Printable View
In Illinois, Trump won the conservative vote (36% to Cruz 29%). In Michigan, very conservative (38 Cruz, 35 Trump) and somewhat conservative (23 Cruz, 37 Trump). Trump's doing very well with the conservatives. How else would he have won the entire SE?Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
I guess it's because my friends are college educated?Quote:
Originally Posted by rmt
You libs are such pussies :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
:cry Trump2016 chalk writing :cry
:cry triggered :cry
:cry micro aggressions :cry
:cry remove immediately :cry
As anyone who has spent five seconds at a college can attest, sidewalks covered in chalk messages are a pretty common fixture of the campus scene. But Emory University students had their delicate worldview shaken by the sudden appearance of one specific chalk message, "Trump 2016," all over campus. The students were so traumatized that they stormed the offices of Emory President James Wagner, demanding answers and feelings-protection. Wagner sent an email to campus in a desperate and wildly unnecessary effort to make everyone feel safe again. Here is the whole thing, with commentary:
Dear Emory Community,
Yesterday I received a visit from 40 to 50 student protesters upset by the unexpected chalkings on campus sidewalks and some buildings yesterday morning, in this case referencing Donald Trump. The students shared with me their concern that these messages were meant to intimidate rather than merely to advocate for a particular candidate, having appeared outside of the context of a Georgia election or campus campaign activity. During our conversation, they voiced their genuine concern and pain in the face of this perceived intimidation.
The election in Georgia may be over, but it is very much the case that there is still an ongoing national conversation about who the Republican Party nominee will be, and, ultimately, who will win the White House. Trump is one such contender. It's not remotely clear—nor even plausible—that the message "Trump 2016" was non-political in tone (and it shouldn't matter). Students who voiced "genuine concern and pain in the face of this "perceived intimidation" should have been told their perception is at odds with reality, does not supersede other people's free expression rights, and should be recalibrated if "Trump 2016" causes them actual pain. Sadly, this is not what the president told them.
After meeting with our students, I cannot dismiss their expression of feelings and concern as motivated only by political preference or over-sensitivity. Instead, the students with whom I spoke heard a message, not about political process or candidate choice, but instead about values regarding diversity and respect that clash with Emory’s own.
It should be perfectly acceptable to challenge "values regarding diversity," even if these values are deeply held by both students and the institution itself.
As an academic community, we must value and encourage the expression of ideas, vigorous debate, speech, dissent, and protest. At the same time, our commitment to respect, civility, and inclusion calls us to provide a safe environment that inspires and supports courageous inquiry. It is important that we recognize, listen to, and honor the concerns of these students, as well as faculty and staff who may feel similarly.
If the institution rushes to the emotional defense of thin-skinned students, can it really be said to support "courageous inquiry"?
On the heels of work begun by students last fall and advanced last month through the Racial Justice Retreat and subsequent working groups, Emory is taking a number of significant steps:
• Immediate refinements to certain policy and procedural deficiencies (for example, our bias incident reporting and response process);
• Regular and structured opportunities for difficult dialogues (like the Transforming Community Project of several years ago);
• A formal process to institutionalize identification, review, and addressing of social justice opportunities and issues; and
• Commitment to an annual retreat to renew our efforts.
Reminding students that they can sic the campus grievance bureaucracy on people who offend them further weakens Emory's stated commitment to free speech.
To keep moving forward, we must continue to engage in rich and meaningful dialogue around critical issues facing our nation and our society. I learn from every conversation like the one that took place yesterday and know that further conversations are necessary. More than that, such discussions should lead to action that continues to foster a more just and inclusive Emory.
Sincerely,
Jim Wagner
To recap: Some Emory students are so fragile, and terrified of innocuous political speech they dislike, that they immediately sought comfort from campus authority figures. These figures, of course, were more than willing to coddle them.
It's enough to make you want to grab a piece of chalk and scrawl "Trump 2016" on an Emory sidewalk, huh? No wonder so many non-liberal students are cheering for Trump—not because they like him, but because he represents glorious resistance to the noxious political correctness and censorship that has come to define the modern college experience.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/03/22/at...g-trump-2016-o
Pretty sure Trump is leading in every category across the board for registered republicans.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Well, I'm college educated, very conservative and voted for Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Because comedy is, in part, about transgressions of that sort... but it's not comedians I'm talking about, you know exactly the type I'm talking about...Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Do you have a link to any recent polls showing that? Most political analysis I have seen suggests the opposite. Has that changed since Little Marco dropped out?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSanityAnnex
Define total overreaction to Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Illinois exit polls: http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/il/RepQuote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Michigan exit polls: http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/polls/mi/Rep
Don't think Arizona or Utah had exit polls.
No link. Heard on the radio on my way home today. It was for registered republicans.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
See post #78 :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Thanks. Looks like he eeked out an advantage over Cruz in Illinois and lost to Kasich in Michigan.Quote:
Originally Posted by rmt
Yeah, that's an overreaction. College political groups often think everyone else is retarded. But Trump being portrayed as a white nationalist is justified.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSanityAnnex
I'm not even a Trump supporter and I don't see the white nationalist label being legit unless you buy into the media smear (both sides) campaign.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Just taking him at his words.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSanityAnnex
The establishment republicans are almost as bad as the establishment democrats. Been that way for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy
They are just now pissing you off?
Have you been asleep at the wheel?
If we're taking people by their words you'd be a top 10 racist here easily, possibly top 5 :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
What's wrong wish wanting clear separation of the sexes? I like a woman who can be my equal, but still sexy! These women who want equality, then use children as excuses, or think they have to shed looking like a woman have no appeal to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by clambake
Race baiters will call anything racist that they can.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
What do you expect from pathetic people?
Did he say that? Or was he referring to immigrants?Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
I don't see it that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
America is too PC. people will find any little reason to find fault in innocent remarks.
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by TheSanityAnnex
Consider Clinton,' former Bush official tells hawkish Republicans
Source: Washington Examiner
<snip>Quote:
A former Bush administration official said Wednesday that single-issue Republican voters, who plan to select a candidate based on their foreign policy, should consider likely Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton if Donald Trump is her opponent come November.
"If you care about that bucket of social issues, pro-life, what not, you can't make the leap to Hillary Clinton," Nicolle Wallace, who served as President George W. Bush's communications chief and a senior adviser to the McCain-Palin campaign in 2008, told MSNBC in an interview Wednesday morning.
"But if foreign policy is how you vote, if that is your central concern, if counterterrorism is what worries you, how do you not consider Hillary Clinton in November?" she added.
Earlier in the program, Wallace said "the conversations happening in private with Republican consultants is that if you are not a social conservative, there is less and less rationale for hardened opposition to Hillary Clinton."
Read more: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/co...rticle/2586644
There is Captain Republican playing the PC card. :cry Can't ever talk about racism :cryQuote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
:cry reverse racism :cryQuote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum