Connect with us

Campaign 2020

Warren, Harris Add Reparations to 2020 Campaign Platforms

All Democrats have to do is not be insane. And they can’t do it.

Published

on

In an effort to pander to black voters, Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), both presidential candidates, said they will back reparations for black Americans as part of their campaign platforms.

“We have to be honest that people in this country do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities,” Harris reportedly said. “I’m serious about taking an approach that would change policies and structures and make real investments in black communities.”

That statement followed a radio interview in which she explicitly agreed with the host when that “government reparations for black Americans were necessary to address the legacies of slavery and discrimination.”

Trending: BETRAYED: How Parler Sold Out to the Globalist Establishment to Get Back Online

Warren echoed a similar sentiment.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“Ms. Warren also said she supported reparations for black Americans impacted by slavery — a policy that experts say could cost several trillion dollars, and one that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and many top Democrats have not supported,” The New York Times said.

The report said that Warren “declined to giver further details” about her reparations plan.

These are the same candidates that also support a “Green New Deal,” which will also cost trillions of dollars at the expense of the American taxpayer.

But there are more questions surrounding reparations than exactly how much they would cost.

Mainly, who would pay them?

Would reparations be paid only by white people who have slave-owning lineages, like Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam of Virginia? Would I, as an Arab American whose family immigrated to the United States through Ellis Island, be required to pay for something in which my ancestors had no part?

Likewise, who exactly would receive them?

Would all blacks receive some form of reparations, regardless of whether their ancestors were slaves? What if someone is half black? Or a quarter? Is that person owed a fraction of the reparations of a fully black American?

And what about poor white people? There are millions of whites who “do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities,” as Harris argued. Will they be buried more deeply – will they have to become poorer –  simply to atone for the color of their skin? Is that justice?

Most importantly, would reparations help repair the cultural strife in this country, which is mostly promulgated by the mainstream press for ratings and Democrat politicians for votes? Wouldn’t the Harris/Warren plan cause more strife and racial tension?

Do these loons really believe that – in a perfect world – reparations would be paid and everyone would simply shake hands, walk away, and that the country will be more united than it has ever been?

These are practical questions that remained unanswered by politicians who are race-baiting for votes.


Follow Peter D’Abrosca on Twitter: @pdabrosca

Like Peter D’Abrosca on Facebook: facebook.com/peterdabrosca

Campaign 2020

Trump Campaign Autopsy Shows Decline in Support From White Men, Coronavirus Epidemic Cost President Re-Election

The 2016 coalition didn’t hold this election.

Published

on

A post-election autopsy reveals that Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential election by losing support from White men and Americans who disapproved of his handling and communication regarding the coronavirus epidemic.

Data suggesting as such was obtained by Trump campaign pollster Tony Fabrizio.

“Racially, POTUS suffered his greatest erosion with White voters, particularly White Men in both state groups,” Fabrizio revealed in his findings. Fabrizio referred to swing states that Trump had held from 2016 and those he had lost. The pollster queried voters in ten different states.

Trump also suffered a decline in support from the youngest Americans and those older than 65. There’s strong reason to believe that some assertions within the Republican Party that the coronavirus pandemic was “no biggie” played a crucial in eroding President Trump’s support among seniors, a vital constituency that has traditionally been strongly Republican. Fabrizio’s data indicates that the coronavirus pandemic was by far and away the most important campaign issue in the 2020 election, and that its importance among the electorate played decisively in Joe Biden’s favor.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

President Trump’s support among White Men declined by as much as 12% in swing states that he lost in 2020. Joe Biden also improved his vote share among the demographic, which still voted strongly Republican, although in a diminished fashion.

It’s been said that Joe Biden won the election with a Democratic version of the so-called “Sailer Strategy,” discarding the Obama coalition in favor of making direct appeals to white seniors who traditionally vote Republican.

At the direction of Jared Kushner, the Trump 2020 campaign prioritized minority outreach and the so-called ‘Platinum Plan’ in hopes of expanding the President’s base of support. This appears to have been only partially successful, and may have come at the crucial cost of outreach energy and resources targeting middle-class white voters who won Trump the presidency.

President Trump expanded his support from Hispanic Americans, a vital constituency in states such as Texas, Nevada and Florida. However, the midwestern Rust Belt has smaller Hispanic communities, and Trump ultimately lost Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. Hispanic outreach in Arizona, a state Trump lost by 10,000 votes, didn’t prove as successful as it was in other Sun Belt states, especially with the state’s White senior population inching to the left, relative to 2016. Buffed Hispanic support didn’t prove enough to ultimately swing Nevada, although the President secured a comfortably high margin of victory in Florida.

Trump’s buffed appeal with Hispanics wasn’t matched with Black voters, who largely voted in a fashion comparable to the 2016 election.

A future Republican candidate- even Trump himself, should he choose to run- would have to look more closely at the path to victory staked out in Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign if they seek a strategy with a proven record of success. It’s entirely plausible to believe that future nationalist, populist and conservative presidential candidates can receive even greater levels of Hispanic support while regaining the white blue-collar populist demographic that swept President Trump into the White House in 2016.

Unfortunately, Fabrizio’s autopsy is likely to be wholly ignored, with a sizable contingent of conservatives blaming Trump’s loss exclusively on a set of election steal theories from “brand” online lifestyle influencers. With a persistent fixation on empty dopamine hits, it may prove that Republicans will never a national election ever again, powerless as the Left and corporations transform the United States into a left-liberal oligarchy.


Follow me on Gab @WildmanAZ, Twitter @Wildman_AZ, and on Parler @Moorhead.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending