American Politics

[SubCmdr]

I got a letter from the government the other day
I opened and read it, it said they were suckers
They wanted me for their army or whatever
Picture me giving a damn I said, "Never"

Here is a land that never gave a damn
About a brother like me and myself
Because they never did, I wasn't with it
But just that very minute, it
Occurred to me, the suckers had authority

Black Steel in the Hour of Chaos, Public Enemy.

I will not take a break from voting because a International Trick living in Bangkok, Thailand on the taxes I pay to fund his Social Security Check (so he can pay for his prostitutes) tells me to do so.

I am already well versed on the The Constitution of the United States of America and the Declaration of Independence. I am always reading it because I want to make sure I principles I quote to others as a citizen of the Dis United States of America are correct. If the suggestion made by the OP was in paper memo form. I would immediately put in the circular file. A very outdated expression (before the internet age / AI age) for sure. But the sentiment expresses my thoughts about the entirety of his response to me and his posting history here on ISG.

I have to wonder out loud if his suggestion is related to my race or to the fact that I choose not to tow the party line and instead choose to think independently. That right to think for myself is provided for me in the very document he suggests I spend more time reading. So maybe he should act on his own suggestion and brush up on The Constitution of the United States of America as it does not mention needing to be a member of a political party in order to express a political opinion or vote.

I stipulate to the information contained in the link below:

https://www.belfercenter.org/publica...vs-republicans

While economists like Alan Blinder and MarkWatson have confirmed this "nearly ubiquitous" advantage, they caution that the correlation does not prove causation, as factors like business cycle timing, global shocks, and luck also play significant roles.

Correlation does not prove causation

Why?*Because a statistical association between two variables merely indicates they change together, not that one directly causes the other.

This distinction is critical because observed relationships can arise from coincidence, reverse causality, or a third confounding variable influencing both factors.

To establish causation, researchers must go beyond simple correlation by employing controlled experiments or rigorous longitudinal studies that rule out alternative explanations.

While causation implies correlation (if A causes be, they will likely be correlated), the reverse is not true; many correlated events, such as ice cream sales and drowning deaths, are linked by a common cause (summer heat) rather than a direct causal link.

Not a single Democrat here has ever presented a study that included the mathematics that are needed in order to prove correlation. That is probably because most International Tricks cannot do the math needed to do so. The math is hard (at least it is for me). I know because my of background in Quantitative Sociology I learned at a top tier University in the Dis United States of America.

Correlation analysis draws primarily from statistics (a branch of applied mathematics), but the specific mathematical tools involved span a few areas:
Descriptive statistics: means, standard deviations, and covariance are the building blocks of the Pearson coefficient.
Linear algebra: Pearson's coefficient is equivalent to the cosine of the angle between two centered data vectors (a normalized dot product). Multivariate correlation uses correlation matrices, and methods like principal component analysis and canonical correlation rely heavily on eigenvalue decomposition. Probability theory
Calculus appears in derivations (e.g., least-squares fitting) and in non-parametric variants like Spearman's rank correlation.
So in short: the core is statistics + linear algebra, underpinned by probability theory.

So the reality is much of what Democrats are saying amount their opinions and no amount of reading The Constitution of the United States of America is going to change that. They need to do the math. But they cannot. So instead they respond to me with their ideas that there is some kind of causation factor involved and there is not.

Neither Party is mine!

There are Republicans posting here, but the Democrat supporters do not address them. They are responding to me. Why is that? Republicans are responding to me. Why is that? Let me tell you why.

It is because it is easy Easy to attack the individual who thinks for himself. Easy to call out the strong man who stands alone and will not bow down to the tyranny of the majority that consists of Democrats and Republicans that are posting in this thread. I point out the problems in each groups think mob (otherwise known as a political party). Only by calling attention to the problems in each party will those members have a opportunity to return to their group think organizations and improve them.

Crypto is a major issue that will help 70 million of my fellow citizens. Democrats are almost universally against any legislation that will improve the situation for crypto in the Dis United States of America. Why in the world should I register with a party that does not have my personal interests at heart? My vote is for me. It is not for some greater party interest.

[KeviKev68]

You make the statement as if it is a fact. But your statement is a logical fallacy.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy where an arguments premise already assumes the truth of its conclusion. Instead of offering independent support, the argument quietly builds the conclusion into its starting pointso the claim ends up propping itself up.

The skeleton is always the same: X is true because X is true, wearing different words..

Obama and Harris were registered Democrats (true) therefore democrats elected them (false). This is only true in primaries where registered Democrats are allowed to vote. In a general election every registered voter of every political party is allowed to vote.

Please note:

No member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) has ever been elected to federal office, including the USA House of Representatives or Senate. While the party has fielded candidates in federal elections since the 1920's, it has never secured a victory at the federal level.

Do you think Obama and Harris would be acceptable as Republican nominees? They would never make it to general election. The Republicans generally don't like black people.

[Spidy]

Hey Spidy,
No doubt my brother. The most civil and intelligent discussion I have had on ISG since I have been posting.

Yes, let's do it!

No, I have come around to your way of thinking. SWB is the way to go. Because of 3 things:

1. Length of time it takes to bring SMRs online.

Agreed! Like you, I'm hopeful for SMR technology for smaller countries like the DR, once the technology has matured and other wealthier nations, have developed the tech, to where it is truly modular and scalable. Till then, the DR should just watch this space!

2. SWB technology has developed and will continue to develop it may make SMR obsolete before they can ever come on line an produce power.

Yeah, the advancements in SWB, seem to be moving more at a faster and cheaper pace. The DR should take note with regards to their reducing their 28% reliance on coal, as renewables in 2025 surpassed coal, as the biggest producer of power / electricity.

3. I am personally pursing that route for my business in the Dominican Republic.

That's great to hear! Congratulations and best of luck!

However you choose to power your business in the DR (off-grid, partially off-grid or totally on-grid), I'm pretty sure your installation experiences, will be as interesting, insightful and varied as your DR home install. I look forward to your stories and tells of woe and joy, of getting it done in the DR.

Your setup, always reminds me of the many Victron Energy videos, I've watched of homeowners, businesses and even commercial enterprises, in far-flung remote wilderness or urban density, use Victron products, that provide money saving economical solutions from running fossil fuels or unreliable electricity grids.

So when I hear stories, like the one you, SubCmdr are about to embark on, I can't help but think of the many great examples of similar off-grid or supplemental off-grid, solutions I've enjoyed watching on the Victron Energy, YouTube channel. There are so many great examples, and I have my personal favorites, but here's one or two you might be find interesting:

• Victron #1: How One Man Powers a Global App from a Dutch Cow Barn | Digital Money Business | Bitcoin | Crypto | www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS-aRiblQ_8

• Victron #2: How One Family Built a Private Energy Factory | Pizza Restaurant Energy Company? | www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCBbJUJJnxQ

Hope you like Victron #1 and Wietse Wind, a crypto digital money entrepreneur, who you may already know about, since you're pretty knowledgeable in those circles. Anyway I'll circle-back to more on the DR's current energy assessment a little later.

[EihTooms]

It says this in The Constitution for the United States of America.

Choosing nether party that serves my interests is a smart decision. The Democrats want to define me by my race. The Republicans want to hate me because of my race. Neither party wants to help me as an individual achieve the goals I have set that define my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

When you join a political party and tow the party line you are allowing other to think for you. You are allowing your political leaders to tell you how you should think and what you shouldn't or should not support.

Democrats posting in this thread have not touched the issue of lack of support of crypto in the Dis United States of America. Why is that? It is because both Democrats and Republicans want new financial slaves. When you cannot get off their corporate / government financial plantations, it does not matter what political party your overseers are a part of.

It really helps to think for yourself instead of letting the new Democratic Corporate / Government Plantation overseers think for you or the the White Hoodie Wearing Republican haters think for you. Both parties are just looking for economic slaves to power their victories.

The key for black people in the Dis United States of America is financial independence. My personal solution is to vote with my feet. To purchase land to grow food on. To own real / hard assets. The purchase of gold, silver and Bitcoin. Bitcoin price is 81,000/ USD per coin as I write this. Democrats are opposed to my financial freedom. I've already addressed this issue in a previous post.

Now back to the main subject of this post:

Abdul El-Sayed Campaign (2026): Michigan Democratic state Rep. Karen Whitsett and other Black Democratic officials have criticized Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, alleging the party's far-left wing takes Black voters for granted. Whitsett described some socialist-leaning party leaders as "more racist than the KKK" and accused figures like Al Sharpton of suppressing Black voter agency. Additionally, Jewish Democrats in Michigan have publicly expressed feeling alienated by El-Sayed's allies and rhetoric.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/soc...ditch-el-sayed

Jasmine Crockett and Chris Brown (2026): Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett faced backlash after pledging to enter singer Chris Brown into the congressional record. Critics, including Democratic strategist Ameshia Cross, condemned the move as "disgusting" and an inappropriate use of congressional weight to uplift a known abuser of women, sparking a cultural divide within the party regarding the balance between artistic support and accountability for violence.

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/18/e...e-crockett-cec

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jasmin...g-black-voters

Allegations of Racialized Politics: Various opinion pieces and internal party critiques argue that the Democratic Party increasingly relies on identity politics and "racial radicalism" to energize its base. Critics, including former Democratic operatives and conservative commentators, claim the party uses systemic racism narratives as a political tool that alienates working-class voters and minority groups who feel infantilized or taken for granted. Conversely, Democrats maintain that their platform addresses genuine structural inequalities and that recent losses among minority voters stem from policy failures rather than racial messaging.

https://jesterpolitics.com/2024/12/1...ocratic-party/

Is it true that Democrats support baby killers? Elvis 2008 wrote that and not a single Democrat supporter has given him any push back. I post a article I did not write about racism in the Democratic party and three individuals who like Elvis 2008 have responded.

Neither party is mine!

I've never heard of nor have I ever met someone who registered to vote as a member of any political party because they need to be told how to think.

On what planet has that ever happened?

I registered as a Democrat and vote for Democrats for the same reason 100% of every other registered Democrat I have ever met does; because we much prefer historic positive economic results, historic jobs creation, Stock Market gains and ending counterproductive quagmire wars of choice over Great Depressions, Great Recessions, massive historic jobs destruction, stock market crashes and the country being plunged into counterproductive quagmire wars of choice.

All available evidence, facts, data, records of results and easily observable reality for the past 100 years show that voting for Dems gets you the former and not voting for Dems gets you the latter. This isn't rocket science.

And here's apparently a shocker for some; even if you are registered under one Party affiliation you can disagree with that Party's candidate or the issues on the ballot and vote for somebody else or vote No on those issues. Really. You can actually do that. No law against it. Does anybody out there not know that is possible, perfectly legal and people do it all the time? If anyone didn't know that, you might want to take a break from voting for a while and do a little more reading of the USA Constitution, the supreme legal document of America, to discover there is no law forbidding it or any punishment under the law for doing it. It couldn't be any simpler to figure out.

[SubCmdr]

Yes, they did. Obama and Harris were registered Democrats. Would either of them had go far as Republicans? Of course not.

You make the statement as if it is a fact. But your statement is a logical fallacy.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy where an arguments premise already assumes the truth of its conclusion. Instead of offering independent support, the argument quietly builds the conclusion into its starting pointso the claim ends up propping itself up.

The skeleton is always the same: X is true because X is true, wearing different words..

Obama and Harris were registered Democrats (true) therefore democrats elected them (false). This is only true in primaries where registered Democrats are allowed to vote. In a general election every registered voter of every political party is allowed to vote.

Please note:

No member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) has ever been elected to federal office, including the USA House of Representatives or Senate. While the party has fielded candidates in federal elections since the 1920's, it has never secured a victory at the federal level.

[KeviKev68]

There is not a single reference to political parties electing anyone to public office at a federal level.

Democrats did not do that. USA Citizens who are at least 18 years old and meet their state's residency requirements are eligible to vote in federal elections.

Barack Obama received significant support from voters outside the Democratic Party in both of his presidential elections.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics...eping-victory/

Please review how the political system works in the Dis United States of America. You have some huge gaps in your understanding of it.

Yes, they did. Obama and Harris were registered Democrats. Would either of them had go far as Republicans? Of course not.

[SubCmdr]

It says this in The Constitution for the United States of America.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Choosing nether party that serves my interests is a smart decision. The Democrats want to define me by my race. The Republicans want to hate me because of my race. Neither party wants to help me as an individual achieve the goals I have set that define my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

When you join a political party and tow the party line you are allowing other to think for you. You are allowing your political leaders to tell you how you should think and what you shouldn't or should not support.

Democrats posting in this thread have not touched the issue of lack of support of crypto in the Dis United States of America. Why is that? It is because both Democrats and Republicans want new financial slaves. When you cannot get off their corporate / government financial plantations, it does not matter what political party your overseers are a part of.

It really helps to think for yourself instead of letting the new Democratic Corporate / Government Plantation overseers think for you or the the White Hoodie Wearing Republican haters think for you. Both parties are just looking for economic slaves to power their victories.

The key for black people in the Dis United States of America is financial independence. My personal solution is to vote with my feet. To purchase land to grow food on. To own real / hard assets. The purchase of gold, silver and Bitcoin. Bitcoin price is 81,000/ USD per coin as I write this. Democrats are opposed to my financial freedom. I've already addressed this issue in a previous post.

Smart traders and investors (like me) took their original investments out of the stock / crypto markets, booked some profit and I now sitting on cash as others are losing their SHIT cause they bought at the top of the market.

We are witnessing history. We are going through a major financial disruption. You are going to witness the largest transfer of wealth from one demographic to another in the history of this Earth. It might be so bad as to create international financial slaves for the rest of my days here on Earth. I don't know. But I do know you need to protect yourself.

Time to buy is now gentlemen! Time to pack your go back is now gentleman! Time to build out your bug out location is now gentlemen. It's about to get ugly!

Now back to the main subject of this post:

Abdul El-Sayed Campaign (2026): Michigan Democratic state Rep. Karen Whitsett and other Black Democratic officials have criticized Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, alleging the party's far-left wing takes Black voters for granted. Whitsett described some socialist-leaning party leaders as "more racist than the KKK" and accused figures like Al Sharpton of suppressing Black voter agency. Additionally, Jewish Democrats in Michigan have publicly expressed feeling alienated by El-Sayed's allies and rhetoric.

An elected Democratic official in Michigan is rallying her community against U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed and claims those within the socialist rise of her party take Black voters for granted.

"It doesn't change, it's just different slave owners," Democratic Michigan state Rep. Karen Whitsett told Fox News Digital in reference to Democratic Party leaders who believe Black voters are a monolith who should only support left-wing candidates.

She claimed that El-Sayed is not working in the best interest of Black Michiganders and that the far-left wing of her party is "more racist than the KKK."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/soc...ditch-el-sayed

Jasmine Crockett and Chris Brown (2026): Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett faced backlash after pledging to enter singer Chris Brown into the congressional record. Critics, including Democratic strategist Ameshia Cross, condemned the move as "disgusting" and an inappropriate use of congressional weight to uplift a known abuser of women, sparking a cultural divide within the party regarding the balance between artistic support and accountability for violence.

And I wanted to make sure we document that in the Congressional Record, Crockett continued onstage, joined by Brown and Texas State Rep. Venton Jones. Were here because of Chris Brown!

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/18/e...e-crockett-cec

Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, suggested the Democratic Party was too focused on trying to win over White voters while ignoring more reliable Black voters during the Fourth of July weekend. During an interview with The Root at the Essence Festival in New Orleans, Crockett said that Black Americans feel ignored by the party despite their loyalty.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jasmin...g-black-voters

Allegations of Racialized Politics: Various opinion pieces and internal party critiques argue that the Democratic Party increasingly relies on identity politics and "racial radicalism" to energize its base. Critics, including former Democratic operatives and conservative commentators, claim the party uses systemic racism narratives as a political tool that alienates working-class voters and minority groups who feel infantilized or taken for granted. Conversely, Democrats maintain that their platform addresses genuine structural inequalities and that recent losses among minority voters stem from policy failures rather than racial messaging.

The Racist Roots and Current Facets of the Democratic Party

The Democratic Partys history with racism is not merely a footnote; it is a stark, defining chapter that has shaped its policies, actions, and voter base over centuries. From its inception, through the Civil War era, and into the modern age, the Democratic Party has demonstrated a consistent pattern of racist policies and attitudes, often paraded under the guise of progressivism or social justice.

https://jesterpolitics.com/2024/12/1...ocratic-party/

Is it true that Democrats support baby killers? Elvis 2008 wrote that and not a single Democrat supporter has given him any push back. I post a article I did not write about racism in the Democratic party and three individuals who like Elvis 2008 have responded.

Neither party is mine!

[EihTooms]

SubCmdr, I thought you were a man of FACTS verses opinions? So if I missed the FACTS in that OPINION piece, let me know!

The opinion piece you shared is provocative, and has a juicy (albeit inaccurate) headline, and all but focuses on what could be seen as internal party racial squabbling and bickering, and less about the real legislative FACTS, policies and political record, that still show Democrats are championing civil rights, women's rights, and LGBTQ rights, equal rights and racial injustice, rather than the infactual racist party, that the author suggests it has become.

The Democrat political record, policies and FACTs around which party has done more for civil, minority or equal rights, speaks for itself and is a stark asymmetrical historical pattern of trying to do and doing the right legislative thing, for minority groups, when compared to Republicans.

Despite the laughable misconceived notion of Democrat internal party racism, as a some planned, carried out mass party policy, that "pales in comparison" to the Lee Atwater's Southern strategy, is ludicrous. FACT: Dems have had "racist" temerity, put forth a NOT one, BUT two (2) Black candidates and two (2) women candidates for president. Repubs NOT one in either category (not that this is an indicator of being racist or sexist, but it sure is telling)..

The last remaining racists who ever voted for a Democrat to get his / her anti-Black, misogynistic agenda fulfilled would be in their 80's by now. Like Trump. And their last Dem vote for that agenda to be fulfilled rather than for the Dems' overwhelmingly superior economic policy results would have been cast around 1964.

That is, if they survived Trump's Pandemic virus after believing his bullshit about "it's disappearing! It will go away without a vaccine!" and ignored the other known mitigation measures but without the advantage Trump enjoyed of being helicopter Dumbo Dropped into the best medical facility in the country within minutes of developing a cough.

Most "Bothsider / Neithersiders" who claim not to notice the blatantly obvious, impossible to miss difference between the Civil Rights achievements, candidates, SCOTUS appointments, etc of the Dem Party vs the many decades long and now accelerating efforts by the Repub Party to abolish those advancements, suppress and overturn Black participation and votes by the Repub Party along with the even more blatantly obvious, impossible to miss difference between Great Dem Economic Recoveries, Great Dem Economic Expansions, Great Historic Dem Jobs Creation and Wage Gains of the past 100 years vs every Great Repub Depression, Great Repub Recession, Great Repub Stock Market Crash, Housing Value Crash, Financial Crash and Massive Historic Jobs Destruction during that same 100 years are in reality Repub-leaning racists and misogynists hiding behind that "Bothsider / Neithersider" bullshit. Perhaps hiding the truth of it even to themselves.

[SubCmdr]

There is not a single reference to political parties electing anyone to public office at a federal level.

They elected a black man as president and a black woman as vice president. Let me know when Republicans will do the same.

Democrats did not do that. USA Citizens who are at least 18 years old and meet their state's residency requirements are eligible to vote in federal elections.

Barack Obama received significant support from voters outside the Democratic Party in both of his presidential elections.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics...eping-victory/

Please review how the political system works in the Dis United States of America. You have some huge gaps in your understanding of it.

[SubCmdr]

SubCmdr, I thought you were a man of FACTS verses opinions? So if I missed the FACTS in that OPINION piece, let me know!

Brother Spidy, for the most part I am a man of facts. Except in two areas.

When I am talking mess in the RANTS threads. In those threads it is is a free for all. I learned very quickly facts don't matter. What people want to do in those threads is to express their personal opinions and attack others (ad hominem). It is very informative to learn about myself from people who have not ever met me and many times have often not stepped foot in the country I am currently posted up again.

2. When posting in the American Politics thread. Exactly what are the facts that need to be referenced?

The opinion piece you shared is provocative, and has a juicy (albeit inaccurate) headline, and all but focuses on what could be seen as internal party racial squabbling and bickering, and less about the real legislative FACTS, policies and political record, that still show Democrats are championing civil rights, women's rights, and LGBTQ rights, equal rights and racial injustice, rather than the infactual racist party, that the author suggests it has become.

Neither party is mine not the donkey or the elephant

I was forced into taking on the racial records of both parties by individuals making claims about my political philosophy (from both sides) that were not true. This is not the NBA. There are no free shots.

I spent my senior year of university preparing to goto law school. There was a Residential Assistant that was a Law Student when I was in my last year of undergraduate studies. He taught me, how to analyze the law, look at the elements, how to think like an attorney and how to make a argument no matter what side you happened to be on.

Our day would finish for each of us and I would see he had his door open and I would stop by. We would be making small talk and he would say: it can be argued that. That was the signal that the conversational issue we were discussing was going to be the subject of our next argument. It involved a presentation of the facts (that we knew at the time) then followed by the argument. It did not matter how we personally felt about the subject. We were responsible for making the argument of the side we were on. At the time, I thought it was wonderful opportunity to learn from him. What I realize now is that the learning process was mutual. He was learning and practicing his legal skills as I was learning.

Most people do not understand what it means to make a legal argument. It is the only point in a trial where you are allowed to voice your opinion based on the facts that have been presented during the trial. That is how I approach discussions. I think you have seen and understand my methods better than most people. When it is done right it results in a informative exchange (like ours on SMRs). When done wrong people get their panties in a knot and butt hurt getting them untangled. They degenerate into ad hominem attacks and in general fail to make an argument because they confuse their own personal attacks with logic.

Exhibit A

It's hilarious to see you quote a far left website as they care about facts.

This (compound profanity redacted) never provides any links to facts. Attacks others personally. He smugly thinks he is being witty. But what he is really doing making of personal display of how blind allegiance to the party line leads to illogical thinking.

In a legal context, an argument is the structured presentation of reasons, evidence, and logical inferences aimed at persuading a judge or jury to accept a particular viewpoint or reach a specific conclusion.

It encompasses both the process of making this persuasive presentation and the specific statements or written submissions (such as briefs or oral arguments) that analyze facts, apply legal principles, and refute opposing claims.

Key characteristics include:
Persuasive Purpose: The primary goal is to convince the decision-maker that the party's contentions are correct by demonstrating why the law favors their position.
Components: Effective arguments typically involve citing relevant statutes, case law, and precedents, and applying them logically to the specific facts of the case.
Exclusions: In certain administrative or procedural definitions, "legal argument" may specifically exclude the presentation of new evidence, witness examination, or the literal interpretation of statutes, focusing instead on jurisdictional, constitutional, or precedent-based issues.

This is what it means to make a argument.

The Democrat political record, policies and FACTs around which party has done more for civil, minority or equal rights, speaks for itself and is a stark asymmetrical historical pattern of trying to do and doing the right legislative thing, for minority groups, when compared to Republicans.

It can be argued that Republicans ending slavery is the mike drop moment when it all judgment about who has done more for civil, minority or equal rights for black people in the Dis United States of America is achieved and never to be matched again in history.

Under one political party I am free, in the other I am a slave. I am sorry Spidy, you cannot ignore the historical record. Historically, Black Americans were Republican voters from the Civil War through the early 20th century because the GOP was the "party of Lincoln" that fought slavery and supported Reconstruction. Full Stop!.

Despite the laughable misconceived notion of Democrat internal party racism, as a some planned, carried out mass party policy, that "pales in comparison" to the Lee Atwater's Southern strategy, is ludicrous.

Since neither party is mine, I will stipulate to your point. As I do not know or care about the internal politics inside of either party.

FACT: Dems have had "racist" temerity, put forth a NOT one, BUT two (2) Black candidates and two (2) women candidates for president. Repubs NOT one in either category (not that this is an indicator of being racist or sexist, but it sure is telling).

It can be argued that: you are overlooking the historical record.

I used AI to pull up some facts. The query was: Black candidates who were Republicans running for federal office since the Civil War.

From the end of the Civil War through the 21st century, Black candidates have held federal office and run for the presidency, evolving from Reconstruction pioneers to major-party nominees.*

Reconstruction Era (1865-1877) Approximately 2,000 Black Americans held public office at local, state, and federal levels during Reconstruction.

Hiram Revels and Blanche K. Bruce became the first Black U.S. Senators from Mississippi, while others served in the U.S. House of Representatives, such as Joseph Rainey and Robert Smalls from South Carolina.

20th Century Presidential Candidates Frederick Douglass received a symbolic vote at the 1888 Republican National Convention, becoming the first African American presidential candidate. Alan Keyes emerged as the first Black Republican to run for president in 1996.

You did not define the exact meaning of put forth a NOT one, BUT two (2) Black candidates and two (2) women candidates for president . Votes decide through primaries who is going to be the candidates running for office. It can be argued that all politics is local and that members of the House of Representatives and Senate who can serve unlimited terms have a greater impact on economic and social policy than the President of the United States of America who is limited to two terms.

Dont forget, Lee Atwater's Southern strategy, was indeed a planned systemic, state-sanctioned political project designed to win and hold power by codifying racial hierarchy into law and policy, designed to inflict cultural conflicts, about holding White power, representation, and resource distribution.

Memory strong my brother.

The shift to the Democratic Party began in the 1930s with the New Deal and solidified in the 1960s when Democrats championed the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, while Republicans adopted the "Southern Strategy" to appeal to white voters. Today, 83- 89% of Black voters identify as Democratic or lean Democratic, making it the most racially unified voting bloc in the U.S.

You close with:

Needless to say, the Democratic Party has been the primary architect of nearly every major piece of civil rights, women's rights, and LGBTQ rights legislation, while the modern Republican Party has, for decades, has been the primary source of opposition to those efforts.

It can be argued that Black voter support is not monolithic, and some Black voters, particularly younger men and those prioritizing economic or social conservatism, have shown increasing openness to the Republican Party.

Republicans: Emphasize individual responsibility, lower taxes, and traditional values; currently receive only 1014% of the Black vote but have seen modest gains in recent midterms.

Political scientists like Ismail White and Chryl Laird argue that Black Democratic loyalty is sustained by "racialized social constraint"a group norm where supporting Democrats is seen as essential for collective political power.

Ultimately, this voter evaluates which party's current platform best addresses their specific concerns regarding economic opportunity, criminal justice, and social equality. My evaluation reveals:

Neither party is mine!

Every single individual making posts that support democrats in this thread runs and hides when I point how the Democratic party opposes crypto ownership and in my opinion negatively effects a estimated 70 million of my fellow citizens in the Dis United States of America. On this particular issue, I favor Republicans universally. I am perfectly willing to ignore their white hoodie wearing nature in order to get access to a financial tool that will set up my liked and loved ones for generational wealth.

Democrats block cryptocurrency bill, demanding more limits on Trump's investments
Senate Democrats on Tuesday blocked legislation to create a new regulatory framework for cryptocurrency, stalling an industry-backed effort to place new guardrails around digital assets after demanding more limits on President Donald Trump's investments.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...ncy-regulation

Elizabeth Warren in March 2023 coined the phrase building an anti-crypto army*to describe her political strategy of uniting progressives, conservatives, and regulators to restrict cryptocurrency usage in the USA.

The Defense Rests!

[KeviKev68]

https://www.newsweek.com/democratic-...pinion-1976128

Neither party is mine!

They elected a black man as president and a black woman as vice president. Let me know when Republicans will do the same.

[Spidy]

https://www.newsweek.com/democratic-...pinion-1976128

Neither party is mine!

SubCmdr, I thought you were a man of FACTS verses opinions? So if I missed the FACTS in that OPINION piece, let me know!

The opinion piece you shared is provocative, and has a juicy (albeit inaccurate) headline, and all but focuses on what could be seen as internal party racial squabbling and bickering, and less about the real legislative FACTS, policies and political record, that still show Democrats are championing civil rights, women's rights, and LGBTQ rights, equal rights and racial injustice, rather than the infactual racist party, that the author suggests it has become.

The Democrat political record, policies and FACTs around which party has done more for civil, minority or equal rights, speaks for itself and is a stark asymmetrical historical pattern of trying to do and doing the right legislative thing, for minority groups, when compared to Republicans.

Despite the laughable misconceived notion of Democrat internal party racism, as a some planned, carried out mass party policy, that "pales in comparison" to the Lee Atwater's Southern strategy, is ludicrous. FACT: Dems have had "racist" temerity, put forth a NOT one, BUT two (2) Black candidates and two (2) women candidates for president. Repubs NOT one in either category (not that this is an indicator of being racist or sexist, but it sure is telling).

Don't forget, Lee Atwater's Southern strategy, was indeed a planned systemic, state-sanctioned political project designed to win and hold power by codifying racial hierarchy into law and policy, designed to inflict cultural conflicts, about holding White power, representation, and resource distribution.

Needless to say, the Democratic Party has been the primary architect of nearly every major piece of civil rights, women's rights, and LGBTQ rights legislation, while the modern Republican Party has, for decades, has been the primary source of opposition to those efforts.

[Elvis 2008]

The economics of clean renewable energy, solar, wind and batteries (SWB), is once again smashing anything the best fossil fuels (gas CCGT, coal-fired plants, petroleum oil / diesel) generators or nuclear power plants, can muster today at between $77 and $110+ / MWh.

Your graph puts costs at $125 per mwh, but hey, a climate change nut is lying. What else is new?

From google, Current natural gas costs for electricity generation vary significantly by region and market structure. In the United States, wholesale electricity prices driven by natural gas in June 2026 ranged from $19.14/ MWh in New York City to $35.42/ MWh for Central Appalachian coal, with Henry Hub natural gas converting to approximately $25.19/ MWh. For new combined-cycle natural gas plants, the total levelized cost (including fuel, operations, and capital) typically ranges from $60 to $150 per MWh, with an average of $90/ MWh.

Because you have lived off government handouts your whole life, you do not understand the concept of investing. While you and the climate change nuts tried to say we were all going to be swallowed up by the ocean, those of who live in the real world have to make educated guesses about where pricing is going to be. When you invest and screw up, it costs millions and billions of dollars. When you and the climate change nuts screwed up your projections, you did the typical Democratic bullshit and said, "Never mind". So what if it cost the world trillions of dollars?

The point is that if you want to invest in energy, there is a futures market where you can lock in the price with oil and natural gas. Here is the price with oil futures: https://oilprice.com/futures/natural-gas/.

And one for natural gas https://oilprice.com/futures/natural-gas/. So if you want to invest in a project, you can pay for the right to sell the oil and gas you are going to produce at a set price. Does your graph have any such assurance that solar and wind are going to cheaper or is that just more hopium bullshit from your so called experts?

And if you didn't notice, your solar and wind, even after the hopium bullshit, costs double the price to produce electricity from coal.

My RV has one Ecoflow power station with 4000 watts and two spare batteries also with 4000 watts for a total of 12,000 watts, and it has worked to run my AC unit all night. I can go 12 hours with night time AC and that has been a success. I no longer need a generator to stay cool at night.

By far, the fastest and easiest way to charge the power station is to plug it into a wall socket. I was stuck where I did not have one though. At first, I used the RV generator but that was financially costly so I bought a small generator about 50% bigger than the size of a toaster.

So now with two gallons of gas and in six to eight hours, I can charge the whole power station at a much cheaper cost than the RV generator.

And I thought solar was even cheaper. It's free right? No oil or gas costs right? The Ecoflow has two inputs and you can put in 2600 watts into the power station. It is set up perfectly for solar or so I thought. I was hoping that I could just plug in 2600 watts of solar and be home free.

I like this woman and her real world tests and she had one on solar panels here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSFOgZ1DE98.

So the first thing I learn is the rooftop solar panels are damned near worthless for my needs. The wattage is just paltry. The only panels that seem to be worth a damn are the ZoupWs, and they do 400 to 500 watts per hour but do you see how fucking big they are? To charge my station in five hours, I would need five or six of these huge panels, and I would need the space of a mid-sized back yard to put down these panels. That is $3000 to get "free" electricity.

And then there is all the issues with having these panels out like getting damaged, stolen, or the sun just does not shine. In comparison to the solar and the $3000 up front cost, the small generator was $400, and I can charge the whole station much more quickly with a whopping $6 in gasoline.

If I used the RV on a daily basis, and I do not, it would be years to get a return on the solar and that is assuming it is not damaged or stolen. Once again, the math for solar just does not work.

[Elvis 2008]

We all know that the Democrats are the racists. You don't want Caucasians to have equal rights. You're obsessed with Caucasians. It's sad to see.

If you are a Democrat, you are perfectly okay with this, https://twitter.com/i/status/2099948154556985396

[Elvis 2008]

We all know that the Democrats are the racists. You don't want Caucasians to have equal rights. You're obsessed with Caucasians. It's sad to see.

Well, the prototypical male voting Republican cares little about race and all about values. Are you a productive person or a victim? Are you helping your fellow man when you are capable of doing so or are you a leach? Are you obsessed with government because you want to see it serve the nation and the public or are you obsessed because you want more money from government?

The latest brouhaha that we have seen was the Lindsay Clancy case. Oh boy. A mother kills her three children and the feminists blamed everyone but her. It was the drugs; it was her medical providers (all women by the way); it was her husband's fault. Eight obviously activist Democratic jurors bullied the other jurors into trying to get her off on an insanity defense. There was one sole male juror who would not bend and the Democratic machine did all it could to have him tossed from the jury.

If you want to know who the racists are in society, you can watch this video and the anchor Gayle King. She loses it when she finds out the holdout juror is a black male. (Gasp!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySTuYw9ogFw

"I have to sit with that for a second", she says. Gee, why Gayle? Is it because in your racist mind the holdout juror had to be an old white MAGA dude? If it makes you feel any better, Gayle, he admitted to being a Republican. You can defend being biased against men and Republicans but race not so much. You just showed the world that you and Democrats like you are the REAL racists.

So now we really know what it is to be a Democrat. The only ones responsible for anything are working men. A woman can literally kill her children and it is the fault of working men. It had to be the husband. Never mind that he made $400 k a year took off work to help more at the home, paid for a nanny, paid for a mansion, and paid for her to see all these health care providers. He was supposed to do more dammit!

And now we have women out claiming how hard it is to be a mother. You men just do not understand how hard it is. No, personally, I do and if today's women cannot handle the stress of being a mother, then I will take them at their word and say that they cannot handle doing other stressful jobs. It is not like a dumb animal can be a mom and raise their young. Oh wait.

The American woman and their Democratic simps have gotten to the point where feminism means a complete absence of any accountability. If you are an American man, you would be stupid to not get yourself a surrogate woman, a nanny, and a hooker abroad to have your fun.

With the average American woman, the only time an American man has any ownership with children is when it comes time to pay the bills. Outside of that, to the average American woman, men can fuck off.

Just remember. A woman admitted to killing her children, and American women wanted her to be not guilty and to blame her husband. Does anyone need to know anything else when it comes to how batshit crazy Democrats are?