No thanks, I already found a poorly-phrased statement from a debate that I’m going to use to assume represents his entire worldview and close my ears to anything to the contrary.

Normally I’d be against crude stereotypes and generalizations, but I guess you don’t like them so it makes it different and okay.

Again, that’s not what political science is. It is a discipline that exists beyond your determination of what it SHOULD be, and your understanding of it doesn’t set the parameters for discussion. Behavior is a MASSIVE piece of political science.

“I” don’t call it science. It’s called political science. This is exactly what I mean when I talk about being manipulative. What YOU refer to as political science is irrelevant. Political science is a discipline that exists outside of you.

Lol that’s “political pseudoscience?!?” What “hard science” do you think political analysis would be? It is by definition a social science.

Either demographics are fair for analysis or they’re not. If your point is that ‘black people’ is too large a demographic to be meaningful, that’s totally fair and I don’t disagree. But then so are white people, Asian people, Hispanic people, gay people, religious people, etc. etc.

You’re literally whining that political science is condescending and that by not stopping (even though you want me to!) I’m being a baby. That’s a pathetically fragile point to stand on.

See what you’ve done there is called lying. I didn’t say any of those things, so if you need to lie to make your point, maybe it’s not that great a point.

Gotcha, so asking for an explanation of something is bad, but telling someone not to ask questions is good. That seems like a smart approach.

Same principle applies for black voters, white voters, gay voters, straight voters, rich voters, poor voters, whatever.

Yes thank you. I realize now that even though a discussion of voting against one’s interest has been a standard part of political analyses for decades, when it is applied to Clinton supporters it is racist, sexist, condescending, presumptions, whitesplaining, and mansplaining.

He looks like someone performed plastic surgery on the cryptkeeper by injecting a quart of crisco under the facial skin.

Lol yes I realize what you’re doing, it’s super clever. The fact that you constantly write as if you’re an authority figure or already correct doesn’t make it so, get over yourself.

Man oh man you are consistent with your attempts at delegitimizing insults, but you’ve gotta figure a way to include them smoother, they stand out now and are pretty transparent and crude.

No you’re right, basing your vote off your idea of what a candidate MIGHT do that could eventually lead to them even appointing a cabinet member who would remind them to maybe do that thing is a strong reason to vote for someone!

Allies of what? I love that your worldview is so incredibly self-centered that you filter all other people through your acceptability matrix. I can understand how that makes it difficult for you to avoid policy discussions, so these lazy right-wing style personal attacks will have to suffice.

I guess I thought the comment/discussion section of articles was for comments/discussion.

I know, it must be frustrating when people don’t agree with you even though you’ve told them over and over!

Yep. When people pull the whole “I COULD answer the question but I don’t have to and it’s ignorant and sexist and bigoted of you to even ask,” you can probably assume they can’t answer the question. It’s a standard deflection technique that has nothing to do with critical theory, it’s just a convenient shield.

Not only am I a white man, but I grew up in an upper-middle class family and enjoyed incredible advantages and privileges throughout my life. I’m also straight and tall, and it wasn’t until my mid-20's that I recognized how even those two aspects got me undeserved recognition and attention over female colleagues.