I guess my sarcasm was a bit too subtle. Republicans don't call for new regulations, higher taxes and laws that restrict christians. When it comes to regulation, taxes and christianity, the republicans rhetorics match their voting records.
Maybe it was a bit too subtle.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...g-taxes-except-when-they-dont-which-is-often/
Stephen Colbert brings up Ronald Reagan's tax-raising record in Ted Cruz interview | PunditFact
Republicans Are Cutting Taxes on the Rich and Raising Them on the Poor | Mother Jones
Capitalism: Republicans and Regulations
Describing the policies that make the dems more attractive to blacks as being limited to affirmative action is quite short sighted. There's the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, support for social spending (food stamps, Sec 8), opposition to voter fraud laws (which are really designed to disenfranchise black voters), minimum wage laws, support for ACA and Medicaid, for the FHA, Head Start, Environmental justice and on and on.
You said that African Americans support the Democrat party at such wildly disproportionate rates "because blacks have been treated differently." I pointed out that as far as I'm aware in the last fifty years the only policies which specify different treatment between African Americans and European Americans have been some limited affirmative action policies. Is that true? It seems so from your list above, since the only points specifying different treatment are the first two, from the 1960s.
Of the rest, all but one clearly relates to low income or poverty programs, or provide the most benefit to those groups. In fact even problems with voting regulations are possibly experienced mostly along low income and education lines - though that's a different type of animal, purely about politicians angling to admit or exclude demographics based on expected voting patterns. But as for the others, do 90% of voters on food stamps or minimum wage etc. vote Democrat? (Hint;
it's more like 60%; site only displays <$50k information after 2000.)
And they don't make arguments that depend on assumptions that blacks don't know what's good for them or that the discrimination they've experienced is just a figment of their imagination
Making an argument which depends on the assumption that most voters are well-informed and thoroughly research their candidates' policies and voting records is impeccable reasoning, I'm sure :roll:
I've clearly said that both of your political parties engage in the same sort of practices, so this obsession with the intelligence of "blacks" is your cross to carry, not mine. To a greater or lesser extent all political parties do the same sort of thing, because that's the nature of the game: Rhetoric, pandering, focusing on target constituents whilst taking 'safe' votes for granted, double-speak, demonizing the opposition, wedge politics, flip-flopping, pragmatism and expediency are all valuable parts of the political toolbox. They're not necessarily all bad all the time, but you seem to be living in a world where they don't even exist!
The African American community as a political constituency must be almost unique in the world in its combination of:
> Being an overwhelmingly 'safe' vote, to be taken for granted whenever there's a more pressing concern
> Having no credible alternative to the R- and D-teams, to dilute loyalty to the Democrats
> Due to American history and current political demographics, being particularly susceptible to demonizing of the R-team and wedge politics
> That being further compounded by their having generally lower education levels than the national norm and (for whatever reason and as you are utterly determined to keep pointing out) lower average IQs
This isn't some kind of conspiracy theory we're talking about here. It's a simple description of political strategy and the kind of approaches used, to a greater or lesser extent, by all parties everywhere. I haven't said or even remotely implied that the Democrats are trying to grind black noses into the dirt, nor that discrimination and racism have not been realities. But it is abundantly clear that there is more than just the low income/poverty policies you listed accounting for the overwhelming black support for the D-team; and it seems equally evident that a big part of the reason is the perception of the R-team as a white or even anti-black party.
And yet you're honestly trying to tell me that you believe there is no incentive there for the D-team to encourage those racial divisions, and present themselves as sympathetic to the black cause?
opcorn2: