goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: MakeItRain on January 25, 2016, 01:46:14 PM
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.colorlines.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2Farticle_lead_normal%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F2015%2F07%2FTa-Nehisi%2520Coates%2520in%2520NY%2520Mag%25207-13-15.jpg%3Fitok%3DSQ-TbDIP&hash=23f7259fd5ecf6623823a7ee9468468306d0ecc4)
Although not the reason I started this thread, you can't have a Ta-Nehisi Coates master thread without his Mona Lisa, it's been posted plenty of times before
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/
-
He's a fantastic writer.
-
Absolutely HATED by the cloak room
-
Here's the actual reason for the master thread
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/bernie-sanders-liberal-imagination/425022/
If it's possible to agree with the article and disagree with the article then I am that. I don't think it's fair for Coates to think like he is black, whether he marched with Dr. King or not. I also don't think it's fair to assume that Sanders can't evolve on this issue, frankly I'm not sure he has given it much thought. He evolved on BLM. For the life of me I don't understand why liberal politicians just can't say "I believe we should consider reparations but I'm not sure how we can pay for it." Or "I believe we should consider reparations but I will need the help of the republican congress to make it a reality."
Here is an incredibly stupid rebuttal article. "The black guy doesn't think we should pay reparations so get off of Bernie's back."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-obama-doesn-back-reparations-don-blast-sanders-article-1.2506362
-
Well boo whoo. Many groups have had horrible horse manure done to them, but no to reparations to any of them. If you tax the hell out of me so there is money for them, I will holler injustice and demand reparations. Let's make things better for disadvantaged populations, not give them blood money to soothe our minds, but really make a difference.
-
Many groups have had horrible horse manure done to them, but no to reparations to any of them.
false
-
The real issue is that it would be too expensive given the size of the pop effected and the length of time it took place.
-
The real issue is that it would be too expensive given the size of the pop effected and the length of time it took place.
That's not a good reason to not do anything. Like, how much can we afford?
-
I am not saying it's a good reason. I am saying it is the reason. Your question is only good down to a certain amt before it becomes symbolic at beat but more likely insulting.
-
I am not saying it's a good reason. I am saying it is the reason. Your question is only good down to a certain amt before it becomes symbolic at beat but more likely insulting.
More insulting than nothing at all?
-
"Here's $100. Sorry your ancestors were enslaved for a couple hundred yrs."
-
I've read his stuff and he makes of course very compelling arguments. More to CNS's point though I think why the amount becomes sticky is how much? How do you calculate what is owed, and what is considered "fair" to all sides? Would $100 billion set aside be enough or a slap to the face (that would come out BTW to around $2400/person for 41.7 million African Americans living in the US). Would you calculate it for the average amount of slaves working 60 hour weeks at nominal farm wages over the lifespan of the US (1776-1865) and is that even fair and good enough? Like I agree that reparations should happen, but what would solve the problem? MIR, thoughts?
-
I've read his stuff and he makes of course very compelling arguments. More to CNS's point though I think why the amount becomes sticky is how much? How do you calculate what is owed, and what is considered "fair" to all sides? Would $100 billion set aside be enough or a slap to the face (that would come out BTW to around $2400/person for 41.7 million African Americans living in the US). Would you calculate it for the average amount of slaves working 60 hour weeks at nominal farm wages over the lifespan of the US (1776-1865) and is that even fair and good enough? Like I agree that reparations should happen, but what would solve the problem? MIR, thoughts?
The numeric value can all be calculated for whatever you want. (in his original piece, he mentions housing discrimination as a major issue beyond slavery, as well.) Someone just needs to start a conversation and hash it out. Right now it's basically a non-starter (as even the most liberal major political candidate in recent memory won't touch the subject), which is sad and wrong.
-
I've read his stuff and he makes of course very compelling arguments. More to CNS's point though I think why the amount becomes sticky is how much? How do you calculate what is owed, and what is considered "fair" to all sides? Would $100 billion set aside be enough or a slap to the face (that would come out BTW to around $2400/person for 41.7 million African Americans living in the US). Would you calculate it for the average amount of slaves working 60 hour weeks at nominal farm wages over the lifespan of the US (1776-1865) and is that even fair and good enough? Like I agree that reparations should happen, but what would solve the problem? MIR, thoughts?
The numeric value can all be calculated for whatever you want. (in his original piece, he mentions housing discrimination as a major issue beyond slavery, as well.) Someone just needs to start a conversation and hash it out. Right now it's basically a non-starter (as even the most liberal major political candidate in recent memory won't touch the subject), which is sad and wrong.
something i never see opponents talk about at all.
-
I've read his stuff and he makes of course very compelling arguments. More to CNS's point though I think why the amount becomes sticky is how much? How do you calculate what is owed, and what is considered "fair" to all sides? Would $100 billion set aside be enough or a slap to the face (that would come out BTW to around $2400/person for 41.7 million African Americans living in the US). Would you calculate it for the average amount of slaves working 60 hour weeks at nominal farm wages over the lifespan of the US (1776-1865) and is that even fair and good enough? Like I agree that reparations should happen, but what would solve the problem? MIR, thoughts?
The numeric value can all be calculated for whatever you want. (in his original piece, he mentions housing discrimination as a major issue beyond slavery, as well.) Someone just needs to start a conversation and hash it out. Right now it's basically a non-starter (as even the most liberal major political candidate in recent memory won't touch the subject), which is sad and wrong.
I agree that it's a sad and wrong that that isn't being talked about, but just brushing it as "you can come up with w/e amount" and "hashing it out" and leaving it at that is just not thinking the problem and solution through and IMO I'm trying to start said conversation. I'd be worried that whatever that number is, it would seem disingenuous to African American (what? they only giving us this? white people screwing us over again), and I also would wonder if any sort of amount will truly fix the problem (IMO it won't, it'll help, a step in the right direction, but systematic racism over time can only take time and diligence to eradicate, if ever). Those of course shouldn't be stumbling blocks to fixing the problem, I guess I'm exhausted of hearing a problem and not offering or hearing what would be a solution. Problems are a dime a dozen, I literally hear hundreds everyday big and small, necessary and cosmetic, but few people ever offer a solution or a step towards what they want the solution to look like. That's why I asked MIR what would he'd like to see.
I do however, find it odd that Coates is so disappointed in Bernie over this. Sure, Bernie should be the guy to try to take this on, but it's odd to pick on a guy who has done so much over the years to work on righting the wrongs when literally all the others won't come close to touching the subject either. Guess you can't be everything to everyone.
-
I think post slavery policy and common practices were horrible and to blame for excluding the black pop from a lot of economic oppy for several generations, but I don't see how they could be considered into reparations.
-
I'd put this whole thread in the Uber Libtarded repository if I wasn't, ironically, too lazy to do it.
What's ironic you ask? The lazy points being made by the advocate libtards in this thread
-
I've read his stuff and he makes of course very compelling arguments. More to CNS's point though I think why the amount becomes sticky is how much? How do you calculate what is owed, and what is considered "fair" to all sides? Would $100 billion set aside be enough or a slap to the face (that would come out BTW to around $2400/person for 41.7 million African Americans living in the US). Would you calculate it for the average amount of slaves working 60 hour weeks at nominal farm wages over the lifespan of the US (1776-1865) and is that even fair and good enough? Like I agree that reparations should happen, but what would solve the problem? MIR, thoughts?
The numeric value can all be calculated for whatever you want. (in his original piece, he mentions housing discrimination as a major issue beyond slavery, as well.) Someone just needs to start a conversation and hash it out. Right now it's basically a non-starter (as even the most liberal major political candidate in recent memory won't touch the subject), which is sad and wrong.
I agree that it's a sad and wrong that that isn't being talked about, but just brushing it as "you can come up with w/e amount" and "hashing it out" and leaving it at that is just not thinking the problem and solution through and IMO I'm trying to start said conversation. I'd be worried that whatever that number is, it would seem disingenuous to African American (what? they only giving us this? white people screwing us over again), and I also would wonder if any sort of amount will truly fix the problem (IMO it won't, it'll help, a step in the right direction, but systematic racism over time can only take time and diligence to eradicate, if ever). Those of course shouldn't be stumbling blocks to fixing the problem, I guess I'm exhausted of hearing a problem and not offering or hearing what would be a solution. Problems are a dime a dozen, I literally hear hundreds everyday big and small, necessary and cosmetic, but few people ever offer a solution or a step towards what they want the solution to look like. That's why I asked MIR what would he'd like to see.
I do however, find it odd that Coates is so disappointed in Bernie over this. Sure, Bernie should be the guy to try to take this on, but it's odd to pick on a guy who has done so much over the years to work on righting the wrongs when literally all the others won't come close to touching the subject either. Guess you can't be everything to everyone.
I'm smart enough to realize that I can't calculate the proper amount that should be paid nor how to pay for it in the afternoon that this thread has been active. That doesn't mean I'm not trying to find a solution, it's just that we're in the extremely early stages.
Basically, the first step is convincing people this is something the government should do. Second step is quantifying the amount of wage and wealth lost. (Probably already done.) Next step is defining who should get paid and how much. Then you figure out how to redirect or raise that money. Seems reasonable?
-
:lol:
-
I say the reparation line starts with Native Americans.
-
They get them. Not addressing value, but they have land, no taxes, fed funds, etc.
-
I say it starts with the indentured servants on the mayflower.
-
wouldn't they be owed the GDP since 1776 or so?
-
They get them. Not addressing value, but they have land, no taxes, fed funds, etc.
The miniscule value of benefits and their general ineffectiveness is the biggest argument.
-
I've read his stuff and he makes of course very compelling arguments. More to CNS's point though I think why the amount becomes sticky is how much? How do you calculate what is owed, and what is considered "fair" to all sides? Would $100 billion set aside be enough or a slap to the face (that would come out BTW to around $2400/person for 41.7 million African Americans living in the US). Would you calculate it for the average amount of slaves working 60 hour weeks at nominal farm wages over the lifespan of the US (1776-1865) and is that even fair and good enough? Like I agree that reparations should happen, but what would solve the problem? MIR, thoughts?
The numeric value can all be calculated for whatever you want. (in his original piece, he mentions housing discrimination as a major issue beyond slavery, as well.) Someone just needs to start a conversation and hash it out. Right now it's basically a non-starter (as even the most liberal major political candidate in recent memory won't touch the subject), which is sad and wrong.
I agree that it's a sad and wrong that that isn't being talked about, but just brushing it as "you can come up with w/e amount" and "hashing it out" and leaving it at that is just not thinking the problem and solution through and IMO I'm trying to start said conversation. I'd be worried that whatever that number is, it would seem disingenuous to African American (what? they only giving us this? white people screwing us over again), and I also would wonder if any sort of amount will truly fix the problem (IMO it won't, it'll help, a step in the right direction, but systematic racism over time can only take time and diligence to eradicate, if ever). Those of course shouldn't be stumbling blocks to fixing the problem, I guess I'm exhausted of hearing a problem and not offering or hearing what would be a solution. Problems are a dime a dozen, I literally hear hundreds everyday big and small, necessary and cosmetic, but few people ever offer a solution or a step towards what they want the solution to look like. That's why I asked MIR what would he'd like to see.
I do however, find it odd that Coates is so disappointed in Bernie over this. Sure, Bernie should be the guy to try to take this on, but it's odd to pick on a guy who has done so much over the years to work on righting the wrongs when literally all the others won't come close to touching the subject either. Guess you can't be everything to everyone.
I'm smart enough to realize that I can't calculate the proper amount that should be paid nor how to pay for it in the afternoon that this thread has been active. That doesn't mean I'm not trying to find a solution, it's just that we're in the extremely early stages.
Basically, the first step is convincing people this is something the government should do. Second step is quantifying the amount of wage and wealth lost. (Probably already done.) Next step is defining who should get paid and how much. Then you figure out how to redirect or raise that money. Seems reasonable?
Sure. Just none of those are easy. But yes, that's the overall idea.
-
I know it's not easy
-
I know it's not easy
All good :cheers:
-
wouldn't they be owed the GDP since 1776 or so?
1620, iirc. In British crowns.
-
Where can I get the "ancestors were anti-slavery and even had to flee for their lives because they were against slavery" exemption form?
-
They get them. Not addressing value, but they have land, no taxes, fed funds, etc.
The land they "got" was land they already owned. It's the worst piece of the land they already owned and the only reason they got that is because they signed a peace treaty.
-
Someone could argue the black Americans today have benefited from having their ancestors enslaved and brought here. Life is much better here, today, than where they came from.
-
Someone could argue the black Americans today have benefited from having their ancestors enslaved and brought here. Life is much better here, today, than where they came from.
Most people understand that in real life when you calculate damages you look at where the person is now compared to where they would be without the alleged harm. In white guilt libtard land you rely on conjecture, revised history, fuzzy math and self interested "studies" when giving away other people's money.
-
"Dear Black America, you're welcome."
