The Democrat Thread

[StrangeSox]

On the other hand, Ta-Nehisi Coates has an interesting piece on the increasingly abstract nature of racialist politics and dog-whistles.

 

The Southern Strategy is often conceived as magic. I would argue that it is better conceived of as another engagement during white supremacy's fighting retreat into oblivion. The "symbols" argument can only work until people decide that the deploying of symbols is, itself, racist. I know people think that Republicans have avoided the Rev. Jeremiah Wright attack out of the goodness of their heart. I would argue that they've avoided it because they (correctly) understand that it would be poisonous to them.

 

And so robbed of symbols, a previously racist attack disperses into a hazy diffusive blabbering. The most striking thing about Mary Matlin's "producer vs. the parasites" line is that she declines to say who the parasites are. Who specifically are the takers? Are they the workers who are paying payroll taxes? Are they the elderly? Are they the 6.9 percent of Americans earning less than $20,000? (See my colleague Derek Thompson for more on this.)

 

By Mitt Romney's lights it's all of them.

[MexSoxFan#1]

Speaking of the Republicans not being able to pass s***, yesterday they killed a veterans' jobs bill (veterans have a higher unemployment rate than the average) that 4 Republicans actually wrote. Dems said "hey this is good s***! we'll all vote for it too!" Republicans filibustered their own f***ing bill (5 of them sensibly voted for it, to their credit, but couldn't break the filibuster). Including the 4 people who wrote it. Why did they do that, you ask? Well, the election is in 6 weeks, Obama would look pretty good.

 

They made up some bulls*** reason as to why they couldn't pay for it and didn't want to add debt but this has never stopped them from any defense project, ever, and certainly didn't stop them from voting for the war they sent these veterans to. f*** them!

lol@Republicans, they wouldn't vote for a Bill they wrote...pathetic.

[StrangeSox]

Also this recent study on white working-class Americans: (from)

 

On “dependency,” the study finds that large numbers of working class whites (46 percent) have received Social Security or disability payments over the last two years; more than a fifth have received food stamps; 19% have received unemployment.

 

Yet the study also finds that three quarters of working class whites believe poor people have become too dependent on government assistance. There’s obviously overlap there, which bears out what some have already pointed out — many of these voters simply won’t think Romney’s comments about the freeloading 47 percent, or about government “dependency” in general, are about them.

 

But the findings on “redistribution” are also revealing. White working class voters want to soak the rich, and they agree with key aspects of Obama’s views about capitalism and inequality.

 

Research like this would seem to support the liberal/progressive contention that much of the discussion of the social safety net is tinged with racial bias. Working-class whites receive many government benefits themselves, but those benefits are not seen in the same light as the "hand outs" that other people get.

 

eg from the report:

 

3. White working-class Americans are more likely than white college-educated

Americans to believe blacks and other minorities have received too

many advantages and government attention.

 

• Six-in-ten (60%) white working-class Americans agree that discrimination

against whites has become as big a problem as discrimination against blacks

and other minorities, compared to only 39% of white college-educated Americans.

 

• Nearly half (49%) of white working-class Americans agree that over the past

few decades the government has paid too much attention to the problems

of blacks and other minorities, compared to 32% of white college-educated

Americans.

 

• White working-class Americans in the West (40%), Midwest (48%), and

Northeast (48%) are less likely than white working-class Americans in the

South (58%) to believe that over the past couple decades, the government has

paid too much attention to the problems of blacks and other minorities.

Edited September 21, 2012 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

Also this recent study on white working-class Americans: (from)

 

 

 

Research like this would seem to support the liberal/progressive contention that much of the discussion of the social safety net is tinged with racial bias. Working-class whites receive many government benefits themselves, but those benefits are not seen in the same light as the "hand outs" that other people get.

 

eg from the report:

 

That's not necessarily inconsistent if those white people are simply saying long-term recipients are a problem, even if they personally received some short term welfare. What does the data show re: blacks versus whites there? Do blacks accept more welfare for longer periods of time? Or is it pretty equal? In Chicago I'm guessing it's blacks more (with my knowledge of the CHA and the hospitals in the area), but maybe in towns like Boston with poor Irish it's more equal.

[MexSoxFan#1]

One thing I'll add about the Southern Strategy, it worked for the GOP ever since LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act and boy did they hammer Democrats with it but now it isn't as effective as it was and with the changing demographics, the GOP are painting themselves into a corner. If the GOP doesn't modernize and they keep listening to the Teabaggers and the other wingnuts, they aren't going to win many Presidential elections in the future. The Democratic base is getting bigger, especially in the electoral rich states while the GOP's base is dying out. Hopefully with another defeat at the hands of a black man (the horror!), they'll realize they need to include more minorities and ditch the pandering to the intolerant racists homophobes.

 

Probably take another asswhupping at the hands of Hillary in 2016 until they get the message...

Edited September 21, 2012 by MexSoxFan#1

[StrangeSox]

I never understood why liberals think that when conservatives b**** about this it's only black people we're considered about.

 

Here is your answer:

That's not necessarily inconsistent if those white people are simply saying long-term recipients are a problem, even if they personally received some short term welfare. What does the data show re: blacks versus whites there? Do blacks accept more welfare for longer periods of time? Or is it pretty equal? In Chicago I'm guessing it's blacks more (with my knowledge of the CHA and the hospitals in the area), but maybe in towns like Boston with poor Irish it's more equal.

 

Assumptions on who receives what sort of aid, how much aid and for how long can be used to rationalize white people's aid while criticizing black people's aid. You, being a well-educated professional who experiences this issue at least tangentially and argues on the internet about politics ad nauseum, are not aware of the data. What is the likelihood of the average working-class white poll respondent being aware of that data?

 

edit: I'm pretty sure that, if anything, this would be even more pronounced in Boston. It's not exactly known as a diverse, well-integrated city.

Edited September 21, 2012 by StrangeSox

[mr_genius]

Here is your answer:

 

 

Assumptions on who receives what sort of aid, how much aid and for how long can be used to rationalize white people's aid while criticizing black people's aid. You, being a well-educated professional who experiences this issue at least tangentially and argues on the internet about politics ad nauseum, are not aware of the data. What is the likelihood of the average working-class white poll respondent being aware of that data?

 

oh boy do you have this wrong. Romney is out pandering to everyone but white people and is going to lose because of it. The GOP needs to go for 65% of the white vote. 60% will win it. That is where their focus needs to be.

[MexSoxFan#1]

I've had some arguments with white working class dudes (I worked in a machine shop when I was younger) who complain about blacks and welfare, they always argued that the only people on welfare were blacks and other minorities...

[MexSoxFan#1]

oh boy do you have this wrong. Romney is out pandering to everyone but white people and is going to lose because of it. The GOP needs to go for 65% of the white vote. 60% will win it. That is where their focus needs to be.

How would you go about it without being a racist? Tell white people to vote for you because Obama helps minorities too much? SMH

[mr_genius]

I've had some arguments with white working class dudes (I worked in a machine shop when I was younger) who complain about blacks and welfare, they always argued that the only people on welfare were blacks and other minorities...

 

are they voting for Romney?

[StrangeSox]

I've had some arguments with white working class dudes (I worked in a machine shop when I was younger) who complain about blacks and welfare, they always argued that the only people on welfare were blacks and other minorities...

 

 

from here

[MexSoxFan#1]

are they voting for Romney?

I have no idea, I don't work in a machine shop anymore.

[mr_genius]

How would you go about it without being a racist? Tell white people to vote for you because Obama helps minorities too much? SMH

 

It's very easy, just like how Democrats have percentages they want certain ethnic groups to vote for them. Are the Democrats anti-White racists? if they oppose our fair and just efforts to help poor working class white people, then we will just call the Democrats racist. 65% is within reach!

[mr_genius]

I have no idea, I don't work in a machine shop anymore.

 

I bet they aren't and this is a problem.

Edited September 21, 2012 by mr_genius

[Balta1701]

It's very easy, just like how Democrats have percentages they want certain ethnic groups to vote for them. Are the Democrats anti-White racists? if they oppose our fair and just efforts to help poor working class white people, then we will just call the Democrats racist. 65% is within reach!

I can't stand white people.

[StrangeSox]

kill all white people

[MexSoxFan#1]

How the heck do you try to win 60-65% of the white vote without being divisive and or racist? I hope Mr Genius wasn't being serious with that post.

[Jenksismyhero]

 

from here

 

Tax credits as a "social program" is bulls***. You're actively doing something for the benefit of society (owning a home, having a kid, etc) to get those credits.

[mr_genius]

I can't stand white people.

 

I am conceding your white vote. You are not in our 65% demographic.

[Balta1701]

Tax credits as a "social program" is bulls***. You're actively doing something for the benefit of society (owning a home, having a kid, etc) to get those credits.

Great, so the standard we get to use now to justify spending is whether or not it does something for the benefit of society? I'm game! Sign me up!

[mr_genius]

How the heck do you try to win 60-65% of the white vote without being divisive and or racist? I hope Mr Genius wasn't being serious with that post.

 

There is nothing racist about it. We will merely talk to the poor and working class white people that have been left behind. Under attack from the Democrats. Laid off from Bain by Romney.

 

What programs do they see, on the ground, that they are not allowed to participate because the Democrats have excluded them. We will simply give them equal opportunity to programs just like those. The exact opposite of racism.

Edited September 22, 2012 by mr_genius

[BigSqwert]

Tax credits as a "social program" is bulls***. You're actively doing something for the benefit of society (owning a home, having a kid, etc) to get those credits.

How is having a kid benefiting society? I've heard many times in the arguments of this forum that poor people should just stop having kids.

[StrangeSox]

Tax credits as a "social program" is bulls***. You're actively doing something for the benefit of society (owning a home, having a kid, etc) to get those credits.

 

Budget-wise, it is the same thing. Refund you $x for your student loan interest or give you $x to pay for school, same difference. Instead of getting your mortgage tax check from the government in routine installments, you get your tax refund check in April. You can argue that some programs are worthwhile or beneficial while others are not, but they are functionally the same. That article lays the argument out.

[Jenksismyhero]

How is having a kid benefiting society? I've heard many times in the arguments of this forum that poor people should just stop having kids.

 

Can't really have a country without a next generation...

[Jenksismyhero]

Budget-wise, it is the same thing. Refund you $x for your student loan interest or give you $x to pay for school, same difference. Instead of getting your mortgage tax check from the government in routine installments, you get your tax refund check in April. You can argue that some programs are worthwhile or beneficial while others are not, but they are functionally the same. That article lays the argument out.

 

You get a max of $2500/year for that credit. So someone can attend one class for about 4 weeks. Great system!