When did Democrats go full retard?
Kennedy is practically a saint of the far left, but he cut taxes on all income brackets with disproportionately high cuts to the top brackets.
Short answer: LBJ
>>70786095
Taxes were being cut because they were the highest they had ever been.
Also, presidents don't cut taxes.
>>70786095
Liberals don't care about history, they only care about emotions.
They love Kennedy because he was handsome and was assassinated. They have no intention of actually learning about the policies of the Kennedy administration.
Kennedy ran on lowering taxes and having a more robust and involved foreign policy. This is essentially the republican platform of today.
Kennedy would probably be a moderate north-eastern republican if he lived today.
>>70786426
Yeah, I'm sure it has nothing to do with his call for civil rights.
>>70786783
The republican party was the biggest pushers of Civil Rights in congress.
Nixon was pro civil rights too.
>>70786095
Kennedy was the last elected president. His assassination was a coup
>>70786934
JFK was a Democrat... not a Republican...
>>70786426
and kennedy was killed by a commie for being anti-communist
meanwhile now they are voting for a literal jew commie
>>70786934
Dems were just as big, it was only the southern democrats against it
>>70787294
>Liberals proving my point about not knowing history.
Yeah I know, dumbfuck. Kennedy and Johnson were atypical as democrats go in pushing for civil rights.
The civil rights laws were passed largely by republicans in congress over democratic objections.
After the laws were passed there was a realignment and southern whites started voting for republicans because they favored civil rights but not black economic empowerment. While the democrats changed from being an expressly racist party for white interests to being a pro-black economic empowerment party.
![Point_over_your_head[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ib39fmW.jpg "Point_over_your_head[1].jpg")
>>70787294
Idiot
>>70787585
complete
bs
>>70787663
A L E A F
L
E
A
F
>>70787663
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Vote_totals
>Democrats approve 61-31
>Republicans approve 80-20
Yeah, total bs. wew lad
![Justin-Trudeau-mosque-620x620[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Sj00QJW.jpg "Justin-Trudeau-mosque-620x620[1].jpg")
>>70787663
t. Justin Trudeau
>>70787585
>>70787604
What you're trying to say doesn't make any sense. We're talking about by Democrats love JFK, not about the Democratic Party circa 1964.
>>70786426
>They love Kennedy because he was handsome and was assassinated. They have no intention of actually learning about the policies of the Kennedy administration.
I'm saying that his call for Civil Rights was unprecedented for a sitting US President, and that's a huge reason why he is glorified by liberals.
>>70787940
I'm saying that JFK calling for civil rights is no reason for democrats specifically to praise the guy, since there doesn't exist a mainstream political party in the US today that is against civil rights.
And the republicans favored civil rights MORE than the democrats did at the time.
Liberals can't point to anything that JFK wanted that is still under discussion today, worthy of being venerated as a modern day saint of the democratic party.
For example. Reagan is the Kennedy of the republicans. But this is because he favored neoliberal economic policy and aggressive foreign policy, positions that are still held the republicans today and opposed by the democrats.
>>70788224
You are completely retarded.
>no reason for democrats specifically to praise the guy
And you're the guy saying that liberals ignore history.
>And the republicans favored civil rights MORE than the democrats did at the time.
That has nothing to do with the politics of today (like you mentioned above), and everyone except you knows that party lines have shifted more than once in US history.
>Liberals can't point to anything that JFK wanted that is still under discussion today, worthy of being venerated as a modern day saint of the democratic party.
Even if that were true, it wouldn't diminish -any- historical figure's significance. I'm legitimately surprised how ignorant you are of history and historical perspective; it's relevance, in context, to today's political battles.
>>70786095
JFK was the last good president we had, as soon as he ordered congress to print money they (jews) don't want that.
>>70788586
>no reason for democrats specifically to praise the guy
Maybe I should clarify this statement because I know liberals have tiny pea brains and need everything explained for them.
There is all the reason in the world for BOTH democrats and republicans today to praise Kennedy for his view on civil rights. There is no reason for democrats SPECIFICALLY to praise Kennedy as if he was some sort of perfect democrat.
They act like he was some sort of ahead-of-his-time 21st century democrat that time traveled back to advocate for civil rights. When the reality is that he took a position that was not typical for people in his party (read: more typical for THE OTHER party). A position that is agreed on by BOTH parties today.
I have no problem with them saying that he changed their party for the better, but praising Kennedy as the man who pushed for civil rights when no one else would is just whitewashing history and whitewashing the evils of the democratic party of the past.
>>70789072
>praising Kennedy as the man who pushed for civil rights when no one else would
No one is saying that you autistic fuck.
>There is all the reason in the world for BOTH democrats and republicans today to praise Kennedy
>There is no reason for democrats SPECIFICALLY to praise Kennedy as if he was some sort of perfect democrat.
What the fuck? Where are you getting this shit from?
>>70789376
>What the fuck? Where are you getting this shit from?
Reality. And also the OP, you know, the topic of discussion.
>Kennedy is practically a saint of the far left, but he cut taxes on all income brackets with disproportionately high cuts to the top brackets.
>>70787663
There were about 5 Civil rights bills.
Look up "Civil Rights Act of XXXX", then cross reference them with the voting records .
