|
Islam is the Lite Rock FM posted:What wraps up charisma? Does it get cut by name recognition? Money, I guess? \/\/\/yeah, there are too many holes in this. I'll have it worked out tomorrow, don't worry\/\/\/ Majorian fucked around with this message at 09:01 on Oct 31, 2016 |
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 08:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 05:42 |
|
|
Majorian posted:Money, I guess? Unless you are Jeb! I guess overt racism beats money in the end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
isk posted:Also, Obama had some name recognition from the 2004 DNC. Sanders also had some level of name recognition due to being in the Senate for a long time and being the most left.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
lozzle posted:Unless you are Jeb! Also, money is only good if you have an R next to your name. I remember that "cartoon" from Ramirez were he listed good properties of Romney and bad properties of Obama. Both lists included "is rich."
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
Islam is the Lite Rock FM posted:Sanders also had some level of name recognition due to being in the Senate for a long time and being the most left. Yeah, but still - that and a buck will get you a cup of coffee, or however that dumb saying goes. His name recognition was pretty light. compared to former First Lady/NY Senate/SecState, etc etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:03
|
|
|
Squeegy posted:I would say Sanders certainly has name recognition now. That said, it's really the 'intraparty organisational network' answer. Obama had charisma *and* access to the Kennedys' network. Clinton has her network and contacts from 30 years or so. Bernie had charisma (hence the crowds) but, despite his long experience in politics, no network inside the party. Currently, he seems to be kinda-establishing one... but not really...
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:05
|
|
|
1stGear posted:Look, I was like you once. One of my only posts in LF was claiming that things aren't as bad for black people any more. I was rightly laughed out of the thread but at the time I was as confused as you are now. I was trying to be understanding and open guys why are you mocking me Well, the difficulty is, it's true that things are not as bad for black people any more. Lynch mobs are no longer a thing. While that's an improvement, it's a long way off from acceptable when policemen routinely get off of murder charges on unarmed black men despite video evidence of the crime occurring.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:06
|
|
|
Honestly I think that Sanders initially wanted to talk about income inequality and universal healthcare for most of 2015 and bow out after Super Tuesday. Sanders was being beat solidly but I don't know if he starting believing his own bullshit or the bullshit of Jeff Weaver. He ended up losing control of his campaign and next thing we all know it ends up being a messianic cult with birds. End up in mid June with "Clinton stole the primary by getting more people to vote for her." That was a actual quote from a Sanders state delegate in Minnesota.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yeah, but still - that and a buck will get you a cup of coffee, or however that dumb saying goes. His name recognition was pretty light. compared to former First Lady/NY Senate/SecState, etc etc. I'm saying the name recognition was not the reason Sanders lost. It may have contributed since it's linked somewhat with running a solid campaign however. Hillary's machine was what won plain and simple. That and she appealed to more of the Democratic tent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
Islam is the Lite Rock FM posted:I'm saying the name recognition was not the reason Sanders lost. It may have contributed since it's linked somewhat with running a solid campaign however. This is true, but I'm not sure if all the corners of the Democratic tent she appealed to are ones we would find pleasant or agreeable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
meristem posted:Of course, no doubt on that. Sanders might have been able to turn "Our Revolution" into something but that died when half of its staff left the first day when Weaver was announced to be President.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:16
|
|
|
Squeegy posted:This is true, but I'm not sure if all the corners of the Democratic tent she appealed to are ones we would find pleasant or agreeable. Oh god no. The "Republican sick of tea party" especially. They're Reaganomics fuckwads who deserve no party. Right now, though, their vote for the Dread Abuela counts just as much as anyone's. Bonus points if they cross over elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
karthun posted:Sanders might have been able to turn "Our Revolution" into something but that died when half of its staff left the first day when Weaver was announced to be President. I guess we'll see after the elections how much power he'll really have.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
meristem posted:Of course, no doubt on that. Bernie had an opportunity to establish a network after the DNC, but he squandered it when he hired Jeff Weaver to lead his movement and the rest of his team abruptly jumped ship. Sanders' insistence on keeping Jeff Weaver around makes me doubtful that he could have beaten Trump. Weaver couldn't manage his way out of a paper bag and there's no way Sanders' general campaign would have been as tight and efficiently organized at Clinton's. Also for all the talk about how unpopular Hillary is, she's actually extremely popular with non-whites and does a good job at getting those core demographics energized. Sanders lost the primary because his minority outreach was abysmal and it would have remained abysmal during the general. His main strategy would have been to win the general election by getting the white working class to vote D, which is an extremely bad idea against a white populist candidate like Trump.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:30
|
|
|
Well I just finished reading that shitshow. I have to say, as blood-boiling as it is to see this same racism happening again, every time I quoted a post with some flames-on-the-side-of-my-face awfulness I wanted to respond to I ended up closing the tab because someone else, usually a few people, got to it first and said good constructive things. That's progress, even if there are still way too goddamn many people popping up in every discussion that touches on race who are the worst kind of ignorant trash. Is there some alarm that sounds on reddit whenever a black poster isn't 100% servile? If you can't explain why Chris Rock said "Happy White People Independence Day" you don't get to give anybody notes on how they should word their thoughts on racism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
drat glad I went out and got real drunk instead of reading the last 50 pages
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:Bernie had an opportunity to establish a network after the DNC, but he squandered it when he hired Jeff Weaver to lead his movement and the rest of his team abruptly jumped ship. Sanders' insistence on keeping Jeff Weaver around makes me doubtful that he could have beaten Trump. Weaver couldn't manage his way out of a paper bag and there's no way Sanders' general campaign would have been as tight and efficiently organized at Clinton's. Bernie did much, much better in the primaries than anyone expected him to almost exclusively because of his extremely strong support among people who don't normally turn out to vote in a Democratic primary, like independents and millennials. These are the kinds of people who defected to Trump or third-party candidates because of an ideological opposition to Clinton. Just because Sanders didn't energize the Democratic base enough to win a popularity contest between himself and Hillary there doesn't mean that they wouldn't have turned out to vote for him if he had been nominated, especially against someone like Trump, and he could have had wider margins than her because of his broader appeal among people who aren't die-hard Democrats. You have a majority of people voting for each candidate (wider, mind you, for Trump) who say they are voting for their choice to oppose the other candidate over actually supporting their choice. I don't think Trump would have been able to net so many of those #NeverClinton votes with Sanders. Would he have been able to maintain the clear advantage against Trump over Clinton that he had in the polls during the primary? No one can say for sure anything other than that those polls aren't generally indicative of the general election.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:His main strategy would have been to win the general election by getting the white working class to vote D, which is an extremely bad idea against a white populist candidate like Trump. The problem was more that Hillary does very well with another group that Bernie was lovely with: Donors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:47
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Well I just finished reading that shitshow. I have to say, as blood-boiling as it is to see this same racism happening again, every time I quoted a post with some flames-on-the-side-of-my-face awfulness I wanted to respond to I ended up closing the tab because someone else, usually a few people, got to it first and said good constructive things. That's progress, even if there are still way too goddamn many people popping up in every discussion that touches on race who are the worst kind of ignorant trash. Is there some alarm that sounds on reddit whenever a black poster isn't 100% servile? WeAreTheRomans posted:drat glad I went out and got real drunk instead of reading the last 50 pages I only caught the tail end of it but I'm about to read through the entire tire fire now that the thread has slowed down. Maybe I should keep a tally of how many times the "angry black man" trope is invoked with no self-awareness whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:47
|
|
|
twerking on the railroad posted:Lynch mobs are no longer a thing. Yes, now we just shoot them in the street. Lynching is so slow and old-fashioned
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
lozzle posted:I only caught the tail end of it but I'm about to read through the entire tire fire now that the thread has slowed down. Maybe I should keep a tally of how many times the "angry black man" trope is invoked with no self-awareness whatsoever. It's literally a couple dozen times at a minimum
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
Squeegy posted:Bernie did much, much better in the primaries than anyone expected him to almost exclusively because of his extremely strong support among people who don't normally turn out to vote in a Democratic primary, like independents and millennials. These are the kinds of people who defected to Trump or third-party candidates because of an ideological opposition to Clinton. Just because Sanders didn't energize the Democratic base enough to win a popularity contest between himself and Hillary there doesn't mean that they wouldn't have turned out to vote for him if he had been nominated, especially against someone like Trump, and he could have had wider margins than her because of his broader appeal among people who aren't die-hard Democrats. You have a majority of people voting for each candidate (wider, mind you, for Trump) who say they are voting for their choice to oppose the other candidate over actually supporting their choice. I don't think Trump would have been able to net so many of those #NeverClinton votes with Sanders. Would he have been able to maintain the clear advantage against Trump over Clinton that he had in the polls during the primary? No one can say for sure anything other than that those polls aren't generally indicative of the general election. Actually, at least two sources I've seen had >50% of Hillary's supporters saying they're voting for her, not just against Trump. A majority of Trump's voters indeed don't like him, though, and are rather voting against Hillary. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Well I just finished reading that shitshow. I have to say, as blood-boiling as it is to see this same racism happening again, every time I quoted a post with some flames-on-the-side-of-my-face awfulness I wanted to respond to I ended up closing the tab because someone else, usually a few people, got to it first and said good constructive things. That's progress, even if there are still way too goddamn many people popping up in every discussion that touches on race who are the worst kind of ignorant trash. Is there some alarm that sounds on reddit whenever a black poster isn't 100% servile? No idea. Racist lurkers, maybe? Like I said in my last post a lot seem to only appear for those discussions, coming out of nowhere to argue with black people and emit ultrasonic whistling noises, only to vanish into the mist shortly after. Edit: Unrelated and not news exactly, but this is the second time I've seen this tweet and, well, yeah. It's really transparent what the evangelicals and such really care about, given how they're now the group most okay with immoral politicians according to those polls and stuff. https://twitter.com/BroderickGreer/status/792569973541568512 Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 09:57 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
lozzle posted:I only caught the tail end of it but I'm about to read through the entire tire fire now that the thread has slowed down. Maybe I should keep a tally of how many times the "angry black man" trope is invoked with no self-awareness whatsoever. gfsincere is a troll. a kung-fu master, but just trolling for reactions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:No idea. Racist lurkers, maybe? Like I said in my last post a lot seem to only appear for those discussions, coming out of nowhere to argue with black people and emit ultrasonic whistling noises, only to vanish into the mist shortly after. The idea of eavesdropping full time on an insanely long, repetitive conversation about Hillary's emails just in case a POC shows up so you can attack them is the most depressing thing I've heard all day, and I spent the day with Cubs fans. Complaint Compilation posted:gfsincere is a troll. a kung-fu master, but just trolling for reactions. That is an incredibly stupid thing to think and say. I'm not great about keeping usernames straight but I'm pretty sure that nauseating epic I just read featured you heavily.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
Complaint Compilation posted:gfsincere is a troll. a kung-fu master, but just trolling for reactions. No he isn't and you need to shut the gently caress up because despite having this poo poo explained to over and over you still don't understand the first thing about any of this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:57
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:The idea of eavesdropping full time on an insanely long, repetitive conversation about Hillary's emails just in case a POC shows up so you can attack them is the most depressing thing I've heard all day, and I spent the day with Cubs fans. Well, I meant more that they probably just read the thread until something (like a burning need to yell at people who aren't white) incites them to post, since I think that's the basic deal with most lurkers, but the image you present here is more amusing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
Okay others have covered most of what I want to with this particular shining exemplar of  , but:Ruggan posted:Eh, I'm not mad or pissy. Trying to listen. Not his responsibility, but since he seems passionate I thought he'd have motivation to do so. Going to stop posting soon anyway. If you want to share anything with me that you recommend I read I will in good faith do it before I go to sleep. Buddy. There is a difference between listening and loudly demanding tutelage, and you are not listening. You are not listening at all. HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 10:03 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:The idea of eavesdropping full time on an insanely long, repetitive conversation about Hillary's emails just in case a POC shows up so you can attack them is the most depressing thing I've heard all day, and I spent the day with Cubs fans. Okay. The guy comes in, swinging his fists, screaming and spitting on everyone, and if you say "uhh, are you ok, chill out" you're more racist than the last guy because 'angry black man trope.' The guy called me a racist because I like 'the new colossus' before he said he was a PoC. This is a message board, I don't know who's white or blue with purple spots, I can't see you. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:03
|
|
|
botany posted:No he isn't and you need to shut the gently caress up because despite having this poo poo explained to over and over you still don't understand the first thing about any of this. I think the guy's a troll, I can do that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:05
|
|
|
Complaint Compilation posted:Okay. The guy comes in, swinging his fists, screaming and spitting on everyone, and if you say "uhh, are you ok, chill out" you're more racist than the last guy because 'angry black man trope.' I think you forgot to add "much like a silverback gorilla" in your description of the angry black man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:06
|
|
|
Complaint Compilation posted:Okay. The guy comes in, swinging his fists, screaming and spitting on everyone, and if you say "uhh, are you ok, chill out" you're more racist than the last guy because 'angry black man trope.' You're a racist moron and I'm not going to engage you any further, but I'm genuinely curious if any of the non-horrible white people in the thread know what the problem is with this bolded portion here. It's certainly something you see a lot coming from your sort. Tiny Brontosaurus fucked around with this message at 10:09 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:07
|
|
|
Complaint Compilation posted:Okay. The guy comes in, swinging his fists, screaming and spitting on everyone, and if you say "uhh, are you ok, chill out" you're more racist than the last guy because 'angry black man trope.' You know what happened when they built the statue? One of the very few black newspapers at the time, the Cleveland Gazette, published an op-ed: quote:"Liberty enlightening the world," indeed! The expression makes us sick. This government is a howling farce. It can not or rather does not protect its citizens within its own borders. Shove the Bartholdi statue, torch and all, into the ocean until the "liberty" of this country is such as to make it possible for an inoffensive and industrious colored man to earn a respectable living for himself and family, without being ku-kluxed, perhaps murdered, his daughter and wife outraged, and his property destroyed. The idea of the "liberty" of this country "enlightening the world," or even Patagonia, is ridiculous in the extreme. And of course decent little liberals like you got offended because those black people were not on board with a statue that celebrated the end of racism, which had so clearly been achieved. And now black posters in this thread are telling you the same thing and you still get offended. You need to read more, you need to listen more and need to shut the gently caress up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:08
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Well I just finished reading that shitshow. I have to say, as blood-boiling as it is to see this same racism happening again, every time I quoted a post with some flames-on-the-side-of-my-face awfulness I wanted to respond to I ended up closing the tab because someone else, usually a few people, got to it first and said good constructive things. That's progress, even if there are still way too goddamn many people popping up in every discussion that touches on race who are the worst kind of ignorant trash. Is there some alarm that sounds on reddit whenever a black poster isn't 100% servile? I can give you three fifths of an explanation. EDIT: You'll have to wait until December 6th for the other two fifths. Bassetking fucked around with this message at 10:11 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Actually, at least two sources I've seen had >50% of Hillary's supporters saying they're voting for her, not just against Trump. A majority of Trump's voters indeed don't like him, though, and are rather voting against Hillary. Here's what I've got https://www.washingtonpost.com/page...TEeaLSAyzRCIRMQ It's definitely something that's leaning more towards her as time goes on. People are coming around to her, I think. But that's not really as relevant to what I was saying as Trump's contingent of anti-Clinton voters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You're a racist moron and I'm not going to engage you any further, but I'm genuinely curious if any of the non-horrible white people in the thread know what the problem is with this bolded portion here. It's certainly something you see a lot coming from your sort. Oh boy -Presuming someone's white -Treating someone in a way that could be racist -Trying to explain/mitigate blame instead of apologizing and doing better
