All purpose news and politics thread part VII: News & Politics Total Landscaping

[CaptainEurope]

The support is undeniable, but I'm surprised that there was a drop in 4% between Hillary and Biden (94% to 90%) - but this doesn't take into account actual participation numbers, right? (more/less black women voting)

As in: could it be that there was a slight drop of 4% but actually more black women voted in 2020 than in 2016 and so the net effect might even be positive?

I'm asking/thinking about this because obviously this is quite important in 2024.

It might be because Republicans had 4 more years to deny black people their constitutional right to vote.

[aja_christopher]

It might be because Republicans had 4 more years to deny black people their constitutional right to vote.

Which they would know if they paid attention to what is actually being said in the conversation about the loss of voting rights -- the percentages were lower in many of the affected areas.



Trump is just the latest figurehead in the ongoing Republican/conservative white nationalist agenda -- there is a reason it is called "systemic" racism.

"Black" people are not responsible for "white men" blocking and rescinding African-American voting rights -- American history should make that clear.

[hyped78]

Everything he says about it is in conditional case because he first says that it is a bad and racist thing. I don't see what there is NOT to get, frankly.

Sarcasm and satire! Of course, of course…

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/201...ampaign-racism

It might be because Republicans had 4 more years to deny black people their constitutional right to vote.

Yes:

“According to analysis by the Voter Participation Center and the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, approximately 90% of Black women who were eligible to vote did so in the 2020 election. This translated to a significant and influential turnout, with an estimated 17.8 million Black women voting.”

“In the 2016 US presidential election, a similar analysis indicates that approximately 94% of eligible Black women voters participated. This translated to an estimated 16.4 million Black women who voted in 2016.”

Actually I’ve just realized that numbers that Christopher posted are % of total black women who voted, rather than % of actual Dem voters out of the black women who voted. So I guess that the numbers posted before assume that 100% of black women who voted, voted Dem (which isn’t entirely accurate, but then the question about any potential slight support drop-off becomes moot)

(This isn’t important, I was just curious)

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Wow, how ironic is that for Vivek? And for others like e.g. Tim Scott

Don't get me started on Tim Scott whom I despise because he and others of his ilk betrayed their race to graze on the Qpublican plantation. There's a term to describe that cretin whom, of late, has been shamelessly slurping Trump like there's no tomorrow in the nonexistent hope of being considered for the VP position, but, using that term would get me banned from here in a heartbeat.

[hyped78]

Don't get me started on Tim Scott whom I despise because he and others of his ilk betrayed their race to graze on the Qpublican plantation. There's a term to describe that cretin whom, of late, has been shamelessly slurping Trump like there's no tomorrow in the nonexistent hope of being considered for the VP position, but, using that term would get me banned from here in a heartbeat.

We also a have term here in the UK for that, I don’t know if it’s the same as over there - but, same as you, can’t say it

Tim Scott’s campaigning for Trump is like Lindsey Graham’s - they look like two poodles, drooling and eagerly hoping to please their owner

[aja_christopher]

The pivot to an "AI" company is not going as planned.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

We also a have term here in the UK for that, I don’t know if it’s the same as over there - but, same as you, can’t say it

Hell, I think I was put in timeout once for calling Scott by that uber-famous sandwich cookie we have here.

Tim Scott’s campaigning for Trump is like Lindsey Graham’s - they look like two poodles, drooling and eagerly hoping to please their owner

Couldn't have put it any better. To people who complain that Trump hates dogs, well, they're wrong, he has two he loves in Scott and Graham.

[aja_christopher]

The impetus should be on Republicans not to engage in racist political tactics to win elections -- not to ask for more from black voters.

[hyped78]

Hell, I think I was put in timeout once for calling Scott by that uber-famous sandwich cookie we have here.

Couldn't have put it any better. To people who complain that Trump hates dogs, well, they're wrong, he has two he loves in Scott and Graham.

Oh, it's a different expression then. For us it's a fruit.

[aja_christopher]

I do think it's best to talk about the topic and not the other guy.

That is highly debateable -- depending on what topic is being addressed.

It's fair to say that if you really wanted to discuss these issues then you would not keep baselessly claiming that others need to "politely" ask you to address them directly.

You would just address the topic (as is normal) and then move on to the next one -- if that were the goal.

[hyped78]

The impetus should be on Republicans not to engage in racist political tactics to win elections -- not to ask for more from black voters.

And I agree - but how do you drive that?

[CaptainEurope]

Sarcasm and satire! Of course, of course…

)

What? I did not say that. Try replying to my point, not what you think is easier to reply to.

[hyped78]

What? I did not say that. Try replying to my point, not what you think is easier to reply to.

My "sarcasm" comment was referring to the original poster/post, who says he made that comment as sarcasm, not to you/your post (even though obviously I was replying to you now)

Anyways, if indeed it's all (low quality) sarcasm then it's much ado about nothing, just IMO an unfortunate original post

I'll take follow-up language like "Do you understand the sarcasm, yet? Do I have to dumb it down further?" as further sad examples of misguided rhetoric

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Oh, it's a different expression then. For us it's a fruit.

No, there's his cookie based nickname which begins with "O", then there's that highly derogatory term that would get me banned. Two different things when it comes to Scott.

[hyped78]

No, there's his cookie based nickname which begins with "O", then there's that highly derogatory term that would get me banned. Two different things when it comes to Scott.

Yep, got it.

Imagine Tim Scott gets picked as VP, they win the election, Trump dies/gets incapacitated during the term and Scott becomes POTUS.......!!!!!