• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wisconsin GOP want Supreme Court to block map that adds a black majority district...

You shoot your credibility with your first sentence. You likely care more than they do.


More cult talking points. For someone who claims to go for substance, you are being entirely the opposite.


Your own bigotry is showing.


To you, it appears, not to a serious politico.


Back to the unfounded assumpttions.


It's not what they are doing. Apparently, it is what you would do in their place.


When it is the only relevant factor.
Look at this district:
1647359082370.png

Where do you think the most minority communities are?
 
Look at this district:
View attachment 67380242

Where do you think the most minority communities are?
That's district Texas #35, previously discussed. It was drawn a decade ago and it has been adjudicated and passed.

Have you got anything where you aren't assuming racism?
 
I thought segregation was back in vogue with all these segregated graduations going on on campus and demands for segregated dorms.

Was I wrong?

Edit: forgot about the segregated PTA meetings
 
That's district Texas #35, previously discussed. It was drawn a decade ago and it has been adjudicated and passed.

Have you got anything where you aren't assuming racism?
It was drawn because it limits voters who are likely to vote Democrat to as few districts as possible. It was determined that these voters were likely to vote Democrat by their skin color. As such, it disempowers minority voters.

That legislators can hide racist districting behind “likely to vote Democrat” doesn’t mean that it must therefore not have been done with racist intentions.
 
I thought segregation was back in vogue with all these segregated graduations going on on campus and demands for segregated dorms.

Was I wrong?

Edit: forgot about the segregated PTA meetings
Yes you are wrong. None of these things are happening except in the imaginations of those who get their only information from conservative rags who find a poorly worded headline or a questionable statement by some crazy progressive somewhere and deliberately misinterpret it in such a way to imply something insane and suggest that it is everywhere and "coming to a town near you if Democrats get their way" in order to scare the shit out of uneducated conservatives who are too lazy to think critically about and do their own investigation of obviously ridiculous stories.
 
It was drawn because it limits voters who are likely to vote Democrat to as few districts as possible.
There you can stop.

It was determined that these voters were likely to vote Democrat by their skin color.
False. Precinct voting patterns determined that they would vote Democrat.

As such, it disempowers minority voters.
Again false. It's difficult to understand why anyone would think this was true.

That legislators can hide racist districting behind “likely to vote Democrat” doesn’t mean that it must therefore not have been done with racist intentions.
It's not hiding anything. That is both sufficient reason and sufficient explanation.

Yes you are wrong.
He was sarcastic.

None of these things are happening except in the imaginations of those who get their only information from conservative rags
And you apparently.

What are these conservative rags you refer to? Conservatives are not like liberals. They don't own a massive media complex.

who find a poorly worded headline or a questionable statement by some crazy progressive somewhere and deliberately misinterpret it in such a way to imply something insane and suggest that it is everywhere and "coming to a town near you if Democrats get their way" in order to scare the shit out of uneducated conservatives who are too lazy to think critically about and do their own investigation of obviously ridiculous stories.
No one who writes sentences like this can criticize anyone else for poor writing.
 
There you can stop.


False. Precinct voting patterns determined that they would vote Democrat.


Again false. It's difficult to understand why anyone would think this was true.


It's not hiding anything. That is both sufficient reason and sufficient explanation.
Right. "We don't intentionally only hire white men, it's just that we haven't had any qualified women or people of color apply." That is also a sufficient reason and a sufficient explanation, yes? No need to dig any deeper here...
 
Bottom line: conservatives have long preferred to have fewer people vote. Goes back to post-Reconstruction, even farther. Most recently, Trump and a few years prior Paul Weyrich suggested that with high levels of turnout Republicans lose. Why else so many GOP-pushed laws in the last few years?
 
Yes you are wrong. None of these things are happening except in the imaginations of those who get their only information from conservative rags who find a poorly worded headline or a questionable statement by some crazy progressive somewhere and deliberately misinterpret it in such a way to imply something insane and suggest that it is everywhere and "coming to a town near you if Democrats get their way" in order to scare the shit out of uneducated conservatives who are too lazy to think critically about and do their own investigation of obviously ridiculous stories.




 




Your chosen sources and your interpretation of these stories prove my point exactly. You are one of those conservatives who takes these insane stories at face value because they were posted in a conservative propaganda rag masquerading as actual news, or on a normal news site as an opinion piece from some random person who doesn't know what they are actually talking about.

There are no "segregated graduation ceremonies." Do your own research. There are ceremonies to celebrate the accomplishments of black students that ALL STUDENTS are invited to attend, IN ADDITION TO the actual graduation ceremony for ALL STUDENTS.

There is no segregation here. An additional ceremony celebrating the accomplishments of black students that anyone is invited to is in no way "segregation."

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/posts-misrepresent-columbias-multicultural-graduation-ceremonies/
 
Your chosen sources and your interpretation of these stories prove my point exactly. You are one of those conservatives who takes these insane stories at face value because they were posted in a conservative propaganda rag masquerading as actual news, or on a normal news site as an opinion piece from some random person who doesn't know what they are actually talking about.

There are no "segregated graduation ceremonies." Do your own research. There are ceremonies to celebrate the accomplishments of black students that ALL STUDENTS are invited to attend, IN ADDITION TO the actual graduation ceremony for ALL STUDENTS.

There is no segregation here. An additional ceremony celebrating the accomplishments of black students that anyone is invited to is in no way "segregation."

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/posts-misrepresent-columbias-multicultural-graduation-ceremonies/
I just proved that segregated graduations were going on all over the country and you're still in denial? LOL!
 
Right. "We don't intentionally only hire white men, it's just that we haven't had any qualified women or people of color apply."
It's to see a parallel. In one case you are talking about groups while the other is about individuals.

That is also a sufficient reason and a sufficient explanation, yes?
Yes, it is sufficient if the applications do not designate race. That is likely the case when drawing the map.

No need to dig any deeper here...
Agreed. Your mind is made up so facts are not relevant to you.
 
I just proved that segregated graduations were going on all over the country and you're still in denial? LOL!
What parts of “in addition to” and “all invited” did you miss? When any group has been separated or demeaned (see Trump’s divisive rhetoric of the past several years) there often results a somewhat natural tendency to celebrate the division others thrust on them. Why do you think the saying “black is beautiful” appeared some years ago, or “black lives matter” more recently?
 
I just proved that segregated graduations were going on all over the country and you're still in denial? LOL!
I proved they aren't. I proved that this is a conservative canard.

Hint: Check your sources and read past the "shocking" headlines. The more shocking a story is, the less likely it is to be accurate.
 
Back
Top Bottom