Why should Trump voters acquiesce and admit the 2020 election was on the up and up just because the media will shame and ground pound them until they do?

CNN’s Gary Tuchman speaks with New Hampshire voters following the CNN Republican presidential town hall with former President Donald Trump.
— CNN, 5/11/23

We’re to believe the same Joe Biden, who spent most of the campaign out of public view, got more votes than Barack Obama. We’re to believe Joe Biden, who made numerous gaffes of senility and racism, overcame setbacks because he had a superior delivery? We’re to believe all of the vote count irregularities on Election Night and following morning were something we must ignore?

While the Democrats and their media insist there was “no evidence of voter fraud”, that doesn’t really mean it didn’t happen. It’s just they don’t want Republicans to talk about it, especially because the most significant election interference came from the media, the Democrat Party and their activists.

It started right after Donald Trump’s election in 2016. You know, when Democrats insisted he was an illegitimately-elected president and tried to decertify his victory.

And one by one, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. — presiding over a joint session of Congress to validate the Electoral College results in Mr. Trump’s victory — turned back their challenges with a stoic message, pounding his gavel without hesitation. “It is over,” Mr. Biden said at one point, as Republicans rose to their feet to cheer.
— New York Times, 1/6/17

The election interference began with the “Russia collusion” hoax, that despite it’s origins from the Hillary Clinton campaign, occupied more than two years of slanderous media coverage and a taxpayer-funded special counsel investigation that offered a half-assed vindication of Trump the left refuses to accept to this day.

If Trump were to reclaim the White House in 2024, Former Attorney General Bill Barr warned of “chaos” and the potential for Trump to self-sabotage his own agenda as president.
— USA Today, 5/7/23

Chaos usually requires a catalyst. In the case of the Trump presidency, it was an unrelentingly partisan media and Deep State, butthurt their preferred Hillary Clinton was rejected by the American people and determined to do everything they could to exact revenge and damage from Day One on.

They attacked hourly for over five years, Trump responded rather directly (see: “mean Tweets”), and we all know a second Trump term would be more of the same.

That’s the “chaos” Barr, other mouthpieces, and Republican presidential candidates will refer to but will absolve the instigators by not mentioning them.

Trump’s first term was engulfed in the “chaos” the left and their media created, resulting in two failed impeachments, an intentional pandemic and despite all that, his accomplishments for the American people were numerous and historic. We always hear the squishy excuse their non-votes because “both sides are the same”. The American people will have a very recent and clear contrast between the Trump and Biden presidencies. Only blind hatred would make a Democrat vote for an additional four years of this shit; their best option would be to stay home, must to the consternation of the left.

More election interference will be needed to offset Biden-voter lethargy, and the first will be to remind and assure voters that vote fraud did not happen in 2020, 2022, and won’t happen in 2024. Common sense won’t work. You have to admit, intimidation did when it counted most.

State and federal judges — some appointed by Trump — have dismissed more than 50 lawsuits brought by Trump or his allies alleging election fraud and other irregularities. Independent experts, governors and state election officials from both parties say there has been no evidence of widespread fraud.
— Reuters, 12/21/20

THIS is the basis for the left’s demand Trump voters accept the election result they worked very hard to achieve. So why would state and federal judges, some appointed by Trump, dismiss these lawsuits? Simple.

The nation witnessed a full summer-plus of liberal Democrats running wild through the streets of America, disrupted public freedom of movement, looted, burned, injured and killed police and civilians alike. The media excused the “mostly peaceful” rioters, demonized law enforcement, and even some politicians worked to fund-raise for the bail to release the domestic terrorists.

The vandalism and looting following the death of George Floyd at the hands of the Minneapolis police will cost the insurance industry more than any other violent demonstrations in recent history. The protests that took place in 140 U.S. cities this spring were mostly peaceful, but the arson, vandalism and looting that did occur will result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion of paid insurance claims
— Axios, 9/16/20

Nine of the people killed during protests were demonstrators taking part in Black Lives Matter protests. Two were conservatives killed after pro-Trump “patriot rallies”. All but one were killed by fellow citizens.
— The Guardian, 10/31/20

Imagine being a judge in 2020; a judge that probably has a spouse and children. Despite their oaths to faithfully render lawful decisions and verdicts, let’s also note they are human beings. They, too, witnessed the summer of violence and it’s understandable that they would prefer not subject themselves and their families to intimidation (or worse) at the hands of organized, angry liberal mobs. It’s not like the left doesn’t intimidate judges, even those with federal protection….

