Why can't he stop insulting them

[Mickeypoo]

(10-09-2020, 06:33 PM)hollodero Wrote: I get why in theory someone might behave that way, sure. Spite and hate, for example. But do you think that is what is actually responsible for black voters supporting Biden?

Spite probably not.  I am sure some hate him, but I have no idea what that % would be.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2020, 11:21 PM)hollodero Wrote: It's the reason you gave me when I asked for the reason, so there's that. 

If you now claim the reason you gave only applies (thosed that ungullibly cut off their noses to spite the face) to a minority, what about all the others? The support is quite overwhelming, in primaries and now against Trump. Now I believe it is in great part because yeah, a big majority of these black voters (never said anything like "they are a singular thing") don't find Biden's comments all that severely insulting as you make them out to be, or perceive him as overall being so overtly racist as you believe he is. I made no secret about that stance and nothing about that is disingenuous. You are/were free to give me alternative explanations as to why so many black voters support a guy in spite of his insulting nature.

I'll tell you what:

Ask MR. "White folks shouldn't think for Black folks", why he didn't think Mayor Pete had a chance of getting the Black vote. Obtain that answer if you can and then get back with me. 

[BmorePat87]

(10-09-2020, 11:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: To first bolded, South Carolina is a heavy Republican leaning State to begin with..

To next bolded, only after "the party" quietly announced that was who they wanted, and all the others stood down..

Last bolded, memorizing some lines while pumped up on amphetamines does not make him a sound person.  Hell, the guy didn't honestly answer any question on his position, when directly asked.  All he did was recite crap that he memorized to regurgitate.

South Carolina's Republican population is only relevant to this conversation about the Democratic primary if we're theorizing that some GOP voters switched parties to vote in that primary, and considering that Trump's SC voters in 2016 were 95% White, I don't think Black Republicans played a huge role in Biden's victory. 

Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out, and their Black support was next to none, so that hypothesis is rejected.

Amphetamines? LOL, that's the excuse now? I just dropped statistics and you respond with that internet conspiracy garbage?

[hollodero]

(10-09-2020, 11:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'll tell you what:

Ask MR. "White folks shouldn't think for Black folks", why he didn't think Mayor Pete had a chance of getting the Black vote. Obtain that answer if you can and then get back with me. 

Why would I? That's not my thing. What kind of response is that?

Oh boy, this IS pointless.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2020, 11:44 PM)hollodero Wrote: Why would I? That's not my thing. What kind of response is that?

Oh boy, this IS pointless.

I thought you were really wanting an answer. 

[fredtoast]

(10-09-2020, 11:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'll tell you what:

Ask MR. "White folks shouldn't think for Black folks", why he didn't think Mayor Pete had a chance of getting the Black vote. Obtain that answer if you can and then get back with me. 

Simple.  Because all the polls showed that Pete did not have the support of black voters.

Next?

[*bfine32*]

(10-12-2020, 03:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Simple.  Because all the polls showed that Pete did not have the support of black voters.

Next?

Of course you're not the individual I was referencing when I posed the question. My thought was he'd give a forthright answer. I had no such thoughts about you. 

[*PhilHos*]

(10-09-2020, 02:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It does not have to mean "EXACTLY THE SAME". And I never had to argue that it meant "exactly the same". Just plain old "SAME" is enough to include him in the same gene pool.

"You have good genes and we are the same, not different"

Get it now?

Yes, I get it. You think Trump is claiming to be from Minnesota and I'm saying Trump is claiming to be SIMILAR to those from Minnesota. 

[Dill]

(10-09-2020, 12:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I’m more of a “light a candle instead of curse the darkness” type dude; allow me to explain the question posed in the OP:

He continues to insult because no one, especially main stream media, holds him accountable. We’ve seen numerous examples of this throughout the thread. Enablers have used techniques such as Ad hominem, false dichotomy, Tu Quogue (Fred basically took over the thread with this one), and Argumentum ad misericordiam

Those he insults who continue to support him do so because of one of two reasons:
1. Those supporters will be led to believe he is the better option as enablers will try to mitigate his comments by bringing up his opponent. This is known as a Red Herring (Charlottesville anyone?)

2. Those supporters realize Biden participates frequently in the soft bigotry of low expectations. But they also realize he will support platforms that will advantage them. (Much like the Evangelical do Trump)

I will say kudos to those that simply stated Biden's comments are not acceptable.

I've raised some questions about your explanation of why Biden "continues to insult," and offered some competing hypotheses, which you have not addressed. 

Your basic premise seems to be that Biden WOULD stop insulting "those who support him" if he were somehow "held accountable" by the mainstream media. Assuming that he is NOT held accountable by the MSM renders unclear what you mean by "accountable," since his gaffes are in fact widely reported, discussed and condemned. Are reporters also supposed to wash his mouth out with soap too, or what? 

A second premise seems to be that although his gaffes are reported, he gets over on those insulted supporters because others--Bpat types--"enable" Biden by distraction, bringing up Trump and otherwise "mitigating" Biden's comments for them, thus "leading" them to believe Biden is ok. As if once Biden enablers stopped comparing him to Trump FOR black people, then Biden would finally, somehow, be held accountable--whatever 'accountable' means now. 

In last place you add "they also realize he will support platforms that will advantage them"--almost as if Black people could look at party platforms and the behavior of politicians and decide for themselves which best serve their interests and which don't, without enablers "leading" them. Were that the case, then it is certainly possible that no amount of MSM "accountability" could make Biden pay a higher price than Trump, in terms of losing Black voter support.    

I am happy to see that you are looking into formal logical fallacies, but you are doing it wrong if you just claim people are commiting them without any demonstration.  E.g., Why shouldn't this entire thread be viewed as one long (and very weak) Tu quoque response to Bpat's thread on Trump, and your posts susceptible to the same charges of ad hominem, false dichotomy, etc. that you level at others?

[hollodero]

(10-12-2020, 03:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course you're not the individual I was referencing when I posed the question. My thought was he'd give a forthright answer. I had no such thoughts about you. 

Yeah in general I really do not feel it makes any sense at all to answer you anything any longer. I'm as forthright as I can. Your ever growing tendency to give snarky, condescending responses and accuse non-conservative folks of being all kinds of awful, dishonest, irrational and stupid is the only incentive you seem to get to keep posting here. While at the same time being ultra selective and just ignoring most points made. There are many others who will keep playing along, but me, I am just about done with that.

What was your question? Why Pete had no chance of getting the black vote? This again had nothing to do with anything we discussed before, but that is kind of typical. The answer probably is a mixture of many things, including distrust, his lack of experience, that many are not that hot on his record as a South Bend mayor or his corporate past, think he is too young to be a good match against Trump, also obviously many on the politically somewhat similar Biden-Buttigieg-lane just liked Biden more, and to me it seems likely (I figure this is where you're getting at, but whatever) a certain dismissal of homosexuality that might be more prevalent in black communities could very well play some limited role in that too. So there you go. Also, I am out.

[*bfine32*]

(10-12-2020, 05:58 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah in general I really do not feel it makes any sense at all to answer you anything any longer. I'm as forthright as I can. Your ever growing tendency to give snarky, condescending responses and accuse non-conservative folks of being all kinds of awful, dishonest, irrational and stupid is the only incentive you seem to get to keep posting here. While at the same time being ultra selective and just ignoring most points made. There are many others who will keep playing along, but me, I am just about done with that.

What was your question? Why Pete had no chance of getting the black vote? This again had nothing to do with anything we discussed before, but that is kind of typical. The answer probably is a mixture of many things, including distrust, his lack of experience, that many are not that hot on his record as a South Bend mayor or his corporate past, think he is too young to be a good match against Trump, also obviously many on the politically somewhat similar Biden-Buttigieg-lane just liked Biden more, and to me it seems likely (I figure this is where you're getting at, but whatever) a certain dismissal of homosexuality that might be more prevalent in black communities could very well play some limited role in that too. So there you go. Also, I am out.

We were discussing why Biden will get the Black vote, but determining why the Black vote wouldn't support Mayor Pete has "nothing to do with what we discussed before"? 

You can be "out' and consider the answer Fred gave forthright (free from ambiguity or evasiveness) if you want, but I'll consider an answer such as that evasive every time.

Person A: "Why can 18 year serve in the military, but not drink beer"

Person B: "Because it's a law".

But on your way out understand the answer is 'because Maslow's hierarchy is flawed"

[fredtoast]

(10-12-2020, 03:36 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Yes, I get it. You think Trump is claiming to be from Minnesota and I'm saying Trump is claiming to be SIMILAR to those from Minnesota. 

No.  You still don't get it.

Trump is saying he is the same as the people from Minnesota.  That is what "not so different means".  The people he is talking too have good genes and he is like them.  He also has good genes.

Sorry, but I can't use any smaller words than that.

I have no clue how you thought i meant he was from Minnesota.  I never said anything like that.

[fredtoast]

(10-12-2020, 03:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course you're not the individual I was referencing when I posed the question.

I said you wanted the answer from "Mr White Folks Should Not Think For Black Folks".

I had no idea he was a member here.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2020, 07:06 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: One of the things I criticized some of my White progressive friends for was dismissing Black folk as a voting bloc, suggesting said White progressives knew better than Black voters how they should vote, and criticizing strong Black support for Joe Biden.

Joe Biden is the nominee because of Black voters. The White folk here regardless of ideology should stop trying to think for Black voters, especially if you haven't had their best interest at heart in the past.

(10-12-2020, 07:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I said you wanted the answer from "Mr White Folks Should Not Think For Black Folks".

I had no idea he was a member here.

Now you have an idea and the person I was talking to knew exactly who i was talking about.

But at least you didn't refute the condemnation of your elusive answer. 

[SunsetBengal]

(10-09-2020, 02:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It does not have to mean "EXACTLY THE SAME". And I never had to argue that it meant "exactly the same". Just plain old "SAME" is enough to include him in the same gene pool.

"You have good genes and we are the same, not different"

Get it now?

What's so different about any of us?  I mean, you got a body, a heart, and a brain, and I have a body, a heart, and a brain..

[hollodero]

(10-12-2020, 07:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: What's so different about any of us?  I mean, you got a body, a heart, and a brain, and I have a body, a heart, and a brain..

Right. 
And some also believe they have "incredible genes", or like Trump let the doctor go out and say that. These people don't necessarily think that way. 

[*bfine32*]

(10-12-2020, 07:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  You still don't get it.

Trump is saying he is the same as the people from Minnesota.  That is what "not so different means".  The people he is talking too have good genes and he is like them.  He also has good genes.

Sorry, but I can't use any smaller words than that.

I have no clue how you thought i meant he was from Minnesota.  I never said anything like that.

not different=Same
not so different-similar

I used regular sized words

[GMDino]

(10-12-2020, 07:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: What's so different about any of us?  I mean, you got a body, a heart, and a brain, and I have a body, a heart, and a brain..

[SunsetBengal]

(10-12-2020, 08:41 PM)hollodero Wrote: Right. 
And some also believe they have "incredible genes", or like Trump let the doctor go out and say that. These people don't necessarily think that way. 

Actually, a lot of people have incredible genes.  Have you ever wondered why you can't perform like a pro athlete, no matter how hard you practice and train?  Ever wonder why you'll never win the Nobel prize, no matter how hard you study?  (psst, it's genetics and you ain't got 'em) 

[GMDino]

This thread is getting the stamp of approval.