You said cops are majority white as if that's why they vote republican, but Dems are majority white as well. They don't vote republican.
Not saying dems are majority women/blacks etc, dems represent minority. Big difference.
You said cops are majority white as if that's why they vote republican, but Dems are majority white as well. They don't vote republican.
Are Dems still majority white? I honestly don’t know but figure it’s got to be pretty close at this point.
About 77% of the country is white. 40% of white voters voted democrat in 2016. There were 138 million votes.
Since the ratio didn't really change, I'd say whites still make up at least 60% of the democratic vote.
It really doesn't matter what either side care about with regards to cons utional rights considering neither side has enough clout to change the Cons ution, nor are in charge of enforcing those rights.
Plus, it's irrelevant to the discussion as to whether hate speech (in the form of religion or otherwise) should be curbed.
Can you link the Wiki description you subscribe to? I found ~5 Wiki entries for Liberalism. Obviously, what we knew as the 19th century 'classical' liberals are no longer what the 'modern' liberals of today look like. That's why I don't want to assume what your position is.
I would say off the top of my head, modern liberal fundamental tenets encompasses: secular democracy, defense of workers' rights above corporatism (with the state having a prominent role on regulation, etc), a voice/platform for minorities (lots of stuff fit under this core tenet), strong personal social rights and freedoms (civil rights fall into this, among other things).
I don't know I'll go much further than that as far as 'core' tenets, and it's also very debatable if some of those topics have become more of lip service than concrete items. But I think that's a fairly safe description, or one I can likely defend.
It's debatable. I do think that parties do reinvent themselves as they go along, sometimes overlooking (if not outright forgetting) some of their basic tenets, and sometimes even get co-opted based on the necessities of the time. ie: both Trump (the absolute social liberal, no question about it) AND Hillary (globalization corporatist) are great recent examples.
I think what they mean by power dispersion is the constant battle between corporatism influence in power (all too common today in the form of lobbying) vs protecting the little guy. Again, when I say some of these topics have fallen by the wayside and can be lip service sometimes, I was specifically thinking about this one. However, we do see some forms of populism extolling this virtue in people like Bernie, and to a lesser degree, Warren. Even Trump ran on this, which is fairly opposite of the free market mantra, but it does resonate today with the electorate generally due to the many shapes globalization has taken hold.
And, honestly, about diversity, I think having their differences accepted is a big part of fostering diversity. I mean, if we can't even agree that a married gay couple should have the same legal rights as those of a straight couple, we really can't proceed with any kind of fostering.
My 2c anyways.
True.
There is nothing wrong with order. It is better than anarchy. Like what a lot of leftists in some urban cities like.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)