Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

America under President Trump


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Show me evidence anything in that video is false or stop embarrassing yourself by choosing to be ignorant of the facts.

It’s total cherry-picking. Telling us about the number of federal senators elected but not congressmen, or state officials for example?

 

Here’s an excerpt from a detailed description, pay attention to the bold part at the very end 

.....The idea of swinging the South to the Republicans was not Phillips’s invention, as he readily admitted. White southerners had been drifting away from their traditional party ties for decades. In the late 1930s, southern Democrats in Congress had forged a “conservative coalition” with like-minded Republicans to fight New Deal liberalism. Despite this working alliance, southern Democratic congressmen remained in the party—not least because Democrats dominated Congress and, as a result, their seniority within the party guaranteed them a good deal of power in the committee system. But the “Dixiecrat” rebellion of 1948, led by South Carolina Governor Strom Thurmond, showed that party ties weren’t permanent*. In that campaign, southern officials and ordinary white southerners alike began to abandon the Democrats over civil rights.

Republican leaders saw an opening. Guy Gabrielson, the chairman of the Republican National Committee from 1949 to 1952, hoped to bring disaffected Dixiecrats into the GOP. “The Dixiecrat Party believes in states’ rights,” he told an Alabama gathering in 1952. “That’s what the Republican Party believes in.” Seeking to craft a coalition of southern Democrats and northeastern Republicans, Gabrielson commenced negotiations for what he called a “trial marriage at the top” in which nominally independent Dixiecrats would pledge to support the Republican nominee in 1952. Gabrielson’s scheme never came to fruition, but the GOP nominee still cracked the solid South: Dwight Eisenhower won three southern or border states in 1952 (Florida, Tennessee, and Virginia) and five in 1956 (Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, Kentucky, and Virginia).

As he prepared for his own run for president, Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater likewise tried to bring white southern conservatives into the Republican fold. But rather than proposing a partnership between the South and the Northeast, Goldwater wanted to connect southern Democrats with libertarians and conservatives in the Southwest and West. In a 1961 speech to southern Republicans in Atlanta, Goldwater famously declared that the GOP should “hunt where the ducks are” by writing off “the Negro vote” and pursuing southern whites instead.
 

Capitalizing on the white southern backlash against civil rights was central to this strategy. But by the mid-1960s, overt racism was an ineffective method of courting southern voters. The region’s most successful politicians adopted more muted appeals to racial issues, and Goldwater proved to be a skilled practitioner of this approach. Instead of “direct racist appeals,” he used “a kind of code that few in his audiences had any trouble deciphering,” noted The New Yorker in 1964.

In making federal involvement in social, cultural, and economic issues the ostensible focus of his opposition, rather than race itself, Goldwater managed to reassure the South that he would protect the status quo while simultaneously appealing to the libertarian sensibilities of the West and Southwest. “I believe that it is both wise and just for Negro children to attend the same schools as whites,” Goldwater wrote in The Conscience of a Conservative. “I am not prepared, however, to impose that judgment of mine on the people of Mississippi or South Carolina … Social and cultural change, however desirable, should not be effected by the engines of national power.”

 

Goldwater lost the 1964 election in a national landslide to Lyndon Johnson, but the election returns showed a silver lining for the GOP. Aside from his home state of Arizona, the only states Goldwater won were in the Deep South—Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana.

While Eisenhower had made inroads in the South by adding states from the region’s edges to his national coalition, Goldwater focused on the “ducks” of the Deep South, and with convincing results. Mississippi’s path was instructive: While GOP nominees had won less than 25 percent of the state’s vote in 1956 and 1960, Goldwater took a whopping 87 percent in 1964. Moreover, his southern coattails helped elect a new generation of Republican congressmen, whose vocal opposition to civil rights had been the centerpiece of their own campaigns. (In an extreme example, Prentiss Walker, the first Republican congressman from Mississippi in a century, celebrated his 1964 victory with an appearance before a Ku Klux Klan front called Americans for the Preservation of the White Race.)....