-
Guess fsd won't be mad when we are better off after the second amendment is abolished
-
I don't always agree with Coates, but i think he is one of the great thinkers of this generation, and every time I'm done reading something by him I'm left contemplating my own thoughts on the issue.
-
Someone could argue the black Americans today have benefited from having their ancestors enslaved and brought here. Life is much better here, today, than where they came from.
Most people understand that in real life when you calculate damages you look at where the person is now compared to where they would be without the alleged harm. In white guilt libtard land you rely on conjecture, revised history, fuzzy math and self interested "studies" when giving away other people's money.
I'm sorry that black people haven't sent you the "Thanks for kidnapping and enslaving our ancestors" card that you are waiting on. I'm sure it was just lost in the mail
-
Someone could argue the black Americans today have benefited from having their ancestors enslaved and brought here. Life is much better here, today, than where they came from.
WOW
-
Someone could argue the black Americans today have benefited from having their ancestors enslaved and brought here. Life is much better here, today, than where they came from.
Most people understand that in real life when you calculate damages you look at where the person is now compared to where they would be without the alleged harm. In white guilt libtard land you rely on conjecture, revised history, fuzzy math and self interested "studies" when giving away other people's money.
I'm sorry that black people haven't sent you the "Thanks for kidnapping and enslaving our ancestors" card that you are waiting on. I'm sure it was just lost in the mail
Hey it's you white devils that did it, not me or my ancestors.
-
Someone could argue the black Americans today have benefited from having their ancestors enslaved and brought here. Life is much better here, today, than where they came from.
Most people understand that in real life when you calculate damages you look at where the person is now compared to where they would be without the alleged harm. In white guilt libtard land you rely on conjecture, revised history, fuzzy math and self interested "studies" when giving away other people's money.
I'm sorry that black people haven't sent you the "Thanks for kidnapping and enslaving our ancestors" card that you are waiting on. I'm sure it was just lost in the mail
Why would I get a card? I didn't enslave anybody and, like the overwhelming majority of people in this country, my ancestors arrival in the u.s. post dates slavery.
I'm just explaining the rudimentary concept of how damages are calculated. When people are kidnapped, do we give them back to their family or set up some kind, of shitty annuity for them and stick them in substandard housing? Not following the analogy here.
-
Damages can be calculated a number of ways, including loss of income in many disputes involving labor issues. In that case, a fair way to assess damages could be seen as back pay plus interest for 150 years.
As far as reparations are concerned, I'm not saying sending all the ancestors of slaves a check is something that should be done. I would say the fact that politically we can't have a discussion on the issue is disappointing.
-
Disappointing, but not surprising. Politics has become something where simply talking to the other side is weakness.
As far as value, there is no way the country could afford any meaningful amt. Earlier, someone noted $100B would equate to something like $2,400 per person. You could times that by 10 and it is still nothing that would change anyone's life, let alone the position of the next generation. Money simply can't be the answer.
-
Someone could argue the black Americans today have benefited from having their ancestors enslaved and brought here. Life is much better here, today, than where they came from.
Most people understand that in real life when you calculate damages you look at where the person is now compared to where they would be without the alleged harm. In white guilt libtard land you rely on conjecture, revised history, fuzzy math and self interested "studies" when giving away other people's money.
I'm sorry that black people haven't sent you the "Thanks for kidnapping and enslaving our ancestors" card that you are waiting on. I'm sure it was just lost in the mail
Why would I get a card? I didn't enslave anybody and, like the overwhelming majority of people in this country, my ancestors arrival in the u.s. post dates slavery.
I'm just explaining the rudimentary concept of how damages are calculated. When people are kidnapped, do we give them back to their family or set up some kind, of shitty annuity for them and stick them in substandard housing? Not following the analogy here.
That along with the Mayflower point isn't necessarily a bad point but the flaw in the analogies are; the United States government did not exist at the time so they cannot be held liable for permitting something when they didn't exist. The government does not permit kidnapping, so again they cannot be held liable. The US government did permit slavery for nearly 100 years.
-
If the $$$ are based on slavery only, do you divide the reparations between the descendants of each slave? The more descendants the smaller the share? What if descendants trees cross paths, which I would think would be a guarantee to happen. If you came to america after slavery was abolished, you are not included?
-
Disappointing, but not surprising. Politics has become something where simply talking to the other side is weakness.
As far as value, there is no way the country could afford any meaningful amt. Earlier, someone noted $100B would equate to something like $2,400 per person. You could times that by 10 and it is still nothing that would change anyone's life, let alone the position of the next generation. Money simply can't be the answer.
