You can almost taste the victim complexes.
I like how people are pointing towards black people voting for Obama as some kind of 'win' for their argument, newsflash; black people already voted mostly democrat anyway, I think there was like a 2% jump in black voters voting for Obama. It's not so much 'Oh hey he's the same colour as us' (which is a ridiculously moronic way to dismiss an entire demographic and pretty insulting) but more 'Oh hey, the Republican party is still rife with racism whereas the democrat party isn't and they seem to be looking out for us'
stop acting like EVERY ELECTION EVER wasn't about popularity of one thing or another. they're all as deep as the average HS elections
people vote for people they like. blacks who weren't into politics suddenly had "their guy" to like and vote for. this year whites who weren't into politics voted against him so "that nigger don't rurn the country"
polarization has been used in media forever. polarizing topics garner ESPN a SHITLOAD of money over the stuff most people like or most people dislike
there has to be some type of argument to draw attention. elections are polarizing now.
It's hard not to point at racism when peope blame the black vote. When Obama wins every minority demographic, with the largest jump being Latino voters. Yet, you ignore all of those minorities and pick on one that didn't even have a substantial jump. It should be easy to see, that minorities vote democrat, regardless of his race. Obama didn't just win his own demographic, he won all but the one Romney is.
Mmm, it's always amusing to see them grasp at straws to reshape reality though. 'It can't be because we don't appeal to minorities, it MUST be because black people suffer from group think and vote based on skin' and the fact that that's considered a socially acceptable opinion to hold by some is just mind boggling. If I was to insult white people's intelligence in the same way, the amount of people coming out of the woodworks to express the horrors that the poor(!) white man has to go through would probably be multiple pages-worth lol.
But, if you look at the actual numbers, that's not what happened. There was no huge jump in African American vote over previous years of democrats. If this was all upto chance of people picking cute pictures, Nate Silver would not be able lend the predictions he did. The voting public is not as frivolous as people make them out to be. The poling shift after the first debate should have clearly shown that plenty of people pay attention. The only problem here, is people have troubles believing that the outcome is not of actual reason.
Racism's protection lies within free speech and freedom of religion.
However, neither of these acts are allowed to have power, which is why people who try to exercise this (openly) are shut down.
You're allowed to have an opinion of someone (exercise rights), but you're not allowed to do anything about it (exercise power). So technically, if someone says something racist about someone, and that person gets penalized, it's technically unconstitutional. However, there are terms, agreements, and contracts in place in environments that are basically fencing for when you can't rely on the walls laws create. If you choose to engage in something (say, a forum) you enter an agreement and they have every right to penalize you if you break their rules. Just pretend it's a game (because it basically is) and if you want to play you have to play by the rules or risk not being able to play.
We just like to play favorites, and be hypocrites. Cynicism ftw I suppose.
(Not that I think Racism is Good, but to claim it's Bad you need to look at your own moral agenda before you criticize.)
There are no bathrooms, only Zuul.
What should be a great example of that whole ideology, is how crap like 'I cannot believe no one is saying it' is usually the lead in. It's like yes, people often avoid saying things that make no sense.
---------- Post added 2012-11-10 at 02:45 AM ----------
Because if they did, Micheal Steele would still be the republican chairman and Herman Cain would just have lost to Obama. People don't just vote on race or else those two would have made it a lot farther. At some point, at looking at every demographic, you have to recognize it's not race but policy. What will make them look at policy and not race? Maybe if we started looking at policy, we wouldn't be as divided.
No.
That would be comprable if Romney was actively calling for African Americans to be removed from social service positions and forbidden from owning businesses and the like until he could get around to killing them all.
Saying Mitt Romney has nothing to offer any African Americans is to imply that all African Americans are the same with regards to where they live, economic status, education, etc etc.
Implying that Mitt Romney is an enemy to African Americans because he is an enemy to the poor is also to imply that A)All African Americans are poor and B)All poor are African Americans.
That's the thing. I believe in absolute free speech, because the best reaction to ignorance is speech showing how ignorant it is. People should be allowed to say what they want, but don't cry me a river when your shit gets a reaction you don't like. That's the inherent punishment of free speech... The free speech responding...
It doesn't have to be like that. All you can relate on, is the look you get when you go into a store. Share the same experience of people assuming your vote depends on race. Have the same experience of being the only kid who looked like you in class. There is a lot more to assume as having in common than just social status and wealth.
It's a lot easier to assume someone of your race has gone through your experience and it has nothing to do with socio economic status. I do not fit most stereo types of my minority, but regardless I would find kinship with those who were the same. But, that does not mean everything I do is a result of it. I never eat gifilta fish and will never vote for Liberman.
Last edited by Felya; 2012-11-10 at 02:59 AM.
Was he ever leading with the same numbers as Obama? How is the minority numbers for republican party registration? At least no comment about Steele...
---------- Post added 2012-11-10 at 03:15 AM ----------
Yeah, my bad. I misread something and went off on a tangent.
Well technically yes, however with very few exceptions 'Blacks' could care less what your skin color is.
I'll use an example that we can all relate to.
Street gangs revolve around drugs, racketeering, and prostitution. Membership in these groups starts young and is usually based on where you live and go to school. Because of this 'Black' gangs will have both Hispanic and Caucasian members, the same is true with Chicano gangs which often have White and African-American members. Meanwhile the White Street Gangs usually recruit by common interests and seldom are based on location and schools. It is highly uncommon for white street gangs to have any 'colored' members, occasionally a Hispanic might join but for the most part they are all Caucasian as a rule.