Florida Schools: DEI Abolished

[hog88]

Kinda true,kinda not true. While they were called Democratic the actual party was called Democratic -Republican. As you may know,the South was heavily Democratic in terms of party up until the civil rights movement. It was LBJ who told Bill Moyer's that by signing the civil rights legislation,"we may have lost the South", which they did. The South turned overwhelmingly to Republican.
Here are just a few acts by the Democrats.
Civil rights,voting rights,clean water, clean Air,Medicare, Medicaid, Disability,workers comp, GI bill, LGBTQ marriage, right to union,40 hour work week, equal right to housing, education, the New Deal.Income Tax(was first passed on only top 1%)-plus more.
In terms of important legislation passed by one party-there are really no comparisons. Yes Lincoln was a Republican but would he be part of today's Republican party?

Dems didn’t loose the south until the 90s

 

[Jimmyandjoes]

Dems didn’t loose the south until the 90s

How the ‘Party of Lincoln’ Won Over the Once Democratic South | HISTORY

Democratic defectors, known as the “Dixiecrats,” started a switch to the Republican party in a movement that was later fueled by a so‑called "Southern strategy."

www.history.com

No they didn't. They lost the South after the Civil Rights movement. 1976 was the last time a pres candidate won a majority of southern electoral votes. Happened way before Clinton. They were called the Dixiecrats up until the 80's. The South was gone for good with Reagan

 

[Lawrence Wright]

Live? No. Understand its implications? Yes. One would sound like a moron to do otherwise.

Connecting those dots can be difficult for some.

 

[hog88]

How the ‘Party of Lincoln’ Won Over the Once Democratic South | HISTORY

Democratic defectors, known as the “Dixiecrats,” started a switch to the Republican party in a movement that was later fueled by a so‑called "Southern strategy."

www.history.com

No they didn't. They lost the South after the Civil Rights movement. 1976 was the last time a pres candidate won a majority of southern electoral votes. Happened way before Clinton. They were called the Dixiecrats up until the 80's. The South was gone for good with Reagan

The majority of southern legislatures and reps to congress were Dem majorities until the 90s. Yeah, the south slowly started to vote R in the presidential elections in the 80s but that doesn't qualify as losing the south.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

The majority of southern legislatures and reps to congress were Dem majorities until the 90s. Yeah, the south slowly started to vote R in the presidential elections in the 80s but that doesn't qualify as losing the south.

Too many southerners have switched to seltzer beers. All is lost!

 

[hog88]

Too many southerners have switched to seltzer beers. All is lost!

Lots of truth in your post.

 

[Vol in Buckeye Land]

Very astute observation. I definitely value your opinion

Oh I’m well aware that the only opinion you value is your own.

 

[whodeycin85]

It’s almost as if, from a macro standpoint, 7-8 generations of being denied equal access to education, employment and housing played a part in that socioeconomic background you mentioned.

How does that play out to the very successful legal immigrants that come from generations in poverty stricken countries??? They come and often have success immediately and rise...how come it just an issue for those born here???

 

[whodeycin85]

Which U.S. Cities Are the Most Dangerous? | Security.org

If you had to guess which town in the United States was the single most violent, would you have picked tiny Industry, California? Probably not. Most of us would likely name St. Louis or Baltimore, maybe Chicago or New York. Surely few, if any, would point to the 204-person Industry, a suburb...

www.security.org

Define dumpster fire. Overwhelmingly,most violent and least safe cities are small towns and a majority of those are in the South. Anniston, Alabama isn't exactly a blue city

Yes but what's more violent...1 murder in a town of 1000 or 10000 murders in a city with a million

 

[Lawrence Wright]

How does that play out to the very successful legal immigrants that come from generations in poverty stricken countries??? They come and often have success immediately and rise...how come it just an issue for those born here???

Same way it plays out for Americans born into poverty who become very successful. Sometimes people break through and become successful in spite of growing up in poverty.

And I missed where anyone here claimed “it’s an issue for those born here” exclusively.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Dems didn’t loose the south until the 90s

loose?

 

[hog88]

loose?

Spelling Nazi!

 

[whodeycin85]

Same way it plays out for Americans born into poverty who become very successful. Sometimes people break through and become successful in spite of growing up in poverty.

And I missed where anyone here claimed “it’s an issue for those born here” exclusively.

You posted that chart about slavery etc...assumed it was a chart of America...so again why do immigrant from social economic poverty from other countries exponentially do better then those born in less impoverished areas...think it might have anything to do with the fact we cater to those instead of expecting them to do better on thier own..like immigrant ls do??? At what point to we hold people accountable for thier own decisions??

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Spelling Nazi!

That one just bugs me. Sorry.

 

[hog88]

That one just bugs me. Sorry.

Dude, my feeling got hurt.

 

[Lawrence Wright]

You posted that chart about slavery etc...assumed it was a chart of America...so again why do immigrant from social economic poverty from other countries exponentially do better then those born in less impoverished areas...think it might have anything to do with the fact we cater to those instead of expecting them to do better on thier own..like immigrant ls do??? At what point to we hold people accountable for thier own decisions??

Go back and take a look at that post with the chart, and what I was specifically responding to.

Key words being “indoctrination of bigotry and hate towards a specific group of people”.

I simply provided a timeline of exactly that in this country.

Your immigrant argument is a strawman. Some immigrants come here and become successful, and others come here and become a drain on the system. No one was arguing otherwise.

 

[whodeycin85]

Go back and take a look at that post with the chart, and what I was specifically responding to.

Key words being “indoctrination of bigotry and hate towards a specific group of people”.

I simply provided a timeline of exactly that in this country.

Your immigrant argument is a strawman. Some immigrants come here and become successful, and others come here and become a drain on the system. No one was arguing otherwise.

your were arguing about the black community and what they have suffered thru as an excuse why DEI needs to exist..but statically black immigrants from worse impoverished countries succeed much more then black americans...why does only seem to effect those born here???

 

[Lawrence Wright]

your were arguing about the black community and what they have suffered thru as an excuse why DEI needs to exist..but statically black immigrants from worse impoverished countries succeed much more then black americans...why does only seem to effect those born here???

I stated unequal access to education, employment and housing over multiple generations was a factor in the educational and economic gap between blacks and whites…at a macro level.

At no point did I say that DEI should exist as a result.

You’re free to educate us on why immigrants succeed more than black Americans. The floor is yours.

 

[whodeycin85]

I stated unequal access to education, employment and housing over multiple generations was a factor in the educational and economic gap between blacks and whites…at a macro level.

At no point did I say that DEI should exist as a result.

You’re free to educate us on why immigrants succeed more than black Americans. The floor is yours.

in regards to your first paragraph, do you think black immigrants from worse poverished countires have access to better schools, employment etc then black americans???

I believe that black americans use exactly what you your first paragraph states as a crutch....in America people can rise from ashes and fall from grace all by thier own merrit...do the rich have an advantage..absolutely...but being a poor black, white, whatever race doesnt automatically put you behind...your work ethic, character, will power or lack thereof are what make the difference between succeeding and failing....do you realize that if a person finishes high school and doesnt have kids early then are 200% more likely to be middle class or above...its that simple..make good choices...last time a check being a different race doesn't mean you cant make good choices.

 

[Lawrence Wright]

in regards to your first paragraph, do you think black immigrants from worse poverished countires have access to better schools, employment etc then black americans???

I believe that black americans use exactly what you your first paragraph states as a crutch....in America people can rise from ashes and fall from grace all by thier own merrit...do the rich have an advantage..absolutely...but being a poor black, white, whatever race doesnt automatically put you behind...your work ethic, character, will power or lack thereof are what make the difference between succeeding and failing....do you realize that if a person finishes high school and doesnt have kids early then are 200% more likely to be middle class or above...its that simple..make good choices...last time a check being a different race doesn't mean you cant make good choices.

From a micro standpoint, I agree with most everything you said in your second paragraph.

From a macro standpoint, the rules of the game in this country were rigged against blacks for a longer period of time than the playing field has been level. There’s long-term economic collateral damage as a result for blacks…from a macro standpoint...compared to whites. We may never see eye-to-eye on this, and that’s okay.

Again, you’re free to point out the differences between the public education system here versus other countries, and how immigrants are more successful.

 

[whodeycin85]

From a micro standpoint, I agree with most everything you said in your second paragraph.

From a macro standpoint, the rules of the game in this country were rigged against blacks for a longer period of time than the playing field has been level. There’s long-term economic collateral damage as a result for blacks…from a macro standpoint...compared to whites. We may never see eye-to-eye on this, and that’s okay.

Again, you’re free to point out the differences between the public education system here versus other countries, and how immigrants are more successful.

Take Nigerians..up until recently they were the most successful immigrant class (now passed by Indians and South Africans) but they only have schooling up to middle school for the majority of the population...but they are widely more successful in the US then blacks born with more opportunities for education..why?? Both have black skin color...it speaks to an victim mindset from black Americans..even with affirmative action and DEI black Americans still lag behind regardless off what aid is given..it speaks to black American culture..witch is failing first due to thier reliance on government programs to supplements 2 parent households...now that was our government's doing...and i agree at the time hurt the black community...but it only the victim mindset keeping it that way.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Take Nigerians..up until recently they were the most successful immigrant class (now passed by Indians and South Africans) but they only have schooling up to middle school for the majority of the population...but they are widely more successful in the US then blacks born with more opportunities for education..why?? Both have black skin color...it speaks to an victim mindset from black Americans..even with affirmative action and DEI black Americans still lag behind regardless off what aid is given..it speaks to black American culture..witch is failing first due to thier reliance on government programs to supplements 2 parent households...now that was our government's doing...and i agree at the time hurt the black community...but it only the victim mindset keeping it that way.

It's because they are all princes and they want to give you their money only if you pay processing fees....

 

[Jimmyandjoes]

The majority of southern legislatures and reps to congress were Dem majorities until the 90s. Yeah, the south slowly started to vote R in the presidential elections in the 80s but that doesn't qualify as losing the south.

Yes that's true and what your speaking of is the Newt Gingrich "contract with America" that happened in 1994-2 years after Clinton was elected. However, what I'm saying is there is a specific turning point where the south was solidly, overwhelmingly democratic. While it was not an immediate switch to Republican, that turning point(election of Kennedy in 60 and the pronounced policy of equal rights) began a decline in every election for Democrats. No power loses it in one election like a playoff system where the winner has control over everything. This announcement of equal rights policy by Kennedy and furthered by LBJ was the absolute turning point where the south was lost. Year after year, in every election, Democrats lost more seats and representation to Republicans. I'm old enough to remember when Tennessee has several Democrat Govs-that's been since the 90's. My point being-this was the precipitous event where the south left the democratic party: Equal Rights
You can see around about 1960-everything started to change. What happened around the election of Kennedy? This goes with what LBJ told Moyer's

 

[hog88]

Yes that's true and what your speaking of is the Newt Gingrich "contract with America" that happened in 1994-2 years after Clinton was elected. However, what I'm saying is there is a specific turning point where the south was solidly, overwhelmingly democratic. While it was not an immediate switch to Republican, that turning point(election of Kennedy in 60 and the pronounced policy of equal rights) began a decline in every election for Democrats. No power loses it in one election like a playoff system where the winner has control over everything. This announcement of equal rights policy by Kennedy and furthered by LBJ was the absolute turning point where the south was lost. Year after year, in every election, Democrats lost more seats and representation to Republicans. I'm old enough to remember when Tennessee has several Democrat Govs-that's been since the 90's. My point being-this was the precipitous event where the south left the democratic party: Equal Rights
You can see around about 1960-everything started to change. What happened around the election of Kennedy? This goes with what LBJ told Moyer's

I’m sure that the civil rights movement had a small part in the Democrats losing the south but the reality is it was the hard left the Democratic Party took in the mid to late 80s that lost the south. Democrats just love to shade the south as racist and want that to be the reason they lost a stronghold.

 

[Jimmyandjoes]

I’m sure that the civil rights movement had a small part in the Democrats losing the south but the reality is it was the hard left the Democratic Party took in the mid to late 80s that lost the south. Democrats just love to shade the south as racist and want that to be the reason they lost a stronghold.

I would say as a resident of the South, it is more racist. There are truths that the south had to have federal troops to force integration. I'm sure we can find pockets in other random places, but as a whole, I would argue race played a huge part. Could be the changing demographics, more black and Hispanic moving in as the south opened up. I wouldn't say they lost a stronghold, but the party platforms shifted more. The old Dixiecrats were not liberals in the democratic sense lol. I think, more than anything, the forced integration of the South over the 20-25 years after the civil rights movement, Reagan as a strong conservative candidate, and the Souths wishes for small government made the switch. But like anything, if you're around long enough, it'll switch back the other way as parties change their platforms, beliefs, candidates. Just like now, there has to be another conservative movement that competes with MAGA. What will that be? Will that be over time the right/centrist Democrats and standard Republicans get a new party while the Democrats turn left and more progressive. Something has to change-Repubs have won the pop vote 1 time since 1992. They realize that. What is the next change in parties and how does power switch. It's very interesting