Quantcast

SAY WHAT? Should David Duke Run for President?

Christine Lusey 2011/07/06 11:00:00
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Remember when David Duke was out of the public eye for a long time and no one had to think about him? Whatever happened to that?

Everything old is new again and, according to The Daily Beast, the former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan is "considering" a 2012 presidential run.

Apparently, he'll be touring "25 states to explore how much support he can garner for a potential presidential bid."

Because that's exactly what the GOP nomination clown car needs: the author of "Jewish Supremacism: My Awakening on the Jewish Question in Russia." That'll certainly take care of any critics who dismiss the Republican Party as racist.

This would mark Duke's third presidential bid, following unsuccessful bids in 1988 and 1992.

Read More: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/0...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • FanOreilly 2011/07/06 11:38:18 (edited)
    Yes
    FanOreilly
    +35
    We already have one racist as president...maybe they can run together!

    By the way, the last Grand Wizard of the KKK who actually WON an election was a Democrat.

    Republicans don't like voting for racists like Democrats.

    racist president run grand wizard kkk won election democrat senator  Bird kkk

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • DefendnProtect 2012/03/25 13:44:34
    Yes
    DefendnProtect
    Why not?

    Everybody is called a racist today. He calls Jews racists and he´s more right than others.

    In Israel 300000 people cannot marry their loved ones because they are not Jewish enough. Talmud states it´s ok to deceive, rob and kill a non-Jew. Jewish leaders in different branches generally agree that possible assimilation is a crisis, but they differ on the proper response to intermarriage.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    http://www.biblebelievers.org...

    Mossad and organized Jewish crime is behind 911. That´s the limit for me.
    antisemtism
  • klanman 2011/08/04 19:13:20
    Yes
    klanman
    +1
    He would make a much better president than our current one. He plans to cut ties with Israel and bring us out of the middle east, which should have been done long ago. He will put troops on the border and stop the illegal flood of immigrants that come into our country every day.
  • Tank 2011/08/03 14:09:03
    Yes
    Tank
  • atomikmom 2011/07/10 07:37:57 (edited)
    No
    atomikmom
    HELL!!! FREAKIN' NO!!! That Racist Bastard. I know who he represents, the KKK, and the Clan.Evil to the Bone!!! That Bed Sheet wearing SOB!!!
  • Fenris atomikmom 2011/08/18 11:23:44
    Fenris
    Grow up would ya?
    Is it better that a racist from NAACP become president!
    Do you even know any from the KKK? From what I know is that they practically don´t even exist anymore!
  • Lynn Fenris 2011/08/18 19:35:49
    Lynn
    Senator Byrd (D) is a member. The only one currently in congress.
  • klanman Fenris 2011/09/02 01:34:32
  • klanman atomikmom 2011/09/02 01:33:19
    klanman
    He wore the same sheet I wear now. I do not hate people for the color of their skin, I am just proud of the color of mine and proud of my culture.
  • Lynn 2011/07/09 03:54:42
    No
    Lynn
    +2
    Duke is an insignificant pinhead with a microscopic fanbase and no support outside of the KKK. Nothing to see here.
  • kresge 2011/07/07 18:50:38
    No
    kresge
    I'm not going to say what I really think of David Duke, but I will say with assurance that he will never become President.
  • Adriana 2011/07/07 14:40:47
    No
    Adriana
    +1
    I can't find the words to describe how disgusted I am that people like this are running for president. America seems to be a lost cause. I give up. *Sighs*
  • Fenris Adriana 2011/08/24 17:20:04
    Fenris
    In what way would he or any one else be worse than Obama?
  • John T. 2011/07/07 13:36:51
    No
    John T.
    +1
    People will vote for David Duke, after all they voted for the “Tea Party” why not a “White Supremacies” They are both a destructive power in this country.
  • photodude 2011/07/07 13:36:46
    No
    photodude
    +1
    His right to vote and our right not to support his racist butt.

    Believe it or not he will have a few that will endorse him
  • Bob 2011/07/07 13:34:20
    Yes
    Bob
    Sweet. Say it is so!
  • (>*~*)>Zombiecat<(*-*<) 2011/07/07 13:34:01
    Yes
    (>*~*)>Zombiecat<(*-*<)
    He has every right to. Funny how many of you drop your rights preaching on this subject....
  • whipnet 2011/07/07 13:29:46
    No
    whipnet
    +1
    Who said he would be running as a Republican? Last I checked, the KKK was a Democratic organization.

    *
  • Ty ~ PHAET whipnet 2011/07/13 19:19:45
    Ty ~ PHAET
    Then it must've been 60 years since you last checked.
  • Stryder Ty ~ PHAET 2011/08/18 12:21:49
    Stryder
    Was Robert Byrd a Republican? Or George Wallace?
  • Ty ~ PHAET Stryder 2011/08/18 20:26:20 (edited)
    Ty ~ PHAET
    What about the rest of the them? I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat, but to claim that either party supports a terrorist organization such as the KKK is ridiculous. True Americans don't support terrorists.
  • Stryder Ty ~ PHAET 2011/08/18 23:53:33
    Stryder
    You made the claim, not me. You implied that the Republicans are part of the KKK. The facts are that the KKK was founded after the Civil War by Democrats. They targeted the freed slaves and Republicans. Duke is a bad example simply due the fact he's ran for office as both a Dem and a Repub. Name a Republican who's been proven to be a member of the KKK. I did a search and came up with nothing.
  • Ty ~ PHAET Stryder 2011/08/19 00:05:12 (edited)
    Ty ~ PHAET
    I never said that Republicans were part of the KKK, I said that the modern-day KKK is a Republican organization. The KKK was originally started by the Dixiecrats (or Southern States Rights Democrats), who converted to the Republican Party after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I sincerely don't believe that the vast majority of Republicans support a terrorist organization.
  • Stryder Ty ~ PHAET 2011/08/19 00:13:35
    Stryder
    And there's a difference? LOL!

    It was the Dems who fought against the CRA of 1964. It was the Republicans who helped get it passed.

    From the Senate.gov website:

    June 10, 1964
    Civil Rights Filibuster Ended



    At 9:51 on the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert C. Byrd completed an address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier. The subject was the pending Civil Rights Act of 1964, a measure that occupied the Senate for 57 working days, including six Saturdays. A day earlier, Democratic Whip Hubert Humphrey, the bill's manager, concluded he had the 67 votes required at that time to end the debate.

    The Civil Rights Act provided protection of voting rights; banned discrimination in public facilities—including private businesses offering public services—such as lunch counters, hotels, and theaters; and established equal employment opportunity as the law of the land.

    As Senator Byrd took his seat, House members, former senators, and others—150 of them—vied for limited standing space at the back of the chamber. With all gallery seats taken, hundreds waited outside in hopelessly extended lines.

    Georgia Democrat Richard Russell offered the final arguments in opposition. Minority Leader Everett Dirksen, who had enlisted the Republican votes that made cloture...






    And there's a difference? LOL!

    It was the Dems who fought against the CRA of 1964. It was the Republicans who helped get it passed.

    From the Senate.gov website:

    June 10, 1964
    Civil Rights Filibuster Ended



    At 9:51 on the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert C. Byrd completed an address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier. The subject was the pending Civil Rights Act of 1964, a measure that occupied the Senate for 57 working days, including six Saturdays. A day earlier, Democratic Whip Hubert Humphrey, the bill's manager, concluded he had the 67 votes required at that time to end the debate.

    The Civil Rights Act provided protection of voting rights; banned discrimination in public facilities—including private businesses offering public services—such as lunch counters, hotels, and theaters; and established equal employment opportunity as the law of the land.

    As Senator Byrd took his seat, House members, former senators, and others—150 of them—vied for limited standing space at the back of the chamber. With all gallery seats taken, hundreds waited outside in hopelessly extended lines.

