Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the statistics-or-lies? dept.

Scott Alexander gives a great breakdown of Trump and how the portrayal of him as being "openly white supremacist" is probably (likely) wrong.

I stick to my thesis from October 2015. There is no evidence that Donald Trump is more racist than any past Republican candidate (or any other 70 year old white guy, for that matter). All this stuff about how he's "the candidate of the KKK" and "the vanguard of a new white supremacist movement" is made up. It's a catastrophic distraction from the dozens of other undeniable problems with Trump that could have convinced voters to abandon him. That it came to dominate the election cycle should be considered a horrifying indictment of our political discourse, in the same way that it would be a horrifying indictment of our political discourse if the entire Republican campaign had been based around the theory that Hillary Clinton was a secret Satanist. Yes, calling Romney a racist was crying wolf. But you are still crying wolf.

I avoided pushing this point any more since last October because I didn't want to look like I was supporting Trump, or accidentally convince anyone else to support Trump. But since we're past the point where that matters any more, I want to present my case.

He further states: "I realize that all of this is going to make me sound like a crazy person and put me completely at odds with every respectable thinker in the media, but luckily, being a crazy person at odds with every respectable thinker in the media has been a pretty good ticket to predictive accuracy lately, so whatever."

So do his claims hold up under scrutiny, is he manipulating the figures, or is he just a 'crazy person' ?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @01:36AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @01:36AM (#429746)

    It's possible to be non-Republican without being "Left".
    (The Blues are pro-Capitalism.)
    Lazy nitwits (like you) won't make the distinction.
    Lazy nitwits (like you) use 1-dimensional terms where they aren't appropriate and aren't accurate to describe the the political position of someone on what is a multi-dimensional palate.

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:24AM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:24AM (#429778) Journal

    Whatever, nitwit. Meanwhile, I'm neither left nor right, neither Republican nor Democrat. I have my place on the political spectrum, as defined by several European sites - but that place doesn't fit into American politics at all. Now, who is the nitwit?