SoylentNews

"Crying Wolf" About Trump's "Openly Racist" State of Being

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

Beanlover and MrPlow both submit the same story, which follows:

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

• Re:Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like Re:Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @02:35AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @02:35AM (#429763)

  Wow. You do realize how full of shit you are right? You did not demonstrate a change of race:

  In her memoir Just Lucky I Guess (2002), Channing revealed that in 1937, when she was a 16-year-old about to head off to Bennington College, her mother told her that her father's birth certificate had marked him as "colored," as his mother had been black. It was an unexpected revelation for Channing, and she didn't make the information public for decades (a decision that allowed her to avoid the discriminatory treatment African Americans faced at the time).

  However, Channing didn't completely forget about her heritage, which she credits with giving her the impressive vocal range and agility that helped her succeed as a performer. In a 2002 interview with Larry King, she declared, "I got the greatest genes in show business."

  A clerical error and misinformation is very distinct from an actual state change. Five minutes before she knew, she still had her father's genes in her, and five minutes later she continued to do so. All that changed was her ignorance of it.

  You literally argued that ignorance once removed constitutes a physical state change. This is the one and the same principle that allows little children to fly in Neverland. You should've sprinkled your post with Pixie Dust.

  Parent

• Re:Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:44AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:44AM (#429784)

  > Wow. You do realize how full of shit you are right? You did not demonstrate a change of race:

  Hey genius. Genes are not race. They are genes.

  Race is something that society both imposes on you and you express to society.

  Everybody thought carol channing was white. She never had to experience being treated as black. For everything that matters, she was white.

  Parent