10 most dangerous cities in America all run by democrats

[sd3035]

no surprise here

[QUOTE]America's ten most dangerous cities

[sd3035]

New York is a good example of what happens when dems finally get the boot


New York City, which in the early 1990s transitioned away from nearly half a century of Democratic leadership, serves as a case study not only of how left-wing law-enforcement policies helped breed crime and chaos for a long period of time, but also how the cessation of those policies caused crime to plummet almost instantly.

[9erempiree]

They probably know whats best and how Blacks are. I don't mind them being held in these 10 cities. So they don't come to my neighborhood.

-Democrats

[Nanners]

democrats run almost all cities, both safe and dangerous. only 3 out of the top 25 largest american cities have republican mayors.

https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_current_mayors_of_the_top_100_cities_in_th e_United_States

[fsvr54]

I would have never thought Milwaukee, Wisconsin was that dangerous.

[Patrick Chewing]

I would have never thought Milwaukee, Wisconsin was that dangerous.


A whopping 32% of the Black population in that city is unemployed! That's HUUUUUGE. No wonder there are riots in these cities. These people have nowhere to be. Yet they keep electing these lying weasel politicians over and over again who do nothing but use their situation for their political gain. How dumb can they be???

[nathanjizzle]

yeah, and the top 10 cities with the best schools are overwhelmingly democrat.

[FillJackson]

New York is a good example of what happens when dems finally get the boot
This is complete ****ing nonsense.

Crime started falling under the Democratic mayor. Crime continued declining under the Republican mayor and continued falling to this day. The biggest drop in crime at any time in NYC's history happened in the last three years of his term. He also passed a tax increase to hire like 10,000 new cops. This Academy class came out of training just as the new mayor was taking over.

The police officials who pioneered the new ways to use all these cops were already working under the Democratic Mayor, in the Transit Police.

The Republican Mayor to his credit promoted the Transit Police chief to take over the NYPD.

To his discredit he fired him after people were giving them the credit for the crime drop.

If you want the safest 5 years in NYC since they 1960's, it's a good bet it will be the last 5 years.

[sd3035]

[QUOTE] From 1946 through 1993, New York was led, in succession, by the following Democratic mayors: William O'Dwyer, Vincent Impellitteri, Robert Wagner, John Lindsay, Abraham Beame, Ed Koch, and David Dinkins. Under the stewardship of these men, the city's crime rates rose sharply and consistently, as reflected most starkly in its homicide statistics. In 1960, some 482 homicides occurred within the confines of New York's five boroughs. By 1970, that figure had risen to 1,117. In 1980, it was 1,814. The apex was reached under Mayor Dinkins in 1990, when 2,245 people lost their lives to violence. During the ensuing three years of Dinkins' mayoralty, the city's homicide totals were 2,154, then 1,995, and finally 1,946.

Throughout his four years in office, Mayor Dinkins repeatedly demonstrated weakness and indecision in dealing with criminals. In some cases, he seemed to be openly at odds with the city's police force. For instance, in the early 1990s a Dinkins administration brochure informed its readers that there

[sd3035]

[QUOTE] Republican Rudolph Giuliani replaced Dinkins as mayor in 1994 and quickly transformed New York into the safest big city in America. He did this chiefly by increasing the NYPD's manpower from 28,000 officers to 40,000, and adopting a zero-tolerance approach to crime-fighting. Toward that end, Giuliani hired William Bratton as his police chief. Bratton was a proponent of the

[poido123]

But the world will be good under a Democrat presidency, I promise.


:roll:



Highest murder rates, highest welfare, more cucks, more nancy boys, highest count of SJWs and the list goes on and on...

[Patrick Chewing]

When the shit hits the fan with Hillary as President, who is she going to blame?? Bush?? :oldlol: :roll:

[poido123]

When the shit hits the fan with Hillary as President, who is she going to blame?? Bush?? :oldlol: :roll:



I honestly want to be wrong about Hillary, but a war with Russia is inevitable with her.


She will carry on bombing the Middle east, while welcoming in the people who want revenge on the United States for doing so. Carrying on what Obama did.


I don't want to find out the hard way, I want to trash every c.unt who is voting that b.tch into power.

[Dresta]

Dems have certainly had a penchant for "urban renewal projects" that dehumanise peoples and are a big impetus for the kind of nihilistic violence that runs rampant in these cities.

[MintBerryCrunch]

Most large cities in general are liberal. This is a perfect example of correlation, not causation.

[Dresta]

Most large cities in general are liberal. This is a perfect example of correlation, not causation.
:oldlol:

Except none of those top 10 cities are even in the top 20 when it comes to population.

Such a "perfect" example, eh?

[DukeDelonte13]

Dems have certainly had a penchant for "urban renewal projects" that dehumanise peoples and are a big impetus for the kind of nihilistic violence that runs rampant in these cities.

:rolleyes:

i don't think you any clue how municipal governments work in the US...

Party lines mean absolutely little to nothing after the person gets elected. Mayors are mostly ceremonial. Most don't have real actual power. City Councils control how the city is run.

What every mayor wants to do, no matter what party they are, is get money into the city. Whether that being getting grants for things like urban renewal projects, road construction, negotiating deals with companies to set up shop in their city to bring in more taxable income, etc...

republican/democrat really means nothing at the city level.


Further, a lot of big budgetary issues like tax levies for police, fire, and schools are based on referendum vote. The people decide, not council, not the mayor.

[MintBerryCrunch]

:oldlol:

Except none of those top 10 cities are even in the top 20 when it comes to population.

Such a "perfect" example, eh?

That doesn't change my point at all. If you were to show that the top 10 cities by population are republican and have low crime rates, sure, but that is not the case.

[UK2K]

That doesn't change my point at all. If you were to show that the top 10 cities by population are republican and have low crime rates, sure, but that is not the case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate_(2014)

If you sort the violent crime by ascending, I bet you you'll find one common statistic among the safest cities in America.

Want to take a guess at what that may be? For the record, I haven't even done the research, I'm just guessing blindly here... but I think I know what these cities have in common.

[~primetime~]

Obama is pres, the whole country is Dem.

[Hawker]

Most large cities in general are liberal. This is a perfect example of correlation, not causation.

And most of these liberal people can't be bothered to assist people in need. They sure like to talk about it though.

[~primetime~]

And most of these liberal people can't be bothered to assist people in need. They sure like to talk about it though.
You think this is the cause?

if there is ANY legitimacy to dem=more crime it is simply because minorities are dems...and not because libs don't help people :facepalm

[falc39]

:rolleyes:

i don't think you any clue how municipal governments work in the US...

Party lines mean absolutely little to nothing after the person gets elected. Mayors are mostly ceremonial. Most don't have real actual power. City Councils control how the city is run.

What every mayor wants to do, no matter what party they are, is get money into the city. Whether that being getting grants for things like urban renewal projects, road construction, negotiating deals with companies to set up shop in their city to bring in more taxable income, etc...

republican/democrat really means nothing at the city level.


Further, a lot of big budgetary issues like tax levies for police, fire, and schools are based on referendum vote. The people decide, not council, not the mayor.

This is only partly true. The mayor, who is elected by the citizens, will share a lot of the same views of people who voted them in and some will try to force their ideology as much as they can. Living in the sf bay area, I see this first hand when it comes to issues like minimum wage, forced below market affordable housing, sanctuary cities, etc. Yes, in general their first priority is to get money in and grow and maintain the city, but that doesn't stop them from pushing their political beliefs when possible.