Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:33 AM
Dacien Dacien is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 97
Elizabeth Warren Stands by DNA Test. But Around Her, Worries Abound.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/u...test-2020.html

Is this a non-issue, being taken more seriously than it should, or was this a catastrophic misstep for Warren that doomed her 2020 chances?

Personally, I don't think it was wise to play into Trump's hands with a weak DNA return. She should have just taken a test quietly, and if it was unfavorable, which ended up being the case, simply moved on. And then there's the problem of her "Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee" recipes in the tribal cookbook, seeming to lend credence to the idea that she was purporting to be Native American.

I dunno if it's really that big of an issue, but what does everyone else think?
  #2  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:40 AM
DWMarch DWMarch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 2,045
Trump purports to be a President and we let him get away with that.

The whole "Pocahontas" thing is Trump repeatedly using a racial slur against a political opponent. Yet somehow Elizabeth Warren is the villain for embracing something that may or may not be as big a part of her heritage as she thought.

It's an asinine controversy built on the ravings of a racist madman. See also birtherism.
  #3  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:52 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 17,812
I have feelings of guilt here, since I encouraged Senator Warren to take a DNA test, right here on this message-board. But I didn't realize that, due to a paucity of North American Indians having submitted DNA, the matching is very fuzzy. BTW, the claim was always that Neoma Ocie Smith, Warren's 3-gt grandmother, was a Cherokee, giving Warren 1/32 Native genes. If instead Neoma Ocie was a half-breed (as might have seemed more likely a priori), Warren would be 1/64 Native, in conformance with the DNA result. This low expectation should have been publicized before taking the DNA test.

Was taking the test but then not releasing undesired results a realistic option? Such a ploy would have been disastrous for her if leaked.
  #4  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:55 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
I dunno if it's really that big of an issue, but what does everyone else think?
I think I've noted your concern.
  #5  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:00 PM
Beckdawrek's Avatar
Beckdawrek Beckdawrek is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: So.Ark ?
Posts: 10,965
To me it makes Trumps racial slur, calling her Pocahontas, even more racist. There is nothing wrong with having Native American blood, or not. Name calling is still childish and moronic. What an imbecile Trump is. Everybody in America has some mixture of DNA. It's what makes you American, afterall.
  #6  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:02 PM
TimeWinder TimeWinder is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany/Corvallis, OR
Posts: 4,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I have feelings of guilt here, since I encouraged Senator Warren to take a DNA test, right here on this message-board. But I didn't realize that, due to a paucity of North American Indians having submitted DNA, the matching is very fuzzy. BTW, the claim was always that Neoma Ocie Smith, Warren's 3-gt grandmother, was a Cherokee, giving Warren 1/32 Native genes. If instead Neoma Ocie was a half-breed (as might have seemed more likely a priori), Warren would be 1/64 Native, in conformance with the DNA result. This low expectation should have been publicized before taking the DNA test.

Was taking the test but then not releasing undesired results a realistic option? Such a ploy would have been disastrous for her if leaked.
Except that the article isn't about the results (really, who cares if she's 1/16 or 1/32 except racists?). I'm not sure it even actually MENTIONS the results. What has people upset is that she took the test at all -- basically validating Trump's racist position that it somehow matters.
  #7  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:12 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
Except that the article isn't about the results (really, who cares if she's 1/16 or 1/32 except racists?). I'm not sure it even actually MENTIONS the results. What has people upset is that she took the test at all -- basically validating Trump's racist position that it somehow matters.
It's worse than that. She released the results as if it was some kind of victory, taunting Trump to make good on his "bet". If she had quietly released the results with a "I guess great grandma had less Cherokee in her than we all thought" or something, she wouldn't have looked so foolish.
  #8  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:13 PM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
Except that the article isn't about the results (really, who cares if she's 1/16 or 1/32 except racists?). I'm not sure it even actually MENTIONS the results. What has people upset is that she took the test at all -- basically validating Trump's racist position that it somehow matters.
Agree. Trump called her a name in a derogatory tone. Even tho she did not have to prove anything to anyone, she took the bait. What was she going to do with that info - did she think Trump was really going to pay her the $1M bet? Was she going to use that info in her political career somehow? The fact that she was baited so easily by the Deej is the issue.
  #9  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:16 PM
EscAlaMike EscAlaMike is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
What has people upset is that she took the test at all -- basically validating Trump's racist position that it somehow matters.
Meh, I don't think Trump gives a damn whether she's NA or not. The issue is that she is widely assumed by the right to be using her alleged NA heritage as a type of streed cred with the identity politicos of the left.
  #10  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:20 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
Not to defend Trump's name calling but it's not exactly "racist" to scoff at someone making a claim to a race she doesn't really belong to. If I went around proclaiming I was 1/32 Nigerian, people wouldn't be racist to look at me and say "Bullshit".
  #11  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:25 PM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
someone making a claim to a race she doesn't really belong to
That's not quite what happened, was it?

