Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 06-15-2019, 01:01 PM
MyFootsZZZ is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,748
She's no slouch. But yes, I think she really made a big gaff with the whole DNA stuff. I can't see her sharing a stage with Trump. I mean, it would be great karmic justice to obliterate him on stage, but I don't see that happening.

We'll get a glimpse of her debate skills soon... Not that being on stage with Trump is a normal debate.
  #52  
Old 06-15-2019, 01:06 PM
D'Anconia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Almost every white person in the United States has "family lore" that they are descended from Indians.
I find that hard to believe. Lots of white people are descended from immigrants who came in the 19th century from Ireland, Italy, Poland, etc. It seems unlikely that they have "family lore" regarding Indians.
  #53  
Old 06-15-2019, 01:11 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,463
"Almost every" might be an overstatement, but it's still a lot of folks. And most of them are probably true: Whites and Indians have coexisted on this continent for long enough for there to have been plenty of mixing.
  #54  
Old 06-15-2019, 01:24 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
I find that hard to believe. Lots of white people are descended from immigrants who came in the 19th century from Ireland, Italy, Poland, etc. It seems unlikely that they have "family lore" regarding Indians.
But even those probably had at least one ancestor who intermarried with a white Anglo-Western European person who had the Indian legend in the family.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
"Almost every" might be an overstatement, but it's still a lot of folks. And most of them are probably true: Whites and Indians have coexisted on this continent for long enough for there to have been plenty of mixing.
And it may be true, but that's my point. Every white person doesn't use their miniscule Indian heritage to claim benefits and set asides like Warren did.

I don't have any particular animosity towards Warren, but it is ignorance at best and fraud at worst. With the proliferation of Ancestry DNA and the like, people will see that they likely have as much or more Native American ancestry than Warren and wonder why they didn't get these benefits throughout their lives.
  #55  
Old 06-15-2019, 08:20 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Kent Clark making something large doesn’t make it more true. There are only politicians. They do what gets them re-elected and what they think is right which may be what I think is wrong.

For the last decade GOP hard line positioning has sold well. After a Trump loss, preferably a big one? The voices that had been saying that they need to reach beyond the base might get louder and more likely to win.

The ten years are facts. What happens in the next four is speculation and assuming no change as facts change is often groundless.

In any case trying to work together sells better and is more likely to accomplish something than not trying to
DSeid, to use your own words, "After a Trump loss."

I read your comment about flipping the Senate to be specifically about 2020. My response is that there will be no bipartisan Republicans running in November 2020, because they all will have lost the primaries to staunch Trumpists.

My fondest hope is that Trump and all who stand with him are utterly annihilated and the Republicans see the error of their ways. But I don't see any Republicans who actually want to be reasonable making it through a primary until 2022, at best.

There, no shouting.
  #56  
Old 06-15-2019, 11:09 PM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
...And it may be true, but that's my point. Every white person doesn't use their miniscule Indian heritage to claim benefits and set asides like Warren did...
what benefits and set-asides did she claim?

Seriously, I don't believe she got anything for it.
  #57  
Old 06-16-2019, 12:14 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
I don't have any particular animosity towards Warren, but it is ignorance at best and fraud at worst. With the proliferation of Ancestry DNA and the like, people will see that they likely have as much or more Native American ancestry than Warren and wonder why they didn't get these benefits throughout their lives.
What benefits did she get throughout her life? She's very explicitly not a tribal member and never has been, which is why it was a controversy. There was a press release from Harvard that's pretty cringeworthy in retrospect, but I don't think there's ever been any evidence unearthed that she was a beneficiary of some kind of preferential hiring program.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 06-16-2019 at 12:17 AM.
  #58  
Old 06-16-2019, 12:23 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyFootsZZZ View Post
We'll get a glimpse of her debate skills soon... Not that being on stage with Trump is a normal debate.
And not that it mattered much the last time Trump was on the ballot. He had his clock cleaned in all three debates in 2016.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 06-16-2019 at 12:24 AM.
  #59  
Old 06-16-2019, 02:27 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
I find that hard to believe. Lots of white people are descended from immigrants who came in the 19th century from Ireland, Italy, Poland, etc. It seems unlikely that they have "family lore" regarding Indians.
D'Anconia for the win! As an amateur genealogist I have perused many American family trees. Even claims of Native ancestry in families here for over three centuries are relatively uncommon.
  #60  
Old 06-16-2019, 07:13 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
DSeid, to use your own words, "After a Trump loss."

I read your comment about flipping the Senate to be specifically about 2020. ...
Then you read incorrectly.

The comment is in reference to the idea that even hoping that enough GOP senators will be interested in doing anything in a bipartisan manner that shit might get done is hopelessly naive and beyond idiotic.

It includes the fact that there a few GOP Senators already who could be emboldened to go hard against kneejerk Trumpism after a Trump loss ... not all are lock step (Romney, Lee, Sasse, Collins, Paul ...) But it isn't mostly about that.

It isn't about flipping in 2020. If it is flipped then there is less need to see that. It is about the number of races that are GOP held now that are expected to be, and potentially might be in a changed mood environment, competitive in 2022. There are quite a few up. In those potentially competitive states that have GOP senators running for re-election the mood after a (preferably humiliating) Trump loss may very well be a move back to moving to a middle as those incumbents will likely win their primaries and cannot win on base alone.

IMHO believing that those GOP incumbents in potentially competitive states will see that some show of bipartisanship is their best chance at staying in office after midterms is less naive than appreciating politicians' self-interests.

IF the GOP maintains a slim majority in 2020 those few being willing to break ranks to prove their worth to the middle will be enough to accomplish some things, even offsetting a Manchin or two going the other direction.
  #61  
Old 06-16-2019, 12:11 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Then you read incorrectly.
Then I apologize for shouting because you and I are on the same page when it comes to 2020.

However, I don't share your optimism about any incumbent Republican being willing to work with any Democratic President in 2021-2022.They didn't run on a platform of bipartisanship, they didn't survive primary challenges by being partisan, and they weren't elected to be bipartisan.

And sure enough, this showed up in my "here's what you missed last week" feed this morning. Alexandra Petri agrees with me.
  #62  
Old 06-16-2019, 02:15 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,335
In those specific competitive states actually some had run more centrist campaigns and were elected to actually get shit done.

But no question the idea that there will be, after a Trump loss, enough GOP senators willing to deal that some actual work can get done, is, as Cilizza put it, a radical position. The popular perspective within many D pundit and social media circles is that GOP = evil, that there is no working with them, there is only destroying them.

Go through the list of states the GOP will be defending in 2022. Many are far from GOP slam dunks. Do you think that after Trump loses in those states those GOP incumbents will stay hitched to that wagon?

Trumpism will outlast a Trump presidency, but enough in the party will be very aware that the rocky core of Trump cultists are not going to be enough for them to have any chance at winning their seats statewide. They need those who had been in their camp but who have left under Trumpism and its base turnout approach to come back. They need suburban voters to win. They were those who had been talking about trying to build support in growing demographics before.

Minimally despite its being a radical position I think it is more what more voters want to hear.
  #63  
Old 06-16-2019, 05:29 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Do you think that after Trump loses in those states those GOP incumbents will stay hitched to that wagon?
I think their Democratic opponents will do everything possible to convince voters those politicians are hitched to the Trump wagon, even if the incumbent wants to become unhitched.

Based on Nixon, Clinton and Bush, I'd guess it will take at least two Congressional elections to reform the party that gave up the White House.
  #64  
Old 06-16-2019, 05:42 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
I think their Democratic opponents will do everything possible to convince voters those politicians are hitched to the Trump wagon, even if the incumbent wants to become unhitched.

Based on Nixon, Clinton and Bush, I'd guess it will take at least two Congressional elections to reform the party that gave up the White House.
And not only do we agree I hope those Democratic opponents succeed and win the seats!

But meanwhile in 2020 to 2022 those GOP incumbents in those states very likely will be trying to become unhitched ... and to do so making showy displays of bipartisanship, of going against the wishes of leadership's party lines. In a closely split Senate all it takes is a couple who decide to work to an acceptable compromise to get something passed.


And while these general election head to heads are not very predictive of 2020 results, Fox saying that even Warren would beat Trump if the election was held today is something.
  #65  
Old 06-16-2019, 08:52 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
And while these general election head to heads are not very predictive of 2020 results, Fox saying that even Warren would beat Trump if the election was held today is something.
Heck, not just Warren, not just Biden and Sanders, but even (by a hair) Harris and Buttigieg!

If I'm Donald Trump and I'm polling behind a 37-year old gay mayor of a mid-sized city in Indiana who got only 37% of the vote in his one bid for statewide office, I'd start to wonder about my reputation as the outsider candidate.
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 04:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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