The article makes a link between stupidity and racists.
But this lead to a larger debate, that Republicans, specifically right wing conservatives, are inherently more racists then Leftist and Democrats.
An old video making the argument that The Tea Party is racist and that there is a neurological reason for their racists behavior. As she says they have a larger "Limbic Brain".
I think both sides are racist for different reasons. Mostly to do with both sides think minorities are inferior in some ways, i.e. none of them think minorities can do things on their own.
I think both sides are racist for different reasons. Mostly to do with both sides think minorities are inferior in some ways, i.e. none of them think minorities can do things on their own.
I don't think people are inherently racist. Racism has been taught to people.
I concur on both counts, to this degree: both strains of thought, if unchecked by reason and evidence, can lead to justifications of racist thought and policy.
Right-wing extreme: Some groups of people are inherently inferior, so no amount of welfare "coddling" will improve their lot.
Left-wing extreme: Some groups of people are so oppressed by power structures that they need all the help they can get... to the extent that they have next to no agency.
At the core it's denial-of-agency, the root of this sort of prejudicial evil. Of course, this is a borderline ludicrous generalization, but I've seen enough instances on both sides to feel comfortable making the conjecture.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do I Contradict Myself? Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
We proposed and tested mediation models in which lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice, an effect mediated through the endorsement of right-wing ideologies (social conservatism, right-wing authoritarianism) and low levels of contact with out-groups.
First off they're proposing the end result of their tests before they've even tested them. They don't say "we went out and tested social conservatives and these are the outliers we found" they're implicitly saying the goal is to predict prejudice based on lower cognitive ability influenced by right wing thinking. Whats that, a triple negative I hear? I think so.
It presupposes the source of lower cognitive thinking and 'greater' prejudice is right wing ideology before they even start thus calling into question the moral honesty of the entire effort as well as laying the foundations for questions on bias that could skew their results.
It also uses two different samples, UK conservatism and US conservatism, which anyone who knows the two will tell you there's a world of difference between conservatives across the pond. This creates continuity issues that can only be addressed by making assumptions of intellectual and philosophy similarity. US conservatism is miles apart from basically everything found in the UK and Europe, the examples of similarity are due to those particular individuals having a more US or UK/Eurocentric favoring viewpoint of conservatism.
It also "confirms" so called "right wing authoritarianism" as an influence on abstract reasoning on antihomosexual prejudice, a 'confirmation' that can only come from an 'assumption' stated and used as a test factor. By the by, "right wing" and "authoritarianism" in the present day are contradictions in every sense except those embodied in the religious who look at God as their Supreme Authority. Que up your religious whackos hate Gays youtube videos, I'm sure. As time goes on and the Right becomes more Libertarian this entire notion ceases to be.
This article reeks of presupposition and bias. Using the picture they did it shows clearly who their target test subjects are and ultimately what those results will be. As someone who has been to countless Metal concerts I can tell you talking to skinheads is an exercise in dealing with the lowest common denominator, big surprise there. When they are the guinea pigs you subject to tests with a presupposed idea of its outcome, there's no wonder they found the results they did, you'd say they designed the tests with those goals in mind. Also it would have been just as easy to replace those skinheads with Black Power types, or include them side by side as indicative of the problem, but they didn't as the goal was to attack supposed White Privilege/Conservative Ideology and that's it.
Lastly, the notion of 'measuring' prejudice is a crock and is typical of the ideas that give birth to the race war mentality on BOTH sides. Leftists have a tendency to ignore or pretend they had no knowledge of when someone on their side dips in the racism pool and only calls them out once the heat from outside sources most of the time conservatives upset at the double standard applied point it out to sufficient public volume to make it necessary to do so. But they pounce and shriek hysterically when there's any example or perceived example from someone on the Right. The Right has done a pretty good job for quite awhile bringing the hammer down on people who express these kinds of views regardless of their political affiliation and actively works against those within its ranks who take that route. Thinking otherwise shows you really don't have a functional knowledge of what's going on and only rely on internet researchers to tell you.
Thusly, this research is a crock, an exercise in mudslinging and mentality shaping due to preconceived bias.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CAMILLA: You, sir, should unmask.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
But this lead to a larger debate, that Republicans, specifically right wing conservatives, are inherently more racists then Leftist and Democrats.
Without getting into all the weird racial theories that you can find on the left and whether they count as "racism", I think most people would accept that the right wing plays host to more of what we might call "Racism Classic". However, we need to make a distinction between two very different propositions: "The right wing has more racists than the left" versus "Right-wingers are more racist than left-wingers". Because there are also plenty of right-wingers who are not racist: if you meet somebody who proposes a flat 9-9-9 tax plan or says "greed is good" or thinks abortion is murder, it's just a bit of a stretch to infer, "This guy must hate people who don't look like him!" And that makes it pretty hard to argue that conservatism is "inherently" racist. It's too broad an umbrella to be "inherently" much of anything.
An old video making the argument that The Tea Party is racist and that there is a neurological reason for their racists behavior. As she says they have a larger "Limbic Brain".
If I were to make a connection between conservatism and racism, it would probably go along these lines:
"I want my children to grow up with values like my grandfather and his grandfather before him."
"Dude, you know that they kept slaves, right?"
"Except that."
"And they used to lynch gays."
"... well, uh..."
"and that women weren't allowed to vote."
"..."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
It's not so much that having an R next to your name is gonna make you a racist, but that characteristics that are common in conservatives are the kinds of characteristics that make racism an easier/more likely proposition. Particularly with an exclusivity, a high level of religiosity and a high level of sexual intolerance (which, again, comes to exclusivity) are all characteristics that are going to instill or exacerbate a certain level of ethnocentrism, as opposed to the more xenophillic views that you see clustered amongst left wing groups where diversity is seen as a benefit. Whats the point of diversity when you have the answer? How does one combine diversity with traditionalism? With a certain level of difficulty and I wish that CM could directly make the case to some of the people in Washington with a few paragraphs about ~famous people I've never heard of~ and their ~awesome thing where the summoned captain planet, basically~ but that isn't likely to happen anytime soon (unless I've really misjudged what his general persona is)
There are racist democrats just as much as there are racist republicans. there are racist smart people just as there are racist dumb people.
this is just another idiotic political backed agenda to try and paint people with a broad brush.
Since also the tea party and the republican party make up a large swath of different races i find it odd that they would resort to calling these people racists.
unless they are just refering to white males then that is racist in and of itself.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
You complain about a broad brush while making textbook false equivalencies?
And large swathe? Unless the demographics have massively changed since this gallup poll from 2009 89% of rank and file republicans are non-Hispanic white
Oh,
Wait,
Crap,
Here's the current gallup stats. riiiiight here and it turns out that over the last 4 years while the tea party was forming from this "large swath of different races" we actually see,
Quote from gallup »
Republicans are overwhelmingly non-Hispanic white, at a level that is significantly higher than the self-identified white percentage of the national adult population. Just 2% of Republicans are black, and 6% are Hispanic.
It's not so much that having an R next to your name is gonna make you a racist, but that characteristics that are common in conservatives are the kinds of characteristics that make racism an easier/more likely proposition. Particularly with an exclusivity, a high level of religiosity and a high level of sexual intolerance (which, again, comes to exclusivity) are all characteristics that are going to instill or exacerbate a certain level of ethnocentrism, as opposed to the more xenophillic views that you see clustered amongst left wing groups where diversity is seen as a benefit.
That's pretty hysterical. Here's someone who thinks right wing exclusivity is racist but left wing exclusivity is not. Here's something even funnier but completely true: exclusivity of any kind, especially ethnocentric exclusivity isn't racist.
Your 'characteristics that are common in conservatives makes racism more likely' idea is junk, and really makes me question just how many conservatives you actually know. I'm personally in touch with hundreds of them, maybe even thousands if I really wanted to take the time to check and I can tell you point blank several things:
1. Conservatives are tired of being accused of being racists just because Liberals cannot equate Conservatism with anything other than racism. Liberals are the ones who go the Uncle Tom, House Negro/Self Hating Jew/Fake Hispanic/Etc. route when a member of that race openly declares themselves a Conservative, there's not one mention of Race Traitor(I don't even know what the racial slang for a sellout White person here would be!) when we're talking about Liberals.
2. Conservatives are just as disgusted with racism as Liberals are but do not share the same views on addressing it. Both agree that teaching against it at the family and community level is the right way to go but Liberals go farther and think legislation and federal policy is needed which is where you get the quota system, where you get assistance programs designed for minorities because of the misguided belief in White Privilege/Institutional Racism. This is a joke. Conservatives disagree with Liberals on an ideological, philosophical level even if individuals aren't able to articulate it. I've had many amazing conversations with people, truly intellectual and far reaching talks with conservatives and then I've had the simple but true to heart "I just want people to love their country, work hard and stop meddling in my business" type of talks. The message in both types is the same: All are welcome, don't tread on me. Or as one lady told me recently: "Don't ask me for handouts but if I see you down on your luck I'll pray for you and help you if I can."
People who truly think Conservatism=Racism might want to actually get out there and meet actual Conservatives. Here's a hint, you won't find them at the Skinhead rally. It is insane that it's almost 2014 and people are still spouting this crap off without even bothering to go out and mingle with these people. You can choose to disagree on an ideological level but it is beyond a gross mischaracterization to say Conservatives are racist. You CAN find racists pretty much everywhere but at the core of things once that's embraced those people place themselves in an entirely different boat and this should be recognized as such by BOTH sides. Racism wed to Conservatism is foolish and completely untrue but makes a good talking and rallying point for the left and if that's your concern, so be it but if the truth is actually your concern you'll find this idea completely wrong if you actually want to see things clearly.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CAMILLA: You, sir, should unmask.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
The article makes a link between stupidity and racists.
But this lead to a larger debate, that Republicans, specifically right wing conservatives, are inherently more racists then Leftist and Democrats.
An old video making the argument that The Tea Party is racist and that there is a neurological reason for their racists behavior. As she says they have a larger "Limbic Brain".
So the question is, is there truth here, or is the simply mud slinging backed up by soft science?
I apologise if I seem like I can't be bothered to track down the precise piece of literature and then the references in that piece of literature, but I think this is an ridiculous suggestion or conclusion to draw. Cheers.
Approaching this from a social science perspective, one simply does not bandy about arguments or meet argument with another argument of another vein. Rather, one would discuss the limitations and study design.
I suspect that the study is poor designed and that the science is simply not there. To suggest that this is soft science is repugnant.
After assessing the science, I would still suspect that all of this is nothing but hot air and hyperbolic, pot-stirring tripe.
It's not so much that having an R next to your name is gonna make you a racist, but that characteristics that are common in conservatives are the kinds of characteristics that make racism an easier/more likely proposition. Particularly with an exclusivity, a high level of religiosity and a high level of sexual intolerance (which, again, comes to exclusivity) are all characteristics that are going to instill or exacerbate a certain level of ethnocentrism, as opposed to the more xenophillic views that you see clustered amongst left wing groups where diversity is seen as a benefit.
That's pretty hysterical. Here's someone who thinks right wing exclusivity is racist but left wing exclusivity is not. Here's something even funnier but completely true: exclusivity of any kind, especially ethnocentric exclusivity isn't racist.
Your 'characteristics that are common in conservatives makes racism more likely' idea is junk, and really makes me question just how many conservatives you actually know. I'm personally in touch with hundreds of them, maybe even thousands if I really wanted to take the time to check and I can tell you point blank several things:
1. Conservatives are tired of being accused of being racists just because Liberals cannot equate Conservatism with anything other than racism. Liberals are the ones who go the Uncle Tom, House Negro/Self Hating Jew/Fake Hispanic/Etc. route when a member of that race openly declares themselves a Conservative, there's not one mention of Race Traitor(I don't even know what the racial slang for a sellout White person here would be!) when we're talking about Liberals.
2. Conservatives are just as disgusted with racism as Liberals are but do not share the same views on addressing it. Both agree that teaching against it at the family and community level is the right way to go but Liberals go farther and think legislation and federal policy is needed which is where you get the quota system, where you get assistance programs designed for minorities because of the misguided belief in White Privilege/Institutional Racism. This is a joke. Conservatives disagree with Liberals on an ideological, philosophical level even if individuals aren't able to articulate it. I've had many amazing conversations with people, truly intellectual and far reaching talks with conservatives and then I've had the simple but true to heart "I just want people to love their country, work hard and stop meddling in my business" type of talks. The message in both types is the same: All are welcome, don't tread on me. Or as one lady told me recently: "Don't ask me for handouts but if I see you down on your luck I'll pray for you and help you if I can."
People who truly think Conservatism=Racism might want to actually get out there and meet actual Conservatives. Here's a hint, you won't find them at the Skinhead rally. It is insane that it's almost 2014 and people are still spouting this crap off without even bothering to go out and mingle with these people. You can choose to disagree on an ideological level but it is beyond a gross mischaracterization to say Conservatives are racist. You CAN find racists pretty much everywhere but at the core of things once that's embraced those people place themselves in an entirely different boat and this should be recognized as such by BOTH sides. Racism wed to Conservatism is foolish and completely untrue but makes a good talking and rallying point for the left and if that's your concern, so be it but if the truth is actually your concern you'll find this idea completely wrong if you actually want to see things clearly.
Exclusively? Edit2: Ok, I misread that. However, your statement still completely misunderstands what I said. I did not say exclusivity is racist. I said a lot of stuff, and gave a conclusion based on that. Take care to read what I actually wrote before launching a tirade. Its a combination deal and there is a difference between the exclusivisity demonstrated in right wing politics compared to left wing politics, check out this (awesome) chart XKCD put together, http://xkcd.com/1127/. What we can see from this, the DW-Nominate scoring, is pretty clear to me. Right-Wing politics is simply more lockstep that left-wing is, at the national level anyway which is the only data I've brought here. It is less willing to work with the other side or disagree with its own party. This is not a supposition. This can be argued simply by pointing at the numbers.
edit: and you have no idea who I know or associate with. So... cheers? I guess. And whats with the skinhead rally thing?
Perhaps you could give me an actual reply and I'll be happy to talk to you, but until then, have fun.
It's not so much that having an R next to your name is gonna make you a racist, but that characteristics that are common in conservatives are the kinds of characteristics that make racism an easier/more likely proposition. Particularly with an exclusivity, a high level of religiosity and a high level of sexual intolerance (which, again, comes to exclusivity) are all characteristics that are going to instill or exacerbate a certain level of ethnocentrism, as opposed to the more xenophillic views that you see clustered amongst left wing groups where diversity is seen as a benefit.
That's pretty hysterical. Here's someone who thinks right wing exclusivity is racist but left wing exclusivity is not. Here's something even funnier but completely true: exclusivity of any kind, especially ethnocentric exclusivity isn't racist.
Your 'characteristics that are common in conservatives makes racism more likely' idea is junk, and really makes me question just how many conservatives you actually know. I'm personally in touch with hundreds of them, maybe even thousands if I really wanted to take the time to check and I can tell you point blank several things:
1. Conservatives are tired of being accused of being racists just because Liberals cannot equate Conservatism with anything other than racism. Liberals are the ones who go the Uncle Tom, House Negro/Self Hating Jew/Fake Hispanic/Etc. route when a member of that race openly declares themselves a Conservative, there's not one mention of Race Traitor(I don't even know what the racial slang for a sellout White person here would be!) when we're talking about Liberals.
2. Conservatives are just as disgusted with racism as Liberals are but do not share the same views on addressing it. Both agree that teaching against it at the family and community level is the right way to go but Liberals go farther and think legislation and federal policy is needed which is where you get the quota system, where you get assistance programs designed for minorities because of the misguided belief in White Privilege/Institutional Racism. This is a joke. Conservatives disagree with Liberals on an ideological, philosophical level even if individuals aren't able to articulate it. I've had many amazing conversations with people, truly intellectual and far reaching talks with conservatives and then I've had the simple but true to heart "I just want people to love their country, work hard and stop meddling in my business" type of talks. The message in both types is the same: All are welcome, don't tread on me. Or as one lady told me recently: "Don't ask me for handouts but if I see you down on your luck I'll pray for you and help you if I can."
People who truly think Conservatism=Racism might want to actually get out there and meet actual Conservatives. Here's a hint, you won't find them at the Skinhead rally. It is insane that it's almost 2014 and people are still spouting this crap off without even bothering to go out and mingle with these people. You can choose to disagree on an ideological level but it is beyond a gross mischaracterization to say Conservatives are racist. You CAN find racists pretty much everywhere but at the core of things once that's embraced those people place themselves in an entirely different boat and this should be recognized as such by BOTH sides. Racism wed to Conservatism is foolish and completely untrue but makes a good talking and rallying point for the left and if that's your concern, so be it but if the truth is actually your concern you'll find this idea completely wrong if you actually want to see things clearly.
Exclusively?
Take care to read what I actually wrote before launching a tirade
edit: and you have no idea who I know or associate with. So... cheers? I guess. And whats with the skinhead rally thing?
Perhaps you could give me an actual reply and I'll be happy to talk to you, but until then, have fun.
I did read it. Words do have exact meanings as well as contextual ones. Words like Exclusivity.
No, I don't have any idea who you associate with, but it's literally impossible you associate with any true to form Conservatives and think what you said without essentially rewriting peoples' viewpoints in your head, so it's no big stretch to say what I did, which by the by wasn't a tirade. The skinhead rally thing was just an illustration of where you'd have to go if you wanted to find quote unquote Conservative Racists, because if you actually spend time with Conservatives, you'll know full well that they're not racist.
So I say again that continuing to equate the two together is just ignorant, whether willful or not.
As another aside, the racial makeup of a political party doesn't matter unless the goal of the party is to deemphasize ideas in favor of identity.
I just saw your edit and am looking at this chart. Let me help you out here. There's really only a handful of Conservatives at the federal level. There's tons of guys who will try to buff up their Conservative Street Cred when it comes time for the election cycle, but day in and day out Conservatives? You have to get out of Washington and out of the Bureaucracy for that.
Part of that is deliberate because Washington Republicans want to stay in good with their Democrat neighbors. They talk good when the cameras are on and pledge a good fight but they're really not different from Washington Democrats at all. So I'm just going to close out this browser because it's really irrelevant to everything I've said and my whole point in things.
CAMILLA: You, sir, should unmask.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
Literally impossible? True to form Conservatives? Where do you get this stuff? It's like you have a the wikipedia page for logical fallacies open. The skinhead thing is mostly weird and ties into that.
The racial makeup of a political party shouldn't matter, but it ends up mattering once we step out of the theoretical world into the actual world. Dog Whistle Politics is a thing. Fear of the "Other" is used to motivate people. We can also infer which party treats minority groups better or worse by how those groups join said parties. Overwhelmingly, minority groups reject republicans.
Literally impossible? True to form Conservatives? Where do you get this stuff? It's like you have a the wikipedia page for logical fallacies open. The skinhead thing is mostly weird and ties into that.
The racial makeup of a political party shouldn't matter, but it ends up mattering once we step out of the theoretical world into the actual world. Dog Whistle Politics is a thing. Fear of the "Other" is used to motivate people. We can also infer which party treats minority groups better or worse by how those groups join said parties. Overwhelmingly, minority groups reject republicans.
Why do you think that is?
Yes, literally impossible. Yes, true to form Conservatives. I didn't stutter.
The point and my assertion still stands. I say with my own experience of near 30 years now that Conservatives and Racism don't mix, and I say that if you actually have spent ANY time whatsoever with these people you'd say that too if you could summon up the temerity to admit it to yourself.
So do you actually have any experience, any time spent with Conservatives in a formal or informal setting? Do you regularly spend time with them, have Conservative friends? Know the extent of both their actions and beliefs? Where do you get that Conservatism=Racism? I think that's the bigger question here.
As far as racism goes have there been problems with this in the past? Sure. Have there been problems with that in the present? Sure. Will there be problems with that in the future? Maybe, assuming isn't something anyone wants to do with a subject like this if they wish to keep a positive view of mankind. But the Outliers while contained in the group aren't indicative of it, on the other hand these Outliers are being told to get their act together or get out, because frankly it's garbage to be casting judgments based on race. NO ONE in the Conservative movement wants anything to do with racists and to think otherwise is wrong.
Dog Whistle Politics goes both ways, you know. I'm willing to grant that there's probably Establishment Republicans who you can hit squarely with that accusation and make it stick but honestly the gap between them and everyday Conservative Americans is so vast that you really do a disservice to them and yourself to not distinguish between the two. The Republican Civil War is true on a few levels, without a doubt. Not so lockstep as you suggested.
Fear of the Other is part and parcel of growing up, of which you see a decided lack of that in many places throughout the world yet at the same time assuming that Fear of the Other is in place is just as bad. Guilty before proven innocent, anyone?
You can infer many things but it doesn't make it so. I worked for a number of years in banking and dealt with people of all races and income brackets. It's a weird day when you go from one customer who is on Food Stamps to the next who happens to be an NBA player. You see a lot and in talking to minorities about politics, elections, voting and that over those years I heard things about that, some of which comes down to what you said: supposed better treatment and "better treatment" being defined as what to these people? Creating access to programs, stickiing up for them in legislative fights. But I also heard things like these:
1. Everyone in my family votes Democrat and has always voted Democrat.
2. My Father/Brother/Cousin/X is in the Union and I want to stand up for Union Rights.
3. I'm against Bush and Cheney, etc etc so I vote Democrat.
These type of things, especially the 1st one. Party affiliation passed from generation to generation, firmly found in those people like it's their blood. No critical thought required, just filial devotion.
On the flipside I once talked to a elderly Cuban man who said probably the single strongest political statement I've ever heard. He was a Republican and we were talking about the 2010 elections and the 2008 Presidential election and the differences in so many things and he says "Well, Democrats want you to eat and Republicans want you to think."
Teach a man to fish, indeed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CAMILLA: You, sir, should unmask.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
You complain about a broad brush while making textbook false equivalencies?
And large swathe? Unless the demographics have massively changed since this gallup poll from 2009 89% of rank and file republicans are non-Hispanic white
Oh,
Wait,
Crap,
Here's the current gallup stats. riiiiight here and it turns out that over the last 4 years while the tea party was forming from this "large swath of different races" we actually see,
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallup Republicans are overwhelmingly non-Hispanic white, at a level that is significantly higher than the self-identified white percentage of the national adult population. Just 2% of Republicans are black, and 6% are Hispanic.
Tell me again about how diverse they are?
no matter how hard you try you cannot equate a political party to racism. if this were true the liberal democrats are the biggest racists in existence.
I do believe that it was the southern democrats and plantation owners that kept the slavery system in this country.
I also do believe that it was a republican that fought to end this and i do believe that it was a republican congress that pasted the civil laws act of th 1960's.
it is quite diverse. there are blacks that get ousted and called race traitors when they are conservative republicans but they exist. all in all hispancs also tend to be conservative for the most part.
that article is a very bad attempt to try and paint a group of people with a logical fallacy.
that fact that you support that logical fallacy is what concerns me.
I do believe that it was the southern democrats and plantation owners that kept the slavery system in this country.
I also do believe that it was a republican that fought to end this and i do believe that it was a republican congress that pasted the civil laws act of the 1960's.
You do know that the political parties switched. When the republican party freed the slaves they were the liberal party. The southern democrats were the conservative party.
There is this thing called the southern strategy were Nixon purposefully sought out the southern racist vote and brought the once southern democrats into the republican party. It was a successful strategy and allowed the republicans to win big elections.
I agree that hispanics are conservative so why do they not vote for the party that lines up with their values.
I'd say most of it is outreach factor, Democrats have been tripping over themselves to cater to them for a long time now as a general part of the whole 'we are the minority party' tenet they've fully embraced. They're also more socially Conservative than they are fiscal though I've read a few things lately that say even that is changing as the numbers of Catholic Hispanics takes a dip and they either become atheists or Muslims.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CAMILLA: You, sir, should unmask.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
Does the right wing have an PR image problem with how they perceive minorities and women?
-Yes.
It's quotes like these that exacerbate that image problem.
"The American people believe English should be the official language of the government. . . . We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto," accorded to Newt Gingrich
"in every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality." -rick santorum
In contrast this tends to line up with the image of how democrats perceive minorities:
When a reporter interrupted Obama with a hostile question, the president admonished him and declared that the policy change is "the right thing to do."
This is how the right wing press responded:
Congress hasn’t passed immigration legislation, but that hasn’t stopped President Obama from issuing directives that grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. --heartland institute
"Show once again his utter disdain for the people and their representatives in Congress, President Obama once again issued executive orders that effectively grant amnesty to illegal aliens in this country. How did he do it this time? By telling Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) to stop following immigration laws if the illegal alien can allege that he or she is the primary provider for a child, legally here or not, or is the parent or guardian of a child who has U.S. citizenship or permanent resident status." --mrconservative.
I'd say most of it is outreach factor, Democrats have been tripping over themselves to cater to them for a long time now as a general part of the whole 'we are the minority party' tenet they've fully embraced. They're also more socially Conservative than they are fiscal though I've read a few things lately that say even that is changing as the numbers of Catholic Hispanics takes a dip and they either become atheists or Muslims.
Rush Limbaugh said on his show one time "the republican party is the party that has a common set of beliefs that holds the party together. The democrats are not a party of common ideals but a collection of minority groups that hate republicans."
My first question after he said this, why do all of these groups, environmentalists, feminists, black americans, hispanic americans, females and any other group I missed hate republicans. If rush is correct; doesn't the republican party shoulder most, if not all of the blame, for alienating these groups.
I'd say most of it is outreach factor, Democrats have been tripping over themselves to cater to them for a long time now as a general part of the whole 'we are the minority party' tenet they've fully embraced. They're also more socially Conservative than they are fiscal though I've read a few things lately that say even that is changing as the numbers of Catholic Hispanics takes a dip and they either become atheists or Muslims.
Rush Limbaugh said on his show one time "the republican party is the party that has a common set of beliefs that holds the party together. The democrats are not a party of common ideals but collection of minority groups that hate republicans."
My first question after he said this, why do all of these groups, environmentalists, feminists, black americans, hispanic americans, females and any other minority I missed hate republicans. If rush is correct; isn't the only real party to blame is the republicans for alienating all of these groups?
No since it's definitely in the Democrats' short and long term interests to mudsling on Republicans as much as possible and cast every single issue as a barnstorming attack on X group, an example of how Identity Politics is totally abusive. This is something that has been increasingly prevalent since the Gingrich shutdown, reached an absolute fever pitch during the 2000 election and continued all the way through Bush's entire Presidency and now due to there being a minority in the Oval Office is something that inevitably hits a little closer to home for those groups.
What happens is every policy opposition is personalized, no matter what it is. Oppose universal healthcare? You hate old people, the poor, minorities, etc etc. Oppose abortion? You hate women, the poor, minorities. It's really never anything dealt with at a philosophical level, the message to their base is always Republicans hate you, want you dead, want you to suffer. Oppose Obama? You're racist. EVERY policy objection results in the most extreme negative stigma.
There's a funny mockup news headline that gets mentioned by Republicans whenever the latest incident of the above happens:
"World Ending Women and Minorities Hardest Hit"
It's funny because it's the penultimate statement of just how over the top and out of sync with reality the Identity Politics platform is. Watching this happen day in and day out and having had to defend myself against these accusations for a long time now has hardened me to the hysteria but it doesn't take away the fact that even if there's some level of philosophical disagreement between the parties the message to the Democrat base and its various groups is always the lowest common denominator form of mudslinging, playground bullying and vitriolic attacks.
All that comes is attacks, and coming from both the media and "official" Democrat talking heads every compromise that is made must be a Republican compromise especially since all the Blue Dogs were purged a short time ago and the ranks became very solidly Liberal. Republicans have their own messaging issues and internal policy stuff that they can fix but when your opposition makes everything into a personal attack and turns every policy objection into fearmongering and murderous hysterics it's not hard to see why low information voters on the left hate Republicans.
In my experience those low info people don't even know anything about what the Republican Party actually believes in, there's a general "they hate the poor" mixed bag statement but they have no idea on any policy platform, thus extremely susceptible to strong defamatory rhetoric.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CAMILLA: You, sir, should unmask.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The article makes a link between stupidity and racists.
But this lead to a larger debate, that Republicans, specifically right wing conservatives, are inherently more racists then Leftist and Democrats.
An old video making the argument that The Tea Party is racist and that there is a neurological reason for their racists behavior. As she says they have a larger "Limbic Brain".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms45EzMR0f8
So the question is, is there truth here, or is the simply mud slinging backed up by soft science?
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
calling liberals loons=not okay
The standard to which the forum moderators apply the rules here.
Believe the hype!
I concur on both counts, to this degree: both strains of thought, if unchecked by reason and evidence, can lead to justifications of racist thought and policy.
Right-wing extreme: Some groups of people are inherently inferior, so no amount of welfare "coddling" will improve their lot.
Left-wing extreme: Some groups of people are so oppressed by power structures that they need all the help they can get... to the extent that they have next to no agency.
