Are you under the impression that I'm someone that thinks Russia did not help Trump win by spreading propaganda and fake news?
I thought it was impossible that "Russians saying things" could never sway votes for other people?
Serious question: does anyone actually care what Sharpton or Farrakhan say except for Fox news?Al Sharpton backing away, doesn't want to try and prop up another liar.
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...ity-to-the-maximum-if-attack-was-orchestrated
Yep, that is why I said its complicated.
Are you under the impression that I'm someone that thinks Russia did not help Trump win by spreading propaganda and fake news?
nope. just responding to your argument as it is.
The President and his MAGA supporters are indefensible and inexcusable. Democrats and liberals overplay that hand to excuse when their side acts unethically, immorally or irresponsibly.As opposed to the current POTUS up a bullshit lie, ran with it for many years and has never to this day admitted it?
Perhaps misplaced concern
Serious question: does anyone actually care what Sharpton or Farrakhan say except for Fox news?
But, a Black guy was crying wolf, and he was right. He also gave his reasons for thinking it was false. You and I may disagree with his logic, but, his logic as stated was not at all based on the person being Black. You had to infer that because of the person you think the poster is.
But, a Black guy was crying wolf, and he was right. He also gave his reasons for thinking it was false. You and I may disagree with his logic, but, his logic as stated was not at all based on the person being Black. You had to infer that because of the person you think the poster is.
Trump got less than half of the votes in 2016, total votes representing about 40% of the registered voters in the country. ...so less than half of less than half of the population is, well, something. Definitely less than 1/3rd of the country, that's for sure. Considering his very temporary support from independents and skeptics in 2016 has shown huge, huge losses in the last 2 years, I honestly think I'm being really conservative in assuming his unquestionable support remaining at that level
But are they more likely though. Are racial based crimes actually on the rise or is just your percaption of them are?
In an earlier thread UC said that "90%" of these incidents are hoaxes. While I don't take that as a literal number since UC has nothing in the way of percentages, I do take it as a statement that he believes most of them are fake. It's reasonable to assume that this assumption colors his perception of every individual case. In fact, it's more than apparent that it does from reading his posts.
But you have no stats of your own, therefore this fogginess of yours is purely emotional.And as been discussed a little for the last few pages, at best the picture is foggy and I doubt those "stats" mean anything.
But you have no stats of your own, therefore this fogginess of yours is purely emotional.
Sadly this apparently fake incident is going to have right wingers crying fake at every incident of racism that they can.
___________
In an earlier thread UC said that "90%" of these incidents are hoaxes. While I don't take that as a literal number since UC has nothing in the way of percentages, I do take it as a statement that he believes most of them are fake.
"Chicago police have said they want to speak to Smollett again, because of “new evidence” learned from interrogating two men once considered potential suspects in the case. Police said Smollett is not considered a suspect, detectives just want to interview him to corroborate the new information they received from the two men who were released."
So, if the 2 brothers aren't suspects and Jussie isn't a suspect, who is?
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/0...vestigation-alleged-attack-brothers-released/
The person we were talking about was Somoene. Homer said that he was saying it was because the person was Black, even though race was not brought up. UC was not the subject.
No, I looked back through your conversation and while you at one point discussed his response to Someone on page 1, the topic was broader than that.
In any event, I take it you concede my point that in the case of UC, it's pretty obvious he had a pre-existing biased which can be seen from his posting history?
Dadgum the 90% still. Even though I’ve said many many times (including on the very same page I originally said 90%) that it was a figure of speech to mean it happens lot and not a true stat which should be obvious many of y’all keep arguing it as if it was. And you know otherwise so it’s strange to do so.
Anyways I’m not saying that racism doesn’t exist, I’ve never made that claim. But these over the top claims where someone finds a noose then runs to the media, yep a lot turn out to be hoaxes. Is it “most” or have a certain percent tied to it? I have no idea. Any time there’s a noose though that should be a red flag.