Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Just now, tantric superman said:

So I will assume that you answer is yes, if she had gained admission to a school or gotten some kind of set aside, that would be a black mark against her -- something that would be wrong, unfair, and dishonest.

Yes — if she lied to get a job, that would be a mark against her.  For example, if she claimed official membership in a tribe to get a job.   Or said she was NA on a federal form that required some sort of formal status, like ancestry based on the rolls.   Something like that would be wrongful for sure. 

[GRHorn 105]

She knew she was AT BEST 1/32 Native American all along.

In those circumstances it is dishonest and self serving to sit back and watch as they keep pumping you up as woman of color. It’s ok to admit that. The real question is what do real minorities think of that in primary. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

#mesioux

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

Woman of color?  Dafuq?

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

Woman of color?  Dafuq?

Yeah, paleface white.....

[horncyclist 1,384]

Assuming she did knowingly misrepresented her heritage -- and all evidence suggests the opposite that she honestly believed what she claimed -- why is that significant when we have Trump who lies every other sentence? What the fuck is wrong with you that you can maintain this kind of hypocrisy?

[SimonBolivar 10,910]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Woman of color?  Dafuq?

Peach is a color.

[GRHorn 105]

4 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Assuming she did knowingly misrepresented her heritage -- and all evidence suggests the opposite that she honestly believed what she claimed -- why is that significant when we have Trump who lies every other sentence? What the fuck is wrong with you that you can maintain this kind of hypocrisy?

Trump thread is over there.

I’m more here for the comedic value of her releasing it like it was a big gotcha thing when it just makes her look bad.

I still say if a hot young thing like Kamala Harris wants to bring up this dishonesty in primaries (or have an unaffiliated PAC) do it, then it’s over for her with minorities.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

31 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Assuming she did knowingly misrepresented her heritage -- and all evidence suggests the opposite that she honestly believed what she claimed -- why is that significant when we have Trump who lies every other sentence? What the fuck is wrong with you that you can maintain this kind of hypocrisy?

Reflexive-control information operations tactics.

 

Some analysis on how this works:

https://medium.com/@joohnchoe/the-resistance-information-warfare-handbook-part-v-3f1f3b4a51b8

Edited October 16, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[tantric superman 4,667]

17 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Assuming she did knowingly misrepresented her heritage -- and all evidence suggests the opposite that she honestly believed what she claimed -- why is that significant when we have Trump who lies every other sentence? What the fuck is wrong with you that you can maintain this kind of hypocrisy?

Trump's not my standard.

[atomheartbevo 89,396]

2 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

When did Warren apply for Cherokee tribal membership?

She didn’t. 

She would have a hard time gaining Cherokee membership.   It’s not unheard of, but for the most part, if your family had Cherokees, but they weren’t listed in the Dawes Rolls, and you had non-registered ancestors (parent, grandparent, etc.), it’s most likely not happening  — they prefer a documented line that involves the Dawes Rolls.

Or to put it another way, if my mom and her parents weren’t registered (mom’s grandpa was in the Dawes Rolls), and I wasn’t a registered member, then it’s not happening with my kids   

They are right in that DNA proves nothing specific to a lot of tribes, but in some cases, combined with documentation (birth records, marriage records, census, etc.) it can shine a light on things.  Plus, depending on the service, if she showed a DNA link to a bunch of cousins who are registered tribal members, that points her down the path, but it’s not enough for formal membership. 

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

She didn’t. 

She would have a hard time gaining Cherokee membership.   It’s not unheard of, but for the most part, if your family had Cherokees, but they weren’t listed in the Dawes Rolls, and you had non-registered ancestors (parent, grandparent, etc.), it’s most likely not happening  — they prefer a documented line that involves the Dawes Rolls.

Or to put it another way, if my mom and her parents weren’t registered (mom’s grandpa was in the Dawes Rolls), and I wasn’t a registered member, then it’s not happening with my kids   

They are right in that DNA proves nothing specific to a lot of tribes, but in some cases, combined with documentation (birth records, marriage records, census, etc.) it can shine a light on things.  Plus, depending on the service, if she showed a DNA link to a bunch of cousins who are registered tribal members, that points her down the path, but it’s not enough for formal membership. 

Hell, Cher couldn't even get honorary membership, and she wrote that kick ass song.

[WhatTheBuck 28,703]

49 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Any person who thinks that academia was infected with unfair race agendas for the past few decades.  Anyone who feels wounded by people who unfairly, or underhandedly, use race or disability (see, service animals), or feels that the learned gentry take unfair advantages.

So...racists. The Republican base. This is just a political game. 

[atomheartbevo 89,396]

1 hour ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

When it was proven that she gained no career advantages from her claims of Indian blood, it was that she simply lied about her Indian heritage, the same way pretty much every Okie ever born does.

If you take out the folks who are registered tribal members.  Just look at the rest of the Okies who claim the mythical Indian princess in the woodpile.  If they all took DNA tests, plenty would turn up NA DNA.   And more than a few are going to turn up DNA that makes them wish they hadn’t take a test. 

I’m surprised more don’t take DNA tests though, because any Okie would love to take a test they can’t possibly fail.  Then again, maybe they don’t want to get their brother-cousin arrested.  

Jokes aside, Warren has done remarkably well for an Okie who wasn’t making money off of oil. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

16 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I’m more here for the comedic value of her releasing it like it was a big gotcha thing when it just makes her look bad.

That's not what this is.   It's a calculated release two years out to set down another rebuttal point on this issue down the line.   Today's back and forth will be forgotten in days.  But when she's running for president — and this is the first time I ever actually thought she was running — the DNA test will be in the bank.

If this was intended as a major gotcha, she would have dropped it on Trump during the campaign.   And it's not enough to be a major gotcha, which is why she'd never do that.   But it is enough to make the issue less clear-cut for the anti-Warren folks.   She won't be running on her blood percentage — her opponents on the right will.  And "she hardly has any Indian blood!" isn't nearly as strong an attack as "If she really thinks she's an Indian, why won't she get her DNA tested?  Because she knows it's a lie."

[cactusflinthead 27,594]

 

[Buzzrock 14,870]

MH nailed it. Don’t be afraid to see what you see.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

That's not what this is.   It's a calculated release two years out to set down another rebuttal point on this issue down the line.   Today's back and forth will be forgotten in days.  But when she's running for president — and this is the first time I ever actually thought she was running — the DNA test will be in the bank.

If this was intended as a major gotcha, she would have dropped it on Trump during the campaign.   And it's not enough to be a major gotcha, which is why she'd never do that.   But it is enough to make the issue less clear-cut for the anti-Warren folks.   She won't be running on her blood percentage — her opponents on the right will.  And "she hardly has any Indian blood!" isn't nearly as strong an attack as "If she really thinks she's an Indian, why won't she get her DNA tested?  Because she knows it's a lie."

This was just not a smart move by a woman everyone says is super smart.  She should have just said My mom has always said this was true, so I just assumed it was true.  I was wrong. The republicans have no where to go then.  Now she's kind of doubled down, and given them more ammo.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

This was just not a smart move by a woman everyone says is super smart.  She should have just said My mom has always said this was true, so I just assumed it was true.  I was wrong. The republicans have no where to go then.  Now she's kind of doubled down, and given them more ammo.

What did she lose? 

[horncyclist 1,384]

This was just not a smart move by a woman everyone says is super smart.  She should have just said My mom has always said this was true, so I just assumed it was true.  I was wrong. The republicans have no where to go then.  Now she's kind of doubled down, and given them more ammo.

You haven't been paying attention. They would have kept at it either way. "She admits she lied about it!" "Her whole life is a fraud."Truth doesn't matter to the GOP anymore.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What did she lose? 

She doubled down on a fact that wasn't a fact to begin with, and the results show she has less DNA than most other Americans. She loses credibility by beating a dead horse that isn't even in the road any more.  She's re ignited an issue that she could have dealt with in a much smarter way.

[cactusflinthead 27,594]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What did she lose? 

Focus on the midterms. I used to think that she had a clue. This event tells me she has no problem getting the focus on her when there's fucking work to be done that doesn't involve her ancestors. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

We're two years out.  She didn't reignite anything.  She's getting another marker down and moving on.  Nobody will be talking about this in literally 3 days. 

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, horncyclist said:

You haven't been paying attention. They would have kept at it either way. "She admits she lied about it!" "Her whole life is a fraud."Truth doesn't matter to the GOP anymore.

Sure with some she would, but Americans have always shown great compassion for people who own up to things they've done.  Now she just looks like she's trying to do damage control.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

We're two years out.  She didn't reignite anything.  She's getting another marker down and moving on.  Nobody will be talking about this in literally 3 days. 

The hell they won't be talking about it when she runs. They'll pound her for it. The results don't back her up, and show she has even less  Native American DNA than many of the the people sitting in her audiences.

