Does Trump calling Warren Pocahontas, make it OK to call him Adolph Drumpf?

[digs]

@Dallas_Jones

Trump will continue to say what he wants, he won’t play the media’s game, they will play his. And I will work.

…And some of us will make popcorn. Who wants real butter on theirs?
I do feel for Actual Conservatives. I come from a long line of Birchers and Goldwater Girls, went to a Libertarian college and have a number of Buckley-ite and Rand-ist friends… who have been mourning the death of Small-Government principles for the last twenty years.

(So sorry you had to live through this, Bricker!)

[Algher]

@John_Mace

She grew up in Oklahoma City, 3.5% NA. Also, while her being from OK is often mentioned as given some credence to NA ancestry, that would only be true if she had deep family roots in that state. However, none of her 4 grandparents was born in OK.

Yeah, I grew in Oklahoma and was also told I had some native ancestry (once again, Cherokee). I never claimed it, because I am not on the tribal rolls. Later I did a 23 & Me test, and found less than 1% POSSIBLE Native American / Inuit blood.

It was dumb of her to put it in her CV in such a way for Harvard to use it in their listing, and makes for tasteless joke from Trump.

[BigAppleBucky]

Snopes

The Globe obtained a portion of Warren’s application to Rutgers, which asks if prospective students want to apply for admission under the school’s Program for Minority Group Students. Warren answered “no.”

For her employment documents at the University of Texas, Warren indicated that she was “white.”

But Penn’s 2005 Minority Equity Report identified her as the recipient of a 1994 faculty award, listing her name in bold to signify that she was a minority. The Herald has twice quoted Charles Fried, the head of the Harvard appointing committee that recommended Warren for her position in 1995, saying that the Democratic candidate’s heritage didn’t come up during the course of her hiring. “It simply played no role in the appointments process,” he said. “It was not mentioned and I didn’t mention it to the faculty.”

The Herald later quoted Fried, a former U.S. Solicitor General under President Ronald Reagan, saying, “I can state categorically that the subject of her Native American ancestry never once was mentioned.”

[Measure_for_Measure]

@John_Mace

Calling Warren “Pocahontas” was indeed childish. If you wish to be as childish as he is, then go ahead and call him Drumpf.

Not just Drumpf. Adolph Drumpf.

Elizabeth Warren received no professional benefit from her alleged NA ancestry. But Trump has definitely received electoral benefit from being a Nazi: that sort of thing appeals to a certain segment of the modern American conservative basis. Remember we’re talking about a guy who thinks we should have wars to grab oil and launch mass expulsions of foreigners.

Hey no worries. Liberals defeated these characters in the mid-20th century. We will crush them again.
I don’t think Adolfph Drumpf is the sort of person who should be calling other people bigoted names.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@quiltguy

Far be it from me to Godwinize anything, which I just think I did, but… The Pocahontas “thing” never would’ve arisen if Warren hadn’t claimed Native American heritage, which she had no right to do, IIRC. I’d have changed my name from Drumpf as well. There are plenty of other names to call The Donald, let’s make a list, shall we? :rolleyes:

I’ve been going with “racist shit-flinging howler monkey”.

[ElvisL1ves]

“Short-fingered vulgarian” has withstood the test of time as well.

[Grrr]

The Donald is being very calculating with his labeling of opponents. Scott Adam was on Real Time last week, with some very interesting thoughts on the matter:

[QUOTE=Scott Adams]
SCOTT ADAMS: I’ve been studying persuasion for decades and when I saw Trump last summer displaying the tools of persuasion I thought, 'Oh my God, he’s not a crazy clown. Everything he’s doing, including his complete ignoring of the facts, is persuasion perfection. I called him to be the landslide winner in the general election last year.

Essentially he’s basically bringing a flamethrower to a stick fight. There’s nobody using the same tools that he’s using. So his complete ignoring of facts are actually part of the persuasion because he doesn’t give you targets. He doesn’t give you details of his policies, usually. So he’s reducing the number of targets while making you feel good and focusing on the things he wants. So it’s not about facts, it’s about focus and attention.
[/QUOTE]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/05/28/dilbert_creator_scott_adams_to_bill_maher_donald_trump_will_win_election_in_a_landslide.html

[Robot_Arm]

@Bricker

I’ll say it again: the only slightly palatable thing Donald Trump offers as a candidate is the impotent fury he stirs in the Left. “But… that’s insensitive! He’s supposed to cower and apologize, and then talk about the Very Real Problems facing Native Americans!”

Now, the joy I feel at seeing this reaction is somewhat tempered by the realization that Trump will be a disaster and I am voting for Hillary Clinton, which a year ago I would have given excellent betting odds against.

Still, life is hard, and one must take joy where one finds it.

I find this post to be very disappointing. There are widely, even passionately diverging political viewpoints in this country, and that’s fine, but it’s a sad state of affairs when we enjoy the antagonism just purely for its own sake.

[Count_Blucher]

@Locrian

Yes.

But not just the Pocahontas remark.

Big smile! Big smile!

[Voyager]

@BigAppleBucky

So juvenile, but what else is there to do? Ignore him? Try to reason with the Kardashian obsessed American voting public that doesn’t seem to give a damn about any of his asinine behavior?

I think there are better names. How about Donman the Conman. Given Trump U, that is accurate.

[jz78817]

So juvenile, but what else is there to do? Ignore him? Try to reason with the Kardashian obsessed American voting public that doesn’t seem to give a damn about any of his asinine behavior?

I don’t know what the “right” thing is. But I’m pretty sure lowering oneself to his style of mudslinging would be like wrestling a pig in its wallow. Both of you get filthy, but the pig enjoys it.

[monstro]

Drumpf doesn’t do anything for me, but Orangey McOrangeface has a certain ring to it.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Robot_Arm

I find this post to be very disappointing. There are widely, even passionately diverging political viewpoints in this country, and that’s fine, but it’s a sad state of affairs when we enjoy the antagonism just purely for its own sake.

I agree completely.

It’s like coming to a website dedicated to fighting ignorance, and then confessing that you really enjoy the assholes who sign up just to troll the place - as long as they troll people you disagree with.

It’s just a little sad.

[Leaper]

@Grrr

The Donald is being very calculating with his labeling of opponents. Scott Adam was on Real Time last week, with some very interesting thoughts on the matter:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/05/28/dilbert_creator_scott_adams_to_bill_maher_donald_trump_will_win_election_in_a_landslide.html

I don’t have a chance to view video right now. Does he address the argument that such tactics are most effective on voters already inclined to agree with him, and may not do much to persuade voters who are even a little skeptical or socially liberal?

[Jackmannii]

The thing about Trump and crude insults is 1) lowering oneself to his level is a failure tactic, and 2) he’s better at it.

I’m not real sympathetic to mocking his family name, in part because my paternal grandfather shortened his on emigrating to this country (which made it sound “American” as well as undoubtedly sparing his descendants some teasing at school).

As for Warren, she’s faced well-deserved mockery for trying to gain an advantage from an insignificant if not completely bogus Native American heritage, but this is really old and stale news. Let Trump do his sneering and faux Western movie Indian noises*; there are plenty of legitimate things to hit back at him with.

*if he hasn’t actually done this yet, give him time.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Robot_Arm

I find this post to be very disappointing. There are widely, even passionately diverging political viewpoints in this country, and that’s fine, but it’s a sad state of affairs when we enjoy the antagonism just purely for its own sake.

It’s not sad, because he backpeddled in post 8. Part of the board’s mission is wisecracks.

Unfortunately, Bricker doesn’t wisecrack well. Not his forte. I sympathize actually. Humor is hard.

@Jackmannii

As for Warren, she’s faced well-deserved mockery for trying to gain an advantage from an insignificant if not completely bogus Native American heritage…

She really didn’t though. This stuff was dug up by others. Did Elizabeth Warren Lie About Her Native American Heritage to Land a Job at Harvard? | Snopes.com

Otherwise an insightful post. I do think that Hillary supporters need to do a little dominance politics of their own, which shouldn’t be too hard. Trump is a failed businessman turned movie star after all. Otherwise he would just release his tax returns. So Trump’s fears are well grounded.

[Not_Carlson]

@Bricker

I’ll say it again: the only slightly palatable thing Donald Trump offers as a candidate is the impotent fury he stirs in the Left. “But… that’s insensitive! He’s supposed to cower and apologize, and then talk about the Very Real Problems facing Native Americans!”

Now, the joy I feel at seeing this reaction is somewhat tempered by the realization that Trump will be a disaster and I am voting for Hillary Clinton, which a year ago I would have given excellent betting odds against.

Still, life is hard, and one must take joy where one finds it.

@ElvisL1ves

Kind of amusing to see Bricker’s absolute loyalty to his party now lead him to endorsing crude, silly ethnic slurs.

How’s it feel to be a member of The Party of Trump, buddy?

I agree Bricker’s dig was petty and childish, but he just told us that he will be voting against his party this election.
Not just sitting this one out, but actually using his vote to do the most good he can with a really shitty choice.

That’s not blind party allegiance.

@digs

…And some of us will make popcorn. Who wants real butter on theirs?

I hope you won’t still be eating popcorn on election day.

[John_Mace]

Let’'s also remember, Warren isn’t running for prez. She’s safe for a senate reelection, so let Trump go after her. It’s meaningless.

[BigT]

The only reason I was okay with the Drumpf thing was as a form of protest. Not as an attempt to get back at him.

Unfortunately, the only way really to handle this is to not give him what he wants, and people already stupidly gave him way too much of that. I don’t mean publicity so much as I mean actually letting him be the Republican candidate.

One of the main rules in my life is to not give assholes what they want. But that’s predicated on the idea that assholes are bad people. But, for some fucking stupid reason, some people don’t seem to agree.

They think an asshole is fine as long as he’s not an asshole towards them. Kinda like thinking a racist is a nice person because he treats you well.

[FairyChatMom]

I’d love to see someone put together an montage of kindergarteners calling each other names intercut with Trump doing the same. Not that it’d make any difference to those who adore The Donald…