Poll: Most Democrats see Republicans as racist, sexist

[TU Curmudgeon]

From FOX News

Poll: Most Democrats see Republicans as racist, sexist
​

Nov. 17, 2018 - 4:53 - Over 60 percent of Democrats polled by Axios think Republicans are bad people.

COMMENT:-

FIRST - My apologies, but that's all that I could get from the link, and I couldn't find a text link to the actual FOX News report (hopefully you will have better luck), so I went straight to the Axios poll.

SECOND - The statement is accurate according to the Axios poll.

THIRD - Once you read the Axios poll, you can see what "selective reporting" is all about.

FOURTH - When you consider that what the Axios poll actually reported was that:

1. 21% of Democrats think Republicans are evil, and about the same share of Republicans (23%) think Democrats are evil;
2. Of the 22% (of Democrats) who provided open-ended descriptions of Republicans, responses included: selfish, greedy, corrupt, spineless, fearful and bad; and
3. Of the 26% (of Republicans) who provided open-ended descriptions of Democrats, responses included: socialist, angry, hypocritical, uniformed, power-hungry and violent;

you start to understand what the problem is - you can understand and work with those who "have a different opinion" but you cannot understand and work with those who "are evil".

As Axios says

The bottom line: Both parties are being redefined around the extreme emotions shaping extremely ugly views of each other. That means that, as the midterm elections proved, there's less room for moderates or centrists in the current political environment — a dynamic that's likely to get worse before it gets better.
​

 

[Captain Adverse]

From FOX News

Poll: Most Democrats see Republicans as racist, sexist
​

Nov. 17, 2018 - 4:53 - Over 60 percent of Democrats polled by Axios think Republicans are bad people.

COMMENT:-

FIRST - My apologies, but that's all that I could get from the link, and I couldn't find a text link to the actual FOX News report (hopefully you will have better luck), so I went straight to the Axios poll.

SECOND - The statement is accurate according to the Axios poll.

THIRD - Once you read the Axios poll, you can see what "selective reporting" is all about.

FOURTH - When you consider that what the Axios poll actually reported was that:

1. 21% of Democrats think Republicans are evil, and about the same share of Republicans (23%) think Democrats are evil;
2. Of the 22% (of Democrats) who provided open-ended descriptions of Republicans, responses included: selfish, greedy, corrupt, spineless, fearful and bad; and
3. Of the 26% (of Republicans) who provided open-ended descriptions of Democrats, responses included: socialist, angry, hypocritical, uniformed, power-hungry and violent;

you start to understand what the problem is - you can understand and work with those who "have a different opinion" but you cannot understand and work with those who "are evil".

As Axios says

The bottom line: Both parties are being redefined around the extreme emotions shaping extremely ugly views of each other. That means that, as the midterm elections proved, there's less room for moderates or centrists in the current political environment — a dynamic that's likely to get worse before it gets better.
​

Well if you can describe someone as evil, you don't have to worry about listening to them or giving their views any consideration.

You can simply dismiss them, and justify any and every act against them and their ideas as combatting "evil."

I've pointed this out many times in the Forum, but this is neither my idea nor is it new.

It's called "Moral Panic" and was identified this way by Stanley Cohen, author of "Folk Devils and Moral Panic" in 1972.

Prior to that it was known as scapegoating. Identify a person as an outsiders, a deviant, a devilish servant of evil and you can socially ostracize and otherwise attack them not only with impunity but with the full support of society.

The Left's tools are those of current Identity Politics, calling someone a sexist, racist, xenophobe, homophobe, nationalist, misogynist, supremacist, etc., etc.. The Right's tools include calling someone unpatriotic, un-American, reverse-racist, commie, God-less, immoral, etc.

Both extremes only serve to push their opponents into more extremism themselves, and really don't help the situation or lead to cooperation, understanding, or valid solutions.​

 

[Skeptic Bob]

So nearly half our country can’t be reasoned with. That’s just swell.

 

[SixStringHero]

I believe both parties have their share of racists, and the tribalism of today is downright pathetic.

