3 ms·

I'm definitely willing to wager that half of the country is awful, but that's if you're willing to use voter turnout as a valid sample size to represent the pop

by legodt 10y ago

I'm definitely willing to wager that half of the country is awful, but that's if you're willing to use voter turnout as a valid sample size to represent the population at large. That's not the point. Racism is bigger than political parties. It's crazy to say that the left doesn't do racism, of course both sides carry that weight! I'm really confused by your comment, I don't know what point you were trying to make beyond trying to absolve yourself of a perceived implication of racism.

AnimalMuppet 10y ago
OK, I'll try to be more clear. I was claiming that what thesimpsons1022 said was in fact bigotry. It wasn't racist bigotry, but it was bigotry against less educated, less "tolerant" (presumably = "subscribing to liberal values"), "rednecks". Therefore, I was (implicitly) trying to say, your statement that "Being intolerant of bigots doesn't exactly make you as bad as them" did not clear thesimpsons1022, since thesimpsons1022 was being bigoted, not just intolerant of bigots. I wasn't claiming that liberals were bigots about race, but I will accept your statement that the left also does racism. It wasn't my point, but I agree with you. I'm confused by your first sentence. Are you saying that "voter turnout" (i.e., the recent election) proves that half the country is awful? Intolerant? Bigoted? I am not claiming anything based on the election. More: I don't think that the election proves very much about the level of bigotry, intolerance, or racism in this country. I think it says more about how tired people were of establishment politicians in general, and of Democrats who claimed to stand up for the little guy and yet did very little about job loss in the heartland. In fact, my (perhaps rose-tinted) perspective is that Trump got more "Ugh, not Hillary" votes than he got "Yes, Trump!" votes.

by legodt 10y ago

AnimalMuppet 10y ago

OK, I'll try to be more clear. I was claiming that what thesimpsons1022 said was in fact bigotry. It wasn't racist bigotry, but it was bigotry against less educated, less "tolerant" (presumably = "subscribing to liberal values"), "rednecks". Therefore, I was (implicitly) trying to say, your statement that "Being intolerant of bigots doesn't exactly make you as bad as them" did not clear thesimpsons1022, since thesimpsons1022 was being bigoted, not just intolerant of bigots. I wasn't claiming that liberals were bigots about race, but I will accept your statement that the left also does racism. It wasn't my point, but I agree with you. I'm confused by your first sentence. Are you saying that "voter turnout" (i.e., the recent election) proves that half the country is awful? Intolerant? Bigoted? I am not claiming anything based on the election. More: I don't think that the election proves very much about the level of bigotry, intolerance, or racism in this country. I think it says more about how tired people were of establishment politicians in general, and of Democrats who claimed to stand up for the little guy and yet did very little about job loss in the heartland. In fact, my (perhaps rose-tinted) perspective is that Trump got more "Ugh, not Hillary" votes than he got "Yes, Trump!" votes.