At the core it's denial-of-agency, the root of this sort of prejudicial evil. Of course, this is a borderline ludicrous generalization, but I've seen enough instances on both sides to feel comfortable making the conjecture.
Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
First off they're proposing the end result of their tests before they've even tested them. They don't say "we went out and tested social conservatives and these are the outliers we found" they're implicitly saying the goal is to predict prejudice based on lower cognitive ability influenced by right wing thinking. Whats that, a triple negative I hear? I think so.
It presupposes the source of lower cognitive thinking and 'greater' prejudice is right wing ideology before they even start thus calling into question the moral honesty of the entire effort as well as laying the foundations for questions on bias that could skew their results.
It also uses two different samples, UK conservatism and US conservatism, which anyone who knows the two will tell you there's a world of difference between conservatives across the pond. This creates continuity issues that can only be addressed by making assumptions of intellectual and philosophy similarity. US conservatism is miles apart from basically everything found in the UK and Europe, the examples of similarity are due to those particular individuals having a more US or UK/Eurocentric favoring viewpoint of conservatism.
It also "confirms" so called "right wing authoritarianism" as an influence on abstract reasoning on antihomosexual prejudice, a 'confirmation' that can only come from an 'assumption' stated and used as a test factor. By the by, "right wing" and "authoritarianism" in the present day are contradictions in every sense except those embodied in the religious who look at God as their Supreme Authority. Que up your religious whackos hate Gays youtube videos, I'm sure. As time goes on and the Right becomes more Libertarian this entire notion ceases to be.
This article reeks of presupposition and bias. Using the picture they did it shows clearly who their target test subjects are and ultimately what those results will be. As someone who has been to countless Metal concerts I can tell you talking to skinheads is an exercise in dealing with the lowest common denominator, big surprise there. When they are the guinea pigs you subject to tests with a presupposed idea of its outcome, there's no wonder they found the results they did, you'd say they designed the tests with those goals in mind. Also it would have been just as easy to replace those skinheads with Black Power types, or include them side by side as indicative of the problem, but they didn't as the goal was to attack supposed White Privilege/Conservative Ideology and that's it.
Lastly, the notion of 'measuring' prejudice is a crock and is typical of the ideas that give birth to the race war mentality on BOTH sides. Leftists have a tendency to ignore or pretend they had no knowledge of when someone on their side dips in the racism pool and only calls them out once the heat from outside sources most of the time conservatives upset at the double standard applied point it out to sufficient public volume to make it necessary to do so. But they pounce and shriek hysterically when there's any example or perceived example from someone on the Right. The Right has done a pretty good job for quite awhile bringing the hammer down on people who express these kinds of views regardless of their political affiliation and actively works against those within its ranks who take that route. Thinking otherwise shows you really don't have a functional knowledge of what's going on and only rely on internet researchers to tell you.
Thusly, this research is a crock, an exercise in mudslinging and mentality shaping due to preconceived bias.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
Wait a second...
Racists are bad because their brain functions are just naturally inferior to other people's?
Interesting...
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
If I were to make a connection between conservatism and racism, it would probably go along these lines:
"I want my children to grow up with values like my grandfather and his grandfather before him."
"Dude, you know that they kept slaves, right?"
"Except that."
"And they used to lynch gays."
"... well, uh..."
"and that women weren't allowed to vote."
"..."
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Influence no but corrolation yes.
It's not so much that having an R next to your name is gonna make you a racist, but that characteristics that are common in conservatives are the kinds of characteristics that make racism an easier/more likely proposition. Particularly with an exclusivity, a high level of religiosity and a high level of sexual intolerance (which, again, comes to exclusivity) are all characteristics that are going to instill or exacerbate a certain level of ethnocentrism, as opposed to the more xenophillic views that you see clustered amongst left wing groups where diversity is seen as a benefit. Whats the point of diversity when you have the answer? How does one combine diversity with traditionalism? With a certain level of difficulty and I wish that CM could directly make the case to some of the people in Washington with a few paragraphs about ~famous people I've never heard of~ and their ~awesome thing where the summoned captain planet, basically~ but that isn't likely to happen anytime soon (unless I've really misjudged what his general persona is)
this is just another idiotic political backed agenda to try and paint people with a broad brush.
Since also the tea party and the republican party make up a large swath of different races i find it odd that they would resort to calling these people racists.
unless they are just refering to white males then that is racist in and of itself.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
And large swathe? Unless the demographics have massively changed since this gallup poll from 2009 89% of rank and file republicans are non-Hispanic white
Oh,
Wait,
Crap,
Here's the current gallup stats. riiiiight here and it turns out that over the last 4 years while the tea party was forming from this "large swath of different races" we actually see,
Tell me again about how diverse they are?
That's pretty hysterical. Here's someone who thinks right wing exclusivity is racist but left wing exclusivity is not. Here's something even funnier but completely true: exclusivity of any kind, especially ethnocentric exclusivity isn't racist.
Your 'characteristics that are common in conservatives makes racism more likely' idea is junk, and really makes me question just how many conservatives you actually know. I'm personally in touch with hundreds of them, maybe even thousands if I really wanted to take the time to check and I can tell you point blank several things:
1. Conservatives are tired of being accused of being racists just because Liberals cannot equate Conservatism with anything other than racism. Liberals are the ones who go the Uncle Tom, House Negro/Self Hating Jew/Fake Hispanic/Etc. route when a member of that race openly declares themselves a Conservative, there's not one mention of Race Traitor(I don't even know what the racial slang for a sellout White person here would be!) when we're talking about Liberals.
2. Conservatives are just as disgusted with racism as Liberals are but do not share the same views on addressing it. Both agree that teaching against it at the family and community level is the right way to go but Liberals go farther and think legislation and federal policy is needed which is where you get the quota system, where you get assistance programs designed for minorities because of the misguided belief in White Privilege/Institutional Racism. This is a joke. Conservatives disagree with Liberals on an ideological, philosophical level even if individuals aren't able to articulate it. I've had many amazing conversations with people, truly intellectual and far reaching talks with conservatives and then I've had the simple but true to heart "I just want people to love their country, work hard and stop meddling in my business" type of talks. The message in both types is the same: All are welcome, don't tread on me. Or as one lady told me recently: "Don't ask me for handouts but if I see you down on your luck I'll pray for you and help you if I can."