CNN political analyst David Gregory called the attempted murder of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh “horrifying” and slammed the left for being “so hypocritical” about blaming the right for mob violence and not addressing their own side’s role in motivating such behavior.

Gregory declared, “And this is horrifying. I mean, activism has its place, of course, speaking out has its place, but to threaten a Supreme Court justice and his family outside of his home is beyond the pale, cannot be tolerated, every politician has an obligation to stand up, condemn this and to do something about it.”
— Fox News, 6/9/22

Intimidation wasn’t denounced by the left because it’s a tactic they will use until their violence takes out someone of elevated stature on their side. Then we’ll ALL be implicated and told to turn down the volume.

Republican candidates and blabbermouths can warn voters about the possibility of “chaos” if Donald Trump again earns the nomination, let alone the presidency in 2024, but if Ron DeSantis promises calm if he’s elected, he’s either a liar or dangerously naive. Local media is nothing compared to what’s in store for him should he secure the Republican nomination for president. It’s obvious he knows that.

Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law Thursday that exempts records related to his travel from the state’s robust public disclosure law. Republicans said the measure was necessary to protect DeSantis and prevent details about his travel habits and security detail from falling into the hands of people who might be plotting an attack on the governor. Asked about the measure last week, DeSantis said it wasn’t his idea.

Sure.

The law applies retroactively and would cover his extensive use of state planes throughout his time as governor. It would also cover records related to visitors to the governor’s mansion, opponents said.
— CNN, 5/11/23

Not a good look from someone who claims to be a voice of calm and reason, compared to you-know-who.

Now that we have millions of new potential Democrat voters (illegal aliens) that will be invading cities and neighborhoods across the nation between now and the next election, there will be more than enough rioting and destruction that will provide cover for any targeted intimidation the left wishes to conduct.

Donald Trump has been there, done that, and seemingly relishes in any opportunity to stick it to the next-in-line who foolishly believes they’ll be the one to finally put him in his place. All the others running have witness it happening to him but it won’t become real until it happens them, and it WILL be real.

There will be chaos. The left has made it not just a threat but a promise.

But with the ongoing socialist-Democrat, #BigTech-led purge of all things conservative and Republican, these “principled” corporation is taking the cowardly approach and have joined in on the left-wing attacks.

Republicans in Congress faced growing blowback on Monday from businesses that said they would cut off campaign contributions to those who voted last week to challenge President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

The announcements by Amazon.com, General Electric Co, Dow, AT&T, Comcast Corp, Verizon Communications, American Express Co, Airbnb, Best Buy and Mastercard, among others, threaten to throttle fundraising resources for Republicans who will soon be out of power in the White House and both chambers of Congress. AT&T and Comcast, for example, are among the biggest corporate donors in Washington.
— Daily Mail (UK), 1/11/21

The question to these corporations and their newly-woke values should rightly be, where the hell were they in 2000 and 2004 when Democrats lost the presidential election and shortly thereafter, challenged the outcome using the same process used by President Trump and his allies now decried?

BTW — To acknowledge a consistency to this day, the majority of “irregularities” cited in 2000 and 2004 occurred in Democrat-run black districts. Funny how that keeps happening….

The pile-on is now safe.

Deutsche Bank AG and Signature Bank, two of Donald Trump’s favored lenders, are pulling away from the billionaire president in the wake of last week’s deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The German lender has decided not to conduct any further business with Trump and his company, said two people with knowledge of the matter, asking not to be identified because the deliberations were confidential. Trump owes the Frankfurt-based lender more than $300 million.

Signature Bank, the New York lender that’s long catered to his family, is closing two personal accounts in which Trump held about $5.3 million, a spokesperson for the firm said on Monday. It’s also calling for the president to step aside before his term officially ends on Jan. 20.
— Bloomberg, 1/12/21

Some of these corporations have made it known they’ll revisit this policy in time for the 2022 elections where political winds may change and it may be necessary to curry favor with Republicans. They’ll depend on short memories; something too many in politics have in abundance where campaign dollars are concerned.

The blowback from Trump supporters, and the sane portion of the public, is real and it hurts.

Facebook sees $34 billion erased from market cap as Trump-ban fallout continues to spook tech investors
Twitter loses $5 billion in market value after Trump is permanently barred from the platform

It never takes long for the arrogants to display their chutzpah and racist condescension.

