Trump Making Impressive Gains With Black Voters? (Liberal Journalists: That's, Like, DOUBLE RACISM!!!11)
Looks like Trump's up from about 3% to around 20% with black voters. Can that be right?? Well, anyway, it just goes to show that he's like super duper racist:
Dara Lind, writing for Vox, argued that Trump’s minority outreach had nothing to do with reaching out to minorities, and that it was “probably too little too late.”
The real reason for the outreach, Lind wrote, was that “wavering Republicans are still looking for a reason to vote Trump. And Trump’s show of racial unity is what they need to feel that, once again, Republicans have the high ground when it comes to race and identity.”
Bob Cesca, writing for The Daily Banter, went even further, declaring confidently that "Trump's outreach to African-Americans is actually a dog-whistle to his white nationalist base."Not reaching out to minority voters is racist...but, if you're a Republican, reaching out to them is like double racist... In fact, reading out to minorities is actually reaching out to white supremacists...see?????
What's up with Trump support? Well, all kinds of things probably, and obviously not all of them good...but here's one of the things that's up: people are tired of this kind of idiotic liberal bullshit. Stupidity + the method of free association + ceaseless, mindless charges of racism against everyone they disagree with...what's not to hate?
Trump is a disaster of Biblical proportions...but I'll be damned if liberals don't make him look like a plausible alternative by comparison.
posted by Winston Smith at
10:44 PM
8 Comments:
I'm not so much sceptical of the 'analysis' part of your post as I am of the 'news' component. I see your 'Polizette' source relies heavily on a rather weird L A Times / USC tracking poll which seems designed to exaggerate support for Trump, on which see here:
http://nyti.ms/2d1wDKP
I also couldn't help noticing that the headline 'Trump Makes Massive Gains with Black Voters' takes its place on the 'Polizette' sidebar alongside 'Kasich Torches His Political Future with Anti-Trump Stand' and 'Globalist Obama Trashes American Sovereignty'.
LOL yeah man right there with you, though I didn't notice those other headlines.
You won't get that information from the lamestream media! I didn't know half that stuff.
LOL! I had another thought, about your response to 'Skittlegate', which I might as well just express here. Again, I'm massively sympathetic with your overall drift -- the SJW Moral Majority (I coined that on PMMMB, btw, not to brag, but I totally did), esp on campus, makes me want to chew off my own arm -- but there is one thing that seems worth mentioning in connection with SJW paranoia about what's 'implied' in what people like DT Jr say, which doesn't get much airtime over here. The point is just that even people like Trump aren't stupid enough to express racism by saying, or even saying anything that directly implies, eg that black or Latino or whatever people are inferior. And the classic illustration of this is Birtherism. The whole case for what Birtherism was supposedly about could be made, fully explicitly, without mentioning race at all. But you know, and I know, and the Last Reasonable Man sure as hell knew, that it was all a great big bowl of poisonous, racist bollocks. This came to mind when I saw your response to Trump's 'sheriff's badge' retweet, and your insistence (perfectly correct as far as it goes) that Trump didn't actually say that Mexicans are rapists; and even though I'm sure you're basically right about the Skittles, I also can't help transposing:
'It's tedious to have to point out that, yes, the Birthers' claims about hoax and conspiracy in connection with Obama's birth certificate seem pretty off... Jesus Christ, criticize that part, you twits. That criticism makes sense. But why do these people have to make everything out to be yet another expression of racism?...'
But hey, you know, keep up the good work...
You know, this is how naive I am about this stuff, and it's important to remember about me--important for me and everybody else to remember--I've never really felt the pull of the proposition that birtherism is about race.
I mean...I always thought it was about his time in Indonesia and/or the fact that his father was Kenyan and/or the view that, y'know, Hawaii isn't *really* part of y'know, *America"...or wasn't back then...
I'm willing to trust people with better instincts than me on this, and I'm willing to nod along...and I certainly take the bigger point: racists can't directly express their views. Absolutely.
But I never really felt the race thing--except insofar as I think that parts of the Republican base are basically willing to accept any bad thing they can think of about any Democratic President... But that's a whole 'nother can of worms...
Yeah, it's weird -- it's like, a lot of those who can't see it can't believe that those who claim to see it are even being sincere, while those who can see it can't believe anyone can't really see it. I don't think that any black people would claim that Birtherism wasn't about racism. (I know some very conservative black people, and I tend to defer to them on issues like this.) Remember Colin Powell's leaked email: 'Yup, the whole birther movement was racist.'