    Georgia Democrat Richard Russell offered the final arguments in opposition. Minority Leader Everett Dirksen, who had enlisted the Republican votes that made cloture a realistic option, spoke for the proponents with his customary eloquence. Noting that the day marked the 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's nomination to a second term, the Illinois Republican proclaimed, in the words of Victor Hugo, "Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come." He continued, "The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here!"

    Never in history had the Senate been able to muster enough votes to cut off a filibuster on a civil rights bill. And only once in the 37 years since 1927 had it agreed to cloture for any measure.

    The clerk proceeded to call the roll. When he reached "Mr. Engle," there was no response. A brain tumor had robbed California's mortally ill Clair Engle of his ability to speak. Slowly lifting a crippled arm, he pointed to his eye, thereby signaling his affirmative vote. Few of those who witnessed this heroic gesture ever forgot it. When Delaware's John Williams provided the decisive 67th vote, Majority Leader Mike Mansfield exclaimed, "That's it!"; Richard Russell slumped; and Hubert Humphrey beamed. With six wavering senators providing a four-vote victory margin, the final tally stood at 71 to 29. Nine days later the Senate approved the act itself—producing one of the 20th century's towering legislative achievements.


    You can't re-write history.
    (more)
  • Ty ~ PHAET Stryder 2011/08/19 00:34:56 (edited)
    Ty ~ PHAET
    I'm not disputing that the Democratic Party has a history of racism. My initial point is that the modern-day KKK tends to associate themselves with the Republican Party, even though decent Republicans denounce terrorism. I'm sure this is based on the assumption that I'm a Democrat... I can assure you I'm not.
  • Stryder Ty ~ PHAET 2011/08/19 00:16:37 (edited)
    Stryder
    It was the defeated rebels of the south led by Nathan Bedford Forrest who helped form it. Last I heard there weren't too many Republicans fighting for the South in the Civil War.

    Educate yourself...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
  • Stryder Ty ~ PHAET 2011/08/19 00:27:26
    Stryder
    Make sure you don't miss this part...



    In an 1868 newspaper interview, Forrest stated that the Klan's primary opposition was to the Loyal Leagues, Republican state governments, people like Tennessee governor Brownlow and other carpetbaggers and scalawags. He argued that many southerners believed that blacks were voting for the Republican Party because they were being hoodwinked by the Loyal Leagues.[38] One Alabama newspaper editor declared "The League is nothing more than a ni**er Ku Klux Klan."[39]



    Despite Gordon's and Forrest's work, local Klan units never accepted the Prescript and continued to operate autonomously. There were never hierarchical levels or state headquarters. Klan members used violence to settle old feuds and local grudges, as they worked to restore white dominance in the disrupted postwar society. The historian Elaine Frantz Parsons describes the membership:



    Lifting the Klan mask revealed a chaotic multitude of antiblack vigilante groups, disgruntled poor white farmers, wartime guerrilla bands, displaced Democratic politicians, illegal whiskey distillers, coercive moral reformers, sadists, rapists, white workmen fearful of black competition, employers trying to enforce labor discipline, common thieves, neighbors with decades-old grudges, and even a few free...







    Make sure you don't miss this part...



    In an 1868 newspaper interview, Forrest stated that the Klan's primary opposition was to the Loyal Leagues, Republican state governments, people like Tennessee governor Brownlow and other carpetbaggers and scalawags. He argued that many southerners believed that blacks were voting for the Republican Party because they were being hoodwinked by the Loyal Leagues.[38] One Alabama newspaper editor declared "The League is nothing more than a ni**er Ku Klux Klan."[39]



    Despite Gordon's and Forrest's work, local Klan units never accepted the Prescript and continued to operate autonomously. There were never hierarchical levels or state headquarters. Klan members used violence to settle old feuds and local grudges, as they worked to restore white dominance in the disrupted postwar society. The historian Elaine Frantz Parsons describes the membership:



    Lifting the Klan mask revealed a chaotic multitude of antiblack vigilante groups, disgruntled poor white farmers, wartime guerrilla bands, displaced Democratic politicians, illegal whiskey distillers, coercive moral reformers, sadists, rapists, white workmen fearful of black competition, employers trying to enforce labor discipline, common thieves, neighbors with decades-old grudges, and even a few freedmen and white Republicans who allied with Democratic whites or had criminal agendas of their own. Indeed, all they had in common, besides being overwhelmingly white, southern, and Democratic, was that they called themselves, or were called, Klansmen.[40]



    Historian Eric Foner observed:



    In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired restoration of white supremacy. Its purposes were political, but political in the broadest sense, for it sought to affect power relations, both public and private, throughout Southern society. It aimed to reverse the interlocking changes sweeping over the South during Reconstruction: to destroy the Republican party's infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life.[41
    (more)
  • b man 2011/07/07 13:14:29
    Yes
    b man
    +1
    He's not a racist, hes an ethnicist.
  • CocaColaCandy 2011/07/07 12:25:43 (edited)
    No
    CocaColaCandy
    Good god, no. That short bus is already full.
  • Tau_Seti 2011/07/07 12:13:07
  • Stryder 2011/07/07 12:08:30
    No
    Stryder
    I'd be willing to bet that every person who voted "yes" in this poll is a Dem.
  • Amanda ... Stryder 2011/07/07 22:03:27
    Amanda Heifner
    Hate to burst your bubble. I'm not Dem! hate burst bubble dem Bursting bubbles
  • Stryder Amanda ... 2011/07/07 23:28:25 (edited)
    Stryder
    And you believe that Duke should run for President? If so, may I ask why?
  • Amanda ... Stryder 2011/07/09 07:14:38
    Amanda Heifner
    +1
    I ask you to read all of this before jumping to a conclusion.My opinion was stated earlier. I do not think he should be president, however, he is an extremely intelligent man. That has devoted his life to education. If people would do the research, They will find that his goal is to preserve his race. Not destroy other races. Who isn't proud of their race? He has come a long way from kkk days and speaks openly about it. I am more or less asking people to think outside the "box". Because the traditional means and methods and politicians aren't helping us as a nation. They are puppets with strings. And those strings are leading to an Elite group of people that want to destroy America causing us to become a One World Government.
    leading elite group people destroy america causing world government Illuminati danger
  • Stryder Amanda ... 2011/07/10 09:54:21 (edited)
    Stryder
    You can be proud of your race without wearing a hood over your head. Without affiliating yourself with a hate organization, let alone LEADING a hate organization. Without espousing hatred towards Israel and the Jews. However, Duke chooses to do just that. Our race is just fine. He needs to go away. People like you who support him need to go with him.
  • Fenris Stryder 2011/08/18 11:27:45
    Fenris
    And again there are at least ONE organization with equal "hatefactor" (if not more)in it it´s called NAACP wich IS a racial supremacist organization!
  • Stryder Fenris 2011/08/18 12:15:40 (edited)
    Stryder
    Two wrongs don't make a right. I don't recall hearing about any NAACP members lynching whites. That aside, they all perpetuate racism and as long as they exist racism will always exist. I wish they'd all go away.
  • Libby 2011/07/07 12:00:04
    No
    Libby
    He should just run for his life.
  • BlueMax372 2011/07/07 11:55:43
    Yes
    BlueMax372
    +1
    To REALLY stir things up, Duke should mount a primary challenge to 0vomit for the Demagogic Party nomination. Then we'll find out once and for all what side of the "race issue" the Dems are really on.
  • No
    ☆The Rock☆ * AFCL* The Sheriff!!
    +1
    We got a racists in office right now this guy is the same mold!!
  • Skar 2011/07/07 09:37:55
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 23 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/03 04:56:22

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals