# The racist Tea Party is in love with Herman Cain **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2011, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876 "2011-10-26T16:57:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/202 "2011-10-28T06:13:32Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Be honest: a year ago, had I predicted that a black man would be the first choice for president by the Tea Party, would you have agreed? Or would you have said that was highly unlikely, given their racism? Well, first of all, if YOU had predicted it, I would have double and triple checked that it wasn’t a trick question of some sort 🙂 To be 100% honest, I have no idea what I would have said. With an issue as complicated as this, every last little word in how such a question was phrased would be almost infinitely parsable… I think there are racist elements in the tea party, and elements in the tea party that are racist (two subtly different things). I don’t think they’re the sole defining characteristic of the TP, nor do I think that there many individual tea partiers for whom racism is the one overriding characteristic. So the strongest statement I would have made is that given two otherwise identical candidates, with otherwise identical positions and strengths, I think the TP would, on average, on the whole, prefer a white candidate over a black candidate. But of course you never have identical candidates, and the reasons that people do or do not support a candidate vary wildly from person to person and from week to week. Certainly, I could have posted a thread right when Rick Perry was at the height of his popularity and tried to draw some conclusion about the TP from it – and we can now see how ridiculous that would have been. I’m rambling on here, and really not saying anything that others in the thread have not already said. But there is one other point I want to make, which is that I hope that you can see why people reacted to this thread, as they do to so many of your threads, in such an aggressive and defensive fashion… this thread might not be “here’s a liberal double standard, defend yourselves”, but it’s a first cousin. If your position is that the TP is not racist (or at least, no more or less racist than the USA as a whole), and you think that their current support for Cain is evidence for that claim, then by all means, lay out your argument. Others will disagree with you, debate will ensue. But, honestly, did you really think that anyone was going to respond by saying “gosh, Bricker, I certainly had previously and publicly maintained a position that the TP were, to the man, caricatures of extreme racism. But this one data point has proven me wrong. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!”. Of course no one would. And because the thread is started in such a confrontational way, people instinctively dig in their heels and don’t even want to say “well, this is an interesting data point, and if Cain’s support continues to be strong among the TP, then it will certainly be worth discussing what that might imply about their level of racism”, or something reasonable like that, because the whole thread is already in “Bricker is trying to make us admit that we are wrong lolz” mode. Which is a shame, because there are interesting discussions to be had on this topic (some of which, fortunately, have taken place anyhow). > [@](#): > > Yes. Absolutely. Look at the right-wing hatred Clinton engendered. Look at the dollars spent, the fact that he was actually hung on a perjury trap that took millions of dollars and tens of thousands of man-hours to create. And that despite the fact that the perjury was over an issue that was utterly foreign to the original investigation, it spawned an impeachment. > > Clinton is, by all accounts, white. Of COURSE the Tea Party would be manifestly similar if Barack Obama had been Barry O’Hara… if Barry O’Hara had proposed the same health care plan and wealth-sharing rhetoric. Well, I guess we’ll never know. It does seem an interesting coincidence to me that the leap from “lots of people really don’t like Clinton” to “lots of people really don’t like Obama, and are suddenly ‘spontaneously’ organizing these protests all over and are suddenly this new party and are on the news all the time” took place when suddenly the president was black. Interesting enough that I draw a conclusion from it. Maybe in a year someone will publish a brilliant scholarly article demonstrating that far and away the hugest factor in the formation of the TP was in fact the ability to organize such things over the internet, and Obama’s race was almost entirely a nonfactor. I would be surprised, but not utterly blown away into disbelief… ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/203 "2011-10-28T07:24:52Z")
Those on the right are also faux equalitarians. They loved Joe the Plumber. The last time I read about him he was scheduled to lecture to Republican senators on an esoteric aspect of economics. But, no matter what they pretend to be, they further policies that benefit rich white men. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/204 "2011-10-28T12:50:15Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Those on the right are also faux equalitarians. They loved Joe the Plumber. The last time I read about him he was scheduled to lecture to Republican senators on an esoteric aspect of economics. He’s [running for Congress](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66890.html) in Ohio, though it’s not clear where he’d be running or who against, due to a redistricting challenge. > [@Bricker](#): > > I regard that as a sensible position, but was hoping you might have some other examples. Feel free to start a separate thread expounding on how your opponents must be either open or disguised leftists. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/205 "2011-10-28T13:06:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, it’s not better evidence than I’ve got. It’s evidence of nothing. Those questions can be answered either way without racism. It is, actually. I could hand-hold you through an explanation, if you like. Let’s look at the question “In recent years, has too much been made of the problems of black people?” Now, certainly, a reasonable person could answer either way on that. However, a racist would almost assuredly say yes, I think you’ll agree. So when the pollsters ask the general population that question, 28% of people say ‘Yes’. Some percentage of that 28% are racists, and the rest are not. I would hazard a guess that the majority of ‘yes’ answers to that question are racist, but it’s not like we can get honest answers if we poll them with ‘Are you a racist?’ so we’ll leave that in the realm of supposition. However, that gives us a baseline - 28% of people think the problems of black people are exaggerated or have too much focus. So then we look at the Tea Party numbers on the same question. 52%. Almost double. It is therefore an inescapable conclusion that the Tea Party, as a whole, has a much different view of race than the general population. That racial factors are at work in the core make-up of the Tea Party’s DNA. The only plausible factor that comes to mind, and certainly the most common one - is racism. I mean, even though we don’t know what percentage of the population is racist, because we know that a racist is virtually guaranteed to answer ‘yes’ to that question, we can conclude that the Tea Party has twice as many racists per capita as the general population. And then we look at “Who do you think is more likely to get ahead in today’s society?” where ‘Black people’ is almost indefensible as an answer based on objective evidence and even many racists wouldn’t go that far- 4% of the general population said it, though, and 7% of the Tea Party. Again, roughly double. > [@](#): > > No, I don’t. I believe it’s unlikely for a racist person to vote for a black presidential candidate, and the more racist the person, the more unlikely the vote. > > So when the favored candidate of a given group is black, that makes it less likely that the group is racist. Not impossible, of course. But less likely. It’s unlikely for a racist person to vote for a black candidate absent other factors, but elections have lots of other factors. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/206 "2011-10-28T14:02:06Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > It is, actually. I could hand-hold you through an explanation, if you like. Let’s look at the question “In recent years, has too much been made of the problems of black people?” > > Now, certainly, a reasonable person could answer either way on that. However, a racist would almost assuredly say yes, I think you’ll agree. So when the pollsters ask the general population that question, 28% of people say ‘Yes’. Some percentage of that 28% are racists, and the rest are not. I would hazard a guess that the majority of ‘yes’ answers to that question are racist, but it’s not like we can get honest answers if we poll them with ‘Are you a racist?’ so we’ll leave that in the realm of supposition. > > However, that gives us a baseline - 28% of people think the problems of black people are exaggerated or have too much focus. > > So then we look at the Tea Party numbers on the same question. 52%. Almost double. It is therefore an inescapable conclusion that the Tea Party, as a whole, has a much different view of race than the general population. That racial factors are at work in the core make-up of the Tea Party’s DNA. The only plausible factor that comes to mind, and certainly the most common one - is racism. Interesting. I offered similar logic on the first page when rebutting the claim that since it’s only 32% of the Tea Party supporting Cain, we can’t draw any other conclusions. I did basically the same thing you just did: extrapolate the level of support to the entire organization. I think it was post #26. Anyway, let me offer you another plausible explanation: different ideas about the role of government. The Tea Party tends to lean very small-government, libertarian-esque. That is, given almost any problem, the average Tea Partier is much more likely to eschew government as a solution. Agreed? So when a poll question asks about the recent years’ attention to the problems of black people, those attentions are almost universally tied to government programs: affirmative action, quotas, racial preferences in university selection, discussions of slavery reparations, protected classes in litigation – of course their common theme is race, but their equally common theme is government regulation in an effort to fix, solve, or change the landscape. Assuming you don’t regard opposition to affirmative action, quotas, racial preferences in university selection, discussions of slavery reparations, protected