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You're a racist moron and I'm not going to engage you any further, but I'm genuinely curious if any of the non-horrible white people in the thread know what the problem is with this bolded portion here. It's certainly something you see a lot coming from your sort. That really racist people usually bring up that they don't care if you're the color of a Star Wars alien and "Tt's about attitudes not color!" to excuse their racism? All the while saying really racist poo poo online, where they don't truly know who they're talking to and if it might be really offensive? Also, wait, are people still arguing that symbols cannot have different meaning to different people, based on personal and shared experience as well as differing cultural backgrounds? That's like, Intro to the Anthropology of Symbols 101.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:This kind of thing comes up in HR for big companies all the time. how much of a robot do you have to be to think everyday real life works like corporate HR? personally, i find that the only people who feel strongly enough to make a big deal about casual racism in a social context tend to lack maturity and real world experience. i don't say this to imply the real world perpetuates racism, i'm simply making an observation that people who get out more tend to experience it on a regular basis and probably eventually come to the conclusion that it's a normal thing people do. they also typically only care if it directly impacts them, ex: a black person typically won't care about a polish joke. People who get out a lot also experience or observe casual racism happening around them because it's part of life, and it's generally good for your sanity not to flip your wig at the drop of a hat on a constant basis, especially if you want other people to actually enjoy being around you. a reasonable reaction is one proportional to the severity of the event, for instance if somebody's making a few comments that aren't very offensive but it bothers you, it would be appropriate to politely ask them to stop. better yet, you could correct them with a contradictory statement supported by evidence or ask them an insightful question to make them question their own belief. not by throwing a label at them perpetuating the exact same anti-intelligent cycle racism stems from in the first place. by labeling people racist, you're doing your own cause no service even if you're "right" in a situation. what has been displayed on the past few pages of this thread is an embarassment. labeling one a racist perpetuates the exact same anti-intelligent cycle racism stems from in the first place. by acting in such a manner, the posters in this thread flipping out are doing their own cause no service. if you want to be a white knight champion of racism, do so with good intentions (not just to discredit somebody or undermine their argument) and in a manner which will actually have any kind of chance of swaying that person's opinion. nobody cares about your personal vindication, go jerk off if you need to feel good. going back to the corporate HR example in the original quote, let me explain something. the only reason somebody making a casual joke about polish people that isn't really offensive would be talked to by HR is because it's a legal liability to have employees be doing that. discrimination lawsuits are a major liability. that's actually the only reason HR jobs exist in the first place; obviously they have other roles & tasks beyond just giving people racism talks but if it weren't for the fact that business owners are in constant fear of getting sued they would simply be called "secretaries." Tashan Dorrsett fucked around with this message at 10:15 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You're a racist moron and I'm not going to engage you any further, but I'm genuinely curious if any of the non-horrible white people in the thread know what the problem is with this bolded portion here. It's certainly something you see a lot coming from your sort. I know that it's lovely as hell, it trivializes matters of race, there's a big deal of colorblindness in it, but I can't express what's wrong in a more eloquent manner. God knows that I've been exposed to it countless times during other discussions about race, though, ugh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
Colbert pulled the color blindness thing on the Colbert Report. That's a pretty good hint, right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 05:42 |
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You're a racist moron and I'm not going to engage you any further, but I'm genuinely curious if any of the non-horrible white people in the thread know what the problem is with this bolded portion here. It's certainly something you see a lot coming from your sort. Other than "white is the default setting", I don't know if "blue with purple spots" is really a recognised ethnicity. botany posted:You know what happened when they built the statue? One of the very few black newspapers at the time, the Cleveland Gazette, published an op-ed: Pretty devastating burn on Patagonia tho
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 10:13
|
|