Warren was always going to take shit for something no matter what she said or didn't say, though. This was just the best excuse a certain faction could find for belittling and dismissing her, and thereby the policy positions she stands for. She frightens them, and this is the inevitable response.
  #12  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:26 PM
Covfefe Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 542
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWMarch View Post
It's an asinine controversy built on the ravings of a racist madman. See also birtherism.
I don't remember any leftists having any falling out with Obama over how he handled that. It's not the case here; people are offended.
  #13  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:28 PM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
What has people upset is that she took the test at all -- basically validating Trump's racist position that it somehow matters.
Did you think the same thing when Obama released his long-form birth certificate?
  #14  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:33 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
That's not quite what happened, was it?
.
It is what happened. Yes, it's an ugly line of attack and shouldn't affect an intelligent voter's decision but she did lay claim to a tribe that she really has no right to.

Last edited by CarnalK; 12-06-2018 at 12:35 PM.
  #15  
Old 12-06-2018, 12:52 PM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,951
Not really.
Quote:
"As a kid, I never asked my mom about documentation when she talked about our Native American heritage," Warren said in a 2012 campaign ad. "What kid would? But I knew my father’s family didn’t like that she was part Cherokee and part Delaware. So my parents had to elope."
That, of course, didn't stop Scott Brown from calling her a liar, or other Republicans from picking up that claim. Anything that blows the dog whistle, though ...
  #16  
Old 12-06-2018, 01:04 PM
Gus Gusterson Gus Gusterson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: US
Posts: 1,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowthx View Post
Agree. Trump called her a name in a derogatory tone. Even tho she did not have to prove anything to anyone, she took the bait. What was she going to do with that info - did she think Trump was really going to pay her the $1M bet? Was she going to use that info in her political career somehow? The fact that she was baited so easily by the Deej is the issue.
Seconded. She thinks she can play Trump's game because she's smarter than him, but she can't. He will tear her to shreds because it's not about intelligence or facts. He's playing a schoolyard game and she's in the library.

I lost all respect for Warren when she pulled this stunt. I didn't vote for her in the midterms because of it. If she is the Democratic nominee for president I will vote for her but I won't like it. I hope she doesn't run. I think she would be a worse candidate than Hillary and could lose to Trump.
  #17  
Old 12-06-2018, 01:35 PM
Dacien Dacien is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gus Gusterson View Post
Seconded. She thinks she can play Trump's game because she's smarter than him, but she can't. He will tear her to shreds because it's not about intelligence or facts. He's playing a schoolyard game and she's in the library.

I lost all respect for Warren when she pulled this stunt. I didn't vote for her in the midterms because of it. If she is the Democratic nominee for president I will vote for her but I won't like it. I hope she doesn't run. I think she would be a worse candidate than Hillary and could lose to Trump.
I think Trump loses to any regular candidate. The candidate doesn't even need to stand out in any special way, just the return to normalcy will drive voters into their arms. This is why Biden polls so high.

But introduce some flawed candidate who rolls around in the mud with Trump, and then loses in that dirty game, it's asking for trouble.

If Democrats knew what was good for them they'd run a very boring, run-of-the-mill candidate. But they won't, I believe. I believe voters will elevate a divisive progressive who doesn't appeal to Independents, and they just might lose because of it.
  #18  
Old 12-06-2018, 01:37 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/u...test-2020.html

Is this a non-issue, being taken more seriously than it should, or was this a catastrophic misstep for Warren that doomed her 2020 chances?
Definitely the first, but that doesn't necessarily keep the second from being true as well. Butteremails and all that.
  #19  
Old 12-06-2018, 01:49 PM
Jonathan Chance Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 21,901
I don't think it matters at all. I don't think she ever had a realistic chance of attaining the nomination, much less winning the presidency.

It was silly of her to respond to the goading. But shows a certain peevishness, not anything else. No one around her - except some real die-hards - should be worrying at all. Her senate seat is essentially hers until she dies or retires. That's as far as she's going to go.
  #20  
Old 12-06-2018, 01:54 PM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
If Democrats knew what was good for them they'd run a very boring, run-of-the-mill candidate. But they won't, I believe. I believe voters will elevate a divisive progressive who doesn't appeal to Independents, and they just might lose because of it.
100% agree. The next election is about winning, not making a point. They had better pick someone the Progressives can live with, but that the Independents love.
  #21  
Old 12-06-2018, 02:39 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 24,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
I don't think it matters at all. I don't think she ever had a realistic chance of attaining the nomination, much less winning the presidency.

It was silly of her to respond to the goading. But shows a certain peevishness, not anything else. No one around her - except some real die-hards - should be worrying at all. Her senate seat is essentially hers until she dies or retires. That's as far as she's going to go.
+1
  #22  
Old 12-06-2018, 05:22 PM
Not Carlson Not Carlson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gus Gusterson View Post
Seconded. She thinks she can play Trump's game because she's smarter than him, but she can't. He will tear her to shreds because it's not about intelligence or facts. He's playing a schoolyard game and she's in the library.

I lost all respect for Warren when she pulled this stunt. I didn't vote for her in the midterms because of it...
I'd say that means you fell for Trump's game too.
He convinced you that not only was this something that mattered, but that it was worth the value of your vote.
  #23  
Old 12-06-2018, 08:42 PM
foolsguinea foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,445
I was thinking about this today, somehow. I don't think there is a position Warren could have taken to satisfy those who want to denigrate her. That means to me that the position she does take isn't to blame for those mocking her.

She hasn't lied; she's not deluded; she is exactly who she says she is. How is any of this nonsense her fault?
  #24  
Old 12-06-2018, 09:14 PM
Measure for Measure's Avatar
Measure for Measure Measure for Measure is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Twitter: @MeasureMeasure
Posts: 14,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by foolsguinea View Post
I was thinking about this today, somehow. I don't think there is a position Warren could have taken to satisfy those who want to denigrate her. That means to me that the position she does take isn't to blame for those mocking her.

She hasn't lied; she's not deluded; she is exactly who she says she is. How is any of this nonsense her fault?
This looks to me like a bullshit controversy, amounting to nothing. Warren was accused of dishonesty; Trump challenged her to take a DNA test. Test vindicated her. Trump welsched on his promise to donate $1 million to charity - another lie in a string of broken promises. Conservatives are desperate to change the subject to talk about anything but the issues facing the country.

Warren did nothing wrong and if she didn't take the test, she would look like she's hiding something. Getting this nonsense out of the way early was the smart move.

Whether Warren is Presidential material is another issue. We'll see. But this is a nothingburger except insofar as it emphasizes that Trump betrays his promises without hesitation or shame.
  #25  
Old 12-06-2018, 09:24 PM
Measure for Measure's Avatar
Measure for Measure Measure for Measure is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Twitter: @MeasureMeasure
Posts: 14,012
Twitter roundup of MfM friendly commentators:

Nate Silver of 538: https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/st...76918670909440
There's something very (Hillary) Clinton-esque about the Warren DNA test story and the way the press is handling it.
—Yeah she showed poor judgement.
—But it's a minor story treated like a major crisis.
—Probably a proxy for other concerns (and/or biases).
Greg Sargent of WAPO https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/st...49551190032384
Elizabeth Warren's DNA test is rapidly becoming the "But her emails!" of 2020. @paulwaldman1 on today's NYT piece on Warren:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.384306518ad0
Paul Waldman, WAPO column:
Welcome to “But her emails!”, version 2020.

Even if you think Warren shouldn’t have bothered with the DNA test, answer this question: So what? I mean actually answer it. See if you can complete this sentence without sounding ridiculous: Elizabeth Warren’s DNA test is extremely important to the question of what sort of president she would be and deserves endless discussion because ___.
Philippe Reines https://twitter.com/PhilippeReines/s...87128647446529
Dems need to live in the real world

Pocahontas, Crooked Hillary, Creepy Joe are deadly attacks

Was Warren’s plan perfect? Hardly

Ignore trump? He’ll be here until 2025

Standing up for yourself isn’t Going Low. It’s a prerequisite to standing up for us.
  #26  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:14 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Not really.That, of course, didn't stop Scott Brown from calling her a liar, or other Republicans from picking up that claim. Anything that blows the dog whistle, though ...
At two different jobs she had herself listed as Native American and she submitted recipes for that Native cookbook. So yeah, really. I'm not saying she's some big liar -- it's just a little affectation.

A wiley politician would have felt out Cherokee leadership before releasing the test. I agree this is a minor story being overhyped but if this was an opening move to set up a Presidential run then she kinda showed she's not that wiley.
  #27  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:23 PM
adaher adaher is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 28,728
It's a total non issue. She's handled like an idiot but it's just not a huge deal, at least not for Warren herself. I see it as more an indictment of racial classification and preferences. But on the scandal scale, this is way less important than Clinton's email problems, and while I did believe those were a legitimate scandal, I never considered them disqualifying either. Just more casual Clinton BS.

Of course, what matters in the end is whether this trifling scandal has legs. If it does, jettison her. Don't repeat the mistake of 2016. Republicans will of course try to take down any Democrat who is a threat. But there are punches that land and punches that are slipped, and she's getting puffy around the eyes. A far cry from Obama, who was barely inconvenienced by what the GOP threw at him. The most serious threat to his candidacy he solved with a single speech(the Wright controversy).
  #28  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:32 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
You know candidates can't be jettisoned. She's smart, hopefully smart enough to know she isn't the woman for the job.*


*eta: she'd probably be a decent President but she's not for the job of getting elected to it.

Last edited by CarnalK; 12-06-2018 at 10:33 PM.
  #29  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:38 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 20,607
She should have ignored it or admitted that she didn't have the data and that she was probably stupid to have marked the thing, 40-something years ago.
  #30  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:40 PM
Zakalwe's Avatar
Zakalwe Zakalwe is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Measure for Measure View Post
Paul Waldman, WAPO column:[INDENT]Welcome to “But her emails!”, version 2020.

Even if you think Warren shouldn’t have bothered with the DNA test, answer this question: So what? I mean actually answer it. See if you can complete this sentence without sounding ridiculous: Elizabeth Warren’s DNA test is extremely important to the question of what sort of president she would be and deserves endless discussion because ___.
__it shows that she is willing to spend time and money, and risk political loss-of-face to respond to a throwaway taunt from a playground bully. It shows she can be baited into doing something stupid by people she should be telling to go to hell. I'd like my President to be a little smarter than that.
  #31  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:48 PM
Measure for Measure's Avatar
Measure for Measure Measure for Measure is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Twitter: @MeasureMeasure
Posts: 14,012
Jeb Bush felt that the best way to handle Trump was to ignore him, and focus his attack ads on other mainstream candidates, who together never topped 40% of the polling. Never get into a wrestling match with a pig they said.

Low energy. We all know how that strategy worked out.
  #32  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:51 PM
adaher adaher is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 28,728
Oh, you want high energy, but you don't want high energy stupid. Trump responds to every attack, but very rarely does he come out looking better for it. And Trump does so many attacks himself if you responded to all of them that's all you'd be doing.

Warren should have just admitted it's a family legend and probably not true, and it was inappropriate to claim the heritage at her job.
  #33  
Old 12-06-2018, 10:58 PM
Ulf the Unwashed Ulf the Unwashed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,134
Is it "extremely important?" Of course not. However, it does show poor judgment, and it clearly shows that she's letting Trump get under her skin and throw her off her game. It doesn't give me confidence that she'll deal with him effectively during a general election. Also, I don't think a chief executive should be so invested in "I was RIGHT! SEEEEE?" Better not to react to the needling. But she couldn't or wouldn't do it.

I don't know how much it'll hurt her chances, maybe not at all; still, given that we have about 50 people running for the Democratic nomination, people (voters, donors, and fellow pols) are going to be looking for reasons NOT to support candidates as much as they look for reasons TO support them, and this is a reason NOT to support her.
  #34  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:14 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 20,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Measure for Measure View Post
Jeb Bush felt that the best way to handle Trump was to ignore him, and focus his attack ads on other mainstream candidates, who together never topped 40% of the polling. Never get into a wrestling match with a pig they said.

Low energy. We all know how that strategy worked out.
I doubt that this was Jeb's largest issue.
  #35  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:40 PM
Not Carlson Not Carlson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Not to defend Trump's name calling but it's not exactly "racist" to scoff at someone making a claim to a race she doesn't really belong to. If I went around proclaiming I was 1/32 Nigerian, people wouldn't be racist to look at me and say "Bullshit".
What if they called you Uncle Rhemus?

As to whether it would be fair to call "bullshit" on your claim, shouldn't that depend on whether you've been led to believe you have such a heritage by your family? Or whether you actually have some DNA evidence of the same? Or whether you've tried to use it to score points?
  #36  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:40 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by adaher View Post
It's a total non issue. She's handled like an idiot but it's just not a huge deal, at least not for Warren herself. I see it as more an indictment of racial classification and preferences. But on the scandal scale, this is way less important than Clinton's email problems, and while I did believe those were a legitimate scandal, I never considered them disqualifying either. Just more casual Clinton BS.

Of course, what matters in the end is whether this trifling scandal has legs. If it does, jettison her. Don't repeat the mistake of 2016. Republicans will of course try to take down any Democrat who is a threat. But there are punches that land and punches that are slipped, and she's getting puffy around the eyes. A far cry from Obama, who was barely inconvenienced by what the GOP threw at him. The most serious threat to his candidacy he solved with a single speech(the Wright controversy).
Resorting to colonialist ideas of blood quanta to debunk a white nationalist (trump) potentially alienated a bunch of people who are involuntarily stuck in minority status.

Remember also that there are 100's of sovereign tribes and Trump is also directly attempting to homogenize them all, ignoring their individual cultures and sovereign rights. The democrats also haven't won many of these people as even extremely liberal cities like my home in Seattle don't even seem to care about murders and abductions of native women.

Elizabeth Warren tokinizing native Americans bolsters Trumps white nationalist base while disenfranchising a huge number of independent cultures and groups who are some of the most discriminated against Americans overall.

Elizabeth Warren has been ignoring the Cherokee elders for way longer than Trump has even been running for office. She should have sincerely apologized directly to the people she has slighted but instead she chose to use a modern form of scientific racism to try and win a debate point with a bigot.

She handed victory to Trump and gained nothing herself. I hope the reports are true and she apologizes to the people she should have done so to over 6 years ago.

If she doesn't do an about face the Democrats need to find a presidential candidate doesn't actively demonstrate the actions of benevolent racism. There isn't a big delta between the negative effects of benevolent and explicit racism.

If she learns and helps the people she has offended a the voice they are due out of respect I fear that the turnout will be greatly reduced by those who will view as a vote in support just another flavor of racism.
  #37  
Old 12-07-2018, 12:24 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
Just found an interesting bit of trivia: Senator Jeanne Shaheen is actually a descendant of Pocahontas

And I think you're overreacting, rat avatar.
  #38  
Old 12-07-2018, 01:41 AM
TimeWinder TimeWinder is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany/Corvallis, OR
Posts: 4,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Did you think the same thing when Obama released his long-form birth certificate?
You don't even know what I think about this. I'm stating the objection that's being made in the linked article.

But of course I do need to point out that you're attempting to "both sides do it" very, very different situations. Had Obama's birth certificate been invalid, it would have disqualified him from holding the office of President. In other words, nothing like this situation at all.

Last edited by TimeWinder; 12-07-2018 at 01:41 AM.
  #39  
Old 12-07-2018, 02:05 AM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Just found an interesting bit of trivia: Senator Jeanne Shaheen is actually a descendant of Pocahontas

And I think you're overreacting, rat avatar.
Quote:
According to publicly available Ancestry.com family tree data
You may want to research the problem with people trying to connect themselves with famous people. It is an epidemic problem, especially with Ancestry.com and the ties to LDS Family History Centers and the incentivized goal of baptism for the dead.

https://twitter.com/CherokeeNation/s...65527214776321

When a minority groups express offense about something that’s happening, it is a sign of privilege and an indication you are dehumanizing them when you decide by fiat that minorities aren't allowed to decide that they are offended by themselves.

If you don't see why saying that the Cherokee Nation is too easily offended is a problem I suggest some reading may be in order. We all have bias but in general telling people they have no right to take offense is an easy one to catch.

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-07-2018 at 02:07 AM.
  #40  
Old 12-07-2018, 05:22 AM
Lamoral Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
Except that the article isn't about the results (really, who cares if she's 1/16 or 1/32 except racists?). I'm not sure it even actually MENTIONS the results. What has people upset is that she took the test at all -- basically validating Trump's racist position that it somehow matters.
I thought the test revealed 1/1024th Native American, not 1/16th or 1/32nd which would be substantial enough numbers to actually have a specific known ancestor. 1/1024th is so ridiculously negligble of a number, she would have been better off just not mentioning it.

That's THREE ZEROES after the decimal point, in terms of percentage. That's statistical noise. 23andMe (which I know is probably not as reliable as whatever proprietary and expensive service Warren used) said that I have .1% Native American and I have NO known Native American ancestry, no legends of Native American ancestry, and in fact no ancestry at all from North America before the 1900s, so to have Native American that far back in my lineage would have to mean that someone with Native American ancestry had to have traveled to Greece, Italy, or Eastern Europe to bring it there. The possibility is so remote that I'm inclined to just think it's a mistake.
  #41  
Old 12-07-2018, 06:00 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
https://twitter.com/CherokeeNation/s...65527214776321

When a minority groups express offense about something that’s happening, it is a sign of privilege and an indication you are dehumanizing them when you decide by fiat that minorities aren't allowed to decide that they are offended by themselves.

If you don't see why saying that the Cherokee Nation is too easily offended is a problem I suggest some reading may be in order. We all have bias but in general telling people they have no right to take offense is an easy one to catch.
Are you Cherokee? Because I said you were overreacting.

And no, I don't buy into the idea that an offended party gets to decide exactly how much of an outrage or insult has been made. I will listen and respect their viewpoints but ultimately I will decide for myself if I think they are overreacting.
  #42  
Old 12-07-2018, 06:03 AM
Not Carlson Not Carlson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Resorting to colonialist ideas of blood quanta to debunk a white nationalist (trump) potentially alienated a bunch of people who are involuntarily stuck in minority status.
......
Elizabeth Warren tokinizing native Americans bolsters Trumps white nationalist base while disenfranchising a huge number of independent cultures and groups who are some of the most discriminated against Americans overall.
This argument bewilders me, as does the OP article's repeated references to the "controversial field of racial science."

Sure, I agree there's a legitimate discussion to be had about the misuse of racial identification and that racial purists sometimes use genetic testing to push their purile beliefs.
What I don't understand is how that has jack-all to do with Warren.

You could fault her for allowing herself to be baited by a trolling racist, but there's nothing implicitly racist about her use of a DNA test to verify her ancestry.
She didn't take the test to prove her racial purity or use it to target any ethnic groups.

Quote:
...Remember also that there are 100's of sovereign tribes and Trump is also directly attempting to homogenize them all, ignoring their individual cultures and sovereign rights.
Warren made the same point in her video.

Quote:
Elizabeth Warren has been ignoring the Cherokee elders for way longer than Trump has even been running for office. She should have sincerely apologized directly to the people she has slighted but instead she chose to use a modern form of scientific racism to try and win a debate point with a bigot.
Trump has been attacking native Americans for longer than Elizabeth Warren has been in office.
As forWarren, from the article:
Quote:
NYT: "This line of criticism has particularly stung Ms. Warren, who has made a point to hold several private talks with Native leaders since taking the DNA test, emphasizing her respect for tribal sovereignty and making clear she does not claim tribal citizenship."
......

"... before the DNA test was released, Ms. Warren had built a reservoir of good will among liberals on these issues. She received praise for lending her national platform to highlighting injustice against Native Americans recently"
So maybe she could have handled this better, but the angle of your criticism against her seems more than a tad bit skewed.
  #43  
Old 12-07-2018, 08:19 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
But of course I do need to point out that you're attempting to "both sides do it" very, very different situations. Had Obama's birth certificate been invalid, it would have disqualified him from holding the office of President. In other words, nothing like this situation at all.
Wrong. The comparison is to how ridiculous, racist allegations have been handled by the targeted politicians. You think Warren did it wrong, but I'm asking you if you think Obama did it right, and if so why that's different. There are no "two sides".

So whaddaya got?
  #44  
Old 12-07-2018, 09:20 AM
spifflog spifflog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,266
I believe that she was overly invested in proving Trump wrong, and proving that she was indeed NA. And she and her staff geared up a strategy to stick it to Trump. But when the test came back and she was much less NA than she thought (1/64 to 1/1,024) she should have just released the results in a month or two, with no mention of Trump at all. She would have gotten her NA bona fides out there (to whatever extent possible) and wouldn't have gotten in the mud with Trump - where she lost.

Last edited by spifflog; 12-07-2018 at 09:21 AM. Reason: mud not mod
  #45  
Old 12-07-2018, 10:28 AM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Carlson View Post
This argument bewilders me, as does the OP article's repeated references to the "controversial field of racial science."

Sure, I agree there's a legitimate discussion to be had about the misuse of racial identification and that racial purists sometimes use genetic testing to push their purile beliefs.
What I don't understand is how that has jack-all to do with Warren.

You could fault her for allowing herself to be baited by a trolling racist, but there's nothing implicitly racist about her use of a DNA test to verify her ancestry.
She didn't take the test to prove her racial purity or use it to target any ethnic groups.


Warren made the same point in her video.


Trump has been attacking native Americans for longer than Elizabeth Warren has been in office.
As forWarren, from the article:

So maybe she could have handled this better, but the angle of your criticism against her seems more than a tad bit skewed.

This IS a misuse of racial identification, is is pure colonial race base B.S these services have limited data and can't tell if the tiny maker they have is Cherokee or if she had a relative from Terra Del Fuego. It is like someone testing and finding out that they have some Irish in them and then claiming that they are Chinese, it is honestly that absurd.

You augment is self justifying not only cultural appropriation, but you are randomly lumping 100's of cultures and peoples with a varied and broad history into one hemisphere into one group who are "others" despite those facts.

You are literally arguing that the lumping of half the historical peopled world as being one homogenized group. Note this one group has been subject to massive genocidal programs within my life time. Between 1970 and 1976 alone, between 25 and 50 percent of Native American women were sterilized. Today this "race" which is more likely to be shot by police than any other group, and the police don't even bother to investigate when women who are placed in this arbitrary group who are abducted and possibly killed.

This is colonial racial eugenics, and the fact that people don't get that it is purely racism is a very real problem.

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-07-2018 at 10:31 AM.
  #46  
Old 12-07-2018, 10:36 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 16,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Wrong. The comparison is to how ridiculous, racist allegations have been handled by the targeted politicians. You think Warren did it wrong, but I'm asking you if you think Obama did it right, and if so why that's different. There are no "two sides".

So whaddaya got?
The obvious difference is that Obama was sitting on a full house, Warren barely had a pair of deuces. The fact that they handled it similarly is not evidence that they both handled it well.
  #47  
Old 12-07-2018, 10:45 AM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 24,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by spifflog View Post
I believe that she was overly invested in proving Trump wrong, and proving that she was indeed NA. And she and her staff geared up a strategy to stick it to Trump. But when the test came back and she was much less NA than she thought (1/64 to 1/1,024) she should have just released the results in a month or two, with no mention of Trump at all. She would have gotten her NA bona fides out there (to whatever extent possible) and wouldn't have gotten in the mud with Trump - where she lost.
I think the first part of your post is key. She was being trolled, and took the bait -- hook, line, and sinker.
  #48  
Old 12-07-2018, 11:10 AM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer Projammer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,523
Her mistake was making the claim without having any kind of documentation (that I'm aware of). If she even had a family bible with a genealogy page in it, that would have been sufficient in the face of the inevitable challenge.

But once the claim was made, there was no good ending for her.

People who wouldn't vote for her to begin with still won't be voting for her.
Most of the people who would, still will in spite of it.

Then there will be a handful like Gus Gusterson who would have, but now won't. Not because of the false claim, but because she has demonstrated questionable critical thinking skills in being drawn into taking the test. Probably not enough to change the outcome of any election, but still demonstrating a lack of confidence in her abilities.
  #49  
Old 12-07-2018, 11:24 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 47,951
The claim was that it was family lore. It was.
  #50  
Old 12-07-2018, 11:26 AM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,091
She says one thing and does another, like us Europeans seem to do. When she spoke in front of NCAI this February she received a standing ovation, she could have moved forward with respecting these groups but instead chose to release the DNA data.

http://www.pollysgranddaughter.com/2...friend-to.html

Quote:
The only thing Warren had to do was admit she was wrong and apologize. She not only refused to do that, but pushed back against it until she went too far. Now her time for apology has passed. At this point, the only thing we Native Americans can do to show her how incredibly alarming and offensive her actions have become is to turn our backs on her while asking the American people to join us and do the same.
The fact that she refuses to just move forward an apologize makes me lump her in with a "polite trump" grouping more every day. It is the outright betrayal of her promises, which she has claimed to reiterated but she continues to prove they are just lip service and lies. She is quickly losing her chance to admit her error and move forward, but by continuing to make Native American identity about racism instead of tribal sovereignty she is still insisting on digging a deeper hole.

Note the un-funny irony of her speech to the NCAI earlier this year.

http://www.ncai.org/Elizabeth_Warren...an_Indians.pdf

Quote:
Indigenous people have been telling the story of Pocahontas — the real Pocahontas — for four centuries. A story of heroism. And bravery. And pain.
And, for almost as long, her story has been taken away by powerful people who twisted it to serve their own purposes.
I am a bit disheartening by my fellow progressives who rightfully call out the alt-right but then ignore situations like this. She is pandering to a group she doesn't respect, and her actions do not match with her words.

Then again I am playing the fool here, as it is quite clear that my supposedly progressive community, like Senator Warren, only seem to care about these causes when it helps serve their own egos and at their convenience and don't really care about helping minorities be treated as the equals they are.

Seattle Has the Highest Number of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women in Urban Areas

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-07-2018 at 11:28 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017