Dueling Dems Round V Topic

the % of republicans despite the proof otherwise during birterism heydays was approx. 80 %.
major polling.
isnt that enough to show the racial problem with republicans ?
8/1/2019 6:28 PM
can anyone who is honest deny that at the hint of racism a dem would be skerwed and dem voters would go crazy.
what do repubs and repubs congress do....light marsmellows at kkk meetings.
yeah...really fine people.

the denial is disgusting...and a form of racism.
8/1/2019 6:31 PM
Posted by laramiebob on 8/1/2019 5:27:00 PM (view original):
You got specific. I can answer. Honestly, I don't know. Could you furnish me with the current Republican party Platform?
I'll read it and let you know. Though I don't know why you'd care what I thought about it since I'm not a republican and you hate parties so much.
But, I'd read it. I like comedy.
So you keep throwing accusations of Racism at a group even though you have no idea what they stand for?
You don't see any issue with that?
8/2/2019 9:17 AM
The Democratic assumption of moral high ground on issues of race, gender etc. is extremely artificial. Frankly, the current progressive-driven attitudes and policy preferences espoused by most of the Democratic candidates are terrible. They're contrary to basic principles of human nature and doomed to fail. And perhaps more importantly, the underlying psychological principle is very popular right now. I've read about it in at least 3 or 4 psychology and behavioral economics books in the past 6 months alone. So maybe lots of rank-and-file progressives don't know, and feel like they're doing the right things. But I guarantee you party leaders with research teams know how damaging the views they continue to embrace really are. There is no moral high ground for them.

Basically - and stop me if you've heard this before - the human mind is hardwired for what is popularly called "us-theming" - creating ingroups and outgroups with inherent, unconscious preference for people who are "like us." What's more, we can make those groups basically anything we like, people will still show an unconscious preference for their own group. Somebody just has to tell us the groups exist. One of the fairly famous studies of this involved having a group of test subjects roll a die. Those who rolled even numbers were put in one group, those who rolled odds in another. When asked to distribute resources among other participants, study participants favored the ingroup. In this case the groupings are obviously arbitrary, the participants know they're based on nothing but random chance. But it's built in. This kind of study has been repeated ad nauseum. If we tell people they're in a group, they will show a subconscious preference for that group, even if they wouldn't show a conscious preference.

This is why the so-called "identity politics" are so damaging. It doesn't matter how benevolent your intentions are. If you focus on differences in race or gender, you inherently group people by those characteristics. When you frame things in this way you automatically make people in each group feel that they will have to give something up in order for the other groups to improve. The effective framework is to draw bigger circles - don't talk about groups, talk about making things better for everyone. Virtually all of the most effective civil rights leaders in history have understood this. MLK, Mandela, Gandhi - their speeches and writings are full of "bigger circle" analogies, asking for everyone to be treated well, often without mentioning their specific groups at all. You can't fight subconscious human nature. The us-them response is part of the automatic response system, it's not governed by conscious thought. The best intentions in the world can't overcome it. Identity politics can't work. At least not with humans.
8/2/2019 9:29 AM
Posted by dino27 on 8/1/2019 6:28:00 PM (view original):
the % of republicans despite the proof otherwise during birterism heydays was approx. 80 %.
major polling.
isnt that enough to show the racial problem with republicans ?
the fact speaks for the conclusion that republicans are racists.
8/2/2019 10:14 AM
First of all, cite your sources. That 80% is nothing close to what I remember. Second, there are plenty of reasons people dislike/suspect opposing politicians that have nothing to do with race.
8/2/2019 11:01 AM
You mean it's possible to disagree with someone about something for a reason other than their skin color?
Wow, who knew? Certainly not a couple people on this site.
8/2/2019 11:17 AM
AUGUST 2016 - 2016 !!!!

NBC NEWS -

only 26% of republicans believed that obama was born in usa.
27% no firm opinion not sure yet.
47% solidly believe he was not born in usa.

out of whack........26 normal vs 74 wackos.
obviously racially motivated.
8/2/2019 11:59 AM
DECEMBER 2017 - DECEMBER -2017!!!!

NEWSWEEK

57% of trump voters believe that it is absolutely or probably true that Obama was born in kenya.

unbelievable. but truthers.
8/2/2019 12:07 PM
those are facts - jack and jackie.
8/2/2019 12:07 PM
same type of motivated beliefs as holocaust deniers.
not intellectually motivated.
8/2/2019 12:14 PM
Posted by all3 on 8/2/2019 9:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by laramiebob on 8/1/2019 5:27:00 PM (view original):
You got specific. I can answer. Honestly, I don't know. Could you furnish me with the current Republican party Platform?
I'll read it and let you know. Though I don't know why you'd care what I thought about it since I'm not a republican and you hate parties so much.
But, I'd read it. I like comedy.
So you keep throwing accusations of Racism at a group even though you have no idea what they stand for?
You don't see any issue with that?
Fair enough. I still haven't seen the Repugnant platform as it is currently, so I have no idea. However, I have been thinking about this.

I've got an example for you. Pretty current one. Like right NOW!

