As long as you associate "racism" with "racist groups", you're missing the point. Did you even read the links?
A Mitt Romney and Condoleeza Rice ticket?
- Thread starter Beantown
- Start date
As long as you associate "racism" with "racist groups", you're missing the point. Did you even read the links?
No. I do not use links from this computer. Period. I will however read them when I am at home.
You are trying to argue something else entirely and are either intentionally missunderstanding or just don't care.
So just because they claim it to be something it is? Bullcrap. You just proved my point. They cry rascism when it clearly is not. Rascism is alive and well but it is not the reason for everything. That is simply a cop out.
I'm very impressed at how well you held up when every television show featured faces with darker skin, all the Presidents had darker skin than you, all those stores kept following you because of your lighter skin, police pulled you over because you had lighter skin, interviewers who classified you as "aggressive" instead of "assertive", etc. That all happened to you, right?
I mean, otherwise, you'd be whining over the same type of treatment given to kids who wore glasses, had funny voices, etc.
I'm not the least bit impressed by your upbringing. When I was 9, we moved to a government project called LaClede Town, which was deloiberately kept racially balanced. Some of the kids with light skin managed to figure out how not to behave with the typical privilege you see emanating from so many of those with lighter skin.
Perahps I understood, but just thought the bringing up of racial groups was irrelevant to the notion that racism was equally prevalent on the left (although, I'm not sure the "New Black Panthers" (quoted in respect of the injunction) would qualify as leftist, regardless)?
The original point was that a darkly skinned, or female, VP candidate would demotivate a substantial part of the Republican base, and from what I can tell, a larger part than would be motivated by it. I don't see how the "New Black Panthers" is relevant to that comment.
No, I was just explaining why the claim might be based on something besides, as you put it, "bullcrap". That something being a life history you have not experienced. A person's life experiences are not "bullcrap".
I specifically said that I believed your actions were fair.
Conversations flow and subjects change or get altered. You have been around long enough to know that. My EXAMPLE is as relevant as your assertion that darker skinned people suffer rascism all day every day. and that just becasue they think it is rascism it is.
Also I do think that rascism is as prevelant on the left as it is the right. The motivations and ways it is expressed are different but I think it is still rascism.
Also I do think that rascism is as prevelant on the left as it is the right. The motivations and ways it is expressed are different but I think it is still rascism.
Thank goodness I have a person with lighter-skinned privilege explaining to me what's relevant for those with darker skin. I'm so enlightened!
Once again, you've never supported this interesting claim with anything other than anecdotal hateful generalizations. Have you got any data to support your assertion that the choice of a minority VP would lessen the election chances of a Republican presidential candidate?
No, I do not. While it would be interesting to run controlled experiments, I'm not sure that's feasible (OK, I'm sure it is not). Therefore, I don't see how any such data can be assembled. I'm open to suggestions on how such data would be accumulated outside of polling, or if there were any way to poll this questions and get honest responses.
Very few people like to think of themselves as racist (or sexist). The interviewer who takes one candidate's attempt to negotiate salary as being a positive, and the other as a negative, does not think of themself as racist; it's just one guy was assertive and the other was aggressive. There have been experiemental studies on these sorts of relationships. You think it doesn't extend to voter's opinions of politicians? Maybe not.
I suppose the more relevant question for this election cycle would be that if there IS indeed a significant effect on the voter, what would be the result? I don't imagine that people would say "I'm not voting for a minority -- I'm voting for Obama instead!"
Given the analysis from many pundits that Republicans were casting votes for Herman Cain partially as an over-reactive response to cover for their own suppressed racist sentiments, coupled with the fact that the sitting president is a minority, I don't really see what Romney(?) would stand to lose by having Rice on his ticket (from a race relations standpoint, anyhow).
It was all the rage in 2008 to be able to say "Hey, I voted for Obama; therefore, I'm open-minded!" I don't see that mentality changing in 2012.
...and I don't have any data either, but I was assuming you had some polling data or some 2008 study to back up your point.