This is a good question. Not of Halifax or anyone in particular. But I too have interpreted a lot of the left's rhetoric as anti-white man. Not really getting that vibe from their leaders. But political commentators, late-night comedians, and anyone that a right-winger would call a "Social Justice Warrior," have been giving off a bit of that vibe. Probably not the best strategy to do that. I'd wager a guess (and it is a guess because I don't know for sure) that the largest registered voter group in the country is white men. And lumping us all in with Trump just because he's a white man isn't fair.
Look at the White House intern photo. Now look at Team Trump Treason's cabinet photo. Now look at the US Senate photo. Now consider the Team Trump Treason Administration's desire to specifically define gender. See also, supreme court rulings. White males disproportionately control the levers of power, to the detriment of minorities. Is it really that difficult to understand?
Of course the pompous liberal ends his post with "Is it really that difficult to understand?" Of course.
Anyway, to suggest all white men are evil (not saying you are, I said political commentators, etc. have been implying that) is the same as when Trump suggested illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. Are all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers? Don't ask Trump because the correct answer doesn't fit his narrative. Are all white men evil, women-hating, minority marginalizing, power-hungry assholes?
I’ll add “pompous liberal” to my “Cheeto eating, basement dwelling, Internet bully tough guy,” moniker.
We've gone from one of the most diverse Administrations and executive branches back to a racist predominantly white administration and executive branch and judiciary. Mitch McConnell and his ilk of white males want to take the US back to how it was in the 1950s. It’s no more difficult to understand than that.
And to answer your question, no. But there are way too many who are.
See I look at McConnell and his ilk as assholes. Not white assholes. I really don't even think about that. Now, do I not think about that because I'm a white male and thus have nothing to worry about with those assholes? Or do I think like that because I'm so progressive that I don't t even take race into consideration? Not just when talking about the government, but in general.
Maybe both.
I would almost agree except it doesn’t explain how and why they treated Obama the way they did.
Now when you say "treat Obama the way they did," do you mean blocking his legislation and just overall hating him? The answer in that case would be because he's a liberal democrat that became popular with the electorate.
Now if you're referring to the Kenyan stuff or Trump going on and on about his birth-certificate, it's because Obama's black. But not necessarily in a "we hate black people" sort of way. More in a "we hate liberal democrats that win elections and since this guy is black and has ties to Kenya, maybe we can use that against him" sort of way. That's a pretty low place to stoop. From a strategic standpoint, I can't blame them for stooping that low. In fact, the democrats should study up on how to stoop so low so that they can actually defeat Trump in 2020.
I disagree and call bullshit. If Obama were white, things would have gotten done and you never would’ve heard Mitch McConnell utter, “our number one priority is to see this president fail,” or “you lie,” shouted during the SOTU address or a total repub boycott of the traditional WH Christmas party. And, you would have had more compromise and more legislation passed that might have helped the country. They were rocked on their heels when the black guy beat Hillary.
I disagree with your disagreement. I feel that if Hillary won in 2016, McConnell and company would treat her exactly has they treated Obama. Maybe worse because they've been hating her since the 90's.
This is a good question. Not of Halifax or anyone in particular. But I too have interpreted a lot of the left's rhetoric as anti-white man. Not really getting that vibe from their leaders. But political commentators, late-night comedians, and anyone that a right-winger would call a "Social Justice Warrior," have been giving off a bit of that vibe. Probably not the best strategy to do that. I'd wager a guess (and it is a guess because I don't know for sure) that the largest registered voter group in the country is white men. And lumping us all in with Trump just because he's a white man isn't fair.
Look at the White House intern photo. Now look at Team Trump Treason's cabinet photo. Now look at the US Senate photo. Now consider the Team Trump Treason Administration's desire to specifically define gender. See also, supreme court rulings. White males disproportionately control the levers of power, to the detriment of minorities. Is it really that difficult to understand?
Of course the pompous liberal ends his post with "Is it really that difficult to understand?" Of course.
Anyway, to suggest all white men are evil (not saying you are, I said political commentators, etc. have been implying that) is the same as when Trump suggested illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. Are all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers? Don't ask Trump because the correct answer doesn't fit his narrative. Are all white men evil, women-hating, minority marginalizing, power-hungry assholes?
I’ll add “pompous liberal” to my “Cheeto eating, basement dwelling, Internet bully tough guy,” moniker.
We've gone from one of the most diverse Administrations and executive branches back to a racist predominantly white administration and executive branch and judiciary. Mitch McConnell and his ilk of white males want to take the US back to how it was in the 1950s. It’s no more difficult to understand than that.
And to answer your question, no. But there are way too many who are.
See I look at McConnell and his ilk as assholes. Not white assholes. I really don't even think about that. Now, do I not think about that because I'm a white male and thus have nothing to worry about with those assholes? Or do I think like that because I'm so progressive that I don't t even take race into consideration? Not just when talking about the government, but in general.
Maybe both.
I would almost agree except it doesn’t explain how and why they treated Obama the way they did.
Now when you say "treat Obama the way they did," do you mean blocking his legislation and just overall hating him? The answer in that case would be because he's a liberal democrat that became popular with the electorate.
Now if you're referring to the Kenyan stuff or Trump going on and on about his birth-certificate, it's because Obama's black. But not necessarily in a "we hate black people" sort of way. More in a "we hate liberal democrats that win elections and since this guy is black and has ties to Kenya, maybe we can use that against him" sort of way. That's a pretty low place to stoop. From a strategic standpoint, I can't blame them for stooping that low. In fact, the democrats should study up on how to stoop so low so that they can actually defeat Trump in 2020.
I disagree and call bullshit. If Obama were white, things would have gotten done and you never would’ve heard Mitch McConnell utter, “our number one priority is to see this president fail,” or “you lie,” shouted during the SOTU address or a total repub boycott of the traditional WH Christmas party. And, you would have had more compromise and more legislation passed that might have helped the country. They were rocked on their heels when the black guy beat Hillary.
I disagree with your disagreement. I feel that if Hillary won in 2016, McConnell and company would treat her exactly has they treated Obama. Maybe worse because they've been hating her since the 90's.
Hillary was well respected in the Senate by the GOP members. Obama was the uppity black guy who routinely took repub policy and incorporated it into his legislative efforts. And yet, stuff they were previously for became toxic.
This is a good question. Not of Halifax or anyone in particular. But I too have interpreted a lot of the left's rhetoric as anti-white man. Not really getting that vibe from their leaders. But political commentators, late-night comedians, and anyone that a right-winger would call a "Social Justice Warrior," have been giving off a bit of that vibe. Probably not the best strategy to do that. I'd wager a guess (and it is a guess because I don't know for sure) that the largest registered voter group in the country is white men. And lumping us all in with Trump just because he's a white man isn't fair.
Look at the White House intern photo. Now look at Team Trump Treason's cabinet photo. Now look at the US Senate photo. Now consider the Team Trump Treason Administration's desire to specifically define gender. See also, supreme court rulings. White males disproportionately control the levers of power, to the detriment of minorities. Is it really that difficult to understand?
Of course the pompous liberal ends his post with "Is it really that difficult to understand?" Of course.
Anyway, to suggest all white men are evil (not saying you are, I said political commentators, etc. have been implying that) is the same as when Trump suggested illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. Are all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers? Don't ask Trump because the correct answer doesn't fit his narrative. Are all white men evil, women-hating, minority marginalizing, power-hungry assholes?
I’ll add “pompous liberal” to my “Cheeto eating, basement dwelling, Internet bully tough guy,” moniker.
We've gone from one of the most diverse Administrations and executive branches back to a racist predominantly white administration and executive branch and judiciary. Mitch McConnell and his ilk of white males want to take the US back to how it was in the 1950s. It’s no more difficult to understand than that.
And to answer your question, no. But there are way too many who are.
See I look at McConnell and his ilk as assholes. Not white assholes. I really don't even think about that. Now, do I not think about that because I'm a white male and thus have nothing to worry about with those assholes? Or do I think like that because I'm so progressive that I don't t even take race into consideration? Not just when talking about the government, but in general.
Maybe both.
I would almost agree except it doesn’t explain how and why they treated Obama the way they did.
Now when you say "treat Obama the way they did," do you mean blocking his legislation and just overall hating him? The answer in that case would be because he's a liberal democrat that became popular with the electorate.
Now if you're referring to the Kenyan stuff or Trump going on and on about his birth-certificate, it's because Obama's black. But not necessarily in a "we hate black people" sort of way. More in a "we hate liberal democrats that win elections and since this guy is black and has ties to Kenya, maybe we can use that against him" sort of way. That's a pretty low place to stoop. From a strategic standpoint, I can't blame them for stooping that low. In fact, the democrats should study up on how to stoop so low so that they can actually defeat Trump in 2020.
I disagree and call bullshit. If Obama were white, things would have gotten done and you never would’ve heard Mitch McConnell utter, “our number one priority is to see this president fail,” or “you lie,” shouted during the SOTU address or a total repub boycott of the traditional WH Christmas party. And, you would have had more compromise and more legislation passed that might have helped the country. They were rocked on their heels when the black guy beat Hillary.
I disagree with your disagreement. I feel that if Hillary won in 2016, McConnell and company would treat her exactly has they treated Obama. Maybe worse because they've been hating her since the 90's.
Hillary was well respected in the Senate by the GOP members. Obama was the uppity black guy who routinely took repub policy and incorporated it into his legislative efforts. And yet, stuff they were previously for became toxic.
Hey don't be calling him an uppity black guy. It's about race with you isn't it?
Really? You can't blame the GOP for stooping the level of blatant racism for the sake of political strategy??? Wow, how low the right has sunk. Amazing.
I'm not on the right. Nor the left for that matter. I was looking at it from a competitive standpoint: Democrats vs. Republicans. The Republicans don't play by any morality rules and that's why they're currently winning.
Okay, then I'll restate it: "Really? You can't blame the GOP for stooping to the level of blatant racism
for the sake of political strategy??? Wow, how low you have sunk.
Amazing."
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
This is a good question. Not of Halifax or anyone in particular. But I too have interpreted a lot of the left's rhetoric as anti-white man. Not really getting that vibe from their leaders. But political commentators, late-night comedians, and anyone that a right-winger would call a "Social Justice Warrior," have been giving off a bit of that vibe. Probably not the best strategy to do that. I'd wager a guess (and it is a guess because I don't know for sure) that the largest registered voter group in the country is white men. And lumping us all in with Trump just because he's a white man isn't fair.
Look at the White House intern photo. Now look at Team Trump Treason's cabinet photo. Now look at the US Senate photo. Now consider the Team Trump Treason Administration's desire to specifically define gender. See also, supreme court rulings. White males disproportionately control the levers of power, to the detriment of minorities. Is it really that difficult to understand?
Of course the pompous liberal ends his post with "Is it really that difficult to understand?" Of course.
Anyway, to suggest all white men are evil (not saying you are, I said political commentators, etc. have been implying that) is the same as when Trump suggested illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. Are all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers? Don't ask Trump because the correct answer doesn't fit his narrative. Are all white men evil, women-hating, minority marginalizing, power-hungry assholes?
I’ll add “pompous liberal” to my “Cheeto eating, basement dwelling, Internet bully tough guy,” moniker.
We've gone from one of the most diverse Administrations and executive branches back to a racist predominantly white administration and executive branch and judiciary. Mitch McConnell and his ilk of white males want to take the US back to how it was in the 1950s. It’s no more difficult to understand than that.
And to answer your question, no. But there are way too many who are.
See I look at McConnell and his ilk as assholes. Not white assholes. I really don't even think about that. Now, do I not think about that because I'm a white male and thus have nothing to worry about with those assholes? Or do I think like that because I'm so progressive that I don't t even take race into consideration? Not just when talking about the government, but in general.
Maybe both.
I would almost agree except it doesn’t explain how and why they treated Obama the way they did.
Now when you say "treat Obama the way they did," do you mean blocking his legislation and just overall hating him? The answer in that case would be because he's a liberal democrat that became popular with the electorate.
Now if you're referring to the Kenyan stuff or Trump going on and on about his birth-certificate, it's because Obama's black. But not necessarily in a "we hate black people" sort of way. More in a "we hate liberal democrats that win elections and since this guy is black and has ties to Kenya, maybe we can use that against him" sort of way. That's a pretty low place to stoop. From a strategic standpoint, I can't blame them for stooping that low. In fact, the democrats should study up on how to stoop so low so that they can actually defeat Trump in 2020.
I disagree and call bullshit. If Obama were white, things would have gotten done and you never would’ve heard Mitch McConnell utter, “our number one priority is to see this president fail,” or “you lie,” shouted during the SOTU address or a total repub boycott of the traditional WH Christmas party. And, you would have had more compromise and more legislation passed that might have helped the country. They were rocked on their heels when the black guy beat Hillary.
I disagree with your disagreement. I feel that if Hillary won in 2016, McConnell and company would treat her exactly has they treated Obama. Maybe worse because they've been hating her since the 90's.
No, in that case they would have used blatant sexism instead of blatant racism. Which you apparently think would have been equally legit tactics undertaken by your government.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
This is a good question. Not of Halifax or anyone in particular. But I too have interpreted a lot of the left's rhetoric as anti-white man. Not really getting that vibe from their leaders. But political commentators, late-night comedians, and anyone that a right-winger would call a "Social Justice Warrior," have been giving off a bit of that vibe. Probably not the best strategy to do that. I'd wager a guess (and it is a guess because I don't know for sure) that the largest registered voter group in the country is white men. And lumping us all in with Trump just because he's a white man isn't fair.
Look at the White House intern photo. Now look at Team Trump Treason's cabinet photo. Now look at the US Senate photo. Now consider the Team Trump Treason Administration's desire to specifically define gender. See also, supreme court rulings. White males disproportionately control the levers of power, to the detriment of minorities. Is it really that difficult to understand?
Of course the pompous liberal ends his post with "Is it really that difficult to understand?" Of course.
Anyway, to suggest all white men are evil (not saying you are, I said political commentators, etc. have been implying that) is the same as when Trump suggested illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. Are all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers? Don't ask Trump because the correct answer doesn't fit his narrative. Are all white men evil, women-hating, minority marginalizing, power-hungry assholes?
I’ll add “pompous liberal” to my “Cheeto eating, basement dwelling, Internet bully tough guy,” moniker.
We've gone from one of the most diverse Administrations and executive branches back to a racist predominantly white administration and executive branch and judiciary. Mitch McConnell and his ilk of white males want to take the US back to how it was in the 1950s. It’s no more difficult to understand than that.
And to answer your question, no. But there are way too many who are.
See I look at McConnell and his ilk as assholes. Not white assholes. I really don't even think about that. Now, do I not think about that because I'm a white male and thus have nothing to worry about with those assholes? Or do I think like that because I'm so progressive that I don't t even take race into consideration? Not just when talking about the government, but in general.
Maybe both.
I would almost agree except it doesn’t explain how and why they treated Obama the way they did.
Now when you say "treat Obama the way they did," do you mean blocking his legislation and just overall hating him? The answer in that case would be because he's a liberal democrat that became popular with the electorate.
Now if you're referring to the Kenyan stuff or Trump going on and on about his birth-certificate, it's because Obama's black. But not necessarily in a "we hate black people" sort of way. More in a "we hate liberal democrats that win elections and since this guy is black and has ties to Kenya, maybe we can use that against him" sort of way. That's a pretty low place to stoop. From a strategic standpoint, I can't blame them for stooping that low. In fact, the democrats should study up on how to stoop so low so that they can actually defeat Trump in 2020.
I disagree and call bullshit. If Obama were white, things would have gotten done and you never would’ve heard Mitch McConnell utter, “our number one priority is to see this president fail,” or “you lie,” shouted during the SOTU address or a total repub boycott of the traditional WH Christmas party. And, you would have had more compromise and more legislation passed that might have helped the country. They were rocked on their heels when the black guy beat Hillary.
I disagree with your disagreement. I feel that if Hillary won in 2016, McConnell and company would treat her exactly has they treated Obama. Maybe worse because they've been hating her since the 90's.
No, in that case they would have used blatant sexism instead of blatant racism. Which you apparently think would have been equally legit tactics undertaken by your government.
I don't think they're legit tactics at all. I said that the GOP had "stooped low" to pull that shit. What I'm saying though is that's part of the game. I don't make the rules of American politics, but that's how they are.. Shouldn't liberals like yourself be looking for cures to racism, rather than simply identifying it?
And don't get me started on the sexism shit with Clinton. It didn't play a role in her losing the election, so I doubt it would have played a role in her presidency. The GOP would hate her because she's a democrat named Clinton, not because she's a woman.
This is a good question. Not of Halifax or anyone in particular. But I too have interpreted a lot of the left's rhetoric as anti-white man. Not really getting that vibe from their leaders. But political commentators, late-night comedians, and anyone that a right-winger would call a "Social Justice Warrior," have been giving off a bit of that vibe. Probably not the best strategy to do that. I'd wager a guess (and it is a guess because I don't know for sure) that the largest registered voter group in the country is white men. And lumping us all in with Trump just because he's a white man isn't fair.
Look at the White House intern photo. Now look at Team Trump Treason's cabinet photo. Now look at the US Senate photo. Now consider the Team Trump Treason Administration's desire to specifically define gender. See also, supreme court rulings. White males disproportionately control the levers of power, to the detriment of minorities. Is it really that difficult to understand?
Of course the pompous liberal ends his post with "Is it really that difficult to understand?" Of course.
Anyway, to suggest all white men are evil (not saying you are, I said political commentators, etc. have been implying that) is the same as when Trump suggested illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. Are all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers? Don't ask Trump because the correct answer doesn't fit his narrative. Are all white men evil, women-hating, minority marginalizing, power-hungry assholes?
I’ll add “pompous liberal” to my “Cheeto eating, basement dwelling, Internet bully tough guy,” moniker.
We've gone from one of the most diverse Administrations and executive branches back to a racist predominantly white administration and executive branch and judiciary. Mitch McConnell and his ilk of white males want to take the US back to how it was in the 1950s. It’s no more difficult to understand than that.
And to answer your question, no. But there are way too many who are.
See I look at McConnell and his ilk as assholes. Not white assholes. I really don't even think about that. Now, do I not think about that because I'm a white male and thus have nothing to worry about with those assholes? Or do I think like that because I'm so progressive that I don't t even take race into consideration? Not just when talking about the government, but in general.
Maybe both.
I would almost agree except it doesn’t explain how and why they treated Obama the way they did.
Now when you say "treat Obama the way they did," do you mean blocking his legislation and just overall hating him? The answer in that case would be because he's a liberal democrat that became popular with the electorate.
Now if you're referring to the Kenyan stuff or Trump going on and on about his birth-certificate, it's because Obama's black. But not necessarily in a "we hate black people" sort of way. More in a "we hate liberal democrats that win elections and since this guy is black and has ties to Kenya, maybe we can use that against him" sort of way. That's a pretty low place to stoop. From a strategic standpoint, I can't blame them for stooping that low. In fact, the democrats should study up on how to stoop so low so that they can actually defeat Trump in 2020.
I disagree and call bullshit. If Obama were white, things would have gotten done and you never would’ve heard Mitch McConnell utter, “our number one priority is to see this president fail,” or “you lie,” shouted during the SOTU address or a total repub boycott of the traditional WH Christmas party. And, you would have had more compromise and more legislation passed that might have helped the country. They were rocked on their heels when the black guy beat Hillary.
I disagree with your disagreement. I feel that if Hillary won in 2016, McConnell and company would treat her exactly has they treated Obama. Maybe worse because they've been hating her since the 90's.
No, in that case they would have used blatant sexism instead of blatant racism. Which you apparently think would have been equally legit tactics undertaken by your government.
I don't think they're legit tactics at all. I said that the GOP had "stooped low" to pull that shit. What I'm saying though is that's part of the game. I don't make the rules of American politics, but that's how they are.. Shouldn't liberals like yourself be looking for cures to racism, rather than simply identifying it?
And don't get me started on the sexism shit with Clinton. It didn't play a role in her losing the election, so I doubt it would have played a role in her presidency. The GOP would hate her because she's a democrat named Clinton, not because she's a woman.
You said you can't blame them for such tactics. Why the hell not??
And you're crazy if you think sexism wouldn't have come into play with Hillary if she'd won... And if you think there wasn't any during her campaign.
Just the lurking incident during the debate alone was sexism at play.
I'm not saying she necessarily lost because of sexism... But I do think that if she were a he, all else being equal, she probably would have scratched out a win, and wouldn't have been as villainized as she was in general, so...
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
This is a good question. Not of Halifax or anyone in particular. But I too have interpreted a lot of the left's rhetoric as anti-white man. Not really getting that vibe from their leaders. But political commentators, late-night comedians, and anyone that a right-winger would call a "Social Justice Warrior," have been giving off a bit of that vibe. Probably not the best strategy to do that. I'd wager a guess (and it is a guess because I don't know for sure) that the largest registered voter group in the country is white men. And lumping us all in with Trump just because he's a white man isn't fair.
Look at the White House intern photo. Now look at Team Trump Treason's cabinet photo. Now look at the US Senate photo. Now consider the Team Trump Treason Administration's desire to specifically define gender. See also, supreme court rulings. White males disproportionately control the levers of power, to the detriment of minorities. Is it really that difficult to understand?
Of course the pompous liberal ends his post with "Is it really that difficult to understand?" Of course.
Anyway, to suggest all white men are evil (not saying you are, I said political commentators, etc. have been implying that) is the same as when Trump suggested illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. Are all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers? Don't ask Trump because the correct answer doesn't fit his narrative. Are all white men evil, women-hating, minority marginalizing, power-hungry assholes?
I’ll add “pompous liberal” to my “Cheeto eating, basement dwelling, Internet bully tough guy,” moniker.
We've gone from one of the most diverse Administrations and executive branches back to a racist predominantly white administration and executive branch and judiciary. Mitch McConnell and his ilk of white males want to take the US back to how it was in the 1950s. It’s no more difficult to understand than that.
And to answer your question, no. But there are way too many who are.
See I look at McConnell and his ilk as assholes. Not white assholes. I really don't even think about that. Now, do I not think about that because I'm a white male and thus have nothing to worry about with those assholes? Or do I think like that because I'm so progressive that I don't t even take race into consideration? Not just when talking about the government, but in general.
Maybe both.
I would almost agree except it doesn’t explain how and why they treated Obama the way they did.
Now when you say "treat Obama the way they did," do you mean blocking his legislation and just overall hating him? The answer in that case would be because he's a liberal democrat that became popular with the electorate.
Now if you're referring to the Kenyan stuff or Trump going on and on about his birth-certificate, it's because Obama's black. But not necessarily in a "we hate black people" sort of way. More in a "we hate liberal democrats that win elections and since this guy is black and has ties to Kenya, maybe we can use that against him" sort of way. That's a pretty low place to stoop. From a strategic standpoint, I can't blame them for stooping that low. In fact, the democrats should study up on how to stoop so low so that they can actually defeat Trump in 2020.
I disagree and call bullshit. If Obama were white, things would have gotten done and you never would’ve heard Mitch McConnell utter, “our number one priority is to see this president fail,” or “you lie,” shouted during the SOTU address or a total repub boycott of the traditional WH Christmas party. And, you would have had more compromise and more legislation passed that might have helped the country. They were rocked on their heels when the black guy beat Hillary.
I disagree with your disagreement. I feel that if Hillary won in 2016, McConnell and company would treat her exactly has they treated Obama. Maybe worse because they've been hating her since the 90's.
Hillary was well respected in the Senate by the GOP members. Obama was the uppity black guy who routinely took repub policy and incorporated it into his legislative efforts. And yet, stuff they were previously for became toxic.
Hey don't be calling him an uppity black guy. It's about race with you isn't it?
Has Team Trump Treason called a white woman house member, “low IQ?” Did any repubs, other than John McCain come to Obama’s defense? Anybody on the repub side come to Maxine Waters’ defense? That wasn’t about policy. Why is that?
How about we ask unsung for a source of that image, so we can figure out what the context is there? Maybe know what's in the direction the rock is being thrown? Figure out why they are there and looking mad, and where? If he's going to use a photo without any references as some kind of evidence against immigrants, we should at least require the minimum amount of info that makes it mean anything at all in any way.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Meanwhile... in America... the land infested with white supremacists according to some... the black guy won in a fucking landslide... and got reelected... and currently has a significant approval rating
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt invent it and doesn't have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
Meanwhile... in America... the land infested with white supremacists according to some... the black guy won in a fucking landslide... and got reelected... and currently has a significant approval rating
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt unvent it andvdiesnt have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
I dare you to say that to a black person's face.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Meanwhile... in America... the land infested with white supremacists according to some... the black guy won in a fucking landslide... and got reelected... and currently has a significant approval rating
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt unvent it andvdiesnt have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
Meanwhile... in America... the land infested with white supremacists according to some... the black guy won in a fucking landslide... and got reelected... and currently has a significant approval rating
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt unvent it andvdiesnt have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
I dare you to say that to a black person's face.
Say what exactly?
That racism isn't as bad in America and some people say it is because Obama.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Meanwhile... in America... the land infested with white supremacists according to some... the black guy won in a fucking landslide... and got reelected... and currently has a significant approval rating
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt unvent it andvdiesnt have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
I dare you to say that to a black person's face.
Say what exactly?
That racism isn't as bad in America and some people say it is because Obama.
No problem, I'll go do it right now.
The way some people talk in here you'd think we have nightly cross burnings in every town square, its absurd
Meanwhile... in America... the land infested with white supremacists according to some... the black guy won in a fucking landslide... and got reelected... and currently has a significant approval rating
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt unvent it andvdiesnt have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
I am on twitter. I am on facebook. I watch those videos. I am acutely aware that most of those videos show a microcosm of society, but information is information. it's best to know about 3 ants in your kitchen before it becomes a colony.
shouting at people to unplug is as effective as yelling at someone to calm down.
if an idiot unplugs he is still an idiot. I'd venture to say that the vast majority of us here are not idiots.
Meanwhile... in America... the land infested with white supremacists according to some... the black guy won in a fucking landslide... and got reelected... and currently has a significant approval rating
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt unvent it andvdiesnt have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
I dare you to say that to a black person's face.
Say what exactly?
That racism isn't as bad in America and some people say it is because Obama.
No problem, I'll go do it right now.
The way some people talk in here you'd think we have nightly cross burnings in every town square, its absurd
I really don't think people are acting like that at all. I think you are overly defensive about people talking about the real problem of racism. You seem to be inflating it to "some people talking like there are nightly cross burnings in every town square" in your own head. That's nobody's problem but your own.
What is a constant daily problem is racism against minorities. And yes, that includes many hate crimes, that includes the thousands upon thousands of full blown white supremacists and neo-Nazis across the country, and that includes an extreme prejudice in the criminal justice system. Not to mention the very real impact of white privilege on non-white people. That's reality, not exaggeration.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
One of the most puzzling elements of the 2016 election, at least for a lot of Americans, was the millions of voters who switched from voting for Barack Obama in 2012 to Donald Trump in 2016. Somewhere between 6.7 million and 9.2 million Americans switched this way; given that the 2016 election was decided by 40,000 votes, it’s fair to say that Obama-Trump switchers were one of the key reasons that Hillary Clinton lost.
The existence of those voters has served as evidence that the most plausible explanation for what happened in 2016 — that Trump’s campaign tapped into the racism of white Americans to win pivotal states — is wrong. “How could white Americans who voted for a black president in the past be racist,” or so the thinking goes.
“Clinton suffered her biggest losses in the places where Obama was strongest among white voters. It’s not a simple racism story,” the New York Times’s Nate Cohn wrote on the night of the election. This typically segues into an argument that Trump won by tapping into economic, rather than racial, anxiety — anger about trade and the decline of manufacturing, or the fallout from the 2008 Great Recession.
A new study shows that this response isn’t as powerful as it may seem. The study, from three political scientists from around the country, takes a statistical look at a large sample of Obama-Trump switchers. It finds that these voters tended to score highly on measures of racial hostility and xenophobia — and were not especially likely to be suffering economically.
“White voters with racially conservative or anti-immigrant attitudes switched votes to Trump at a higher rate than those with more liberal views on these issues,” the paper’s authors write. “We find little evidence that economic dislocation and marginality were significantly related to vote switching in 2016.”
This new paper fits with a sizeable slate of studies conducted over the past 18 months or so, most of which have come to the same conclusions: There is tremendous evidence that Trump voters were motivated by racial resentment (as well as hostile sexism), and very little evidence that economic stress had anything to do with it.
This isn’t just a matter of historical interest or ideological ax-grinding. Understanding the precise way in which racism affected the 2016 election should shape how we think about the electorate in the run-up to the 2018 midterms. More broadly, it helps us understand the subtleties of America’s primordial divide over race — and why racism will continue to fracture the country politically for the foreseeable future.
The study found strong evidence for racism — and little for economic anxiety
The three scholars who wrote the study — UCLA’s Tyler Reny, UC-Riverside’s Loren Collingwood, and Princeton’s Ali Valenzuela — drew on a database that has information on more than 64,000 American voters. Inside that huge sample, they restricted their analysis to white voters who switched their presidential vote from 2012 to 2016 (most commonly from one major party’s candidate to the other’s, but occasionally from a third party in 2012 to Clinton or Trump).
They then split the sample of white voters in two, between working-class and non-working class voters, and then tried to figure out what the vote switchers ran in common. To do so, they ran tests on three different types of question: scores on a test measuring attitudes towards racial minorities, hostility to mass immigration, and measures of economic stress (e.g., whether a person’s family income was lower or higher than the median income in the county where they lived).
The results were quite striking. First, attitudes on race and immigration were crucial distinguishing characteristics of both Trump and Clinton switchers. The more racially conservative an Obama or third party voter was, the more likely they were to switch to Trump. Similarly, the more racially liberal a Romney or third-party voter was, the more likely they were to switch to Clinton.
Second, class was largely irrelevant in switching to Trump. Keeping racial attitudes constant, white working-class voters were not more likely to switch to Trump. The white working-class voters who did switch tended to score about as highly on measures of racial conservatism and anti-immigrant attitudes as wealthier switchers.
Third, the correlations between measures of economic stress and vote switching were either weak or non-existent. There’s just little evidence supporting the “economic anxiety” or “economic populism” explanations for the Trump surge.
“We find a much stronger association between symbolic racial and immigration attitudes and switching for Trump and Clinton than between economic marginality or local economic dislocation and vote switching,” Reny et al. write. “In fact, we find marginally small or no associations between any of our economic indicators and vote switching in either direction.”
The Reny et al. findings may seem counterintuitive: How can people who wanted a black man to run the country somehow become attracted to Trump because of his racial demagoguery?
The unspoken premise behind this question is an assumption of a certain kind of white redemption narrative: By voting for Obama, white America exorcized its racial demons. But the truth is nothing of the sort. For one thing, Obama lost the white vote by 12 points in 2008 and 20 points in 2012.
You said you can't blame them for such tactics. Why the hell not??
And you're crazy if you think sexism wouldn't have come into play with Hillary if she'd won... And if you think there wasn't any during her campaign.
Just the lurking incident during the debate alone was sexism at play.
I'm not saying she necessarily lost because of sexism... But I do think that if she were a he, all else being equal, she probably would have scratched out a win, and wouldn't have been as villainized as she was in general, so...
To clarify, when I say I don't blame them for such tactics, I'm trying to say that if I was an politician with no morals, I'd do the same thing. It's just another competition. Like football for example. In the 2014 playoffs, the Patriots broke out these bizarre, rarely-used (but legal) formations to beat the Ravens. I thought that was a cheesy way to win. But that's easy for me to say watching on TV. If I coached the Patriots, I'd do whatever I could, and fuck the people that complain about it. This is how the GOP (and to a lesser degree, the Dems) views things. They don't care about the country or anybody that lives here. They just want to win by any means, even racism.
But the sexism thing, I dunno, during that debate, I think he'd lurk behind Marco Rubio the same way. I thought it was more of a "I'm powerful and you're not" sorta thing rather than "I'm a powerful man, and you're a weak woman." If not for people on TV and the internet calling it sexist, that thought wouldn't have crossed my mind.
I totally disagree with your "if she was a he" statement. I think being a woman was actually in her favor. That set her apart. Otherwise, she's just another boring-ass politician...like Mitt Romney. It's no surprise that she lost to Obama, barely beat Sanders, and lost to Trump. It's not because they're men, they're (to some voters at least) entertaining. And we have reached a point in our politics where that seems to hold more weight than the ability to govern.
Also, she lost white women 53% to 43%. And then she had the nerve to suggest that those women were likely forced into voting for Trump by the men in their lives. THAT'S sexism to suggest those women that voted against her are too weak to even be allowed to vote the way they want.
And in full-disclosure, I voted for Hillary. Thought she'd be the better president. Her gender never crossed my mind. And Obama's race didn't cross my mind either when I voted for him twice. People on both sides of the political spectrum make that stuff into a bigger deal than it ought to be. That's why I like my place right here in the middle with no party affiliation. I could just think for myself...which some people can't understand. Not too long ago, I was having a similar conversation with a woman at work and she refused to believe I was truly in the middle (especially after I said I voted for Clinton). I went on to tell her that I'm both Pro-Choice and Pro-Guns. She looked at me like I was from another planet, as if I had to be on one team or the other.
I guess what I'm saying is that I hope you and everyone everywhere don't lower their standards to just be "well, they are politicians and have no morals, so it figures that's what they're doing." Allowing them to get away with all this shit because our opinions of politicians are so low is how America got into such a hole in the first place. It's become a self-fulfilling prophecy in a way.
PS - Any woman who voted for Trump DISGUSTS me. Well, any person who voted for Trump disgusts me, but all those white women who did disgust me even a little more. But FWIW, I don't think that often-quoted stat about idiot white women voting for Trump and not Hillary impacts the view that there was sexism directed at Clinton.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I guess what I'm saying is that I hope you and everyone everywhere don't lower their standards to just be "well, they are politicians and have no morals, so it figures that's what they're doing." Allowing them to get away with all this shit because our opinions of politicians are so low is how America got into such a hole in the first place. It's become a self-fulfilling prophecy in a way.
PS - Any woman who voted for Trump DISGUSTS me. Well, any person who voted for Trump disgusts me, but all those white women who did disgust me even a little more. But FWIW, I don't think that often-quoted stat about idiot white women voting for Trump and not Hillary impacts the view that there was sexism directed at Clinton.
That's a valid concern but I can assure you I haven't lowered my standards like that. Rather, I'm of the belief that the only power I have is my vote. In fact, the morality issue is really what put me over the top as far as voting for Clinton over Trump. I didn't like either of them, and she's certainly no prize, but stories of Trump ripping off people (contractors, etc.) and ruing their lives carried more weight with me than anything else during the campaign.
As for my "often-quoted" stat (I sense some snarkiness in that phrasing), I used it and then put her explanation for it (men forcing women to vote for Trump) to suggest that she's partaken in sexism herself. I think that's very sexist to suggest that there's that many women that are just slaves to their men. Especially when, to a degree, she's a slave to her man. Maybe that turned off some female voters. If your husband has cheated on you multiple times, how could any self-respecting woman stay with him? Because it's in her best political interest to be Bill Clinton's wife. Hard to think of her as a leader ,or even an independent person, when that's the case.
There wasn't snarkiness in that phrasing, lol. It really is often-quoted by GOPers.
It's not sexist to suggest there are women who do what men say. That is actually true is some cases, unfortunately, and it's one of the symptoms of the inequality suffered by women in society since the beginning of humankind. Though I do think Clinton should not have said it out loud, as too many people were predictably going to take it the wrong way. As for her being with Bill.... a self-respecting woman can indeed stay with a husband who cheated, and continue to love him. And vice-versa. I think it's kind of fucked to hold that against anyone. Tons of married couples stay together after cheating. And even if she did stay with him for reasons other than love... So what?? Why would you care about that? Tons of married couples stay together for all kinds of reasons. That's their business, and I don't think it's anyone's place to judge them unless you're talking about knowingly supporting crime or abuse or harm against others, etc etc (and FWIW, I assume Hillary just doesn't believe the accusations of sexual assault against Bill... No reason to think otherwise. Although if she does and stays anyway, yes, that's where I would start judging her marital decisions).
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So if us simpletons took it the wrong way, what did she really mean? Was she commenting on inequality, or making excuses and pointing blame?
Actually don’t answer that. Let’s get off the Hillary subject. I’m being a hypocrite even talking about her because quite often over the past two years, I’ve dismissed her as an irrelevant has-been that’s not worth talking about anymore. So it’s very hypocritical of me to still be talking about the 2016 election...especially with another election just weeks away.
So back on the thread topic of immigration, I think this migrant caravan and Trump’s rhetoric against it is going to work in the GOP’s favor on Election Day. The Dems are saying they’re impoverished people that need help while the GOP is saying they’re invading our country. I suspect the latter will resonate with the electorate more. So what say you? Will this issue factor into this midterm and if so, which way would America lean?
So if us simpletons took it the wrong way, what did she really mean? Was she commenting on inequality, or making excuses and pointing blame?
Actually don’t answer that. Let’s get off the Hillary subject. I’m being a hypocrite even talking about her because quite often over the past two years, I’ve dismissed her as an irrelevant has-been that’s not worth talking about anymore. So it’s very hypocritical of me to still be talking about the 2016 election...especially with another election just weeks away.
So back on the thread topic of immigration, I think this migrant caravan and Trump’s rhetoric against it is going to work in the GOP’s favor on Election Day. The Dems are saying they’re impoverished people that need help while the GOP is saying they’re invading our country. I suspect the latter will resonate with the electorate more. So what say you? Will this issue factor into this midterm and if so, which way would America lean?
White voters afraid of the “other” and immigrants will vote repub.
Look at all of those women and children! Stop being heartless unsung, lol
Oh, I see how this works. Here, a group of young men interested in talking about their beliefs.
There is grey area between, you know? Not everyone that would like real immigration reform and is opposed to undocumented immigration is a nazi or racist like the clowns in that picture
Of course we are. No seriously this is all they have. 100 or so people acting like this out of millions and apparently the US is now all white supremacy. I doubt many here know anything more than this pic and the guy with the car.
Still though there is a horde coming. What is going to happen when they try to swarm the border? Someone better have some answers soon. I am a bit surprised on how many don’t seem to be carrying any belongings, kinda makes ya think they are being supported.
Perhaps it's because many don't have belongings. Many left with only the clothes on their backs. They don't have any money anyway, and it's not like they're going to be able to carry a lot, when they're walking that far. They are getting support - from Mexicans along the way, among others; people who actually have a heart.
Local Mexicans could be seen handing out water bottles and food to the thirsty and hungry migrants. They also distributed clothes and shoes and gave out coins to those begging along the roadway. Some tractor-trailer and pickup drivers offered migrants free rides or the migrants themselves stole rides in a passing dump truck.
Why did they leave their homes? Generally to escape such violence and poverty that the long trek with an uncertain end looks better.
Monterosa, a factory worker, said he fled after threats from tattooed young men, who demanded their “rent” – a euphemism for extortion – totaling 5,000 Lempiras per month for nothing more than living in his own home. Nonpayment wasn’t an option, especially as his factory job wasn’t offering steady hours.
“They gave me a piece of paper saying that if I didn’t pay them they were going to kill me,” Monterosa said. “They gave a week or they were going to burn down the house.”
Comments
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
And don't get me started on the sexism shit with Clinton. It didn't play a role in her losing the election, so I doubt it would have played a role in her presidency. The GOP would hate her because she's a democrat named Clinton, not because she's a woman.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Racism has existed since people saw another human that looked different... America didnt invent it and doesn't have a monopoly on it... if racism was as rampant and powerful in 2018 as you claim Obama would not have made it out of Iowa in 2007
We all know the GOP is the old white dude party, so what, beat them instead of screaming they are racist
Turn off the news showing you every video they can of morons saying dumb shit... they are warping your sense of reality
The way some people talk in here you'd think we have nightly cross burnings in every town square, its absurd
shouting at people to unplug is as effective as yelling at someone to calm down.
if an idiot unplugs he is still an idiot. I'd venture to say that the vast majority of us here are not idiots.
www.headstonesband.com
Keep trying to pidgeon hole america.
Turn off the news, they have you guys thinking the USA is one big Klan rally. Its bullshit
One of the most puzzling elements of the 2016 election, at least for a lot of Americans, was the millions of voters who switched from voting for Barack Obama in 2012 to Donald Trump in 2016. Somewhere between 6.7 million and 9.2 million Americans switched this way; given that the 2016 election was decided by 40,000 votes, it’s fair to say that Obama-Trump switchers were one of the key reasons that Hillary Clinton lost.
The existence of those voters has served as evidence that the most plausible explanation for what happened in 2016 — that Trump’s campaign tapped into the racism of white Americans to win pivotal states — is wrong. “How could white Americans who voted for a black president in the past be racist,” or so the thinking goes.
“Clinton suffered her biggest losses in the places where Obama was strongest among white voters. It’s not a simple racism story,” the New York Times’s Nate Cohn wrote on the night of the election. This typically segues into an argument that Trump won by tapping into economic, rather than racial, anxiety — anger about trade and the decline of manufacturing, or the fallout from the 2008 Great Recession.
A new study shows that this response isn’t as powerful as it may seem. The study, from three political scientists from around the country, takes a statistical look at a large sample of Obama-Trump switchers. It finds that these voters tended to score highly on measures of racial hostility and xenophobia — and were not especially likely to be suffering economically.
“White voters with racially conservative or anti-immigrant attitudes switched votes to Trump at a higher rate than those with more liberal views on these issues,” the paper’s authors write. “We find little evidence that economic dislocation and marginality were significantly related to vote switching in 2016.”
This new paper fits with a sizeable slate of studies conducted over the past 18 months or so, most of which have come to the same conclusions: There is tremendous evidence that Trump voters were motivated by racial resentment (as well as hostile sexism), and very little evidence that economic stress had anything to do with it.