$24k could change the life of a lot of poor people.
-
What about those who are 1/2 black? Do they get 1/2 as much? 1/4? 1/10? etc.
-
If the $$$ are based on slavery only, do you divide the reparations between the descendants of each slave? The more descendants the smaller the share? What if descendants trees cross paths, which I would think would be a guarantee to happen. If you came to america after slavery was abolished, you are not included?
If you read the Coates piece, he attributes supremacy to slavery so none of these things matter. I do think some of these issues need to be parsed out though. Barack Obama is a classic example. He's African American but he's first generation American born. Coates believes he would be eligible for reparations but I think a line should be drawn somewhere, I really don't know what that line is though. I'd like for it to happen without the need for DNA testing but I don't think it's possible.
-
Disappointing, but not surprising. Politics has become something where simply talking to the other side is weakness.
As far as value, there is no way the country could afford any meaningful amt. Earlier, someone noted $100B would equate to something like $2,400 per person. You could times that by 10 and it is still nothing that would change anyone's life, let alone the position of the next generation. Money simply can't be the answer.
$24k could change the life of a lot of poor people.
Not if you are talking about making up for lost economic opportunity over a hundred years, or so. That opportunity is not just how in debt are you know, but how likely your kid is to be educated and go on to be secure as well. I don't think $24k gets that done. Also, (again I didn't do this math) that would be $1Trillion. We aren't giving out $1Trillion.
-
I also might suggest that, if money is the tool, that anyone who is above a certain financial worth be excluded. If you overcame the barrier and are exceeding, good for you, and you don't need help.
-
What about those who are 1/2 black? Do they get 1/2 as much? 1/4? 1/10? etc.
I don't know of a single half black person in this country that isn't seen as black, not a one. So again if you are giving reparations to fix the issue of supremacy the one drop rule applies here.
-
What about those who are 1/2 black? Do they get 1/2 as much? 1/4? 1/10? etc.
I don't know of a single half black person in this country that isn't seen as black, not a one. So again if you are giving reparations to fix the issue of supremacy the one drop rule applies here.
I have a drop or two in my lineage. :billdance:
-
Originally I was for this, but after hearing how complicated it is I think I'm gonna pass.
-
I typed up a pretty big response to this thread but I don't have the time to really offer a full rebuttal to Coates. He is a brilliant writer and I agree with the sin but not the remedy.
1) statute of limitations
2) lack of an effective institutional actor with moral standing and the political capital to arbitrate this
I could write a lot about each of these. Coates is absolutely right when he says that we need to do more to get the history right and that will change minds, and I think that should be the focus.
That being said...
I am much too comfortable an American capitalist to believe the precedent set by reparations for slavery would be anything but a poor one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I'm in favor of reparations with the caveat that anytime they use any public services, roads, or watch TV we assign a.value to their activities and deduct it from their reparations. Even let them go into the hole. My great grandpa was Irish and we suspect he was in the leprechaun ghettos in NY. Why in the hell ain't he eligible for reparations for.the beat down society gave to the Irish.
-
Well, reno, you get your gravel road subsidized, so, your welcome.
-
The speed at which many of these people would be parted from their money would be worth the entertainment value.
-
I typed up a pretty big response to this thread but I don't have the time to really offer a full rebuttal to Coates. He is a brilliant writer and I agree with the sin but not the remedy.
1) statute of limitations
2) lack of an effective institutional actor with moral standing and the political capital to arbitrate this
I could write a lot about each of these. Coates is absolutely right when he says that we need to do more to get the history right and that will change minds, and I think that should be the focus.
That being said...
I am much too comfortable an American capitalist to believe the precedent set by reparations for slavery would be anything but a poor one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How would reparations for slavery differ from reparations given by our government for other reasons as far as precedent setting goes? That horse left the barn generations ago.
-
The last paragraph kills.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/tanehisi-coates-reparations/427041/
-
The last paragraph kills.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/tanehisi-coates-reparations/427041/
That's great, everyone should read
-
Since hillbillies have been taken care of with road gravel, I'm voting Indians real Americans as the next recipients.
-
The last paragraph kills.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/tanehisi-coates-reparations/427041/
I thought the last two paragraphs were pretty naïve. I think pragmatism (i.e. "how are we going to do this?") has a role at every level.
-
I typed up a pretty big response to this thread but I don't have the time to really offer a full rebuttal to Coates. He is a brilliant writer and I agree with the sin but not the remedy.
