Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "People vote the way they do for many reasons, and to chalk it up to people wanting "free stuff" or having "hive mind"" Do you think that if you asked black people if they voted for Obama only because he is black, that they would be telling you the absolute truth? People of all races lie to pollsters constantly. This is proven each time we are surprised at an election outcome. People will lie and say they support gay marriage and then turn around and vote for gay marriage bans. The margin of error you hear on polls assumes everybody is telling the truth. The true margin of error, if we assume people lie, is larger. So it's something you have to infer, which is admittedly subjective. But sometimes cracks appear in the thin veneer of black objectivism. Obama gonna pay my bills: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...x8rTb3jI</a> <a href="http://www.theroot.com/samuel-l-jackson-obama-voted-because-black" target="_blank">http://www.theroot.com/samuel-...se-black</a> Howard Stern Interviews Obama Supporters: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqAiarOhC2U" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...iarOhC2U</a> A much longer video with a similar theme: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8&feature=related" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...=related</a> Blah, blah, blah confirmation bias.
Originally Posted By ecdc The rambling post-modernist appeal was nice and all, but we're in the real world, not a college dorm after Philosophy 101. The point remains that your thinly (and not so thinly) veiled racism hasn't been backed up by any evidence beyond wishful thinking, confirmation bias around voting patterns, and absurd anecdotal stories from a superb data source as Howard Stern. You've been intellectually lazy in defense of stupidity.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <"People vote the way they do for many reasons, and to chalk it up to people wanting "free stuff" or having "hive mind">> <Do you think that if you asked black people if they voted for Obama only because he is black, that they would be telling you the absolute truth?> Black people tend to vote for Democrats, as you yourself showed. They tend to vote for white Democrats at just about the same rate that they vote for black Democrats. And they tend to vote for white Democrats OVER black Republicans. Take even NYC, where I live. Generally liberal, but with some decided conservative pockets in the outer boroughs. Even though there are conservative pockets, it's heavily Democratic. And in in 1984 NYC went heavily for Mondale, both black and white neighborhoods. Same for 1988 for Dukakis and 1992 for Clinton. In 1986 and 1990 it went heavily for Mario Cuomo for governor, both white and black neighborhoods. Yet in 1989 and 1993, David Dinkins and Rudy Guiliani split a pair of squeaker elections, Dinkins barely winning the 1st, and Rudy the 2nd. The black neighborhoods went heavily for the Democrat, as they always do. The difference was in the white neighborhoods. They were the ones who crossed party lines to vote for the Republican, whereas usually they also go heavily Democratic. Similar patterns are shown nationwide. The empirical evidence shows that black voters vote party more than race. Whites, on the other hand, have been shown to vote for black candidates at a lower rate, in both parties, i.e. white Democrats vote in lower pluralities for black Democrats than white Democrats, and white Republicans vote in lower pluralities for (the rare) black Republican than for white Republicans. So which group can be said to be voting race more often? Interestingly, the first time this showed signs of cracking for whites was 2008 for Obama. <But sometimes cracks appear in the thin veneer of black objectivism.> Anecdotal examples prove exactly nothing, unless you're looking to have your thesis proved to yourself.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>The evidence for both is found in the way blacks and Hispanics vote<< Now that I have a bit more time to respond.... This is the equivalent of seeing a woman with her arm in a sling and saying, "Well the evidence is clear that she was abused by her husband." When called on such an overreaching statement, and told there could be a number of different reasons why the woman's arm is in a sling, we get >>I don't know. We are people sharing ideas, perceptions and experiences. Your perception may be different from mine, but it's going to be a tall order to figure out which perception of reality is the correct one.<< This is an attempt at backtracking from such lazy, one-dimensional thinking. It's essentially the "we all have our opinions" argument, as if facts and reason don't really matter. It also attempts to claim the scales are equally balanced. "Well, it's just as likely that blacks are of a hive mentality and vote the way they do for free stuff as it is some other explanation, or combination of many." This is also lazy thinking and fails to address many facets.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Hispanics are not yet as much of a hive mind as blacks and there is a wider range of political thought among Latinos.<< The black community is a culture. A complex culture, but a culture nonetheless. The modern American black community traces its roots over a long period of slavery, Civil War, Reconstruction, and Jim Crow. The culture banded together, particularly around the church, as a way to give their community power. There's a deep, rich cultural history there worth exploring. Just like there is around most communities, especially those that emerge from oppression. To label a shared culture that leads to similarities among group members a "hive mind" exposes one's own bigotry. It's a pejorative term that brings to mind insects or the Borg. It's yet another example of intellectual laziness in these comments.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones They are trying to get more Latinos onto food stamps. <a href="http://washingtonexaminer.com/sessions-usda-gets-secretive-about-mexican-food-stamp-partnership/article/2502629" target="_blank">http://washingtonexaminer.com/.../2502629</a> <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/19/usda-partnering-with-mexico-to-boost-food-stamp-participation/" target="_blank">http://dailycaller.com/2012/07...ipation/</a>
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones ecdc, what about that culture prompts them to always vote Democrat? Democrats were once the racists (and I believe they still are), yet we are supposed to believe that Republicans and Democrats "switched" at some point. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwqhoVIh65k" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...hoVIh65k</a> 3:53.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>what about that culture prompts them to always vote Democrat?<< You were adamant they voted black until Dabob punctured that theory. Well, I'll answer even though you're not really interested. Perhaps someone else will read.... I think there's many reasons, again a lot of which go back to the culture's roots to the church. The community relied (and still relies) heavily on each other for justice, for financial support, etc. I think many African Americans look at the Democratic party and see the values that is mirrored somewhat in the black church and community of helping the poor, social justice, etc. I also think in the last forty or fifty years, it's been very clear which party is more interested in giving the black community a better chance at equality: the Democrats. Members of minority groups tend to define their identity almost exclusively around being a member of a minority group--so that what animates them becomes causes that helps better the group. It's more tribal than white Americans are accustomed to, which is perhaps why libertarians denigrate it with racist comments like "hive mind." I think this link between shared values also explains why the black community will sometimes break with traditional Democratic positions. Conservatives love to crow about how Prop 8 was partially passed in California due to black voters who oppose gay marriage. The community can be deeply divided over abortion, where a strong tension between unwanted pregnancies and strict sexual taboos collide. I think all that's just the tip of the iceberg. More books than you've ever read have been written on it. But why give a complex culture it's due when we can just accuse them of wanting free stuff?
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "I also think in the last forty or fifty years, it's been very clear which party is more interested in giving the black community a better chance at equality: the Democrats." But the War on Poverty has not accomplished that. Even if voting Republican is hopeless for blacks, voting Democrat has already been demonstrated to be hopeless anyway. Maybe it's time for a third-party. "More books than you've ever read have been written on it." Yes, I think you are stupid too. Yawn.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>But the War on Poverty has not accomplished that.<< Which is a different issue than you've argued all along, but I'm not interested in battling a hydra or playing Whack-a-Mole. The point remains, you spoke ignorantly about an entire community of millions of Americans.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Democrats were once the racists (and I believe they still are), yet we are supposed to believe that Republicans and Democrats "switched" at some point.> A little history: Because Lincoln was a Republican, white southerners wouldn't be caught dead in that party for many decades. They were all Democrats. Conservative southern whites were Democrats and (more) liberal southern whites were Democrats. The south was basically full of one-party states, but within that one party you had the entire range of what we now would call liberal to conservative. The northern Democrats in the 20th century also included a growing number of liberals and those who favored racial equality. This was held together with the famous "New Deal Coalition" - northern liberals who favored FDR's policies, both economic and social, and southern conservatives who could deal with the social positions they didn't like because of the economic populism they did. Southern blacks effectively couldn't vote after Reconstruction, even though they ostensibly could. Northern blacks could, and they began shifting to the Democratic party in large numbers during the Depression through the outreach of FDR (and Eleanor) and the fact that the Republican party of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover had long since stopped supporting black equality, and FDR (though not perfect here) was much better. Until fairly recently, "liberal Republican" and "conservative Democrat" were not oxymorons. There were plenty of both. What's important to remember is that it was liberals of both parties who opposed segregation and favored racial equality, and conservatives of both parties who were on the other side. What began the modern migration of conservative southern whites to the GOP was when LBJ enacted the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. He accurately predicted that the Democrats would lose southern whites within a generation. And that's exactly what happened. Conservative southern whites became conservative Republicans instead of conservative Democrats. Their views didn't change; just their party. This was accelerated by Nixon's famous "southern strategy" in which he hinted strongly that he was "with" southern whites when it came to those uppity blacks, and Humphrey wasn't; and lo and behold, the '68 election is the first time we see a good number of southern states going for the Republican candidate (unless they went for 3rd-party candidate George Wallace, that is.) Conservative southern whites have been largely Republican ever since, and the GOP continues to pander to the ugly side of them all too often.
Originally Posted By Vic Sage "What's important to remember is that it was liberals of both parties who opposed segregation and favored racial equality, and conservatives of both parties who were on the other side." You do realize one can be conservative on some issues and not on others, or liberal on some issues and not on others? You don't think that because someone believes in equality of the races, they also believe in unrestricted abortions? Isn't it more likely that in the South both parties became less racist than they were and so other issues came to define them?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 All you have to do is look at the Dixiecrats who became Republicans to see what I'm talking about; Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and scads of others. Different nominal parties, same conservatism, same racist crap.
Originally Posted By Vic Sage "All you have to do is look at the Dixiecrats who became Republicans to see what I'm talking about; Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and scads of others." George Wallace? J. William Fulbright? Robert Byrd? How many racists remained Democrats? If you're a racist and no longer feel welcome in your old party, why would you join a less racist party?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "Dabob, STOP!!" Right you are. He contributes nothing of value; just ignorance, as his last post shows.
Originally Posted By Vic Sage "He contributes nothing of value; just ignorance, as his last post shows." Are the posters that contribute extreme left wing rhetoric and hatred of the right of value? If your beliefs can't respond to a little skeptical questioning, are they of value? Are you worried that if you honestly answer my questions, you will no longer be able to hold onto your leftist assumptions?
Originally Posted By EdisYoda Are you capable of ANSWERING questions instead of just asking? I think not.
Originally Posted By mawnck Edis-Yoda, you stop too. People, trolls only go away when you DO NOT RESPOND TO THEM. In any way, shape or form. Do not correct them, or set them straight, or make fun of them, or otherwise acknowledge that you are reading their drivel. (Side advice: don't read their drivel.) Just click on the "report to the mods" link and then go about your business. If you feel you must make a pithy reply to them, then do it, and just don't click "post".
Originally Posted By Dabob2 People, trolls only go away when you DO NOT RESPOND TO THEM." A lesson people (including me) need to re-learn periodically.
