Home
Posted By: IndyCA35 Taking Back the Cities - 11/28/19
Here are the largest cities in the US and percentage of the vote HILLARY CLINTON got in each one in 2016.

Detroit 97%
Washington DC 96%
9 NJ cities such as Newark, East Orange, Paterson, Atlantic City 91%
San Francisco 90%
Baltimore 89%
Chicago 87%
Boston 86%
New Orleans 85%
Philadelphia 84%
St Louis 83%
New York City 81%
Portland 81%
Atlanta 77%
Seattle 77%
Los Angeles 75%
Bottom tip of Texas 70%
Miami 66%
Charlotte/Durham/Wake 65%
Dallas 61%
Houston 56%

It's pretty obvious that if we could cut the Dem presidential vote by 20% in each one, there would never be another dem president.

So why can't we (or why can't you, RNC) take back the cities?

I happen to live in a suburb of a large city that like all of these, has been controlled by dems for 50 years. Like most other such cities, it is becoming hollowed out. Those who can afford it, move out. The ones left are the poor, the homeless, those whose mortgages are underwater because of declining property values, ghetto welling minorities, and, in a few walled enclaves, a few rich.

Why isn't it possible to appeal to those residents? Do you like generation after generation of your kids having inferior lives because, unlike your rich democrat masters, you have to send your kids to inferior schools instead of selecting where you want them to go? Why do you keep putting up with danger and crime because the police don't come when they are called? Why doesn't city hall, year after year, improve anything in your life?

It would seem possible to turn a lot of these people. Not that it would be easy. The opposition is well organized. It has convinced many that it defends their interests while only being interested in keeping them in misery and dependent on the democrats.

But why doesn't someone try?
Posted By: hanco Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/28/19
Because most of the people that live in them are stupid and too lazy to work.
Originally Posted by hanco
Because most of the people that live in them are stupid and too lazy to work.


Or dead people who still manage to faithfully vote Democrat!!
Posted By: DakotaDeer Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Because most strategists are not actually very strategic.

Get Bill Belechick as your campaign strategist manager, and you'd win that no problem.
Posted By: 44mc Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
cut off welfare let them starve or go to work
Posted By: stxhunter Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
avoid the groid
Posted By: hanco Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Dumbocrats will someday realize what a monster they have created. It is already too late to go back.
Posted By: mtnsnake Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Let groids vote republican and we get the cities back. Then we can clean them up.
Originally Posted by stxhunter
avoid the groid




Easier said then done unfortunately!!
Posted By: rong Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
I would guess the hardest part would be how to get to those people,the news will never give any positive reports on a Republican.
Since the days of FDR during the depression, the government has been swapping enough money for bare-bones survival for votes by the people too lazy to work. When W.P.A. was paying $2.00 a day for people to lean on a shovel and gripe about how hard times were, my grandfather could not get carloads of coal unloaded so his trucks could deliver it to his customers. He paid $4.00 a car, about 12 hours' work for someone who was willing to keep at it for a day. The people he tried to hire would rather "work" for W.P.A. for half as much money, and not have to make much effort for it. People too lazy to work have been around since the beginning of recorded history!
Jerry
Posted By: joken2 Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19

The Democrat party is so deeply rooted in Chicago politics the likelihood of it ever going Republican is nothing but pure unadulterated fantasy.

"You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours", politics rules Chicago from bottom to top among the citizenry as a whole and in all facets and levels of government.
Posted By: Fubarski Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
People operate under the misconception that democrats and urban minorities are actually voting (as we know it), and can therefore possibly be converted to conservatism and an R vote.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Statistics, FWTW, say that 50% of eligible voters actually vote.

But as we know, in urban areas 80-90% of blacks turn out to vote for the D candidate.

How can that be?

It can't.

Freeloadin pot/crackheads turnin out to vote at a higher percentage than normal people would never, and has never, happened.

But what *does* happen, is massive voter fraud.

Here's how it worked (and may still work) in MO, pre- voter ID.

Only ID required was a utility bill. So, paid D voter registrars went door ta door in black neighborhoods.

D regis: Hey, neighbor, are you gonna vote?

Crackhead: Nope.

D regis: Well, we can help you. I can give you 2 sonic gift cards and a $20 Walmart gift card, if you'll give me your light bill.

Crackhead: OK.

Come election day, that crackhead votes, through donations to inner city churches, who supply parishioners to ride buses around town all day.

They hand out the bought and paid for utility bills for each precinct, and the bus riders hit the polls, votin a straight D ticket.

For major elections, there's a lawsuit filed in the urban counties, claimin there was problems at the polls and they need ta stay open late.

Some liberal judge signs an order, and the polls stay open late, so extra fraud can occur. Later, the appeals court stays the order, but the fraudsters have already voted, and there's no way to tell a late vote from a real one.

On TV, they call this the demorrhoid "ground game".

O'Buckwheat was the "best" at it, in the primaries and the elections, because he knew he couldn't be called on it, bein "black" and all.

Massive D voter fraud occurs in D controlled jursidictions, and those that could police it are told to stand down, just like with the antifags.

Good news is that sooner or later, the supreme kangaroos will rule that requirin voter ID is constitutional.

That and the wall is the only chance ta save the country, votin wise.
Posted By: Hastings Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Originally Posted by mtnsnake
Let groids vote republican and we get the cities back. Then we can clean them up.
NOT going to happen
Posted By: funshooter Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
I hope what I heard was correct.
I live and work in Southern Commyfornia
I was working on a Hospital Project and the Metal Stud Union Welder said that he attended an Union Meeting and the Union told all of them in the Meeting if they wanted to keep their jobs they had better vote for President Trump.
Because if the Dumbocrates were elected all of their jobs would come to an end.
They told all of their members that they have never had this much work in the History of the Union.
That Came out of the Framing Union Members Mouth.
I Could not believe my ears.
Now if we could only get the Teachers Union to flip. (NEVER GUNNA HAPPEN) with that Union EVER sad to say.
Posted By: jaguartx Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Originally Posted by IndyCA35
Here are the largest cities in the US and percentage of the vote HILLARY CLINTON got in each one in 2016.

Detroit 97%
Washington DC 96%
9 NJ cities such as Newark, East Orange, Paterson, Atlantic City 91%
San Francisco 90%
Baltimore 89%
Chicago 87%
Boston 86%
New Orleans 85%
Philadelphia 84%
St Louis 83%
New York City 81%
Portland 81%
Atlanta 77%
Seattle 77%
Los Angeles 75%
Bottom tip of Texas 70%
Miami 66%
Charlotte/Durham/Wake 65%
Dallas 61%
Houston 56%

It's pretty obvious that if we could cut the Dem presidential vote by 20% in each one, there would never be another dem president.

So why can't we (or why can't you, RNC) take back the cities?

I happen to live in a suburb of a large city that like all of these, has been controlled by dems for 50 years. Like most other such cities, it is becoming hollowed out. Those who can afford it, move out. The ones left are the poor, the homeless, those whose mortgages are underwater because of declining property values, ghetto welling minorities, and, in a few walled enclaves, a few rich.

Why isn't it possible to appeal to those residents? Do you like generation after generation of your kids having inferior lives because, unlike your rich democrat masters, you have to send your kids to inferior schools instead of selecting where you want them to go? Why do you keep putting up with danger and crime because the police don't come when they are called? Why doesn't city hall, year after year, improve anything in your life?

It would seem possible to turn a lot of these people. Not that it would be easy. The opposition is well organized. It has convinced many that it defends their interests while only being interested in keeping them in misery and dependent on the democrats.

But why doesn't someone try?


Because Christ has been kicked out of school.
Posted By: local_dirt Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Originally Posted by IndyCA35
Here are the largest cities in the US and percentage of the vote HILLARY CLINTON got in each one in 2016.

Detroit 97%
Washington DC 96%
9 NJ cities such as Newark, East Orange, Paterson, Atlantic City 91%
San Francisco 90%
Baltimore 89%
Chicago 87%
Boston 86%
New Orleans 85%
Philadelphia 84%
St Louis 83%
New York City 81%
Portland 81%
Atlanta 77%
Seattle 77%
Los Angeles 75%
Bottom tip of Texas 70%
Miami 66%
Charlotte/Durham/Wake 65%
Dallas 61%
Houston 56%

It's pretty obvious that if we could cut the Dem presidential vote by 20% in each one, there would never be another dem president.

So why can't we (or why can't you, RNC) take back the cities?


I happen to live in a suburb of a large city that like all of these, has been controlled by dems for 50 years. Like most other such cities, it is becoming hollowed out. Those who can afford it, move out. The ones left are the poor, the homeless, those whose mortgages are underwater because of declining property values, ghetto welling minorities, and, in a few walled enclaves, a few rich.

Why isn't it possible to appeal to those residents? Do you like generation after generation of your kids having inferior lives because, unlike your rich democrat masters, you have to send your kids to inferior schools instead of selecting where you want them to go? Why do you keep putting up with danger and crime because the police don't come when they are called? Why doesn't city hall, year after year, improve anything in your life?

It would seem possible to turn a lot of these people. Not that it would be easy. The opposition is well organized. It has convinced many that it defends their interests while only being interested in keeping them in misery and dependent on the democrats.

But why doesn't someone try?



The two most diligent perpetrators of the myth.

1. The Media
2. Academia


They are also 2 of the groups with the most to lose if the myth dies.
Posted By: boatboy Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
They are gone and a waste of energy

They are ok with the,life they created

Hank
Posted By: Seafire Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
They've been rattling on the talk radio circuit, is that if the Republican party can take away just 12 % or so of the black vote nationally, we'd never see a democRAT president in office either...so maybe we don't need to turn around those cities....

what they need to do is turn around themselves...

they are in such decay that anyone from any third world country feels right at home in them....
no flush toilets, no heat, no running water except when it rains....

the only housing that don't have rats, are the ones, that the rats left due to the size of the cock roaches..
and the ones that don't have any cockroaches anymore, are because the cockroaches left because they got concerned about their health...

and corrupt elected officials need to be jailed, with the key thrown away...

and the transients, need to be kicked out of town or arrested and jailed somewhere where they don't panhandle etc...
Posted By: Tyrone Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
We absolutely should retake the cities. Why do we pay any attention to Democrats/Marxists when they tell us our days are numbered because of city voters?

It's typical of Republicans to be weak-kneed and accepting of problems rather than proactive in solving them.
Posted By: funshooter Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
One reason President Trump won the election is because he fought back and had a back bone.
Damb Republicans role over and pee all over them selves during election show no back bone and all most give the elections to the Dumbocrats
Poleoozy runs unchallenged most of the time. Short of Dyeing she will never leave office just like Ginsburg
Posted By: jdunham Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Nothing will change in those cesspools until there is some major catastrophe/event and those cities are on there own for food and survival. They will realize the government isn't really protecting them and their well being is their own personal responsibility. The ones who survive likely won't forget it.
Posted By: Dillonbuck Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
There is the welfare factor, both black and white.

There is the race factor, the Dems have captured the civil rights flag, and wave it wildly.
We need to work hard at getting the truth out on that one.

Then there is the tough on.
Turner's Thesis, Rugged Individualism.


City people are different. Period. (And off topic, but they spread like the clap)
We drill a well and maintain it.
Install a septic and maintain it.
Plant a garden, preserve the bounty.
Butcher, and preserve our food.
Most can build a structure. (Maybe not pretty, but solid)
Weld two pieces of metal, run a torch.
Fix a car, at least, rotate tires and change oil.

Including our women and kids.

City people, even the blue collar or engineers,
depend on government for all services and maintenance of same.
Depend on stores for food.
A hammer, screwdriver and pliers are a good city tool kit.

I resent that which I don't know, or can't do. City folk, even working ones,
are dependant, and know it. And...embrace it.

Bottom line,
Dependants vs self sufficient.
Posted By: RMerta Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Lots of wisdom speaking here.
It’s like rap music. They start plugging in rap music in children shows. As children grow up rap is constantly plugged in everywhere and everything. After several years rap becomes a everyday part of life. Im using rap as an example.
Republicans first need to grow a set of balls and quit being cowards. Second they need to go into the big cities as OP has mentioned and implement a republican grass roots program. Show people there is a better life out here.
My college roommate was a Illinois prison guard and is now retired. He spent a lot of his career at Pontiac and Joliet prisons. Basically Chicago area.
He told me of numerous occasions that they were busing prisoners out of Chicago down to Pontiac. Prisoners were shocked as to what they seen as they left the city and suburbs. They were seeing cows ,farms and other oddities that most of us give zero notice to. Pontiac is out in farming country. He said they were like little kids going to a zoo for the first time.
Instead of showing up in these cities a week before the election let’s dive in with a long term plan to turn these places around.
Posted By: joken2 Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19

Chicago Is The Most Corrupt American City: Report February 11, 2019 at 12:24 pm

These Are the 15 Most Corrupt Cities in America March 03, 2018

List of current mayors of the top 100 cities in the United States




Originally Posted by Dillonbuck
There is the welfare factor, both black and white.

There is the race factor, the Dems have captured the civil rights flag, and wave it wildly.
We need to work hard at getting the truth out on that one.

Then there is the tough on.
Turner's Thesis, Rugged Individualism.


City people are different. Period. (And off topic, but they spread like the clap)
We drill a well and maintain it.
Install a septic and maintain it.
Plant a garden, preserve the bounty.
Butcher, and preserve our food.
Most can build a structure. (Maybe not pretty, but solid)
Weld two pieces of metal, run a torch.
Fix a car, at least, rotate tires and change oil.

Including our women and kids.

City people, even the blue collar or engineers,
depend on government for all services and maintenance of same.
Depend on stores for food.
A hammer, screwdriver and pliers are a good city tool kit.

I resent that which I don't know, or can't do. City folk, even working ones,
are dependant, and know it. And...embrace it.

Bottom line,
Dependants vs self sufficient.




Dillon,

The reality's somewhat more complicated.

The most common tool kit in the city actually consists of a AAA card and a cell phone. It seems strange to country folk, but in the city, it makes sense.

The efficiency of cities is based upon an economic concept call "specialization and the division of labor". Most of us know this from Henry Ford and the assembly line, but it also applies when you have larger and larger collections of people each able to divide their efforts into more specialized areas and this increasing there relative productivity. This is also why, on average, the typical professional in cities makes more then a comparable professional in rural areas. There general rule is that for every order of magnitude for a metro area, productivity goes up 10%, and this compounds. So, the group of 1,000 is 33% more productive than the individual, and the city of 10,000,000 is twice as productive on a per person basis.

Take a look at your examples above. The person who can do all the things you mention is typically what we could call a "jack of all trades", but "a master of none". Additionally mastering all there requires a significant capital investment in tools and time to learn all there skills. It's amazing how much I spend on tools when taking on a new project. Additionally, there's the time involved. Now providing the person has the opportunity, often you are better off working an amount of overtime equal to how long it would take you to complete the project yourself, and just pay someone else to do the work for you.

Additionally, none of you country folks are near as independent as you think you are.

Your fuel, spare parts, tools, welders, welding rods, tires, steel, and gun powder, where's all that stuff made???

True, cities can't eat without farms, but without the cities, every farming operation in this country would quickly come to a halt as well.
Posted By: Clarkm Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
The little blonde girl is being beaten by the big black boys.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1194357688743931904
Posted By: Tyrone Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
The mentality in cities is totally different. Most are renters. When something goes wrong with the apartment, they call the landlord to fix it. If the landlord fails, they move. Very little "skin in the game".
Originally Posted by Tyrone
The mentality in cities is totally different. Most are renters. When something goes wrong with the apartment, they call the landlord to fix it. If the landlord fails, they move. Very little "skin in the game".


Those who own live in the suburbs. It's a much better value.
Posted By: Dillonbuck Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
You are right about it being complicated.
And even the efficiency.
And absolutely right on no one being self sufficient. Totally.
And I don't want to be.


I think you may have missed my point due to my not making it even
more simple though. And, this is generalized, people are individuals.

City people as a group, are used to government taking care of them.
Every thing outside their door if apartment dwellers, including their
mechanics in their home is taken care of automatically or with a call.
Single home dwellers mow a lawn, maybe rake leaves, or shovel snow.

Condo management/HOA regulates most aspects of their ourside lives.
It's life, it's normal.

Not condemning it, it's required for a compact society.

The more one depends on government, or something similar,
the less offensive a big government Uncle becomes.
Eventually, it becomes daddy.

Like, it's the Government's money, I'm not hurting
anyone getting...
Posted By: Boyd45 Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Because your ideas fail to persuade. This is why the RNC tries to suppress voter turnout.
Posted By: joken2 Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19

New Orleans and politics? It's a fight. Area ranked 2nd-most polarized in nation, study says

Where Democrats And Republicans Live In Your City
Posted By: gregintenn Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Originally Posted by mtnsnake
Let groids vote republican and we get the cities back. Then we can clean them up.

Who's stopping them?
Posted By: Stickfight Re: Taking Back the Cities - 11/29/19
Originally Posted by gregintenn
Who's stopping them?


(((Who))) indeed.

Deny the franchise to ethnic Jews and the black vote would be back with the Republican Party in 30 years.
© 24hourcampfire