A new poll conducted by Survey Monkey shows a rapidly increasing sense that racism against black Americans is a major problem in the United States. A growing perception that white Americans benefit from unfair advantages.
Meanwhile.... in the Real World:
Federal Hate Crime Statistics
Black Americans don't live in the real world? What's the "real world" according to you? Kekistan? A place where Dotard Donald actually won the election but it was "stolen" by Joe Biden? LOL!!
ReplyDeleteI guess the DOJ statistics and SPLC data must be racist...
ReplyDeleteNumbers are so "white spuremacist"! lol!
I was responding to the sentence "Meanwhile.... in the Real World". Sentence = words, not numbers. As for your numbers, the first graph shows that hate groups increased during Obama's presidency, then decreased during Dotard's presidency. No surprise there. Hate increased when a Black man was president and decreased when things were going the way White Supremacists wanted (with a fellow racist in the White House).
ReplyDeleteBy the time Obama left office in 2016 there were less racist groups than before he took office 2008 and even before Bush took office in 2000. So racism actually declined under Obama, then declined further under Trump. White supremacy is a DNC scarecrow.
ReplyDeleteWhite supremacy is a DNC scarecrow.
ReplyDeleteIs it? It certainly is the narrative the conservative white elites, those like tRump would like us to believe.
Reality does not by default align with the delusions of the conservative Evangelical base of the shrinking republican party.
But do have a great day deluding yourself into believing the bullshit.
The numbers don't lie.
ReplyDeleteElection of Obama provokes rise in U.S. hate crimes. (updated 13 years ago) White supremacist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Council of Conservative Citizens have seen a flood of interest from possible new members since the landmark election of the first black president in U.S. history.
ReplyDeleteThat sure explains the declining number of groups and hate crimes...
ReplyDeleteYour graph doesn't show how many hate groups there were under bush compared to under Obama. The numbers don't lie... the number of hate groups under Obama were ALWAYS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER than they were under gwb. The number shot up BIGLY and stayed in the bigly range throughout Obama's entire presidency.
ReplyDeleteSure it does Bush was President in 2008 and Obama in 2012.
ReplyDeleteGuess you didn't look at the graph I linked to. The graph I link to cites SPLC, same as the one you show, but they sure don't match up.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the author of the Counter-Punch article you link to "Russiagate [charges remain unproved] and imagined racist organizing didn't lead the Times to want to bring down Trump. It was the desire to bring down Trump that led it to promote Russiagate and allegations of racism ... The circular logic, that deploying stories to bring down a political figure is legitimated by the stories deployed to bring down that political figure, falls completely apart when/if the stories don't match the facts".
But the stories DO match the facts. Collusion between the Dotard campaign has been proven and hate crimes under Dotard surged nearly 20% (as per an FBI report). Looks like Rob Urie has authored other fake news stories (of the variety you like*) for CounterPunch :P
*Lefties defending Dotard by denying proven Russian collusion.
Perhaps because the SPLC isn't a very credible source to begin with. How much did SPLC's funding increase during the Obama years? How bid is their endowment now (half a billion)? Must be why the FBI stopped using them as a source in 2014.
ReplyDeletebtw - why'd the FBI's case closure rate go down in 2019 if crimes went up 20%? Were all their tied up on the Mueller investigation?
ReplyDeleteThe graph isn't from SPLC. Only (supposedly) the data the graph is based on. It's likely a misrepresentation. Given the blend of fact and fiction in the attached article, that would be my guess.
ReplyDeletePlease feel free to point out the fiction. Oh, wait, you can't...
ReplyDeleteI already did.
ReplyDeletelol! Not one fact proved fiction.
ReplyDeleteLOL! Only in your delusions. They don't count for shit.
ReplyDeleteNeither do non-refutations of specific facts.
ReplyDeleteSure. But that's a non sequitur. Given that specific facts have been refuted. It's not my problem that your illiteracy prevented you from reading the refutations.
ReplyDeleteName one. Again you can't and won't.
ReplyDelete...and if there are data differences, perhaps the SPLC itself is to blame since none of this data matches either your chart or mine. Perhaps like GISS and NOAA Earth temperature data, they like to "revise" their data upwards.
ReplyDelete...as they invent new types of hate and new "microaggressions" to condemn (like using the word "trigger").
ReplyDeleteName one. Again you can't and won't.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I already did. The article claims that the Russiagate "charges remain unproved". The collusion charges have been proven factual. Everything else he writes is suspect due to the inclusion of this ridiculously false assertion. fyi, I pointed this out in my 5th comment.
Then who did Trump collude with? You've got a tape of Trump speaking with Putin? I thought he said "Russia, if you're listening...." LOL!
ReplyDeleteHad the charges been true, wouldn't the Senate have obtained a conviction in their FAILED Impeachment?
ReplyDeletePaul Manafort colluded with Konstantin Kilimnik. Dotard knew Roger Stone was coordinating with Julian Assange's WikiLeaks (a Russian cutout). After the election Rudy Giuliani colluded with Andrii Derkach to spread Russian disinformation (re the Ukraine bullshit). The Senate didn't convict because they were fine with the collusion. Various "GOP" congresspersons repeated Russian talking points.
ReplyDeletelol! Assange says he didn't get the leaks from Russians.
ReplyDelete:P
ReplyDeleteAssange: "Our source is not a state party. So the answer -- for our interactions -- is no"...
ReplyDeleteThe stolen data was likely handed off to Assange using an intermediary and did not come directly from Russia. Assange also implied his source was Seth Rich. Julian Assange is a lying POS.
Seth Rich was a Russian cut-out? Who knew?
ReplyDeleteSeth Rich wasn't involved. He had nothing to do with the Russian hacking of the DNC.
ReplyDeleteSince as an employee, he didn't need to "hack" anything.
ReplyDeleteWikipedia: According to the Mueller Report, WikiLeaks had received an email containing an encrypted file named "wk dnc link I .txt.gpg" from the Guccifer 2.0 GRU persona on July 14, which was four days after Seth Rich died. In April 2018, Twitter direct messages revealed that even as Assange was suggesting publicly that WikiLeaks had obtained emails from Seth Rich, Assange was trying to obtain more emails from Guccifer 2.0, who was at the time already suspected of being linked to Russian intelligence. BuzzFeed described the messages as "the starkest proof yet that Assange knew a likely Russian government hacker had the Democrat leaks he wanted. And they reveal the deliberate bad faith with which Assange fed the groundless claims that Rich was his source, even as he knew the documents' origin".
ReplyDeleteSo if a Russian sent Assange a file with leaks of files that Wikileaks already had, that's supposed to prove that they didn't already have the files? That's some pretty strained logic...
ReplyDeleteAnd I always thought journalists demanded at least two sources before publishing so that info could be confirmed...
These emails were subsequently leaked by DCLeaks in June and July 2016[2] and by WikiLeaks on July 22, 2016, just before the 2016 Democratic National Convention.
I agree. Your logic is strained. Assange didn't already have squat. Seth Rich wasn't a WikiLeaks source. Assange isn't a journalist. He's Putin's useful idiot.
ReplyDeleteMore likely Seth Rich was assassinated by the DNC.
ReplyDeleteI think that your admiration of Dotard Donald is due (in part) to the fact that you both suffer from delusional disorder (and you share the same delusions).
ReplyDelete"An individual with this disorder often has a single fixed delusion and otherwise functions normally, setting it apart from illnesses such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, in which the patient typically experiences broad impairment in social and occupational functioning. The hallmark of delusional disorder is a non-bizarre fixed false belief, contradicting external reality, which is held by the patient fiercely despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary" :(
38% of America suffers from similar delusions? Who knew? Are aliens responsible?
ReplyDeleteYes. Why do you think Qanon took off so bigly?
ReplyDeleteAs for what is responsible, it isn't aliens of any kind (space aliens or illegal aliens). Stupidity is responsible. And the tendency of people to believe things they WANT to be true are true. Unless you're saying Dotard Donald is a space alien that comes from a planet inhabited by orange people.
Wouldn't similarly stupid people believe many different things instead of the same thing? The correlation between them would be 0,0 not 1.0.
ReplyDeletetrumpism is a cult. Cult members believe what the cult leader tells them to believe.
ReplyDeleteProgressivism is a mental disease. They're trained to ignore what the urban riots they see and experience and still call them "peaceful demonstrations".
ReplyDelete...and then state with a straight face that the violent mob that organized the destruction (Antifa) doesn't exist.
ReplyDeleteFalse and false.
ReplyDeleteAbout 93% of racial justice protests in the US have been peaceful, a new report finds.
Fact check: Joe Biden has condemned Antifa, violent protests.
lol! And where are YOUR condemnations? The Squad's? Nancy Pelosi's?
ReplyDeletePresidents never pander? Who knew?