The Natural Inclination of Mankind

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

The population of Texas has about doubled since 1980 and most of that has come from people moving into the state. And that doesn't even count folks who moved into Texas before 1980.

Did they swim,

.... ride on rail cars coming North, or


.....hide in the back of 18-wheelers crossing coming across "the bridge"?

Those folks are called "knapsackers" not "carpetbaggers"!

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Did they swim,

.... ride on rail cars coming North, or

.....hide in the back of 18-wheelers crossing coming across "the bridge"?

Those folks are called "knapsackers" not "carpetbaggers"!

You need to get out more, speak to your neighbors.

You will find that a huge percentage of the non-Hispanic ones are also non-native Texans.

In fact, look at all the tech companies that have big and small facilities here. They are mostly from out of state, too, and brought in significant numbers of employees from other states.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

You need to get out more, speak to your neighbors.

Ha, ha, ha! Don't confuse louder in noise as being greater in numbers.

Porque? No necesito, hombre.

[Jewish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Racist idiot.

You're leeeeeaving on a jet plane ...

Apologies to John Denver.

If I'm a racist for pointing out that the Japanese elect Japanese, Indians elect Indians, Chinese elect Chinese, Mexicans elect Mexicans, Blacks elect Blacks, etc - what does that make them?

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

If I'm a racist for pointing out that the Japanese elect Japanese, Indians elect Indians, Chinese elect Chinese, Mexicans elect Mexicans, Blacks elect Blacks, etc - what does that make them?

You are a racist for ascribing everything to identity politics.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

You are a racist for ascribing everything to identity politics.

Well, he's not a racist then, because that is not what he "ascribed"!

[Randy4Candy]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Well, he's not a racist then, because that is not what he "ascribed"!

Let the intellectual pissing match begin!!!!!

as·cribe
əˈskrīb/Submit
verb
past tense: ascribed; past participle: ascribed
1.
attribute something to (a cause).
"he ascribed Jane's short temper to her upset stomach"
synonyms: attribute to, assign to, put down to, accredit to, credit to, chalk up to, impute to;

[Jewish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

You are a racist for ascribing everything to identity politics.

You didn't answer the question!

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Well, he's not a racist then, because that is not what he "ascribed"!

Yes, he did.

If "Japanese elect Japanese, Indians elect Indians, Chinese elect Chinese, Mexicans elect Mexicans, Blacks elect Blacks" is NOT identity politics, then what is?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Yes, he did.

If "Japanese elect Japanese, Indians elect Indians, Chinese elect Chinese, Mexicans elect Mexicans, Blacks elect Blacks" is NOT identity politics, then what is?

It depends on what is the "identity" ... having close ties and attachments to cultural matters is not "racism" .. unless, of course, you want to redefine "racism" to make a point. Don't worry. You will not be the first to do so. Additionally, if statistically speaking that is for the most part a correct statement then it also is not "racism," but merely pointing out that persons with the same backgrounds, which includes cultural experiences that are different between the races, tend to vote for persons with similar backgrounds. They are not necessarily voting on the race, but persons from their community with whom they identify.

If you want to be precise, BTW, none of those listed are "races" for that matter. They are nationalities, except for "Indians" if you mean the "Indians" who inhabited North, Central, and South America.

If you want to go around slapping labels on people and shoving them into pigeon holes to make a discussion point, try to marginalize them, and/or discourage them from participating, I suppose that is your "right." But expect to get called out on it and challenged as to the validity of your statement.

Are all these "races": Japanese, Indians, Chinese, Mexicans, Blacks? May be you are if you think they are.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

It depends on what is the "identity" ... having close ties and attachments to cultural matters is not "racism" .. unless, of course, you want to redefine "racism" to make a point. Don't worry. You will not be the first to do so. Additionally, if statistically speaking that is for the most part a correct statement then it also is not "racism," but merely pointing out that persons with the same backgrounds, which includes cultural experiences that are different between the races, tend to vote for persons with similar backgrounds. They are not necessarily voting on the race, but persons from their community with whom they identify.

If you want to be precise, BTW, none of those listed are "races" for that matter. They are nationalities, except for "Indians" if you mean the "Indians" who inhabited North, Central, and South America.

If you want to go around slapping labels on people and shoving them into pigeon holes to make a discussion point, try to marginalize them, and/or discourage them from participating, I suppose that is your "right." But expect to get called out on it and challenged as to the validity of your statement.

Are all these "races": Japanese, Indians, Chinese, Mexicans, Blacks? May be you are if you think they are.

Stop being an idiot.

I'm responding to JL's classifications of people. I didn't say they were races, HE did. Don't put words in other peoples' mouths. That's IB Hankering's trick.

JL is insinuating (approvingly) that everyone votes only for their own - a rancid form of identity politics - so why can't white people?

Except it isn't true.

If it was true, Rubio and Cruz would poll a lot better among Hispanics than the likely non-Hispanic Democratic candidates.

If it was true, Bill DiBlasio in NY would not have done better among Jews than Weiner or among blacks than Bill Thompson.

JL is projecting his own racism onto others.

People do not always vote their own, even if they are frequently inclined to do so.