snood
 
  7  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 08:12 am
@engineer,
engineer wrote:

I don't know about that one. This is about his "what do you have to lose" speech in Michigan.

Yeah, that was insulting and so condescending. To say that most of what comes out of his mouth about non-whites is racist is pretty much foregone at this point. What's important to remember is that Trump wasn't talking to Blacks or Latinos, but to any of his base that might be made more comfortable voting for Trump because 'See? He's trying - he's not racist." He couldn't give less of a **** about blacks' or latinos' status or true condition.
revelette2
 
  4  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 09:16 am
@engineer,
I don't see how McGentrix couldn't figure that out on his own.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -4  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 09:18 am
@snood,
Please list from his speech the comments you claim to be racist
revelette2
 
  4  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 09:26 am
@giujohn,
I doubt you get condensation and nuanced racism if it fell on your nose. But to try and give you a clue.

Quote:
"This is Trump's SALES PITCH to black voters, ostensibly. Telling us we're dumb, broke suckers who have no jobs is the best he could do," Jamil Smith, a black reporter for MTV News, wrote on Twitter.

Ana Navarro, a Latina Republican strategist, wrote: "Trump's 'Black outreach' so tone-deaf & condescending, his 'Hispanic outreach', (eating a taco bowl), suddenly not that bad & stupid."


source

I guess Bannon is doing a heck of a job.
izzythepush
 
  5  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 09:49 am
@giujohn,
Why should he? Snood is black, you're not. You don't understand what it's like, and don't seem interested in understanding, just lecturing.
revelette2
 
  5  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 10:27 am
Realized my mistake, I meant condescension, not condensation.

izzy, Wink
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
giujohn
 
  -3  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 10:49 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Why should he? Snood is black, you're not. You don't understand what it's like, and don't seem interested in understanding, just lecturing.


Your argument is typically specious and I'm not the one lecturing.

This bullshit about how only a white person can be racist and a black person can't be racist or a white person can't understand the racism of others is such an ineffectually weak argument.

I don't have to be hit over the head with a baseball bat to understand the aspects of being hit over the head with a baseball bat.

Let's just be honest here and say that he can't list what remarks were racist in the speech and not claim that he doesn't have to because he's black. Parroting the hue-and-cry that Trump is a racist is not an argument. It's an emotional response based not in fact but in purposeful Hysteria.
revelette2
 
  4  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 12:30 pm
@giujohn,
It not as though he called them a bunch of blatant racist names where I could give you a list of the names. Look Trump's entire sales pitch to his white audience was to say that blacks are too stupid to know they have been hoodwinked by liberals all these years because they haven't got anything for their votes because they don't work. None of that is true and it is talking down about black folks with the implication being they are stupid and easily led rather than making a reasoned choice when they vote democrat most of the time. Like Hillary said, his speech was unbelievably ignorant. It was also racist because it treats the black community as a group as dumb and easily hoodwinked.
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 12:43 pm
@revelette2,
What's funny is how Trump continues to show his bigotry without knowing it.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -4  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 01:12 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:

It not as though he called them a bunch of blatant racist names where I could give you a list of the names. Look Trump's entire sales pitch to his white audience was to say that blacks are too stupid to know they have been hoodwinked by liberals all these years because they haven't got anything for their votes because they don't work. None of that is true and it is talking down about black folks with the implication being they are stupid and easily led rather than making a reasoned choice when they vote democrat most of the time. Like Hillary said, his speech was unbelievably ignorant. It was also racist because it treats the black community as a group as dumb and easily hoodwinked.


I disagree... telling it like it is is not talking down to somebody. If a person keeps voting for a party that says they are going to improve your lot in life but never does, it is at the least incredibly naive and at worst incredibly stupid. I'm not sure how you would assign racism to this equation because frankly it doesn't enter into it. The fact that as a race they monolithically seem to vote for the Democrats and their failed policies has nothing to do with their skin color.

What were dancing around here is as a voting Bloc the urban black seems not to care about those failed policies that perpetuate the ghetto as long as they feel that with the Democrats they are able to get their entitlements... An Incredibly short-sighted attitude... Some would say even ignorant.

No one can argue that for the last 50 years the failed policies of the Democratic Party and their courtship of the black community or the 8 years with a black president has done anything to eliminate the ghettos or raised these people out of poverty.

Trump was right to say that Hillary is a bigot in as much as she understands what it takes to get there vote and that is to Simply Pander to them reassuring them they will get their entitlements but knowing full well that she's not interested in any policies that will actually make a positive difference in helping them achieve the American dream or to at least get out of the ghetto.
Blickers
 
  6  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 01:44 pm
@giujohn,
Well, you're full of crap. Blacks got hurt worse than the general population in the crash of 2008, but in the last three years African-Americans, with 13% of the population, have gotten 20% of the jobs we've GAINED in the last three years. The percentage of blacks who finish high school is higher than ever, and the percentage of blacks who finish college is higher than ever. Median weekly pay, adjusted for inflation, is higher than before the crash. Murder rates, both of blacks and the general population, have gone down under Obama.

Of course, you are going to disregard these facts entirely and post this false information again. And again. Because it is all you know how to do.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 02:12 pm
@McGentrix,
I'm from a town in Ohio that once elected a Klansman for President, from family from Appalachian Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky, the Alabama part of Indiana it certainly rang with what I grew up with.

Three state Governors in my family and it all went thfthp! after the Civil War. What do we now Texan rednecks got to lose? We sure never ever were Republican. before. (note: I was a pre Ronnie Reagan Republican and did vote for GHWB twice though the GOP has forced me to vote straight Democratic in national elections since.)

From Wikipedia. BTW I refer to the pre '70's "Redneck". Like me, a redneck.

Redneck
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about redneck as a pejorative. For the subculture, see Poor White. For other uses, see Redneck (disambiguation).

The term redneck is a derogatory term chiefly used for a rural poor white person of the Southern United States.[1][2] Its usage is similar in meaning to cracker (especially regarding Georgia and Florida), hillbilly (especially regarding Appalachia and the Ozarks),[3] and white trash (but without the last term's suggestions of immorality).[4][5][6]

By the 1970s, the term had become offensive slang, and its meaning had expanded to mean bigoted, loutish, and opposed to modern ways. [7]

Patrick Huber has emphasized the theme of masculinity [clarification needed] in the continued expansion of the term in the 20th century, noting, "The redneck has been stereotyped in the media and popular culture as a poor, dirty, uneducated, and racist Southern white man."[8]

19th and early 20th centuries
Political term for poor farmers

The term characterized farmers having a red neck caused by sunburn from hours working in the fields. A citation from 1893 provides a definition as "poorer inhabitants of the rural districts...men who work in the field, as a matter of course, generally have their skin stained red and burnt by the sun, and especially is this true of the back of their necks".[9]

By 1900, "rednecks" was in common use to designate the political factions inside the Democratic Party comprising poor white farmers in the South.[10] The same group was also often called the "wool hat boys" (for they opposed the rich men, who wore expensive silk hats). A newspaper notice in Mississippi in August 1891 called on rednecks to rally at the polls at the upcoming primary election:[11]

Primary on the 25th.
And the "rednecks" will be there.
And the "Yaller-heels" will be there, also.
And the "hayseeds" and "gray dillers," they'll be there, too.
And the "subordinates" and "subalterns" will be there to rebuke their slanderers and traducers.
And the men who pay ten, twenty, thirty, etc. etc. per cent on borrowed money will be on hand, and they'll remember it, too.

By 1910, the political supporters of the Mississippi Democratic Party politician James K. Vardaman—chiefly poor white farmers—began to describe themselves proudly as "rednecks," even to the point of wearing red neckerchiefs to political rallies and picnics.[12]

Linguist Sterling Eisiminger, based on the testimony of informants from the Southern United States, speculated that the prevalence of pellagra in the region during the great depression may have contributed to the rise in popularity of the term; red, inflamed skin is one of the first symptoms of that disorder to appear.[13]


Coal miners

The term "redneck" in the early 20th century was occasionally used in reference to American coal miner union members who wore red bandannas for solidarity. The sense of "a union man" dates at least to the 1910s and was especially popular during the 1920s and 1930s in the coal-producing regions of West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania.[14] It was also used by union strikers to describe poor white strikebreakers.[15]
Late 20th and early 21st centuries

Writers Edward Abbey and Dave Foreman also use "redneck" as a political call to mobilize poor rural white Southerners. "In Defense of the Redneck" was a popular essay by Ed Abbey. One popular early Earth First! bumper sticker was "Rednecks for Wilderness". Murray Bookchin, an urban leftist and social ecologist, objected strongly to Earth First!'s use of the term as "at the very least, insensitive".[16]

But many members of the Southern community have proudly embraced the term as a self-identifier.[17][18] Among those who dispute that the term is disparaging, Canadian Paul Brandt, a self-identified redneck, says that primarily the term indicates independence.[19]


I find it accurate and real.

Why do you only call out racist when you imagine yourself slighted? Things what make Juan go " .....hmmmm!"
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 02:26 pm
From the NYT:

Quote:
HAS the party of Lincoln just nominated a racist to be president? We shouldn’t toss around such accusations lightly, so I’ve looked back over more than 40 years of Donald Trump’s career to see what the record says.

One early red flag arose in 1973, when President Richard Nixon’s Justice Department — not exactly the radicals of the day — sued Trump and his father, Fred Trump, for systematically discriminating against blacks in housing rentals.

I’ve waded through 1,021 pages of documents from that legal battle, and they are devastating. Donald Trump was then president of the family real estate firm, and the government amassed overwhelming evidence that the company had a policy of discriminating against blacks, including those serving in the military.

To prove the discrimination, blacks were repeatedly dispatched as testers to Trump apartment buildings to inquire about vacancies, and white testers were sent soon after. Repeatedly, the black person was told that nothing was available, while the white tester was shown apartments for immediate rental.


It's laughable that Trump is trying to win the black vote. Trump asks blacks, "what have you got to lose?"

ROFLMAO

Trump also paid for a full page ad to execute five blacks who were charged with raping a white girl in Central Park.

DNA proved they were innocent.

Trump now wants to win the black vote? He's an idiot!
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  2  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 02:30 pm
@giujohn,
You really need to stop listening to tired repeated lies from right wing sites and start looking for facts yourself. Trump does not tell it like it is, he distorts it from what it is.


Quote:
Donald Trump has been repeatedly called a racist by protesters at his rallies. But the Republican frontrunner says he'd "do a great job" for blacks, much better than America's first black president, Barack Obama.

"58% and even 59% of African-American youth has no job. African-Americans in their prime -- 30 years old, 40 years old, 50 years old -- they are way, way behind, Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer earlier this week. "We have an African-American president and what he's done for African-Americans is a shame."

There's no question blacks suffered during the Great Recession and the subsequent slow recovery. Blacks and Hispanics lost a large share of their wealth during this period because more of their net worth is tied up in housing. In addition, they continue to face similar wage stagnation and income pressures as other Americans.

But have blacks done so much worse under Obama? CNNMoney took a look.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/160315142612-chart-teen-unemployment-rate-drops-780x439.jpg

The unemployment rate for black teens, as well as for blacks age 16 to 24, has dropped by more than half from its high point during the Obama administration.

During the depths of the crisis, the unemployment rate for black teens spiked to as high as 48.9% in September 2010. For those age 16 to 24, the jobless rate jumped up to 32.5% in January 2010.

Both rates have since recovered -- along with the rest of the job market -- to 23.3% for teens and 14.5% for those age 16 to 24, as of February.

Trump's "58% and even 59%" figure for African-American youth unemployment is likely extrapolated from the employment-to-population ratio, which shows that 42.4% of blacks ages 16 to 24 had a job in February. But that doesn't mean that the rest -- or 57.6% -- were unemployed. To be considered unemployed, one has to be looking for a job. Those in school or not looking for work are not included.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/160315142609-chart-unemployment-rate-falls-780x439.jpg

At 8.8% in February, the share of jobless black Americans is the lowest its been since April 2008. While the unemployment rate for blacks is still higher than it is for whites, it's far lower than the 17.3% rate reported in January 2010.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/160315142616-chart-median-income-for-blacks-780x439.jpg

Blacks have seen their median income stagnate, along with the rest of the population.

Median income stood at $35,398 in 2014, just a touch below where it was in 2009, when Obama took office. But it has climbed back from $33,926 in 2011.

Poverty among blacks remains elevated, though its down from its high in recent years.

The Great Recession sent many Americans into poverty, but blacks were hit particularly hard. The rate for blacks hit 27.6% in 2011, nearly 2 percentage points higher than what it was when Obama was sworn in. It has since receded to 26.2%.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/160315142614-chart-blacks-in-poverty-780x439.jpg

source

cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 02:34 pm
@revelette2,
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/17/central-park-five-donald-trump-jogger-rape-case-new-york

Trump's ongoing bigotry is astounding.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 02:36 pm
http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r589/duadmin/160825-in-trump-we-trust_zps33tpabcb.jpg
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 02:38 pm
@revelette2,
All of those charts that cut off the bottom to make the changes seem more dramatic need to be refactored.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -3  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 03:16 pm
@revelette2,
It's a wonderful thing to quote statistics but when utilizing unemployment figures you are not taking into account those people who are no longer actively seeking employment.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics for July 2016 the unemployment rate for black men is 8.4%

Additionally many jobs that came back after recession more low-paying jobs especially for the black community.

Let's see what Bernie Sanders has to say about it:(politifact)

We checked a claim by Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders at a rally in Portland, Maine, on July 6, 2015.
During a campaign event in Portland, Maine, that attracted thousands of supporters, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders made a striking claim about unemployment among African-American youth.

"For young people who have graduated high school or dropped out of high school, who are between the ages of 17 and 20, if they happen to be white, the unemployment rate is 33 percent," he said. "If they are Hispanic, the unemployment rate is 36 percent. If they are African-American, the real unemployment rate for young people is 51 percent."

A reader asked us to check whether Sanders was correct, so we took a closer look. (Sanders seems to have made this a go-to talking point in his campaign; he offered a similar claim in an interview with The Nation.)

We’ll start by noting that the most commonly used unemployment-rate statistic is not as high for each group as Sanders indicated. The most readily available data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics covers the age range from 16 to 19, which isn’t identical but gives a quick approximation.

For whites in that age range, the official unemployment rate was 15.7 percent, for Hispanics it was 20.8 percent and for African-Americans it was 31.8 percent.

In other words, the official unemployment rate shows the same general pattern -- that African-American youth unemployment is significantly higher than white youth unemployment and, to a lesser extent, higher than Hispanic youth unemployment. Still, the levels for each group are lower than what Sanders said.

So what’s going on?

Sanders’ camp pointed us to research by the Economic Policy Institute, a left-of-center think tank. This data is different from the more familiar measurements for a few reasons.

One, the institute didn’t just look at employment status for people between the ages of 17 and 20; it limited its reach to high school graduates who were not enrolled in further schooling.

And two, EPI counted not only unemployed workers but also those who were working part-time due to the weakness of the economy and those who were "marginally attached to the labor force." The latter category includes people who did not meet the strict definition of being in the job market, but weren’t entirely out of the market, either.

The statistic EPI used, known by the wonky shorthand U-6, is officially called a measure of "labor underutilization" rather than "unemployment." EPI itself used the term "underemployment" in its research.

It’s a real statistic, but Sanders didn’t really describe it the correct way. He twice used the term "unemployment rate" and once used the variation "real unemployment rate," a vague term that doesn’t have any official definition at BLS and wasn’t mentioned in the EPI research he was quoting.

On the other hand, Sanders’ choice of statistics actually understated his broader point. Since it’s reasonable to assume that dropouts have an even higher unemployment rate than high-school graduates, the figure for "young people who have graduated high school or dropped out of high school," as he put it, is probably even higher than 51 percent, since that figure includes only high school graduates.

All in all, economists agreed that Sanders had a point despite his problems with terminology.

"He should have been clearer," said Tara Sinclair, a George Washington University economist. "But I think the overall scale is right. Both education and race are predictive of employment outcomes in the United States. A number of different studies show that even for the same levels of education, minorities appear to have worse average employment outcomes."

Our ruling

Sanders said that for African-Americans between the ages of 17 and 20, "the real unemployment rate … is 51 percent." His terminology was off, but the numbers he used check out, and his general point was correct -- that in an apples-to-apples comparison, African-American youth have significantly worse prospects in the job market than either Hispanics or whites do. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 03:22 pm
@engineer,
What do they have to lose?

What has almost monolithic support for Democrats got them?

Despite the fact that any sane person in this country will say that racism in America has consistently diminished since the 60's, liberals want to argue that it stands out there as this horrible, amorphous monster that remains dedicated to the persecution of blacks, and must be confronted by Democratic candidates.

Never mind that the notion of Jim Crow laws is repugnant to 99% of American (and, more importantly, they have been wiped from the books).

Never mind that Americans have, in the main, been favorably inclined towards programs that will help blacks recover from a long history of racism.

Never mind that there are examples galore of motivated, hard working blacks actually making it in America

Never mind we have a president who is 50% black and self identifies as "African-American."

Were Democrats responsible for these advances? Yes in part and maybe even in the main, but they have decided that taking credit for them is not worth promoting the idea that nothing has changed.

Never mind that the conditions in African-American communities are, by comparison, abhorent. It's that ugly, undying force of Racism. The noble liberals have fought their hardest to make things better but they get stymied all the time by racists.

Never mind all of this, because it is just to juicy an argument to make that blacks are oppressed and need to vote for Democrats.

Only Democrats advance and accept the pathetic argument that they shouldn't be held accountable for their failure to deliver on promises made because of the power of the evil minority.

If they can't defeat the evil minority, why vote for them?

It is breathtakingly cynical, but it works, in no small measure, because intelligent and educated individuals such as yourself are more concerned about tribal loyalties than reality.

What the hell is racist about "What do you have to lose?"



 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 03:57:49