People who truly think Conservatism=Racism might want to actually get out there and meet actual Conservatives. Here's a hint, you won't find them at the Skinhead rally. It is insane that it's almost 2014 and people are still spouting this crap off without even bothering to go out and mingle with these people. You can choose to disagree on an ideological level but it is beyond a gross mischaracterization to say Conservatives are racist. You CAN find racists pretty much everywhere but at the core of things once that's embraced those people place themselves in an entirely different boat and this should be recognized as such by BOTH sides. Racism wed to Conservatism is foolish and completely untrue but makes a good talking and rallying point for the left and if that's your concern, so be it but if the truth is actually your concern you'll find this idea completely wrong if you actually want to see things clearly.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
I apologise if I seem like I can't be bothered to track down the precise piece of literature and then the references in that piece of literature, but I think this is an ridiculous suggestion or conclusion to draw. Cheers.
Approaching this from a social science perspective, one simply does not bandy about arguments or meet argument with another argument of another vein. Rather, one would discuss the limitations and study design.
I suspect that the study is poor designed and that the science is simply not there. To suggest that this is soft science is repugnant.
After assessing the science, I would still suspect that all of this is nothing but hot air and hyperbolic, pot-stirring tripe.
Exclusively? Edit2: Ok, I misread that. However, your statement still completely misunderstands what I said. I did not say exclusivity is racist. I said a lot of stuff, and gave a conclusion based on that. Take care to read what I actually wrote before launching a tirade. Its a combination deal and there is a difference between the exclusivisity demonstrated in right wing politics compared to left wing politics, check out this (awesome) chart XKCD put together, http://xkcd.com/1127/. What we can see from this, the DW-Nominate scoring, is pretty clear to me. Right-Wing politics is simply more lockstep that left-wing is, at the national level anyway which is the only data I've brought here. It is less willing to work with the other side or disagree with its own party. This is not a supposition. This can be argued simply by pointing at the numbers.
edit: and you have no idea who I know or associate with. So... cheers? I guess. And whats with the skinhead rally thing?
Perhaps you could give me an actual reply and I'll be happy to talk to you, but until then, have fun.
I did read it. Words do have exact meanings as well as contextual ones. Words like Exclusivity.
No, I don't have any idea who you associate with, but it's literally impossible you associate with any true to form Conservatives and think what you said without essentially rewriting peoples' viewpoints in your head, so it's no big stretch to say what I did, which by the by wasn't a tirade. The skinhead rally thing was just an illustration of where you'd have to go if you wanted to find quote unquote Conservative Racists, because if you actually spend time with Conservatives, you'll know full well that they're not racist.
So I say again that continuing to equate the two together is just ignorant, whether willful or not.
As another aside, the racial makeup of a political party doesn't matter unless the goal of the party is to deemphasize ideas in favor of identity.
I just saw your edit and am looking at this chart. Let me help you out here. There's really only a handful of Conservatives at the federal level. There's tons of guys who will try to buff up their Conservative Street Cred when it comes time for the election cycle, but day in and day out Conservatives? You have to get out of Washington and out of the Bureaucracy for that.
Part of that is deliberate because Washington Republicans want to stay in good with their Democrat neighbors. They talk good when the cameras are on and pledge a good fight but they're really not different from Washington Democrats at all. So I'm just going to close out this browser because it's really irrelevant to everything I've said and my whole point in things.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
Literally impossible? True to form Conservatives? Where do you get this stuff? It's like you have a the wikipedia page for logical fallacies open. The skinhead thing is mostly weird and ties into that.
The racial makeup of a political party shouldn't matter, but it ends up mattering once we step out of the theoretical world into the actual world. Dog Whistle Politics is a thing. Fear of the "Other" is used to motivate people. We can also infer which party treats minority groups better or worse by how those groups join said parties. Overwhelmingly, minority groups reject republicans.
Why do you think that is?
Yes, literally impossible. Yes, true to form Conservatives. I didn't stutter.
The point and my assertion still stands. I say with my own experience of near 30 years now that Conservatives and Racism don't mix, and I say that if you actually have spent ANY time whatsoever with these people you'd say that too if you could summon up the temerity to admit it to yourself.
So do you actually have any experience, any time spent with Conservatives in a formal or informal setting? Do you regularly spend time with them, have Conservative friends? Know the extent of both their actions and beliefs? Where do you get that Conservatism=Racism? I think that's the bigger question here.
It's really easy to find examples here and there of people who peddle racist crap in pretty much every circle, but they become what math guys call an Outlier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomaly_detection
As far as racism goes have there been problems with this in the past? Sure. Have there been problems with that in the present? Sure. Will there be problems with that in the future? Maybe, assuming isn't something anyone wants to do with a subject like this if they wish to keep a positive view of mankind. But the Outliers while contained in the group aren't indicative of it, on the other hand these Outliers are being told to get their act together or get out, because frankly it's garbage to be casting judgments based on race. NO ONE in the Conservative movement wants anything to do with racists and to think otherwise is wrong.
Dog Whistle Politics goes both ways, you know. I'm willing to grant that there's probably Establishment Republicans who you can hit squarely with that accusation and make it stick but honestly the gap between them and everyday Conservative Americans is so vast that you really do a disservice to them and yourself to not distinguish between the two. The Republican Civil War is true on a few levels, without a doubt. Not so lockstep as you suggested.
Fear of the Other is part and parcel of growing up, of which you see a decided lack of that in many places throughout the world yet at the same time assuming that Fear of the Other is in place is just as bad. Guilty before proven innocent, anyone?
You can infer many things but it doesn't make it so. I worked for a number of years in banking and dealt with people of all races and income brackets. It's a weird day when you go from one customer who is on Food Stamps to the next who happens to be an NBA player. You see a lot and in talking to minorities about politics, elections, voting and that over those years I heard things about that, some of which comes down to what you said: supposed better treatment and "better treatment" being defined as what to these people? Creating access to programs, stickiing up for them in legislative fights. But I also heard things like these:
1. Everyone in my family votes Democrat and has always voted Democrat.
2. My Father/Brother/Cousin/X is in the Union and I want to stand up for Union Rights.
3. I'm against Bush and Cheney, etc etc so I vote Democrat.
These type of things, especially the 1st one. Party affiliation passed from generation to generation, firmly found in those people like it's their blood. No critical thought required, just filial devotion.
On the flipside I once talked to a elderly Cuban man who said probably the single strongest political statement I've ever heard. He was a Republican and we were talking about the 2010 elections and the 2008 Presidential election and the differences in so many things and he says "Well, Democrats want you to eat and Republicans want you to think."
Teach a man to fish, indeed.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
no matter how hard you try you cannot equate a political party to racism. if this were true the liberal democrats are the biggest racists in existence.
I do believe that it was the southern democrats and plantation owners that kept the slavery system in this country.
I also do believe that it was a republican that fought to end this and i do believe that it was a republican congress that pasted the civil laws act of th 1960's.
it is quite diverse. there are blacks that get ousted and called race traitors when they are conservative republicans but they exist. all in all hispancs also tend to be conservative for the most part.
that article is a very bad attempt to try and paint a group of people with a logical fallacy.
that fact that you support that logical fallacy is what concerns me.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
The absence of stability causes desperation
You do know that the political parties switched. When the republican party freed the slaves they were the liberal party. The southern democrats were the conservative party.
There is this thing called the southern strategy were Nixon purposefully sought out the southern racist vote and brought the once southern democrats into the republican party. It was a successful strategy and allowed the republicans to win big elections.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
I agree that hispanics are conservative so why do they not vote for the party that lines up with their values.
I'd say most of it is outreach factor, Democrats have been tripping over themselves to cater to them for a long time now as a general part of the whole 'we are the minority party' tenet they've fully embraced. They're also more socially Conservative than they are fiscal though I've read a few things lately that say even that is changing as the numbers of Catholic Hispanics takes a dip and they either become atheists or Muslims.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!
-No.
Does the right wing have an PR image problem with how they perceive minorities and women?
-Yes.
It's quotes like these that exacerbate that image problem.
"The American people believe English should be the official language of the government. . . . We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto," accorded to Newt Gingrich
"in every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality." -rick santorum
In contrast this tends to line up with the image of how democrats perceive minorities:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/15/politics/immigration/index.html
Obama administration to stop deporting some young illegal immigrants
from the article:
When a reporter interrupted Obama with a hostile question, the president admonished him and declared that the policy change is "the right thing to do."
This is how the right wing press responded:
Congress hasn’t passed immigration legislation, but that hasn’t stopped President Obama from issuing directives that grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. --heartland institute
"Show once again his utter disdain for the people and their representatives in Congress, President Obama once again issued executive orders that effectively grant amnesty to illegal aliens in this country. How did he do it this time? By telling Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) to stop following immigration laws if the illegal alien can allege that he or she is the primary provider for a child, legally here or not, or is the parent or guardian of a child who has U.S. citizenship or permanent resident status." --mrconservative.
Rush Limbaugh said on his show one time "the republican party is the party that has a common set of beliefs that holds the party together. The democrats are not a party of common ideals but a collection of minority groups that hate republicans."
My first question after he said this, why do all of these groups, environmentalists, feminists, black americans, hispanic americans, females and any other group I missed hate republicans. If rush is correct; doesn't the republican party shoulder most, if not all of the blame, for alienating these groups.
No since it's definitely in the Democrats' short and long term interests to mudsling on Republicans as much as possible and cast every single issue as a barnstorming attack on X group, an example of how Identity Politics is totally abusive. This is something that has been increasingly prevalent since the Gingrich shutdown, reached an absolute fever pitch during the 2000 election and continued all the way through Bush's entire Presidency and now due to there being a minority in the Oval Office is something that inevitably hits a little closer to home for those groups.
What happens is every policy opposition is personalized, no matter what it is. Oppose universal healthcare? You hate old people, the poor, minorities, etc etc. Oppose abortion? You hate women, the poor, minorities. It's really never anything dealt with at a philosophical level, the message to their base is always Republicans hate you, want you dead, want you to suffer. Oppose Obama? You're racist. EVERY policy objection results in the most extreme negative stigma.
There's a funny mockup news headline that gets mentioned by Republicans whenever the latest incident of the above happens:
"World Ending Women and Minorities Hardest Hit"
It's funny because it's the penultimate statement of just how over the top and out of sync with reality the Identity Politics platform is. Watching this happen day in and day out and having had to defend myself against these accusations for a long time now has hardened me to the hysteria but it doesn't take away the fact that even if there's some level of philosophical disagreement between the parties the message to the Democrat base and its various groups is always the lowest common denominator form of mudslinging, playground bullying and vitriolic attacks.
All that comes is attacks, and coming from both the media and "official" Democrat talking heads every compromise that is made must be a Republican compromise especially since all the Blue Dogs were purged a short time ago and the ranks became very solidly Liberal. Republicans have their own messaging issues and internal policy stuff that they can fix but when your opposition makes everything into a personal attack and turns every policy objection into fearmongering and murderous hysterics it's not hard to see why low information voters on the left hate Republicans.
In my experience those low info people don't even know anything about what the Republican Party actually believes in, there's a general "they hate the poor" mixed bag statement but they have no idea on any policy platform, thus extremely susceptible to strong defamatory rhetoric.
STRANGER: Indeed?
CASSILDA: Indeed it's time. We all have laid aside disguise but you.
STRANGER: I wear no mask.
CAMILLA: (Terrified, aside to Cassilda.) No mask? No mask!