The history of the African American is being rewritten. Check out 1619, a two series documentary on this subject. It claims the United States of America began in 1619, the year the first black s***es were brought to America. It is viewed through the prism of r****m, and the white man is the perpetrator of all that ails the black community. This is also being incorporated into our schools as Social Studies.

Please note that broad generalizations meant to demean and humuliate a community of people based upon race or religion is offensive. The vast majority of black people are hard working, law abiding people. MSM portrays a different image with so much coverage of crimes committed by the few. This done to divide and conquer. Just as 1619 is attempting to do. Do not fall into this misguided trap and swallow blindly everything MSM feeds you, not even Fox or Newsmax. Be objective, questioning, and forever curious.

Such an excellent reply, Eagleye. Thank you. Note further that over 50,000 users of Direct TV have unsubscribed since January 24th and counting. Source: Newsmax.

Binkley, name calling is such a persuasive, erudite approach to furthering debate: NOT. Your reach back into a twisted version of black history hardly resolves any issues currently existing in the black community. In my opinion, it reeks of bigotry.

That is pure propaganda. The black v**e is a small portion of total v**es cast. If more b****s v**ed, perhaps it could be a tipping point. However, more b****s are registered Republicans than ever before in history, ~17%. In 2020, 59% of registered b****s v**ed, the largest ever in American history. However, since more and more are changing party affiliation, it is a farce to suggest that the democrats actually court the black v**e. The Democrats court the swing states, just like the Republicans,

One way to destroy the black community is by promoting a******ns. This has k**led more black babies than any other approach to reducing the black population. It is effective. The percentage of b****s in the USA has dropped over the past fifty years from 20% to 13% (2020 census). This is the progressive agenda at work.

Direct TV pays 22 other stations carriage fees, but refused to pay its only conservative news outlet. Call your house of representative to complain about abuse of airwaves and the first amendment at 1 202 224 3121 words are cheap - do something!

No chaos here:

The Summer of Love
Open border
Fentenyl k*****g our youth every five minutes
No bond for many felony crimes
Nation ranking among the highest in the world on crime stats
City sidewalks are campgrounds for druggies and homeless
Etc etc etc

Justice gets to the point that my above replies inferred: VICE TV, with a much lower viewership than pro-right NEWSMAX, gets carriage fees, and leans left to indoctrinate the up and coming gen z population. For those wanting sources, once again I refer you to Neilsen ratings.

What is the your source for this statement? Otherwise, it is nonsensical spouting without basis, i.e. Uninformed opinion. Most fact check sites fail to be reliable.

Agreed, Padre, which is why I cited the CNN rating, the third highest ranking cable news program. The fact remains, according to Neilsen, while Newsmax is available to 40 million plus homes, the average viewership is just 100,000.

Peg, try searching for Republican BRIEF instead of Republican BReiF.

According to Neilsen ratings, CNN has an average viewership of about 440,000, while Newsmax has an average viewership of about 100,000. Certainly, for Direct TV, this is not the lowest rating of Direct TV's news programs. Also aired by Direct TV, VICE TV has a viewership of about 64,000.

So what's the more probable cause of Direct TV bouncing Newsmax? Carriage fees. Most cable news have their carrier pay fees to choose that carrier for airing the program. VICE TV, apparently, receives such fees from Direct TV. When Newsmax demanded the same consideration, that news program got booted. Note: VICE TV is a left leaner aimed at the gen z audience, and has much lower ratings. Moreover, a CEO of Direct TV is alleged to be significantly invested in VICE TV.

While I rarely agree with the opinions that you post, this one made me laugh out loud. Nice sence of humor.

As to differences of opinion, this is essemtial for a true democratic republic. The difficulty arises when misinformation is spread like the common cold, or vulgarity and childish name calling is used to refute a person's point of view.

Article Ii Of the Constitution leaves to the states the authority to choose delegates. Who gets chosen, how each state determines who will be choosen, and how these delegates are to v**e, is determined by each state. Therefore, the popular v**e determines how a delegate is to v**e in 33 states. The state legislature also determines how a delegate is to be appointed. Also, two states have a split system for how the delegates are to v**e, who are apportioned according to the majority v**e of each e*******l district, not winner takes all as most States have legislated.

There are "faithless delegates" who may v**e for a canidate that did not get the majority v**e, or for a candidate who is not even on the b****t. This happened with three delegates in 2016 in Colorado. Faithless delegates have never altered the outcome of p**********l e******ns.

Interestingly, in New York, the legislature permits the US Senators to select delegates. So naturally, when Hillary was on the p**********l b****t, she chose Bill to be a NYS delegate. Bush 43 choose two family members to be delegates in Texas. .

Two times the Constitution has been amended, see Articles 12 and 23 altering delegate rules. Due to Trump winning the 2016 e******n by the number of delegate v**es passed, and not by the popular v**e, democrats want to amend the Constitution again, mandating that delegates are to cast their v**es only for the winner of the popular v**e in each state. That has gone no where in Congress.