The current damage done to the conservative, Trump-supporting electorate will be something we’ll be told to get over and these cowardly, politically-motivated corporations will soon find out how their #woke decision plays out in the real world.

Before you start naming off the obvious, let’s put this into perspective.

There are many black conservatives who’ve worked, more of less, behind the scenes to promote Republican values. Very few have been formally embraced by the Republican Party because many of us were at it long before the prominence of social media. It was more about the mission of pushing back against the kneejerk all-Republicans-are-racist narrative. We appeared in hostile environments, took on controversial issues, and at times our messaging was much more informative and engaging than your average wonk.

CNN only invite black conservatives on their broadcasts when we speak out of turn, have to be questioned as to our sanity, and ridiculed once the segments end. We are the Fox News backstop against unfounded or made up accusations against the movement and/or the party. We do it more for love of the concept of conservatism that the Republican Party itself.

In many respects, we outperform the party when it comes to the means of creating messages and the fat-and-happy entrenched are naturally threatened by those who do it better.

For example, I dare you to find ONE speaker who so effortlessly and fearlessly explained conservative opposition to gay marriage when the topic was white hot or since….

This was not issued in the mocking, self-promoting tone many of today’s younger mouthpieces would. There were no Facebook likes and Twitter follows to be gained when Alan Keyes spoke in Boston. This wasn’t streamed online. It couldn’t be shared by the hundreds of thousands as to create a back-patting metric that excites today’s nonprofits and cable news interests.

The older group of black conservative activists I knew/know were comfortable with our individual methods of reach. Hardly any of us got rich off our activism but if we could speak somewhere and later be surrounded by a room full of students who never heard black people speaking the way we did and just had to hear more, that’s all we needed to keep us going. We never lied to anyone about who we are, how we got here, and where we wanted to go. All that’s off the table now, as in any movement, there are those who are there more for themselves than the movement.

Unlike “Good Trubah”, there will be no CNN Films documentaries honoring Lloyd, Harry or Herman. At least Mr. Cain got an R.I.P. mention on Fox News and some talk radio shows, once. And as many times as we physically stuck our necks out for the cause, I foresee no formal honors on the conservative side for any of us when our times come and I think we’re okay with that.

Allan, Zo, Star, Alan, Erik, Mychal, Anita, Alveda, Jesse Lee, Larry, Charles, David, Niger, Lynn, C.L., William, and my other black conservative acquaintances will be remembered for more than opening a door. We did it at a time where there was no real market for our sincere points-of-view and there was nothing really to personally gain. We did it because it needed to be done and we had to be damn good at it.

As the left’s #CancelCulture ramped up in intensity, the House of Representatives had to prove themselves relevant.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday ordered the removal of four portraits in the Capitol of previous House Speakers who served in the Confederacy. The move marks Pelosi’s latest effort to take down Confederate imagery in the Capitol, following her push last week calling for the removal of 11 Confederate statues displayed in the Capitol complex.

In a letter to the House clerk, Pelosi requested the “immediate removal” of the portraits of four Speakers who served the Confederacy in various capacities: Robert Hunter of Virginia, Howell Cobb of Georgia, James Orr of South Carolina and Charles Crisp of Georgia.
— The Hill, 6/18/20

It was obviously an innocent oversight that Speaker Pelosi didn’t mention that Hunter, Cobb, Orr and Crisp were all Democrats.

In an effort to infuse some consistency, Rep. Louie Gohmert, Republican from Texas, decided to issue a resolution of his own….

Of course, this will invoke the oft-repeated hysterical recitation that one bright, sunny day, the Republican and Democrat parties just up and “switched” positions.

“A great portion of the history of the Democratic Party is filled with racism and hatred. Since people are demanding we rid ourselves of the entities, symbols, and reminders of the repugnant aspects of our past, then the time has come for Democrats to acknowledge their party’s loathsome and bigoted past, and consider changing their party name to something that isn’t so blatantly and offensively tied to slavery, Jim Crow, discrimination, and the Ku Klux Klan,” Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said in a statement.

The resolution is co-sponsored by GOP Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Jody Hice (Ga.), Randy Weber (Texas) and Andy Harris (Md.). It comes after the House on Wednesday voted to remove from the Capitol statues of people who served in the Confederacy or defended slavery.
— The Hill, 7/23/20

Yeah, right.

For more information on the untaught history, see The Democrat Race Lie.

Not much, regarding the issues mentioned, has changed since.

This Is the Woman Who Could Help Republicans Win in November

Ronna Romney McDaniel loves the phrase “You don’t get what you don’t ask for.”

McDaniel, 45, is supremely confident about asking for what she wants: Since January 2017, when she became the chair of the Republican National Committee, she has helped the party haul in well over $210 million, more than any previous RNC chair during a midterm election cycle. The Michigan-based mom of two has traveled more than 150,000 miles, visiting over half the states. But there’s no time to rest: Republicans are fighting to keep their hold on Congress in a November vote that is widely seen as a referendum on President Donald Trump.
— Glamour Magazine, 9/13/18

If you can raise large amounts of money, cool. You need to be able to show results and if the game is politics during a political season, you need to assure donors and voters that you’re competitive. Appearances on cable news is one thing and it’s sad how that alone can be enough to give one credibility.

It also means you need to have players on the field, something Ronna Romney McDaniel’s Republican Party has monumentally failed at doing, especially in a campaign season predicted to be razor-thin close.

In 2018, a total of 3 U.S. House races do not have a Democratic candidate and 39 U.S. House races do not have a Republican candidate.
— Ballotpedia

The standard excuse issued is that some races are “unwinnable”; an excuse clearly debunked by that well-known term “upset victory”. However, upset victories are only possible if an effort is made and maintained.

Just ask PRESIDENT Trump.

When the final numbers are tallied on election night, we’re hoping the Republican Party keeps both the House and Senate so President Trump’s agenda can continue to move full steam ahead.

However should the Republicans lose the House and the margin is within 39 seats, we hope Ronna Romney McDaniel has more than excuses why the party couldn’t find and support a candidate to at least try and make those races competitive. We hope she has an even better reason on why she should keep HER job, which could be argued was more about the protecting the self-serving while making a half-assed attempt at recruiting those who wish to serve the American people.

In very few instances is a no-show acceptable, especially when it’s your well-paid job to not only raise money to keep your employees compensated and your expensive overhead covered, but to also support candidates who’re sticking their necks out.

That is, unless, you dropped the ball and there are no candidates to support.

11/7/18 UPDATE:

As it turns out, Republicans lost the House by 26 seats.

There are many teams prior to the start of the 2018 National Football League season that we all know don’t have a shot in hell in winning the Super Bowl, yet they try and find the best possible players to put on the field in an attempt to compete, and some even win. At the start of the last National Hockey League season, no one believed an expansion team would make it to the Stanley Cup final. Yes, they didn’t win but had they adopted the wisdom of the Republican Party, Las Vegas wouldn’t have even put that team on the ice.

Would those 39 uncontested seats have produced victories? That all depends on how invested Ronna and the national party would have been to that district, but it also shows the lack of interest a “sacrificial lamb” had in sticking his or her neck out knowing they’d receive zero meaningful help from the GOP. One would think Republicans living in those districts would have appreciated the courtesy of having a candidate, other than a Democrat, to vote for.

But her Uncle Mitt found his way back to Capitol Hill, one step closer to what he’s always believed is his birthright, whether the people of Utah or the United States want him or not and Ronna’s presence can only be there for a reason, given her years of experience and political acumen.

Romney McDaniel began her political career in 2012 working on the presidential campaign of her uncle, Michigan native and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. She was elected one of Michigan’s two representatives on the Republican National Committee in 2014 and was elected  chairman of the Michigan Republican Party in 2015.
— Detroit Free Press, 12/9/16

Turning Michigan red in 2014 wasn’t that monumental an accomplishment given the backlash that had been brewing against Barack Obama and Democrats for years. But her name was enough, losing with Mitt in 2012 wasn’t enough and now Ronna Romney McDaniel takes the 2018 midterm House loss with a smile.

That “blue wave” hit the Trump red wall… it was a great night for Republicans!
— RNC Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel, 11/7/18

Tell that to the driven Republican candidates who lost and voters who had no GOP option.

Let’s do some easy math.

In 2018, there were 435 congressional district races and 35 senate races. According to OpenSecrets, the GOP raised $283.6 million and spent $274.7 million. That could’ve come out to roughly $584,415.00 per race, not including what the candidates individually raised. Even if that expenditure per campaign were lowered to $450k per race so assistance could be shared with statewide candidates, there was more than enough cash to help candidates that needed support while keeping the GOP staff fat and comfortable with the remaining $34.2 million “cash on hand”.

Like most on the D.C. political level, failing to do what you were hired to do is not a fireable offense like in almost every other business entity. We’re probably stuck with McDaniel for the foreseeable future and we’ll also soon see where her true alliances lie and why she was installed as Chairman of the Republican Party in the first place.

We demand that you stop honoring both those who fought to preserve the institution of Black bondage as well as those who profited from it. Instead, we demand that homage is paid to those who died in the quest to free themselves from from the hands of those sought to keep them as laborers never as citizens and as property not as people.
— Petition

Not like it matters.

Of course, the one small detail these activists ALWAYS leave out is “those who fought to preserve the institution of Black bondage” were Democrats and “those who died in the quest to free themselves from from the hands of those sought to keep them as laborers” were Republicans.

See: The Democrat Race Lie

But in a coordinated attempt to call all who oppose them as racists, the so-called educated are now lecturing the rest of the nation and demanding we eradicate the names of prominent Democrats who fought until the 1960s to keep blacks in their place.

The whitewashing of their racist legacy continues to this day.

7/23/18: Residents of Valdosta want Forrest Street changed to Obama
7/18/18: Peter Faneuil Hall Name Change? Some Want It Because Of Slavery Ties
7/18/18: FSU is removing a statue of its slave-owning founder Francis Eppes
7/17/18: Charlottesville parks, once named for Confederate generals, to change names again
7/11/18: After $20K donation, 3 Petersburg schools change Confederate names
7/2/18: IDEA John T. Allan school sheds name after learning of Confederate origin
6/28/18: Should area school named after ‘Little House’ author Laura Ingalls Wilder get a new name?
6/23/18: Alexandria strips Confederate president Jefferson Davis’s name from highway
5/30/18: Petition Circulated To Change John L. Hadley Park To Malcolm X Park
5/26/18: Student cites slave owner legacy in effort to change the name of James Madison High School
5/22/18: Slave ownership stops John Walden Meyers Secondary name change
5/21/18: Students and Community leaders speak in support of changing the name of Robert E. Lee High
5/21/18: Feds change the name of Confederate Corners on Highway 68 to Springtown
5/17/18: Movement would rename St. Paul school named for slave-owning president James Monroe
5/4/18: This DC school was named for Benjamin Grayson Orr, a mayor and slave owner. Not anymore.
4/26/18: Boston Changes ‘Yawkey Way’ To ‘Jersey Street’ After Concerns Over Racist Legacy
2/28/18: Brookline Will Change Name Of School Named For Edward Devotion, Slave Owner
2/2/18: Georgia Senate votes unanimously to rename Runaway Negro Creek
1/24/18: School Board renames Jefferson Davis MS after slave, Revolutionary War hero from Hampton
1/19/18: Minnesota lake named for pro-slavery Calhoun gets new name
1/19/18: Virginia School Named for Confederate General Changed to Barack Obama Elementary
11/27/17: Berkeley school will no longer be named for slave owner Joseph Le Conte, board decides
11/21/17: Confederate Motors officially announces name change
11/13/17: AISD moves to rename remaining schools with Confederate ties by August
8/31/17: New Paltz’s founding families were slaveholders; should names be stricken from college buildings?
8/27/17: Stockton University removes bust of slave owner Richard Stockton
8/18/17: Temple student wants Philly to rename Roger B. Taney Street after Mo’ne Davis
8/14/17: Jacksonville City Council president calls for Confederate memorials to be moved off public property
8/4/17: Change the name of Sienna Plantation
5/18/17: Slave-owning, KKK-supporting namesake of Wade Hampton High sparks name-change controversy
4/26/17: New Orleans begins controversial removal of Confederate monuments
4/11/17: Echoes of slave-owning past bring change to Rice’s college masters
2/11/17: Yale changes name of building honoring slave owner John C. Calhoun
2/10/17: Rutgers proposes renaming parts of campus after former slaves
10/13/16: Residents strongly urge city to rename Third Ward Lt. Richard Dowling St. Emancipation Avenue
10/12/16: City Council minority group urges NYCHA to remove names of slave-owner from public housing
9/28/16: Wade Hampton no more: Alaska census area honoring Confederate officer is renamed
9/8/16: San Francisco school board president calls for the renaming of schools tied to slavery
2/25/16: Harvard abolishes ‘master’ in titles in slavery row
1/10/16: Local historian likely to withdraw Gen. William Saffold street name change request
11/23/15: Princeton students demand removal of Woodrow Wilson’s name from buildings
7/14/15: Group calls for removal of Confederate monument in Portsmouth
7/9/15: UC Berkeley students call for renaming of campus buildings tied to Confederacy
7/8/15: DC Residents Say Washington Needs To Change Name To ‘Black City’
4/17/09: Brown Should Consider Christopher Columbus Name Change Due to Slave Ties, Critics Say
11/13/97: School Changes Name From George Washington Because He Owned Slaves

This is by no means a complete list but you’ll note on EVERY media “name change” report, the word “Democrat” appears virtually nowhere and we all know if just one of these slave owners were a Republican, his name would be in the headline of every story in all caps and Republicans today would be hunted down to publicly denounce their party’s inhuman legacy of deadly oppression.

We won’t get into the taught-sheer ignorance of those doing the protesting and the desperation of others still insisting the Republicans are now the racists and Democrats are the enlightened. If that’s the case, why the continuation of historical revisionism to the liberal simples and omission of the party affiliation of Confederates that would require a public explanation?

Again a sad indictment on the Republican Party whose founders opposed slavery while their modern day descendants appear too sheepish to remind progressive exploiters of their obvious murderous, racist place in American history.

Many national Republican officials are increasingly resigned to Mr. Trump’s looming presence. At a meeting of the Republican Governors Association this week in Aspen, Colo., donors and operatives mused about how to prevent him from hijacking the debate.

One idea that came up was to urge three leading candidates — Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor; Mr. Walker; and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida — to band together and state that they would not participate in any debate in which Mr. Trump was present, using his refusal to rule out a third-party bid as a pretext for taking such a hard line. The thinking, according to a Republican involved in the conversations, was that the lesser-funded prospects who have been eclipsed by Mr. Trump would follow suit, and the TV networks airing the debates would be forced to bar Mr. Trump in order to have a full complement of candidates.
— New York Times, 7/22/15

Tell ya what: if I was in the midst of a deal and I knew the people I was negotiating with were secretly trying to stab me in the back, I’d threaten to blow shit up. Beware of the media verbiage being issued of the party not “being nice to him”. It’s really about the establishment GOP, in their “wisdom”, long ago deciding that a Jeb Bush-type would be our best chance at a 2016 presidential victory.

Unfortunately, not everyone’s buying it.

Jeb Bush stumbled through a familiar question about his brother and father, struggling for the right words as he cracked a joke about duking it out with anyone who questioned the legacy of his aging dad.

After weeks of preparing for a smash-mouth debate with Donald J. Trump, 14 Republican candidates found themselves instead Trump-less but sandwiched into a constricting format on Monday night, delivering strikingly uneven performances just days before the first big test of the presidential primary contest.

Rather than making the other contenders look more presidential, however, the event, at St. Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., seemed to shrink the candidates. Assembled in the front row, the Republicans gawked as each rival took his or her turn on stage, looking at times as if they were being forced to sit through a tedious school assembly.
— New York Times, 8/4/15

While some are good people, imagine the sinking feeling many of us would have, watching yet another bunch of Republican stiffs reciting focus group-tested responses and mini-speeches that would give you that dreaded here-we-go-again feeling. Despite the concern of the aforementioned “donors and operatives”, hijacking the debate might have been a good thing.

In what could be yet another brilliant display of business savvy, by Trump sitting out this event, he gave the Republican base a clear illustration of what we’d have to deal with if he wasn’t in the race and that illustration is downright depressing. Meanwhile, the Trump train is mowing down the competition….

Trump Leads Nationally, and In IA, NH, SC, FL

We all know the choices forced upon us by the Republican Party have not always resulted in victories and the ramifications on the rest of us are real. Those in the elite, GOP donor-operative class can afford to weather the results of poor electoral decisions. The rest of us can’t.

If the party apparatus decides to go against the voters (again), Mr. Trump should do what he has to do if the GOP is too thick-headed and arrogant to take yet another hint.

Donald Trump doesn’t need the job, doesn’t need to be adored, has money, loves this country, won’t pitifully suck up to a hostile media, has negotiated successfully in almost every country we now have diplomatic issues with, is presently building a place on Pennsylvania Avenue, and won’t make bad deals just to avoid having no deal.

IF Mr. Trump decides to enter the race, Republicans should resist the knee-jerk impulse to dismiss him as a kook (look at the growing list of “respectable” losers they’ve selected for us in the past), considering some of our obvious unelectable time-wasters who will jump in and embarrass themselves, and us. Trump is unapologetic, will go after his opponent in a merciless manner that would have been nice to have seen in 2012.

Comments?

Democrats are unwavering in our support of equal opportunity for all Americans. That’s why we’ve worked to pass every one of our nation’s Civil Rights laws, and every law that protects workers…. On every civil rights issue, Democrats have led the fight. We support vigorous enforcement of existing laws, and remain committed to protecting fundamental civil rights in America.

THAT was not true. Why the Democrats opted to remove most of those words is something the party should explain, if they ever do.

Last night, I received an email from an academic at an “Intercultural Communications College” who took issue with assertions I raised after doing research on the 150-plus years of American history glossed over in many of today’s classrooms. In my case, I left school with a rather abbreviated knowledge of black history. There was slavery, Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves, Martin Luther King, Jr. fought for civil rights until he was killed, Republicans were/are racists, something about Selma, Alabama, the Klan, and not much else. It wasn’t until I did the research did I come to another conclusion, a conclusion that doesn’t sit well with the left….

A republican I know directed me to your website as prof that the democratic party is racist. She is obviously unable to formulate her own opinion and learn things on her own. . As a history PHD I thought you may appreciate a few facts yourself. omissions.

Before the Civil War, the South was Democratic and the North largely Republican. Both parties were thoroughly racist.

My research found that the Republican Party was created as an abolitionist party to slavery; it’s sole purpose for being. I may be a simpleton in comparison to this academic, but this was one of the first things I found in my personal quest for the truth and I’m surprised she didn’t find it as well. Omissions?

I’ll try not to interrupt.

The war was fought to reunify the nation — not to end slavery. Lincoln said, “If I can restore the Union without freeing any slaves, I will do so.” However, he ultimately issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed “slaves in the states of rebellion.” In other words, it freed nobody. Why was it issued? Largely to deter Britain from siding with the South. (Britain was antislavery, but her economic ties were to the South.) In other words, virtually everything your website, Black and Right, attributes to Republicans in the 19th century was done for political expediency. Nonetheless, one could certainly argue that the northern Republicans after the Civil War were far less racist than the southern Democrats into the 20th century. There was full segregation of the races in the South, but not in the North. Blacks were also denied the vote by use of such things as “grandfather” clauses (if your grandfather couldn’t vote, you couldn’t vote), literacy tests and poll taxes in the South.

Thanks for the clarification….

Naturally, African Americans overwhelmingly voted Republican where they were able to vote. But it must be remembered that there were very few blacks in the North during this entire time.

It is in the 20th century that all things change. At around the time of World War I, there is a mass exodus of blacks from the South to the North. At that time, racism becomes entrenched in the North — leading to terrible riots and rampant discrimination in Chicago and elsewhere in 1919. Now repression occurs in the North with a vengeance, leading to acute suffering within the black community as the economy slides into the Great Depression. Despite the racism of the times and his dependence on the votes of racist southern Democrats, Franklin Roosevelt demanded that blacks share equally in all relief efforts of his administration. Indeed, FDR had a “black cabinet”: African American leaders who kept him apprised of the special needs of black people in the depression. FDR also named a black woman head of the youth relief program. Eleanor, of course, was an outspoken black advocate.

I believe the person FDR appointed to head the National Youth Administration was Aubrey Williams, a white man. Black Republican Mary Jane McLeod Bethune was appointed to an NYA division, but not as “head”. Yes, I know I’m nitpicking….

Then came Harry Truman. The idea that Republicans opposed his dropping of the atomic bombs is ludicrous. America didn’t have such partisanship then as it does today. His Sec’y of War, Henry Stimson, was a Republican who had service under Herbert Hoover (a Republican prez). Besides, in 1948, Truman desegregated the armed services — fulfilling FDR’s promise to do so after the war. That was huge because it was so eminently successful from the get-go, and gave black men such an important avenue of advancement.

“America didn’t have such partisanship then as it does today.” Tell that to Charles Sumner.

Again, I’m humbled in my attempt to debate a “history PHD” (wouldn’t that be “Ph.D”…?), but I would think partisanship would be at it’s worse during, let’s say, a Civil War? But that’s only me.

Yes, Earl Warren, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court when Brown vs. Bd. of Ed. decision was made in 1956 was a Republican. However, the case was brought by an all-Democratic organization, the NAACP.

“… all-Democratic organization, the NAACP”…?

February 12, 1909
On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP

It’s clear it’s an “all-Democratic organization” today.

In addition, the Republican prez at the time, Eisenhower, reacted to the decision by saying that his appointment of Warren was “the biggest damn-fool decision I ever made.”

Of course, the most egregious aspect of your Website is its failure to mention the two most singularly important pieces of civil rights legislation passed in American history: the Civil Rights Act of 1963 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

I believe I did. I “egregiously” wrote:

June 9, 1964
Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate

June 10, 1964
Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.

August 4, 1965
Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose. Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

I guess she missed that.

It is utterly dumbfounding to me that Lyndon Johnson (a Democrat) was actually able to get them passed. Indeed, if they hadn’t been passed then, they would never have gotten passed. The Civil Rights Act of 1963 made discrimination and segregation unlawful in all aspects of life. (By the way, this forbade discrimination against woman as well.)

Discrimination against women was legal prior to 1919.

November 18, 1872
Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket — straight”

That was changed by Republicans, despite the best efforts of Democrats.

January 10, 1878
The Republican House passed a constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans and only 54% of Democrats in favor. In the Senate 80% of Republicans voted yes and almost half of Democrats voted no.

May 21, 1919
Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no

August 18, 1920
The Republican-authored 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote became part of the Constitution. Twenty-six of the 36 states needed to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures.

Whoops.

Despite its passage, the vast majority of blacks were still unable to vote in the South. So, the Voting Rights Act outlawed all devises impeding blacks’ right to vote, and allowed the Justice Dept. — not states — to prosecute all cases brought under the law. Indeed, the Justice Dept. was empowered to go into districts where fewer than 50% of blacks were registered to vote and oversee their registration and voting procedures to ensure fairness. Fortunately, a largely Democratic Supreme Court withstood the many legal attempts to have these laws gutted or claimed unconstitutional. In other words, they were enforced to the full measure and changed society forever.

It was after the passage of these bills that the South abandoned the Democratic party for the Republican party. That’s why the vast majority of bigots with guns are now older white-guy Republicans and live in the Bible-belt. It’s also why these Republicans oppose money going to safety-net programs: they assume, mistakenly, that the recipients are all blacks (or immigrants).

I presume you heard of all the efforts made in these states in the last two elections to curtail the black vote? Requiring special ID, etc. Some African Americans waited hours and hours to vote. That is what Obama was referring to in his Inaugural Address. But they did wait. They waited to vote Democratic!

I produced an informal sampling of blacks and found some even laughed at the notion that obtaining a photo I.D. was beyond them.

You can hear the partisan tone of her email and I don’t believe she adequately addressed the initial premise of my “Race Lie” piece that contends that Democrats have lied to blacks about their past because they believe blacks are stupid enough to accept it, and they have such low regard for black people they would deny us the truth about our history in this country.

This academic accused me of “omission” while herself leaving easily attainable, yet inconvenient information out of her rebuttal. Her snarky response to the Republican she demeaned as not being able to formulate her own opinion is clear hypocrisy when this very academic recites Democrat talking points about voter disenfranchisement and our reliance on the “safety net”.

Yes, they waited to vote for Obama (purely because he’s black) and they will continue to have little to show for it. THAT is the Democrat tradition.

I would ask this person since 1965 when Democrats retook ownership of the black population, what has gotten better for the community? Sure, a black president was elected twice and he and his family will be taken care of, but what exactly has improved for most blacks? Personally, I believe the Democrat track record in the black community is a travesty and the only way they can maintain the vote is by keeping the black standard of living down by increasing the dependence on “safety net” programs.

Liberals, championed by progressive Margaret Sanger, call it choice to kill our babies and say very little when our children are shot dead in the street, yet they go are far as attempting to pass legislation when white kids are victims.

As in any lie, the real fear for the liar is that one day the truth will come out and what the repercussions will be.

Democrats have been using blacks for political gain for decades and what has been the result?

Inferior schools thus low employment opportunities thus high crime neighborhoods. There is NOTHING happening in the black community that liberals would allow to happen in theirs. When it does, they freak out. There is little in the history of the Democrat Party that shows me they have the best interests of blacks at heart. Back in the day, they created the Klan to kill us, now they use Planned Parenthood to do it legally.

If I’m wrong, maybe this academic can show me some proof I can see, not just take her word for it.