Biden just lost the nomination.

[ecofarm]

So, would a person who is 99.5% white and 0.5% American Indian, be justified in writing down "American Indian" to the question of "race" on her registration card with the Bar, as depicted here? Seriously?
Real American Indians don't seem to think so.

I don't know where someone wants to draw the line, but the test proved her claim 100% accurate. If one is not impressed with the numbers of the claim, perhaps one should not have been impressed with "great great great grandmother" because they're the same thing.

Let's see your citation for this bar registration.

 

[kitsune]

If this sinks Biden, I'll be glad. At least some good will have come from it.

 

[DiAnna]

That's why I presented a range of "if you believe in her positions" versus not believing in them...because I didn't want to presume on your exact political standing. I know it's similar to mine, but I don't know exactly where it is so I couched the question in a broader range.

I appreciate that, but the thing is my answers would have been "I believe in some of her issues" and "yes, I believe she's a good person"... and yet I still hope she will not be the democratic nominee, for the reasons I have already stated.

I stand by the larger principle of my post, which is that the sincerity of one's position and the sincerity of one's candidate is an overwhelmingly greater priority than whether or not you believe that candidate will resonate with a certain segment of the country. Obviously there are limitations to that logic, but the gist of it is one I believe to be true.

And I did mean my post to be respectful, not just civil. I'm sorry if that respect wasn't expressed clearly.

Don't worry about it, I actually laughed at the "scolding" part, and was smiling when I typed my response. I was not angry, nor even miffed, lol. As far as I'm concerned, we may disagree on this issue, but we're good! :kissy:

 

[Amelia]

I don't know where someone wants to draw the line, but the test proved her claim 100% accurate. If one is not impressed with the numbers of the claim, perhaps one should not have been impressed with "great great great grandmother" because they're the same thing.

Great great great grandmother is 3.125%. Her ancestry results put her at between 1.5625% and 0.09765%.

That is nowhere near enough to justify this:

But more importantly, she took Trump's bait instead of dismissing it the way that GreatNews pointed out she could have done. And that is not the only bad judgment/inauthenticity she has shown. She has weakened herself. And here we are in a Joe Biden thread talking about it.

 

[ecofarm]

Great great great grandmother is 3.125%. Her ancestry results put her at between 1.5625% and 0.09765%.

That is nowhere near enough to justify this:

But more importantly, she took Trump's bait instead of dismissing it the way that GreatNews pointed out she could have done. And that is not the only bad judgment/inauthenticity she has shown. She has weakened herself. And here we are in a Joe Biden thread talking about it.

First, your math is off. She claimed 5-6 generations and 6 generations was in the range of the test results.

Second, I know the story about being listed in some directory as having ancestry, this long after her employments and largely a social media thing.

I dunno about the pic or what that even means. Surely you don't expect me to be swayed by an image. I expect that image is linked to the social media mistake/confusion that Warren has already apologized for and explained.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

At least you're honest and manage to post without name calling.

Oh my gosh, the Breitbart loving hardcore Trump guy has the sadz about namecalling.
Oh the irony...

 

[GreatNews2night]

She didn't take a DNA test before checking that box because, like most people, she accepted her family's narrative, same as I've accepted mine and a good number of Americans just assume that if their parents tell them they are of X lineage, they aren't lying. The difference is that Warren was directly challenged in a way that most people aren't. And of course the degree of her lineage didn't live up to some arbitrary standard that absolutely nobody defined in advance. It was just, "Nope, not good enough for us." And who are they to make that determination? And the answer is, nobody at all.

Sorry. Her stance doesn't pass the smell test. She is clearly, overwhelming, a white woman. She isn't at all an American Indian.
It's one thing to say "I have a tiny percentage of American Indian ancestry." It's a way different thing to say, when asked "Race?" "American Indian."
I like you, Cardinal, and I share your goal of bringing Trump down.
But I'll have to respectfully disagree with you, here.
For me, Warren is way more qualified than Trump, but didn't play this card right, which makes me question her judgment, and fear for the easy attack line she brought upon herself.

 

[GreatNews2night]

I don't know where someone wants to draw the line, but the test proved her claim 100% accurate. If one is not impressed with the numbers of the claim, perhaps one should not have been impressed with "great great great grandmother" because they're the same thing.

Let's see your citation for this bar registration.

Let's see my citation for this bar registration? Her card has been reproduced here, twice.

 

[joko104]

She never claimed to be a member of a tribe. She claimed she had Native American ancestry, and a ****ing DNA test proved her right.

No it didn't. As a lawyer she knew that even her belief in 1/32th ancestry proves that when she wrote on her application for a law license and to be a professor at Harvard she knew that 1/32th did not qualify her for minority status legally, with any tribe or ethically. Nor is her claim she did so for being so in touch with her belief she foremost was Native American since she opted to have no involvement with any tribe nor any Native American activities. This is added to her jumping back and forth between claiming to be white or NA depending whichever best served her.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Worrying about whether somebody makes for a candidate that the middle will vote for is why Democrats come across as unreal and insincere, and it's why we got hammered in 2016. If you're spending all of your time growing the perfect centrist candidate in a laboratory, guess what? People are going to pick up on that. Voters aren't always smart or informed, but they have a strong belief about what they perceive as insincere. As a result, they'll feel compelled to choose between the fake sounding candidate with the proper, crowd-tested centrist statements that say nothing, and the populist and despicable candidate who makes statements that appear to be backed by absolute sincerity. In the end, the right people are disincentivized to vote for the former, and the wrong people are motivated to vote for the latter.

Push out the noise and consider this: Do Warren's policies and her message resonate with you? Despite her "goofy aunt" persona, does she seem like a genuinely good human being who believes in the right things? If the answer to this question is no, then by all means don't support her. But if the answer is yes, then you do your own principles harm by denigrating her just because you're afraid of how somebody in the middle is going to perceive her. We lost 2016 because of an insincere-sounding candidate, and we kicked ass in 2018 because all our candidates ran on policy and sincerity.

But if we're worried about how Buttigieg's sexual orientation or Warren's goofy aunt persona will sit with the middle, or if we're afraid of the funny names that Trump will lob at them, then we don't have the moral courage to lead and Trump should just be made President in perpetuity.

Let me be clear, your sparkling logic is beginning to work on me, and it's not fair, but please carry on.
I am powerless to stop you

 

[Amelia]

First, your math is off. She claimed 5-6 generations and 6 generations was in the range of the test results.

Second, I know the story about being listed in some directory as having ancestry, this long after her employments and largely a social media thing.

I dunno about the pic or what that even means. Surely you don't expect me to be swayed by an image. I expect that image is linked to the social media mistake/confusion that Warren has already apologized for and explained.

On an official document Warren claimed her race to be American Indian.

For the longest time we were supposed to believe it was just in some professional directory ... some social networking thing. But it was more than just that.

By trying to use a weak DNA test to justify her claim of being American Indian, she dug her hole deeper and had to issue additional apologies.


She is going to have to wear her ridiculous racial claims around her neck every time she goes up against Trump ... if she can make it that far. I don't think she can make it that far.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Exactly. This is why I'm so mad at the dumb Millennials who were all in love with Bernie and sat out or joined Trump, out of spite, not understanding the generational damage they'd be doing to everything they believe in, by allowing Trump to fill the SCOTUS with nasty conservatives. These idiots now have the president and the SC that they deserve.

This is what it sounded like, from where I sat:

 

[ecofarm]

Let's see my citation for this bar registration? Her card has been reproduced here, twice.

I could show you the same with all kinds of stuff on it.

Is this just the registration she filled out via social media thinking it was for that media?

How much have you read about this? Because I've read a ton, the complete explanation. And I can only guess what that pic is from.

 

[ecofarm]

On an official document Warren claimed her race to be American Indian.

For the longest time we were supposed to believe it was just in some professional directory ... some social networking thing. But it was more than just that.

By trying to use a weak DNA test to justify her claim of being American Indian, she dug her hole deeper and had to issue additional apologies.


She is going to have to wear her ridiculous racial claims around her neck every time she goes up against Trump ... if she can make it that far. I don't think she can make it that far.

Late in her career she was involved with a social media thing and was asked about her ancestry in regard to her personal stories. Believing she was joining an ancestry social media thing, she registered as such. It's the only time ever in her life she's registered as such and she thought it was for a discussion group. She's apologized and explained.

I dunno if that pic is real, but if so then it's presumably from that. Not her original registration with the bar association. Which, of course, she was not attempting to change.

 

[Cardinal]

Sorry. Her stance doesn't pass the smell test. She is clearly, overwhelming, a white woman. She isn't at all an American Indian.
It's one thing to say "I have a tiny percentage of American Indian ancestry." It's a way different thing to say, when asked "Race?" "American Indian."
I like you, Cardinal, and I share your goal of bringing Trump down.
But I'll have to respectfully disagree with you, here.
For me, Warren is way more qualified than Trump, but didn't play this card right, which makes me question her judgment, and fear for the easy attack line she brought upon herself.

You're straying into waters that you won't like. Kamala Harris is black, as is Barack Obama, and your argument is dangerously inside the territory of "they're not black enough," which was a common and ridiculous accusation from the right.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

What I find most damaging is her stupidity in trying to confront Trump on his own territory. Her DNA test reeked of desperation and played right into his hand.

THIS ^^^

Instead, she should have just said "I heard this version of this possible ancestry from my family, when I was young. I sincerely believed in it, as a child. Maybe it is not true. But that's it, I'm not addressing this issue any longer; the Donald can try his best to engage me on his infantile level, but I'm not going there. Instead, I'm focusing on policy. Here is what I think should be done to solve [insert big issue here that Americans care about]."

That's too kind and genteele.
If I was Warren, I never even would have hinted at taking a test, and I'd respond to his taunts with this:

"I'd been told the story of my Native American heritage ever since I was a little girl. Every family has stories and folklore, some of it true, some of it made up nonsense, like in your case where they told you that you were a genius, and everyone laughed at that. Listen you big orange coward, if you want to discuss policy and issues, here's the 800 number where you can sign up to debate me.
Your Pocahontas nonsense is nothing more than schoolyard bullying, which means you don't have enough brains to debate the issues."

 

[Cardinal]

THIS ^^^



That's too kind and genteele.
If I was Warren, I never even would have hinted at taking a test, and I'd respond to his taunts with this:

If I had to guess, she took a page from Obama, who successfully crushed the mainstream question about his citizenship by posting his birth certification. If I'm right and that's where she took her inspiration, there was one critical difference between the two situations she didn't anticipate: there was genuine (if incredibly stupid and racist) doubt about the legitimacy of Obama's citizenship, whereas the Native American question from the right was 100% trolling. And if I'm wrong, what's your theory for the two entirely different outcomes?

 

[ecofarm]

THIS ^^^



That's too kind and genteele.
If I was Warren, I never even would have hinted at taking a test, and I'd respond to his taunts with this:

If someone denied your family's stories of ancestry and bet you to take a test, why not? When the test confirms your claim, you'd then apologize for taking it? She did. Even though it proved her correct.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

If I had to guess, she took a page from Obama, who successfully crushed the mainstream question about his citizenship by posting his birth certification. If I'm right and that's where she took her inspiration, there was one critical difference between the two situations she didn't anticipate: there was genuine (if incredibly stupid and racist) doubt about the legitimacy of Obama's citizenship, whereas the Native American question from the right was 100% trolling. And if I'm wrong, what's your theory for the two entirely different outcomes?

Test didn't come back one quarter Indian or higher.

 

[GreatNews2night]

I could show you the same with all kinds of stuff on it.

Is this just the registration she filled out via social media thinking it was for that media?

How much have you read about this? Because I've read a ton, the complete explanation. And I can only guess what that pic is from.

Well, there you go. I'm a fairly informed voter, I'm left of center, and I'll NEVER EVER even consider voting for Trump, and I'm taking at face value the claims that have been spreading all over the place that she wrote that on her Texas Bar registration card, even though, you are right, I haven't read much about it. So, if a fairly informed voter (not so informed regarding reading extensively on this, but fairly informed in general terms) so favorable to the Dem candidate has his doubts, imagine what this does to the vast mass of way less informed voters out there.

Like I said, this narrative about her has acquired force of truth, even if maybe it isn't true.

This is why I said, you don't need to convince me, I'll vote for her anyway if she's the nominee, but you need to convince all the swing voters out there who think "cheater" as an immediate association when the name Elizabeth Warren pops up.

That's precisely why her chances are tainted.

 

[Amelia]

Late in her career she was involved with a social media thing and was asked about her ancestry in regard to her personal stories. Believing she was joining an ancestry social media thing, she registered as such. It's the only time ever in her life she's registered as such and she thought it was for a discussion group. She's apologized and explained.

I dunno if that pic is real, but if so then it's presumably from that. Not her original registration with the bar association. Which, of course, she was not attempting to change.

She identified her race as American Indian to the state of Texas in 1986.

Washington Post: Warren listed race as 'American Indian' on Texas bar registration - CNNPolitics



You're stretching really hard to defend her. And she stretched really hard to defend herself when she hamhandedly presented her DNA results as exoneration.
And then she had to apologize again for that. And here we are talking about her poor judgement and all the apologies she had to or chose to make. When if she had shown an iota of sound judgement she never would have taken Trump's bait to begin with.

It was too late to go back to 1986 and undo the poor judgement she showed then. But she certainly had a choice last year and she screwed the pooch.

 

[Cardinal]

Test didn't come back one quarter Indian or higher.

I don't buy that, and have no reason to. There was never any defined expectation of her lineage. If her test had come back 50% that wouldn't have been sufficient.

 

[Amelia]

Well, there you go. I'm a fairly informed voter, I'm left of center, and I'll NEVER EVER even consider voting for Trump, and I'm taking at face value the claims that have been spreading all over the place that she wrote that on her Texas Bar registration card, even though, you are right, I haven't read much about it. So, if a fairly informed voter (not so informed regarding reading extensively on this, but fairly informed in general terms) so favorable to the Dem candidate has his doubts, imagine what this does to the vast mass of way less informed voters out there.

Like I said, this narrative about her has acquired force of truth, even if maybe it isn't true.

This is why I said, you don't need to convince me, I'll vote for her anyway if she's the nominee, but you need to convince all the swing voters out there who think "cheater" as an immediate association when the name Elizabeth Warren pops up.

That's precisely why her chances are tainted.

^^ that

 

[GreatNews2night]

THIS ^^^



That's too kind and genteele.
If I was Warren, I never even would have hinted at taking a test, and I'd respond to his taunts with this:

That, too. I like your answer even better.
But hey, that's NOT what she did. She had to take the damn test!!!
That's why I question her judgment.

 

[ecofarm]

Well, there you go. I'm a fairly informed voter, I'm left of center, and I'll NEVER EVER even consider voting for Trump, and I'm taking at face value the claims that have been spreading all over the place that she wrote that on her Texas Bar registration card, even though, you are right, I haven't read much about it. So, if a fairly informed voter (not so informed regarding reading extensively on this, but fairly informed in general terms) so favorable to the Dem candidate has his doubts, imagine what this does to the vast mass of way less informed voters out there.

Like I said, this narrative about her has acquired force of truth, even if maybe it isn't true.

This is why I said, you don't need to convince me, I'll vote for her anyway if she's the nominee, but you need to convince all the swing voters out there who think "cheater" as an immediate association when the name Elizabeth Warren pops up.

That's precisely why her chances are tainted.

I think her explanation becomes common knowledge, even for those not inclined to a political debate website, and the fact that she one time ever in her life registered as NA for what she thought was a social media discussion group, and at the request of others who had heard about her personal family stories, will prevail.

I think that pic might be fake. Or it's for what she believed to be a social media group.

Edit: I see the citation, above.