The Attack of the Anti Trumpers Pt. one
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Mark Twain
The New York Times showed a map of Trump voters. "Everywhere there are Trumpers, there are disgruntled White people, probably even racist, uneducated, Southern White people," they wrote. "Loads of em, in fact."
Yes, Trump equals hate, especially virulent White hate (is there any other kind?)
With this bit of wisdom, the many anti-Trumpers shouted with glee, for their bigotry regarding White folks and Trump had been affirmed....uh, I mean their profound insight into human nature. Yes, reading "Gawker" had paid off, to say nothing of reading the Tweets of the rich and famous, who, apparently, had a deep bond with the poor. Probably because they were employed as nannies and gardeners on their private estates.
Here's the thing, 63% of the nation is White. 12% is Black. 17% is Hispanic. Of the 17% of the population that is Hispanic, about half are White, racially speaking, regardless of how they choose to define themselves. Meaning, that about 71% of the nation is of the Caucasian persuasion. But, for the sake of argument, let's leave Hispanic Whites out of this debate for the moment.
Now, what can we infer from the New York Time's statement that it is primarily poor, uneducated crackers voting for Trump, based on geography and lots of inference?
How about this: that people overall are poorer than before Obama. And the reality is, they've been gradually getting poorer for the better part of two decades. That is just about all Americans, regardless of race. So, finding disgruntled poor people isn't very hard. And, when 2/3 of the nation's population is White and spread over the geographic U.S., you could throw a rock and hit an abundance of financially challenged White people with the greatest of ease. Black, and Brown folk, too. This says far more about the failing economy than it does about anything else. But race is always the great divider. Pick at the wound and whisper racist nothings in the ear, and you'll always get a heated reaction. And that is exactly what The New York Times has done, to the detriment of all of us. Trump is simply the device used to achieve that goal, and that’s all.
Mark Magula
The New York Times showed a map of Trump voters. "Everywhere there are Trumpers, there are disgruntled White people, probably even racist, uneducated, Southern White people," they wrote. "Loads of em, in fact."
Yes, Trump equals hate, especially virulent White hate (is there any other kind?)
With this bit of wisdom, the many anti-Trumpers shouted with glee, for their bigotry regarding White folks and Trump had been affirmed....uh, I mean their profound insight into human nature. Yes, reading "Gawker" had paid off, to say nothing of reading the Tweets of the rich and famous, who, apparently, had a deep bond with the poor. Probably because they were employed as nannies and gardeners on their private estates.
Here's the thing, 63% of the nation is White. 12% is Black. 17% is Hispanic. Of the 17% of the population that is Hispanic, about half are White, racially speaking, regardless of how they choose to define themselves. Meaning, that about 71% of the nation is of the Caucasian persuasion. But, for the sake of argument, let's leave Hispanic Whites out of this debate for the moment.
Now, what can we infer from the New York Time's statement that it is primarily poor, uneducated crackers voting for Trump, based on geography and lots of inference?
How about this: that people overall are poorer than before Obama. And the reality is, they've been gradually getting poorer for the better part of two decades. That is just about all Americans, regardless of race. So, finding disgruntled poor people isn't very hard. And, when 2/3 of the nation's population is White and spread over the geographic U.S., you could throw a rock and hit an abundance of financially challenged White people with the greatest of ease. Black, and Brown folk, too. This says far more about the failing economy than it does about anything else. But race is always the great divider. Pick at the wound and whisper racist nothings in the ear, and you'll always get a heated reaction. And that is exactly what The New York Times has done, to the detriment of all of us. Trump is simply the device used to achieve that goal, and that’s all.
Mark Magula