of republican politicians are from the south.
Avatar image for Food_Nipple
Food_Nipple

8379

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 Food_Nipple
Member since 2003 • 8379 Posts
Because they support Affirmative Action. Anything that gets you an unfair advantage, why wouldn't you support?
Avatar image for PannicAtack
PannicAtack

21040

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 PannicAtack
Member since 2006 • 21040 Posts
I think its because alot (dare i say the majority) of republican politicians are from the south.-Serpahim-
Funnily enough, the South used to be the region where the Democrats always won. Look at the voting for FDR. All four elections, the South consistently voted for him. >_>
Avatar image for -Serpahim-
-Serpahim-

1627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 -Serpahim-
Member since 2007 • 1627 Posts

[QUOTE="-Serpahim-"]I think its because alot (dare i say the majority) of republican politicians are from the south.PannicAtack
Funnily enough, the South used to be the region where the Democrats always won. Look at the voting for FDR. All four elections, the South consistently voted for him. >_>

Im not talking about where they won, im talking about where the politicians are from. Southern White Politicians start with a -5 Charisma.

Avatar image for Mysteryous
Mysteryous

213

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 Mysteryous
Member since 2007 • 213 Posts

Lot's of black people are poor and/or working class. Democrats are more about letting the government take care of everyone. They give "handouts" in a sense. Republicans are more about not interfearing in people's personal lives as much.. not as much handouts. They are more for business by the people, and less help from the government.

That's why the lower class likes the democratic party. They give instead of show "tough love".. ya know what I mean? It's like a parent doing everything for their kids growing up, instead of letting them find out on their own, with guideance.

Avatar image for ninjacat11
ninjacat11

5008

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#48 ninjacat11
Member since 2004 • 5008 Posts
Because the interests of the Democrats today are more in tune with the working class.
Avatar image for Xx_CYC756_xX
Xx_CYC756_xX

2388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 Xx_CYC756_xX
Member since 2005 • 2388 Posts

Lot's of black people are poor and/or working class. Democrats are more about letting the government take care of everyone. They give "handouts" in a sense. Republicans are more about not interfearing in people's personal lives as much.. not as much handouts. They are more for business by the people, and less help from the government.

That's why the lower class likes the democratic party. They give instead of show "tough love".. ya know what I mean? It's like a parent doing everything for their kids growing up, instead of letting them find out on their own, with guideance.

Mysteryous

Couldn't have said it better myself. :)

Avatar image for dgbiker1
dgbiker1

2139

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#50 dgbiker1
Member since 2003 • 2139 Posts
Because "George Bush hates black people"....but >1 million Californians are now evacuees, so does he hate caucasians, asians and latinos as well??? Maybe George Bush hates humanity...