This isn’t just a matter of historical interest or ideological ax-grinding. Understanding the precise way in which racism affected the 2016 election should shape how we think about the electorate in the run-up to the 2018 midterms. More broadly, it helps us understand the subtleties of America’s primordial divide over race — and why racism will continue to fracture the country politically for the foreseeable future.
The study found strong evidence for racism — and little for economic anxiety
The three scholars who wrote the study — UCLA’s Tyler Reny, UC-Riverside’s Loren Collingwood, and Princeton’s Ali Valenzuela — drew on a database that has information on more than 64,000 American voters. Inside that huge sample, they restricted their analysis to white voters who switched their presidential vote from 2012 to 2016 (most commonly from one major party’s candidate to the other’s, but occasionally from a third party in 2012 to Clinton or Trump).
They then split the sample of white voters in two, between working-class and non-working class voters, and then tried to figure out what the vote switchers ran in common. To do so, they ran tests on three different types of question: scores on a test measuring attitudes towards racial minorities, hostility to mass immigration, and measures of economic stress (e.g., whether a person’s family income was lower or higher than the median income in the county where they lived).
The results were quite striking. First, attitudes on race and immigration were crucial distinguishing characteristics of both Trump and Clinton switchers. The more racially conservative an Obama or third party voter was, the more likely they were to switch to Trump. Similarly, the more racially liberal a Romney or third-party voter was, the more likely they were to switch to Clinton.
Second, class was largely irrelevant in switching to Trump. Keeping racial attitudes constant, white working-class voters were not more likely to switch to Trump. The white working-class voters who did switch tended to score about as highly on measures of racial conservatism and anti-immigrant attitudes as wealthier switchers.
Third, the correlations between measures of economic stress and vote switching were either weak or non-existent. There’s just little evidence supporting the “economic anxiety” or “economic populism” explanations for the Trump surge.
“We find a much stronger association between symbolic racial and immigration attitudes and switching for Trump and Clinton than between economic marginality or local economic dislocation and vote switching,” Reny et al. write. “In fact, we find marginally small or no associations between any of our economic indicators and vote switching in either direction.”
The Reny et al. findings may seem counterintuitive: How can people who wanted a black man to run the country somehow become attracted to Trump because of his racial demagoguery?
The unspoken premise behind this question is an assumption of a certain kind of white redemption narrative: By voting for Obama, white America exorcized its racial demons. But the truth is nothing of the sort. For one thing, Obama lost the white vote by 12 points in 2008 and 20 points in 2012.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm
"No shit sherlock."
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
But the sexism thing, I dunno, during that debate, I think he'd lurk behind Marco Rubio the same way. I thought it was more of a "I'm powerful and you're not" sorta thing rather than "I'm a powerful man, and you're a weak woman." If not for people on TV and the internet calling it sexist, that thought wouldn't have crossed my mind.
I totally disagree with your "if she was a he" statement. I think being a woman was actually in her favor. That set her apart. Otherwise, she's just another boring-ass politician...like Mitt Romney. It's no surprise that she lost to Obama, barely beat Sanders, and lost to Trump. It's not because they're men, they're (to some voters at least) entertaining. And we have reached a point in our politics where that seems to hold more weight than the ability to govern.
Also, she lost white women 53% to 43%. And then she had the nerve to suggest that those women were likely forced into voting for Trump by the men in their lives. THAT'S sexism to suggest those women that voted against her are too weak to even be allowed to vote the way they want.
And in full-disclosure, I voted for Hillary. Thought she'd be the better president. Her gender never crossed my mind. And Obama's race didn't cross my mind either when I voted for him twice. People on both sides of the political spectrum make that stuff into a bigger deal than it ought to be. That's why I like my place right here in the middle with no party affiliation. I could just think for myself...which some people can't understand. Not too long ago, I was having a similar conversation with a woman at work and she refused to believe I was truly in the middle (especially after I said I voted for Clinton). I went on to tell her that I'm both Pro-Choice and Pro-Guns. She looked at me like I was from another planet, as if I had to be on one team or the other.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
As for my "often-quoted" stat (I sense some snarkiness in that phrasing), I used it and then put her explanation for it (men forcing women to vote for Trump) to suggest that she's partaken in sexism herself. I think that's very sexist to suggest that there's that many women that are just slaves to their men. Especially when, to a degree, she's a slave to her man. Maybe that turned off some female voters. If your husband has cheated on you multiple times, how could any self-respecting woman stay with him? Because it's in her best political interest to be Bill Clinton's wife. Hard to think of her as a leader ,or even an independent person, when that's the case.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Actually don’t answer that. Let’s get off the Hillary subject. I’m being a hypocrite even talking about her because quite often over the past two years, I’ve dismissed her as an irrelevant has-been that’s not worth talking about anymore. So it’s very hypocritical of me to still be talking about the 2016 election...especially with another election just weeks away.
So back on the thread topic of immigration, I think this migrant caravan and Trump’s rhetoric against it is going to work in the GOP’s favor on Election Day. The Dems are saying they’re impoverished people that need help while the GOP is saying they’re invading our country. I suspect the latter will resonate with the electorate more. So what say you? Will this issue factor into this midterm and if so, which way would America lean?
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qphz9lxy6pxni1k/final_submission_reny_etal_poq_public.pdf?dl=0
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Local Mexicans could be seen handing out water bottles and food to the thirsty and hungry migrants. They also distributed clothes and shoes and gave out coins to those begging along the roadway. Some tractor-trailer and pickup drivers offered migrants free rides or the migrants themselves stole rides in a passing dump truck.
Why did they leave their homes? Generally to escape such violence and poverty that the long trek with an uncertain end looks better.
Monterosa, a factory worker, said he fled after threats from tattooed young men, who demanded their “rent” – a euphemism for extortion – totaling 5,000 Lempiras per month for nothing more than living in his own home. Nonpayment wasn’t an option, especially as his factory job wasn’t offering steady hours.
“They gave me a piece of paper saying that if I didn’t pay them they were going to kill me,” Monterosa said. “They gave a week or they were going to burn down the house.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/10/22/caravan-migrants-flood-southern-mexico-en-route-u-s-mexico-border/1731542002/Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©