|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 7, 2010 9:28:35 GMT -8
"You have asserted this before. No explanation of your logic, though."
Fair enough. www.census.gov/population/www/projections/usinterimproj/Ethnic populations PERCENT OF TOTAL POPULATION '00 '10 '20 '30 '40 '50White alone 81.0 79.3 77.6 75.8 73.9 72.1 Black alone 12.7 13.1 13.5 13.9 14.3 14.6 Asian Alone 3.8 4.6 5.4 6.2 7.1 8.0 All other race 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 Hispanic (of a 12.6 15.5 17.8 20.1 22.3 24.4 White alone, 69.4 65.1 61.3 57.5 53.7 50.1 Election preferences or voter party preference (I chose 2004 for African Americans, because I think it is more representative than the 2008 vote.) African American 88% Democrat (Wikipedia Vote for Kerry) Hispanics 57% Democrat (Pew Hispanic Center) Asian 2008 presidential presidential polling 77% Democrat (http://www.asian-nation.org/headlines/2008/09/new-poll-on-asian-american-presidential-preferences/) I tried to get immigrant preferences, but they are closely tied to Hispanic preferences based on the nature of our immigration. These figures may or may not be completely accurate, but they do indicate that Republicans and conservatives have reason to reach out. Don't you think? I think that this last election shows that Conservatives have reached out to not only those you reference but also to Republicans. It is only common sense that all ethnic groups will eventually get the idea that you can only eat up so much "seed corn".
Just so long as you don't have to pay any taxes, you mean.  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 7, 2010 14:18:11 GMT -8
I think that this last election shows that Conservatives have reached out to not only those you reference but also to Republicans. It is only common sense that all ethnic groups will eventually get the idea that you can only eat up so much "seed corn".
Just so long as you don't have to pay any taxes, you mean. I guess a cynic would say and think that, but it is just common sense that folks eventually figure it out. Independent voters saw the light last week. When will you? |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Nov 7, 2010 14:45:26 GMT -8
You have asserted this before. No explanation of your logic, though. The Repubs picked up ~700 seats in state legislatures. Alabama and North Carolina went Repub in their legislatures for the first time since Reconstruction, fer cryin' out loud. By big margins. If you think immigration is going to swing the demographics, I think you could be miscalculating... many immigrants come here to escape the top down central planning tyranny that your party has been trying to impose. People enjoy liberty. Your party has been trying to restrict it. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xqp0eXfpiWU
Fair enough. www.census.gov/population/www/projections/usinterimproj/Ethnic populations PERCENT OF TOTAL POPULATION '00 '10 '20 '30 '40 '50White alone 81.0 79.3 77.6 75.8 73.9 72.1 Black alone 12.7 13.1 13.5 13.9 14.3 14.6 Asian Alone 3.8 4.6 5.4 6.2 7.1 8.0 All other race 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 Hispanic (of a 12.6 15.5 17.8 20.1 22.3 24.4 White alone, 69.4 65.1 61.3 57.5 53.7 50.1 Election preferences or voter party preference (I chose 2004 for African Americans, because I think it is more representative than the 2008 vote.) African American 88% Democrat (Wikipedia Vote for Kerry) Hispanics 57% Democrat (Pew Hispanic Center) Asian 2008 presidential presidential polling 77% Democrat (http://www.asian-nation.org/headlines/2008/09/new-poll-on-asian-american-presidential-preferences/) I tried to get immigrant preferences, but they are closely tied to Hispanic preferences based on the nature of our immigration. These figures may or may not be completely accurate, but they do indicate that Republicans and conservatives have reason to reach out. Don't you think? I won't argue with your figures. I'm just not sure that they will lead to the conclusions you are suggesting. (even if they do, I would be 107 by the time 2050 comes around). Here's the elephant in your room: tinyurl.com/267wrml |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 7, 2010 15:44:50 GMT -8
" . . . .get the idea that you can only eat up so much "seed corn. . ."
Just so long as you don't have to pay any taxes, you mean. I guess a cynic would say and think that, but it is just common sense that folks eventually figure it out. Independent voters saw the light last week. When will you? I am cynical. The deeper my understanding of conservatism, the more fearful of it I become. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 7, 2010 15:59:19 GMT -8
"You have asserted this before. No explanation of your logic, though."
Fair enough. www.census.gov/population/www/projections/usinterimproj/Ethnic populations PERCENT OF TOTAL POPULATION '00 '10 '20 '30 '40 '50White alone 81.0 79.3 77.6 75.8 73.9 72.1 Black alone 12.7 13.1 13.5 13.9 14.3 14.6 Asian Alone 3.8 4.6 5.4 6.2 7.1 8.0 All other race 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.1 4.7 5.3 Hispanic (of a 12.6 15.5 17.8 20.1 22.3 24.4 White alone, 69.4 65.1 61.3 57.5 53.7 50.1 Election preferences or voter party preference (I chose 2004 for African Americans, because I think it is more representative than the 2008 vote.) African American 88% Democrat (Wikipedia Vote for Kerry) Hispanics 57% Democrat (Pew Hispanic Center) Asian 2008 presidential presidential polling 77% Democrat (http://www.asian-nation.org/headlines/2008/09/new-poll-on-asian-american-presidential-preferences/) I tried to get immigrant preferences, but they are closely tied to Hispanic preferences based on the nature of our immigration. These figures may or may not be completely accurate, but they do indicate that Republicans and conservatives have reason to reach out. Don't you think? I won't argue with your figures. I'm just not sure that they will lead to the conclusions you are suggesting. (even if they do, I would be 107 by the time 2050 comes around). Here's the elephant in your room: tinyurl.com/267wrmlPERCENT OF TOTAL POPULATION '00 ' '20 ' % change White alone 81.0 77.6 (-9.6) Black alone 12.7 13.5 (+6.3) Asian Alone 3.8 5.4 (+42) All other race 2.5 3.5 (+40) Hispanic (of a 12.6 17.8 (+40.1) White alone, 69.4 61.3 (-12) Here are the 00-20 figures. I am telling you that unless Republicans change, change is going to happen to you. And its going to happen fast. Just my opinion though, but the numbers explain Tea Party anxiety with astonishing precision. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 7, 2010 16:04:18 GMT -8
I guess a cynic would say and think that, but it is just common sense that folks eventually figure it out. Independent voters saw the light last week. When will you? I am cynical. The deeper my understanding of conservatism, the more fearful of it I become. Tell me just what is your understanding of Conservatism? Just why are you fearful? For me, it is just about the opposite. The more that I see the difference between what liberals claim to advocate and the results of their policies, the more clear it becomes that we need to return to the Conservative ideas upon which we largely built this nation. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Nov 7, 2010 16:13:41 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 7, 2010 16:32:38 GMT -8
Yes really. One You Tube post notwithstanding. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Nov 7, 2010 16:39:49 GMT -8
I am cynical. The deeper my understanding of conservatism, the more fearful of it I become. Tell me just what is your understanding of Conservatism? Just why are you fearful? For me, it is just about the opposite. The more that I see the difference between what liberals claim to advocate and the results of their policies, the more clear it becomes that we need to return to the Conservative ideas upon which we largely built this nation. What conservatives want is social and economic survival of the fittest, with the accompanying risk of competing and surviving borne solely by the individual. The perils of competing against worldwide economic forces is not relevant to the conservative calculus. And they want that Darwin like existence so that a few will pay less in tax. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Nov 7, 2010 17:02:36 GMT -8
Yes really. One You Tube post notwithstanding. Sure. Whatever you say.  |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Nov 7, 2010 17:10:30 GMT -8
Tell me just what is your understanding of Conservatism? Just why are you fearful? For me, it is just about the opposite. The more that I see the difference between what liberals claim to advocate and the results of their policies, the more clear it becomes that we need to return to the Conservative ideas upon which we largely built this nation. What conservatives want is social and economic survival of the fittest, with the accompanying risk of competing and surviving borne solely by the individual. The perils of competing against worldwide economic forces is not relevant to the conservative calculus. And they want that Darwin like existence so that a few will pay less in tax. What liberals want is other people's money. To support their base. Nearly half of the population pays NO Federal Income tax. The other half is getting a little tired of pulling the wagon while the one half rides. Obama said, "...everyone has some 'skin' in the game..." That's a lie. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Nov 7, 2010 17:28:53 GMT -8
Oh, as for predicting what the future may hold, I'm just not quite ready to accept what you seem to offer with such confident hubris. See: tinyurl.com/2fhqqla |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 7, 2010 17:38:54 GMT -8
Tell me just what is your understanding of Conservatism? Just why are you fearful? For me, it is just about the opposite. The more that I see the difference between what liberals claim to advocate and the results of their policies, the more clear it becomes that we need to return to the Conservative ideas upon which we largely built this nation. What conservatives want is social and economic survival of the fittest, with the accompanying risk of competing and surviving borne solely by the individual. The perils of competing against worldwide economic forces is not relevant to the conservative calculus. And they want that Darwin like existence so that a few will pay less in tax. Currently, we pay a boatload in taxes, but get very little back out of it. That is what conservatives rail against the most. My biggest gripe is that there is so much waste and mismanagement in government that when they add new giveaway programs like health care the REAL costs 10 or 20 years down the line is usually 5 to 6 times what the liberals claim it will be. History has shown this to be true. Government has NO incentive to be efficient. People in government make more money and have better job security when it is INefficient. Democrats have more to gain from the loyalty of those government employees who hope to keep their gravy train rolling by keeping Democrats in office. People ON government assistance likewise want to keep Democrats in office to keep their gravy train rolling. Democrats have created a permanent underclass - a dependency class that has no idea how to surivive without the government giving them handouts (or jobs, in the case of government employees). That is the Democrats base of power, and that is why they are the majority party. They are buying the loyalty of their constituency. Contrary to your opinions on Conservatives, they don't want people to starve to death or die prematurely due to lack of health care. They just have a different view on how to best help those out who need help. Make them self-sufficient and EVERYONE is better off. Keep them dependent on government and only the Democrats in office are better off. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Nov 7, 2010 19:42:55 GMT -8
So Leftists have illegal immigration on their side in the quest for other people's money. When was this new news? A racist sees everything in term of race and it is not lost on me that Democrats are now exclusively carrying the flag of race based politics. Their interest is not the rule of law, not solving the problem of swamping government services, not the problem of long-term national fiscal health, not the problem of Latina high school drop- out rates, not the hidden cash economy that avoids US taxes, not the billions of our GDP that goes to Mexico and not spent here, etc, etc. No - It is just - I want your money now and the power to allocate it and if you don't give it to me now, I'll sick the Mexican immigrants on you in the future.  Are Mexican immigrants never capitalists? Do they never become small business owners and become sick of Gov bureaucracies, taxes, Gov. mandates, frivolous law suits, etc? Are they never social conservatives? And how about these questions for their second generation family members? I'll be a conservative regardless of the prospects of winning or losing a particular political battle. Sure, people are free to trash the tax payers in their state all they want. See New York, New Jersey, Michigan - Oh lets move there....Not! Thank god we still have the freedom to move in the US (of course, Obama wants to nationalize the confiscation so there is no where to run away from the Statists). At some point, hyperbole fails, power corrupts and reason triumphs and conservatism will always have its place to counter misguided progressivism. As it was in this election. |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 7, 2010 22:42:21 GMT -8
Contrary to your opinions on Conservatives, they don't want people to starve to death or die prematurely due to lack of health care. They just have a different view on how to best help those out who need help. Make them self-sufficient and EVERYONE is better off. Keep them dependent on government and only the Democrats in office are better off. Hilarious. You say that "conservatives" want to find a way to "best help out" those in need..."make them self-sufficient." What are you gonna do---retroactively change the circumstances of their birth? You don't want anyone to "help them out." You want them to help themselves out. I guess they'll go to work at Walmart and attain the almighty american dream. Meanness aside, there's nothing wrong with this, but come on. Conservatives don't want government "helping people out," and they themselves don't want to help anybody out unless there's a tax writeoff for doing so. That last part is utter bullcrap. It's been long documented that registered Republicans give more to charity than registered Democrats. Republicans have no problem helping people out - they just want to be able to pick and choose where the money goes and how it gets spent. By the way, people are NOT doomed from birth to be financial losers. If they work hard in school there are a TON of grants and scholarships available for those who come from less fortunate financial circumstances. The resources are there, people just have to want it and work hard enough to make it happen. I find that whole, "People from less fortunate backgrounds can't make it on their own," thing to be incredibly insulting and condescending. Everyone is capable of being a success and becoming self sufficient. People tend to live up or down to expectations. Oddly, it seems that the liberals think less of those less fortunate than conservatives do. It's the conservatives with the, "Can do," attitude, while the liberals seem to have the, "They can't do it without us," attitude. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 8, 2010 11:18:46 GMT -8
Tell me just what is your understanding of Conservatism? Just why are you fearful? For me, it is just about the opposite. The more that I see the difference between what liberals claim to advocate and the results of their policies, the more clear it becomes that we need to return to the Conservative ideas upon which we largely built this nation. What conservatives want is social and economic survival of the fittest, with the accompanying risk of competing and surviving borne solely by the individual. The perils of competing against worldwide economic forces is not relevant to the conservative calculus. And they want that Darwin like existence so that a few will pay less in tax. That is not what I want and I consider myself a Conservative. I think that what we want is smaller less intrusive government at a reasonable cost. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Nov 8, 2010 14:38:58 GMT -8
The libs count on demographics to guarantee their ultimate victory in the future, but I think they might be taking too much for granted. It ought to be insulting to the 'minorities' they are so certain will always embrace the Demagogues and their agenda. New Mexico has a bigger Hispanic percentage of its population than California, and that state elected a Hispanic REPUBLICAN for governor. Nevada elected a Hispanic REPUBLICAN as their governor. And in California, while the Demagogue slate of candidates won, and the people handed Moonbeam a victory, they also handed him a $#!+ sandwich. Looks like even the demographics can't overcome the desire of the people to limit government's ability to pick their pockets: CA Prop 21 - Vehicle license surcharge for state parks... down in flames. CA Prop 22 - Prohibits the turds in Sacramento from raiding local government funds... passed BIGTIME. CA Prop 24 - Would have repealed corporate tax breaks... down in flames. CA Prop 26 - Requires 2/3 vote for fees, as is required for taxes... passed! So, Moonbeam is going to have to be pragmatic. Hopefully, in his ripe old age, he has learned how to be pragmatic. He can start with his paring knife here: pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/109431/Also, just for grins, I'd like to point out that that beautiful Evergreen State, while they also voted in favor of reelecting (barely) left wing scum like Patty Tennis-Shoes, they REJECTED new taxes on the so-called "rich": pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/109408/ |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Nov 8, 2010 15:51:46 GMT -8
Yes really. One You Tube post notwithstanding.  It was not a "you tube" post. It was a news article from the Rio Grande valley. I see you don't bother with clicking on the links you are offered. Is that what your handlers at the Daily Kook recommend? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 8, 2010 16:24:47 GMT -8
Yes, it is just a matter of time till minority folks abandon the Dems and demand less from their government and embrace personal freedom and aspire to be the very best that they can be in order to better themselves in general and society as a whole.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 8, 2010 19:20:21 GMT -8
Conservatives are born with a can do attitude. True. Baloney. There are more grants and scholarships available for low income people than there are for middle class people. And when you add in grants and scholarships for minorities there isn't a single reason why anyone in that socio-economic status cannot go to college and get a degree. They just have to want it badly enough and work to get it. Period. Because a lot of people make bad decisions. And then some people are lazy. Between those who make bad decisions and those who are lazy you get a huge percentage of the people on welfare. Many of them don't know how to get off of it. It's like drugs - government handouts are addictive. Once some people become accustomed to getting it they don't know how to live without it, and they don't know how to improve their lot in life. There are ways for them to do it, but those people are short changed by a government that puts less value on teaching them what those ways are and how to become self sufficient than it does in just giving them handouts. No one is condemned to poverty from birth. Anyone can rise up, do well in school, find the grants and scholarships and go to college, and do as well as anyone else. If I were in one of those low income minority groups I would find it incredibly insulting that liberals were telling me that I wasn't good enough or smart enough to make it on my own. The means for those people to succeed are there - they just need to look for them and then work to earn them. |
|
