Conquer Club

That Tea-Party bit was just to get your attention. Maybe.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/08/46-pe ... -marriage/

46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned

A new poll gauging Mississippi Republicans' preferences going into the 2012 election ended up revealing something more startling: 46 percent of GOP voters in the state think interracial marriage should be illegal.

Results were announced Thursday by Public Policy Polling, a polling firm based in North Carolina. The company asked 400 Republican primary voters about their preferences for candidates for state and national offices, as well as their views on interracial marriage.

The PPP poll also revealed that Palin has more support among voters who believe interracial marriage should be illegal than among those who are OK with it. Mitt Romney's numbers reveal just the opposite. He has a higher favorability among Mississippi Republicans who want interracial marriage to remain legal.

Oh man,
This is the best thing that I've read all week.

In related news, 46% of forum-goers want tea party threads banned lol.

Juan_Bottom wrote:That Tea-Party bit was just to get your attention. Maybe.

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/08/46-pe ... -marriage/

46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned

A new poll gauging Mississippi Republicans' preferences going into the 2012 election ended up revealing something more startling: 46 percent of GOP voters in the state think interracial marriage should be illegal.

Results were announced Thursday by Public Policy Polling, a polling firm based in North Carolina. The company asked 400 Republican primary voters about their preferences for candidates for state and national offices, as well as their views on interracial marriage.

The PPP poll also revealed that Palin has more support among voters who believe interracial marriage should be illegal than among those who are OK with it. Mitt Romney's numbers reveal just the opposite. He has a higher favorability among Mississippi Republicans who want interracial marriage to remain legal.

Oh man,
This is the best thing that I've read all week.

I lived in Mississippi for five years. This does not in any way surprise me, sadly enough.

Woodruff wrote:
I lived in Mississippi for five years. This does not in any way surprise me, sadly enough.

I lived there for six... and it does not surprise me, either.

That said, folks in the northeast are not necessarily any better. The northerners are less likely to admit to racism, but.. "somehow", just don't seem to associate with, live by or even do much business with more than a select few of "them". (those few, of course representing they are "most definitely not racist").

Oh.. here's one thing that did stun me. I moved to a county on the coast that was over 75% Roman Catholic. I thought that would mean little Klan presence (ya know .. it's one of the "K's" -- Kykes, Kinks, Katolicks). I was quite wrong.

Quick test- name a mainstream movie which has a mixed-race relationship that ends happily.

It's not an impossible question, there are a few. Some more if you blur race a bit. But it's something you start to notice when it's pointed out. Rom-Coms with a black and white pairing? Only one that I know. Horror movies with a black and white pairing? I know who'll die first. Hollywood is just as uncomfortable with mixing races. Even those that end happily focus on the racial problems in between.

The cross tabs of that poll are particularly interesting. To quote from Tom Jensen:

Palin's net favorability with folks who think interracial marriage should be illegal (+55 at 74/19) is 17 points higher than it is with folks who think interracial marriage should be legal (+38 at 64/26.) Meanwhile Romney's favorability numbers see the opposite trend. He's at +23 (53/30) with voters who think interracial marriage should be legal but 19 points worse at +4 (44/40) with those who think it should be illegal

True story: When my wife and I were planning our honeymoon, I suggested that we tour Mississippi's old blues sites. She said that people down there wouldn't be happy with our interracial marriage. I thought she was crazy - no way people can still care about that sort of thing, right? We ended up learning to surf in Costa Rica instead.

It's the only time she's ever been right in our marriage, I think.

Symmetry wrote:Quick test- name a mainstream movie which has a mixed-race relationship that ends happily.

It's not an impossible question, there are a few. Some more if you blur race a bit. But it's something you start to notice when it's pointed out. Rom-Coms with a black and white pairing? Only one that I know. Horror movies with a black and white pairing? I know who'll die first. Hollywood is just as uncomfortable with mixing races. Even those that end happily focus on the racial problems in between.

Ironically enough I think the west is less racially divided than the east at least once you get outside of southern California and the Bay area (Oakland, Richmond). This is just because so many people have come there recently. When you have millions of people building houses since the 1970's, you are just more likely to have folks of differing races living and working together. Also, of course, the west never truly had a "slave culture" (even though Ca was a slave territory). Though some did come west in the "diaspara", that migration was overtaken by the Oakies, the Chinese brought for railroads, etc, etc, etc.

Even in Southern California it is not so much straight racism as "socially upward snobbery". Suburbs in southern California tends to be the kinds of places where its common to live next door to people for 20-30 years and only maybe know their names, but are likely to know what kind of outfits they all wear. Racism absolutely gets mixed in, but anybody without money is likely to have a hard time down there and anybody who has it will do fine now.. to a point.

