GOP Electability for 2024?

[DeluxAuto]

No, the main concern among informed voters is whether or not the FBI and the government are going to be interfering in the next election as they have the last three.

Including the one Trump won?

 

[JohnEngelman]

I have. You told me that there is research saying otherwise that is being suppressed and then gave me a paper by a non geneticist that whined about the same thing as proof.

Races are genetically the same to each other.

Then why are the races so different in average ability levels and behavior? I have already posted this. Read it this time.

----------

"The Inequality Taboo," by Charles Murray, Commentary, September 2005

The Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin originated the idea of race as a social construct in 1972, arguing that the genetic differences across races were so trivial that no scientist working exclusively with genetic data would sort people into blacks, whites, or Asians. In his words, "racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance."

Lewontin's position, which quickly became a tenet of political correctness, carried with it a potential means of being falsified. If he was correct, then a statistical analysis of genetic markers would not produce clusters corresponding to common racial labels. In the last few years, that test has become feasible, and now we know that Lewontin was wrong.

Several analyses have confirmed the genetic reality of group identities going under the label of race or ethnicity. In the most recent, published this year, all but five ofthe 3,636 subjects fell into the cluster of genetic markers corresponding to their self identified ethnic group.

When a statistical procedure, blind to physical characteristics and working exclusively with genetic information, classifies 99.9 percent of the individuals in a large sample in the same way they classify themselves, it is hard to argue that race is imaginary.

http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

 

[JohnEngelman]

Racist says what?

Of course you also fail to address what Jackson actually was speaking about, but "cherry picking" seems to be your speciality.

Fuck off and die....*chuckles* you Racist piece of shit!

Excuse me. Jesse Jackson said he is afraid of walking in his own black neighborhood. This is his statement again.

 

[ll74]

Then why are the races so different in average ability levels and behavior? I have already posted this. Read it this time.

----------

"The Inequality Taboo," by Charles Murray, Commentary, September 2005

The Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin originated the idea of race as a social construct in 1972, arguing that the genetic differences across races were so trivial that no scientist working exclusively with genetic data would sort people into blacks, whites, or Asians. In his words, "racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance."

Lewontin's position, which quickly became a tenet of political correctness, carried with it a potential means of being falsified. If he was correct, then a statistical analysis of genetic markers would not produce clusters corresponding to common racial labels. In the last few years, that test has become feasible, and now we know that Lewontin was wrong.

Several analyses have confirmed the genetic reality of group identities going under the label of race or ethnicity. In the most recent, published this year, all but five ofthe 3,636 subjects fell into the cluster of genetic markers corresponding to their self identified ethnic group.

When a statistical procedure, blind to physical characteristics and working exclusively with genetic information, classifies 99.9 percent of the individuals in a large sample in the same way they classify themselves, it is hard to argue that race is imaginary.

http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

Charles Murray isn't a geneticist..and his argument was the one I referred to. Nothing he says is evidence that races are genetically unique.

Additionally, the genome was not fully realized/understood in 1972.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Charles Murray isn't a geneticist..and his argument was the one I referred to. Nothing he says is evidence that races are genetically unique.

Additionally, the genome was not fully realized/understood in 1972.

What matters is that Charles Murray is a well informed political scientist. He is not blowing hot air. He is referring to a scientific experiment, which like good scientific experiments is repeatable.

 

[ll74]

What matters is that Charles Murray is a well informed political scientist. He is not blowing hot air. He is referring to a scientific experiment, which like good scientific experiments is repeatable.

If you want to argue politics, then yes.

You're not arguing politics. You're arguing genetics.

And the argument that Murray makes and you support isn't that there is proof that races are genetically unique.

 

[JohnEngelman]

If you want to argue politics, then yes.

You're not arguing politics. You're arguing genetics.

And the argument that Murray makes and you support isn't that there is proof that races are genetically unique.

The races are not unique, in that they share gene alleles that influence ability levels and behavior. Nevertheless, they have those alleles in different proportions. This is why they differ in different ability levels and kinds of behavior.

 

[ll74]

The races are not unique, in that they share gene alleles that influence ability levels and behavior. Nevertheless, they have those alleles in different proportions. This is why they differ in different ability levels and kinds of behavior.

Lol...your argument is that they aren't genetically different but they are genetically different.

Good job on that cluster fuck of a response

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Excuse me. Jesse Jackson said he is afraid of walking in his own black neighborhood. This is his statement again.

View attachment 2203080

I already posted this, earlier on.

But since you want to die on this hill, please go and post the rest of what Jackson said that evening in Chicago back in 1993, while giving a speech to the PUSH organisation.

NOTE: there is zero obscenity in this reply.......but I can assure you, when ( assuming you're actually stupid enough to follow through on my request) you do post it, there shall be loads of obscenities directed your way....*chuckles*

 

[ll74]

I already posted this, earlier on.

But since you want to die on this hill, please go and post the rest of what Jackson said that evening in Chicago back in 1993, while giving a speech to the PUSH organisation.

NOTE: there is zero obscenity in this reply.......but I can assure you, when ( assuming you're actually stupid enough to follow through on my request) you do post it, there shall be loads of obscenities directed your way....*chuckles*

Why are people so against fucking obsceneties? They make the fucking point much clearer.

Where would Samuel L Jackson be if he me er used them?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Why are people so against fucking obsceneties? They make the fucking point much clearer.

Where would Samuel L Jackson be if he me er used them?

Honestly, do you think I don't get that....*chuckles* JE thinks not using them makes him "classy"......but he's a fucking piece of shit Racist.

 

[ll74]

Honestly, do you think I don't get that....*chuckles* JE thinks not using them makes him "classy"......but he's a fucking piece of shit Racist.

Yah, my reply was meant to be in jest.

 

[YDB95]

I am not racially ethnocentric. I prefer Orientals to whites, for the same reason I prefer most whites to most blacks:

Preferring any one race over another is the textbook definition of racism. It doesn't matter where you rank your own race.

 

[ll74]

Then why are the races so different in average ability levels and behavior? I have already posted this. Read it this time.

----------

"The Inequality Taboo," by Charles Murray, Commentary, September 2005

The Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin originated the idea of race as a social construct in 1972, arguing that the genetic differences across races were so trivial that no scientist working exclusively with genetic data would sort people into blacks, whites, or Asians. In his words, "racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance."

Lewontin's position, which quickly became a tenet of political correctness, carried with it a potential means of being falsified. If he was correct, then a statistical analysis of genetic markers would not produce clusters corresponding to common racial labels. In the last few years, that test has become feasible, and now we know that Lewontin was wrong.

Several analyses have confirmed the genetic reality of group identities going under the label of race or ethnicity. In the most recent, published this year, all but five ofthe 3,636 subjects fell into the cluster of genetic markers corresponding to their self identified ethnic group.

When a statistical procedure, blind to physical characteristics and working exclusively with genetic information, classifies 99.9 percent of the individuals in a large sample in the same way they classify themselves, it is hard to argue that race is imaginary.

http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

You believe it to be a genetic uniqueness of race....I get that. But it's not. This is true even as non geneticist Murray trys to argue that it is. In fact, the only argument which you seem to enjoy here that he's making is that people won't provide evidence for his hypothesis because of some PC bullshit.

That's why the copypasta you have is from 2005 and it relies on shit from 1975 and why all of your data is decades old on the topic. Since then, we've unlocked the genome and found the hypothesis to be false conclusively....

One might say that you cherry picked the data that agrees with you.

 

[JohnEngelman]

You didn't answer his question.

My answer was either over your head, or it interferes with your use of the Straw Man Fallacy.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Preferring any one race over another is the textbook definition of racism. It doesn't matter where you rank your own race.

I prefer a race that is characterized by intelligence, obedience to the law, and monogamy to a race that is characterized by none of those characteristics. I do not belong to the first race.

 

[JohnEngelman]

You believe it to be a genetic uniqueness of race....I get that. But it's not. This is true even as non geneticist Murray trys to argue that it is. In fact, the only argument which you seem to enjoy here that he's making is that people won't provide evidence for his hypothesis because of some PC bullshit.

That's why the copypasta you have is from 2005 and it relies on shit from 1975 and why all of your data is decades old on the topic. Since then, we've unlocked the genome and found the hypothesis to be false conclusively....

One might say that you cherry picked the data that agrees with you.

The truth does not change.

 

[ll74]

My answer was either over your head, or it interferes with your use of the Straw Man Fallacy.

It wasn't an answer to the question

 

[JohnEngelman]

You didn't answer his question.

Let's try this for an answer:

The popular definition of racist conflates racism with white supremacy and white nationalism. I am not a white supremacist. I am not a white nationalist.

I like blacks who live up to civilized standards. I admire the Oriental race because most Orientals live up to civilized standards.

Orientals are more likely to be intelligent, law abiding, and monogamous than are whites. What is why they deserve to be called "the model minority."

 

[ll74]

Let's try this for an answer:

The popular definition of racist conflates racism with white supremacy and white nationalism. I am not a white supremacist. I am not a white nationalist.

I like blacks who live up to civilized standards. I admire the Oriental race because most Orientals live up to civilized standards.

Orientals are more likely to be intelligent, law abiding, and monogamous than are whites. What is why they deserve to be called "the model minority."

No it doesn't conflate anything. It's a definition. And saying their definition is wrong doesn't answer the question

 

[ishtat]

John Engelman and 1174. This thread is not about race but about GOP electability. You guys are constantly hi-jacking threads to pursue a quarrel which you will never resolve. Pack it in and try and stick somewhere close to the subject

 

[YDB95]

John Engelman and 1174. This thread is not about race but about GOP electability.

Oh, I don't know. You could argue that GOP electability is inexorably linked to racism. Let's face it, if the white working class ever got over their bigotry and found the common cause with Blacks that everyone else can see just fine, the Repubs would be fucked. Which is why JohnEngelman's tired excuses for racism are so welcome in their corner.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

https://preview.redd.it/oqbdgxde61fa1.jpg?width=960&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=4515eba96d87c51d8798a53272d4640e82128697

 

[KeithD]

Tilt. I think the US is wealthier in the aggregate now than it ever has been before--and I can look back a very long time and project back to the beginning through what I've read. I think anyone who thinks they are worse off in terms of finances and amenities now than the generations before them were hasn't checked in with the generations before them.