U.S. Elections 2016: It's Not A Lie, If YOU Believe It

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

SPIKE THE FOOTBALL ALREADY OBAMA!!!!!!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/09/13/a-new-report-brings-very-good-news-about-the-economy-what-will-trump-say-about-it/?utm_term=.299f4bd59269

[Shryke]

58 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Gotta say, this last week is pretty depressing. Clinton's numbers continue to decline, Trump continues to improve with independents for no reason that I can remotely understand, and stupid shit continues to dominate the news cycle.

Asked and answered. The media has been shitting all over Clinton while giving Trump a pass. And so her numbers drop.

[Shryke]

15 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Shryke,

McCain didn't choose to stay in the Hanoi Hilton with other American POWs when he could have come home early?

He also wasn't a straight-talker and was balls deep in the Keating Five scandal and as his endorsement of GWB if nothing else shows, has zero principals when it comes to staying in power.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, Shryke said:

He also wasn't a straight-talker and was balls deep in the Keating Five scandal and as his endorsement of GWB if nothing else shows, has zero principals when it comes to staying in power.

Okay.  I was just checking to see how far back you were taking your statement.

[DanteGabriel]

24 minutes ago, Shryke said:

Oh please. That fucker cut his teeth whitewashing the My Lai Massacre. The guy's reputation is just like McCain's: it's media-created flim-flam.

Please note I said nothing complimentary about Powell. I spoke of his reputation, which I agree is undeserved puffery.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a14035/colin-powell-it-worked-for-me-8834861/

[Fez]

The turnaround has been pretty stunning, both in how big it is and how quickly it happened. At the same time though, there's a new poll today that has Clinton actually UP +4 in Texas with registered voters (Trump is +6 with likely voters, which is a huge spread). And the most recent Georgia poll is still only Trump +4. So the map still has the potential to get weird, and the collapse isn't everywhere.

[DanteGabriel]

9 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Okay.  I was just checking to see how far back you were taking your statement.

I won't criticize McCain's conduct in captivity, but before that he was an undisciplined asshole who pulled family strings to get where he was and skated out of trouble due to his father and grandfather being admirals. He was a hot-tempered overprivileged little shit who built a self-serving mythology around himself. Look up Matt Taibbi's Rolling Stone profile from 2008.

[Mudguard]

6 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm curious, do you see the laughable irony in this comment? Because I've provided several links to a wealth of data and one that goes in-depth in explaining how stereotypes work and you dismissed it all (I'm pretty sure you didn't read any of the links considering your response was just 20 minutes after my post) while clinging to one poll with an incomplete data set to make your argument. When you're ready to have an adult conversation I'll be here. Until then don't waste my time.

I didn't read you first link because I agreed with your statement that ethnic groups apply a disproportional amount of negative traits to African Americans.  Sure, subconscious biases exist, but that's not relevant to the Reuters poll which explicitly asked whether blacks are less intelligent than whites, whether blacks are more lazy than whites, whether blacks are more violent than whites, and whether blacks are more criminal than whites.  There's nothing subconscious about answering yes to any of these questions.  

I've gone back now and read you first link to see if it says anything about negative racial stereotypes not being racist, and not surprisingly, it doesn't.  In fact, the author states:

Quote

This dynamic is obviously a direct result of racism. Too often, racism is seen as a social phenomenon that happens to black people. But it happens through black people as well. 

It boggles my mind that you think the negative stereotypes listed above (blacks being less intelligent, more lazy, more violent, and more criminal than whites) isn't racist.  Some stereotypes aren't racist, like saying whites tend to have lighter colored skin that blacks, but the ones I listed above are.   

I did actually skim your second two links, which both discussed and/or reproduced the Reuters poll that I originally linked.  Your own links are stating the Reuters poll as evidence yet you claim that "there isn't any data to suggest that's true."  Also, much of the polling data is on other issues, such as racism against islam/muslims and racism against hispanics.  The Thinkprogress link is less useful because it doesn't present any data about Clinton.  None of this data rebuts the Reuters poll on the prevalence of racism against blacks.  The only other piece of evidence of the numbers of Clinton supporters that have racist views against blacks is found in the Vox article, which claims that 40% of white Clinton supporters have a high racial resentment against blacks (and 81% for white Trump supporters).  This data seems in line with the Reuters data.

[Mudguard]

1 hour ago, BloodRider said:

No.  The difference is that Trump says racist things, and specifically has an outreach to the racist elements of his party.  Do you understand why that is an important distinction?   It's one thing to have a racist grampa in the family.  It's another thing entirely to ask him to tell racist jokes at neighborhood gatherings.  You don't then get to excuse your racist behavior by saying - I bet you have racists in your family.  Well, yeah.  Probably.  How bout we deal with that when you quit taking gramps to the library with a megaphone to give his speech about the good ole days of Operation Wetback.

I get that you think you are being clever and witty.  But quite frankly, you are not.  You are being actively racist.  Not blase "that's not my problem" indifference to racism, but just flat out "I want to talk shit about large swaths of humanity with impunity, and I get pissy like a spoilt kid when I get called out" kinda racism.  

I'm racist for calling out the racists and bigots in my own party?  Wow.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

Really looking at this map I just see 2012 all over again and while I know it worries people because it should look like  a Reagan landslide I just don't see Trump's path heck some of his "gains" in NC and Ohio can go away as easy at it came

[Swordfish]

10 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

I'm racist for calling out the racists and bigots in my own party?  Wow.

This is the way it works these days.  Agreeing is no longer enough to appease some people.

You must agree on their terms, using the exact phrases and descriptors they want to hear, and with exactly the right level of outrage....

Otherwise, you're a racist.

[Jace, Extat]

49 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

This is the way it works these days.  Agreeing is no longer enough to appease some people.

You must agree on their terms, using the exact phrases and descriptors they want to hear, and with exactly the right level of outrage....

Otherwise, you're a racist.

I'm impressed. It probably took a lot of determination to nail yourself to that cross you're on.

[BloodRider]

1 hour ago, Mudguard said:

I'm racist for calling out the racists and bigots in my own party?  Wow.

Maybe I am misunderstanding, but you went far beyond calling out racists and bigots in my own party.  You moved into the area of normalizing Trump's behavior and shaming Clinton when Clinton clearly has a platform of diversity and is leading towards that as a goal and Trump clearly is courting white separatists.

If I misunderstood, then mea-culpa.  If I didn't then, yes, in this instance you are, in my opinion, serving to further racist ends.  It's at least racist adjacent.  You are running cover downfield for white power groups, and the excuse is basically - some other people are racist too!  This is why I pointed out first that there is a difference.  But you doubled down.

If the portion of people supporting Clinton are actually racist, they obviously see that as something to overcome or change - otherwise they probably would have moved to the person who gives those racist feeling succor.  So what good then is there in berating the people who are there to see a way forward and have turned away from the person who want to indulge the nasty impulses.  

Furthermore, there is a spectrum of these things.  Some doofball who does accents at work is probably racist, yes.  And it is a problem.  But its kinda nuts if you are pulling the rip chord and asking that this schnook get publicly shamed in a public platform by Clinton because she had the temerity to call out neo-Nazi and alt-right members of the Trump campaign.

[BloodRider]

59 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

This is the way it works these days.  Agreeing is no longer enough to appease some people.

You must agree on their terms, using the exact phrases and descriptors they want to hear, and with exactly the right level of outrage....

Otherwise, you're a racist.

SWORDFISH: Transported for life to the colonies, and for what? Scum I was to that beak, nothing but scum. 'Tis for my accent and my situation that I am condemned. 'Tis for the want of better graces and the influence they bring that I am to board this prison hulk.

PRISONER #2: And all that racist shit you said.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Mudguard said:

I didn't read you first link because I agreed with your statement that ethnic groups apply a disproportional amount of negative traits to African Americans.  Sure, subconscious biases exist, but that's not relevant to the Reuters poll which explicitly asked whether blacks are less intelligent than whites, whether blacks are more lazy than whites, whether blacks are more violent than whites, and whether blacks are more criminal than whites.  There's nothing subconscious about answering yes to any of these questions.  

I've gone back now and read you first link to see if it says anything about negative racial stereotypes not being racist, and not surprisingly, it doesn't.  In fact, the author states:

Actually it's completely relevant. The author provides a link to a study that found that African Americans viewed African Americans as being more violent than White Americans at a higher rate than the Reuters poll found for supporters of Clinton, Cruz and Kasich. I've seen several more myself that are unfortunately behind pay walls. That isn't out and out racism as much as it's a major problem with our culture's perception on race. What that poll really showed IMO is that a third of Americans have absorbed a negative part of our culture. The key is that Trump supporters responded at a much higher level. 

1 hour ago, Mudguard said:

It boggles my mind that you think the negative stereotypes listed above (blacks being less intelligent, more lazy, more violent, and more criminal than whites) isn't racist.  Some stereotypes aren't racist, like saying whites tend to have lighter colored skin that blacks, but the ones I listed above are.   

I did actually skim your second two links, which both discussed and/or reproduced the Reuters poll that I originally linked.  Your own links are stating the Reuters poll as evidence yet you claim that "there isn't any data to suggest that's true."  Also, much of the polling data is on other issues, such as racism against islam/muslims and racism against hispanics.  The Thinkprogress link is less useful because it doesn't present any data about Clinton.  None of this data rebuts the Reuters poll on the prevalence of racism against blacks.  The only other piece of evidence of the numbers of Clinton supporters that have racist views against blacks is found in the Vox article, which claims that 40% of white Clinton supporters have a high racial resentment against blacks (and 81% for white Trump supporters).  This data seems in line with the Reuters data.

It boggles my mind that you're trying to argue that a third of Clinton's supporters are racists because of one question from one poll. The whole point of the links you're talking about here was to show that there are several different polls that show that a majority of Trump supporters express bigoted views. Trying to compare the two is just flat out silly

Also, the poll about racial resentment is kind of flawed. It initially jumped out at me too, but when I looked at the methodology it became pretty clear that it over-captured resentment for every candidate. 

[Ruhail]

1 hour ago, Swordfish said:

This is the way it works these days.  Agreeing is no longer enough to appease some people.

You must agree on their terms, using the exact phrases and descriptors they want to hear, and with exactly the right level of outrage....

Otherwise, you're a racist.

Bloody millineals.

[Swordfish]

1 hour ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

I'm impressed. It probably took a lot of determination to nail yourself to that cross you're on.

It's really more of a hair shirt, to be honest.

I'm not afraid of heights, but I am afraid of ladders.

 

13 minutes ago, Ruhail said:

Bloody millineals.

INORITE?

[Jaxom 1974]

7 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

I feel the same. I don't normally hold people's voting choices against them, not very much, but I can't say the same of those voting for Trump, or even just sitting out the race.

The willfully blind following of Trump is infuriating, but I'm also highly agitated with those who insist on backing Johnson, mainly because they recognize Trump is awful, but who can't articulate why they don't support Hillary other than they believe she killed people, which I suppose might be valid if it wasn't, you know, not exactly correct...

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

Hillary isn't cool. Johnson and Stein are.

[TrackerNeil]

57 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

The willfully blind following of Trump is infuriating, but I'm also highly agitated with those who insist on backing Johnson, mainly because they recognize Trump is awful, but who can't articulate why they don't support Hillary other than they believe she killed people, which I suppose might be valid if it wasn't, you know, not exactly correct...

Good point. There are lots of people who won't vote for Clinton because she doesn't act like their mom or girlfriend, or else she just rubs them the wrong way. (This is often code for "I'm not comfortable voting for a woman who doesn't act like my mom or girlfriend.")