The White House has called on Congress to approve aid to Israel and Ukraine, but Republicans oppose any measure that excludes provisions to address security on the U.S.-Mexico border.
Hate is a strong word. It’s more that she made a decision that made no strategic sense, and was not a stand on moral principles or anything like that. It was just either a dumb choice, as we all make sometimes, or a conscious attempt to crater Bernie. It doesn’t really have a third option that I can think of.
In either case, it was senseless, and any time the issue comes up, I draw attention to it, because it was fucking disastrous.
Oh, sorry, not dropping out on Super Tuesday. She was stayed in as a spoiler candidate on Super Tuesday despite the fact that polling showed that she hadn’t a chance in hell of actually making any progress towards the nomination, and all the other moderates had simultaneously dropped out to support Biden.
Bloomberg wasn’t a moderate, he was a straight-up right-wing twat. But in any case, that doesn’t really take away from the core problem I’m pointing out?
Warren should have know it was Sanders turn, amirite?
Man, if you’re at a point in your support and with the polls opening soon and realize you’re gonna be a spoiler candidate, then you have to either accept responsibility for cratering someone, or nut up and drop out to avoid cratering the candidate you’re closer to. She didn’t do the latter, so she has to accept the former.
Anyone old enough to remember Bill Clinton’s campaign knows this is complete hogwash. Clinton had no chance of winning the nomination until suddenly he was the front runner riding a wave of popularity seemingly overnight. No one owes a single candidate their allegiance just because you see them as closely aligned, and they have every right and reason to believe they can win. Additionally candidates also choose to stay in to force their policy positions onto the party platform, something Sanders also did well past a likely winning outcome. I really think you’re only seeing this from a self centered perspective without considering the situation from any other candidates perspective. Its honestly very Bernie bro culty.
Anyone old enough to remember Bill Clinton’s campaign knows this is complete hogwash.
Afraid I’m not that old. Wasn’t even born when Clinton ran in '92.
No one owes a single candidate their allegiance just because you see them as closely aligned, and they have every right and reason to believe they can win.
They have every right, but not every reason. A failure to examine the current circumstances and likelihood of success accurately is… well, a mistake. A failure. It doesn’t make anyone a bad person, but it is a bad decision.
Additionally candidates also choose to stay in to force their policy positions onto the party platform, something Sanders also did well past a likely winning outcome.
Yes, but she dropped out two days after Super Tuesday, so that’s not really applicable here.
I really think you’re only seeing this from a self centered perspective without considering the situation from any other candidates perspective. Its honestly very Bernie bro culty.
It’s… culty to think that Bernie would have had better chances had the other progressive candidate in the race, who was polling much more poorly, had dropped out when all the moderate candidates dropped out and endorsed the moderate candidate remaining?
Man, I’m at peace with what happened. It’s politics, it is what it is. But that doesn’t mean Warren made a good or sensible choice.
Bernie could have gotten every single Warren vote and he’d still have lost. Do you question why he stayed in after having his heart attack? Warren was briefly beating Biden right around that point in the primary, so surely he should have dropped out to not be a spoiler?
She said that she has a Native ancestor. Which a DNA test can’t disprove because:
Not all of someone’s DNA gets passed on each generation.
Native Americans have a pretty widespread dislike of DNA tests, so DNA tests don’t really know what to look for.
Also,
Native Americans focus their community on culture, not DNA
Because of #3, anytime someone from outside their culture talks about ancestry, a bunch of tribes release boilerplate statements about how a DNA test doesn’t make anyone a Native or not a Native.
I can’t remember how far back she said that ancestor was, but I think it was so far back that statistically the most likely result was going to be no native ancestry. People think DNA is all stamped with ethnicity of origin or something, it doesn’t work like that. There’s just certain mutations that can be tracked to specific isolated populations.
Most DNA is just ambiguously human.
So you take that slim chance of an identifiable mutation getting passed down every generation, and the low sampling rate among native populations, and yeah, lots of people will get negative results.
However, it was extremely disappointing that she hired that ex Clinton campaign worker, and then took their advice and immediately started attacking Bernie. That was never about helping Warren, they were kamikazing her campaign into Bernie’s.
I can’t remember how far back she said that ancestor was, but I think it was so far back that statistically the most likely result was going to be no native ancestry.
That’s not how DNA tests work. The experts consulted were confident she had Native ancestry, but it was unclear how far back. The 1/1024th isn’t a chance, it’s people who don’t understand DNA incorrectly converting “on the upper end of 6-10 generations” to 1 out of 1024 ancestors and then to 1/1024 chance. The statistics of it being true were very high even though the proportion of her DNA from the ancestor was small.
Also, I feel like most of these people are either too young to know life without the internet, or they forget, but this was something white, suburban, middle class people used to say all of the time. It was usually some story (true or not, I don’t know), passed down from their great grandparents or some shit, and probably altered like a game of telephone, until you’ve got a person telling their friends about how they’re “1/32 Cherokee” or some shit.
There was never any way to check, and nobody really cared. It was a different time.
I’m not defending what she said, it was a dumb thing to say. But it’s probably just based on some story she was told as a kid that may or may not be true.
Not to mention, I’ve never heard a person- whose basically white, with no apparent native culture- use “I have Native American ancestry” as anything other than a cudgel to insist they can’t be racist.
Usually while being racist. (Example: my grandfather.)
The vast majority of “old family” Appalachians have natives somewhere on their family tree, it’s just most people never really talk about it.
At most it’s offhand mention at family gatherings, which was exactly the context Warren said she heard. Her grandparent or whoever could very well had it and shown up on a test, but it gets exponentially harder the more generations go by
Warren just happened to mention it on the campaign trail, and a bunch of people jumped on it.
At most it’s offhand mention at family gatherings, which was exactly the context Warren said she heard. Her grandparent or whoever could very well had it and shown up on a test, but it gets exponentially harder the more generations go by
it stopped being family history discussions when she mentions it on the campaign trail or on job applications. (I understand there’s conflicting evidence as to the Harvard thing, but, lets be honest here, it’s probably true).
such things coming up in the context of family history makes sense and wouldn’t (necessarily) be racist. But Warren went beyond that… when it’s usually pretty evident if someone’s family is Native American when they’re talking about it. the handful of soundbites I caught were very much in the manner my racist grandfather used to justify his angry bullshit screeds against Native Americans. that said, DNA tests are definitely never going to be conclusive about that. it’s patently ridiculous to think one’s heritage is genetic- heritage is a matter of culture; and culture is learned… distilling your heritage to a percentage based on DNA is a scam to get your DNA.
People used to say shit like this all of the time before the internet. It was usually just someone trying to sound cool, or set themselves apart from other kids in some way.
If they weren’t just making it up whole cloth, It was usually some story passed down from their great grandparents that they’re repeating (probably inaccurately) about how someone x generations ago had a Cherokee father or some shit, then they do the math to claim that means they’re 1/32 Cherokee or whatever.
Back then, I don’t remember it being used in any way as an argument against being racist. It was usually just people trying to be cool or different, or telling a boring story about their family that they think is true.
I’m not excusing what she said, it was a stupid thing to say. I’m just not sure if it deserved the criticism it received.
I never get the warren hate. Other than her native American gaff, she was a strong candidate and would have made a good president.
Hate is a strong word. It’s more that she made a decision that made no strategic sense, and was not a stand on moral principles or anything like that. It was just either a dumb choice, as we all make sometimes, or a conscious attempt to crater Bernie. It doesn’t really have a third option that I can think of.
In either case, it was senseless, and any time the issue comes up, I draw attention to it, because it was fucking disastrous.
You said she made a dumb decision but haven’t stated what that is.
Oh, sorry, not dropping out on Super Tuesday. She was stayed in as a spoiler candidate on Super Tuesday despite the fact that polling showed that she hadn’t a chance in hell of actually making any progress towards the nomination, and all the other moderates had simultaneously dropped out to support Biden.
I love this alternative history where Michael Bloomberg doesn’t exist and didn’t take more votes away from Biden than Warren did Sanders.
Warren should have know it was Sanders’ turn, amirite?
Bloomberg wasn’t a moderate, he was a straight-up right-wing twat. But in any case, that doesn’t really take away from the core problem I’m pointing out?
Man, if you’re at a point in your support and with the polls opening soon and realize you’re gonna be a spoiler candidate, then you have to either accept responsibility for cratering someone, or nut up and drop out to avoid cratering the candidate you’re closer to. She didn’t do the latter, so she has to accept the former.
The only charitable way to interpret Heresy_generator’s comment would be as a confession that Biden was also a straight-up right-wing twat, LOL.
deleted by creator
Anyone old enough to remember Bill Clinton’s campaign knows this is complete hogwash. Clinton had no chance of winning the nomination until suddenly he was the front runner riding a wave of popularity seemingly overnight. No one owes a single candidate their allegiance just because you see them as closely aligned, and they have every right and reason to believe they can win. Additionally candidates also choose to stay in to force their policy positions onto the party platform, something Sanders also did well past a likely winning outcome. I really think you’re only seeing this from a self centered perspective without considering the situation from any other candidates perspective. Its honestly very Bernie bro culty.
Afraid I’m not that old. Wasn’t even born when Clinton ran in '92.
They have every right, but not every reason. A failure to examine the current circumstances and likelihood of success accurately is… well, a mistake. A failure. It doesn’t make anyone a bad person, but it is a bad decision.
Yes, but she dropped out two days after Super Tuesday, so that’s not really applicable here.
It’s… culty to think that Bernie would have had better chances had the other progressive candidate in the race, who was polling much more poorly, had dropped out when all the moderate candidates dropped out and endorsed the moderate candidate remaining?
Man, I’m at peace with what happened. It’s politics, it is what it is. But that doesn’t mean Warren made a good or sensible choice.
Bernie could have gotten every single Warren vote and he’d still have lost. Do you question why he stayed in after having his heart attack? Warren was briefly beating Biden right around that point in the primary, so surely he should have dropped out to not be a spoiler?
It wasn’t any kind of gaff…
She said that she has a Native ancestor. Which a DNA test can’t disprove because:
Not all of someone’s DNA gets passed on each generation.
Native Americans have a pretty widespread dislike of DNA tests, so DNA tests don’t really know what to look for.
Also,
Because of #3, anytime someone from outside their culture talks about ancestry, a bunch of tribes release boilerplate statements about how a DNA test doesn’t make anyone a Native or not a Native.
I can’t remember how far back she said that ancestor was, but I think it was so far back that statistically the most likely result was going to be no native ancestry. People think DNA is all stamped with ethnicity of origin or something, it doesn’t work like that. There’s just certain mutations that can be tracked to specific isolated populations.
Most DNA is just ambiguously human.
So you take that slim chance of an identifiable mutation getting passed down every generation, and the low sampling rate among native populations, and yeah, lots of people will get negative results.
However, it was extremely disappointing that she hired that ex Clinton campaign worker, and then took their advice and immediately started attacking Bernie. That was never about helping Warren, they were kamikazing her campaign into Bernie’s.
And it worked.
That’s not how DNA tests work. The experts consulted were confident she had Native ancestry, but it was unclear how far back. The 1/1024th isn’t a chance, it’s people who don’t understand DNA incorrectly converting “on the upper end of 6-10 generations” to 1 out of 1024 ancestors and then to 1/1024 chance. The statistics of it being true were very high even though the proportion of her DNA from the ancestor was small.
Also, I feel like most of these people are either too young to know life without the internet, or they forget, but this was something white, suburban, middle class people used to say all of the time. It was usually some story (true or not, I don’t know), passed down from their great grandparents or some shit, and probably altered like a game of telephone, until you’ve got a person telling their friends about how they’re “1/32 Cherokee” or some shit.
There was never any way to check, and nobody really cared. It was a different time.
I’m not defending what she said, it was a dumb thing to say. But it’s probably just based on some story she was told as a kid that may or may not be true.
deleted by creator
Not to mention, I’ve never heard a person- whose basically white, with no apparent native culture- use “I have Native American ancestry” as anything other than a cudgel to insist they can’t be racist.
Usually while being racist. (Example: my grandfather.)
Eh, depends on the area.
The vast majority of “old family” Appalachians have natives somewhere on their family tree, it’s just most people never really talk about it.
At most it’s offhand mention at family gatherings, which was exactly the context Warren said she heard. Her grandparent or whoever could very well had it and shown up on a test, but it gets exponentially harder the more generations go by
Warren just happened to mention it on the campaign trail, and a bunch of people jumped on it.
it stopped being family history discussions when she mentions it on the campaign trail or on job applications. (I understand there’s conflicting evidence as to the Harvard thing, but, lets be honest here, it’s probably true).
such things coming up in the context of family history makes sense and wouldn’t (necessarily) be racist. But Warren went beyond that… when it’s usually pretty evident if someone’s family is Native American when they’re talking about it. the handful of soundbites I caught were very much in the manner my racist grandfather used to justify his angry bullshit screeds against Native Americans. that said, DNA tests are definitely never going to be conclusive about that. it’s patently ridiculous to think one’s heritage is genetic- heritage is a matter of culture; and culture is learned… distilling your heritage to a percentage based on DNA is a scam to get your DNA.
Lol really giving the benefit of the doubt, huh?
Not really. She annoys me though, so I’m probably biased or something.
But I really wouldn’t expect there to be any evidence either way, so pick your poison. She has used it in her stump speeches, and that’s verifiable
People used to say shit like this all of the time before the internet. It was usually just someone trying to sound cool, or set themselves apart from other kids in some way.
If they weren’t just making it up whole cloth, It was usually some story passed down from their great grandparents that they’re repeating (probably inaccurately) about how someone x generations ago had a Cherokee father or some shit, then they do the math to claim that means they’re 1/32 Cherokee or whatever.
Back then, I don’t remember it being used in any way as an argument against being racist. It was usually just people trying to be cool or different, or telling a boring story about their family that they think is true.
I’m not excusing what she said, it was a stupid thing to say. I’m just not sure if it deserved the criticism it received.
Jeez, some even fly the traitorous flag.