More generally, not all of what you're denouncing as exaggerated sensitivity is coming from the left. Note eg arch-conservative Jennifer Rubin's criticism of D T Jr's 'Skittles' tweet in the WP. Of course, like any remotely sane person, she's on the warpath against D T. But still, it's not just a PC/SJW thing.
I have two cents. Perhaps one and a half:
I seriously doubt the birther crap would happen with a white candidate.
John McCain was born in Panama (on a US military base), but there was some question about the phrase "natural born citizen" and its relevance to him despite all agreeing upon his citizenship. So the damn Senate convened to unanimously agree on his eligibility. Unanimously!
Ted Cruz was born in Canada to a Cuban father and an American mother, but everyone basically agreed on his eligibility. There was some attempt to argue against it (by Alan Grayson, for example), but it was all shot down in a bipartisan fashion.
Obama, on the other hand, was clearly born in Hawaii. He has a birth certificate from Hawaii. There were effing newspaper announcements of his birth in Hawaiian newspapers!
But the birther movement against Obama was/is convinced he is a foreigner nonetheless. As far as I can tell, Obama is the only president against whom conspiracy theories were risen regarding something as seemingly concrete and simple as his birth certificate (and effing newspaper documentation!).
And it was all lumped in together with other garbage that really seems to merit the description "xenophobic." People clamored for Obama to release his birth certificate to prove not only his native birth, also that his middle name wasn't "Muhammad." Trump himself wondered if his birth certificate would say he was a Muslim (wtf!?).
The birther movement charged Obama with a large number of falsehoods, none of which would have actually made him ineligible for serving as the President anyway. His mom was an American, and therefore so was he; they could've gone the John McCain or Ted Cruz argument route, but all things being equal, those issues should've made an equivalent sized splash (i.e. a professional diver's sized splash). It didn't matter if he were a Muslim, or if his father were a Muslim, of course, and it certainly didn't matter if his middle name were Muhammad, but these were pressing birther concerns nonetheless.
They also claimed he didn't love America because something something Kenyan anticolonialism. For example, Newt Gingrich said:
"What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]? That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior."
I mean, throwing this all together like this is kinda rough and loose, but basically, wtf.
Back in reality, Obama was born in Hawaii and he didn't even know his father. He saw him only once in his entire conscious life. His father was the son of a man who became a Muslim late in his life, but his father was a staunch atheist when he met Obama's mother.
Obama's past was allegedly the source for all crazy birtherism, and yet, if it's actually known in any detail, it completely trashes all their strange theories.
This makes me think: the only reason there could be developed such an unprecedented, crazed pile of nonsensical theories about this man is the color of his skin.
There's at least this: The set of allegations thrown at Obama by birthers and their ilk are largely irrelevant to anything of actual consequence. But they still assert that he's a Muslim Kenyan, and (therefore?) he is some sort of America hating Manchurian candidate. They assert he can't even be understood unless you understand Kenyan anti-colonialism.
Such allegations just wouldn't stick to white skin, in my estimation.
DJ and M,
Yeah, I know a lot of people I trust who think (recognize?) that birtherism is driven by racism, and I'm totally willing to accept my blind spot on that, I'm just being honest that the point never resonated with me. I might be too literal-minded or whatever, but I I just saw the evidence, thought it was crap, and never felt the allure of the racism explanation--though of course I see it as way on the table.
They hated Clinton SO MUCh, and accused him of so much--e.g. drug-running and multiple murders--that nothing they said about Obama (short of him possibly being the Antichrist) really surprised me all that much.
Anyway, I don't deny the point, I just--largely by way of acknowledging my own blindness--don't want to just assert that it's all clear to me.
M--
Yeah, that Gingrich bullshit about "Kenyan anticolonialism"...Jebus...
And the points about McCain and Cruz are well-taken.
For what it's worth, I'm totally sympathetic to your position, WS. There's nothing about birtherism that necessitates a racist base of operations. And I'm hesitant to call anything racist without direct and obvious evidence, as well.
But, if one were challenged to bet money on whether or not birtherism is mostly based on racism, whether the supporters are even aware of it or not, I would definitely be putting my money on "yes."
Could be wrong; it's not an open and shut case, and it's not obviously correct...
But no one argued that Cruz, son of a Cuban father and American mother (in Canada, even!), could be a Castro-sympathizing, America-hating candidate who grew up "without an American experience" (see rep Steve King: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/steve-king-unlike-obama-cruz-raised-with-exceptional-american-experience/article/2579900) or that his "heart doesn't beat the same as ours".
And of course, there are differences beyond the color of Barack Obama's skin that could be relied upon for this sort of comparison, and none of it is obvious racism...
But yeah. My money's on "yes."
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home