Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 11-05-2019, 05:01 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
That's the problem, too many Democrats dont consider this to be discriminatory because its happening to asians. A junior partner in civil rights. Some Democrats would like them to be silent partners.



They tune out as soon as you question Democratic orthodoxy on AA.
This is totally wrong. Most Democrats have no idea what you're talking about. I had never heard of the possibility that some AA policies might harm Asians until the last few years, on this board. And I think I spend a lot more time discussing policy disagreements than most Democrats.

If you want change on this issue, then work on spreading awareness.
__________________
My new novel Spindown

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-05-2019 at 05:01 PM.
  #102  
Old 11-05-2019, 05:20 PM
Chingon is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: the hypersphere
Posts: 724
He wants to pit Asians against Blacks and Latinos. That's why he drags it into nearly every thread he posts on.
  #103  
Old 11-05-2019, 08:42 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by str8cashhomie View Post
You put stuff like this out and not back it up.
This article highlights two instances,

https://www.dailycamera.com/2018/06/...n-meritocracy/
  #104  
Old 11-05-2019, 08:46 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
This article highlights two instances,



https://www.dailycamera.com/2018/06/...n-meritocracy/
This does not support your argument. Maybe those tests were shitty for a variety of reasons.

It only supports your argument if you insist on interpreting everything in the most Hannity-esque (or maybe Malkin-esque?) way possible to make the Democrats seem as bad as possible.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #105  
Old 11-05-2019, 09:04 PM
str8cashhomie is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
This article highlights two instances,

https://www.dailycamera.com/2018/06/...n-meritocracy/
I wanted some citation or basis for what I quoted which was (paraphrasing) "democrats want Asians to be silent partners".
  #106  
Old 11-07-2019, 11:08 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
This is totally wrong. Most Democrats have no idea what you're talking about. I had never heard of the possibility that some AA policies might harm Asians until the last few years, on this board. And I think I spend a lot more time discussing policy disagreements than most Democrats.

If you want change on this issue, then work on spreading awareness.
I think a lot of Democrats don't understand the issue because they tune out as soon as you question Democratic orthodoxy on affirmative action.

Asians have tried to distinguish between anti-asian discrimination and affirmative action but the message that we seem to be getting is that anti-Asian discrimination is a necessary by product of affirmative action. Apparently, you can't fight anti-Asian discrimination without fighting affirmative action.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...sian-americans

It is discouraging having t spend so much effort trying to convince otherwise liberal folks that discrimination against asians is not acceptable.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-c...e-harvard-case

The way current liberal position on AA is inconsistent and leads to undesirable outcomes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...6a7_story.html

So now a bunch of Asians are fighting back against the anti-Asian discrimination and being called racists for doing so.

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs...liminate-shsat

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educa...ssions-policy/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/u...on-ballot.html
  #107  
Old 11-07-2019, 11:12 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chingon View Post
He wants to pit Asians against Blacks and Latinos. That's why he drags it into nearly every thread he posts on.
The fight's already started, we're just fighting back now and it offends some people that asians would fight back because we're expected to be passive and just take what we are given.

Asians brought this on themselves by being politically disengaged and it took a direct threat to their children's earned educational opportunities to awaken them politically.

Asian votes swing. Asian votes swing more than any other demographic. It is at an all time high in favor of Democrats (or more accurately, against Trump) but as soon as Trump leaves office, this may change if there is not a shift in how politicians view the Asian vote.
  #108  
Old 11-07-2019, 11:22 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by str8cashhomie View Post
I wanted some citation or basis for what I quoted which was (paraphrasing) "democrats want Asians to be silent partners".
You don't have to paraphrase, there is a quoting function and you've used it before. I said:

"too many Democrats dont consider this to be discriminatory because its happening to asians. A junior partner in civil rights. Some Democrats would like them to be silent partners."

It was not clear you were focusing on the part where I said "some Democrats would like them to be silent partners"

To explain that comment, I would say that I think that accusations of racism from the SJW crowd are frequently just attempts to silence dissent. Particularly when these accusations are directed at otherwise left of center groups.

There have been accusations that this resistance to affirmative action are driven by racism. It's actually not an uncommon accusation, made explicitly or implicitly.

I assume this means you at least think there is some merit to the rest of the statement.
  #109  
Old 11-07-2019, 11:36 AM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 27,104
I married into an Asian-American family, with branches in both the Midwest and the Pacific Coast.

From what I've witnessed, when people complain affirmative action discriminates against Asian-Americans and/or Latino-Americans and favors African-Americans, they don't really have the best interests of African-Americans, Asian-Americans, or Latino-Americans at heart.
  #110  
Old 11-07-2019, 12:16 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I think a lot of Democrats don't understand the issue because they tune out as soon as you question Democratic orthodoxy on affirmative action.
I hadn't tuned anyone out. I had never even heard the argument until relatively recently.

I'm sure there are a few high profile Ivy-League defenders out there who insist that these incredibly wealthy and influential schools are totally fair... but why do you believe most Democrats are onboard with this? I'm certainly not. Neither are the vast majority of Democrats and liberals I know.

The GOP wants to pit minorities against each other. By insisting that Democrats (and blacks and Latinos) are against you, you're doing their work for them. It's bullshit. Ivy League schools are yet another set of wealthy institutions largely working to benefit the rich and powerful.

What you're saying about Democrats, liberals, and blacks and Latinos, as big groups, is not based on any facts that you've shared. AFAICT, most of these folks have no idea what you're talking about, and haven't heard the arguments you're making at all.

If you really care about this problem, rather than just another way to demonize Democrats/liberals/blacks/Latinos, then work on awareness rather than bomb-throwing.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-07-2019 at 12:17 PM.
  #111  
Old 11-07-2019, 03:38 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
I married into an Asian-American family, with branches in both the Midwest and the Pacific Coast.

From what I've witnessed, when people complain affirmative action discriminates against Asian-Americans and/or Latino-Americans and favors African-Americans, they don't really have the best interests of African-Americans, Asian-Americans, or Latino-Americans at heart.
Why do so may white folks think they know what's best for asians?
Why does that usually involve asians paying the bill for white liberal guilt?
Why are so many asians protesting affirmative action laws? Do these asians not have the interests of asians at heart?
I actually support affirmative action but it is getting harder and harder to support this nuanced view when liberals accuse anyone that questions liberal orthodoxy on affirmative action as a racist.

Last edited by Damuri Ajashi; 11-07-2019 at 03:43 PM.
  #112  
Old 11-07-2019, 03:52 PM
Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 3,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Why do so may white folks think they know what's best for asians?
Why does that usually involve asians paying the bill for white liberal guilt?
Why are so many asians protesting affirmative action laws? Do these asians not have the interests of asians at heart?
I actually support affirmative action but it is getting harder and harder to support this nuanced view when liberals accuse anyone that questions liberal orthodoxy on affirmative action as a racist.
For someone who is so against racial discrimination against Asians, you sure seem to say a lot of negative things about White People.

Self awareness is a good thing.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #113  
Old 11-07-2019, 08:22 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
For someone who is so against racial discrimination against Asians, you sure seem to say a lot of negative things about White People.

Self awareness is a good thing.
There's a lot of negative things that white people did and continue to do. Things that white people seem happy to tell asians to pay the moral price for.

It wasn't asians that decided to enslave a race and practice one of the most vile forms of slavery imaginable.
It wasn't asians that decided to breed human beings so that they could sell the children.
It wasn't asians that then decide to rape the women because mixed kids commanded higher prices.
It wasn't asians that kept discriminating against them with Jim Crow laws.
It wasn't asians that continued to segregate blacks to poor neighborhoods with redlining.

And it wasn't blacks that decided that the best way to balance the scales was for white people to take opportunities from asian kids and give it to black kids. This is not the remedy they might have chosen if given a choice, white men chose the paltry remedy.

I've seen too many allegedly liberal white folks freak the fuck out when opportunity for their kids were being diminished in favor of black kids to take white woke SJWs seriously.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/ny...?module=inline

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/n...n-schools.html

There are ways to structure affirmative action so that the burden falls primarily on white folks instead of primarily on asians but then affirmative action wouldn't be quite as popular.

10 years ago I was firmly in favor of affirmative action. You can't be a racial minority of any kind in this country and not realize how racist it is, particularly against blacks. Asians generally would not compare the discrimination that asians have experienced with the discrimination against blacks like some white minority groups have done.

But as these debates and conversations have developed on this board, it is clear to me that affirmative action as it is practiced today in college admissions and education generally is discriminatory towards asians and it is also clear to me that a LOT of liberal white folks seem to be OK with that.

