That is an interesting assessment. I do not agree with you at all. The republicans use talk about legal immigrants who happen to be minorities to show how low they are and know they lie about it. They use racism in more ways than the democrats. A random quote from a few will not change what vance and trump did in this election. Also, kee…
That is an interesting assessment. I do not agree with you at all. The republicans use talk about legal immigrants who happen to be minorities to show how low they are and know they lie about it. They use racism in more ways than the democrats. A random quote from a few will not change what vance and trump did in this election. Also, keep in mind who the republicans are. These are the people who were dixiecrats. They are the ones who used race for years to justify their actions. No, I do not have it in reverse. I have it correct. Do you believe that immigrants in Springfield, OH eat pets? The racist aligns with republican principles and values.
One statement is not evidence. A party’s position is. A false statement made by the party leaders and acted upon by racists is evidence. You may think it is emotional, but it is fact. The lies were spread and appealed to racists who responded to these lies with bomb threats. Fellow republicans went on the defensive and supported the people who were the subject of these bomb threats. They were hard working legal immigrants. So, it seams you have misunderstood this information.
I have heard that approach from certain people for years. My evidence is with my eyes and not with false information made by one person. I do not call that “factual evidence”. Add to this the fact that I am not a democrat but an independent and your argument falls very flat. Saying immigrants eat cats and dogs without evidence is racism when they are black. Seeing bomb threats and putting bounties up trying to get evidence on hard working legal immigrants should not be a staple of any party. I guess you think I am so dumb that I can forget that the person who started these lies was a maga republican. I would feel the same way, factually, no matter who said that type of thing. I only see you making the same mistake that most make. You are the one who thinks they have evidence whereas you explain things in your own context. I have real evidence and you say it is emotional. Take a hard look at what is real and what was said and what was done. Stay away from things you cannot comprehend. Also, there is a lot more evidence about racism here that I have the patience to deliver. republicans are the party of the dixiecrats now. Look that up and see what I mean.
I mean, I directly quoted the Representative’s words from the article, you can see that for yourself - with your very own eyes.
I am discussing what is plainly written for us both to see- how could it possibly be more factual than that?
My argument about what the article says is not related at all to your political persuasion and I find it strange you think that would matter.
I never said immigrants eat cats and dogs, and I am pretty sure that wasn’t brought up in the article either.
I am only talking about the specific thing the Representative said in the article. Nothing else.
I don’t comprehend your argument because you seem to be bringing in all sorts of things that don’t appear relevant at all, and make no logical tempt to connect or support them.
Are you implying that taking a quote directly from the article we both read is not a form of “fact” in supporting an argument I am making?
If you never saw what jd vance and trump said, you must live in a bubble. They started spreading those rumors and trump repeated it during the debate with Harris. The bomb threats were news all over the country. The republicans who run Springfield, OH made appeals and stated that the immigrants were not eating cats and dogs. Funny how you can remember what one person sad out of context but you claim to have no knowledge of these statements. You also probably don’t remember vance saying he lied but he doesn’t care that he did. Just do a search on it. I guess logic to you is what you think it is. These facts that I am quoting came directly from the candidates you probably voted for. Your premise is that I am a democrat who blindly supports them. That is too far from the truth. I am an Independent who thinks critically about who I support. I can never support maga or trump or vance because they lie for all to see. To directly answer your question, I believe that you have misunderstood and misinterpreted the quote to fit your own argument. You probably don’t believe that racism exists in this country.
I can see that no matter what I say, you will disagree. I have “cited” racism in the republican party. I have shown why. I don’t care about a false statement within an article which is supposed to be evidence. It is another statement twisted out of context. It is what I see from folks all of the time. So I will end it here with this statement: republicans are and have been racists for quite some time. They engage is racist politics and attempt to blame democrats for that behavior. This is the truth of the matter when viewed objectively. One remark taken out of context will not support any other position. Show me a party leader who supports racism on the democratic side. This is the flaw in your “logical” argument. And you have not proven anything except how gullible you are. Goodbye.
Respectfully, I think you’re misreading his comment and taking it out of context. Black and Hispanic voters have long been part of the Democratic coalition because Democrats historically supported things that benefited them — civil rights, voting rights, social safety net, public education, immigration reform, etc. Democrats were the party of economic growth for working people, which has disproportionately included people of color. What Rep. Andrews meant is that as Democrats shift away from their historic mission of delivering for working class people and standing up for voting rights, among other things, they risk losing the support of those voters.
The point is that they have to deliver on education and income or they’ll lose their most loyal voters along with more white working class voters. That’s not racial division, it’s reorienting your service to delivering for constituents.
It’s possible I could be misreading it, but it seems pretty clearly written:
“If minority voters stop polarizing along racial lines and start polarizing around education and income, then we’re going to lose a big chunk of voters to the are public and at that point.”
That is a definitive statement that Democrats benefit from racial polarization, where Republicans do not.
He also doesn’t say working class in this statement, he very clearly says racial.
The whole article is about Democrats needing to win back the votes of white people. Adams specifically says that he wants to focus on class, and believes that the job is to convince working class white people that they have more interests in common with working class Black people than any millionaire CEO.
He also wants to create more universal programs, like the New Deal. Hence the focus on expanding the social safety net and creating good jobs.
If you want to continue to misread and take a quote grossly out of context, feel free, but you’re wasting your time.
I did the interview. I know what it says. There’s nothing wrong with it — Democrats have to deliver for constituencies to keep them on board, but that doesn’t mean dividing people. Nobody is talking about dividing by race.
He also said that he wants to pay attention to young white men even if that’s unpopular among Democrats.
Again, you’re pushing a bad-faith argument and trying to build out of one misread quote from one state representative. It’s pretty sad, to be honest.
That is an interesting assessment. I do not agree with you at all. The republicans use talk about legal immigrants who happen to be minorities to show how low they are and know they lie about it. They use racism in more ways than the democrats. A random quote from a few will not change what vance and trump did in this election. Also, keep in mind who the republicans are. These are the people who were dixiecrats. They are the ones who used race for years to justify their actions. No, I do not have it in reverse. I have it correct. Do you believe that immigrants in Springfield, OH eat pets? The racist aligns with republican principles and values.
You might disagree, and think you have it correct, and that’s your prerogative.
Yet, only one of us here is supporting their argument with tangible evidence rather than emotional appeals.
One statement is not evidence. A party’s position is. A false statement made by the party leaders and acted upon by racists is evidence. You may think it is emotional, but it is fact. The lies were spread and appealed to racists who responded to these lies with bomb threats. Fellow republicans went on the defensive and supported the people who were the subject of these bomb threats. They were hard working legal immigrants. So, it seams you have misunderstood this information.
I have heard that approach from certain people for years. My evidence is with my eyes and not with false information made by one person. I do not call that “factual evidence”. Add to this the fact that I am not a democrat but an independent and your argument falls very flat. Saying immigrants eat cats and dogs without evidence is racism when they are black. Seeing bomb threats and putting bounties up trying to get evidence on hard working legal immigrants should not be a staple of any party. I guess you think I am so dumb that I can forget that the person who started these lies was a maga republican. I would feel the same way, factually, no matter who said that type of thing. I only see you making the same mistake that most make. You are the one who thinks they have evidence whereas you explain things in your own context. I have real evidence and you say it is emotional. Take a hard look at what is real and what was said and what was done. Stay away from things you cannot comprehend. Also, there is a lot more evidence about racism here that I have the patience to deliver. republicans are the party of the dixiecrats now. Look that up and see what I mean.
I mean, I directly quoted the Representative’s words from the article, you can see that for yourself - with your very own eyes.
I am discussing what is plainly written for us both to see- how could it possibly be more factual than that?
My argument about what the article says is not related at all to your political persuasion and I find it strange you think that would matter.
I never said immigrants eat cats and dogs, and I am pretty sure that wasn’t brought up in the article either.
I am only talking about the specific thing the Representative said in the article. Nothing else.
I don’t comprehend your argument because you seem to be bringing in all sorts of things that don’t appear relevant at all, and make no logical tempt to connect or support them.
Are you implying that taking a quote directly from the article we both read is not a form of “fact” in supporting an argument I am making?
If you never saw what jd vance and trump said, you must live in a bubble. They started spreading those rumors and trump repeated it during the debate with Harris. The bomb threats were news all over the country. The republicans who run Springfield, OH made appeals and stated that the immigrants were not eating cats and dogs. Funny how you can remember what one person sad out of context but you claim to have no knowledge of these statements. You also probably don’t remember vance saying he lied but he doesn’t care that he did. Just do a search on it. I guess logic to you is what you think it is. These facts that I am quoting came directly from the candidates you probably voted for. Your premise is that I am a democrat who blindly supports them. That is too far from the truth. I am an Independent who thinks critically about who I support. I can never support maga or trump or vance because they lie for all to see. To directly answer your question, I believe that you have misunderstood and misinterpreted the quote to fit your own argument. You probably don’t believe that racism exists in this country.
They didn’t say anything in the article I mentioned.
So, what are you trying to say? That the remarks I mentioned are not evidence?
Well, yeah… we were talking about an article- you had my citation right there as a direct quote.
If you want to bring in other things, it’s appropriate to cite them. That’s just good form for debate and discussion.
My original post had nothing to do with the article you brought up.
Your original post was in response to the article from which I pulled a quote that directly disagreed with your point.
I can see that no matter what I say, you will disagree. I have “cited” racism in the republican party. I have shown why. I don’t care about a false statement within an article which is supposed to be evidence. It is another statement twisted out of context. It is what I see from folks all of the time. So I will end it here with this statement: republicans are and have been racists for quite some time. They engage is racist politics and attempt to blame democrats for that behavior. This is the truth of the matter when viewed objectively. One remark taken out of context will not support any other position. Show me a party leader who supports racism on the democratic side. This is the flaw in your “logical” argument. And you have not proven anything except how gullible you are. Goodbye.
Respectfully, I think you’re misreading his comment and taking it out of context. Black and Hispanic voters have long been part of the Democratic coalition because Democrats historically supported things that benefited them — civil rights, voting rights, social safety net, public education, immigration reform, etc. Democrats were the party of economic growth for working people, which has disproportionately included people of color. What Rep. Andrews meant is that as Democrats shift away from their historic mission of delivering for working class people and standing up for voting rights, among other things, they risk losing the support of those voters.
The point is that they have to deliver on education and income or they’ll lose their most loyal voters along with more white working class voters. That’s not racial division, it’s reorienting your service to delivering for constituents.
It’s possible I could be misreading it, but it seems pretty clearly written:
“If minority voters stop polarizing along racial lines and start polarizing around education and income, then we’re going to lose a big chunk of voters to the are public and at that point.”
That is a definitive statement that Democrats benefit from racial polarization, where Republicans do not.
He also doesn’t say working class in this statement, he very clearly says racial.
The whole article is about Democrats needing to win back the votes of white people. Adams specifically says that he wants to focus on class, and believes that the job is to convince working class white people that they have more interests in common with working class Black people than any millionaire CEO.
He also wants to create more universal programs, like the New Deal. Hence the focus on expanding the social safety net and creating good jobs.
If you want to continue to misread and take a quote grossly out of context, feel free, but you’re wasting your time.
Well, no amount of me showing you exactly what he said is going to make you read it for what it explicitly says.
I did the interview. I know what it says. There’s nothing wrong with it — Democrats have to deliver for constituencies to keep them on board, but that doesn’t mean dividing people. Nobody is talking about dividing by race.
He also said that he wants to pay attention to young white men even if that’s unpopular among Democrats.
Again, you’re pushing a bad-faith argument and trying to build out of one misread quote from one state representative. It’s pretty sad, to be honest.
Thanks for putting that into words.