Voters More Unwilling to Vote for a Jewish Prez than a Black Prez (solution, crime)
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.
Now you're just enjoying arguing with a Jewish Republican. Are you ACTUALLY asking me to back up my claim that Democrats accused people of not voting for Obama because he was black, and that you are now asking me to back up my claim that liberals are calling Trump supporters racists?
And THAT is such a liberal tactic, too. (There's a term for it, which escapes my memory at the moment.) It's taking the most obvious and apparent statement made by a Republican, and turning it around to say "prove it"? It's an Alinsky tactic of putting people who disagreed with him on the defensive, rather than him having to defend himself.
Me: Liberals have called Trump supporters racist non-stop for three years.
You: Oh yeah? Prove it. Otherwise you're just dodging.
Liberals. Jeesh. They get worse and worse with each passing day.
Honestly, can someone explain antisemitism to me? It’s weird. Usually racists at least hate someone who looks different, how do white folks come to hate white folks that way?
Multiculturalism is a new phenomenon. There wasn’t much of a variety of skin color in European countries (or other countries) back in the day, so they needed to find other differences to hate people over.
Are you ACTUALLY asking me to back up my claim that Democrats accused people of not voting for Obama because he was black, and that you are now asking me to back up my claim that liberals are calling Trump supporters racists?
You said the article shows something it did not show, so I asked you to quote it. The fact that you are trying to spin your argument into something else only proves my point.
Since you made it up, you are unable to back it up, and instead try to make it about me tossing around silly labels.
Its weak attempt to dodge, and its also dishonest.
And yes, YOU ARE using your religion as a pawn in your partisan bicker-fests.
Multiculturalism is a new phenomenon. There wasn’t much of a variety of skin color in European countries (or other countries) back in the day, so they needed to find other differences to hate people over.
You might want to read up about Rome, or any other ancient empire which created multi-cultural societies,
And I suppose that's directed at Jews, or any Jew who points out bigotry against them is actually higher than against blacks, at least when measured by willingness to vote for one for president? (You're a liberal, am I right? There's the very thing I was talking about - downplaying antisemitism.) And forget that presidential elections are decided by far less than 7%.
You are wrong. The poster you quoted is no liberal. Careful, your very own biases are showing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
Your poll tends to blow up in your face, because it shows Republicans are far more likely to reject candidates based on what they are as opposed their views. Same number of Republicans (5%) would not vote for a Jewish candidates, so why do you call only Dems bigoted. If 95% will vote for a Jew, it tends to show they are the opposite of bigots.
Maybe the fact that a Jewish man is leading the race should tell you something, but apparently not.
The OP cannot admit to that because that does not fit his/her posting agenda which is:
DEMOCRATS BAD - REPUBLICANS GOOD.
All of OP's post are just an endless repetition of same in one form or another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
Only liberals ask people to back up their claims That's news to me, but let me ask again: can you back up your claim?
Just answer the question as opposed to trying to make it about. Such tactic is called "a dodge".
Well, your own data says 95% Dems and 95% of Repubs would vote for a Jew, and you are here whining about the 5% of Dems who would not, so YES, you are playing a victim and you are using your religion as a political pawn (and you have a LONG history of doing this), and it is also very hypocritical given the fact that the numbers are the same for both parties.
It's quite clear to anyone looking objectively at the NUMBERS provided by OP.
The OP cannot admit to that because that does not fit his/her posting agenda which is:
DEMOCRATS BAD - REPUBLICANS GOOD.
All of OP's post are just an endless repetition of same in one form or another.
This is the beginning and the ending and everything in between of every one of these threads. There is no deviation from the unending diatribe against "evil liberals," even if it means completely ignoring the fact that what she is accusing those liberals of doing, conservatives are doing as well. That matters not at all.
You said the article shows something it did not show, so I asked you to quote it. The fact that you are trying to spin your argument into something else only proves my point.
Since you made it up, you are unable to back it up, and instead try to make it about me tossing around silly labels.
Its weak attempt to dodge, and its also dishonest.
And yes, YOU ARE using your religion as a pawn in your partisan bicker-fests.
Her whole motive was to suggest that Jews face more bigotry than blacks when it comes to presidential politics. Well, Muslims even face more bigotry that Jews. Also, blacks are not "linked" to a foreign country as Jews are seen to be, with the existence of a "Jewish State". There is no "black state" that blacks are linked to and could potentially favor.
I think that there are enough check and balances in the system where as people know that a President cannot be a dictator and hence any special agendas are still subject to the check and balances of the American public.
You might want to read up about Rome, or any other ancient empire which created multi-cultural societies,
Meh, I took 4 years of Latin in high school, and in addition to learning a useless language, I also learned more about Ancient Rome than I ever needed to know. Sure, if you want to go back that far, there were varying skin tones due to the ever expanding reach of Rome’s governance. I don’t think you saw a whole lot of sub Saharan Africans walking around Rome, but you did see plenty of Middle Easterners and Europeans in the capital of an empire that engulfed both regions.
That period of history is the exception rather than the rule. Before and after, for the most part, humans remained tribal, and anyone that was different, was bad.
I see all the nasty liberals are piling on now. But yes, my point is that while liberals kept accusing conservatives of not voting for Obama because he is black, they are IGNORING that more people are opposed to voting for a Jew. Destroys their narrative people are bigoted against blacks, while they simultaneously claim that Jews are exaggerating antisemitism. (In fact, worse....any Jew who speaks out against antisemitism is promptly accused of playing the victim card.) Liberals are eager to go back to focusing their sympathy on black racism, and anything that shows that bigotry is worse against Jews - a Jew is much more likely to be a victim of a hate crime than a black - promptly brings out the hostility toward Jews who complain against prejudice. (Well, I mean prejudice against Jews; they're all for speaking out against prejudice against blacks and Muslims and gays and whatever else "oppressed" minority they can think of. But Jews? Eh. They need to shut up.)
Her whole motive was to suggest that Jews face more bigotry than blacks when it comes to presidential politics. Well, Muslims even face more bigotry that Jews. Also, blacks are not "linked" to a foreign country as Jews are seen to be, with the existence of a "Jewish State". There is no "black state" that blacks are linked to and could potentially favor.
I think that there are enough check and balances in the system where as people know that a President cannot be a dictator and hence any special agendas are still subject to the check and balances of the American public.
Listen. You said you admire and respect Farrakhan, the most notorious anti-Semite alive today (He calls Jews "termites.") Give that, you're not one to express criticism of Jews or the "Jewish State."
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.
That's news to me, but let me ask again: can you back up your claim? 