Last edited by Damuri Ajashi; 11-07-2019 at 08:26 PM.
  #114  
Old 11-07-2019, 08:29 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
it is also clear to me that a LOT of liberal white folks seem to be OK with that.
It is clear to me that you're convinced this is so by something other than actual facts and data. Is it really so hard for you to believe that most liberals just haven't heard this argument about how college admissions might harm Asians? I hadn't until quite recently.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #115  
Old 11-07-2019, 08:57 PM
str8cashhomie is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I assume this means you at least think there is some merit to the rest of the statement.
This is a common debate tactic that involves making multiple assertions, including one vague, unsupported accusation, and when someone only comments on the one argument that was thrown out with absolutely no justification, it's taken as tacit approval of the rest. It's a line of reasoning generally that also has no merit and only seeks to imply consensus when none is there.

I don't think iiiandyiii was accusing you of racism or dismissing your arguments because of race, I couldn't read all of your links because there were paywalls on most of them, but from the ones I read there was no accusation there, there was simply a defense of affirmative action. Today some posters have actually made dismissive comments towards you which I do think is shameful on their part.

As to the rest of the argument, my main thrust is that there is no intent from the Democrats to be unfair to white people, and that the party isn't just playing a 0 sum game of using racism accusations as a cudgel, and I still don't think this has been refuted. When it comes to Asians not being treated fairly by the education system - thus far there has been nothing I can see that people in Washington can do anything about. The lawsuit against Harvard was thrown out and AFAIK no lawsuit similar lawsuit has been successful. All that has been shown is a lot of implicit biases in colleges - nothing has been traced to affirmative action except speculation.

There is of course a lot of implicit bias involved in cases involving racism against Black or Latino people, but there have actually been policy avenues to attempt to remedy the problems, and frankly attempts to change societal problems that arise because of many individual people having implicit bias very rarely work regardless of race. This is absolutely not a reason not to try but it means that the existence of structural problems due to implicit bias is not a reason to dismiss other attempts to reduce analogous structural problems.
  #116  
Old 11-08-2019, 08:06 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
It is clear to me that you're convinced this is so by something other than actual facts and data. Is it really so hard for you to believe that most liberals just haven't heard this argument about how college admissions might harm Asians? I hadn't until quite recently.
When I talk about all the people who are OK with the discrimination, I am talking about all the folks who chime in on the Harvard lawsuit and defend the anti-Asian discrimination there.

When I talk about all the people who are OK with the discrimination, I am talking about all the folks who chime in on Bill DeBlasio's attempts to racially balance the magnet schools in NYC dismissing Asian concerns as either a necessary evil or selfishness/racism on the part of Asians.

The anti-asian discrimination has been around for decades but it took the Harvard lawsuit to really crystallize how anti-asian the arguments in favor of affirmative action (as it exists today) are.
  #117  
Old 11-08-2019, 08:40 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
When I talk about all the people who are OK with the discrimination, I am talking about all the folks who chime in on the Harvard lawsuit and defend the anti-Asian discrimination there.
I'm unaware of any more than a minuscule minority of Democrats and liberals who have done this.

Quote:
When I talk about all the people who are OK with the discrimination, I am talking about all the folks who chime in on Bill DeBlasio's attempts to racially balance the magnet schools in NYC dismissing Asian concerns as either a necessary evil or selfishness/racism on the part of Asians.
This, however, seems to be a dispute about De Blasio's views on a certain test -- and maybe that test sucks. I don't know, but getting rid of a specific test isn't necessarily a sign of anti-Asian bias. Maybe there really are problems with that test.

Quote:
The anti-asian discrimination has been around for decades but it took the Harvard lawsuit to really crystallize how anti-asian the arguments in favor of affirmative action (as it exists today) are.
I would encourage you to try and educate others about this rather than just casting blanket aspersions on Democrats, liberals, black people and Hispanic people.
  #118  
Old 11-08-2019, 09:06 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by str8cashhomie View Post
This is a common debate tactic that involves making multiple assertions, including one vague, unsupported accusation, and when someone only comments on the one argument that was thrown out with absolutely no justification, it's taken as tacit approval of the rest. It's a line of reasoning generally that also has no merit and only seeks to imply consensus when none is there.
If you have an argument, please make it. Right now all you seem to be saying is "well prove it" after I provided links

I made the following statement. All of them related:

"That's the problem, too many Democrats dont consider this to be discriminatory because its happening to asians. A junior partner in civil rights. Some Democrats would like them to be silent partners."

Are you saying that Democrats don't view discrimination against asians differently than discrimination against blacks and hispanics?

Quote:
I don't think iiiandyiii was accusing you of racism or dismissing your arguments because of race
Not iiandyii. But there are definitely accusations of racism when I say that asians deserve to be admitted over less qualified blacks and hispanics. The accusations of racism are often accompanied by racist anti-asian tropes accusing asians of being selfish or taking advantage of wealth and white proximity.

Quote:
, I couldn't read all of your links because there were paywalls on most of them, but from the ones I read there was no accusation there, there was simply a defense of affirmative action. Today some posters have actually made dismissive comments towards you which I do think is shameful on their part.
Perhaps these links will work better:

This link implies that the Asians are selfish and says it's ironic that asians are making accusations of racism (isn't that implying racism on the part of the asians making the acusations of racism?).
https://www.theroot.com/nyc-school-c...-no-1826678079

Counter to stereotypes, Asians have the highest poverty rate in NYC
They have higher rates of poverty than blacks or hispanics.

Here are statements of policy from some of NYC's Democratic politicians:

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...605-story.html

https://www.cityandstateny.com/artic...ons-guide.html

The argument of asian protesters in NYC is basically that the city does a crappy job from K-8 and their efforts at racial justice would be far better served trying to support the k-8 program so more black and Hispanic kids get admitted on their own merit rather than being elevated over more deserving Asian kids based on the color of their skin.

It's not like the college admissions where they cannot control how high schools are run. The NYC DOE controls the hole pipeline leading up to the high school exam. They cannot claim that the SHSAT is racist so they say that testing itself is racist. They are embarrassed by the racial balance of the magnet schools so they make veiled accusations of racism and reinforce racist tropes against Asians in order to try and silence dissent. Right now every black an hispanic kid with a Stuyvesant diploma has unimpeachable nerd cred when they go to college.

Quote:
As to the rest of the argument, my main thrust is that there is no intent from the Democrats to be unfair to white people,
No it's just seen as a necessary side effect of their intent to be more fair to other races. All races are equal, some races are more equal than others.

Quote:
and that the party isn't just playing a 0 sum game of using racism accusations as a cudgel, and I still don't think this has been refuted.
There have been veiled accusations of racism by Democrats (see DeBLasio and Carranza) and it has been used as cudgel to silence dissent. Or at least that seems to have been the intent.

Quote:
When it comes to Asians not being treated fairly by the education system - thus far there has been nothing I can see that people in Washington can do anything about. The lawsuit against Harvard was thrown out and AFAIK no lawsuit similar lawsuit has been successful. All that has been shown is a lot of implicit biases in colleges - nothing has been traced to affirmative action except speculation.
The people making the link between anti-asian discrimination and affirmative action are liberals. Liberals are the ones making the argument that protesting anti-Asian discrimination is protesting AA. If AA depends on discrimination against one minority group for the benefit of another, then it cannot be called justice.

Does your definition of right and wrong hinge on whether there has been success in the courts?

Quote:
There is of course a lot of implicit bias involved in cases involving racism against Black or Latino people, but there have actually been policy avenues to attempt to remedy the problems, and frankly attempts to change societal problems that arise because of many individual people having implicit bias very rarely work regardless of race. This is absolutely not a reason not to try but it means that the existence of structural problems due to implicit bias is not a reason to dismiss other attempts to reduce analogous structural problems.
You say implicit, I think it's a pretty deliberate attempt at racial balancing.

California, Washington, Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Oklahoma, Florida, Texas and Georgia all managed to alleviate much of this bias by banning affirmative action and scrubbing identifying information from the applications. It is becoming clear that affirmative action as it is practiced today is discriminatory (implicitly or explicitly) against asians.
  #119  
Old 11-08-2019, 09:39 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
This does not support your argument. Maybe those tests were shitty for a variety of reasons.
The test in question in the Harvard lawsuit is the SATs.

The test in question in the Stuyvesant case is the SHSAT. Nobody has found anything wrong with the test and it's not for a lack of trying.

It's the same test used by TJHSST (that's how I know about it). A few years ago, the county decided that TJHSST needed more blacks and hisanics so they reduced the importance of the test and started adding some holistic factors. The school got richer, whiter and dumber. The population of blacks and Hispanics didn't budge. It turns out that holistic criteria absent explicit racial preferences leads to advantages for those with money and white privilege and explicit racial preferences were not politically viable.

They quietly reverted back to using the SHSAT as a primary determinant and they are now simply resigned to having a school that is going to be over 70% asian.

The timing of all these diversity initiatives are interesting. It tends to occur as institutions become minority white and majority asian.

Quote:
It only supports your argument if you insist on interpreting everything in the most Hannity-esque (or maybe Malkin-esque?) way possible to make the Democrats seem as bad as possible.
Calling it like it is. If you think this reflects poorly on Democrats, perhaps Democrats should change. It isn't Republicans defending Harvard's discriminatory admissions. It isn't Republicans supporting Bill DeBlasio's plans.
  #120  
Old 11-08-2019, 09:55 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
The test in question in the Stuyvesant case is the SHSAT. Nobody has found anything wrong with the test and it's not for a lack of trying.
Says you, but I have no way of knowing whether that's true or not.

To be clear, it's very possible that the test is fine and getting rid of it is just a lazy way to get the ratio of minorities that De Blasio or some other jackass wants. And I think your grievance against some universities appears reasonable, with solid arguments behind it (AFAICT).

But your grievance isn't with Democrats as a group, or blacks/Hispanics as a group. It's with certain wealthy and powerful institutions, who are doing far, far more to harm Asians (and others) than Democrats and black and Hispanic folks.

Quote:
Calling it like it is. If you think this reflects poorly on Democrats, perhaps Democrats should change.
I don't think any of your arguments reflect poorly about Democrats as a group, since none of the blame for the policies you find problematic have anything to do with Democrats as a group.

Quote:
It isn't Republicans defending Harvard's discriminatory admissions. It isn't Republicans supporting Bill DeBlasio's plans.
It isn't Democrats, either, as a group. It's a tiny group of people who are generally wealthy, influential, and white.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-08-2019 at 09:56 AM.
  #121  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:07 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'm unaware of any more than a minuscule minority of Democrats and liberals who have done this.
I have provided links to Democrats doing this and you have certainly seen liberals on this board doing this. It is such a common Democratic kneejerk reaction that it is fair to say that it is THE Democratic kneejerk reaction to this subject. The instinct to defend AA regardless of it's costs can be fairly characterized as a common Democratic/liberal reaction.

Quote:
This, however, seems to be a dispute about De Blasio's views on a certain test -- and maybe that test sucks. I don't know, but getting rid of a specific test isn't necessarily a sign of anti-Asian bias. Maybe there really are problems with that test.
Nobody has identified any problems with the test (and it's not for a lack of trying). The only problem with the test is that asians do well on it and blacks and hispanics don't do well on it. (this is an example of the instinct to defend apparent discrimination, why the heck would you assume there might be something wrong with the test when there is no mention of a flaw with the test?)

The language coming from city hall, the NYC DOE and their supporters has been pretty anti-asian. It's not like they're calling us fucking greedy chinks, but they have been accusing the poorest race group in NYC of buying their way into these schools with test prep, making subtle accusations of cheating, making accusations of racial selfishness, telling asians that they owe a racial debt to blacks and hispanics because they fought for our rights, implying that Asian kids are fungible and uninteresting.

Quote:
I would encourage you to try and educate others about this rather than just casting blanket aspersions on Democrats, liberals, black people and Hispanic people.
I don't have your patience. I can't soothingly explain to bigots how their bigotry is manifesting itself as anti-asian discrimination. I understand that they are not hateful racists but the end effect is similar.

Democrats are pretty consistent on this issue. Particularly liberal Democrats. Specifically white liberal Democrats. They see nothing wrong with robbing peter to pay paul. All they see is their debt to paul.

Blacks and Hispanics are no worse than the average Democrat AFAICT, I don't think I have been saying otherwise. There are also plenty of asians who think that discrimination against asians is acceptable in the interests of racial justice.
  #122  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:13 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I have provided links to Democrats doing this and you have certainly seen liberals on this board doing this. It is such a common Democratic kneejerk reaction that it is fair to say that it is THE Democratic kneejerk reaction to this subject. The instinct to defend AA regardless of it's costs can be fairly characterized as a common Democratic/liberal reaction.

Nobody has identified any problems with the test (and it's not for a lack of trying). The only problem with the test is that asians do well on it and blacks and hispanics don't do well on it. (this is an example of the instinct to defend apparent discrimination, why the heck would you assume there might be something wrong with the test when there is no mention of a flaw with the test?)

The language coming from city hall, the NYC DOE and their supporters has been pretty anti-asian. It's not like they're calling us fucking greedy chinks, but they have been accusing the poorest race group in NYC of buying their way into these schools with test prep, making subtle accusations of cheating, making accusations of racial selfishness, telling asians that they owe a racial debt to blacks and hispanics because they fought for our rights, implying that Asian kids are fungible and uninteresting.

I don't have your patience. I can't soothingly explain to bigots how their bigotry is manifesting itself as anti-asian discrimination. I understand that they are not hateful racists but the end effect is similar.

Democrats are pretty consistent on this issue. Particularly liberal Democrats. Specifically white liberal Democrats. They see nothing wrong with robbing peter to pay paul. All they see is their debt to paul.

Blacks and Hispanics are no worse than the average Democrat AFAICT, I don't think I have been saying otherwise. There are also plenty of asians who think that discrimination against asians is acceptable in the interests of racial justice.
Your characterization of Democrats as a group continues to be cite-free (citing a tiny number of individual Democrats has nothing to do with Democrats as a group) and continues to have nothing to do with my understanding of reality and having interacted with thousands of Democrats over the last 20-30 years and countless discussions about Affirmative Action.

If you're going to continue to characterize Democrats as a group this way, then there's not much point to further discussion. You might be making a good argument about Harvard, but you're providing no cites and no backing other than your feelings for the blanket aspersions you're casting upon Democrats as a group. There's no widespread belief among Democrats that any particular AA policy being bad for Asians is acceptable.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-08-2019 at 10:14 AM.
  #123  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:13 AM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 83,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
If you have an argument, please make it.
Okay, here's mine.

All discrimination is wrong. People should only be judged on the basis of their individual abilities and actions not on some imagined group standard.

Society should be trying to eliminate discrimination. Individuals should be supporting that effort. The end goal should be zero discrimination.

As to your particular concern, I'm sure there is discrimination against Asians in American society. It's wrong and it should be eliminated.

But we do not have infinite resources in the struggle against discrimination. So we should set priorities and work on solving the biggest problems first before we move on to smaller problems.

There is a vastly greater amount of discrimination directed against black people in America than there is against Asians in America. So right now we should be directing more efforts against discrimination against black people.
  #124  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:16 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Okay, here's mine.

All discrimination is wrong. People should only be judged on the basis of their individual abilities and actions not on some imagined group standard.

Society should be trying to eliminate discrimination. Individuals should be supporting that effort. The end goal should be zero discrimination.

As to your particular concern, I'm sure there is discrimination against Asians in American society. It's wrong and it should be eliminated.

But we do not have infinite resources in the struggle against discrimination. So we should set priorities and work on solving the biggest problems first before we move on to smaller problems.

There is a vastly greater amount of discrimination directed against black people in America than there is against Asians in America. So right now we should be directing more efforts against discrimination against black people.
I'll add to this -- if any particular policy is inadvertently harming Asian Americans, that is a bad thing and the policy should be reconsidered and reevaluated. I don't believe that harming Asians is necessary to accomplish the beneficial and necessary things that AA is here for.
  #125  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:33 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Says you, but I have no way of knowing whether that's true or not.
This is the kneejerk reaction I am talking about. With absolutely no evidence that a test is anything but fair and objective, your immediate reaction is that maybe there is something wrong with the test. Even the folks that want to get rid of the test can't identify anything wrong with the test itself. Modern psychometricians know how to make a test fair.

Quote:
To be clear, it's very possible that the test is fine and getting rid of it is just a lazy way to get the ratio of minorities that De Blasio or some other jackass wants.
It's not just possible, it is unrefuted fact. NOONE on the other side of the argument is claiming what you are claiming. This is the sort of Democratic/liberal bias that I am talking about. You are advancing arguments that even DeBlasio isn't making.

Quote:
And I think your grievance against some universities appears reasonable, with solid arguments behind it (AFAICT).

But your grievance isn't with Democrats as a group, or blacks/Hispanics as a group. It's with certain wealthy and powerful institutions, who are doing far, far more to harm Asians (and others) than Democrats and black and Hispanic folks.
Generally speaking, Democrats and liberals as a group have conflated affirmative action and anti-Asian discrimination. That is the paradigm that they have created in order to preserve the current form of affirmative action, AA=anti-Asian discrimination.

"Certain wealthy institutions"? You mean like Harvard? The same Harvard that woke SJW liberals are falling over themselves to defend?

Quote:
I don't think any of your arguments reflect poorly about Democrats as a group, since none of the blame for the policies you find problematic have anything to do with Democrats as a group.
No more than white supremacy has anything to do with Republicans as a group.

