Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Currently there are ten Black CEO's of Fortune 500 companies. According to a Google search there are twelve black billionaires in the United States. Here is a few of them. Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Tiger Woods, Oprah, Lebron James and musician Jay-Z. I think those chains have been lifted, at least for some anyway.
That could have come straight out of the mouth of Thomas Sowell or Ben Carson. You better watch it Adav8s28, people are going to start calling you a racist Republican.
...Of course, calling Biden racist is just another way of trolling the forum....
OK, then please explain Biden's crusade against school bussing. The only explanations I can think of are,
1. He was a racist segregationist, or
2. He wanted to keep poor minority students isolated in disadvantaged neighborhoods. If you keep people poor and dependent on government they're more likely to vote for Democrats, or so some Democratic Party politicians believe.
Which is it? Or do you have another explanation.
Kamala Harris brought this up in Democratic primary debates in 2020. She said she didn't think Biden was a racist, but she sure didn't sound convinced.
The realignment and the party sorting topics from your AI output are facts that some of the Republicans that post in this forum refuse to acknowledge or accept. Two examples of your conclusion are Senator Strom Thurman and David Duke the former Grand Dragon of the Louisiana Klan. Both left the democratic party to join the republican party after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act into law.
There you go again!
Spewing false liberal revisionist history, intended to salve the deep guilt pangs of the Democratic Party and deflect our attention away from their own long, sordid, racist history.
We've had this convo so many times already that my head hurts. When you keep bringing it up, I can only react with face palms.
Or... let's go the archives! Here is what I posted back on July 25, 2020:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad
Oh dear! Are the Dems in this forum once again trying to sweep the long racist history of their party under the rug by perpetrating the MYTH of the BIG SWITCH??
Well then, it must be time to invite Dinesh D'Souza to make an appearance as an eccie guest speaker and straighten out you liars!
Here ya go, start @ 32:30 to hear him debunk the Big Switch. Then be sure to go back and listen to the rest of his excellent expose of the sordid and disgusting history of the Democratic Party!
How many rebel flags do you see at a Democrat rally vs the number at Republican rallies?
How many CURRENT klansman or white nationalists support Democrat candidates vs Republican candidates?
Which party currently supports racist diatribes and policies?
Which party over the last say half century has elected the most minorities into public office or promoted or appointed more minorities to positions of policy making?
Disputing when Republicans got co-opted by the racist factions of this nation is irrelevant since the current status is that the current Republican Party loves and supports its racists.
How many rebel flags do you see at a Democrat rally vs the number at Republican rallies?
How many CURRENT klansman or white nationalists support Democrat candidates vs Republican candidates?
Which party currently supports racist diatribes and policies?
Which party over the last say half century has elected the most minorities into public office or promoted or appointed more minorities to positions of policy making?
Disputing when Republicans got co-opted by the racist factions of this nation is irrelevant since the current status is that the current Republican Party loves and supports its racists.
As to the bold text, so what? Klan members total roughly 3,000 to 8,000 people, and active participants in white nationalist and neo-Nazi organizations total 10,000 to 25,000. There are 70 to 75 million Republican leaning voters. So the Klansmen and white supremacists are a drop in the bucket, regardless of their party affiliation.
You are correct that minorities, particularly blacks, are more involved in the Democratic Party. The Republicans have to do better. And some subset of the party needs to ditch the Confederate flags.
The rest of the post is your subjective, unquantifiable opinion. The current Republican Party does not love and support its racists. And yeah, dumb ass Trump has no business calling white supremacists "very good people." Like every major, mainstream Republican leader since Abraham Lincoln, he should condemn them.
Oh man, Tiny, I thought you were way too smart for the “very fine people” hoax.
OK Jacuzzme, you got me, honestly. Looking up the incident, I see that Trump did say “You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides.” But he went on to say, “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.”
OK Jacuzzme, you got me, honestly. Looking up the incident, I see that Trump did say “You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides.” But he went on to say, “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.”
... Yeah, you missed that, mate.
As did the LYING liberal media and Democrat politicians.
Missed it on purpose. ...
... With them - no bleedin' wonder some people feel that
there's racist white fokes in the GOP. ...
Spewing false liberal revisionist history, intended to salve the deep guilt pangs of the Democratic Party and deflect our attention away from their own long, sordid, racist history.
We've had this convo so many times already that my head hurts. When you keep bringing it up, I can only react with face palms.
Or... let's go the archives! Here is what I posted back on July 25, 2020:
Funny---Dinesh D'Souza is an Indian immigrant. I watched this. He does not make a convincing argument that The Big Switch didn't happen as historically presented. If anything, he is presenting revisionist history.
He says the switch from Democrat to Republican overall occurred because Blacks switched to the Democrat Party during the New Deal because of economic reasons (that's all he says) and Southern whites switched to the Republican party because the South became less racist. These are the two main arguments he uses to destroy the myth of The Big Switch.
I asked Claude.AI if Dinesh D'Souza successfully debunked The Big Switch and received the following:
Quote:
No, D'Souza did not successfully debunk The Big Switch. Here's why the scholarly consensus remains firmly against his argument:
**What the evidence actually shows**
The regional realignment is documented across multiple independent lines of evidence — voting records, party platforms, congressional roll calls, and electoral maps. A few key facts D'Souza's argument struggles to explain:
- **Congressional voting patterns:** Republican support for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (80%) was higher than Democratic support (61%), but this breakdown was *regional*, not simply partisan. Northern Democrats voted overwhelmingly in favor; Southern Democrats opposed it. Those Southern congressional seats gradually flipped Republican over the following decades.
- **The "Southern Strategy":** Internal Republican Party documents and statements from figures like Lee Atwater (a senior GOP strategist) explicitly acknowledged that the party pursued Southern white voters alienated by Democratic support for civil rights. This is not disputed among historians.
- **Gradual electoral shift:** The South went from near-total Democratic dominance to near-total Republican dominance between roughly 1964 and 1994 — precisely tracking the civil rights era. D'Souza has no compelling alternative explanation for this timing.
**Problems with D'Souza's methodology**
Historians and political scientists broadly criticized *Hillary's America* for several reasons:
- He conflates the *party label* with the *regional coalition and ideology*, ignoring that both shifted together.
- He focuses heavily on the 19th century while glossing over the post-1964 transformation, which is the heart of the "Big Switch" argument.
- He selectively cites individual politicians who didn't switch while ignoring the broader electorate and congressional makeup that clearly did.
- He offers no credible explanation for *why* the South — once the Democratic stronghold — became the Republican stronghold in the precise decades following the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.
**The academic verdict**
No peer-reviewed historical or political science scholarship has validated D'Souza's framing. His work is treated as political advocacy rather than serious history. Even some conservative scholars and commentators distanced themselves from the book's methodology.
**The fair nuance**
The "Big Switch" is sometimes *oversimplified* in popular discourse — it wasn't a single dramatic moment and relatively few individual politicians literally changed party registration. A more accurate description is a *Great Realignment* that unfolded over 30+ years. To that narrow extent, D'Souza correctly pushes back on the most cartoonish version of the narrative. But that's a far cry from debunking the underlying reality that the two parties' regional bases and ideological characters did substantially reverse over the 20th century — which remains the mainstream, well-evidenced historical position.
