I believe Google and Twitter and that other web site, what is it? Tinder??. They are rich and can't be wrong.

@michaelk

Your thumbnail is amusing but it also illustrates precisely what is wrong with the Democratic party and why we now have Trump as US president. The one thing you do not do in an upcoming election is to say that everyone who votes for your opponent is an idiot. You can insult your opponent in any way you like but you never insult the electorate. The precise moment when Hillary Clinton lost the election was when she called Republican voters a "basket of deplorables". I remember hearing it on the news and thinking, "OMG! She just shot herself in the foot and lost the blue-collar vote".

Up to that point, blue-collar Democrats who privately agreed with a lot that Trump said were still prepared to hold their noses and vote for Hillary. If she had kept her big mouth shut, a lot of them might have done that. But not afterwards. You would think the Democrats had learned their lesson, but apparently they are incapable of learning anything. They still think their party is flawless and righteous and everybody else is a Nazi.

Oops! Wrong thread.

The funny thing about michaelk's picture is that the KKK and slavery actually both have their roots in the Democratic party. Of course you never hear that being case... Also remember the Japanese interment camps of WW2? Where they put U.S. citizens that were of Japanese decent into camps for fear they could be allied with the Japs. That happened under a Democrat president [Franklin D. Roosevelt].

Their not a party of science or facts, their the party of victims (i.e. everyone is always a victim), divide and conquer, and globalization. Picture also demostrates how elitist they are.

No the KKK was not founded or has roots with by the Democratic party.

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...klu-klux-klan/

For crying out loud, quickquestion111, you really have drunk the koolaid. No party can be reduced to such simple terms even if only because they all have changed so dramatically over the years, let alone centuries. There is no stereotype Democrat any more than there is some stereotype Republican EXCEPT at the extremes where people have abdicated from thinking for themselves and just opt to see everything as Black or White, or in this case Red or Blue. It really isn't that simple. It's just "convenient".

No koolaid here, I just misplaced my rose colored glasses (their around here somehwere). But do you mind pointing to a specific part of my post that prompted that response from you? Because if you're insinuating that I think everyday democrats are racists due to their party having it's roots in the KKK, or likwise that I think their all pushing for globalism. Then that would be pretty ignorant, and/or a unintelligent repsonse from you. Btw I apologize I have to be the guy who pushes back whenever I notice an attack on right wing politics. I guess you rather the silent majority stay silent?

In the mid 1800s a rift in the Democratic party emerged over the question "should the U.S. extend slavery to to the Western terrorties?", which split the party into two groups. With the Southern Democrats saying "yes we should" and the Northern saying "let the states decide". This led each side to offer their own canidate in the 1860 presidential election which ultimately split their vote and allowed Abraham Lincoin, the canidate of the recently formed Republican party to win.

These first republicans were against slavery which led to the Civil War from 1861-1865. Democrats all the while were labing themselves as the "white man's party". Even after the civil war (during the "Reconstruction era") Southern Democrats continued this mantra by creating a set of laws for African Americans called the "Black Codes". Which entailed forcing blacks to work in low wage jobs, limiting right to property, etc... It was during this period in the south that the KKK was formed. So while it would not be accurate to labal the KKK an official organ of the Democrat party, it was largely due to Democrat policies at the time that allowed for their inception.

Maybe I have misjudged you but you have certainly misjudged me and exactly for the reason for my previous post. Yes there are stereotypical people who are so invested in some paint-by-numbers herd mentality that they seem literally a definition of a term. There are also a larger number of diverse people as well as those who don't buy everything lock, stock and barrel. It is meaningless to try to define me as a Liberal OR a Conservative as I embrace a mix of both. Politically and economically I am very Conservative in the old school Libertarian sense of that word. Socially, I am quite liberal by some definitions of that term.

I see the extremes on both sides of that spectrum to prefer to try to stuff everyone and all ideas in one of two extreme boxes. It makes things easy and I think way too easy. It makes things possible to "write off" with no consideration required. I consider that intellectually lazy. It's a lot like the military, all militaries, tending to envision their perceived enemies as some sort of sub-human because that makes them easier to kill without a second thought. It's harder to realize they are basically just like us, with families, jobs, and typical concerns but just happen to be in a position of opposition. Now that's a Life and Death extreme but it exists in Politics, too which is exactly why the US Founding Fathers incorporated the system of Checks and Balances and divorced The State from The Clergy, since Clergy tend to be dogmatic and unwilling to see any larger picture let alone negotiate.

I have ambivalence toward Politicians... ALL politicians. On one hand I find them to be despicable in the way they so often deal like Used Car Salesmen, hiding relevant facts, spin doctoring to minimize concern and tout what benefits, real or imagined, they think will sell. They seem largely disingenuous. OTOH the only alternative to negotiation, Politics, is the barrel of a gun, just like that despicable man Chairman Mao thought and practiced. It seems to me politicians are the ultimate "Necessary Evil". I don't choose to become one of those for good or for ill.

It seems to me if you buy any party line hook,line and sinker, you become one. Does that not scare you? Do you not mind becoming a political caricature? where there is zero difference talking to you than any other Party Member?.. or would you prefer to think for yourself and not let Party Politics define you?

While the Republicans were generally against slavery they did not want to abolish it right away either but prevent its expansion to the western territories.

Its true the Democratic party of the south and white resistance lead to the demise of reconstruction but the sad part was many of the confederate leaders were "elected" to government which did not help thanks to Andrew Johnson. SCOTUS of that time ruled the new legislation as unconstitutional too like the right to vote.

If white supremacy was a democratic policy of the time then I might agree with you about the KKK.

Slavery existed in America since Columbus discovered the new world...

Actually some indigenous American tribes enslaved other tribe's members especially as a result of raiding, just like everywhere else in human history. Slavery was sparse in Hunter-Gatherer societies as slaves had little value to them and considerable deficit. Agricultural societies benefit the most from Slave labor. Early Industrial societies had some but less value on outright slavery preferring a for of indentured servitude. There have been articles about both Apple and Microsoft referring to employee conditions as a kind of "serfdom" so the entire concept of treating others in ways you would never wish to be treated still exists and I suspect will only be diminished by the invention/discovery of cheap, abundant energy, readily available to everyone. Someday...maybe.