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/595504/

And here is a  campaign strategy memo from the Nixon library  Note the strategy re “Negroes”  

https://cdn.nixonlibrary.org/01/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/02130151/White-House-Special-Files-Box-36-Folder-7.pdf

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 17.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bush_cheney2004

    2639

  • Omni

    1845

  • Boges

    1483

  • taxme

    1291

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I see Trump went all "crybaby" toward the press yet again today in Florida. Is it perhaps that orange crap he sprays himself with that makes his skin so thin?  

His first 100 days will be a flurry of activities to implement most of the policies he'd promised. Here's an excerpt from a lengthy article how he says it would look: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05

maybe they share an addiction. Does Oxy make you sniff a lot I wonder?

Posted Images

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Benghazi

Another debunked conservative conspiracy theory

 

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Police knelt on Tony Timpa's neck for 13 minutes. What's your point? 2) Screaming bystanders does not de-escalate

1) So? Whats YOUR point? 2)It should have been to the cops that there’s something wrong. 

 

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

The genesis of the idea that the KKK support Republicans was an Alinsky stunt. It's never really been the case.

2) Just because a certain group of people support Trump over Hillary it doesn't necessarily have to do with any one specific topic. Anyone who considers themselves an American would prefer Trump over Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton.

1) Prove that bullshit

2) So you admit KKK supports Trump anyway. But didn’t you just say KKK is Democrats?  Also KKK wizard David Duke ran for office as a Republican decades ago and is also currently a Trump supporter. 
 

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

o back and watch the video. The very first time that Wallace asked Trump to disavow the KKK he said "Sure". 

Even your transcripts suck Beaver. Look what he said 13-14 seconds into the video and try to tell me that the word isn't "SURE". He said it again at 20 seconds and then 25 seconds in. TRUMP SAID SURE 3 TIMES!!!!! 

“Sure” is not a denouncement. Thats One word. That’s why they responded  to it bu asking him to go ahead and say it then. He couldn’t bring himself to say anything bad about white supremacists at the very least because he wants their votes. 

 

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Then Trump went on TO CORRECTLY IDENTIFY ANTIFA AS THE GROUP COMMITTING 49.9% OF THE VIOLENCE AND DESTRUCTION  in America, for whatever reason he didn't mention that BLM was doing another 49.9%.

FYI, Trump doesn't have to be a dancing bear and disavow everyone on Wallace's list while at the same time Biden isn't held accountable for supporting the violence of BLM and Antifa, and supporting the fear mongering against police officers. 

Many people were killed, and Biden approved of it al. At no point in time has he ever condemned any of that violence.

Everything in you above quote is simply a lie. Full stop. 
 

Also Republicans like to claim dem CITIES have higher crime because most large cities are run by Democrats. When you look at state data though most of the highest crime states are Republican. 
 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/200445/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-us-states/

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Well yeah, Beave I think we've established that from deep inside the pixie dust dream landscape of Beave-world all fact looks like garbage.

I'll agree with you that the southern strategy isn't a theory though. It doesn't even rise to the level of hypothesis. It's imagined, revisionist crap yanked straight out the Progressive butt-hole. It's fantasy. It never happened.

http://inside.sfuhs.org/dept/history/US_History_reader/Chapter14/southernstrat2.htm

 

Yup.  Never happened.  :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. Congratulations you two.

I've seen some straw manning and pettifoggery in my day but you two have me so confused with those links diverting off in a hundred directions pretending extreme examples of something or other or unconnected trivia proved something. 

Supposedly you were going to show me why I should believe there was a Southern Strategy. So let's start by agreeing what that was supposed to be.

Here, we'll use a source you guys on the left like:

Quote

In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

So what specifically do either of you think you've produced that proves the existence of that?

As I understand it, the southern strategy was a concept concocted by this guy - I think his name was Kevin Phillips. He was this guy who finagled a job bean counting for the Nixon campaign and calling himself a strategist. Last I heard he was appearing here and there as a contributor to Progressive media.

Oh and can we stop doing this thing where we think by mentioning something we've proved it. And by we I mean you, Cannucklehead.

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Atwater just added some fuel to the fire by encouraging the idea that it had been possible to 'dog whistle' racist talking points without actually coming flat out and encouraging racists to vote for somebody because he was a fellow racist.

The Southern Strategy idea is claimed to have begun either with Goldwater in 64 or Nixon in 68. 

However...

Quote

The Real Story of the Un-Solid South

At the center of the Southern Strategy myth is the idea that Republicans used the race card to seduce Democratic voters in the South into leaving their natural partisan home. The truth, as Trende convincingly demonstrates, is the opposite: the growth of GOP support among white Southerners was steady and mostly gradual from 1928 to 2010, and was a natural outgrowth of the fact that white Southerners were ideologically much more compatible with the national Republican agenda and coalition than with the national Democratic agenda and coalition. What retarded the Southern switch from the Democrats to the GOP was a combination of party loyalties dating back to Reconstruction and the Democrats’ use of racial issues. In other words, if you take race out of the picture, it’s likely that white Southerners would have switched parties earlier and in greater numbers.

https://redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2012/07/11/the-southern-strategy-myth-and-the-lost-majority-n43726

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry S. Dent, Sr. and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now you don't have to do that. All that you need to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues that he's campaigned on since 1964, and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster.

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

Atwater: Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger". By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this", is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger". So, any way you look at it, race is coming on the back-burner.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, 

Avoid derailing this thread discussion. 

 

If you want to revisit stories from days of yore, you are welcome to do so in a new thread or an established thread.  Take a look at the Clubs section down below whereby the moderation is much less strict.  Ecco:  https://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/forum/76-general-history/

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Another debunked conservative conspiracy theory

Benghazi was never 'debunked' in any way, shape or form that benefitted Hillary Clinton. Hillary's fake reason for why the attack occurred was debunked, if that's what you're talking about.

Simple fact is that Hillary/Obama got no help whatsoever to the troops in Benghazi for 13 hours. They could have gotten a weather ballon to Benghazi in that period of time. It was a gross display of casual disregard for the men and women who put their lives on the line to serve their country.

Trump's reaction to a similar incident in Iraq was remarkably different. 

Quote

From Wikipedia:

After the news of the U.S. embassy compound's breach, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper stated that reinforcements were en route to the compound and urged the Iraqi government to "fulfill its international responsibilities" and protect the facility.[27] About five hours after the violence first erupted, 30 Iraqi soldiers in seven armored vehicles arrived and deployed near the embassy walls but not near the burning, breached checkpoint. Reportedly, four vehicles carrying riot police later approached the embassy but were forced back by the protesters who blocked their path.[2] A detachment of approximately 100 U.S. Marines assigned to a crisis response unit in Kuwait, Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force – Crisis Response – Central Command (SPMAGTF-CR-CC), along with two U.S. Army AH-64 Apache attack helicopters from Taji, Iraq were deployed to secure the embassy.[25] Mark Esper subsequently announced the immediate deployment of an infantry battalion of about 750 U.S. soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East. He did not specify their destination, but a U.S. official familiar with the decision said they were to deploy to Kuwait. Esper said additional soldiers from the 82nd Airborne's quick-deployment brigade, known officially as its Immediate Response Force, were prepared to deploy over the next several days. The 750 soldiers deploying immediately

That was no 13 hr ramble in response effort. It was a rapid military deployment which was massive compared to the forces that they were sent to counter.

Quote

1) So? Whats YOUR point? 2)It should have been to the cops that there’s something wrong. 

1) My point is that what happened to Floyd wasn't 'evidence' of police brutality towards black men, and it wasn't the most heinous crime ever committed by US police against a citizen. It was just police brutality period, and political agitators seized on the event to portray as something that it wasn't.

2) It wasn't. Irrational people scream at cops all the time. The cops that arrested Floyd faced that kind of verbal abuse on a regular basis. Furthermore, the people who were there screaming didn't know that Floyd was saying that he couldn't breathe while he was all alone. 

Quote

1) Prove that bullshit

G Bush Sr was appointed to the UN by Nixon in 1971. Alinsky got kids who had intended to protest bushes speech to instead dress up like members of the KKK and cheer for it. It's referenced many times by many different people.  http://spectatorarchive.library.columbia.edu/cgi-bin/columbia?a=d&d=cs19900125-01.2.23 

Quote

2) So you admit KKK supports Trump anyway. But didn’t you just say KKK is Democrats?  Also KKK wizard David Duke ran for office as a Republican decades ago and is also currently a Trump supporter. 

No, I admit that everyone who likes the US supports Trump. 

The KKK was created by Democrats and existed as a wing of their party for years. 

Now the Dems create unreasoning fear and resentment between black people and police as a matter of priority. Why do you think they do that? Do you think it's good for little black kids to hear "The pigs will just kill ya for being black. You don't need to go to university because none o' these crackers will hire you anyways. You need a gun, and you need cash. Sell some drugs." 

Quote

“Sure” is not a denouncement. Thats One word. That’s why they responded  to it bu asking him to go ahead and say it then. He couldn’t bring himself to say anything bad about white supremacists at the very least because he wants their votes. 

"Sure" is a denouncement when someone asks you "Do you renounce ____________". He said sure 3 times. That's a renouncement. 

When Biden was asked: "Are you going to pack the SC if ACB gets appointed?" do you think that the word "sure" would have constituted an answer? Of course it would have. 

If someone said: "Do you renounce Jesus/Mohammed" would one of their followers say "sure" thinking that it was no big deal? 

"Sure" actually was an answer. You know that, that's why the transcripts that you chose didn't include that word. FYI Trump is not required to recite a formal denouncement speech just for the amusement of Chris Wallace. His answer was entirely appropriate, the question was bogus, unfortunately it was necessary to counter all the fake news coming from CNN.

Quote

Everything in you above quote is simply a lie. Full stop. 

You're calling me a liar? That's ripe. It's also an unsubstantated allegation, seeing as you never bothered to mention 'who did all of those things if what I said was somehow inaccurate'?

I've cited several actual lies by you, and what I said there is actually 100% correct. In all the time that you've been posting here you've never found an example of me being inaccurate and the quote that you just responded to definitely wasn't a lie lol. 

Are you seriously trying to tell me that Antifa and BLM didn't just cause billions of dollars in damages, murder people & beat people and loot stores over the past 5 months? Are you for real? That's maybe the most brazen lie that I've heard in my entire life. 

I'd like for you to explain then, who did all the killings, looted the stores, beat people up and set all of the fires if it wasn't Antifa and BLM........?

This should be good. 

Quote

Also Republicans like to claim dem CITIES have higher crime because most large cities are run by Democrats. When you look at state data though most of the highest crime states are Republican. 
 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/200445/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-us-states/

Yeah I don't see a strong correlation there like 100% of the top 16 cities, or 9/10 of the top cities, like I showed you with Dem cities. And FYI murder is the ultimate judge of what an actual violent crime rate is. IE, a murder in Texas is a murder in Oklahoma is a murder in Spuzzum BC is a murder on the shore of lake Titicaca, etc. A high violent crime rate can just be indicative of an area where violent crime doesn't go unreported. 

Do you think that people in east LA go to the cops for the same types of 'assaults' as people in the Hamptons, or in Pigeon Forge Tennessee? LMAO. 

 

Also, regarding your claim about the large cities: Baltimore was on that list, they're 30th in population. Oakland 45th. Stockton 62nd. San Bernadino 102nd. Little Rock 126th. 

San Diego is the 8th largest city in the US. They have a Republican mayor, they have 38 violent crimes per 10,000 people. Little Rock is 126th largest and they have 75 violent crimes per 10K people. Sand Diego is literally 7x as big, with one half of the violent crime........

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Charles Anthony said:

Folks, 

Avoid derailing this thread discussion. 

 

If you want to revisit stories from days of yore, you are welcome to do so in a new thread or an established thread.  Take a look at the Clubs section down below whereby the moderation is much less strict.  Ecco:  https://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/forum/76-general-history/

Thanks. Done.

https://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/40976-political-history/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Joe Biden...your choice. Okay....

Hillary Clinton would have been my choice too, in case you missed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Many people don't know much about the Klan, including how popular they were in Canada.

Many people know Trump's dad was IN the KKK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The U.S. federal debt was never paid off during Clinton's years because even with budget surpluses, more money was still owed to Social Security and other trust funds that the government was still spending.

Total U.S. federal debt increased each year for fiscal years 1993 - 2001.

...but your version makes for good politics !

I never said the debt was paid off. I said there were budget surpluses which would have eventually paid off the debt had the Republicans not repeatedly cut taxes (but not spending).

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Argus said:

I never said the debt was paid off. I said there were budget surpluses which would have eventually paid off the debt had the Republicans not repeatedly cut taxes (but not spending).

