I’d vote for her myself, and I believe that a majority will, so go for it babe!
No, i said no such thing. The state has monopolized law and protection. If it ended this monopoly, blacks would have been free to protect themselves by all means necessary, including private protection firms.
Prejudice was not fought. Period. Certain types of discrimination were fought. Prejudice is an instinct. You would sound as silly claiming that sexual appetites were fought. In fact it would be a funny throwback to your progressive roots.
I think she’s going to fall flat on her face. The reason is that her popularity went up as Secretary of State. As a Presidential candidate, all her negatives will come back to the fore. Her polling numbers have been consistently dropping since she went from SecState to prospective candidate. She’s not a talented enough campaigner to win over new people. In 2008, she won over no new Democratic voters. Obama not only did that, but took many of hers as well. If she can’t win over new Democrats, she can’t win over new independents.
In 2016, at any rate, I’m sure she can beat any Pub whose name has yet been floated.
I am aware of what government does. One thing it does is pay individuals to participate in military adventures that bring death and destruction to millions of people. Some are well known like Clinton. Others are mostly anonymous and rarely leave suburbia.
They can do that now.
If they have the money.
Sometimes; but sometimes, “No Negros inside the town line after sundown” was an actual town ordinance.
Check out Sundown Towns, by James Loewen. It’s quite a doorstopper, but it tells the whole story of a fascinating and usually overlooked side of American history. For instance, did you know that no Jews were allowed to buy property in Levittown (when the lots first went on the market, that is; there must be some there now)? William Levitt was Jewish himself, but he would not sell to Jews – if he did, the “better” class of white gentiles would not have wanted to live there.
BTW, most sundown towns were outside the South. Southern whites wanted to keep blacks in a subordinate and servile position, but, on those terms, were very well accustomed to having them around. Loewen recounts how genteel Southern visitors to the Midwest were astonished to find their hosts had no blacks around even as servants.
Be honest now. When Al Gore was running against GWB, while Bill Clinton was enjoying 60+% approval ratings, did you think there was any chance Gore wouldn’t cream him?
Hillary Clinton won’t be running with that kind of wind at her back. She’ll be having to figure out how to distinguish herself from Obama, whereas Gore had the option of pledging to continue Clinton’s policies or be his own man(he chose wrong, incidentally).
Yes, actually. I could perceive a Pub backlash brewing, and W at the time seemed to be at any rate an unobjectionable placeholder.
You keep saying that, but you keep forgetting that Obama himself is far less popular than his policies.
And that and 50 cents will get you a gumball. It’s also not completely true. On specific issues, such as foreign policy, the economy, etc., he’s actually running under his overall job approval. Obama the man is probably more popular than his policies. Even if his approval is under 30%, I think he’d get a prime speaking slot at the convention just because among Democrats he’s teflon.
WillFarnaby, perhaps you read my Mod instructions too literally
Stop the hijack involving discussions of what government does or fails to do.
And anyone else that continues to respond to his off-topic posts will receive the same Warning that he appears to desire.
[ /Moderating ]