What's new

Youngkin Wins.

Suggesting teachers read books that are about CRT does not equal teaching CRT. Like not even a little bit. It's good to see that teachers are being encouraged to learn...
There is a school system, there is CRT, and there is learning but there is no teaching. The school system is involved in getting people to learn CRT but that facilitation of learning by the school system can't be called teaching. I'm not saying you're wrong or right but it is an interesting concept to play with where lines are being drawn.
 
I'm sure Hispanic voters will come rushing back to the not-at-all-racist Progressive caucus after voting 55% for Youngkin versus 45% for McAuliffe now that Progressives have labeled them "white supremacists".
How completely unresponsive.

It is strange they ever left the Progressive caucus given the outreach where Progressives labeled their native language as bigoted and demand they identify themselves as Latinx rather than Lantina or Latino.
Of course. By and large, the Hispanic community is very conservative.
 
Did the sentence that I quoted use the term "white supremacist"? If not, why did you connect them?
I'm trying to figure out where you are going with your point of connecting the voting preferences of the majority of Hispanic voters in Virginia to white supremacy.
 
Since CRT isn't part of the curriculum in VA schools, what would you call the message being sent that he's going to ban something that isn't even being done and isn't being pushed as a K-12 subject?
It is easier to prevent implementation than it is to remove it after implementation.
 
This is not intended as a challenge to you, as I think you accurately described the sentiment that helped get Youngkin elected.

So parents were upset that they would have no role in their children's education so they elected the guy that is going to outright ban a topic from being taught?
Basically.
 
Why are you dragging democrats into this?
Can you clarify what you mean by this question? Doesn't make any sense without some clarification.
 
I'm trying to figure out where you are going with your point of connecting the voting preferences of the majority of Hispanic voters in Virginia to white supremacy.
I didn't. You made that connection. I was connecting Hispanic social preferences to their dislike of "Latinx". That's why I put it after that sentence.
 
Can you clarify what you mean by this question? Doesn't make any sense without some clarification.
Before 1930, the Democrats were the conservative party, with strong agrarian roots, while the Republicans were pro-business and relatively more liberal. All the Southern states were just as comparatively conservative as they are today, and deeply Democratic because that was the more conservative party. Over the next 40+ years, the Republicans stayed pro-business, but the Democrats moved from being agrarian to being more social-safety oriented. This was accompanied by a leftward move in their political positions.

Scat is using the right-wing pretense that the party of racists 100 years ago is still the party of racists today, despite 1) the obvious switching of the Southern states to the Republican party, and 2) the declarations of the racists themselves. It's an argument designed to help racists believe that they are not really racist.
 
Back
Top