[WhatTheBuck 28,703]

1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

Her DNA test merely serves to bolster her claim to an honest belief in her family story of an NA ancestor, which is already backed up by other family members as well.   That she has that DNA wouldn't validate claims to formal NA status because it is insufficient for those purposes.   But she never claimed formal NA status, so that doesn't matter.  Again, she applied for all of her schooling and jobs as a white woman.  Numerous forms prove it.   Given that, it wouldn't even matter if her DNA were all-white.   There's nothing wrong with seeking cultural connection based on a mistaken, but honest, belief in NA ancestry, as long as you don't overstate that belief to be something more than it is for improper purposes.  But, the DNA makes it even more believable that her family did pass down such a story, because it's actually true. 

And yet there are people making the claim that it was foolish for her to take the DNA test to prove herself. How many of them were asking why she wouldn't take a DNA test before she took the DNA test? The whole thing has been a farce all along. 

[bad_teammate 13,132]

You guys are talking to OnBoard like he operates in good faith.

It's fun to watch, really.

[Caddox 952]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

The hell they won't be talking about it when she runs. They'll pound her for it. The results don't back her up, and show she has even less  Native American DNA than many of the the people sitting in her audiences.

Trump calls her Pocahontas. Of course this isnt going away. She's made a mockery of herself. Thats the new normal in this environment. Just ask Kavanaugh. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

The people lambasting Warren for taking the DNA test were never, ever going to vote for her.

This is her way of finishing this stupid “issue” on her end and giving her a snappy “I took a test and proved it so shut up” rebuttal when idiots bring it up two years from now.

Only stupid people think this will be a thing even three days from now.

Saudi Arabia will murder someone or Trump will say something stupid or Mattis will rage quit and this will be another tempest in a teapot.

[horncyclist 1,384]

Is the less native than average person fact true? Sounds like disinformation to me. Link for that?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

 

12 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Focus on the midterms. I used to think that she had a clue. This event tells me she has no problem getting the focus on her when there's fucking work to be done that doesn't involve her ancestors. 

 People can walk and chew gum at the same time. FFS Trump had a Summit with Kanye last week but Warren is out of line for not being entirely focused on the midterms.  

Give me a break.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

13 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

The hell they won't be talking about it when she runs. They'll pound her for it. The results don't back her up, and show she has even less  Native American DNA than many of the the people sitting in her audiences.

I said they won't be talking about it in 3 days, and they won't.   I don't dispute that they will talking about it in a year when she's running for president.   My entire previous post was about that.   But they were already going to pound her for it and challenge her, why won't you take a DNA test if you honestly believe you're part Native?   She's already gotten that out of the way on her own terms.  This is a good move that will pay off in a year, even though it's drawn more mockery today.   Politics 101 — get it all out of the way early. 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[cactusflinthead 27,594]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

 People can walk and chew gum at the same time. FFS Trump had a Summit with Kanye last week but Warren is out of line for not being entirely focused on the midterms.  

Give me a break.

It couldn't wait? She HAD to be on the feed today?

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

I said they won't be talking about it in 3 days, and they won't.   I don't dispute that they will talking about it in a year when she's running for president.   My entire previous post was about that.   But they were already going to pound her for it and challenge her, why won't you take a DNA test if you honestly believe you're part Native?   She's already gotten that out of the way on her own terms.  This is a good move that will pay off in a year, even though it's drawn more mockery today. 

3 days isn't the issue, it's 2 years from now when it'll count.   I don't think  it's going to pay off in a year because nothing about the test helps her claim, it's inconclusive at best.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

I said they won't be talking about it in 3 days, and they won't.   I don't dispute that they will talking about it in a year when she's running for president.   My entire previous post was about that.   But they were already going to pound her for it and challenge her, why won't you take a DNA test if you honestly believe you're part Native?   She's already gotten that out of the way on her own terms.  This is a good move that will pay off in a year, even though it's drawn more mockery today.   Politics 101 — get it all out of the way early. 

She wants the focus to be on the issues during the campaign.  Best to get all the bullshit out of the way first.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

So what about Trump's claim of Swedishness? Does he just get a pass for that like his nine million other lies? And yes, he made that claim to get ahead and may well have derived profit from it. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

3 days isn't the issue, it's 2 years from now when it'll count.   I don't think  it's going to pay off in a year because nothing about the test helps her claim, it's inconclusive at best.

No, there's a discussion about whether she's blundered by releasing this today.  Read some of the posts on this very page.  That this is a blip that will be gone in 3 days is on point. 

As for your other claim, you aren't anywhere near the target for this information.   It will pay off where it matters. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

1 minute ago, cactusflinthead said:

It couldn't wait? She HAD to be on the feed today?

To be honest, I think Warren going on offense helps midterm enthusiasm.  Even if it’s over this stupid DNA bullshit.  It shows there are fighters out there, people love fighters. 

What Democratic effort did she hinder? I honestly don’t know. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Now THIS is how you milk a dubious claim of Native American ancestry -

[atomheartbevo 89,396]

33 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

This was just not a smart move by a woman everyone says is super smart.  She should have just said My mom has always said this was true, so I just assumed it was true.  I was wrong. The republicans have no where to go then.  Now she's kind of doubled down, and given them more ammo.

Where do you draw the line on “super smart” and Okies?

[atomheartbevo 89,396]

15 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

The people lambasting Warren for taking the DNA test were never, ever going to vote for her.

Yep.  These are people who cheer at Indians being locked up over pipeline protests.  

[cactusflinthead 27,594]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

To be honest, I think Warren going on offense helps midterm enthusiasm.  Even if it’s over this stupid DNA bullshit.  It shows there are fighters out there, people love fighters. 

What Democratic effort did she hinder? I honestly don’t know. 

Let's go over this again. We're going through a discussion about her DNA scant days before the election. Sucking up the air time. Who benefits from her fight besides her? It's a distraction. It doesn't do a damn thing positive for Sinema. She could have waited oh I don't know until after the fucking midterms to go in the spotlight. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

To be honest, I think Warren going on offense helps midterm enthusiasm.  Even if it’s over this stupid DNA bullshit.  It shows there are fighters out there, people love fighters. 

What Democratic effort did she hinder? I honestly don’t know. 

Has anything ever done by any democrat ever not caused you to predict it would help them in any upcoming election?

[Bama Chick 28,596]

It won’t matter by Friday much less by the midterms.

All anyone could talk about a week ago was Kavanaugh. And now? Old fucking news.

Seriously, there will be 387 more “distractions” between now and the midterms.

This won’t even be a thing.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

Just now, cactusflinthead said:

Let's go over this again. We're going through a discussion about her DNA scant days before the election. Sucking up the air time. Who benefits from her fight besides her? It's a distraction. It doesn't do a damn thing positive for Sinema. She could have waited oh I don't know until after the fucking midterms to go in the spotlight. 

Distraction from what though? Trump saying outrageous shit again?  

Like Sinema was going to make serious gains today if Warren didn’t release her DNA results. 

The outrage over this is absurd. 

[GRHorn 105]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

16 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Has anything ever done by any democrat ever not caused you to predict it would help them in any upcoming election?

Yes, the way they handled Kavanaugh could have easily backfired if he wasn’t confirmed.

It would have given the democrats a false sense of security and made Kavanaugh a real martyr that Republicans could rally around for the midterms. 

But Kavanaugh and the GOP won so all the false sense of security it with them now. 

[Jack Burton 35]

OnBoard, why do you have this hate obsession with Democrat women?

Edited October 16, 2018 by Jack Burton

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Orrin Hatch pretending to use an intern’s phone, captioned with a dumb non sequitur.

Cool.

[Celery Man 20,881]

3 hours ago, tantric superman said:

Onboard hits on the problem.  A very large number of Americans have more native American blood than Warren.  People know that using ethnicity was often a game in the days when Warren entered academia.  Whether or not she used it to her advantage, she is seen as part of a crowd that did.  To those American who have more Native American blood than she has, she is going to be seen as an opportunists in one way or another. 

 

this is not really "true".  I mean, it's definitely true because of our non white hispanic population, and sure - for the population of white people who have submitted to 23 and Me tests, a very large number would have similar or more "Native" ancestry than Warren in that test.  It's not a useful number.  Because a)there's not a large enough sample of "American Indian" Native Americans who have submitted samples, and because b) even if there were, probably it wouldn't come up as a bunch of distinct pools where you could say "this blood sample is 16% Comanche, 17% Kickapoo, 66% Irish" or something like that.  Warren didn't go around in her life trying to pass herself off as some born on the reservation Cherokee or whatever, she just had some family history that led her to believe that a few generations back she had a grandparent who was Native American.  It came up at Harvard, I don't know why at Harvard she or someone there decided to say that she was some degree Native American in her heritage but they did and as far as she was aware it was true.  The party of racial purity digs it up as dirt and starts calling her Pocahontas because lol she's so white.  Here's the current Chief of the Cherokee nation btw - 

Trump says if there's Native American in her blood he'll give $1mm to a charity of her choice.  There is, as best as we can tell.  It's consistent with what she believed and not inconsistent with anything she has said.  I'm wondering about the timing as well, but she's been on the (sorry) warpath for several months.  Trump should pay up, if he has the money.

 

I have a non blood uncle who is Pueblo.  Strong family history that they are from Pueblo people.  His last name is very "Indian" seeming - think "Mooneagle".  He took one of those tests and was shocked at how little and how non specific it came up as Native American for him.  Those aren't exact and they aren't particularly useful for Native Americans.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Celery Man