classes in litigation as _per se_ racism, then an equally plausible explanation is that the difference between the general run of Americans and the Tea Party is that the Tea Party is hypersensitive and hyperaware of government – that is, after all, completely consistent with their stated goals and their actions. > [@](#): > > And then we look at “Who do you think is more likely to get ahead in today’s society?” where ‘Black people’ is almost indefensible as an answer based on objective evidence and even many racists wouldn’t go that far- 4% of the general population said it, though, and 7% of the Tea Party. Again, roughly double. It depends completely on what the poll respondent was thinking of when he answered the question. I agree that considering society as a whole, it’s hard to say that black people are more likely to get ahead. But for someone who found themselves in a similar position to dsylexic firefighter Frank Ricci, it’s not racism that might prompt the answer. People having recently faced “reverse discrimination,” or who have a family member similarly situated, might well feel their bitterness pout out into an answer like this. And such folks would see, again, the hand of government interference in a problem that they would say should be resolved by the free market. A small number, to be sure – but then, so is 7% of the Tea Party. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/207 "2011-10-28T14:06:14Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Feel free to start a separate thread expounding on how your opponents must be either open or disguised leftists. You were the one that first offered your [centrist credentials](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14401955&postcount=178) as evidence of your alliance with the correct position. So my answer to your earlier post should change, I guess, to: “Feel free to start a separate thread establishing your centrist _bona fides_, because they are unproven here.” ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/208 "2011-10-28T14:44:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Anyway, let me offer you another plausible explanation: different ideas about the role of government. > > The Tea Party tends to lean very small-government, libertarian-esque. That is, given almost any problem, the average Tea Partier is much more likely to eschew government as a solution. How could that statement be falsified? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/209 "2011-10-28T14:47:28Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > How could that statement be falsified? Excellent question. But I didn’t present it as The Absolute Right Answer – merely to rebut **CandidGamera** ’s reasoning: “The only plausible factor that comes to mind, and certainly the most common one - is racism.” I have presented another plausible factor. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/210 "2011-10-28T15:07:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Interesting. I offered similar logic on the first page when rebutting the claim that since it’s only 32% of the Tea Party supporting Cain, we can’t draw any other conclusions. > > I did basically the same thing you just did: extrapolate the level of support to the entire organization. I think it was post #26. Apples to oranges. We don’t have a poll of the general populace to compare to, in the case of Cain’s numbers. If the question of “Do you think too much has been made of the problems of black people?” was a singular anomaly, then your explanation would be (somewhat) more plausible. Taken in combination with the other answers - twice as many say black people are more likely to get ahead than white people, for instance - it’s evidence of racial animus as a significant contributor to the Tea Party’s enthusiasm. But hey, maybe they only hate black people because of how they resent affirmative action. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/211 "2011-10-28T15:09:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You were the one that first offered your [centrist credentials](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14401955&postcount=178) as evidence of your alliance with the correct position. I said no such thing. I was pointing out that one did not have to be a Raging Leftist™ to find fault with your poorly thought-out views. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/212 "2011-10-28T15:11:54Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Apples to oranges. We don’t have a poll of the general populace to compare to, in the case of Cain’s numbers. > > If the question of “Do you think too much has been made of the problems of black people?” was a singular anomaly, then your explanation would be (somewhat) more plausible. Taken in combination with the other answers - twice as many say black people are more likely to get ahead than white people, for instance - it’s evidence of racial animus as a significant contributor to the Tea Party’s enthusiasm. > > But hey, maybe they only hate black people because of how they resent affirmative action. But the combination isn’t any stronger when the same alternate explanation vitiates both elements. In other words, you seem to say, “Yeah, your explanation flies if it were just one question, but it was TWO questions!” But – my explanation is the same for both questions. If it’s true for one, why wouldn’t it be true for both? And I think they can resent affirmative action without hating anyone. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/213 "2011-10-28T15:13:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You were the one that first offered your centrist credentials as evidence of your alliance with the correct position. > [@Jackmannii](#): > > I said no such thing. I was pointing out that one did not have to be a Raging Leftist™ to find fault with your poorly thought-out views. Let the reader judge for himself: > [@Jackmannii](#): > > It is also not simply a matter of the Left beating on poor **Bricker** for his flawed premise. I’m confident I’m not the only centrist who’s remarked upon its gaping holes. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/214 "2011-10-28T16:10:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Excellent question. > > But I didn’t present it as The Absolute Right Answer – merely to rebut **CandidGamera** ’s reasoning: “The only plausible factor that comes to mind, and certainly the most common one - is racism.” > > I have presented another plausible factor. That would be a good rebuttal, if true. How can the truth of that statement be tested? Suppose we evaluate the voting record of Dick Armey, and see the extent to which he supports smaller government over larger? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/215 "2011-10-28T16:17:22Z")
Mr Cain’s policy proposals are stupid and destructive. There is no need to find the underlying malice, whether it exists or not. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/216 "2011-10-28T17:06:27Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Mr Cain’s policy proposals are stupid and destructive. There is no need to find the underlying malice, whether it exists or not. But I hear he makes a damn good pizza for $9.99. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/217 "2011-10-28T17:21:39Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > These debates make no sense. First of all, the Tea Party isn’t running for anything, Herman Cain is. So if racism is your concern, you should be concerned with whether Herman Cain is a racist, not with whether some or most people in the Tea Party are. If you think Cain is racist, and that’s the most important issue to you, then don’t vote for him. If you think I shouldn’t vote for him, persuade me not to. Okay, I’ll give it a shot: Don’t vote for Herman Cain. I’ll be your best friend… ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/218 "2011-10-28T17:28:11Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Ie illegals. Same for Swedish, Botswanan, and Kiribati nationals who are illegally here. I know you’re only in high school. But you should know by now that “illegal” is an _adjective_. Also that in our language we don’t have plural forms of adjectives. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/219 "2011-10-28T17:41:13Z")
> [@Buchanan](#): > > Can you give me a cite for the claim that racism is ignorant? > > In fact, science hasn’t changed: someone’s race is a statistically significant indicator of many things beyond skin color (and I don’t mean just the PC-acceptable differences like susceptibility to hypertension and Sickle-Cell Anemia, explosive athletic power as required for football runningbacks and basketball fowards, etc.). Or perhaps it is just coincidence that in nearly every IQ test devised in the last 100 years, ethnic groups’ means and standard deviations are quite similar? Or that in the US in 1988, there were 9,406 cases of black-on-white rape and fewer than 10 cases of white-on-black rape (cite: William Wilbanks, who derived all stats from DOJ data, as published in "Frequency and Nature of Interracial Crimes,"Justice Professional (November 7, 1990)…and that these ratios don’t vary much across which which year you choose, which western country you select, or which violent crime you are interested in…? To me, not drawing valid conclusions based on group membership due to observed propensity for certain behaviors is ignorant and wishful thinking. > > Illegal immigrants that are Hispanic, as a group, have different behaviors than irish illegal immigrants. One such behavior is incarceration rate. It is reasonable to therefore discriminate in country of origin. > > Let me know if you can find any flaws in that race realism philosophy, will you? Oh, where are my manners? Welcome to the SDMB, **Buchanan**! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/220 "2011-10-28T18:31:19Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > I know you’re only in high school. But you should know by now that “illegal” is an _adjective_. Also that in our language we don’t have plural forms of adjectives. [From Merriam-Webster:](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/illegal?show=1&t=1319826318) > [@](#): > > illegal: noun > > Definition of ILLEGAL > > : an illegal immigrant > > First known use of ILLEGAL > > 1939 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876/221 "2011-10-28T18:32:54Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > That would be a good rebuttal, if true. > > How can the truth of that statement be tested? Suppose we evaluate the voting record of Dick Armey, and see the extent to which he supports smaller government over larger? The plausibility of which statement, precisely? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-racist-tea-party-is-in-love-with-herman-cain/600876.md?page=12)