so what... i'd endorse an exhumed corpse over anything the republican boys club had to offerOriginally Posted by Dan Druff
and that applies over several decades
idiot
hate to point it out but todd w is just like ben shapiro
they talk faster than they think
stooges in the long run
laughable idiots
yeah you can talk but it's the ramblings of a mad mad man
Last edited by limitles; 12-31-2018 at 07:49 PM.
"The founding fathers did not like the idea of the tyranny of the majority ruling the country"
Dan Druff
“I don't know what weapons World War III will be fought with, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
Albert Einstein
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today if a gift
and that is why it's called the present"
Eleanor Roosevelt
She has a good chance to win 23 and me states, imo.
Left-wing supporters of Warren are already making the same mistake they made regarding Hillary.
Rather than taking the honest approach of, "Yeah, I know Warren screwed up with the whole Native American thing, but she'd be a great President, and that's really what we need right now, especially following a guy like Trump", they are attempting to still defend the Native American thing and claiming that it's just Breitbart smearing her (lol).
That's part of the reason Hillary lost. People in the center were asking, "Okay, Hillary seems kinda shady. Can you address these concerns of mine?", and the left replied, "Hillary's great! Nothing to see here! It's all a right wing conspiracy to frame her!", and that didn't go over well with most swing voters.
At the same time, Trump supporters were taking the line of, "Sure, the guy is an asshole and has his problems, but he's what we need right now to put our country on the right track." That resonated far more with the swing voter.
But I just don't see this changing. I think Hokeyhontas is going to continue to lie about this Native American thing to the bitter end, and that's going to end up defining her.
I would do it very differently if I were Warren's campaign manager. Rather than putting out the ridiculous 1/1024th Native DNA test results, I would have released the following statement:
"I realize there has been some controversy regarding my Native American ancestry. Growing up, I heard a lot of stories from family members which led me to believe I had a lot more Native heritage than it turns out I actually do. Upon further research, I have learned that there is not clear evidence of my Native ancestry, and I apologize for not looking into this more in depth at an earlier stage. I apologize to any Native Americans I offended by these claims, and I want everyone to know that I truly did believe I was one of them, and always felt pride in that.
I hope we can put this distraction behind us, and focus upon the important issues facing this country, at this very pivotal time in our modern history. I plan to give my all to solve as many of these issues as I can, and I hope I can still count on your support."
That would've been a hell of a lot better than, "See! See! This DNA tests proves I'm 1/1024th Native! In your face, Trump!"
She’s not American Indian at all...her ancestry is Central American....and only an epsilon at that.
I have more Botswanan in me....and I’m Lilly white
Or deep down she knows she has no shot but knows she can wrestle up a bucket o cash from the “Impeech45NOW!” Club to build as big a war chest that she will never need and cash it out when she retires.
Once again she's as Native as she thought and said. Sorry, if that's not enough for you. There is very clear evidence of her Native ancestry. She looked in to that at the depth that was possible at an earlier stage. Exactly how many Natives are offended by the "claims" she has actually made?
Do you pretend not to understand how basic math works or is there another reason for using the 1/1024 figure?
There is not "very clear evidence" of her Native ancestry.Once again she's as Native as she thought and said. Sorry, if that's not enough for you. There is very clear evidence of her Native ancestry. She looked in to that at the depth that was possible at an earlier stage. Exactly how many Natives are offended by the "claims" she has actually made?
Do you pretend not to understand how basic math works or is there another reason for using the 1/1024 figure?
Not only is that ancestry a laughable single relative 6-10 generations back (perhaps dating to the 1700s), but it was conceded that they didn't necesarily have the proper Native DNA samples to compare. Instead, they used samples which could have been South American or Mexican.
But let's say she was actually, factually 1/1024th Native American.
That's so tiny that it's inconsequential -- certainly not worthy of identifying as a "Native American professor" while at Harvard.
It's not like she was up front the whole way that her Native ancetry was a tiny percentage, but she still identifies with it.
She told those ridiculous stories about her parents having dating issues because one of them was Native, and the other one's family didn't like that (lol).
Warren is as lily white as I am.
As I already stated, Warren embellished her Native "ancestry" for credibility purposes in academia. I don't even think she necessarily did it to advance her career. I believe she did it because academia considers you to be boring and inconsequential if you're white and Christian, so this was a way she could separate herself and appear to be part of a victim class.
It's a hell of a lot cooler to walk around Harvard as Elizabeth Warren, Native American professor than Elizabeth Warren, lily white professor.
I don't even think Warren thought she was being deceptive. She probably heard family stories that they're part Native, and even without any real evidence of it being true, she latched onto that identity in order to fit in better in the world of academia.
The problem is that the DNA test actually proved the opposite of what she was going for. Trump doubted her Native heritage and repeatedly mocked her. She was so tilted about it that she sought proof to show he was wrong, and then the "proof" turned out to mostly support what he was saying. Rather than either keeping quiet about the findings or sheepishly conceding that she mistakenly believed she was Native all these years, she attempted to double down on the BS by releasing that DNA test, hoping that no one would notice what it really meant.
I realize that you're not in the US, but I hope that most Democrats here continue taking the same attitude about her as you.
The average swing voter sees this Native thing as embarrassing bullshit, and the more she insists she's actually Native, the more dishonest/crazy she looks. And these people will vote for Trump again if she's the nominee.
As I said, the current political climate in the US allows you to be a flawed/fucked up person as long as the belief is that electing you will result in the greater good. That's what Trump proved. Few believed that he was a good, highly ethical man, but those voting for him largely believed that he was who we needed at the moment.
Rather than focusing upon her anti-Wall-Street populism, which could play well with the swing voter, she's still dancing around her wigwam trying to show everyone that Trump was wrong about her heritage.
Trump really does have her on monkey tilt.
Eh? Yes there is very clear evidence of her ancestry. Literally no debate whatsoever.There is not "very clear evidence" of her Native ancestry.
Not only is that ancestry a laughable single relative 6-10 generations back (perhaps dating to the 1700s), but it was conceded that they didn't necesarily have the proper Native DNA samples to compare. Instead, they used samples which could have been South American or Mexican.
But let's say she was actually, factually 1/1024th Native American.
That's so tiny that it's inconsequential -- certainly not worthy of identifying as a "Native American professor" while at Harvard.
It's not like she was up front the whole way that her Native ancetry was a tiny percentage, but she still identifies with it.
She told those ridiculous stories about her parents having dating issues because one of them was Native, and the other one's family didn't like that (lol).
Warren is as lily white as I am.
The conceding whatever is a strawman. Doesn't make any difference. I covered this before. With Native blood you can use any Native group from North-, South- or Central-America.
How bout we don't use that 1024 figure. What if we use the actual report that found a single relative 6-10 generations ago. You know the one that proved she had a single distant relative just as she said.
And no she's not as lily white as you're. That misconception comes from not understanding basic math.
If the Trump claim would have been a bet, would you have honestly said that he won that. Not Native enough is just blatantly moving the goal post.
Things like upper bound and range likely ring a bell. You possibly even understand how they work. Obv you have no idea how unlikely the 1024 figure is. Even you're not that disingenuous when debating your side. Now, using misleading rhetoric, completely unproven "facts", repeating known lies and just making shit up, that's just the gold standard that we're used to, but i assumed there was at least some connection to reality.
What are you talking about? The upper bounds was 1/1024th, yes, but even the lower bounds was 1/64th. If we take the middle (8 generations), that's still 1/256th.Eh? Yes there is very clear evidence of her ancestry. Literally no debate whatsoever.
The conceding whatever is a strawman. Doesn't make any difference. I covered this before. With Native blood you can use any Native group from North-, South- or Central-America.
How bout we don't use that 1024 figure. What if we use the actual report that found a single relative 6-10 generations ago. You know the one that proved she had a single distant relative just as she said.
And no she's not as lily white as you're. That misconception comes from not understanding basic math.
If the Trump claim would have been a bet, would you have honestly said that he won that. Not Native enough is just blatantly moving the goal post.
Things like upper bound and range likely ring a bell. You possibly even understand how they work. Obv you have no idea how unlikely the 1024 figure is. Even you're not that disingenuous when debating your side. Now, using misleading rhetoric, completely unproven "facts", repeating known lies and just making shit up, that's just the gold standard that we're used to, but i assumed there was at least some connection to reality.
So what about 20 generations from now, where, provided no more Natives get into the family tree, that person will be one-billionth Native. Does that still make them Native to you? Would you still pay out a bet for someone who claims to be Native when you find out that they are one-billionth Native? Or do you stop at some point and call the whole thing ludicrous?
Obviously to make any legitimate, common-sense claim of a heritage, it needs to be fairly close to you in the family tree. Otherwise you're just misleading people, and are truly engaging in cultural appropriation!
I don't know how you say there is "clear evidence" of her ancestry anyway, for the reasons I already stated in my last post.
I'm pretty secure in stating that anyone who is between 1/64th and 1/1024th of a certain race doesn't get to legitimately claim that racial identity, unless they're very up front with how small of a percentage they really are. Elizabeth Warren went as far as telling stories about her PARENTS having dating issues because of one of them being Native! Highly, highly misleading given what we know now, right?
The fact that you're even trying to debate this is mind-boggling.
Even many Democratic Party leaders are/were shaking their heads at the whole DNA thing, and wish she would just concede the point and move on.
I don't know how you say there is "clear evidence" of her ancestry anyway, for the reasons I already stated in my last post.
I'm pretty secure in stating that anyone who is between 1/64th and 1/1024th of a certain race doesn't get to legitimately claim that racial identity, unless they're very up front with how small of a percentage they really are. Elizabeth Warren went as far as telling stories about her PARENTS having dating issues because of one of them being Native! Highly, highly misleading given what we know now, right?
Current Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation 1/64 Native.
Warren was up front in that she believed she had 5th generation ancestor. The DNA report didn't disprove that. It only proved that she had at least one distant relative. Not only or just, as the right keeps claiming. DNA reports don't prove that sort of things.
Oh and regarding ethnicity there's currently 5 major groups. White, black, yellow, red and jew. I assume it's because of the work of Israeli scientists and their policy of Nationality by blood. Not really sure any other country does that. Anyway in DNA research Jews aren't Caucasian. If it helps, in that sense Warren is indeed whiter than you're.
E Warren for president?!
I have reservations
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
What Druff seems to repeatedly ignore about Elizabeth Warren’s story is the part where her grandfather, who was fully white (from the “good” social stock in the community), was disowned by his bigoted parents because he married a woman who had some Native American blood in her family tree. Apparently, her grandmother had one grandparent who was Native American. That people would be so petty and bigoted about the racial makeup of someone is the important story that Warren conveys in the story of her ancestry. Too bad Druff keeps ignoring that point. Hell! Anti-race mixing laws in the US were only found to be unconstitutional about 50 years ago!
Current Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation 1/64 Native.
Warren was up front in that she believed she had 5th generation ancestor. The DNA report didn't disprove that. It only proved that she had at least one distant relative. Not only or just, as the right keeps claiming. DNA reports don't prove that sort of things.
Oh and regarding ethnicity there's currently 5 major groups. White, black, yellow, red and jew. I assume it's because of the work of Israeli scientists and their policy of Nationality by blood. Not really sure any other country does that. Anyway in DNA research Jews aren't Caucasian. If it helps, in that sense Warren is indeed whiter than you're.
https://www.thoughtco.com/interracia...ge-laws-721611
_____________________________________________
It might be a true story. Fairly sure Druff has decided it isn't. Not really based on anything besides that Warren doesn't look Native enough. Just telling the story is apparently exaggerating ones ethnic background.What Druff seems to repeatedly ignore about Elizabeth Warren’s story is the part where her grandfather, who was fully white (from the “good” social stock in the community), was disowned by his bigoted parents because he married a woman who had some Native American blood in her family tree. Apparently, her grandmother had one grandparent who was Native American. That people would be so petty and bigoted about the racial makeup of someone is the important story that Warren conveys in the story of her ancestry. Too bad Druff keeps ignoring that point. Hell! Anti-race mixing laws in the US were only found to be unconstitutional about 50 years ago!
Current Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation 1/64 Native.
Warren was up front in that she believed she had 5th generation ancestor. The DNA report didn't disprove that. It only proved that she had at least one distant relative. Not only or just, as the right keeps claiming. DNA reports don't prove that sort of things.
Oh and regarding ethnicity there's currently 5 major groups. White, black, yellow, red and jew. I assume it's because of the work of Israeli scientists and their policy of Nationality by blood. Not really sure any other country does that. Anyway in DNA research Jews aren't Caucasian. If it helps, in that sense Warren is indeed whiter than you're.
https://www.thoughtco.com/interracia...ge-laws-721611
Looks are inherited in a very nonlinear way.
In the DNA report something like sixth of her DNA was unrecognized (or less than 99.9% certainty). Studying Native DNA markers isn't exactly at the top of the list of research funding. And all of this is about that 0.5% of human DNA that differs among all of humanity. Rest of it is shared. Everything that is involved with DNA is minuscule and usually based on probabilities.
Kevin and I went to high school and junior college together and have been life long acquaintances. Politically, we have our differences (I’m a Dem) and I think his “leadership” in Congress and has been ineffective, to say the least, but as a person he is a standup, normal guy. The kind you’d want as a friend. So I’m gonna stand up for him here.
All of Warren’s aunts and uncles who were children of those grandparents told the same story. But Druff does have a history of discounting facts that don’t jive with his political spin on things.It might be a true story. Fairly sure Druff has decided it isn't. Not really based on anything besides that Warren doesn't look Native enough. Just telling the story is apparently exaggerating ones ethnic background.
Looks are inherited in a very nonlinear way.
In the DNA report something like sixth of her DNA was unrecognized (or less than 99.9% certainty). Studying Native DNA markers isn't exactly at the top of the list of research funding. And all of this is about that 0.5% of human DNA that differs among all of humanity. Rest of it is shared. Everything that is involved with DNA is minuscule and usually based on probabilities.
_____________________________________________
Funny how you chide me regarding using the "upper bounds" of 1/1024th to make my point, and then you try to make your point using the lower bounds of 1/64th.
Current Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation 1/64 Native.
Warren was up front in that she believed she had 5th generation ancestor. The DNA report didn't disprove that. It only proved that she had at least one distant relative. Not only or just, as the right keeps claiming. DNA reports don't prove that sort of things.
Oh and regarding ethnicity there's currently 5 major groups. White, black, yellow, red and jew. I assume it's because of the work of Israeli scientists and their policy of Nationality by blood. Not really sure any other country does that. Anyway in DNA research Jews aren't Caucasian. If it helps, in that sense Warren is indeed whiter than you're.
Where did that DNA test report say she had "at least" one distant relative. I read the report myself BEFORE reading any criticism from the right wing media (in fact, I caught it early enough when the mainstream media and left were fawning over how she just owned Trump with it), and I was shocked to see that it was pretty clear about it just being one relative 6-10 generations ago.
If one had to come up with a "best guess" from the DNA test, it would be one relative 8 generations ago. That's basically negligible. You can't identify with a race because of one ancestor 8 generations ago. It makes you look like a fool.
Say that I found I had a black ancestor from 8 generations ago. Could I walk around claiming I was black and a "person of color"? I would be accused of being the next Rachel Dolezal, and they'd be right. In fact, this whole premise is so absurd that "Family Guy" (a show written by mostly leftists) even did an entire episode making fun of this, long before the controversy involving Warren took place.
It's absolutely absurd that you're still trying to argue that Elizabeth Warren is Native American. The twisting and turning you're doing to attempt to justify this is incredible.
This is a white person who may have a tiny bit of Native ancestry from hundreds of years ago, and appropriated that identity in order to gain better acceptance in academia. That's it. Nothing else to see here.
Not the worst thing a person can do, and it shouldn't be a showstopper to getting elected.
However, it is a showstopper because she is stupidly sticking to this ludicrous claim, instead of simply apologizing for the mistake and moving on. The average swing voter is not going to understand you being "Native" when your own DNA test shows you range between 1/64th and 1/1024th.
Right on cue, she finally claimed she's "not a person of color" (despite what she told Harvard), and put out an answer similar to the one I posted the other day as what I said she should have claimed all along.
Basically, the story now is that she took at face value what her family was saying, and was only referring to her ancestry when she said she was Native American, NOT her identity.
Uh huh.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/05/polit...can/index.html
And to think she took some other, deserving minority’s spot at Harvard. Me, me, me.
It is so weak that you guys focus on fake news,
Why? You can't come up w/any real problem w/her?
It like lol at AOC because she dances,
Can't you guys come up w/some reql problems, .like how does Trump, who doesn't listen to his own intelligence, spout propaganda he'd get only from Putin?
Montenegro is aggressive? Not common knowledge, but some how that made its way to Trump? He doesn't read.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/el...tive-american/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.28ceaa0fc1e2
And to think she took some other, deserving minority’s spot at Harvard. Me, me, me.
San Francisco crowned the ‘world’s best’ city to live: survey
https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/...o-live-survey/
A few things here:It is so weak that you guys focus on fake news,
Why? You can't come up w/any real problem w/her?
It like lol at AOC because she dances,
Can't you guys come up w/some reql problems, .like how does Trump, who doesn't listen to his own intelligence, spout propaganda he'd get only from Putin?
Montenegro is aggressive? Not common knowledge, but some how that made its way to Trump? He doesn't read.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/el...tive-american/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.28ceaa0fc1e2
1) I'm not a Trump supporter, and you'll find very few posts here where I'm praising him (and in fact, more of them criticizing him)
2) I actually defended AOC's dancing video, stating that it was from 2010 and a completely normal thing for college students to do.
3) I'm not really focusing on any "problems" with Elizabeth Warren right now. I'm just focusing on her peculiar obsession with defending this Native American super-exaggeration which she perpetuated during her career in academia.
4) Snopes is an excellent source for looking up or debunking internet hoaxes. It's a terrible source for political information, as it's highly biased, and they've all but admitted that all of the researchers there are left-of-center.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
