You feel there was no serious voter fraud in 2020?
We have a phone recording of Trump telling an official to invalidate votes that were cast for Biden. And Trump made a public speech encouraging his followers to storm the Capitol in order to substitute a different set of vote results.
And they didn’t do it. Sure ATTEMPTED fraud, but nothing that actually changed the election.
The State of Georgia v. Donald J. Trump, et al. is a pending criminal case against Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States, and 18 co-defendants. The prosecution alleges that Trump led a “criminal racketeering enterprise”, in which he and all other defendants “knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome” of the 2020 U.S. presidential election in Georgia.
Not that he actually succeeded. So, no significant actual fraud.
So, I am done with this side conversation.
My working hypothesis is that people first decide who to vote for at some non-verbal level and then come up with a socially acceptable justification. And in most of the world, giving an ethnic or gender stereotype is socially acceptable. People who know me, and like Trump, probably sense that I wouldn’t like those types of justifications, and so have told me it was because of the economy. But maybe if they were newer immigrants, they would give an ethnic justification.
As to whether this makes them a globally horrible person, no. Suppose you went to Ghana and asked people about Nigerians. From what I have read, you will hear some bad stereotyping. And if someone they did not like, was running for office, and had Nigerian-born parents, you would hear that reason given. But I can’t believe that makes Ghanaians horrible people.
Another hypothesis I have is that the bigger predictor of whether someone will vote for Trump is fear. That’s what lots of his rally speeches are about – hyping fear. Fear of impoverishment – and fear of other people. So if someone in suburban Philadelphia is frightened of walking around center city Philadelphia, you can almost guarantee they went for Trump – regardless of what they think about Venezuelans.
On the contrary, I think this is exactly why many voters were drawn to Trump: they blame the current administration for higher prices and believed Trump when he says he will fix this.
Of course he won’t, and his proposed policies will actually increase inflation. And even if inflation were to stay under control, prices are never going to return to what they were in 2019—unless the entire economy collapses—because that would require deflation.
Well, there you’ve hit the nail on the head. Note that these are the same people who want “Obamacare” repealed but depend on the ACA for their health insurance. Blazing Saddles said it best.
So a man’s ethnicity wears off in time, according to where he lives?
But sure, the longer a family lives in a place, the more assimilated they will be, and since Hispanics are generally what is considered socially conservative, it was only a matter of time that they’d vote conservative. And yes, I do realize that it’s debatable how conservative a lot of Republican politicians actually are.
As a Hispanic living in Florida I know a hell of a lot of Hispanic Trump supporters. The grand majority of them do it because they hate “socialists”. Hate. With the passion of a million burning suns. They want socialists to literally die. Of course they believe Democrats are socialists.
My original point that you were arguing against was my claim that Trump tried to commit voter fraud in 2020.
To the matter of this thread, I believe the original point before y’all got into that back-and-forth was that this specific result being discussed was not caused by any significant “vote stealing”.
Meanwhile…
Well, there’s enthincity as a defining identity from within and there’s “ethnicity” as an “othering” construct from the outside. I mean, a current day American named Pagani, O’Leary, Papadoupolos or Zyzkowski whose Great-great-grandpa arrived pre-1900, for the purposes of this issue discussion, are all called just “White” aren’t they? Hell even Jewish Americans get lumped in with “White” when it’s convenient for an argument.
And for sure, not every Latino “looks” or “sounds” or behaves like some casting director archetype so yeah, as mentioned earlier, many of them look in the mirror and say to themselves, “but what are they talking about, ¡soy blanco!(*) and those other guys are not, are they blind?” (I am myself by now past visibly rolling my eyes when someone says “but you look White” but boy does it grind that people still just say that) . Our societies are quite filled with our own brands of racism, colorism and classism and we bring them with us. A harbinger of what we are seeing here was seen back in 1980 with the Mariel boatlift, where there was a lot of friction with the earlier-established Cuban exile community of Middle-class emigrés of the 60s, and we began hearing the “they’re emptying their prisons and shipping out here their druggies and street people” speech.
(* “I’m white!”)
By now, I’ve probably said it in a dozen different ways, on a dozen different threads, but … why stop now?
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
– Eleanor Roosevelt
Trump, Fox, OANN, Newsmax, et al, spend an inordinate amount of time talking about people (“Liberals,” “Leftists”, “Communists,” “Socialists,” “Marxists”). Rush Limbaugh did this, too – more than any of the other major networks AFAICT (and I spread my listening and viewing time across a large number of outlets, across the political spectrum). They disparage the other side constantly – again: talking about the people and NOT the ideas.
This is the apotheosis of demagoguery, and it profoundly fans the flames of hatred and division. It doesn’t enlighten. It doesn’t inform. It doesn’t persuade. It just pits neighbor against neighbor.
[And the truth about Donald Trump is still infinitely more horrible than the endless RW lies about Biden, Harris, and the Democrats.]
…is she discussing people, there?
I think it’s more declaration than discussion, and more minds than people.
But if you wanted to pit Eleanor Roosevelt … well … it would probably be a first 
Well, the important thing is that if you and I are now discussing her, then we’re — hang on a sec.
I’m really talking about the idea of Eleanor Roosevelt
But I’m done doing that on this thread, too 
Are there no Libertarians here? I remember someone ant a Libertarian rally ranting about her UN declaration of human rights being more dangerous than the communist manifesto. But that was 35 years ago (man I’m old). I think it was a rally in support of Ron Paul and someone else.
Once again, I didn’t say it was caused by voter fraud. I said it could have been caused by voter fraud.
Uhh no
I posted the thread topic and the point is that 45% of Hispanic voters opting for Trump exemplifies that the broad assumptions Democrats have of our Hispanic populace is wrong , and that other broad assumptions apparently are as well.
I’m pretty sure they left or were banned at some point.
No, because she did not say or write that bit of wild exaggeration.
I prefer Fran Lebowitz’s version:
Great people talk about ideas, average people talk about things, and small people talk about wine.
Plenty of libertarians, but IIRC the Libertarians are gone.