Trump is Potus. The "R's" have the Senate (majority)
They control judicial appointments. They can get ANY appointee to the Federal bench approved and seated they want.
In FACT, that has been BOTH McConnell and Trump's go to line when referring to this Administration's so-called "achievements".

Trump has repeatedly referred to his success with judicial appointments as his Legacy.

FACTS:

Trump has now appointed (approx.) 25% of ALL Appeals Court Judges (Fed level) AND He has Now appointed 15% of ALL Fed District Court judges.
He has been very successful in getting HIS nominations on the bench thanks to McConnell (a Republican) and the REPUBLICAN Senate.

More Facts:

Trump has NOT NOMINATED (Nor has their been seated, of course) a SINGLE person with Black or Brown skin. NO Blacks, No Latinos.
In FACT: 70% of his appointees have been WHITE MALE.

Want more evidence of How racist the Repugnant Party presently is?:

The last sitting Black representative within the Republican Party just announced He won't run for re-election (Rep. Hurd of Texas)
He (Hurd) was also the ONLY Republican in Congress from a Congressional Dist. along our Southern Border!!
You might also take a look at how many Females are in the Repugnant half of Congress.
You can count them on your fingers and toes so stupidity is NOT an excuse!

It has taken me many years to understand and conclude that the Republican Party has been a refuge for and has now been taken over by Racists!
I guess I'm a tad slow.

So let's see, we have a nearly all white male party who opposed civil rights at every step, who continues to harbor and apologize for white nationalist sentiment, and who are AT THIS VERY MOMENT going about a concerted and calculated effort to stock the Federal Bench with white male judges.

Ain't no racism in any of that. Nope.

BTW: Welcome to the debate Dah's Debater!
8/2/2019 12:20 PM (edited)
whenevr someone tries to feed the line that the the 2 parties are the same
just look at the recent example of the beloved al franken and see how the dems can walk the walk.
let trump be the one to say 2 equal groups on both sides.

it is acop out to accept that.
and for trump supporters to try and say they are as bad as we are.
dont fall for it.

the dems are not the same.
we are NOT cut from the same cloth.

dont follow leaders...watch your parking meters.
8/2/2019 12:18 PM
Posted by all3 on 8/1/2019 5:02:00 PM (view original):
Why would Historical policies matter? History by definition is exactly that. Nobody in either of today's Parties can change what happened in History. They had no part in making past policies, so why should they apologize for them? Acknowledge them, yes, but that's it. Let's also remember that Party lines didn't really mean much for most of History. For the last time, please tell us what about today's Republican platform you consider to be racist.
Putting Latinos in cages.

And btw, the rates of asylum acceptance gets lower the less white your previous country was.
8/2/2019 1:02 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 8/2/2019 9:29:00 AM (view original):
The Democratic assumption of moral high ground on issues of race, gender etc. is extremely artificial. Frankly, the current progressive-driven attitudes and policy preferences espoused by most of the Democratic candidates are terrible. They're contrary to basic principles of human nature and doomed to fail. And perhaps more importantly, the underlying psychological principle is very popular right now. I've read about it in at least 3 or 4 psychology and behavioral economics books in the past 6 months alone. So maybe lots of rank-and-file progressives don't know, and feel like they're doing the right things. But I guarantee you party leaders with research teams know how damaging the views they continue to embrace really are. There is no moral high ground for them.

Basically - and stop me if you've heard this before - the human mind is hardwired for what is popularly called "us-theming" - creating ingroups and outgroups with inherent, unconscious preference for people who are "like us." What's more, we can make those groups basically anything we like, people will still show an unconscious preference for their own group. Somebody just has to tell us the groups exist. One of the fairly famous studies of this involved having a group of test subjects roll a die. Those who rolled even numbers were put in one group, those who rolled odds in another. When asked to distribute resources among other participants, study participants favored the ingroup. In this case the groupings are obviously arbitrary, the participants know they're based on nothing but random chance. But it's built in. This kind of study has been repeated ad nauseum. If we tell people they're in a group, they will show a subconscious preference for that group, even if they wouldn't show a conscious preference.

This is why the so-called "identity politics" are so damaging. It doesn't matter how benevolent your intentions are. If you focus on differences in race or gender, you inherently group people by those characteristics. When you frame things in this way you automatically make people in each group feel that they will have to give something up in order for the other groups to improve. The effective framework is to draw bigger circles - don't talk about groups, talk about making things better for everyone. Virtually all of the most effective civil rights leaders in history have understood this. MLK, Mandela, Gandhi - their speeches and writings are full of "bigger circle" analogies, asking for everyone to be treated well, often without mentioning their specific groups at all. You can't fight subconscious human nature. The us-them response is part of the automatic response system, it's not governed by conscious thought. The best intentions in the world can't overcome it. Identity politics can't work. At least not with humans.
I am against Identity Politics too dahs... BUT this isn't a Dem thing... Trump uses identity politics all the time.
8/2/2019 1:04 PM
◂ Prev 1...14|15|16|17|18...37 Next ▸
Dueling Dems Round V Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.