Presidential candidate Donald Trump’s proposal to bar all Muslims from entering the United States has reignited an old debate about the Republican Party, which some see as the party of intolerance.
Liberal critics have long insisted that Republican candidates use coded language that sounds respectable on its face but covertly signals an outdated view of race, ethnicity and religion to their constituents. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) voiced this perspective on Tuesday, saying that Trump’s words and policies simply reveal the true values of the party and its supporters.
Whew. I was afraid this piece might be nonsensical drivel, but noted voice of reason Harry Reid is being quoted right away:
Donald Trump is standing on a platform of hate that the Republican Party built for him.
Passing mention is made of the fact that House Speaker Paul Ryan and others rejected Trump’s Muslim ban idea but, per the rigged media bias rules, they’re not rejecting him loudly, or frequently enough:
At the same time, other Republicans have been circumspect in their criticism of the party’s presidential front-runner. Critics claim these GOP politicians are blowing a “dog whistle,” inaudibly appealing to their constituents’ prejudices.
That’s a hard one to combat, as virtually everything has become a racist dog whistle in the last seven years. It’s an arbitrary assignation that leftists provide to any conservative statement they want, because they believe they can infer intent.
Both Reid’s comments and the dog whistle nonsense are part of the latest attack coordinated by the Democrats and the media.
One bias not discussed enough here is confirmation bias, which essentially says that people doing research will gravitate only to evidence that supports what they are trying to prove. We see this a lot with climate change. Computer models are continually touted as “proof” of why we need to act, despite the fact that most don’t prove to be true. Go back and look at the post-Katrina coverage from ten years ago. According to climate “experts” we were heading into an almost apocalyptic era of monster hurricanes.
The Vegas odds on a bunch of liberal academics finding racist motives in Republican voters would be very good, not because it’s true, but because liberal academics are doing the research. That “an expanding body of research” even exists shows that this is something they’re desperate to prove. Academic research follows the money and there is a lot of it in reinforcing the fiercely held beliefs of the hive mind. They’re not doing research to see how prevalent racism still is in America, they’re doing research to prove Republicans are motivated by it.
It’s a maze with one hallway and the grant money is the cheese that awaits in the only possible direction the researcher can go.