Identity politics means judging someone first and foremost by their race, gender, and sexuality. That's the attitude that leads many to "find it more virtuous to hire a wealthy black man or a wealthy white woman than to hire a poor white man".
This is ridiculous on its face. The comparison is nonsensical. If I'm hiring someone for a job, I'm going to pay them the same wage so they're going to be roughly at the same income level.
Also, that's not true. For example, I'm a black man with a white barber. Why? Because he cuts my hair better than anyone else.
> Identity politics means judging someone first and foremost by their race, gender, and sexuality.
Funny. When I was taking part in various equality movements, the whole point was to NOT judge someone based on their race, gender, or sexuality. Looking past the exterior husk and judging someone on the content of their character was the point. I still don't like most people. However, it's not because they are part of some particular group, but because I just find something off-putting towards that particular person and I won't generalize my distaste to a whole group of individuals.
Amongst friends, I make fun of every group under the sun. Racial jokes, female jokes, I throw around racial slurs amongst friends as well. Some of my white friends greet me by saying 'What's up nigga." I'm pretty colorful with my language as well. It may surprise you, but a lot of us grew up with the sticks and stones may break bones, but words never hurt mentality. For me, words only have the power that you give them.
We're not all stereotypical white knight, social justice warriors seeking safe spaces and stifling dissent on college campuses. I'm not going to twitter shame you for making a blonde joke. If you can't look past your own biases and judge people on their own merits rather than taking lazy mental shortcuts, what hope is there?
I never called Trump supporters sexist. I called Trump sexist.
But it's not the attitude of so many who did call people sexist for voting for Trump, and of Clinton herself who said half of Trump's supporters were "deplorable".
I hope people like you and me can take back the left from "stereotypical white knight, social justice warriors seeking safe spaces and stifling dissent on college campuses".
(And the quote you found ridiculous wasn't from me, but I thought the author meant from a wealthy background vs a poor background.)
The modern left voted for, donated to and campaigned for Bernie, who also had the accusations of sexism slung at him. That was the establishment lashing out.
They also tested the anti-semitic accusations, though no doubt they fell flat because he was Jewish:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/262007/bernie-sanders-and-hi...
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/bernie-sander...
Pretty much every anti-establishment figure gets these attacks.
Our side of the left lost the election that defined the platform for this election.
It should be obvious by now that the last thing the establishment wants is a genuine anti-establishment candidate.
And also, that any candidate who wins cannot truly be anti-establishment.
If Trump was a genuine threat to the establishment, he'd never have had a prayer.
That's not anti-establishment, it's just aligning with a different kind of establishment (the ayatollas).
And...
> 538: Clinton Couldn’t Win Over White Women
> Preliminary exit poll results show that ... Clinton lost the votes of white women overall and struggled to win women voters without a college education in states that could have propelled her to victory.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-couldnt-win-over...
> Mexico: Sexual violence routinely used as torture to secure “confessions” from women
> Sixty-six of the [100] women said they had reported the abuse to a judge or other authorities but investigations were opened in only 22 cases. Amnesty International is not aware of any criminal charges arising from these investigations.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/06/mexico-sexual...
Trump spoke about an uncomfortable subject in an offensive way, as he often does, but if it opens the door to an honest discussion his un-PC remarks may have some value.
> You can find his own words but he has said immigrants from mexico were rapist and murderers but some are good and repeated some.
That was a comment about illegal immigrants, many of whom are rapists, both immigrants themselves and the people who bring immigrants to America.
80% Of Central American Women, Girls Are Raped Crossing Into The U.S. ... Rape can be perpetrated by anyone along the way, including guides, fellow migrants, bandits or government officials [0]
http://fusion.net/story/17321/is-rape-the-price-to-pay-for-m...
> Talk about black voters as if they all live in inner city ghettos were walking in the wrong part of town will get you shot.
I don't know what you're referring to here.
> Lauded stop and frisk a measure that was show to lead to racial profiling of African Americans.
His exact words are important here. What did he say?
> Selected a VP that believe conversion therapy (or some form of it) is a good way to cure homosexuality.
I agree Pence is terrible, but I've gotten used to terrible vice presidents. It's a powerless position that is usually a political dead end.
And considering that Trump is a) hated by quite many and therefore a possible assassination target, and b) oldest president-elect so far, it's distinctly possible that Trump wouldn't serve whole term.
On the other hand, Pence should act as an insurance for Trump against the more militant left: should they assassinate Trump, they'll get Pence as president...
Well, the assassination doesn't sound that likely. Many speculated that Obama would be a target for the white supremacists and extreme right. We haven't seen any openly reported attempts.
Instead, most threads discussing the Clinton loss describe a class of people who are relegated to corners of the country with inadequate education and dying industries. It's that combination which leads voters in states such as Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to ignore the hatred, the vitriol, the proven lack of business success, and the lack of government leadership in hopes of changing the status quo as it relates to them.
In summary: nearly 50% of voters chose to prioritize personal gain over human dignity.
(I voted for Clinton, but I consider myself solidly independent of any particular party.)
•••
I have no interest in continuing the thread, though, so feel free to get in the last word.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/womens-rights-and-oppo...
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/page/latinos-for-hillary/
This sort of polarization is sort of worrisome in one sense; trust is needed to cohesively run a society. (http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21705831...) If we're becoming a low-trust nation overall, that's not terribly good.
If you keep telling yourself that's what this election was truly about, Trump is already halfway to his second term.
Your comment is just as vitriolic and uninformed as the article's author. You complain, rightly so, about Trump supporters being unfairly characterized as uneducated, toothless, incestuous rubes while also generalizing the the modern left.
Criticize the author instead if assuming that he speaks for the entirety of people who didnt vote for Trump.