Religiously, nonwhite Democrats are more similar to Republicans than to white Democrats

[TitanTiger 20,499]

An interesting dynamic in the 2016 election was that Hillary couldn't excite the Democrat base the way Obama did.  I tend to see the result as more of a Hillary/DNC failure than a Trump triumph.  Any competent, decent candidate on the other side should have mopped the floor with him.

For all the problems the GOP currently has between the Trump wing and the rest of the party, the Democrats are in a similar pickle.  The rich, white Democrats who are the financial and ideological core of the party view the religious beliefs of their non-white base with (at best) mild embarrassment or worse, disdain.  And I think the base knows it.  Hillary essentially ran a campaign that took the attitude toward that non-white religious base of "You don't have anywhere else to go.  You have to vote for me," then promptly lurched left on social issues, doubling down on idiotic things like repealing the Hyde Amendment.  

She learned the hard way that one place that non-white religious base could go was home in the living room and not vote.

If white and non-white religious voters could ever see how much they have in common and stop accepting or cheerleading for their current party's other issues out of blind loyalty, they could be a force.  But establishment Dems and Republicans don't want that.  It is to their advantage to keep religious whites and religious black and brown people at odds, as well as keeping poor and lower middle class whites and poor and lower-middle class people of color at odds.  Divide and conquer.

Quote

It’s sometimes said that the Democratic Party is less comfortable with religion than the GOP. And it is true that, on the whole, Democrats are less religious than Republicans. But this glosses over profound racial and ethnic differences within the Democratic Party: While white Democrats are less likely to be religious than Republicans, nonwhite Democrats – who mostly identify as black or Hispanic – more closely resemble Republicans overall on a host of religious measures...

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/23/religiously-nonwhite-democrats-are-more-similar-to-republicans-than-to-white-democrats/

 

[triangletiger 1,599]

The ideologies seem to break down into two categories:  liberal or conservative on fiscal matter and liberal or conservative on social/moral matters.  While the minority democrats agree with their party on fiscal matters (they support government programs), they disagree with the prevailing view of their party on social matters. 

Unfortunately, the Republicans have largely lost all credibility when it comes holding the moral high ground on social issues. 

 

 

[DKW 86 7,431]

There is nothing Reaganesque about the new Republican Party. Reagan courted the Latino vote all his life. He saw in them a people that were tied to God and Family. What used to pass for Republican policy back then.Nowdays, its just "Profits Uber Aalles!."

[AuburnNTexas 7,154]

Having a Hispanic wife and a good bit of time around Hispanics at Quinceañera's, Hispanic Godchildren, cookouts, etc. The Hispanic community is very diverse. Surprisingly mixed views on immigration even among those who have friends or family here who are not illegal. On the whole they are religious with Catholic being the predominate faith but a fast growing evangelical Christian community that mixes some of the belief's from the Catholic Church and the evangelical church's. It is not uncommon to see an Hispanic evangelical to carry a Rosary or to believe in the Saint's similar to the way Catholic's do. In Texas there are a lot of Republican Hispanic's also there are Democratic Hispanic's who want a more humane immigration system but who live on the border and are scared to death of some of the open border talk coming out of the Democratic party.

The other thing that you see in Texas is most Hispanic families are mixed similar to my family. There is also a huge difference between Hispanics who have been here for many generations and new arrivals.  There is a huge difference between different Hispanic group's Central American's and Mexican's don't always like each other many are jealous of the special immigration rules for Cuban's and most of the ones from South America were upper class and rich when they came to the US.

Currently close to 30% of the Hispanic Voters actually support the Republican Party in Texas. Many of these are the self made business people who are helped by the Republican business friendly attitudes. Texas is unique in this area but I actually expect the trend to continue throughout the country. One reason is in Texas you see Hispanic names on the ballot in local offices and even near the top (Ted Cruz).

If the Republican Party would get out of its own way and actively recruit Hispanics and Blacks not only for their votes but to run for office especially at the local level they could pick up a huge number of voters.

Immigration is the thorn in the Republican Parties and the Democratic parties sides. Kids being separated from their families by the way it occurred in large numbers under Obama also but was not shown by the media. The face of illegal immigration. In the past the majority of illegal immigrants were single men or young married men and a smaller number were single women.  After the men got established they married the single woman who had come on their own and then if already married they paid for a coyote to bring their wives.  They then started their family here. If they already had families back home they sent money and often started a second family here.

During the Obama administration partly do to some of his policies and partly do to crime and economic hardship in Central America you started to see mothers and children coming together and also large groups of children coming separately. To be honest under Obama first and now under Trump we were not prepared to handle the numbers especially with the children. Trumps zero tolerance exacerbated the problem but was not the cause of the problem.

We need true immigration reform that takes into account multiple issues. People living here illegally but working hard paying taxes under incorrect social security numbers, higher crime rates among a small group of illegals, impact on salary scale of having cheap illegal labor that disproportionately impacts the poor, cost of Social services to illegals, the sanctity of the family, etc.

You have a hard core Republican block that want just the wall and no true reform and want to portray illegals ad criminals use it for political purposes, you have a hard core democratic block that wants status quo so they can use it for political purposes and probably the majority in both parties who want to resolve it but there are two major stumbling blocks some honest differences in what is needed but that could probably be resolved via compromise and leadership in both parties that wants to win at any cost will not compromise and will not let the rank and file negotiate without them.

The House tried two different approaches one very conservative and one more moderate neither came close to passing. Why both were driven by two different Republican blocks with not input allowed from like minded Democrats as both parties leaders would not allow a bipartisan discussion.  Party leadership believes that compromise is a dirty word. Nothing changes until we can get back to talking civilly with people we disagree with and start compromising. 

Compromise does not mean You give up your basic moral provincials but that you can respect that people who disagree with you also have basic moral principals.  There will always be some things people can not compromise on because of moral principals but there is an awful lot that we have more in common then Party leadership will allow.

 

 

[bigbird 60,571]

8 hours ago, AuburnNTexas said:

Having a Hispanic wife and a good bit of time around Hispanics at Quinceañera's, Hispanic Godchildren, cookouts, etc. The Hispanic community is very diverse. Surprisingly mixed views on immigration even among those who have friends or family here who are not illegal. On the whole they are religious with Catholic being the predominate faith but a fast growing evangelical Christian community that mixes some of the belief's from the Catholic Church and the evangelical church's. It is not uncommon to see an Hispanic evangelical to carry a Rosary or to believe in the Saint's similar to the way Catholic's do. In Texas there are a lot of Republican Hispanic's also there are Democratic Hispanic's who want a more humane immigration system but who live on the border and are scared to death of some of the open border talk coming out of the Democratic party.

The other thing that you see in Texas is most Hispanic families are mixed similar to my family. There is also a huge difference between Hispanics who have been here for many generations and new arrivals.  There is a huge difference between different Hispanic group's Central American's and Mexican's don't always like each other many are jealous of the special immigration rules for Cuban's and most of the ones from South America were upper class and rich when they came to the US.

Currently close to 30% of the Hispanic Voters actually support the Republican Party in Texas. Many of these are the self made business people who are helped by the Republican business friendly attitudes. Texas is unique in this area but I actually expect the trend to continue throughout the country. One reason is in Texas you see Hispanic names on the ballot in local offices and even near the top (Ted Cruz).

If the Republican Party would get out of its own way and actively recruit Hispanics and Blacks not only for their votes but to run for office especially at the local level they could pick up a huge number of voters.

Immigration is the thorn in the Republican Parties and the Democratic parties sides. Kids being separated from their families by the way it occurred in large numbers under Obama also but was not shown by the media. The face of illegal immigration. In the past the majority of illegal immigrants were single men or young married men and a smaller number were single women.  After the men got established they married the single woman who had come on their own and then if already married they paid for a coyote to bring their wives.  They then started their family here. If they already had families back home they sent money and often started a second family here.

During the Obama administration partly do to some of his policies and partly do to crime and economic hardship in Central America you started to see mothers and children coming together and also large groups of children coming separately. To be honest under Obama first and now under Trump we were not prepared to handle the numbers especially with the children. Trumps zero tolerance exacerbated the problem but was not the cause of the problem.

We need true immigration reform that takes into account multiple issues. People living here illegally but working hard paying taxes under incorrect social security numbers, higher crime rates among a small group of illegals, impact on salary scale of having cheap illegal labor that disproportionately impacts the poor, cost of Social services to illegals, the sanctity of the family, etc.

You have a hard core Republican block that want just the wall and no true reform and want to portray illegals ad criminals use it for political purposes, you have a hard core democratic block that wants status quo so they can use it for political purposes and probably the majority in both parties who want to resolve it but there are two major stumbling blocks some honest differences in what is needed but that could probably be resolved via compromise and leadership in both parties that wants to win at any cost will not compromise and will not let the rank and file negotiate without them.

The House tried two different approaches one very conservative and one more moderate neither came close to passing. Why both were driven by two different Republican blocks with not input allowed from like minded Democrats as both parties leaders would not allow a bipartisan discussion.  Party leadership believes that compromise is a dirty word. Nothing changes until we can get back to talking civilly with people we disagree with and start compromising. 

Compromise does not mean You give up your basic moral provincials but that you can respect that people who disagree with you also have basic moral principals.  There will always be some things people can not compromise on because of moral principals but there is an awful lot that we have more in common then Party leadership will allow.

 

 

Great post!

[bigbird 60,571]

A facepalm from ICHY? I must've said something right.

[homersapien 11,393]

On 6/27/2018 at 8:52 AM, triangletiger said:

The ideologies seem to break down into two categories:  liberal or conservative on fiscal matter and liberal or conservative on social/moral matters.  While the minority democrats agree with their party on fiscal matters (they support government programs), they disagree with the prevailing view of their party on social matters. 

Unfortunately, the Republicans have largely lost all credibility when it comes holding the moral high ground on social issues. 

 

 

Not just social issues.  

[augolf1716 21,221]

8 hours ago, bigbird said:

A facepalm from ICHY? I must've said something right.

Well that must mean a damn lot of members have said something right