So it’s the 53% of white women who delivered Trump the vote? Not the black men and women who voted for him? Or the Hispanic men and women? Or the independents who decided to vote republican instead of democrat like they did in one or both of the past two elections? Or the democrats within the party involved in damaging Bernie Sanders campaign? I could go on and on. You can compare statistics from the last election or the one before and make an argument (like you would have done before I make this statement) that it’s the difference bn the % white females that voted democrat last election who voted republican this election….or some variety of generalization that puts all of some group that criticizing allows you to still maintain the narrative that you likely wear as a mask like identity. The problem is those stats when compared assume no variation in the individuals that make up every single number in the %. As if every individual who makes up a single number of the total % of any other sex or gender or race or political group or nationality or or religion or system of belief etc etc was 100% perfectly consistent with how they voted this election compared to the previous 4 years or the 4 years prior to that. Pre-Socratic Greek philosopher, Heraclitus said, “ A man (or woman) never steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man” -Heraclitus
That is referring to the individual as an ever changing and often unity of contradictions… referring to the concept of “everything flows”. Some of the greatest philosophers of antiquity would rightly argue for the dialectic method of debate rather than a competition to be 100% right in the face of some opposing persons or group who is then 100% wrong and in need of ridicule as if that’s the way to further any debate or do little more than get a cheap thrill for the perpetrator from the drug of condescension. Their can be important value in the unity of opposites and the everflowing nature of any relationship. Yet you seem to take every opportunity to categorize into some perceived monolithic group every one who doesn’t agree with you, while at the same time criticizing “the other side” (whatever that means during the whim in question) for taking any potentially similar stand when referring to another groups choices. And of course you’re going to excuse your own bad and easily arguable sexist or prejudice behavior because you have a handful of poorly worded and expressed opinions from women who probably didn’t realize their words would be scoured over for inconsistencies, when they gave their opinions. Of course you’ll be doing so while completely ignoring how simple it is to make any video of inconsistent uninformed opinions about any group of people. Just look to YouTube and you’ll find dozens if not hundreds of videos who’s directors have chosen to highlight only tur 6–7 opinions that suit the narrative of the political inclination of the audience they get paid to advertise to…while occasionally cleverly tossing in the token opposing opinion for effect.
Truth is People are Messy and statistics are overused and under analyzed and while many times valuable for getting an over view of group patterns of behavior, they are easily manipulated and not meant to be the final analysis. They are meant to be the beginning. People are often full of contradictions and that goes for even the most intellectually proficient of us all….maybe even more so! I surely am and that bundle of contradictions while making sense to myself bc I live my life and know the inter workings of my mind and the experiences and thoughts that led to those beliefs or the choices in question. Representing the daily struggle to abide by principles that keep me consistent to certain principles even when I’m contradicted and not some easily categorized simple being that fits perfectly into everyone else’s idea of what identity politics category my beliefs and opinions should neatly fit into. Maybe everyone isn’t as simple as you seem to be to fit so neatly into some identity that grants you the entitlement to dictate who should be ridiculed and who shouldn’t without deeper analysis and regardless of similar contradictions. Also without consideration of the fact that no group lacks members identified with that group who also have poorly worded inconsistent opinions. But I’m glad to see you made it easy to criticize your article by leaving hypocritical contradictions of your own mixed nicely with the very same snarky tone that pushed so many away from the party you seem to support and towards Trump in the first place. I guess maybe you should look at your self now and maybe write an article of how people who deliver such predictable opinions to the public have someone they forgot to blame to add to the list. Now I doubt this will really influence much self analysis but the mental image of you trying to get a word in while arguing with the image in the mirror leaves me with a peaceful chuckle.
Btw to be fair if you want to get into statistics…considering the average IQ is 100 with a standard deviation of 15….so basically 68.26% of the population are bn 85–115, and 34.13% are bn 100 and 85 and 15.87% are below 85. Now mentally disabled is identified as an IQ of below 70 and gifted is generally above 134–142 depending on the source. So gifted is further away from the mean than mentally disabled is from the mean (mean of 100). This means that you may actually be close right about the number 53%! You are just wrong to apply it to any race of women alone. Bc the average AMERICAN PERSON (let’s let go of the identity politics a second if you can handle it) according to IQ is closer to being mentally disabled aka “an idiot” than intellectually gifted….then technically a large number of any group may seem to be idiots from the standpoint of the 2% or so who have more developed abstract cognitive abilities…..but who’s counting? Guess you could post an IQ score for me to calculate where you fall within that range ;D