GOP, 'WHITE CHRISTIAN PARTY'

Cleon said:
Not at all. It's a reflection of reality.
Click to expand...
Aren't all stereotypes a reflection of reality?

ster·e·o·type
n.
A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image.
Click to expand...

Your article even says so--"Republicans tend to make more money, Democrats are more ethnically diverse, Republicans are more religious and Democrats are more liberal."
Click to expand...
And "tends to" is the stuff of stereotypes.

The Republican party is overwhelmingly white and Christian. That's reality. Of course, your article would be more useful if it analyzed the parties rather than the population; in other how many in the Democratic/Republican leadership are white, Christian, etc. Break it down by leadership positions, prominent activists, etc.
Click to expand...
I agree, do you have that data or are you simply making a specious assumption?
 
Cleon said:
Not at all. It's a reflection of reality. Your article even says so--"Republicans tend to make more money, Democrats are more ethnically diverse, Republicans are more religious and Democrats are more liberal."

The Republican party is overwhelmingly white and Christian. That's reality. Of course, your article would be more useful if it analyzed the parties rather than the population; in other how many in the Democratic/Republican leadership are white, Christian, etc. Break it down by leadership positions, prominent activists, etc.
Click to expand...

Are the democrats not overwhelmingly "white and christian"?
 
Ed said:
Are the democrats not overwhelmingly "white and christian"?
Click to expand...

Yep, just not to as great an extent. If Dean had referred to the Democratic Party in such a fashion, I would have responded similarly (regarding the Pope, bear, Elvis, etc).
 
Cleon said:
Yep, just not to as great an extent. If Dean had referred to the Democratic Party in such a fashion, I would have responded similarly (regarding the Pope, bear, Elvis, etc).
Click to expand...

Point is, it is unavoidabel Unless, of course, Bush has his way.

As it is, Deans comment is purely perjuritive.

I still think that Dean is doing his best to make the Dems a third party.
 
I think ultimately Dean is divisive. He complains that his remarks become the focus and not the important issues. Here's some advice Howie. You are a politician. If you don't want your ideas to be the focus then use different ideas. Don't attack and villify an entire group of people. Figure out a way to energize your base and raise money without energizing your opponents base. As yet you are failing.
 
Perhaps the Dems need a Dean to make their candidate appear less radical. Sort of like how Rush and Hannity make any Repub candidate appear more centrist.
 
Figures I'd see this after making a similar post. sigh (I did do a search on "Dean") Pardon.
 
corplinx said:
Really, I haven't enjoyed the dogpiling on Howard Dean as of late. Terry McAulife (sp?) was a bitter partisan and always said outlandish things at these sorts of meetings Dean goes to where the audience _wants_ to hear some energizing rhetoric. This is Howard Dean's job if you judge it by Terry's execution. Terry was always lieing, obfuscating, grandstanding, spinning, fussing, fueling, tooling.

However, I accepted Terry's performance as part of being a tough competitor. The base doesn't want to hear "can't we all just get along". The base wants to hear "we're right, they're wrong, and we will defeat them".
Click to expand...

As someone who generally wants Republicans to do better than Democrats, here's hoping that Dean does as well as McAuliffe.
 
He should have said a white, christian-supremacist party. That would have been more accurate.
 
RandFan said:
"Why did I lie"? Oh for Christ's sake, it was mistake that I withdrew. NO HE DIDN'T SAY "ONLY" It is still stupid rhetoric based on a stereotype.
Click to expand...

It's a "mistake" that the right-wingers here make routinely when replying to others who disagree with them.

The "push it to an extreme" is something that happens far too often, and is often (I give you credit for being otherwise) supported even after it's detected.
 
corplinx said:
Really, I haven't enjoyed the dogpiling on Howard Dean as of late. Terry McAulife (sp?) was a bitter partisan and always said outlandish things at these sorts of meetings Dean goes to where the audience _wants_ to hear some energizing rhetoric. This is Howard Dean's job if you judge it by Terry's execution. Terry was always lieing, obfuscating, grandstanding, spinning, fussing, fueling, tooling.
Click to expand...

And yet look how quickly the media jumps on the Dem chairman once he tries his hand at it. Odd. They're so liberal after all (har har). It probably doesn't help that its Dean. They act like a really nasty high school click putting one of the geeks in their place when it comes to Dean. It also doesn't help that the Dems are such collasal pussies. They're already backing down, distancing themselves from Dean. Or at least the other party leaders are. (And the white Christian comment was dumb, I must admit, though the vast majority of the other comments he's being attacked for hardly warrent it).

"some Republicans have never worked an honest day in their lives." Damn! thats a new low in american politics. Right...
 
Who did Ann Coulter have to sleep with...

You mean "threathen to sleep with", don't you?

Well, yes, that's obvious, but look at the vilification Dean gets for telling the truth. That's the real news here, more of the big lie.

This is precisely why the democrats keep losing elections:

1). D.r Howard "Nutcase" Dean makes another "I hate Republicans" statement.

2). He alienates precisely those swing voters who voted Republican in the past and might cosider Democratic candidates now, by telling them how awful and evil they are.

3). The idiots of the moveon.org type look at the backlash against Dean's latest outburst and claim it is all the evil Republican propaganda's fault (just like everything else.)

4). They further alienate moderates by making it seem that Dean's latest outburst is the official belief of most Democrats.

END RESULT:

a). Another rise in Republican voters due to Dean's stupidity and moveon's paranoia;

b). Another rise in Democratic paranoia and self-righteousness, making sure that

c). Dean's next foot-in-mouth incident will be even more stupidly defended: "Look, when St. Dean said he wants to eat Republican babies, he was saying the truth about how the Republican brainwashing of the young must be stopped by any means before they destroy America! Whaddaya mean, he's nuts??? Are you part of the Republican propaganda machine or somethin'???"
 
Snide said:
Perhaps the Dems need a Dean to make their candidate appear less radical. Sort of like how Rush and Hannity make any Repub candidate appear more centrist.
Click to expand...

You have a point; but the Republicans don't nominate them to head the party.
 
Religiously, Jews are staunchly Democratic, 55 percent to 18 percent, and likewise atheists favor Democrats, 31 percent to 15 percent. Unfortunately for Democrats, white Catholics have been trending Republican in recent decades, and the survey I'm using to write this put white Catholics at 32 percent Democratic and 31 percent Republican. White Protestants are overwhelmingly Republican, 40 percent to 26 percent. Of those, evangelical Protestants are even more Republican compared with mainline Protestant denominations. Additionally, the more orthodox views and the greater frequency of church attendance white Christians have, the more likely they are to be Republican.
Click to expand...
This doesn't answer the question of what the composition of the Republican party is, but what percentage of these racial and religious groups identify with each party. Courtesy of Gallup, subscription needed, article by Lydia Saad dating from July of 2000.
In terms of gender, men outnumber women in the Republican Party by a six-point margin, 53% to 47%. By contrast, women outnumber men among Democrats by a 14-point margin, 57% to 43%. And if the Republican convention hall looks to be noticeably lacking in minorities next week, it could be because the party at large is 93% white, with only 3% of Republicans reporting to be black and 4% reporting to be other racial minorities such as Asian or American Indian. While a majority of Democrats are also white, the proportion is much lower, at 75%, while 19% are black and 6% are other minorities.
Click to expand...
A graph shows religion: Republican Protestant, Roman Catholic, Orthodox(Christianity), Mormon and other Christian categories are 44%, 24%, 1%, 3% and 6%. 78% total Christian. Democrat percentages for the same groups are 34%, 25%, 1%, 1% and 6%. 67% total. (2%+/- margin of error)

I saw several articles commenting on Dean's statement that mentioned a CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll that said 82% of Republicans and 57% of Democrats are white and Christian, but couldn't find the poll itself, so I don't know if that degree of overlap is accurate.

Census Bureau DP-1 Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000 says 75.1% of Americans are white.

Gallup's numbers on Christians in 2000 is 52% Protestant, 25% Catholic, 1% Orthodox, 2% Mormon, 5% Christian non-specific. As of May 5th, 2005, the Protestant percentage declined to 48% and non-specific Christian rose to 7%.

So whatever anyone wants to make of it, there are the numbers.
 
RandFan said:
The Republican party is monolithic, only Christian and only white. Sounds like rhetoric to me. Dumb rhetoric. Anyone have any evidence or are we supposed to bow our heads and accept it as gospel?
Click to expand...
He's talking about the elected representatives, and their unusually apartheid proportions. Which is something you can see for yourself if you choose to look.
 
SlippyToad said:
...and their unusually apartheid proportions.
Click to expand...
Could you please explain.

Which is something you can see for yourself if you choose to look.
Click to expand...
I did not read it this way. If this is what is meant then I will agree that this is true to a large extent.
 
You got to love the Democrats' logic: first they warn minorities to not vote for that evil, evil, Republican party which wants to bring back slavery, and then they blame the Republican party because not many minorities join it. It's the same sort of logic that first refuses to have ROTC offices on elite campuses and then whines that few graduates of elite universities join the military.

That is changing though--the real reason for the "RACISTS!!!!" accusations by democrats against republicans is that more and more minorities are voting republican lately, and should be scared back to the plantation.
 
Skeptic said:
You got to love the Democrats' logic: first they warn minorities to not vote for that evil, evil, Republican party which wants to bring back slavery, and then they blame the Republican party because not many minorities join it. It's the same sort of logic that first refuses to have ROTC offices on elite campuses and then whines that few graduates of elite universities join the military.

That is changing though--the real reason for the "RACISTS!!!!" accusations by democrats against republicans is that more and more minorities are voting republican lately, and should be scared back to the plantation.
Click to expand...
It's true, AIU there is currently a significant shift in demographics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom