Reply to NYT: Profound increase in black voters who support Trump

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "NYT: Profound increase in black voters who support Trump"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]How do the Dems remain so tone deaf?  NYT reported polling data showing skyrocketing support among black voters for Trump:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/us/politics/biden-trump-black-voters-poll-democrats.html

People across the board are sick and tired of the out of the control crime like car jackings and shootings that have skyrocketed under Biden and are a result of local policies enacted by the Democrats.  All too often that crime is occurring in black neighborhoods.  That and the massive influx of illegal immigrants that have been pouring into the country courtesy of Biden and the Democrats is causing a significant erosion in the confidence of Dems to be able to govern.  People want law and order and oour borders to be restored.

It is almost inevitable Trump is going to win.  He is leading Biden by double digits now. 
[/quote]

our policies continue to screw low wage African Americans.  and we have known this for decades.

people need good jobs to thrive in our capitalism

The 1980-2000 immigrant influx, therefore, generally 'explains' about 20 to 60 percent of the decline in wages, 25 percent of the decline in employment, and about 10 percent of the rise in incarceration rates among blacks with a high school education or less

Almost everybody knows that in the past 40 years, the real wages and job prospects for low-skilled men, especially low-skilled minority workers, have fallen. And there is evidence, that a rising tide of immigration is  to blame. Now, a new NBER study suggests that immigration has more far-reaching consequences than merely depressing wages and lowering employment rates of low-skilled African-American males: its effects also appear to push some would-be workers into crime and, later, into prison.

https://www.nber.org/digest/may07/effects-immigration-african-american-employment-and-incarceration

When the supply of workers goes up, the price that firms have to pay to hire workers goes down. Wage trends over the past half-century suggest that a 10 percent increase in the number of workers with a particular set of skills probably lowers the wage of that group by at least 3 percent.

Immigration redistributes wealth from those who compete with immigrants to those who use immigrants—from the employee to the employer.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216/

Democrats have abandoned US workers. 
[/quote]
The 1980s started an explosion of offshoring manufacturing to MX with the maquiladora program under Reagan.   My dad's factory was impacted, and he got laid off.

I used to be a R, but this is what capitalism is about. You cannot want capitalism and control whether companies can offshore jobs.  The R word (regulation) would be needed to prevent offshoring of jobs.

Also, you forget that it's the Dems that support a living minimum wage, not Rs.  [/quote]

You've been brainwashed. It was Clinton, Bill Clinton, who destroyed our manufacting sector via that NAFTA free trade deal with Mexico and his pushing the WTO to accept China.

Remember Perot? He was 100% right. And this happened well after Reagan. [/quote]

Do better research. NAFTA was started by Reagan and negotiated by Bush 41. Clinton negotiated side deals on labor and environmental issues before sending it to Congress where 75% of Republicans and 40% of Democrats voted for it.

NAFTA was better than no NAFTA because trade with Mexico and Canada is better for the US than trade with Asia which was the most likely alternative. A huge part of NAFTA trade is related-party trade, shipments of supply chain parts and components between affiliates and subsidiaries of the same company. [/quote]

Sorry, you're quite misguided on the facts. Like it or not, it was Clinton who actually signed it and implrmented it.

On NAFTA: "Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994."[/quote]

(Needless to say, that's a full year into Clinton's Presidency, so your blaming Reagan shows your colors too much)[/quote]

You are clueless. It was negotiated over several years beginning in the Reagan administration. The NAFTA treaty itself was signed by Bush. Clinton then added side agreements on labor and environment and signed the law that ratified it after it passed Congress by mostly Republican votes:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/103-1993/h575

Here are your buddies at the Heritage Foundation in 1993:

The North American Free Trade Agreement: Ronald Reagan's Vision Realized
https://www.heritage.org/trade/report/the-north-american-free-trade-agreement-ronald-reagans-vision-realized
[/quote]

I see. So you blame 9/11 on Clinton because after all he's the one who started the "root causes" of it. And of course you'll hold Biden and Pelosi responsible on a potential war with China in 5 years because of their aggressive words and actions now.

Sorry but nope. POTUS are responsible for what they do and sign since Day 1, and it's dumb to pretend to blame the previous POTUS. This is always the case, and it's even more obvious when you do something a full year after taking office.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics