The Existential Problem of Identity Politics (Obama, Pelosi, border, Americans)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I love how the This is all temporary. folks, for whatever reason, ignore the yuge change at the state level.
Check out the progression in change of state legislative control via linked tables below. The tables cover from 1978 - 2014, not even including the continuing trend in 2016. This is not temporary and not quickly reversed. 2020 Census three years away. Ms Pelosi can live until 100. She is unlikely to have a shot at House Speaker again.
Republicans have no plan for the Rent Serf Class, representing roughly the bottom third of the country. As far as Republicans are concerned, rent serfs can go twist slowly, slowly in the wind. Not that Democrats are any better for rent serfs.
I'm a well off rent surf. What are they going to do for me? !
Trump started as a birther and drove that for all it was worth for years. Then he went on the attacks with Mexicans, etc.
For starters, you didn't answer my question to the other poster, and just went off on a tangent. So Trump being a "birther" is irrelevant to some kooks that might support him. As an FYI, there have been birthers related to McCain and others in politics, and it had nothing to do with race. Instead it is always an attempt to eliminate or hamstring a political opponent.
As to Trump "attacks with Mexicans", I don't get the connection. If we are having problems with criminal illegal aliens coming from Mexico, what would you have him say instead of calling the problem for what it is?
Just because our dear leader does not want to call a spade a spade with Islamic terrorism, does not mean most people want to play the PC game, instead of calling out people/groups that are causing problems.
Trump, though certainly not PC, has said others are also illegally crossing our border and reeking mayhem on our citizens. He has also said he was speaking about specific illegal Mexicans who commit crime (which is factual), not all of them.
So again, just because that message might resonate with some kooks, does not mean it doesn't resonate with normal Americans as well.
Now, back to my point which you ignored. If the kooks on the racist/radical left support Hillary (communists, BLM/NBP), does that impugn her as well?
If not, then why is the related derision saved for Trump only?
For starters, you didn't answer my question to the other poster, and just went off on a tangent. So Trump being a "birther" is irrelevant to some kooks that might support him. As an FYI, there have been birthers related to McCain and others in politics, and it had nothing to do with race. Instead it is always an attempt to eliminate or hamstring a political opponent.
As to Trump "attacks with Mexicans", I don't get the connection. If we are having problems with criminal illegal aliens coming from Mexico, what would you have him say instead of calling the problem for what it is?
Just because our dear leader does not want to call a spade a spade with Islamic terrorism, does not mean most people want to play the PC game, instead of calling out people/groups that are causing problems.
Trump, though certainly not PC, has said others are also illegally crossing our border and reeking mayhem on our citizens. He has also said he was speaking about specific illegal Mexicans who commit crime (which is factual), not all of them.
So again, just because that message might resonate with some kooks, does not mean it doesn't resonate with normal Americans as well.
Now, back to my point which you ignored. If the kooks on the racist/radical left support Hillary (communists, BLM/NBP), does that impugn her as well?
If not, then why is the related derision saved for Trump only?
I don't know what NBP is and I don't know what communist you are referring to but Black Lives Matter is a response to numerous black killings or beatings by police, often that go unpunished. People like Philando Castile, a school cafeteria worker shot while reaching for his license even though he was not driving and had a permit to carry or the guy beaten after being pulled over in Oklahoma, mistaken for someone else, and after being beaten, was charged for bleeding on the policeman's uniform. I'm not black but I am very disturbed by these things.
Hillary lost the election two months ago but since Trump supporters are still obsessed with her, I will say Hillary has nothing to apologize for, while Trump literally got his start as a birther, attacking President Obama for years in every microphone he could get, saying he had investigators in Hawaii that couldn't believe what they were finding. We still haven't heard. Trump very specifically called Mexicans rapists and drug dealers.
And let's not forget that the Trump family was penalized years ago for refusing to rent to blacks.
‘No Vacancies’ for Blacks: How Donald Trump Got His Start, and Was First Accused of Bias
I don't know what NBP is and I don't know what communist you are referring to
Of course you don't because it is not drummed into your head from the liberal MSM like the new term of "Alt Right" which they want to catch on. It is to replace the overused term of racist, which does not get the same traction any longer.
NBP stands for the New Black Panthers, a vile racist groups of kooks every bit as hateful as the Nazi's or KKK.
As to the communists that supported Hillary, or any other leftist/socialist kooks, does it mean Hillary must be stigmatized by virtue of their support for her?
If not, then you can hardly blame Trump for racist kooks like the KKK supporting him.
Quote:
but Black Lives Matter is a response to numerous black killings or beatings by police, often that go unpunished.
That is flat out an false narrative created by the liberal media, and the statistics do not bear it out. Sure there are a few bad apples that abuse their power, but those rouge type of people behind the badge also abuse whites as well. Additionally, the stats show far more white people are beaten/killed by police (deserved or not), than black people (deserved or not).
Quote:
People like Philando Castile, a school cafeteria worker shot while reaching for his license even though he was not driving and had a permit to carry
It is amazing to me how willful idiots (not saying you necessarily) buy into the false narratives of claims that typically turn out to be wrong. Yet the liberal media bought the woman's video hook, line, and sinker.
Just as Ferguson was based on a false narrative created by the "Gentile Giant's" strong armed robbery accomplice, that mattered little to the race merchants and and their willing pawns.
So too will the Castile case be debunked based on all sorts of things we already know to be false.
There are occasional incidents where the police genuinely screw up or even commit crimes as in the case of Walter Scott in South Carolina who was unarmed yet shot in the back multiple times.
Unless there are things we are unaware of at this point, I cannot see any lawful justification for the cop to have shot him. He will likely be put away for a long time, and rightly so. This, provided he is not overcharged by a reckless DA.