 

No, the total U.S. federal debt would still continue to grow, because government continued to spend trust funds to pay for discretionary and non-discretionary programs.

Spending is the issue, but neither party is in a hurry to drastically reduce spending to the levels required.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Argus said:

Many people know Trump's dad was IN the KKK.

Many people know how to fact check, and even a left-leaning fact-checker like politifake says that your claim is unsupported: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/mar/28/facebook-posts/heres-whats-known-about-fred-trumps-arrest-after-k/

Many people know that Kamala Harris's great grandmother was an ACTUAL slave-owner, and that Kamala slept her way to the top by dating a 60 yr old mayor for months when she was only 29.

Many people know that Joe Biden created THE MOST RACIST BILL of the last 30 years and that he OPPOSED INTERRACIAL BUSSING because he didn't want to create an 'urban JUNGLE'. 

Many people know that Joe Biden is a creepy, senile, kid-sniffing scumbag who has been completely busted for using the power of his vice-presidential position to make his son over 1M U$D.

Many people know that Trump is far superior to Biden in intelligence, energy, his decisions at critical moments have been far better, and that he's innocent of Ukrainian collusion charges, unlike Biden. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, WCM. I was going to say that.

I mean @Argus, "C'mon Man." If you're going to brag about your superior knowledge don't make it so easy to show it doesn't exist. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/18/fact-check-fred-trump-detained-kkk-rally-circumstances-unclear/3209853001/

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Many people know how to fact check, and even a left-leaning fact-checker like politifake says that your claim is unsupported: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/mar/28/facebook-posts/heres-whats-known-about-fred-trumps-arrest-after-k

He was 'detained' at a KKK rally nowhere near where he lived, for 'refusing to disperse'. At that rally there was a lot of violence. It's known that Trump, who owned thousands of apartments, refused to rent to Blacks. Years later his company, where Donald Trump was president, was sued by the government and settled, agreeing to rent to Blacks. They didn't. They were sued again.

I don't think there's really any doubt Trump is a racist. The most recent book about him by a longtime aide and VP at Trump towers makes it clear he didn't want Black people in the building, even as construction workers when it was going up.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/18/fact-check-fred-trump-detained-kkk-rally-circumstances-unclear/3209853001/

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Thanks, WCM. I was going to say that.

I mean @Argus, "C'mon Man." If you're going to brag about your superior knowledge don't make it so easy to show it doesn't exist. 

Lol.

"C'mon, man! I got way hairier legs than you, because I come from a long line of coal miners. The kids LOOOVE my hairy legs. And just because I graduated near the top of my class doesn't mean I'm a wimp, either. I'll take you out behind the woodshed just like I did to Corn Pop you lying dog-faced pony soldier! And just in case there was ever any doubt, my Ukrainian collusion is bigger than your Ukrainian collusion, ya know what I mean Jack? I doubt it, because even I don't know wth I'm saying half the time."

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Argus said:

He was 'detained' at a KKK rally nowhere near where he lived, for 'refusing to disperse'. At that rally there was a lot of violence. It's known that Trump, who owned thousands of apartments, refused to rent to Blacks. Years later his company, where Donald Trump was president, was sued by the government and settled, agreeing to rent to Blacks. They didn't. They were sued again.

I don't think there's really any doubt Trump is a racist. The most recent book about him by a longtime aide and VP at Trump towers makes it clear he didn't want Black people in the building, even as construction workers when it was going up.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/18/fact-check-fred-trump-detained-kkk-rally-circumstances-unclear/3209853001/

Get your facts straight Argus.

1) It was a Memorial Day Parade, not a KKK rally,

2) your link doesn't actually prove anything so I don't know why you chose it. There's nothing about renters or construction workers in it either :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a WashPo ad at the bottom of my page lol. 

Are they stupid?

Do they think I have enough birds to need their daily paper, or do they think that I'd subscribe to the online version when I can just watch CNN tell the exact same lies for free while I'm watching Brian Stelter's puffy little head turn red?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Get your facts straight Argus.

1) It was a Memorial Day Parade, not a KKK rally,

2) your link doesn't actually prove anything so I don't know why you chose it. There's nothing about renters or construction workers in it either :lol:

I don't know why you insist on cites which are common knowledge.

In 1973, Trump and his company Trump Management were sued by the Department of Justice for housing discrimination against African-American renters; he settled the suit, entering into a consent decree to end the practices without admitting wrongdoing.[13][14][15] The Justice Department sued again in 1978, claiming continued racial discrimination in violation of the consent decree, but that settlement agreement expired in 1982, ending the case.[16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump

On Memorial Day in 1927, over a thousand Ku Klux Klan members marched in a Queens parade to protest "Native-born Protestant Americans" being "assaulted by Roman Catholic police of New York City."[20] The 21-year old Trump and six other men were arrested.[21][22] All seven were referred to as "berobed marchers" in the Long Island Daily Press;[21] Trump, detained "on a charge of refusing to disperse from a parade when ordered to do so," was dismissed.[20][23] Another of the men, arrested on the same charge, was a bystander who had had his foot run over by a police car. According to the police, the five remaining men were certainly Klan members

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump#1927_arrest

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Argus said:

Hillary Clinton would have been my choice too, in case you missed it.

 

I still admire you and think you're a great fellow.

Keep up the good work.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Argus said:

All seven were referred to as "berobed marchers" in the Long Island Daily Press;

That doesn't exactly tell the story.

More completely it was like this:

Quote

Another article about the rally, published by the Long Island Daily Press on June 2, 1927, mentions that there were seven arrestees without listing names, and claims that all of the individuals arrested were wearing Klan attire. The story, titled "Meeting on Parade Is Called Off," focuses on the police actions at the rally, noting criticism of the cops for brutally lashing out at the Klan supporters, who had assembled during a Memorial Day parade.

While the Long Island Daily Press doesn't mention Fred Trump specifically, the number of arrestees cited in the report is consistent with the other accounts of the rally. Significantly, the article refers to all of the arrestees as "berobed marchers." If Fred Trump, or another one of the attendees, wasn't dressed in a robe at the time, that may have been a reporting error worth correcting.

This only insinuates that maybe Fred was one of the guys in Robes in a ballpark description by a small time 1920s paperman. But again Fred was discharged. So it's more likely he wasn't. Six were charged.

Even if the reporter somehow got it right when he pulled the number 7 out from somewhere (and we have no idea where) are you sure this matters?

The other day we were told that Joe Biden's mentor, an Exalted Cyclops of the KKK and a Dixiecrat gets a wash because his KKK days were back in the 40s. You want to damn Donald for something his father may have done, but most probably didn't, at a memorial day rally way back in the 20s.

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to this non-sensical drivel it sounds like the rantings of a crazy person:

 

According to one decades-old unverified claim from some random guy, Saul Alinsky got a few students to dress up in Klan costumes at some obscure event and that one tiny stunt permanently fooled all of Americans into falsely thinking the Klan supports Republicans which they actually do but only because the Klan and neo nazis love America and they know what’s best for it. 


Riiight  that makes perfect sense   Makes you long fo the days where at least the conservative lies tried to  follow some kind of coherent narrative  

So the Democrats want to tear down confederate statues and the confederate flag because they’re pro-slavery and pro-segregation. Meanwhile Republicans and Trump especially want to protect and restore them because they’re anti-slavery and anti-segregation  

Trump tweets out lies like blacks are responsible for almost all murdersof white peoples but the real White supremacists are Ilhan omar, AOC, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton

The Democrats are white supremacists but want unlimited third world immigration, affirmative action and white genocide. 
 

Also minor fact check:  The KKK was never “a wing of the Democratic party.“

Edited by BeaverFever
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

The other day we were told that Joe Biden's mentor, an Exalted Cyclops of the KKK and a Dixiecrat gets a wash because his KKK days were back in the 40s. You want to damn Donald for something his father may have done, but most probably didn't, at a memorial day rally way back in the 20s.

I'm not damning him. I'm pointing this out in response to everyone talking about old Democratic racists. From all accounts Trump worshiped his old man, and would have obviously imbibed his views on life from him. Certainly he wasn't doing anything to persuade the old man to let black people stay in his apartments when he was the President. Further, everyone who's ever worked for him and been willing to talk mentions these incidents of him not wanting blacks around. Is that all coincidence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...