It's unfortunate to think that some people consider race a bigger deal than what it is. However, we're better than we were 30 years ago, and in 30 years from now, I bet we'll be better than now. Things seem to be moving towards a more even playing field -- I hope that they may.

-rd

rdsrds2120 wrote:It's unfortunate to think that some people consider race a bigger deal than what it is. However, we're better than we were 30 years ago, and in 30 years from now, I bet we'll be better than now. Things seem to be moving towards a more even playing field -- I hope that they may.

-rd

FINALLY! Someone who's actually aware of what happens in the long-run.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:It's unfortunate to think that some people consider race a bigger deal than what it is. However, we're better than we were 30 years ago, and in 30 years from now, I bet we'll be better than now. Things seem to be moving towards a more even playing field -- I hope that they may.

-rd

FINALLY! Someone who's actually aware of what happens in the long-run.

Well...Thank you?

-rd

BigBallinStalin wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:It's unfortunate to think that some people consider race a bigger deal than what it is. However, we're better than we were 30 years ago, and in 30 years from now, I bet we'll be better than now. Things seem to be moving towards a more even playing field -- I hope that they may.
-rd

FINALLY! Someone who's actually aware of what happens in the long-run.

Of course, bringing these sorts of things to light is part of the reason WHY things are moving in that direction.

Woodruff wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:It's unfortunate to think that some people consider race a bigger deal than what it is. However, we're better than we were 30 years ago, and in 30 years from now, I bet we'll be better than now. Things seem to be moving towards a more even playing field -- I hope that they may.
-rd

FINALLY! Someone who's actually aware of what happens in the long-run.

Of course, bringing these sorts of things to light is part of the reason WHY things are moving in that direction.

Yes. Bringing attention to the problem of racial inequality is a negative feedback loop with it going away. The more we address it as a problem, the more it goes away. The less we care to talk about it and resolve issues surrounding it, the more of a problem it will become.

-rd

"46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned"

... Does anybody else find it odd that the Dems weren't polled? The end of the article says, "Another poll will be done with non-Republicans" (as opposed to Democrat) "in the coming weeks". Yeah, I'll be holding my breath.

... They didn't poll the Dems because southern white Dems are racist sh*ts to a man. It's the party of the Ku Klux Klan for crying out loud.

... Mississippi, bunch of Skoal chewing, mixed martial arts & NASCAR fan hillbillies.

...

Symmetry wrote:Quick test- name a mainstream movie which has a mixed-race relationship that ends happily.

It's not an impossible question, there are a few. Some more if you blur race a bit. But it's something you start to notice when it's pointed out. Rom-Coms with a black and white pairing? Only one that I know. Horror movies with a black and white pairing? I know who'll die first. Hollywood is just as uncomfortable with mixing races. Even those that end happily focus on the racial problems in between.

It Could Happen To You.. Nicholas Cage. in which he had a "bad black" wife. the movie had her as a devil.

and rds,

rdsrds2120 wrote:It's unfortunate to think that some people consider race a bigger deal than what it is. However, we're better than we were 30 years ago, and in 30 years from now, I bet we'll be better than now. Things seem to be moving towards a more even playing field -- I hope that they may.

-rd

I hope this get real even sooner

Nobunaga wrote:"46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned"

... Does anybody else find it odd that the Dems weren't polled? The end of the article says, "Another poll will be done with non-Republicans" (as opposed to Democrat) "in the coming weeks". Yeah, I'll be holding my breath.

... They didn't poll the Dems because southern white Dems are racist sh*ts to a man. It's the party of the Ku Klux Klan for crying out loud.

... Mississippi, bunch of Skoal chewing, mixed martial arts & NASCAR fan hillbillies.

...

Public Policy Polling (PPP) is an American Democratic Party-affiliated polling firm based in Raleigh, North Carolina.[1][2][3] PPP was founded in 2001 by businessman and Democratic pollster Dean Debnam, the firm's current president and chief executive officer.[1][4

Don't worry, their "non-Republicans" will be Tea Party members only.

Night Strike wrote:

Nobunaga wrote:"46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned"

... Does anybody else find it odd that the Dems weren't polled? The end of the article says, "Another poll will be done with non-Republicans" (as opposed to Democrat) "in the coming weeks". Yeah, I'll be holding my breath.

... They didn't poll the Dems because southern white Dems are racist sh*ts to a man. It's the party of the Ku Klux Klan for crying out loud.

