Shut her down boys, shut her down.

[churchmouse]

Keep wondering, other people in "middle America," are probably keenly aware of the dangers of Latino voters.

Now that makes some sense.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Now that makes some sense.

Perhaps it does, but it is certainly NOT the way frame a point of view.

 

[Expat]

I saw on the local news this morning, that there was supposed to be some science thing going on at the Dunes and now that has been cancelled due to the shutdown. So once again Republicans are attacking science.

 

[jamil]

Keep wondering, other people in "middle America," are probably keenly aware of the dangers of Latino voters.

Again, this shows you think of things superficially in terms of race. So. Prove me wrong. Explain in sufficient depth what he means.

 

[jamil]

Perhaps it does, but it is certainly NOT the way frame a point of view.

...because people will superficially infer a racist intent, rather than trying to understand what is meant from the perspective of the person.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Again, this shows you think of things superficially in terms of race. So. Prove me wrong. Explain in sufficient depth what he means.

Lol, wut? I haven't interjected anything that hasn't already been explicitly said. Perhaps YOU can explain in sufficient depth what you think I mean.

 

[churchmouse]

Perhaps it does, but it is certainly NOT the way frame a point of view.

Possibly but there is some truths in a lot of what has been stated.

Yes, there is fear of certain voting blocks growing to over ride another.

 

[KG1]

Perhaps it does, but it is certainly NOT the way frame a point of view.

Just curious, Kut. If "perhaps it does" make some sense then how would YOU frame that same point of view to make it palatable to your standards?

Help us understand here.

 

[jamil]

Lol, wut? I haven't interjected anything that hasn't already been explicitly said. Perhaps YOU can explain in sufficient depth what you think I mean.

Explicitly said? How about you explain what was explicitly said? That’s what I’m asking. You need to presume more facts in evidence to find something worthy to make the complaint you made. The presumptions substituted for facts is what I’m trying to nail down. So if you don’t mind...

 

[jamil]

Just curious, Kut. If "perhaps it does" make some sense then how would YOU frame that same point of view to make it palatable to your standards?

Help us understand here.

That would require more formal composition to nail the subtleties so that uber race-sensitive people who are looking for offenses wouldn’t take it in a way that was not intended. But, peoole tend to say things in less precise colloquial language in informal settings. It’s not a problem when everyone understands the colloquial language.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Explicitly said? How about you explain what was explicitly said? That’s what I’m asking. You need to presume more facts in evidence to find something worthy to make the complaint you made. The presumptions substituted for facts is what I’m trying to nail down. So if you don’t mind...

What complaint/presumption, did I make that wasn't in reference to what was explicitly said?

 

[Kutnupe14]

That would require more formal composition to nail the subtleties so that uber race-sensitive people who are looking for offenses wouldn’t take it in a way that was not intended. But, peoole tend to say things in less precise colloquial language in informal settings. It’s not a problem when everyone understands the colloquial language.

I understood Latino.... "middle America," (with purposefully added quotes) though, I'm a bit hazy. Just enough to remain ambiguous as to meaning.

 

[jamil]

What complaint/presumption, did I make that wasn't in reference to what was explicitly said?

Well, you made the complaint. I don’t have to quote it. What your presumptions were is what I’m trying to nail down. So again, if you don’t mind...

ETA, nevermind. I didn’t see the above post.

 

[jamil]

I understood Latino.... "middle America," (with purposefully added quotes) though, I'm a bit hazy. Just enough to remain ambiguous as to meaning.

And the problem with that? What do you think he meant to convey?

 

[KJQ6945]

 

[trailrider]

So this wall is about "Latino" vs "middle America" votes? Very interesting... I guess that's about as transparent one can be and still be slightly ambiguous with what they mean.

Not the wall, the shutdown.

Interesting how that is all that you extracted from that post.

 

[Kutnupe14]

And the problem with that? What do you think he meant to convey?

Idk, I'm hazy on what "middle America" means, when contrasting with Latino voters. But apparently there is some kind of difference, enough difference that apparently Latino voters are excluded from "middle America." Now since I've spent some time in the actual place called middle America, and know that there are Latino voters there, I'm left scratching my head as to what is actually meant.
Perhaps you can provide some clarification?

 

[BugI02]

I think Trump's talking points are spot on. Why are we OK with spending trillions defending other countries' borders, but aren't willing to spend a few billion to protect ours? Are the dems willing to go the distance for the latino vot?. I hope the GOP is willing to go the distance for "middle America" votes.

Dem's are ok with giving billions in corruptible cash to the countries that are attempting(and succeeding) to "crash" our borders. A structured border might pay for itself eventually. We don't need new laws, just enforcement of the one's in place

So this wall is about "Latino" vs "middle America" votes? Very interesting... I guess that's about as transparent one can be and still be slightly ambiguous with what they mean.

I think the first quote is speaking to the Democrat's arguable tendency of favoring porous borders to pander to a certain demographic and hope to convert a non-zero percentage of those who achieve citizenship to the democratic fold. It is not an uncommon nor extreme viewpoint to believe that at heart the Democrats care little for the people caught up in their plans nor the Americans harmed by the same, so long as they achieve power. They are widely held to be the party of "by any means necessary" I would expect "going the distance for the Latino vote" could refer to their open borders at all costs stratyegy

When the OP speaks of the Republicans "going the distance for the middle America vote" I interpret it as doing whatever it takes to get control of the border and bring some semblance of rationality to immigration. I infer the writer would prefer emigres that are committed to the idea of America and becoming Americans not those solely committed to the idea of profiting off America while becoming La Raza Unida members

I get no read from the OP that says "keep all the brown people out". I just hear another voice raised against people storming our border demanding we take them in. Not nearly as many people as you imagine are for closed borders, they are for the creation of new Americans. Assimilation should not be a dirty word nor fail to be required of any who wish to be awarded citizenship. Anything else is self-destructive

In the other post, I see innuendo used to suggest dark undercurrents but still haven't seen that OP post up the evidence (or lack thereof) he was called out on

Cue the usual krewe to come and grab an oar

 

[trailrider]

I think the first quote is speaking to the Democrat's arguable tendency of favoring porous borders to pander to a certain demographic and hope to convert a non-zero percentage of those who achieve citizenship to the democratic fold. It is not an uncommon nor extreme viewpoint to believe that at heart the Democrats care little for the people caught up in their plans nor the Americans harmed by the same, so long as they achieve power. They are widely held to be the party of "by any means necessary" I would expect "going the distance for the Latino vote" could refer to their open borders at all costs stratyegy

When the OP speaks of the Republicans "going the distance for the middle America vote" I interpret it as doing whatever it takes to get control of the border and bring some semblance of rationality to immigration. I infer the writer would prefer emigres that are committed to the idea of America and becoming Americans not those solely committed to the idea of profiting off America while becoming La Raza Unida members

I get no read from the OP that says "keep all the brown people out". I just hear another voice raised against people storming our border demanding we take them in. Not nearly as many people as you imagine are for closed borders, they are for the creation of new Americans. Assimilation should not be a dirty word nor fail to be required of any who wish to be awarded citizenship. Anything else is self-destructive

In the other post, I see innuendo used to suggest dark undercurrents but still haven't seen that OP post up the evidence (or lack thereof) he was called out on

Cue the usual krewe to come and grab an oar

Well in not so many words...exactly what I meant.

 

[jamil]

Idk, I'm hazy on what "middle America" means, when contrasting with Latino voters. But apparently there is some kind of difference, enough difference that apparently Latino voters are excluded from "middle America." Now since I've spent some time in the actual place called middle America, and know that there are Latino voters there, I'm left scratching my head as to what is actually meant.
Perhaps you can provide some clarification?

Hazy. You can take offense to it if you want. You can infer it means "white people" if you want. But fine. I'll explain what I think was meant. Democrats tend to be identitarians. They group people by identity, court the minority identity groups to pit them together against the majority identity group. I think that's just universally understood among people who are right of center. Middle America means "sane" America. Not racially. Ideologically. It means the red states. Of course there are pockets of insanity speckled throughout the red states, we call those large metropolitan areas, where the Democrat identity group pitting works extremely well.

To keep the identity group pitting fires hot, Democrats have to continually feed them coal. Convince them that the mean old Rubes are out to get them. (In reality, the mean ole rubes are just out to line their own pockets, but whatever)

So, as it pertains to the shutdown, Democrats probably don't give a flying **** about the wall. I mean, they say the wall won't do anything but cost money. And they're not opposed to throwing money to the wind. So if the shutdown were as harmful and dire as they claim it is, why would they put people through all that suffering and loss, just for a few $billion thrown to the wind? They **** more than that in a given toilet. One reason, to feed the Republican/anti-latino narrative, they grandstand in pretense that they care so much about not building the wall, to prevent those mean ole republicans from persecuting the poor Mexican families with it.

Well, that narrative doesn't fly in flyover country. Flyover country, "middle America", red states. Whatever you want to call it, it's not the land of bat **** crazy land where racist lies like the narrative Democrats are pushing are largely believed. And like I said, red states aren't completely homogeneous. There are pockets of bat **** crazy in the large metro areas.

In one sentence, I'd sum it up as, he's saying "Democrats are racist **********s."