Sunday, November 13, 2016

Why Muslim Woman Votes For Trump?

This woman is incredible !!!  She gets it !!!

WP Why Muslim Woman Voted for Trump
CNN Woman being Interviewed

Joel is trying to explain over here that...
"Here's a link that describes it a whole lot better than I can.
Cinemax Theory of Racism 
If you can overlook racism, misogyny, homophobia, and xenophobia to get what you want, then you are choosing racism, misogyny, homophobia, and xenophobia."
So by his logic this immigrant Muslim woman is apparently a closet...  racist, misogynistic homophobic xenophobe... Or his idea could be all wet.

Here was my view:
"I agree. Some folks here want to blame the loss on Hillary being a flawed candidate... I would have preferred to have voted for Clinton if her platform was not so far Left, Race / Sex based and politically correct... 
The number of times that negative labels like xenophobe, misogynist, sexist, racist, bigot, deplorable, etc are applied to our hard working fellow citizens is terrible and of course it has consequences." G2A


Anonymous said...

Really, the article illuminates one of the many problems Democrats had in this election. We think in categories way too much, in this case, the Muslim category, as if religion defined individuals, and of course it doesn't. The rationale for voting for Trump is the same as for anyone else. While Trump has had some rude things to say about Muslims, he is also indifferent to religion and that's something many religious minorities will find appealing. Certainly Trump is the least religious president we will ever had in America.


John said...

I liked her point about the politically correct Liberals preventing fact based discussions, analysis and solutions from occurring.

One of my favorite examples:
Don Lemon Statements and Response
The Grio Don Lemon

Just like this Muslim Woman Immigrant, Don Lemon tries to state facts and about people and problems in his race. And the Liberals belittle and attack. I am so puzzled how folks think we are to fix problems without clearly describing them?

Anonymous said...

I don't know if I have prevented a discussion. In terms of self reflection, I generally feel I discuss things way too much.


Laurie said...

The cinemax link is an excellent analogy. The words I have used to describe the Trump vote are because of /in support of racism or in spite of Trump's racism/xenophobia. He clearly had significant numbers of both kinds of voters.

As for the Muslim women who voted for Trump I just ignore outliers. I feel confident the Muslim vote was ~95 % anti Trump.

John said...

Sometimes your comments are vague and aloof in my opinion, sometimes they are clear and very well thought out. But never do you attack people who think differently with vilifying derogatory terms like many Liberals seem to enjoy doing.

They would be appalled if Conservatives referred to their constituents by those types of labels. And yet many Liberals have no problem stereotyping, being prejudiced and applying terms like " racist, misogynistic homophobic xenophobe..." I just find it very hypocritical...

John said...

Show me the data...

Please remember that successful capitalistic Muslim people likely supported Trump, just like ~30% of the Hispanics did. Do you really think all Muslims are one issue voters who want to take a chance on a few radical Islamic terrorists getting into the country and ruining the good thing they have going here?

The is nothing racist, xenophobic, or anti-immigrant about it. There are 100's of millions of desperate people from all over the world who want in to the USA. Taking in from the pool that may contain some radicalized people simply is irrational.

Let's run a test. I'll put out 2 buckets of candy.
Each bucket contains 1,000 pieces of candy.

The difference is that I tainted one piece of candy in bucket #2 with a poison.

Now you are going to take 30 pieces of candy for the students in your class.

Which bucket will you avoid? #1 or #2?

Anonymous said...

And yet many Liberals have no problem stereotyping

I know I stereotype a lot. I have talked with hundreds, possibly thousands of people about political stuff, and it's easy to do almost an automatic thing. While I do stereotype a lot, I have often found that my stereotypes have turned out to be wrong.

Quite honestly, I have never thought of that as a liberal or conservative thing. I think people who meet a lot of people have a tendency to try to size them up, and interact with them accordingly.

However, on the other hand, perhaps after the initial sizing up, it's very important to interact with people in a personal way, to get past the initial stereotype. I don't think that's a liberal or conservative thing either.


John said...

This is an interesting and grounding piece. I really like the the last lady's view.

MP Interviews Muslims

John said...

I agree with you... It is a human thing...

However in my history it is the Liberal commenters who seem to believe they are immune to this normal affliction. Look at how they have commented regarding people who voted for Trump. One would swear that they think we all have KKK garb stored in our closet... And that we want to keep our women bare foot and pregnant...

Which is humorous since I work in a very diverse company, and deal with people from around the world every day. And am surrounded by women at home.

Anonymous said...

However in my history it is the Liberal commenters who seem to believe they are immune to this normal affliction

Liberal commentators or liberals? I don't know, it seems to me we are into guilt quite a bit. I think now we are doing a lot more soul searching about these attitudes than Donald Trump, for example. I know my own attitude toward race and prejudice is something I think a lot about. I know I am not without prejudice. My KKK garments aren't in the closet, but I couldn't swear to you that there isn't a sheet or two buried deep in the attic. Conservatives sense that guilt among liberals and they play on it.


John said...


Here is part of a response I gave Edward over here.

"Spouting generalizations that simply go to supporting stereotypes is not helpful: Republicans = hardworking patriots, Democrats = lazy losers." Edward

"By the way, I think both parties have their problems. I don't think the Democratic Party supporters are lazy. I just think they find it more gratifying to buy people fish with other people's money, than to force the people to learn how to fish and be independent. As a Father, I love to buy my daughters things occasionally. However I also know that as a responsible parent it is more important that I help them learn self control and how to be independent adults." G2A

As I learned in Atlas Shrugged, typically it is the Liberals who try to guilt the Successful into giving more. And it is the "Just Do It" attitude of the successful people that make them susceptible to these attacks.