Quote:
It isn't Democrats, either, as a group. It's a tiny group of people who are generally wealthy, influential, and white.
DeBlasio isn't that wealthy, Carranza isn't white. I can link about a hundred articles from liberal authors defending anti-Asian discrimination in college admissions. Yes many of them are wealthy and white but many of them are not. What they all have in common is that they are liberals.

Now to be fair, there are a ton of liberals that have a problem with this anti-Asian discrimination. At first most of them were themselves asian and could see the discrimination more clearly. Plenty of liberals are uncomfortable with the antiasian discrimination but the woke SJWs tend to be pretty unapologetic about it.
  #126  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:45 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Your characterization of Democrats as a group continues to be cite-free (citing a tiny number of individual Democrats has nothing to do with Democrats as a group) and continues to have nothing to do with my understanding of reality and having interacted with thousands of Democrats over the last 20-30 years and countless discussions about Affirmative Action.
How many cites do you need? It most of the NYC city council. I can cite the attempts to overturn prop 209 in California, the recent attempt to overturn prohibitions against race based admissions in Washington state, etc. These are all Democratic proposals and they are all opposed by asian groups and the criticism leveled against asians in these cases all sound the same. Asians are racist, greedy, selfish, not team players, privileged, etc.

Quote:
If you're going to continue to characterize Democrats as a group this way, then there's not much point to further discussion. You might be making a good argument about Harvard, but you're providing no cites and no backing other than your feelings for the blanket aspersions you're casting upon Democrats as a group. There's no widespread belief among Democrats that any particular AA policy being bad for Asians is acceptable.
Of course there is. Harvard is a good example of Democrats and liberals lining up on the side of antiasian discrimination. They may have convinced themselves that no such discrimination exists but I think that takes either willful or actual ignorance. Wilful ignorance is bad enough but actual ignorance means you don't take the asian claims seriously enough to take a close look.

I've given a cite to the Democratic mayor of the largest city in the country and the chancellor of the largest school system in the country exercising anti-Asian discrimination in order to achieve what they view as racial justice.

The initial criticism and arguments on this board regarding the Harvard lawsuit demonstrates the default positions of liberals on this issue. First there is denial that there is a problem then when confronted with convincing evidence, they deny that its actually racism and it might be something else... like a shitty test
  #127  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:48 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
This is the kneejerk reaction I am talking about. With absolutely no evidence that a test is anything but fair and objective, your immediate reaction is that maybe there is something wrong with the test. Even the folks that want to get rid of the test can't identify anything wrong with the test itself. Modern psychometricians know how to make a test fair.

It's not just possible, it is unrefuted fact. NOONE on the other side of the argument is claiming what you are claiming. This is the sort of Democratic/liberal bias that I am talking about. You are advancing arguments that even DeBlasio isn't making.
I have not advanced any argument, and I had no reaction to your argument on this specific test. I neither believe nor disbelieve it -- I have no information on it.

Quote:
Generally speaking, Democrats and liberals as a group have conflated affirmative action and anti-Asian discrimination. That is the paradigm that they have created in order to preserve the current form of affirmative action, AA=anti-Asian discrimination.
This is entirely false. Democrats and liberals as a group have not done this. I've never even heard of this, and I'm rather plugged into Democratic and liberal circles, both "inside the beltway" and outside.

Quote:
"Certain wealthy institutions"? You mean like Harvard? The same Harvard that woke SJW liberals are falling over themselves to defend?
What "woke SJW liberals"? It's another wealthy and powerful institution that largely serves the interests of the wealthy and powerful. This is nonsense.

Quote:
No more than white supremacy has anything to do with Republicans as a group.
You're joking about this, right? You haven't offered any cites tying the party as a group to your assertions about the party. Do you seriously believe that there are no facts that clearly link the Republican party of the last several decades to toleration or even support of white supremacism?

Quote:
DeBlasio isn't that wealthy, Carranza isn't white. I can link about a hundred articles from liberal authors defending anti-Asian discrimination in college admissions. Yes many of them are wealthy and white but many of them are not. What they all have in common is that they are liberals.
This still says nothing about Democrats and liberals as a group.

Quote:
Now to be fair, there are a ton of liberals that have a problem with this anti-Asian discrimination. At first most of them were themselves asian and could see the discrimination more clearly. Plenty of liberals are uncomfortable with the antiasian discrimination but the woke SJWs tend to be pretty unapologetic about it.
Perhaps your own feelings about "woke SJWs" (not sure whether I qualify or not) are distorting your views on this. I think I'm pretty plugged into "woke SJW" circles and I have never heard any defense of anti-Asian discrimination. All the "woke SJW" crowd I know are horrified (if not surprised, considering American history) by any discrimination against minorities, including against Asians.

You haven't presented any support for the aspersions you cast upon Democrats, liberals, or "woke SJWs" as groups. Why is it so important to you that these people must be evil on this issue? Is it really that hard for you to consider that maybe these folks are largely just unaware of it?
  #128  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:51 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Okay, here's mine.

All discrimination is wrong. People should only be judged on the basis of their individual abilities and actions not on some imagined group standard.

Society should be trying to eliminate discrimination. Individuals should be supporting that effort. The end goal should be zero discrimination.

As to your particular concern, I'm sure there is discrimination against Asians in American society. It's wrong and it should be eliminated.

But we do not have infinite resources in the struggle against discrimination. So we should set priorities and work on solving the biggest problems first before we move on to smaller problems.

There is a vastly greater amount of discrimination directed against black people in America than there is against Asians in America. So right now we should be directing more efforts against discrimination against black people.
This sounds a lot like a hierarchy of race. The oppression Olympics.

But so be it.

Asians might necessarily have to take a junior partner position to blacks in pursuit of racial justice (never mind that the beneficiary of that racial justice tends to rarely be the descendants of slaves).

I am not even averse to quotas for the descendants of slaves but how have hispanics suffered disproportionately to asians that is justifies discriminating against asians to provide preferences for hispanics?
  #129  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:55 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
How many cites do you need? It most of the NYC city council.
Okay, let's see the anti-Asian sentiments from "most of the NYC city council".

Quote:
I can cite the attempts to overturn prop 209 in California, the recent attempt to overturn prohibitions against race based admissions in Washington state, etc. These are all Democratic proposals and they are all opposed by asian groups and the criticism leveled against asians in these cases all sound the same. Asians are racist, greedy, selfish, not team players, privileged, etc.
Okay, I'd like to see quotes from Democratic elected officials that "Asians are racist, greedy, selfish, not team players, privileged, etc."

If there really is an anti-Asian streak among my party, I want to see it in detail. You've provided lots of cites, and I haven't read every word of every one of them (though I have looked at all of them), so it's possible I missed it. But please point me in the right direction.

Quote:
Of course there is. Harvard is a good example of Democrats and liberals lining up on the side of antiasian discrimination. They may have convinced themselves that no such discrimination exists but I think that takes either willful or actual ignorance. Wilful ignorance is bad enough but actual ignorance means you don't take the asian claims seriously enough to take a close look.
Let's see evidence that "Democrats and liberals" as a group are "lining up" in defense of Harvard's admissions policies.

Quote:
I've given a cite to the Democratic mayor of the largest city in the country and the chancellor of the largest school system in the country exercising anti-Asian discrimination in order to achieve what they view as racial justice.
You've given cites that they oppose a specific test, but let's see a cite, specifically, that they are "exercising anti-Asian discrimination". Not some guy's opinion that getting rid of some test is discriminating against Asians (me writing an opinion that "this test discriminates against black folks" is not evidence that the test discriminates against black folks) -- but actual evidence of "anti-Asian discrimination".

Quote:
The initial criticism and arguments on this board regarding the Harvard lawsuit demonstrates the default positions of liberals on this issue. First there is denial that there is a problem then when confronted with convincing evidence, they deny that its actually racism and it might be something else... like a shitty test
Let's see cites for all of this. I've said "maybe it's a shitty test", but I'll also say "maybe it's the best test in the universe and getting rid of it is worse than the Holocaust", so that should balance that part out.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-08-2019 at 10:59 AM.
  #130  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:55 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'll add to this -- if any particular policy is inadvertently harming Asian Americans, that is a bad thing and the policy should be reconsidered and reevaluated. I don't believe that harming Asians is necessary to accomplish the beneficial and necessary things that AA is here for.
I've been saying this for over a decade:

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...rmative+action

But the current crop of woke SJW liberals that are defending Harvard, DeBlasio and the current incarnations of Affirmative Action seem to disagree. And I am coming around to their way of thinking. Affirmative Action may indeed by incompatible with fairness to asians. And if your remedy for injustice to one group is to impose injustice on another politically weaker group, then that is less than a zero sum game, it is the perpetuation and reinforcement of power based racism. What happens next? Asians get political power and use it to screw over some other politically weaker group?
  #131  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:57 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
This sounds a lot like a hierarchy of race. The oppression Olympics.

But so be it.

Asians might necessarily have to take a junior partner position to blacks in pursuit of racial justice (never mind that the beneficiary of that racial justice tends to rarely be the descendants of slaves).

I am not even averse to quotas for the descendants of slaves but how have hispanics suffered disproportionately to asians that is justifies discriminating against asians to provide preferences for hispanics?
This doesn't actually dispute anything he said. You're attacking a straw man.
  #132  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:59 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
But the current crop of woke SJW liberals that are defending Harvard, DeBlasio and the current incarnations of Affirmative Action seem to disagree. And I am coming around to their way of thinking. Affirmative Action may indeed by incompatible with fairness to asians. And if your remedy for injustice to one group is to impose injustice on another politically weaker group, then that is less than a zero sum game, it is the perpetuation and reinforcement of power based racism. What happens next? Asians get political power and use it to screw over some other politically weaker group?
Then I stand with you against these (probably fantastical and derived from your own personal biases, and IIRC by your posts, hatred) "woke SJWs". Let's stop these evil (and probably fictional) "woke SJWs" together!
  #133  
Old 11-08-2019, 12:06 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I have not advanced any argument, and I had no reaction to your argument on this specific test. I neither believe nor disbelieve it -- I have no information on it.
And you don't see the problem with that? You are questioning the test in a way that even the critics of the test are not. You are looking for excuses for this discriminatory behavior.

Quote:
This is entirely false. Democrats and liberals as a group have not done this. I've never even heard of this, and I'm rather plugged into Democratic and liberal circles, both "inside the beltway" and outside.
I am also fairly plugged into Democratic and liberal circles. Mostly inside the beltway. They see the Harvard lawsuit, which is a lawsuit against anti-asian discrimination and they have characterized it as or accepted the characterization as an assault on affirmative action.

Quote:
What "woke SJW liberals"? It's another wealthy and powerful institution that largely serves the interests of the wealthy and powerful. This is nonsense.
Are you seriously not aware that woke SJW liberals see the Harvard lawsuit as an attack on affirmative action rather than an attack on anti-asian discrimination? In fact the anti-asian discrimination is frequently entirely lost on them.

Quote:
You're joking about this, right? You haven't offered any cites tying the party as a group to your assertions about the party. Do you seriously believe that there are no facts that clearly link the Republican party of the last several decades to toleration or even support of white supremacism?
You seriously believe that there are no facts that just as clearly link the Democratic party to tolerance or even support of affirmative action, even at the expense of anti-asian discrimination?

I offered a cite where the majority of the NYC Council, the NYC mayor and the NYC chancellor (all Democrats) have done so. These aren't random internet liberals, these are elected politicians.

Quote:
This still says nothing about Democrats and liberals as a group.
Seriously, how many Democratic politicians do I have to cite? Why isn't the mayor of the largest city and the chancellor of the largest school system enough?

Quote:
Perhaps your own feelings about "woke SJWs" (not sure whether I qualify or not) are distorting your views on this. I think I'm pretty plugged into "woke SJW" circles and I have never heard any defense of anti-Asian discrimination. All the "woke SJW" crowd I know are horrified (if not surprised, considering American history) by any discrimination against minorities, including against Asians.
The ones that are accusing asians of racism for protesting (anti-asian discrimination) tend to be woke SJWs. See pretty much any article about the Harvard lawsuit.

Quote:
You haven't presented any support for the aspersions you cast upon Democrats, liberals, or "woke SJWs" as groups.
So what were the links to DeBlasio and Carranza? It may not be convincing to you but isn't that at least SOME support?

Quote:
Why is it so important to you that these people must be evil on this issue? Is it really that hard for you to consider that maybe these folks are largely just unaware of it?
I don't think everyone on the other side of the argument is evil.
I think it is entirely possible for someone to simply adopt the party line on affirmative action and mindlessly defend that position. I think kneejerk reactions are common across the spectrum.
But the aggressive woke SJW crowd is probably evil. They are effectively fascists trying to win debates with accusations of racism, sexism, etc.

Of course, the response from the woke SJW crowd is not resounding support for anti-asian discrimination. They sidestep the issue entirely and say asians are focusing on the wrong thing and that the REAL issue is some other thing and that we're racist for not adequately focusing on that other thing. They claim that asians are being hoodwinked into fighting against their own interests when they fight against discrimination. Gaslighting of the highest order.

I'm sure that if they were presented with A with anti-asian discrimination versus equally effective AA without the anti-asian discrimination, they would choose the latter but they seem ready to defend the former.
  #134  
Old 11-08-2019, 12:22 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
And you don't see the problem with that? You are questioning the test in a way that even the critics of the test are not. You are looking for excuses for this discriminatory behavior.







I am also fairly plugged into Democratic and liberal circles. Mostly inside the beltway. They see the Harvard lawsuit, which is a lawsuit against anti-asian discrimination and they have characterized it as or accepted the characterization as an assault on affirmative action.







Are you seriously not aware that woke SJW liberals see the Harvard lawsuit as an attack on affirmative action rather than an attack on anti-asian discrimination? In fact the anti-asian discrimination is frequently entirely lost on them.







You seriously believe that there are no facts that just as clearly link the Democratic party to tolerance or even support of affirmative action, even at the expense of anti-asian discrimination?



I offered a cite where the majority of the NYC Council, the NYC mayor and the NYC chancellor (all Democrats) have done so. These aren't random internet liberals, these are elected politicians.







Seriously, how many Democratic politicians do I have to cite? Why isn't the mayor of the largest city and the chancellor of the largest school system enough?







The ones that are accusing asians of racism for protesting (anti-asian discrimination) tend to be woke SJWs. See pretty much any article about the Harvard lawsuit.







So what were the links to DeBlasio and Carranza? It may not be convincing to you but isn't that at least SOME support?







I don't think everyone on the other side of the argument is evil.

I think it is entirely possible for someone to simply adopt the party line on affirmative action and mindlessly defend that position. I think kneejerk reactions are common across the spectrum.

But the aggressive woke SJW crowd is probably evil. They are effectively fascists trying to win debates with accusations of racism, sexism, etc.



Of course, the response from the woke SJW crowd is not resounding support for anti-asian discrimination. They sidestep the issue entirely and say asians are focusing on the wrong thing and that the REAL issue is some other thing and that we're racist for not adequately focusing on that other thing. They claim that asians are being hoodwinked into fighting against their own interests when they fight against discrimination. Gaslighting of the highest order.



I'm sure that if they were presented with A with anti-asian discrimination versus equally effective AA without the anti-asian discrimination, they would choose the latter but they seem ready to defend the former.
Most of this appears to have little connection with reality as I'm aware of it, and seems highly focused on your personal hatred of "woke SJWs", and thus there doesn't seem to be any more point to trying to discuss this with you. Best wishes to you and your family.

EDIT: To be clear, I have no problem with discussing possible anti Asian discrimination. But your posts are mostly just feelings-based rants and hatred against liberals and "woke SJWs", and I have no interested in that.
__________________
My new novel Spindown

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-08-2019 at 12:25 PM.
  #135  
Old 11-08-2019, 02:33 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Okay, let's see the anti-Asian sentiments from "most of the NYC city council".
They initially supported the mayor. Many have since changed their tune when asians finally stopped being so politically apathetic.

Quote:
Okay, I'd like to see quotes from Democratic elected officials that "Asians are racist, greedy, selfish, not team players, privileged, etc."
Carranza is not elected but he has implicitly or explicitly said all these things.

DeBlasio's spokesperson has also said some of these things.

Quote:
If there really is an anti-Asian streak among my party, I want to see it in detail.
It's not so much an anti-asian streak so much as it is hierarchy of races. All races are equal but some races are more equal than others.

What was YOUR initial reaction to the Harvard lawsuit and the allegations of anti-asian discrimination? Were you inclined to believe the asians or inclined to find some reason why the asians were wrong because what they were saying might threaten preferences for other minority races? Or was it something else?

We don't have bunch of Democrats saying "fuck the chinks" but it seems clear that asian are second class citizens in the Democratic hierarchy compared to other minorities that don't have a profoundly different history of discrimination than asians e.g. hispanics.

Quote:
You've provided lots of cites, and I haven't read every word of every one of them (though I have looked at all of them), so it's possible I missed it. But please point me in the right direction.
For what premise would you like a pinpoint cite? Frankly, I m pretty tired of providing cites for stuff. If you want to continue to believe that folks on your side are pre as the driven snow, I don't think anything I provide is going to be seen as anything more than an exception to the rule. You've basically admitted as much.

Quote:
Let's see evidence that "Democrats and liberals" as a group are "lining up" in defense of Harvard's admissions policies.
Let me amend that to say they used to line up in Harvard's (and affirmative action's) defense. But you don't even have to leave this website to see this defense of Harvard and criticism of asians. I suspect if you went back to the threads where you were illuminated on the issue, you will find a lot of folks who took that attitude (at least at first).

It's gotten easier since the revelations about: Harvard's personal rating, the differences in SAT cutoffs for recruiting different races, the scandal with the Singer college admissions bribery scandal. But for folks who are convinced that asian rights jeopardize affirmative action, they still find some way to justify the discrimination.

But it's troubling that these sort of allegations from any other minority group would be immediately believed but asians have to make a fairly strong case to be believed.

Here is the list of documents including the amicus briefs
you will note which side the liberal organizations take
https://admissionscase.harvard.edu/supporting-documents

Quote:
You've given cites that they oppose a specific test, but let's see a cite, specifically, that they are "exercising anti-Asian discrimination". Not some guy's opinion that getting rid of some test is discriminating against Asians (me writing an opinion that "this test discriminates against black folks" is not evidence that the test discriminates against black folks) -- but actual evidence of "anti-Asian discrimination".
Would a statement saying that asians act like they own those seats at magnet schools suffice?

Quote:
Let's see cites for all of this. I've said "maybe it's a shitty test", but I'll also say "maybe it's the best test in the universe and getting rid of it is worse than the Holocaust", so that should balance that part out.
Nah. You are asking me to rebut specious arguments. I think the burden is on you to provide proof that the test is no good. I think the burden is on you to show that statements made by Democrats are not reflective of what other Democrats might think considering the effects of the policies they support.

For example, if Republicans in general supported a very restrictive immigration policy along our southern border and a few Republicans said some racist shit about hispanics in reference to that restrictive immigration policy, would you insist on more examples of Republican racism before you started thinking maybe the Republican immigration policy was racist? But when it comes to racism against asians coming from your party...
  #136  
Old 11-08-2019, 03:58 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
They initially supported the mayor. Many have since changed their tune when asians finally stopped being so politically apathetic.


So Asians spoke out and Democrats listened? That doesn't sound like anti Asian sentiment to me.



Quote:
Carranza is not elected but he has implicitly or explicitly said all these things.



DeBlasio's spokesperson has also said some of these things.
Okay. What specifically did they say?



Quote:

It's not so much an anti-asian streak so much as it is hierarchy of races. All races are equal but some races are more equal than others.



What was YOUR initial reaction to the Harvard lawsuit and the allegations of anti-asian discrimination? Were you inclined to believe the asians or inclined to find some reason why the asians were wrong because what they were saying might threaten preferences for other minority races? Or was it something else?
I first heard about it in the last year or two, on this board. I listened to the arguments, did a bit of reading, and it sounds to me like it's a reasonable complaint. And that Harvard is yet another wealthy and powerful institution that largely serves the interests of the wealthy and powerful. I still am unaware of any significant number of Democrats that support Harvard, and you haven't provided a cite to support your criticism of Democrats as a group regarding Harvard.

Quote:
We don't have bunch of Democrats saying "fuck the chinks" but it seems clear that asian are second class citizens in the Democratic hierarchy compared to other minorities that don't have a profoundly different history of discrimination than asians e.g. hispanics.

You haven't supported this argument, and it seems just to be based on your feelings.

Quote:
For what premise would you like a pinpoint cite? Frankly, I m pretty tired of providing cites for stuff. If you want to continue to believe that folks on your side are pre as the driven snow, I don't think anything I provide is going to be seen as anything more than an exception to the rule. You've basically admitted as much.
A cite for your characterization of Democrats as a group could be polling on particular cases of anti Asian discrimination, for example. Do you have polls that suggest that Democrats, as a group, think Asians should be second class citizens, or similar?

Quote:
Let me amend that to say they used to line up in Harvard's (and affirmative action's) defense. But you don't even have to leave this website to see this defense of Harvard and criticism of asians. I suspect if you went back to the threads where you were illuminated on the issue, you will find a lot of folks who took that attitude (at least at first).



It's gotten easier since the revelations about: Harvard's personal rating, the differences in SAT cutoffs for recruiting different races, the scandal with the Singer college admissions bribery scandal. But for folks who are convinced that asian rights jeopardize affirmative action, they still find some way to justify the discrimination.



But it's troubling that these sort of allegations from any other minority group would be immediately believed but asians have to make a fairly strong case to be believed.



Here is the list of documents including the amicus briefs

you will note which side the liberal organizations take

https://admissionscase.harvard.edu/supporting-documents


So Democrats listened to the complaints of Asians, looked at the data, and changed their views?
Quote:

Would a statement saying that asians act like they own those seats at magnet schools suffice?

Actually, yes.

Quote:

Nah. You are asking me to rebut specious arguments. I think the burden is on you to provide proof that the test is no good.
I haven't said that the test is no good (maybe it is, maybe it isn't). I have no information on the test.
Quote:
I think the burden is on you to show that statements made by Democrats are not reflective of what other Democrats might think considering the effects of the policies they support.
If any senior Democratic official has publicly made blanket negative characterizations of Asians without being strongly criticized by other Democrats, I would certainly agree with you. Has that occurred?
Quote:

For example, if Republicans in general supported a very restrictive immigration policy along our southern border and a few Republicans said some racist shit about hispanics in reference to that restrictive immigration policy, would you insist on more examples of Republican racism before you started thinking maybe the Republican immigration policy was racist? But when it comes to racism against asians coming from your party...
You haven't provided anything remotely comparable to the myriad of racist, bigoted, and similar statements from prominent Republicans.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #137  
Old 11-08-2019, 04:52 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 83,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
This sounds a lot like a hierarchy of race. The oppression Olympics.
It's a hierarchy in the same sense that a person who goes to the ER with a heart attack will get treated before a person who goes there with a toothache.
  #138  
Old 11-08-2019, 06:03 PM
str8cashhomie is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Ok I have to admit this is a damning example of what you're talking about:

Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Daily News
“I just don’t buy into the narrative that any one ethnic group owns admission to these schools,” he [Carranza] said.

“We are systematically excluding students in the most diverse city in the world from opportunities,” the chancellor added. “In this particular case, specialized schools. I think we have a moral obligation.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
It's not like the college admissions where they cannot control how high schools are run. The NYC DOE controls the hole pipeline leading up to the high school exam. They cannot claim that the SHSAT is racist so they say that testing itself is racist. They are embarrassed by the racial balance of the magnet schools so they make veiled accusations of racism and reinforce racist tropes against Asians in order to try and silence dissent. Right now every black an hispanic kid with a Stuyvesant diploma has unimpeachable nerd cred when they go to college.

No it's just seen as a necessary side effect of their intent to be more fair to other races. All races are equal, some races are more equal than others.
So I have to give you that Carranza's comments, which I believe he never apologized for (?), definitely show that he (and presumably the Deblasio admin which hasn't walked it back or come out against his remarks either) see it as an "us or them" zero-sum situation and a policy that hurts Asian students as a "necessary side effect" as you say.

As for the first paragraph, the SHSAT was introduced in the first place when elite NYC schools were predominantly white, in an attempt to preserve the (then predominantly white) racial makeup of the schools in response to integration efforts at the time: https://www.vox.com/2018/6/14/174587...-asian-protest

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
The people making the link between anti-asian discrimination and affirmative action are liberals. Liberals are the ones making the argument that protesting anti-Asian discrimination is protesting AA. If AA depends on discrimination against one minority group for the benefit of another, then it cannot be called justice.

Does your definition of right and wrong hinge on whether there has been success in the courts?
You say implicit, I think it's a pretty deliberate attempt at racial balancing.

California, Washington, Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Oklahoma, Florida, Texas and Georgia all managed to alleviate much of this bias by banning affirmative action and scrubbing identifying information from the applications. It is becoming clear that affirmative action as it is practiced today is discriminatory (implicitly or explicitly) against asians.
On the Harvard issue, the court's job essentially was to find a deliberate attempt by Harvard to limit Asian applicants. The fact that they didn't shows that this is an issue where the task is to fight implicit and under-the-surface bias which is a lot harder to fight. It is entirely possible that they were able to hide an actual deliberate attempt to discriminate against Asians, which is both unprovable and wouldn't change the intervention required by the govt, unless they could root out evidence of deliberate discrimination.

Last edited by str8cashhomie; 11-08-2019 at 06:04 PM.
  #139  
Old 11-09-2019, 11:34 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
This doesn't actually dispute anything he said. You're attacking a straw man.
Let me try to connect the dots a bit more for you.

He is saying that all of our resources need to be directed at fighting discrimination against blacks. So none can really be spared to fight discrimination against asians.

The discrimination against asians that we are discussing is not the result of conservative racism. We can stop discrimination against asians by stopping liberal discrimination against asians.

However if in the interests of fighting discrimination against blacks, we must continue to discriminate against asians, then why does that burden on asians need to be icnreased to extend preferences to hispanics as well?
  #140  
Old 11-10-2019, 12:24 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
So Asians spoke out and Democrats listened? That doesn't sound like anti Asian sentiment to me.
Please try to use the words that I used. I never said sentiment.

The kneejerk reaction was to dismiss asian complaints about discrimination in order to protect affirmative action. Their instinct was to dismiss asian concerns in favor of preferences for other minorities. They had to be talked out of it. It was long and tedious work. And there are still plenty on the council that think that we should scrap the test.

Quote:
I still am unaware of any significant number of Democrats that support Harvard, and you haven't provided a cite to support your criticism of Democrats as a group regarding Harvard.
The ACLU is generally considered liberal. The NAACP is generally considered liberal. AALDEF is generally considered liberal, they all wrote amicus brief in defense of anti-asian discrimination at harvard (mostly be denying it exists).

These organizations are all run by prominent Democrats.

There are a slew of liberal asians basically calling other asians privileged and or racist for protesting the anti-asian discrimination. See the first episode of the Hasan Minhaj Show. Articles by Janelle Wong, Iris Kuo, Lisa Ko, and Julie J. Park.

All the defenses of Harvard's admissions process are coming from liberals not conservatives. How many articles do you need to establish that this is a liberal position.

Quote:
You haven't supported this argument, and it seems just to be based on your feelings.
I've provided plenty of evidence but you seem to want a witness stand confession like Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men. is there really that much doubt in your mind that it is liberals that are defending Harvard and it's affirmative action?

Quote:
A cite for your characterization of Democrats as a group could be polling on particular cases of anti Asian discrimination, for example. Do you have polls that suggest that Democrats, as a group, think Asians should be second class citizens, or similar?
Don't be absurd. Racists never admit to their racism. They frequently don't even realize they are being racist. But it is Democrats and liberals that are defending anti-asian forms of affirmative action in spite of complaints that it is harmful to asians.

The response to the asian complaints is frequently accusations of racism, selfishness and white proximity.

Quote:
So Democrats listened to the complaints of Asians, looked at the data, and changed their views?
No, it was a long and tedious process before that happened. And all the folks defending the anti-asian discrimination are STILL Democrats and liberals.

Quote:
Actually, yes.
“I just don’t buy into the narrative that any one ethnic group owns admission to these schools,” - Carranza

The ethnic group he is referring to is asians. A group that has never claimed to own anything.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/n...on-asians.html

Quote:
I haven't said that the test is no good (maybe it is, maybe it isn't). I have no information on the test.
And yet you question it's fairness when even the critics of the test do not.

And how about the SATs? Do you question that as well because that was the other test you were dismissing.

Quote:
If any senior Democratic official has publicly made blanket negative characterizations of Asians without being strongly criticized by other Democrats, I would certainly agree with you. Has that occurred?
Carranza, the Democratic head of the largest public school system in the country has made such statements. He continues to have the full support of the Democratic mayor of the largest city in the country.

The only Democrats that seem to be strongly criticizing him are mostly asian Democrats.

Quote:
You haven't provided anything remotely comparable to the myriad of racist, bigoted, and similar statements from prominent Republicans.
Well shit, the Democrats don't have a Donald Trump.
  #141  
Old 11-10-2019, 12:31 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
It's a hierarchy in the same sense that a person who goes to the ER with a heart attack will get treated before a person who goes there with a toothache.
Wow! That's racist as fuck!

All it takes for discrimination against asians to stop is for liberals to stop discriminating against asians and your response is that liberals have to stop discrimination by others against blacks before they can stop discriminating against asians?

So tell me how are hispanics suffering from a heart attack? Why is there a preference for hispanics over asians?

How are caribbean and african immigrants suffering from heart attacks?

You act like asians are relatively successful in america because we had it easy. Which ethnicity were put in American internment camps? Which ethnicity had a law specifically excluding their immigration?
  #142  
Old 11-10-2019, 01:02 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by str8cashhomie View Post
Ok I have to admit this is a damning example of what you're talking about:

So I have to give you that Carranza's comments, which I believe he never apologized for (?), definitely show that he (and presumably the Deblasio admin which hasn't walked it back or come out against his remarks either) see it as an "us or them" zero-sum situation and a policy that hurts Asian students as a "necessary side effect" as you say.
Well, Thank you for the admission. It's not common for people to admit that they learned something new on this site anymore (it used to be a very common occurrence 10+ years ago).

Quote:
As for the first paragraph, the SHSAT was introduced in the first place when elite NYC schools were predominantly white, in an attempt to preserve the (then predominantly white) racial makeup of the schools in response to integration efforts at the time: https://www.vox.com/2018/6/14/174587...-asian-protest
I know a little something about the Hecht-Calandra Act and the VOX article is mischaracterizing the facts. The "predominantly white" kids at the time were predominantly Jews.

"Mathew's board demanded that the schools chancellor abolish the admissions test and admit students solely on the basis of recommendations; it threatened a lawsuit if he didn't."

"Chancellor Scribner announced that "any test of academic achievement tends to be culturally biased.""

https://www.city-journal.org/html/ho...-ax-12276.html

In the face of these attacks on objective measures of merit, they fought back.

Now it's the asians that must fight back.

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/...shy-story.html

"Brooklyn Tech, for example, was 25% black, Latino and Asian when the law passed. By 1976, black and Latino students became a large majority for nearly 20 years."

Quote:
On the Harvard issue, the court's job essentially was to find a deliberate attempt by Harvard to limit Asian applicants. The fact that they didn't shows that this is an issue where the task is to fight implicit and under-the-surface bias which is a lot harder to fight. It is entirely possible that they were able to hide an actual deliberate attempt to discriminate against Asians, which is both unprovable and wouldn't change the intervention required by the govt, unless they could root out evidence of deliberate discrimination.
If the perceived racist origin of the SHSAT makes the test somewhat suspect then why doesn't the racist origin of holistic admission make Harvards admissions process suspect?

As for whether there is deliberate discrimination, I think it is the most plausible reason for why the asian population has remained relatively steady over the last few decades despite the asian population exploding in the same period (although the asian contingent in each entering class has increased since the lawsuit started). I can be convinced that it was subconscious after all when Berkeley stopped considering race, not only did asian admissions increase, white admissions fell. And I feel pretty confidant that the berkeley admissions committee was not trying to admit more white kids at the expense of asian kids, it just sorta happened.

When you subjectively introduce race into the calculus, you poison the whole process. I think it would be better to do away with racial preferences altogether but if you must have it, then make it objective. A quota or a defined preference (e.g. +200 points on the SATs) would be more fair even if SCOTUS declared it unconstitutional.
  #143  
Old 11-10-2019, 07:35 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Please try to use the words that I used. I never said sentiment.

The kneejerk reaction was to dismiss asian complaints about discrimination in order to protect affirmative action. Their instinct was to dismiss asian concerns in favor of preferences for other minorities. They had to be talked out of it. It was long and tedious work. And there are still plenty on the council that think that we should scrap the test.
So some prominent liberals had some false instincts on an issue, and after "long and tedious work" most of them (or enough of them) changed their mind on the issue?

While I'd hope liberals wouldn't have any negative or racist instincts, I understand that anyone can have such feelings. But this reflects well on liberals, in general -- we're a group who, with time and good arguments and data, actually have a great chance at changing our views.

It sounds like Asian advocates are doing the right thing and making good arguments. Good for them. I don't know if everything you're saying is factually accurate (sometimes you characterize your cites in ways that don't strike me as accurate), and given our past history of discussions and disagreements, I'm probably not going to take your characterizations at face value. I still think your personal feelings about black people, liberals, and "woke SJWs" are pointing you at the wrong enemies -- the "right" enemies are the same as they almost always are... wealthy and powerful institutions, generally run by and benefiting wealthy white people. "Woke SJWs" are just a silly fantasy boogieman.

I'll leave it there.
  #144  
Old 11-10-2019, 10:45 AM
str8cashhomie is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/...shy-story.html

"Brooklyn Tech, for example, was 25% black, Latino and Asian when the law passed. By 1976, black and Latino students became a large majority for nearly 20 years."
This is misleading - other elite schools were still majority white in the 70s (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-students.html)

Quote:
If the perceived racist origin of the SHSAT makes the test somewhat suspect then why doesn't the racist origin of holistic admission make Harvards admissions process suspect?

As for whether there is deliberate discrimination, I think it is the most plausible reason for why the asian population has remained relatively steady over the last few decades despite the asian population exploding in the same period (although the asian contingent in each entering class has increased since the lawsuit started). I can be convinced that it was subconscious after all when Berkeley stopped considering race, not only did asian admissions increase, white admissions fell. And I feel pretty confidant that the berkeley admissions committee was not trying to admit more white kids at the expense of asian kids, it just sorta happened.

When you subjectively introduce race into the calculus, you poison the whole process. I think it would be better to do away with racial preferences altogether but if you must have it, then make it objective. A quota or a defined preference (e.g. +200 points on the SATs) would be more fair even if SCOTUS declared it unconstitutional.
The relevant aspect of this is to recognize the scale (the net effect is STILL that Black and Latino students are underrepresented in a variety of ways) what you can do about it. Actually having racial quotas would be illegal as you say. Having a single test to get in would probably not work in any case in undergrad, and would have to be something very different from the SAT.

The SAT is run by a private organization, you have to pay to take the test and you can pay to take the test multiple times and use your best scores from each section - it nakedly benefits people who can pay more. It's also very unlikely to actually test what students will be studying in a particular field of study. You would at the very best have to do something more like creating a test like the LSAT tailored for the particular field of study a student would be going into, which also would have complications because a lot of people apply to undergrad with no major, or switch majors.

I think the conclusion to your argument is that the only thing remaining is the binary choice to allow or disallow affirmative action. I don't think it's fair to view someone who doesn't want to scrap AA over the Harvard (or similar) admissions controverseys to be doing it out of racism or unfairness to Asians.
  #145  
Old 11-10-2019, 10:48 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,922
I'm sure it is just me, but I am highly doubtful that concern over allegations of discrimination against Asian students at the nation's most elite institutions is the issue that is most critical to Democratic performance with the non-college educated, especially rural, whites. I did click the right thread?

So, meanwhile two conflicting narratives regarding how Ds are positioned to do with the non-college educated, especially rural, white voters moving forward are being fed by different takes on recent data:

1) We have 538's take on the recent election cycle: Ds are killing it in suburbia but doing even poorer in rural areas.
Quote:
...an important takeaway of the 2019 elections: Rural areas got redder, and urban and suburban ones got bluer — and not only in Virginia. Even for centrist Democrats like Mississippi gubernatorial candidate Jim Hood, the old, pre-Trump Democratic coalition has been replaced by one that increasingly relies on suburban voters to make up for losses among rural whites. Four years after being elected Mississippi attorney general with 55 percent of the vote, Hood won just 47 percent on Tuesday — yet he still managed to improve his vote share in DeSoto County (the Memphis suburbs) by 6 points, more than in any other county. And Madison County (the Jackson suburbs), the county with the highest per-capita income in the state, was the one county he lost in 2015 but carried in 2019. Meanwhile, his vote share dropped precipitously in the rural white counties of northeast Mississippi — from 54 percent to 21 percent in Itawamba County, for example.

In Kentucky, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andy Beshear turned in a more impressive performance overall, turning a 9-point Democratic loss in the 2015 race into (probably) a half-point win. According to an exit poll conducted by a consortium of political scientists,3 he did so by winning 16 percent of Republican voters and defeating (admittedly unpopular) Republican Gov. Matt Bevin by 27 points among independents. But Beshear’s strongest overperformances relative to his 2015 counterpart, Jack Conway, came in urban and suburban areas. Beshear won Jefferson County (home of Louisville) with a whopping 67 percent of the vote, while Conway won Jefferson with just 58 percent. And perhaps most impressively, Beshear won a combined 47 percent in the three most populous counties in the Cincinnati suburbs: In 2015, Conway got only 37 percent across Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties. In the rest of the commonwealth — mostly rural areas — Beshear won 42 percent of the vote, not too much better than Conway’s 39 percent. So it’s fair to say that Beshear won where Conway lost because of his strength in metropolitan areas.
2) We have a NYT opposing take that yes suburbia is delivering for the Ds but that Trump's rural white support is softening significantly.
Quote:
... election results and polling data suggest Mr. Trump’s support may also be threatened elsewhere: among the rural, less-educated voters who have so far formed his base.

A series of New York Times/Siena College polls of swing states conducted last month found that in the rural Appalachian counties of Pennsylvania — the vast majority of which Mr. Trump won in 2016 — only 44 percent of voters said they would definitely choose him over a Democratic candidate in 2020.

By comparison, Mr. Trump commanded the backing of well over 60 percent of voters in most of those counties in 2016 — reaching as high as 80 percent support in some of them. ...

... A Mason-Dixon poll conducted just before this week’s election found that in most parts of Kentucky, Mr. Trump’s favorability rating was just a few points lower than his share of the vote in 2016. But in those eastern, Appalachian counties, the president’s 67 percent favorability rating — while still high — sits 11 points below his 2016 vote share there. His support appears to have fallen more in rural eastern Kentucky than anywhere else in the state.

“Those are folks who have been left out of any economic recovery that the country has been experiencing,” Larry Harris, a pollster at Mason-Dixon, said in a phone interview. ...
Massive turnout and D-ward margins among urban to suburban voters will of course be key in 2020. But there are important states that cannot be won without undercutting Trump's GOP huge margins with non-college educated rural white voters. The nature of our system is that all voters are equal but that some voters (rural voters) are more equal than others. Ceding them to Trumpism without contest would be foolish and I hope that the NYT analysis is more on target this time ...
  #146  
Old 11-10-2019, 02:45 PM
Yankees 1996 Champs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 145
I will make a thread to discuss Asian-Black relations and affirmative action.

Yes, some black people despise Asians and vice versa.

The Democratic Party is a coalition of tribes.


But meanwhile, yes, Democrats should appeal more to white voters.

The Kaepernick thing did not help; since politics and sports is intertwined, why doesn't some of the white athletes, who can sympathize with their black colleagues, who face racial discrimination with policing, etc. discuss these things with voters to further their platform.

Democrats should probably campaign more in rural places and talk about jobs, healthcare, etc.
  #147  
Old 11-10-2019, 04:19 PM
Paranoid Randroid's Avatar
Paranoid Randroid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,954
The recent NYT polling also showed underwhelming results for democratic candidates in the six polled swing states, with Warren definitively losing against Trump and Biden mostly winning but by relatively low margins. Notably, Warren does worst in North Carolina and Michigan; Biden loses North Carolina and only wins Michigan by a point.* I don't know how to square that with the story that Trump sees worsening performance in white rural areas -- and even if he does worse in Kentucky as indicated by that Mason-Dixon poll, well, you could have Trump on tape laughing uproariously while aborting babies and peeing on a bible and I'm still not sure he'd lose Kentucky.

* Edit: among likely voters

Last edited by Paranoid Randroid; 11-10-2019 at 04:22 PM.
  #148  
Old 11-10-2019, 04:25 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees 1996 Champs View Post


Democrats should probably campaign more in rural places and talk about jobs, healthcare, etc.
They do this constantly.
  #149  
Old 11-10-2019, 04:52 PM
Paranoid Randroid's Avatar
Paranoid Randroid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
They do this constantly.
All the time! Arguably to their detriment! I don't know where Yankees 1996 Champs's headspace is currently at, but I urge them to pay a little more attention.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankees 1996 Champs View Post
The Kaepernick thing did not help; since politics and sports is intertwined, why doesn't some of the white athletes, who can sympathize with their black colleagues, who face racial discrimination with policing, etc. discuss these things with voters to further their platform.
I don't quite follow you here. Are you saying that it would help democrats appeal to white voters if white athletes addressed voters about the challenges their black teammates face? Regardless, I don't see how Kaepernick presents a problem that was caused by or could be addressed by democratic politicians seeking election. If Biden were to come out and say I think literally anything at all about Colin Kaepernick, he'd alienate somebody or other whose vote he needs.
  #150  
Old 11-10-2019, 05:17 PM
Yankees 1996 Champs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paranoid Randroid View Post
All the time! Arguably to their detriment! I don't know where Yankees 1996 Champs's headspace is currently at, but I urge them to pay a little more attention.



I don't quite follow you here. Are you saying that it would help democrats appeal to white voters if white athletes addressed voters about the challenges their black teammates face? Regardless, I don't see how Kaepernick presents a problem that was caused by or could be addressed by democratic politicians seeking election. If Biden were to come out and say I think literally anything at all about Colin Kaepernick, he'd alienate somebody or other whose vote he needs.
That's like saying that Republicans should appeal in urban areas.

Parties should focus on everyone, not only a sliver of the electorate.

Yes, some white athletes should discuss what their black teammates face.

However, a lot of the black teammates are wealthy, they still face challenges.

But Democrats should tone down on the SJW stuff and talk about jobs, healthcare, crime, etc.
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 08:50 PM.

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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017