... Mississippi, bunch of Skoal chewing, mixed martial arts & NASCAR fan hillbillies.

...

Public Policy Polling (PPP) is an American Democratic Party-affiliated polling firm based in Raleigh, North Carolina.[1][2][3] PPP was founded in 2001 by businessman and Democratic pollster Dean Debnam, the firm's current president and chief executive officer.[1][4

Don't worry, their "non-Republicans" will be Tea Party members only.

Is this your way of trying to avoid the painful fact of this thread's existence?

100% of current Democrat Senate Majority Leaders from Nevada think Obama was electable because he's light skinned and doesn't speak with a negro dialect.

Woodruff wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Nobunaga wrote:"46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned"

... Does anybody else find it odd that the Dems weren't polled? The end of the article says, "Another poll will be done with non-Republicans" (as opposed to Democrat) "in the coming weeks". Yeah, I'll be holding my breath.

... They didn't poll the Dems because southern white Dems are racist sh*ts to a man. It's the party of the Ku Klux Klan for crying out loud.

... Mississippi, bunch of Skoal chewing, mixed martial arts & NASCAR fan hillbillies.

...

Public Policy Polling (PPP) is an American Democratic Party-affiliated polling firm based in Raleigh, North Carolina.[1][2][3] PPP was founded in 2001 by businessman and Democratic pollster Dean Debnam, the firm's current president and chief executive officer.[1][4

Don't worry, their "non-Republicans" will be Tea Party members only.

Is this your way of trying to avoid the painful fact of this thread's existence?

If I wanted to do that, I wouldn't have posted in the thread. Nobunga's point is completely valid. Why would they only poll Republicans for this question if they weren't trying to make political attacks against their opponents? And what do Democrats say about the topic? If they have similar percentages, then there is no point in even putting a party label on the view (besides the aforementioned political attacks).

rdsrds2120 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

rdsrds2120 wrote:It's unfortunate to think that some people consider race a bigger deal than what it is. However, we're better than we were 30 years ago, and in 30 years from now, I bet we'll be better than now. Things seem to be moving towards a more even playing field -- I hope that they may.
-rd

FINALLY! Someone who's actually aware of what happens in the long-run.

Of course, bringing these sorts of things to light is part of the reason WHY things are moving in that direction.

Yes. Bringing attention to the problem of racial inequality is a negative feedback loop with it going away. The more we address it as a problem, the more it goes away. The less we care to talk about it and resolve issues surrounding it, the more of a problem it will become.

-rd

It depend on how you are discussing it.
If it is talked about specifically as a race problem, then yes.. it can be negative. However, if it is a matter of "manners" and just treating people properly -- regardless, then it is effective. Of course, part of good manners is understanding other people.

That so many people think there is a problem with interracial marriage, still, today in Mississippi, is a problem given Mississippi's history (regardless of the political party... I would suspect the Democrats might not differ that much in Mississippi). A lot of harm came to people because of those ideas. If those ideas are again becoming "mainstream", it is something deserving attention.

Night Strike wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Nobunaga wrote:"46 Percent of Mississippi Republicans Want Interracial Marriage Banned"

... Does anybody else find it odd that the Dems weren't polled? The end of the article says, "Another poll will be done with non-Republicans" (as opposed to Democrat) "in the coming weeks". Yeah, I'll be holding my breath.

... They didn't poll the Dems because southern white Dems are racist sh*ts to a man. It's the party of the Ku Klux Klan for crying out loud.

... Mississippi, bunch of Skoal chewing, mixed martial arts & NASCAR fan hillbillies.

...

Public Policy Polling (PPP) is an American Democratic Party-affiliated polling firm based in Raleigh, North Carolina.[1][2][3] PPP was founded in 2001 by businessman and Democratic pollster Dean Debnam, the firm's current president and chief executive officer.[1][4

Don't worry, their "non-Republicans" will be Tea Party members only.

Is this your way of trying to avoid the painful fact of this thread's existence?

If I wanted to do that, I wouldn't have posted in the thread. Nobunga's point is completely valid. Why would they only poll Republicans for this question if they weren't trying to make political attacks against their opponents? And what do Democrats say about the topic? If they have similar percentages, then there is no point in even putting a party label on the view (besides the aforementioned political attacks).

My point is that whether it's used for political attacks or not is irrelevant to me. All that matters is that it is in fact the case.

Would I like to see the same poll run for Democrats in Mississippi? Sure. Do I think it would be similar? I don't think it would be AS bad as that, but I do think it would be bad enough to be an embarrassing black mark also. But that doesn't change the results of what was done.

Basically, what you're doing here is saying "But they MIGHT BE just as bad!". That's even worse than "But they do it too!".

Woodruff wrote:Would I like to see the same poll run for Democrats in Mississippi? Sure. Do I think it would be similar? I don't think it would be AS bad as that, but I do think it would be bad enough to be an embarrassing black mark also. But that doesn't change the results of what was done.

Basically, what you're doing here is saying "But they MIGHT BE just as bad!". That's even worse than "But they do it too!".

That's what you're doing as well on the other side of the coin. Basically, what you're doing here is saying that they MIGHT NOT BE as bad before a poll is even conducted. You're jumping to a conclusion before data is collected or even the attempt to do so.

beezer wrote:

Woodruff wrote:Would I like to see the same poll run for Democrats in Mississippi? Sure. Do I think it would be similar? I don't think it would be AS bad as that, but I do think it would be bad enough to be an embarrassing black mark also. But that doesn't change the results of what was done.

Basically, what you're doing here is saying "But they MIGHT BE just as bad!". That's even worse than "But they do it too!".

That's what you're doing as well on the other side of the coin. Basically, what you're doing here is saying that they MIGHT NOT BE as bad before a poll is even conducted. You're jumping to a conclusion before data is collected or even the attempt to do so.

No, I'm saying that Night Strike, and yourself now, are trying to distract from this very embarrassing poll. If the poll results were about teachers (to grab one of my demographics), I wouldn't be trying to distract from it or making excuses for it.

Woodruff wrote:

beezer wrote:

Woodruff wrote:Would I like to see the same poll run for Democrats in Mississippi? Sure. Do I think it would be similar? I don't think it would be AS bad as that, but I do think it would be bad enough to be an embarrassing black mark also. But that doesn't change the results of what was done.

Basically, what you're doing here is saying "But they MIGHT BE just as bad!". That's even worse than "But they do it too!".

That's what you're doing as well on the other side of the coin. Basically, what you're doing here is saying that they MIGHT NOT BE as bad before a poll is even conducted. You're jumping to a conclusion before data is collected or even the attempt to do so.

No, I'm saying that Night Strike, and yourself now, are trying to distract from this very embarrassing poll. If the poll results were about teachers (to grab one of my demographics), I wouldn't be trying to distract from it or making excuses for it.

You're absolutely wrong. Please show me where I've ever discounted the results of this poll. Let's just accept the poll results concerning Mississippi Republicans. Nobunaga made a very clear point about Democrats not being polled. Night Strike reiterated it. What I pointed out was your inconsistency in criticizing Night Strike's post for what results might come about, while you exempted your own post from that same line of reasoning for what might not come about.

beezer wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

beezer wrote:

Woodruff wrote:Would I like to see the same poll run for Democrats in Mississippi? Sure. Do I think it would be similar? I don't think it would be AS bad as that, but I do think it would be bad enough to be an embarrassing black mark also. But that doesn't change the results of what was done.

Basically, what you're doing here is saying "But they MIGHT BE just as bad!". That's even worse than "But they do it too!".

That's what you're doing as well on the other side of the coin. Basically, what you're doing here is saying that they MIGHT NOT BE as bad before a poll is even conducted. You're jumping to a conclusion before data is collected or even the attempt to do so.

No, I'm saying that Night Strike, and yourself now, are trying to distract from this very embarrassing poll. If the poll results were about teachers (to grab one of my demographics), I wouldn't be trying to distract from it or making excuses for it.

You're absolutely wrong. Please show me where I've ever discounted the results of this poll. Let's just accept the poll results concerning Mississippi Republicans. Nobunaga made a very clear point about Democrats not being polled. Night Strike reiterated it.

You'll notice that I did not respond to Nobanuga's post in the same manner that I did Night Strike's. I wonder why that might be. It certainly wasn't because Night Strike simply reiterated it.

beezer wrote:What I pointed out was your inconsistency in criticizing Night Strike's post for what results might come about, while you exempted your own post from that same line of reasoning for what might not come about.

You're right in that I should never have allowed myself to be drawn into Night Strike's distraction attempt. That way, I would have been able to avoid your continuance of that distraction attempt.

This is a case where we can apply the logic that one fault does not excuse another. I see where Woodruff is coming from. Any data that we don't have about some other set of factors (in this case, political party) won't refute or discredit the information that we do have. It may provide a contrast for us to examine and make conclusions about, and yes, I'd say this survey is biased, but the data presented still remains in tact and plausible. Choosing to point out a potential and possibly extraneous observation does not lessen the one being discussed. That's true for any situation.

-rd