So why are those examples, rare as they are, not used as a real reason to have a grievance?
Quote:
Hillary lost the election two months ago but since Trump supporters are still obsessed with her, I will say Hillary has nothing to apologize for,
This is where your overwhelming bias and/or partisanship is exposed for all to see. Hillary has to be one of the most corrupt, dishonest, and unethical people ever to get a major parties nomination for potus. Yet people like you claim she has nothing to apologize for
So while I am willing to engage posters who think differently than I do and exchange some rational and reasoned ideas, claims like yours in defense of Hillary mean you are too far gone to intellegently discuss these issues.
There are occasional incidents where the police genuinely screw up or even commit crimes as in the case of Walter Scott in South Carolina who was unarmed yet shot in the back multiple times.
Unless there are things we are unaware of at this point, I cannot see any lawful justification for the cop to have shot him. He will likely be put away for a long time, and rightly so. This, provided he is not overcharged by a reckless DA.
So far they can not find a jury that will convict him. Few defend what he did but yet a jury will not convict him.
Quote:
So why are those examples, rare as they are, not used as a real reason to have a grievance?
Rare.....Is it? What would have happened if someone hadn't been there to capture what happened? It would have been ruled justifiable. How many times has this happened?
I was a Democrat most of my life and 30 year Teamster truck driver. I am now a recent Republican for Trump and only a Republican because of Trump.
The Democratic Party cannot have it two ways: Open doors and we support American workers don't mix. It's like the states jumping on the band wagon to raise the minimum wage; but then encouraging foreign competition for the few jobs that remain after the businesses go under.
Here is the one fact that sunk the Democrats: 94% of new jobs during Obama era were part-time, contract. That article states that 94% of Obama's newly created jobs were part-time. I have seen other figures that claim 75% - but even that is too high. Workers cannot raise families, buy houses or plan for the future without security and benefits.
I have no idea what Trump will do about part-time jobs. However, if he can put America to work; there should be a shift to competing for employees and providing better working terms and conditions. Of course we will have to wait and see. If Trump pulls this off; it could be a very long draught for the Democrats.
So far they can not find a jury that will convict him. Few defend what he did but yet a jury will not convict him.
Rare.....Is it? What would have happened if someone hadn't been there to capture what happened? It would have been ruled justifiable. How many times has this happened?
I think many times juries are reluctant to convict a cop on murder charges, unless he has turned bad and kills someone in the commission of a crime. That is especially true of trying to convict on 1st degree murder, as there is typically no intent for a cop to kill a random suspect. It is chalked up to poor judgment, or fear.
Yes, killing suspects who do not resits arrest is rare. It is even more rare for unarmed fleeing suspects to be shot in the back, unless the person is a known threat to society. Keep in mind that for many decades, if you fought with the police, then tried to flee, it was assumed you posed a greater threat to the general populace based on the willingness to attack an armed/trained cop.
There is certainly some merit in that suspicion, yet society has deemed that lethal force should be used sparingly, even if someone physically assaults and officer then tries to get away.
As to your suspicion at to the outcome without video evidence, it could have turned out that way. However it was such a bad shoot (in my view), the forensic evidence would have had him thrown off the force, and arrested anyway.
There are undoubtedly times where cops have messed up and then tried to cover their tracks. However it is not as often as liberal Hollywood and the MSM would have us believe. With the number of cop to suspect interactions every year (most ending without injury/death), there is hardly an epidemic worthy of constant media attention.
That is especially true in light of the fact that most blacks are killed by other blacks, which is truly an epidemic. Yet nary a peep about it from the liberal media, because they will not like what they find as to the root causes of the epidemic.
Instead it is easier to demonize whites (and cops in particular) for the high number of young black boys/men who die violently.
I think many times juries are reluctant to convict a cop on murder charges, unless he has turned bad and kills someone in the commission of a crime. That is especially true of trying to convict on 1st degree murder, as there is typically no intent for a cop to kill a random suspect. It is chalked up to poor judgment, or fear.
Yes, killing suspects who do not resits arrest is rare. It is even more rare for unarmed fleeing suspects to be shot in the back, unless the person is a known threat to society. Keep in mind that for many decades, if you fought with the police, then tried to flee, it was assumed you posed a greater threat to the general populace based on the willingness to attack an armed/trained cop.
There is certainly some merit in that suspicion, yet society has deemed that lethal force should be used sparingly, even if someone physically assaults and officer then tries to get away.
As to your suspicion at to the outcome without video evidence, it could have turned out that way. However it was such a bad shoot (in my view), the forensic evidence would have had him thrown off the force, and arrested anyway.
There would not have been any sort of in depth investigation.
Even then it wouldn't have mattered. We know Timothy Loehmann lied. We know he was not honest when he was hired. We know he was terminated for the same things previously. What has happened to him? Nothing.
Quote:
There are undoubtedly times where cops have messed up and then tried to cover their tracks. However it is not as often as liberal Hollywood and the MSM would have us believe. With the number of cop to suspect interactions every year (most ending without injury/death), there is hardly an epidemic worthy of constant media attention.
That is especially true in light of the fact that most blacks are killed by other blacks, which is truly an epidemic. Yet nary a peep about it from the liberal media, because they will not like what they find as to the root causes of the epidemic.
Instead it is easier to demonize whites (and cops in particular) for the high number of young black boys/men who die violently.
When a citizen is killed by another citizen they go to prison for a long time. We have an answer to that. That is NOT what this is about. It doesn't matter how often a police officer unjustifiable kills someone else. Maybe it's .oooo1% of the time. It is inexcusable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
