Zorral Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Kalbear said: The 31st largest per capita is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm very aware that Latinx populations live all over the US; the issue is whether or not they'd make a significant difference if you catered to them in the same way you catered to, say, white people, or evangelicals, or non-college educated people. Significant in your view appears to be non-zero. Significant in mine appears to be 'if you shifted the demo or turnout by 10%, would it matter?' And in Pennsylvania, if you shifted the voting population of latinx to another 10% (so from approximately 400k to 440k) the answer is no, it wouldn't have won that election. Alternately, and hear me out here, there are a whole lot of white people that also have needs. Alternately, and hear me out here, the hispanic population has not done nearly as good a job at political organizing as the AA population has, nor have they been able to side effectively with one group or another. And they've also had a historically worse voting record, both in population and who they vote for. Getting damned close to 10% in PA and other places, and other places more than that. Hear me and many others: Voter repression and suppression! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted December 28, 2019 Share Posted December 28, 2019 10 minutes ago, Zorral said: Getting damned close to 10% in PA and other places, and other places more than that. Again, is it better to go after 10%, or 40%? Which makes you win more often? Especially when that 40% looks like 80% in some of the states? 10 minutes ago, Zorral said: Hear me and many others: Voter repression and suppression! There is a difference between 'not performing outreach in a primary' and 'removing polling stations'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted December 28, 2019 Share Posted December 28, 2019 7 minutes ago, Zorral said: Getting damned close to 10% in PA and other places, and other places more than that. Hear me and many others: Voter repression and suppression! Democrats can't solve that problem. They have to play by the rules as they are made by Republicans. Regarding religion for our resident Son of Abraham, most Lutheran offshoots I've ever witnessed are mostly social events. The level of attention paid to most places of worship is shockingly small, when you think about how religiously devout huge chunks of this country are supposed to be. I've lived in Texas, Tennessee, Indiana, Washington, and even a little bit in Arkansas. Churches in rural areas are almost always a simple long rectangular building with one big room. Not much decoration, not much scripture hanging all over the place. Stained glass windows are a pretty big luxury, I think. I've probably been in more than thirty churches in my life, and I can count the stained glass on one hand. Why am I talking about churches and how plain they are? I think this simple aesthetic style actually hurts the ability of the congregation to feel awed. I don't know enough about Judaism or Islam to comment at all, but in most Christian traditions for a very long time there was a lot of attention to displaying the grandeur of god and the awesome wealth of the church. These are signs of divine favor, signs that all men are beggars in the house of the lord. So do I actually think that the lack of wealth displayed to churchgoers in America fails to impart upon them their insignificance in the face of their supposed creator, thereby robbing them of a feeling of communal insignificance and pride as *god's chosen people* that would foster empathy and compassion? Eh, it was fun to write it out. *Everyone thinks they're god's chosen people. I'm aware that that is a line most often used in reference to Jews, but I defend my use of it here* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.