No. Is it ok if I announce the results though? Jeezzzznotyou2 wrote:PS does it feel good to blow your own horn?
Moderator: Community Team
No. Is it ok if I announce the results though? Jeezzzznotyou2 wrote:PS does it feel good to blow your own horn?
notyou2 wrote:PS does it feel good to blow your own horn?
wtf is thisnotyou2 wrote:Your going to announce your biased racist views anyways. Why ask me?
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
Oh come on. I voted yes in the poll, but are you really gonna pull out the w-word?Phatscotty wrote:also interesting to note. the % of people who disagree, and are obviously WRONG, is a mirror reflection of the % of progressive Liberals?
Well, I think the issue of "manipulation of race, and of the terminology involved with racism" does a gross disservice to true, objective diversity and acceptance on an individual scale. I think those who manipulate the terminology, who blatantly reverse-discriminate and race-bait, defies all common sense and should be called out. The problem is that this sickness has infected the very presidency.Army of GOD wrote:Oh come on. I voted yes in the poll, but are you really gonna pull out the w-word?Phatscotty wrote:also interesting to note. the % of people who disagree, and are obviously WRONG, is a mirror reflection of the % of progressive Liberals?
I continually call out race-baiters. there is a crystal clear difference, whether you can comprehend this or not.notyou2 wrote:Phatty, keep driving your wedge between the races. You can call an asshole a clever sumbitch, but he's still an asshole.
bullshit! The question is 100% purely OBJECTIVE. You are full of it matenotyou2 wrote:The ignorance here is any people that fall for your twisting of words and fail to see what you are really doing....inciting racial hate
Its been said so many times...what the heck. The question is based on the reality, that if you refuse to vote for someone because of their race, that qualifies as racism. Example..."I won't vote for a purple person" ""why not?"" "because he is purple. I refuse to vote for a purple colored person"notyou2 wrote:OK, clearly and concisely define what you mean by your question. Also, advise how you interpret the data you have acquired on this question.
Baron Von PWN wrote:In answer to your question. Yes that would be racist. However I find it doubtful anyone votes purely upon skin colour .
In Obama's case there is more at play than a simple "he's black so I'm voting for him". There is the whole Historical build up from the beginning of US history which you know much better than I do. Obama's election signified the full overturning of those historical abuses. I think it is in that context that many voted for him, so I suppose at its most crass and reduced level you can say many voted for him because he is black. I think the true reason was because of the symbolic nature of overcoming the old biases of American society.Phatscotty wrote:Baron Von PWN wrote:In answer to your question. Yes that would be racist. However I find it doubtful anyone votes purely upon skin colour .
95% of black people voted for Obama
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
Neither. The racism card is mostly a red herring. There might be the occasional racist or bigot on either side, but neither is being actively racist.john9blue wrote:So basically now both sides are taunting the other and saying "you're racist, not me". How about we judge by actions? Which side actively promotes the support or opposition of people base on race? Anyone honest with themselves knows the answer.
I think disingenuous accusations is in the same ball-park. Knowingly making a false charge is malicious and hypocritical, and dare I say evil.Baron Von PWN wrote:Neither. The racism card is mostly a red herring. There might be the occasional racist or bigot on either side, but neither is being actively racist.john9blue wrote:So basically now both sides are taunting the other and saying "you're racist, not me". How about we judge by actions? Which side actively promotes the support or opposition of people base on race? Anyone honest with themselves knows the answer.
Black state lawmakers blasted Gov. John Kasich yesterday over the absence of racial diversity in his cabinet and called on the Senate to reject his appointments until he takes steps to add minorities to his leadership team.
lolPhatscotty wrote:Baron Von PWN wrote:In answer to your question. Yes that would be racist. However I find it doubtful anyone votes purely upon skin colour .
95% of black people voted for Obama
Mccain or "other"Aradhus wrote:lolPhatscotty wrote:Baron Von PWN wrote:In answer to your question. Yes that would be racist. However I find it doubtful anyone votes purely upon skin colour .
95% of black people voted for Obama
What happened to the last 5%?!