TRUMP Thread

It's our job to stroke their women.

 

Trump never gave a rat's butt to Blacks. Actions speak louder than words.

 

Good. That's exactly what you get for taking your eyes off the prize. Now we're actually behind where we were under Obama, including a SCOTUS seat gone, and re-litigating shit that should have been set in stone decades ago: affirmative action, Medicare, Medicaid, women's reproductive rights, Wall Street regulations, and so on. For-profit prisons set to be outlawed under Obama, back in business. Cold War status quo re: Cuba, back in business. Marijuana re-criminalized. Etc etc etc. Bernie and Stein ain't helping anybody except Russia and their own bank accounts.

 

No wonder cuckold genre is so popular

 

Yes, even I feel there is some justification. There are definitely liberals who behave as if they must get everything they want or they'll take their ball and go home (or rather, they won't vote).

But look at the other side: white evangelical christians never get EXACTLY what they want. I guess exactly what they want would be someone like Ted Cruz. So even if Trump isn't their ideal candidate they vote for him anyway. They vote in the midterms, they vote in local elections, they vote and vote and vote. And despite the fact that Republicans are only ~30% of the electorate now, they are hugely overrepresented in our government because a lot of liberals get pouty when they don't get exactly what they want.

 

l know the lens here is that only two races exist in the world and it's always White people's fault, but are you aware of the multiple lawsuits filed by Asians?

Below, is the one line that has some declaring: "Trump to BAN Affirmative Action"!

Quote: “The Department of Justice will always review credible allegations of discrimination on the basis of any race.” Unquote

That's it. That's been the law. On the books.

It was an internal memo citing the policy.
Here it is, in full:
The document, an internal announcement to the civil rights division, seeks current lawyers interested in working for a new project on “investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions.”

************
"Hours later, the Justice Department issued a statement saying the posting was in response to a complaint filed in 2015 regarding allegations of discrimination against Asian Americans in an unidentified university’s admissions practices."

The Justice Department declined to provide more details about its plans or to make the acting head of the civil rights division, John Gore, available for an interview.

“The Department of Justice does not discuss personnel matters, so we’ll decline comment,” said Devin O’Malley, a department spokesman"


Furthermore, AB, this investigation has been going on for one year due to the volume of Asian Lawsuits:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/princeton-is-scrambling-to-block-release-of-admission-records.html

Excerpt:

Princeton is one of several elite colleges embroiled in battles with Students for Fair Admissions, which has filed a slew of lawsuits and complaints against schools like Harvard, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Yale, Dartmouth, and Brown. The complaints allege that the schools unfairly discriminate on the basis of race in their admissions process — particularly against Asian-Americans.

The Education Department did its own investigation into the allegations against Princeton, the lawsuit says, and concluded the university didn't discriminate on the basis of race.

But even if it isn't incriminating, the data collected for that investigation is likely to be extremely controversial in the obsessive world of elite college admissions.

"Everyone want to see what goes on behind the curtain," said Mimi Doe, the president of Top Tier Admissions, a college admissions advising company. While it is generally known that top schools give applicants numeric grades and rankings, Doe said, "We haven't seen the qualitative piece of this — the unspoken quotas. What will probably come out is that, for years, colleges have been — just as they did in the 1940s with Jews — saying, 'we don't want this person, because this is a stereotypical Asian applicant.' These kids are penalized because of their race."

 

Exactly. Republicans know that it's a game of inches. Far-leftists stayed home in 2010, 2012 and 2016, saddled Obama with a hostile GOP congress, tanked the election for Obama's successor, who ran on continuing his policies, and are now crying that they didn't get what they wanted including single-payer, which is magically supposed to pass with that same GOP-majority house and senate, and a conservative-majority Supreme Court.

I was researching this for another board. Pat Buchanan was an (I) who ran as a GOP in 1996 and dropped out when he got 21% of the primary vote. Bernie (I) got only 13% of the Dem primary vote and stayed in. Here we are now. Socialism rocks.

 

Who did the far left want instead of Obama in 2008?

 

They a) hated Bush/Cheney and b) wanted to be able to say they looked beyond race and voted for a black man in 2008. By 2010, they were "disappointed." St. Bernie wanted Obama primaried in 2012.

 

Bliss, it's not that colleges don't want Asians. What they don't want is Asians to be overrepresented on their campuses. At schools like UCLA and Berkley, for example, although Asians represent less than 6% of the U.S. population and 11% of California, they make up over 40% of the student population at the aforementioned schools.

What's worse is that nearly half of all HS grads from California are Black or Latino. So a great state school like UCLA is failing its core mission to educate its residents.
California passed Prop 209 in 1997 in favor of colorblind admissions and this was the result.


What's funny is when Affirmative Action became a part of U.S. law in 1961, it was meant to remedy centuries of racial discrimination experienced by Blacks.
Now anyone who's a non-White male believes they should be considered for college admissions under AA.smh

This is a great article from Columbia on the 7 myths about Affirmative Action.
http://www.columbia.edu/content/seven-myths-about-affirmative-action-universities.html
(The fourth myth discussed is particularly insightful.)

I was under the impression that private universities weren't subject to affirmative action policies,(although they do rigorously practice them) due to the First Amendment.

Look, I know it sucks if you're Asian, have a 4.2 GPA, graduate top 5% of your HS class and have near perfect SAT scores and still don't get into the school of your choice, despite it appearing you achieved all the academic criteria. However grades and high test scores isn't enough. And I don't think this lawsuit will force any university to reveal the details of their admissions selection process.

According to the Columbia U. article, below is but a general list of the qualifications applicants need for admission to elite public and private universities. Notice many of these categories can be broadly interpreted;

High school grade point average;

The rigor of the high school courses taken;


Alumni relationships (parent, sibling, or grandparent);


Quality of the essay;


Personal achievement;


Leadership and service;


Socio-economically disadvantaged student or education;


Athletic ability;


Underrepresented racial or ethnic minority identity or education; and


Residency in an under-represented region.

Seriously, one of the best ways to get into a top 10 school is to move someplace like South Dakota for HS.

 

Bernie wanted him primaried???

Dayum!

 

Facts. Feel free to look it up.

 

Never been a fan of the far left, seems they suck even more than I thought.

 

I'll say this: whether you identify as a conservative or a liberal, this is a really, really bad time to centrist. The far left and far right wings of both parties are winning.

 

^How is the "far left" winning??? Where???

 

Well you could make the argument that liberals aren't winning at all! But within the Democratic party, since the election, the group that has done best for itself is the "Bernie" side of the party. For example, the party has begun to adopt medicare for all more broadly.

 

All candidates endorsed by Bernie Sanders since 2016 have lost.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/11/all-of-the-candidates-bernie-sanders-is-endorsing-are-losing/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Enough_Sanders_Spam/comments/68fnfw/is_there_a_list_anywhere_of_berniecrat/