Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote: I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do.
Biden got 81 million, Harris got 74 million, Hillary got 65 million. Blumpf's popular vote went up every single time. That means it's Democrats not voting for women. By the data, a white woman candidate is therefore the most discriminated against by Democratic voters.
What the heck? You're just pulling up the total voters with no demographic breakdown and declaring a demographic conclusion?
On November 16 2024 22:57 oBlade wrote: Talking about the general election
And that was answered already, when I pointed out that you excused the 76 million Trump voters. Try to keep up.
Planet DarkPlasmaBall: 99% of Democrat primary voters who told Kamala, a Democrat, to shove it and pound sand were just voting for who they thought was the best candidate, whereas Republicans are racist and sexist because they voted for a Republican and not someone who isn't a Republican, even though 16 million fewer Democrat voters went for the woman who was actually on their side of the ticket for the party that they believe in.
Evidence: Democrats don't vote for women, and Republicans vote for Republicans. Conclusion: Republicans are sexist and racist, because obviously the worldview of voting for Kamala Harris is the default and needs to be explained if reality deviated from it.
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
On November 16 2024 22:57 oBlade wrote: Talking about the general election
And that was answered already, when I pointed out that you excused the 76 million Trump voters. Try to keep up.
Planet DarkPlasmaBall: 99% of Democrat primary voters who told Kamala, a Democrat, to shove it and pound sand were just voting for who they thought was the best candidate, whereas Republicans are racist and sexist because they voted for a Republican and not someone who isn't a Republican, even though 16 million fewer Democrat voters went for the woman who was actually on their side of the ticket for the party that they believe in.
Evidence: Democrats don't vote for women, and Republicans vote for Republicans. Conclusion: Republicans are sexist and racist, because obviously the worldview of voting for Kamala Harris is the default and needs to be explained if reality deviated from it.
They didn’t vote for her in 2020 and they thought she would be a detriment to Joe stepping down because they didn’t want her to be the presumptive nominee. But once she because the nominee they pretended to love her all along. That’s how you know they are good people.
On November 16 2024 22:57 oBlade wrote: Talking about the general election
And that was answered already, when I pointed out that you excused the 76 million Trump voters. Try to keep up.
Planet DarkPlasmaBall: 99% of Democrat primary voters who told Kamala, a Democrat, to shove it and pound sand were just voting for who they thought was the best candidate, whereas Republicans are racist and sexist because they voted for a Republican and not someone who isn't a Republican, even though 16 million fewer Democrat voters went for the woman who was actually on their side of the ticket for the party that they believe in.
Evidence: Democrats don't vote for women, and Republicans vote for Republicans. Conclusion: Republicans are sexist and racist, because obviously the worldview of voting for Kamala Harris is the default and needs to be explained if reality deviated from it.
They didn’t vote for her in 2020 and they thought she would be a detriment to Joe stepping down because they didn’t want her to be the presumptive nominee. But once she because the nominee they pretended to love her all along. That’s how you know they are good people.
"I'm a good person because I'm not racist and sexist" is not a very high bar.
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist (or sexist), you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
On November 16 2024 22:57 oBlade wrote: Talking about the general election
And that was answered already, when I pointed out that you excused the 76 million Trump voters. Try to keep up.
Planet DarkPlasmaBall: 99% of Democrat primary voters who told Kamala, a Democrat, to shove it and pound sand were just voting for who they thought was the best candidate, whereas Republicans are racist and sexist because they voted for a Republican and not someone who isn't a Republican, even though 16 million fewer Democrat voters went for the woman who was actually on their side of the ticket for the party that they believe in.
Evidence: Democrats don't vote for women, and Republicans vote for Republicans. Conclusion: Republicans are sexist and racist, because obviously the worldview of voting for Kamala Harris is the default and needs to be explained if reality deviated from it.
My last post on this, then feel free to have the last word:
1. Republicans had an option to vote for Nikki Haley over Donald Trump in the primary. They decided not to do so. 2. In 2016, part of Trump's platform was to repeal Roe v. Wade, meaning he was publicly announcing his attempt at performing a sexist, anti-woman rollback of civil rights. Republican voters overwhelmingly supported this. 3. In 2024, part of Trump's campaign was bragging about how he successfully removed said women's right to bodily autonomy. Republican voters still overwhelmingly voted for him, in both the primary and general elections. 4. For literally decades, Trump has bragged about sexually harassing and sexually assaulting women. These were not seen as disqualifying in the eyes of Republican voters, and were hand-waved as either "locker room talk" or celebrated as a signal of alpha male machismo. 5. Trump was found, by a jury, to be liable of sexual assault that fit the commonly understood definition of rape, and has been accused by dozens of other women of sexual abuse and rape too. Republican voters didn't care. 6. Trump has been unfaithful in all three of his marriages, going so far as to attempt to hide his infidelity from the public during his 2016 campaign, leading to 34 felony convictions surrounding hush money payments and other crimes. News of this went public anyway, yet Republican voters didn't care.
I think it's safe to say that the Republican party doesn't give a shit about women or their rights.
I know you brought up "racist" too, and it really wouldn't be much harder to create another list like the one above on that topic: from Trump's entrance onto the political scene as promoting the Obama birther conspiracy theory, to Trump's final campaign attacking Harris for being bi-racial, there's a complete A to Z on Trump being publicly racist and his supporters being all for it. (And that doesn't even include Trump's history of racist policies in his old real estate dealings.)
In 2020, Kamala Harris did not have much support in the primary, yet was still on the winning ticket, as Biden/Harris beat Trump/Pence. In 2024, despite having less than 4 months to run a campaign and still being somewhat unknown against a man who's been in the news every day for nearly a decade, Harris still won 74 million votes (compared to Biden's 81 million votes in 2020). I'm not sure where you got 16 million fewer votes (it's actually just 7 million votes), and we don't even know if all 7 million of those votes are registered Democrats (you asserted that they're all Democrats), as opposed to swing/independent voters who leaned Biden in 2020 but then in 2024 either leaned Trump or stayed home. We've all discussed plenty of reasons why Harris lost to Trump as well, and those were contributing factors to Harris winning fewer votes too.
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it?
2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women.
Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to!
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it?
"Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here.
On November 16 2024 19:37 BlackJack wrote: When Dems finish blaming the election loss on racism and sexism maybe they will get around to looking in the mirror
I don't get criticising the far left on this one. The far left was given jack squat. They generally held their nose and voted Harris anyway. Some didn't, but that isn't what cost the Dems the elections. It was their brain-dead shift to the center (right). Somehow aligning with Dick Cheney was seen as the smarter move than aligning with Bernie Sanders. This didn't crush enthusiasm on the far left (I mean, they were already thoroughly unenthused), it crushed enthusiasm on the center left. The working class voted for Trump, because they stupidly believed he is the "anti-establishment" vote. The center left stayed home because they were disillusioned. The result was a landslide victory for Trump.
And yes, social progressive policy is probably not very popular. But it was dangling at the bottom of what people cared about in the election. It's media outlets that appear to care about it most, probably because it gets twits like you all riled up to repeat it.
It’s remarkable that anyone would think anything Dick Cheney does in 2024 is relevant to anything. Your theory is ridiculous.
Why would it not be relevant? What Dick Cheney has to say about anything isn’t going to make many waves, but going ‘hey guys look, Dick Cheney endorsed our ticket’ is.
I mean you were in the thread, that perception clearly annoyed quite a few in here.
The average American voter probably doesn’t know who he is or who he endorsed. They’re upset that Biden pulled the inflation lever they keep in the Oval Office.
On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote: 2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women.
Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to!
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it?
"Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here.
Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party.
On November 16 2024 19:37 BlackJack wrote: When Dems finish blaming the election loss on racism and sexism maybe they will get around to looking in the mirror
I can't think of a single person in this thread who blames the election loss on racism and sexism, nor can I think of a single person in this thread who things the Democrats are completely blameless in Harris's loss to Trump. Or are you just criticizing the people in Bill Maher's video?
Perhaps you were too stunned on election night but there were many posts blaming the election result on Kamala not being a white man
Would you mind finding some posts to support your claim? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I honestly don't recall "many posts blaming the election result on Kamala not being a white man".
I did and still do. Trump is an identity politics candidate. You don’t run a black woman against him. It plays to his strengths. You run an old white man who doesn’t have Trump’s baggage against him so it can’t be an identity issue. The election should just be about deciding which old white man is best on the issues.
On November 16 2024 22:46 WombaT wrote: Earnest question, why do you spend so much time railing against wokeness versus currrent Republican platforms?
Is it because you’re in a bubble that is largely anti-Republican anyway so you feel there’s no point preaching to the converted, or do you think wokeness is actually worse than whatever this shitshow is?
Probably because I live in San Francisco Bay Area and somehow living in a world where Dems get free rein isn’t the utopia you imagine it would be
Also if Dems just got their shit together they could have trounced Trump and then I wouldn’t have to hear about him anymore
Also there’s already >90% voices here saying the same thing. Would I really be adding anything by telling the one pro-life poster on this forum that Republicans stance on abortion is batshit or something like that’s? If I were posting on a conservative forum then I would be shouting all my grievances with the Republican Party
Fair enough but you can’t really complain if you’re characterised in certain ways if your maxim isn’t pushing out your own views but railing against the tenor of a particular environment
On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote: 2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women.
Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to!
On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:37 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:22 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:13 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:06 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it?
"Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here.
Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party.
Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women.
On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote: 2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women.
Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to!
On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:37 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:22 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:13 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:06 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it?
"Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here.
Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party.
Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women.
What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women.
On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote: I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do.
On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote: 2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women.
Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to!
On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:37 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:22 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:13 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:06 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 22:37 oBlade wrote: Interesting theory but there wasn't a Republican woman on the ballot for them to sexistly vote for the opposite of what they believe in against.
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it?
"Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here.
Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party.
Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women.
What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women.
Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM.
The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case.
On November 16 2024 22:14 Magic Powers wrote: I can see the argument that racism and sexism won Trump the vote - but that's because his voters support racism and sexism, not because Harris' voters support it. The argument should go the other way around. Biden being replaced by a white man wouldn't have won them the elections because Democrats don't vote based on race and gender. Republicans do.
On November 16 2024 23:54 oBlade wrote: 2020-2016 = 16 million. The objectively worst performing demographic on Democrat tickets is not women of color, it's white women.
Wonder why women would vote for such a sexist like Blumpf. It's truly appalling how they can somehow value something like the life of an unborn child over the fact that a rich guy had sex with people. Those stupid handmaids should learn what's good for them and vote Democrat like they're supposed to!
On November 16 2024 23:43 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:37 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:22 Magic Powers wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:13 oBlade wrote:
On November 16 2024 23:06 Magic Powers wrote: [quote]
That's because the Republican party is so racist and sexist that they wouldn't even consider putting a black person or a woman on the ballot. They'd NEVER consider it, EVER!
The Republican party had the first black man in Congress, the first woman in Congress, the first woman on the Supreme Court, the first woman White House Chief of Staff will be a woman. Blumpf has in his history considered Oprah, Tim Scott, and Ben Carson for VP. Two of the frontrunners for the ticket in 2016 were Hispanic. As BlackJack noted, Nikki Haley was the Plan B if Blumpf suddenly dematerialized. You didn't mention Hispanics, just black people, but I'll assume that's not because you think racism towards them is excusable.
The Republican party isn't racist, you're just sublimely ignorant and are downing too much BS media or something that you can come here and constantly insult a country you've never lived in like it's just water cooler talk.
Tell me you don't know anything about American politics without telling me you don't know anything about American politics.
The Republican party today is not the Republican party then. It was Republicans who advanced the black people's agenda and social justice.
Joseph Rainey was 1870. Jeannette Rankin was 1917. Sandra Day O'Connor in 1930.
At around that time the Republican party and the Democrat party effectively switched their agendas.
Sandra Day O'Connor was BORN in 1930 but thanks for the civics lesson Mr. Smith.
"First" does not mean "only." The Republicans have black people and women and Hispanics at every level of government. And have had a longer history of that than their opposition. Despite that the Democrat party is older. Every level of government. Except the vice president and president. Do you know why? Because there's only been about 40 of each since the Democrats started and about 30 of each since the Republicans. And the Democrats have achieved a total of one VP. Wow what an incredible proof that Republicans must be racist and sexist. The Dems managed one single VP. That 99% of their party voted against. And who couldn't win a general election because she lost 7 million votes compared to the white guy in her party. If you want to make a claim of racism and sexism here, which I do not because it's frivolous, however the data only goes in one direction and it's the opposite of the claim you want to make. Best not to poke the sleeping giant of latent Democrat racism because the awakening might be too rude for you.
The Democrat party is far more diverse than the Republican party. I posted the infographics of that a while back. Want me to repost it?
"Diverse" and "racist" are not antonyms. There is no point to whatever you think you are talking about here.
Diverse and racist are antonyms when black people overwhelmingly avoid and hate the Republican party.
Well we've gotten somewhere, thanks for at least agreeing they're not sexist since there's no overwhelming avoidance and hate by women.
What the fuck? You didn't say anything about sexism, so I didn't respond to that. Women are ALSO avoiding the Republican party as proven by their representation. They're a TINY minority in the party. We just don't know whether that's because women hate Republicans or because Republicans hate women.
Fucking outstanding gaslighting failure buddy. Either figure out what you believe, or make an effort to remember what you believe, or at least remember what you pretend to believe. This is getting childish. I can get more insight from an LLM.
The sex divide in voting is like 55% Democrat / 45% Republican. Women and people of color can vote for any representation they want. You may be projecting your own racism and sexism that your natural instinct is to vote for someone who looks exactly like you at all costs - Americans don't think that way. It's not a good assumption to make. You're probably the outlier in that case.
You didn't talk about sexism in the comment I responded to, you fool. Learn to follow your own argument.
Here's a breakdown of Republican/Democrat support by gender. It's very obvious that women do NOT like Republicans. Only old or married women are more in support.
EPT![[image loading]](https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/18905.jpeg)
![[image loading]](https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2022/12/FT_22.01.03_WomenCongress_1.png?resize=704,1536)
