In what may be the Voxiest Vox story ever, "a new study" shows that people who voted for Obama twice and then switched to Trump are just racists after all. Such a relief to have one's priors validated like that.https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm …
-
-
Someone who votes for a black man twice for president and then votes for Trump has, at the very least, extremely complicated views about race that don't seem to be captured by this study's conclusions, to at least Beauchamp's rendering of them.
-
Moreover, Vox has a stake in wanting to prove that the only possible reason anyone could have voted of Trump is racism. And any attempt to complicate that picture is an excuse for racism. I think that's facile and anti-intellectual, but that's just me.
-
What “stake” does Vox have? Isn’t it better to make the critique you just made rather than just say the article is invalid because too Vox? I still have no idea what is based on. (“But that’s just me”—seriously?)
-
That wasn't the argument he made.
-
I honestly (not snark) could not follow the argument so feel free to enlighten me.
-
Not necessary to understand his argument. The part about it being Voxy isn't an argument in the first place.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
First the definition of racism they used is absurd. Am pretty sure you live in a majority white neighborhood in D.C ( in a city that is 50% white) but I wouldn’t called you racist.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.