alex8912 Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 Another one bites the dust. She has truly lost it. Including this race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connda Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 9 hours ago, rooster59 said: "I am not a person of colour. I am not a citizen of a tribe. Tribal citizenship is very different from ancestry. But she claimed she was Native America at the University of PA and Harvard University and then leveraged that 'minority status' to benefit her education and university tenure later on. 512th to 1024th part minority does not make you a minority. But she went with it without offering a ancestral linage to support her claims. It's dishonest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attrayant Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 6 minutes ago, connda said: But she claimed she was Native America at the University of PA and Harvard University and then leveraged that 'minority status' to benefit her education and university tenure later on. In what way did she leverage it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
348GTS Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 5 hours ago, newnative said: The fact that she has some native American ancestry makes her right. But, as I said, the Republicans, and especially our Electoral College-selected President, have been using this tempest in a teapot because they seem to be unable to come up with anything else. It's all really ridiculous when you compare it to all of Trump's countless false claims and outright lies. Yes, I know how the cursed Electoral College works and why we still have it in the 21st century and not election by popular vote is a mystery to me. Thank you, cursed Electoral College, for giving America George W. Bush and now Donald Trump. It bears remembering that Clinton won nearly 3 million more votes than Trump. Unfortunately you're not that informed and are clearly taking your cues from the pro-Dem propaganda media. People don't claim to have "whatever" ancestry because of 0.001% results in a DNA test. That is patently absurd. She has made numerous claims and assumptions based on this falsehood including things mentioned in other comments. As for the "cursed Electoral College", again... you don't get it. There are reasons why it is in place. What you are basically saying is that the state (or states) with the highest populations should get to decide the legislation for the others. America is a constitutional republic, it is not a pure democracy whereby the majority gets to impose it's will on the minority. As for the tired old chestnut "Clinton won nearly 3 million more votes than Trump", that is just selective cherry picking. Perhaps it "bears remembering" that Clinton won California by around 4.3 million votes, ie more than she "won" the other 49 states combined. In other words, subtract California and Trump actually "won" the "popular vote" by about 1.5m. It also "bears remembering" that Trump won 2600 counties to Clinton's 500 (2600 counties equates to 84% of the USA). So basically what you are saying is that the results in California alone should determine who wins the US presidency because it has the most people in it. Got it... ???????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirineou Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 18 hours ago, rooster59 said: But Native American leaders criticized Warren for using a DNA test to lay claim to even a vague connection to a tribal nation, saying culture and sovereignty were just as important as blood and the tests did not confer the rights of tribal citizenship. Why apologising for taking a DNA test? thousands of people take it daily. She never claimed membership to any tribe. Does it mean that if I take a DNA test and find out that I have an American Indian ancestry I have to call the Cherokee tribe and apologise?Do they have an apology hotline? Warren has always said: "I am not a person of colour. I am not a citizen of a tribe. Tribal citizenship is very different from ancestry. Tribes, and only tribes, determine tribal citizenship, and I respect that difference," I think trumpers are grasping at straws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benmart Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 11 hours ago, whatsupdoc said: Elizabeth Warren would be an infinitely better president than the current occupant of the White House. Joseph de Maistre stated; "Every nation gets the government it deserves". Judging from some of the comments here, I'd say he was right. The DNA test is a non-issue. If that sinks her candidacy, then how got Trump ever elected?? Breathtakingly double standards..... Your prediction of her future performance as President is quesswork at best. If you are so sure of your ability to look into the future, perhaps you should speculate on the stock market where you will benefit from your gift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas J Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 She should definitely apologize. If I were a Cherokee I would be deeply offended to have even one dna molecule that was similar to hers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfokevin Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 12 hours ago, rgraham said: She got caught lying, typical politician. You would think if one can overlook a mans bonespurs one could overlook the memory of someone’s Grandmother... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas J Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 12 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said: She’s apologised for taking the DNA test, not for her ancestory claim. She has never claimed to be Cherokee or a citizen of any Native American Nation. She, like me and I suspect most TVF members claims ancestors of different nationality/ethnicity without claiming to be any of those nationalities/ethnicities. And she apologised for causing offence. That’s new. You are mistaken. She claimed it multiple times. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/dec/01/facts-behind-elizabeth-warren-and-her-native-ameri/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 13 hours ago, Tug said: A tempest in a tea pot but she has proven to be the better person for the apology and she would make a far better president than the current occupant There's not even an argument to be made on that point, at least among any sane, non-delusional person. The whole Cherokee thing is just a typical Republican drummed up nothing controversy aimed at trying to discredit a would-be Democratic adversary. In typical belittling Trump style. As I understand it, the woman claimed some Indian ancestry, and the DNA test confirmed that, no matter how small. AFAIK, she never claimed to be a Cherokee tribe member or citizen of any Indian "nation". And frankly, I don't know what any of the whole issue has to do with whether someone is or isn't a suitable candidate for president. If anyone thinks the whole Indian thing somehow discredits or disqualifies Warren to be a presidential candidate, then Trump should have never ever made it onto any ballot, considering his lifelong pattern of lying about pretty much everything under the sun, including much of his own actions and background. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancelot01 Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 18 hours ago, Somtamnication said: Cherokee People. Great song! I hope she dances to it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ0gobSHgIs Don Carson, Cherokee Nation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 Off-topic, troll posts and replies removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 This whole mess is nothing more than another one of Trump's racist attempts to discredit someone. He did the same with Obama and the birther movement. It's a simple attempt to put down a person. This is from a man who used to lie and claim he was Swedish to distance himself from being German and all that entailed in dealing with businesses which had a large Jewish population. Elizabeth Warren's test showed that she does have Native American ancestry and that it is more than the 'average American.' The estimated range of 1/64 to 1/1024th would back up the claim that it was a distant ancestor. But those who wish to discredit her for nothing more than politics will use something as ridiculous as this to keep a false narrative in play. It's what they do when they can't challenge the important issues. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/10/the-facts-on-elizabeth-warrens-dna-test/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 Troll posts and replies removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
348GTS Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said: There's not even an argument to be made on that point, at least among any sane, non-delusional person. As I understand it, the woman claimed some Indian ancestry, and the DNA test confirmed that, no matter how small. AFAIK, she never claimed to be a Cherokee tribe member or citizen of any Indian "nation". Poppycock. There are several arguments to be made. However as is so usual for someone on the left to do, you immediately discredit anyone with opposing views as "insane" or "delusional" without offering any facts or substance to support your baseless claims. Just because you don't like President Trump, does not by definition make Elizabeth Warren a better candidate. Regarding "the woman" who claimed "some ancestry", you clearly don't "understand it" at all. I suggest you do some research as to her claims, because it is quite telling how people who support her are back-pedaling on this and trying to underplay what they were. Now suddenly it's only important that she didn't claim to be a tribe member or citizen, as if that makes any difference to her claim of being "part Cherokee" her whole life. Harvard referred to her as an example of a minority (of Native American descent) on their faculty. Her "ancestry, no matter how small" ended up being LESS than the average American which in itself is not really that surprising if you take into account that "Native Americans" are not actually native to America at all and have their origins in Eurasia. 48 minutes ago, Credo said: This whole mess is nothing more than another one of Trump's racist attempts to discredit someone. He did the same with Obama and the birther movement. It's a simple attempt to put down a person. How does Trump's "attempt to discredit someone" qualify as "racist" ?? It has nothing to do with racism. You clearly have no idea what racism is if you think that. Elizabeth Warren is as white as Trump is. Her claims were always ludicrous and she used her "ethnic diversity" to gain favour with her base. The Cherokee nation themselves were enraged by her claims for years before Trump ran for President. She has been accused of being a fraud for years. It has nothing to do with Trump, he just called her out on it. The so called Obama "birther movement" is also not "racist", it has to do with where the man was really born, of which there is still doubt (I am NOT getting into this, but do your own research). But as usual, the left will throw buzzwords words such as "racist" around to discredit someone rather than actually investigate the issue, nothing new there. Furthermore, Trump did not dream up the birther thing, it is not "his" movement, it dates back to the 2008 Clinton campaign. It's just another tired old chestnut used to bash Trump with to discredit him (oh the irony....). Ted Cruz was also called out for not being eligible for President on similar grounds, so was that "racist" too ?? As if the claims of racism somehow invalidate the claims. Ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manarak Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 the most bewildering thing in this is that some people could take offense at her taking a DNA test ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricklev Posted February 2, 2019 Share Posted February 2, 2019 Yes, let's ignore all her policy proposals and economic analysis and focus on this. The news media should be ashamed. Warren's DNA/Hillary's emails -- <deleted>> all of you for that horses--t! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 More off-topic posts removed. I have no idea where posters got the idea that this thread is about the Electoral College. It's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newnative Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 5 hours ago, ricklev said: Yes, let's ignore all her policy proposals and economic analysis and focus on this. The news media should be ashamed. Warren's DNA/Hillary's emails -- <deleted>> all of you for that horses--t! Yes, that's the Republican plan--seize on something totally meaningless but apparently a bit newsworthy and focus all attention on it. Look, look, look, folks, at Warren's DNA. Don't, don't, don't, for goodness sake DON'T look at her proposal to have the ultra rich pay their fair share of taxes. Nothing to see there, folks, and now back to that DNA... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newnative Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 6 hours ago, Scott said: More off-topic posts removed. I have no idea where posters got the idea that this thread is about the Electoral College. It's not. You're spoiling all the fun. Half the enjoyment of the Forum, at least for me, is when a thread does go somewhat off-topic--just as conversations do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 2 hours ago, newnative said: You're spoiling all the fun. Half the enjoyment of the Forum, at least for me, is when a thread does go somewhat off-topic--just as conversations do. Some tangents are indeed a part of a topic and I do try to give them some leeway. This one, however, isn't and we've had the Electoral College argued Ad Nauseum in a number of threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVENKEEL Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 She will forever be "Pocahontas" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 13 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said: She will forever be "Pocahontas" Well, Trump would like to have it that way... If he has his druthers, she would join his cast of characters including Lyin' Ted and Little Marco, etc etc.. However, if the American people and their news media haven't entirely lost any sense of reality, they'll ignore all of Trump and Co.'s belittling B.S. and keep their focus on the things that matter in a president -- starting with honesty, character, knowledge and policies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVENKEEL Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Just now, TallGuyJohninBKK said: Well, Trump would like to have it that way... If he has his druthers, she would join his cast of characters including Lyin' Ted and Little Marco, etc etc.. However, if the American people and their news media haven't entirely lost any sense of reality, they'll ignore all of Trump and Co.'s belittling B.S. and keep their focus on the things that matter in a president -- starting with honesty, character, knowledge and policies You're absolutely right, one of the issues will be killing babies as they are born. How's that for a character challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 1 minute ago, EVENKEEL said: You're absolutely right, one of the issues will be killing babies as they are born. How's that for a character challenge. People are entitled to vote their preference on such matters.... But, I don't think any law or state in the U.S. allows "killing babies as they are born" -- except perhaps to save the life of the mother. And that whole divisive subject is off topic here anyway. But back on topic, I'd rather someone base their presidential pick on the candidate's policies than on the bizarre issue of what to make of someone who has distant ancestry of a particular group. I have Irish ancestry. If I took a DNA test, it would show that. I've never claimed to be an Irish citizen or said I'm more Irish than American. So what difference any of that makes to anything, I have no idea. But, nonetheless, I could truthfully and accurately state I have Irish ancestry... So what... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVENKEEL Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Oh, so why would Mrs. Warren even mention Indian ancestry. I was born in Denmark, a US citizen by naturalization. Should I mention that? No, no reason to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beechguy Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Very well, as to policies, plotting to take something that doesn't belong to you, would be called stealing in any other context. Warren is not the only one, but comes across as a thief, and a loser, as does Harris, Booker, Sanders. Rich pay their fair share? Based on who's opinion, and how much is really fair? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-tax-plans-reflect-profound-shift-in-public-mood/ar-BBT5Mid?ocid=spartandhp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVENKEEL Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 1 minute ago, beechguy said: Very well, as to policies, plotting to take something that doesn't belong to you, would be called stealing in any other context. Warren is not the only one, but comes across as a thief, and a loser, as does Harris, Booker, Sanders. Rich pay their fair share? Based on who's opinion, and how much is really fair? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-tax-plans-reflect-profound-shift-in-public-mood/ar-BBT5Mid?ocid=spartandhp One of the crazies is talking about 90% tax being fair for the rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beechguy Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 Just now, EVENKEEL said: One of the crazies is talking about 90% tax being fair for the rich. Well in the article I quoted, Bloomberg says what she is proposing is unconstitutional, and as to wealth redistribution, he says look at Venezuela. Don't agree with the guy's politics much, but hard to argue with him on these points. Bottom line to the Warren, Bernie, etc. supporters, there is no such thing as free. If you push the wealthy very much, you will have another France on your hands. People will be parking their money, or border hoping, how long has the cash from Apple and others sat overseas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 31 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said: Oh, so why would Mrs. Warren even mention Indian ancestry. I was born in Denmark, a US citizen by naturalization. Should I mention that? No, no reason to. If you were proud of your Danish heritage, no reason not to... Except that Trump would likely come along and try to belittle you for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.