(12-08-2020 07:17 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: You know that is a strategy for Reps too, right?
Gerrymandering can be completed by concentrating power for your opponent in one district to distribute power more evenly across other districts, allowing you to win more of them. So I'm arguing that this issue (packing minorities into a voting district) isn't unique to Dems, since Reps engage in the same kind of gerrymandering.
Still with the failed reading comprehension.
A) I never said it wasn't, in fact I've played out numerous scenarios and specifically said... if you want to argue that Republicans are racists and do things as well thats fine, but it has NOTHING to do with the topic.... yet you KEEP coming back to something which has nothing to do with anything.
B) to the extent that what you say is an option that is true, but it still results in a guaranteed minority seat... and if it is a black district, almost assuredly a democratically held seat. Does it happen when there are no other options? Sure. Rather give dems one seat than two... but if you have a chance to give them none? THAT is the goal. So the point for a Republican would be to lump DEMOCRATS into a single district (if they can't dilute them away)... regardless of their color. Little Oaxaca might be part of such a district, but little Havana would not be. Thus the 'plan' has more to do with their political leanings than their races. No other race so closely identifies with a party.
THAT SAID... THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING I"VE SAID!! I don't know how much clearer I can be.... nor how much clearer I can be that if you KEEP going back to this, you're clearly missing the point.
Though most Republicans don't care at all about race in any regard, IT IS NOT REMOTELY THE GOAL OF REPUBLICAN GERRYMANDERING TO MAKE SURE THAT DEMOCRATS HAVE A VOICE IN CONGRESS.... AND BLACK VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY SKEW DEMOCRAT. IF YOU BELIEVE IT IS THEIR GOAL TO MAKE SURE THEY ONLY HAVE ONE VOICE, THATS FINE... BUT IT IS NOT AT ALL THE SAME THING, SO IT IS NOT THE SUBJECT OF THIS CONVERSATION!
Whether like you, you think that Republicans are 'behind the times' on racial issues or like me, you think that Republicans differentiate between ending racism and making up for it... I think almost ALL of us (on here anyway) believe that issues that impact minorities are important and need to be addressed... and PART of the reason why they aren't being addressed is
because by creating 'majority minority' districts, we are concentrating the discussion and the power, yet the reality is that black people are interspersed throughout the country... So addressing a problem in Oakland, Ca doesn't often help a black person living just a few miles away in Pleasanton, Ca much less one living in Bowie, Tx.... because we've primarily addressed an OAKLAND problem, not a BLACK problem.
I am interested in solving the problem... so I am trying to work with people whose STATED goal it is to solve the problem... who get 90+% of the votes from this population. I'm not interested in working with people who don't get many votes from this population, who have limited if any credibility in efforts to solve the problem, despite the fact that many of the solutions I see as being helpful would involve things that Republicans have suggested like gentrification and vouchers and school choice etc... just in a way that PROTECTS black people, like giving them ownership/equity, which is definitely something few Republicans would support, but many Democrats might.... and again, I haven't remotely suggested that my solution is the only, much less the best one... I've only suggested that it makes sense to me and that I've thought a lot about it (in general terms).
So if you care to engage in solutions, I want to have that conversation. Instead, you seem vastly more focused on engaging in placing blame. Yes, I have some opinion that many Democrats don't want to fix the problem because they get power from it... myth power value... but I also know that MOST Democrats actually want to fix the problem. I don't need to say that many Republicans don't want to fix the problem for the same reasons... because I don't think you'll have a problem getting 10-30 votes out of the Senate from the right for a massive expansion of economic redevelopment/increases in school choice etc etc etc... at the cost of electing a black person who is focused on black issues... as opposed to a (most often) URBAN black person focused on URBAN black issues. Black people in Wyoming don't care about projects in Harlem... and white people in Wyoming SURE as hell don't... but they MIGHT care about a reduction in concentrated desperation in Harlem that ultimately resonates into a broader conversation that reduces racial tensions... AND creates an opportunity for them to leave an underperforming school in favor of a better one.
(12-08-2020 07:30 PM)Rice93 Wrote: Ham, I think that you are are really smart guy and definitely not a moron. As such, I'm sure that you recognize the difference between language that is inflammatory ("your moronic interpretation") and language that is not ("your ridiculous interpretation"). You can crap on Lad all you want (I honestly don't know what the deal is between you) but you might as well own it IMO.
I am more than happy to own the fact that my statement was inflammatory. I pretty clearly intended it to be so. I found the statement I was responding to (but really, the LONG line of similar statements) to deserve derision so that is how I responded. MOST of my posts, including the one above are not especially inflammatory (other than the frustrated CAPS). If someone were to respond to the above (in isolation) by saying....
'So you agree Republicans are racists' or even 'I understand why you don't want to talk about why Republicans don't address these issues'... and not in any way try and substantively address the issues I speak about, I would find that insulting, unless that comment came along with an actual discussion... which to this point, it has not.
(12-08-2020 07:53 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Maybe I'm living in a different world, but it's not as if every other back and forth on this board between every poster is completely and perfectly interpreted and understanding of the previous comment.
This board doesn't foster discussion or discourse by the sheer nature of it being a message board where back and forth is inherently more difficult than speaking with one another. You can't read one's tone, you can't easily ask clarifying questions, people are sometimes posting in between tasks, and on and on. But yeah, I'm the only one on here intentionally posting moronically... For ****'s sake.
I definitely post with snark on occasion (including the line about our 2021 talking points) and I will own that. I'll even own when I make a mistake. But I do make an honest effort 90% of the time to respond intelligently. So I must just be dumb.
I find those last two lines amusing.... and again, for perhaps the 3rd time in just the last 3 responses... I never said you were the only person doing this... You're just the only one I notice consistently and repeatedly doing it. The fact that i've pointed this out in each of these posts and yet you continue to do it (put words in my mouth/hear voices) tells me a lot about your personality. You act like you get it and you don't intend it, but even when I point it out specifically, you keep doing it. There is a psychology about 'attacking' when you engage in the simple act of someone making a statement and the response either suggests that it was intended to be more broad (If Joe is accused of being a racist and he responds with... 'so all white people are racists') or the inverse... ('White people are racists' somehow shouldn't be taken by white people to imply that they are racists)
MAYBE if you'd internalize what you said above and stop with the 'so you're saying' and then spot off some charicatature of a
right wing meme... Or maybe if you'd not respond to a piece of a quote as if that must have been all that was said (your correction about 'one of the safest' vs 'THE safest'). I mean seriously... do you honestly believe that someone with my experience in healthcare and opinions on this virus (which are not dramatically different from yours... role of government maybe, but not the virus) would make the claim that schools are THE safest place for kids during COVID? Have you seen me post that anywhere? If you do, then that's insulting... and ignores the very facts about this method of conversation that you CLAIM to understand above.
Your responses quite often aren't the clever... oh look, you mistyped something (like we all do) and it made for a joke that we can all laugh at because we know that's not what you meant... It is most often a deflection from meaningful conversation (because often, none of the other issues are addressed along with the correction) and/or a pigeon hole of someone's opinions as being a trite right-wing meme.... like whether or not ONLY Democrats engage in gerrymandering.
If that's what you think someone meant and that was the key point they were making, why would you even bother to respond to it? That's my biggest issue with your style. You most often respond to meaningless parts of posts and ignore the most important part. It'd be different if in addition to the small parts, you ost often responded to the 'meat'. Do you disagree that concentrations of poor people and discouraging of gentrification because of a lack of ownership for those people keeps them from being able to access home equity and for local tax bases to rise which hampers the entire community?? If so, lets have that conversation. If you agree but you disagree with my solutions, let's have that conversation. If instead you'd rather look for ways to interpret my comments under this preconception of what you THINK a Republican is... then you're wasting everyone's time, including yours.
/
2020 Presidential Election predictions