I don't take the dems anymore seriously with their constant cries of racism. As a collective they seem to not have any qualms about pre judging an entire group of people as being 'privileged' simply for their skin color, and what makes matters worse is this racist garbage has the backing of academia and the media.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I believe both parties have their share of racists, and the tribalism of today is downright pathetic.

I don't take the dems anymore seriously with their constant cries of racism. As a collective they seem to not have any qualms about pre judging an entire group of people as being 'privileged' simply for their skin color, and what makes matters worse is this racist garbage has the backing of academia and the media.

1. Is a statistical analysis that shows that a person of "Race X" has a disproportionately high chance of being killed by a person of "Occupation Y" racist?
   
2. Is a statistical analysis that shows that a person of "Occupation Y" has a disproportionately high chance of being killed by a person of "Race X" racist?

What do you call a person who answers "Yes." to Question 1 and "No." to Question 2?

What do you call a person who answers "No." to Question 1 and "Yes." to Question 2?

 

[Roadvirus]

Democrats hate Republicans....how is this news?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Democrats hate Republicans....how is this news?

Didn't follow the links, eh wot!

 

[Maccabee]

This may be from my personal bias, but it seems that the republicans description of democrats seem to be less harsh than vice versa. I may be mistaken, though. Anyone else noticed this?

 

[Cardinal]

From FOX News

Poll: Most Democrats see Republicans as racist, sexist
​

Nov. 17, 2018 - 4:53 - Over 60 percent of Democrats polled by Axios think Republicans are bad people.

COMMENT:-

FIRST - My apologies, but that's all that I could get from the link, and I couldn't find a text link to the actual FOX News report (hopefully you will have better luck), so I went straight to the Axios poll.

SECOND - The statement is accurate according to the Axios poll.

THIRD - Once you read the Axios poll, you can see what "selective reporting" is all about.

FOURTH - When you consider that what the Axios poll actually reported was that:

1. 21% of Democrats think Republicans are evil, and about the same share of Republicans (23%) think Democrats are evil;
2. Of the 22% (of Democrats) who provided open-ended descriptions of Republicans, responses included: selfish, greedy, corrupt, spineless, fearful and bad; and
3. Of the 26% (of Republicans) who provided open-ended descriptions of Democrats, responses included: socialist, angry, hypocritical, uniformed, power-hungry and violent;

you start to understand what the problem is - you can understand and work with those who "have a different opinion" but you cannot understand and work with those who "are evil".

As Axios says

The bottom line: Both parties are being redefined around the extreme emotions shaping extremely ugly views of each other. That means that, as the midterm elections proved, there's less room for moderates or centrists in the current political environment — a dynamic that's likely to get worse before it gets better.
​

Regardless of whether that statement is accurate, it's an observation that plays specifically in Trump's favor.​

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

This may be from my personal bias, but it seems that the republicans description of democrats seem to be less harsh than vice versa. I may be mistaken, though. Anyone else noticed this?

You may well be correct.

However, that's like wondering if it is better for a 5'9" tall person to be buried under 5'10" of feces or under 5'11" inches of feces - isn't it?

 

[Maccabee]

You may well be correct.

However, that's like wondering if it is better for a 5'9" tall person to be buried under 5'10" of feces or under 5'11" inches of feces - isn't it?

You're right. It was just something that I was thinking.

 

[gfm7175]

I'm willing to bet that most Democrats don't even know what their two favorite words (racism & bigotry) actually mean, and that they probably don't know where the meanings of those words derive from...

 

[uptower]

1. Is a statistical analysis that shows that a person of "Race X" has a disproportionately high chance of being killed by a person of "Occupation Y" racist?
   
2. Is a statistical analysis that shows that a person of "Occupation Y" has a disproportionately high chance of being killed by a person of "Race X" racist?

What do you call a person who answers "Yes." to Question 1 and "No." to Question 2?

What do you call a person who answers "No." to Question 1 and "Yes." to Question 2?

Simply reporting statistics won't make anyone a racist. Bringing it up as a stick to beat certain ethnicity with or suggesting some sort of biological propensity is the cause might be pushing it: decades of socio-economic studies have shown us that external factors such as poverty and lack of opportunity are far more likely the cause of crime. Statistics are neutral till someone weaponizes them.