Anonymous said...

As I learned in Atlas Shrugged, typically it is the Liberals who try to guilt the Successful into giving more.

I don't think Ayn Rand was very familiar with how charities work. The successful, liberal and conservative, guilt each other. One of the strange things about Trump was his almost total absence from New York's charitable scene. Rich New Yorkers network each other through charity. Trump, possibly because of cash flow problems, never participated in that world, and as a result remains largely unknown in the world of the wealthy and the successful.


Anonymous said...

"So by his logic this immigrant Muslim woman is apparently a closet... racist, misogynistic homophobic xenophobe..."

No. You didn't understand at all. But I'm done educating the willfully ignorant.


John said...

Thank you for giving up. I think it wrong for you to stereotype, pre-judge and try to demean Trump and his supporters over a month before he is even in office.

Let's see what actually happens.

Now is anyone here excited to take candy from Jar #2 home to your family, friends, students? Or are you all a bunch of candy xenophobes?

Anonymous said...

Metaphors are always hard for me to understand. They always add an additional level of complexity to any situation, the opposite of what they try to do.

Election wise I always trust the inherent wisdom of the voters. It's up to them to get it right, and I trust their judgment, even when I disagree with it. This time, they chose Hillary. If only the founders had the same trust in America and it's people as I do.


Sean said...

"Now is anyone here excited to take candy from Jar #2 home to your family, friends, students? Or are you all a bunch of candy xenophobes?"

Again, let's dispose with the stupid parables and the "I get my political beliefs from a novel" nonsense and talk about some facts.

Immigrants -- legal or illegal -- commit crimes at lower rates that those born in the U.S. The existing screening process is already highly extensive and takes 18-24 months for most (and often longer than that for Syrians because there are additional steps). Less than 1% of the refugees originally screened by the UN get referred to the U.S. for resettlement, and as of the end of 2015, only about 10% of those folks cleared the additional U.S. security checks detailed below.

White House: Screening Process for Refugees

Despite all of these checks, there's no way you can 100% assure that the candy in *either* jar is not poisoned. So we do our best to live up to our ideals as a country and accept that in a free society that we take some risks (after all, isn't that what you all tell us when a white kid shoots up a school or a church?).

John said...

What do you call that again... False Equivalency...

Please remember that "white kid" is a citizen of the USA. We have him no matter what.


You are advocating adding non-citizens from the higher risk pool for ideological reasons. Even though there are plenty of equally desperate and needy candidates available from lower risk pools.

I am happy to pick from Jar #1. Maybe some Hindus from India, Christians from Ethiopia, or ???

Sean said...

Where are all the Trump supporters who aren't racist, sexist, homophobic and xenophobic complaining about putting a guy like Steve Bannon in the West Wing?

Sean said...

"Hindus from India"

There's a long history of attacks by Indian Hindus on Christians and Muslims.

John said...

I am guessing Trump will end up with quite the eclectic group of advisors. I don't know enough about Bannon to judge. All I know is that the Liberals who dislike Trump also dislike Bannon. Time will tell if they are paranoid or Trump will need to say "You're Fired"...

I guess we are left with the Jews, Christians, Agnostics and Atheists then... What about Buddhists and Taoists?

Sean said...

How about we live up to our creed as Americans and not use religious tests at all?

Sean said...

"I don't know enough about Bannon to judge. "

Well, you should do some legwork and find out what you voted for, then.

John said...

Because unfortunately some Muslims are trapped in certain teachings of Muhammad that encourage them to eliminate non-Muslims.

If there are Christian sects out there who wanted to destroy the "Great Satan". (ie USA) I would take great care before letting them in also. And I would happily kick out that idiot who burns Korans if we could. Unfortunately he is an existing citizen...

John said...

I didn't vote for Bannon... Was he running for some office?

Sean said...

You voted for the guy who was being advised by Bannon. It wasn't a secret.

John said...

Let me repeat... The people who dislike Trump seem to dislike Bannon... I will happily give them both a chance.

I didn't see any Democrats freaking out when Obama got advice from some of the Far Left individuals.

It seems he has the appropriate education, and a military background.

Anonymous said...

So, now you'll also accept White Supremacists because they have "appropriate education and a military background".

Christian Republicans are so fascinating.


John said...

So you are apparently pretty sure that Bannon has that KKK outfit in his closet...

SNOPES Viewpoint seems Different

Sean said...

"I didn't see any Democrats freaking out when Obama got advice from some of the Far Left individuals."

Well, this doesn't work on many levels. Let's look at two of them.

For starters, Obama's first-term Cabinet was widely praised for its moderate makeup. Two Republicans (Bob Gates and Ray LaHood) served on the Cabinet and a third (Judd Gregg) accepted a Cabinet post before changing his mind. The most "no" votes a member of said Cabinet got in confirmation hearings was Tim Geithner's 34.

Second, you're the one who keeps going on and on about how you don't support Trump when he goes off on his more questionable tangents. So when he goes down that path, you need to call him out. Otherwise, you own it. Bannon has a long history of race-baiting and anti-Semitism.

Sean said...

"The people who dislike Trump seem to dislike Bannon."

If dislike of Trump were the critical factor here, wouldn't we see all sorts of complaining about Reince Priebus as chief of staff? Doesn't the fact that the complaints (coming from people on both sides of the aisle, incidentally) are solely about Bannon indicate that something else is at work here?