1) statute of limitations
2) lack of an effective institutional actor with moral standing and the political capital to arbitrate this
I could write a lot about each of these. Coates is absolutely right when he says that we need to do more to get the history right and that will change minds, and I think that should be the focus.
That being said...
I am much too comfortable an American capitalist to believe the precedent set by reparations for slavery would be anything but a poor one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How would reparations for slavery differ from reparations given by our government for other reasons as far as precedent setting goes? That horse left the barn generations ago.
The age of exploration and colonial era was extremely problematic. It also literally drew the borders of much of the world.
Slavery should not be understood as independent of, but rather a problem fundamentally driven by this era. I don't know how you separate it and attempt to deal with its specific by asserting the primacy of one victim of history over another in a very real sense to remedy it.
Most other examples of reparations have been much more limited in scope and much more timely. The white supremacists who ran down the clock knew what they were doing, as the roots of history become further entwined and burrow deeper, it makes picking the fruits from each root impossible.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
really good.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/
-
Yep. Good article.
-
Trump’s legacy will be exposing the patina of decency for what it is and revealing just how much a demagogue can get away with
So true
-
What a bunch of hateful hogwash.
I hope this guy realizes the voters from all minority groups pushed Trump to victory.
From an NBC article from Nov. 2016 ---
People] went into this election expecting Hillary Clinton to post Obama-esque margins against Donald Trump because he had made so many racial comments against different groups,” said Andra Gillespie, a fellow at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington, D.C., a black think tank. “Instead, Trump out-polled John McCain and Mitt Romney among blacks.”
-
Liberals just can't wrap their brains around the fact that Hillary was the more flawed candidate of the two. The majority of conservatives held their noses while voting for Trump. The only reason Trump won the primary was there were too many candidates dividing the voters.
If the democratic committee hadn't chosen Hillary for their candidate, Trump would not be president. The democratic primary is a rigged system.
-
Yea, no one really thinks Trump got elected solely because a black president preceded him. But the article makes a good case that it was at least a factor in how he managed to get any support in the primary in the first place.
-
Trump’s legacy will be exposing the patina of decency for what it is and revealing just how much a demagogue can get away with
So true
But to this point, just as important is the fact that so many conservatives found Trump palatable at all. It's pretty disturbing that if we get an overcrowded primary, you can have a unified block of racists essentially elect the next president because the rest of the party feels compelled to fall in line regardless.
That is definitely what bugged me the most about this election.
-
People like jdougie won't even admit that racists love him
-
People like jdougie won't even admit that racists love him
I have no doubt they do, but the article makes is sound as if he only won because a few racists voted for him. There is no doubt to me the only reason he won is because Hillary is a lying, self-serving POS.
-
Well trump def isn't a lying self serving pos, so you must be correct
-
You have to go all the way back to Reagan to find a better 'pub candidate than Trump.
-
People like jdougie won't even admit that racists love him
I have no doubt they do, but the article makes is sound as if he only won because a few racists voted for him. There is no doubt to me the only reason he won is because Hillary is a lying, self-serving POS.
I agree with John's point. I would have voted for a dead squirrel before voting for Hillary. Many of my buds from the coffee think tank in Havens town voted for Trump cause he said he would appoint a conservative justice to the SOTUS, maybe another if ol Prunesberg croaks. My point is Trump likely got more of a diverse group of people voting for him than Hillary. Democrats identity politics is not working anymore. I think this guy's article is racist and devisive. Where is the next MKL.
-
People like jdougie won't even admit that racists love him
I have no doubt they do, but the article makes is sound as if he only won because a few racists voted for him. There is no doubt to me the only reason he won is because Hillary is a lying, self-serving POS.
Have you not been following politics very long? The other party's candidate is always a "lying, self-serving POS."
Hillary was a bad candidate, but to anyone who "held their nose" to vote for a candidate as terrible as Trump I say: you would have found a way to justify your terrible decision no matter who the Democrats put up.
-
I enjoyed Coates's book quite a bit. good quick read.
-
You have to go all the way back to Reagan to find a better 'pub candidate than Trump.
Wow. Just wow.
-
This is why Hillary lost. Check out the numbers for independents, even after 8 months of Trump.
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/tabsHPHillaryClinton20170913.pdf (http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/tabsHPHillaryClinton20170913.pdf)
-
Yea, well this was not at all an article about why Hillary lost, so take your Daxflecting somewhere else.