Now the real problem with one party seeing another as extremists is that the media, primaries and election cycles tend to give voice to the more extreme wings of each party. Therefore a lot of Republican pundits, candidates, surrogates and politicians are obviously racist even though the majority of people in the party may not be. Likewise a lot of Dems with similar platforms are given to hysterical finger-pointing and sweeping generalisations even though the majority of Democrats probably don't consider their Republican next-door neighbour a card-carrying Klan member.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I'm willing to bet that most Democrats don't even know what their two favorite words (racism & bigotry) actually mean, and that they probably don't know where the meanings of those words derive from...

There are several theories on the last point. There is general agreement that the word "racism" came into the English language from "Middle French" (14th century to early 17th century). There is no agreement on whether it entered Middle French from the Hebrew "rosh" or the Arabic "ra's", but that does indicate that it is of Middle Eastern origin.

As for "bigotry", that word can be traced back to 12 century France where it appears to have been used as a derogatory term for both Germans and Normans in the same way that the English were later known as "goddamns" and WWI Americans (serving in France) were known as "les sommobiches".

As far as MEANING is concerned, it's going to be pretty difficult to find someone who doesn't know that "racism" (correctly) refers to prejudice based on a person's "race" - even though they may not actually know what a "race" is and "bigot" (in contemporary American usage) can mean as little as "someone who doesn't agree with me 100%" (i.e. "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices") or as much as "someone who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance".

Unfortunately, I fail the "Is a Democrat" test.

PS - I also fail the "Is a Republican" test.

PPS - I also fail the "Got all of their education at American schools and never reads anything other than American news sources" test.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Simply reporting statistics won't make anyone a racist. Bringing it up as a stick to beat certain ethnicity with or suggesting some sort of biological propensity is the cause might be pushing it: decades of socio-economic studies have shown us that external factors such as poverty and lack of opportunity are far more likely the cause of crime. Statistics are neutral till someone weaponizes them.

I'm pointing out correlation NOT causality.

If the social conditions between "Blacks" and "Whites" were reversed, then the correlation would also be reversed.

Now the real problem with one party seeing another as extremists is that the media, primaries and election cycles tend to give voice to the more extreme wings of each party. Therefore a lot of Republican pundits, candidates, surrogates and politicians are obviously racist even though the majority of people in the party may not be. Likewise a lot of Dems with similar platforms are given to hysterical finger-pointing and sweeping generalisations even though the majority of Democrats probably don't consider their Republican next-door neighbour a card-carrying Klan member.

I suspect that your actual point is that the "public face" of BOTH parties doesn't actually represent the majority of the party's supporters - and I think that you are probably correct.

 

[enderpotato00]

I believe both parties have their share of racists, and the tribalism of today is downright pathetic.

I don't take the dems anymore seriously with their constant cries of racism. As a collective they seem to not have any qualms about pre judging an entire group of people as being 'privileged' simply for their skin color, and what makes matters worse is this racist garbage has the backing of academia and the media.

I'd argue that Democrats and Republicans are just stupid.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I'd argue that Democrats and Republicans are just stupid.

The prevailing view of almost 50% of those who self-identify with either the Democrats or the Republicans is:

"They are evil and we are pure."
​

and those people do not seem to recognize that "Your view of what is needed for the best interests of the country is different from mine" does NOT mean "You are evil.".

 

[mpg]

So nearly half our country can’t be reasoned with. That’s just swell.

Everyone can be reasoned with some of the time, and no one can be reasoned with all of the time.

 

[Harshaw]

The prevailing view of almost 50% of those who self-identify with either the Democrats or the Republicans is:

"They are evil and we are pure."
​

and those people do not seem to recognize that "Your view of what is needed for the best interests of the country is different from mine" does NOT mean "You are evil.".

This is pointedly true of easily 50% of those who strongly identify with one of the parties here on DP.

 

[DarkWizard12]

1. Is a statistical analysis that shows that a person of "Race X" has a disproportionately high chance of being killed by a person of "Occupation Y" racist?
   
2. Is a statistical analysis that shows that a person of "Occupation Y" has a disproportionately high chance of being killed by a person of "Race X" racist?

What do you call a person who answers "Yes." to Question 1 and "No." to Question 2?

What do you call a person who answers "No." to Question 1 and "Yes." to Question 2?

Indeed, this is why we need more police officers in poorer, more racially segregated communities. There are no shortage of murder victims, by other people of the same minority group.

 

[ataraxia]

Well if you can describe someone as evil, you don't have to worry about listening to them or giving their views any consideration.

You can simply dismiss them, and justify any and every act against them and their ideas as combatting "evil."

Good luck reasoning with these guys:

 

[ataraxia]

I'm willing to bet that most Democrats don't even know what their two favorite words (racism & bigotry) actually mean, and that they probably don't know where the meanings of those words derive from...

It's like pornography. You know it when you see it.

 

[OlNate]

There are several theories on the last point. There is general agreement that the word "racism" came into the English language from "Middle French" (14th century to early 17th century). There is no agreement on whether it entered Middle French from the Hebrew "rosh" or the Arabic "ra's", but that does indicate that it is of Middle Eastern origin.

As for "bigotry", that word can be traced back to 12 century France where it appears to have been used as a derogatory term for both Germans and Normans in the same way that the English were later known as "goddamns" and WWI Americans (serving in France) were known as "les sommobiches".

As far as MEANING is concerned, it's going to be pretty difficult to find someone who doesn't know that "racism" (correctly) refers to prejudice based on a person's "race" - even though they may not actually know what a "race" is and "bigot" (in contemporary American usage) can mean as little as "someone who doesn't agree with me 100%" (i.e. "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices") or as much as "someone who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance".

Unfortunately, I fail the "Is a Democrat" test.

PS - I also fail the "Is a Republican" test.

PPS - I also fail the "Got all of their education at American schools and never reads anything other than American news sources" test.

:lamo Post of the day.

 

[American]

I believe both parties have their share of racists, and the tribalism of today is downright pathetic.

I don't take the dems anymore seriously with their constant cries of racism. As a collective they seem to not have any qualms about pre judging an entire group of people as being 'privileged' simply for their skin color, and what makes matters worse is this racist garbage has the backing of academia and the media.

Haven't you read the Communist Manifesto?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

Proletarians and Communists:

The section ends by outlining a set of short-term demands—among them a progressive income tax; abolition of inheritances and private property; abolition of child labour; free public education; nationalisation of the means of transport and communication; centralisation of credit via a national bank; expansion of publicly owned etc.—the implementation of which would result in the precursor to a stateless and classless society.

The whole racism thing is really just another class struggle phenomenon, which is part of achieving the stateless (think borderless) society.

 

[calamity]

From FOX News

Poll: Most Democrats see Republicans as racist, sexist
​

Nov. 17, 2018 - 4:53 - Over 60 percent of Democrats polled by Axios think Republicans are bad people.

COMMENT:-

FIRST - My apologies, but that's all that I could get from the link, and I couldn't find a text link to the actual FOX News report (hopefully you will have better luck), so I went straight to the Axios poll.

SECOND - The statement is accurate according to the Axios poll.

THIRD - Once you read the Axios poll, you can see what "selective reporting" is all about.

FOURTH - When you consider that what the Axios poll actually reported was that:

1. 21% of Democrats think Republicans are evil, and about the same share of Republicans (23%) think Democrats are evil;
2. Of the 22% (of Democrats) who provided open-ended descriptions of Republicans, responses included: selfish, greedy, corrupt, spineless, fearful and bad; and
3. Of the 26% (of Republicans) who provided open-ended descriptions of Democrats, responses included: socialist, angry, hypocritical, uniformed, power-hungry and violent;

you start to understand what the problem is - you can understand and work with those who "have a different opinion" but you cannot understand and work with those who "are evil".

As Axios says

The bottom line: Both parties are being redefined around the extreme emotions shaping extremely ugly views of each other. That means that, as the midterm elections proved, there's less room for moderates or centrists in the current political environment — a dynamic that's likely to get worse before it gets better.
​

They are mostly racists, or they are those who do not care that they have racists on their side--same thing.​