Quote:
Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA
Haven't looked at his crime stats, no idea (seriously, didn't even know there was some "thing" about them until saw it mentioned here)
As for the Jersey City thing, I think thousands might be a stretch but hundreds isn't hard for me at all ... and I can tell you exactly why:
On 9/12, went to lunch in my little bucolic Mayberry/Peyton Place still stunned after watching all night just like the rest of most folks. Okay, if you knew me then you might even remember the little restaurant around the corner during my stay-at-home dad days, I ate there 3-5 times a week with baby in tow, I credit them with keeping me AND the kid alive. Point being, I knew everybody there -- only 4-5 employees -- very well.
And on 9/12 I had the very normal middleclass -- she waited tables, her husband was a longtime bus driver for the school system, black waitress go into a full blown wide-eyed rant about how she couldn't understand what the big deal was ... it was just a bunch of rich white people in that building, why the fuck should anybody care if it came down?
That's in Monticello, Georgia. In f'n faux Mayberry.
And you think I've got a problem believing there were open celebrants in Jersey City*?
*being more urban, not because it's Jersey/northeast
|
I agree with the idea that there were more people than anyone wants to admit who were agnostic at best about the Towers coming down. Not a chance I buy the idea that people were happy enough to actually celebrate in the streets, the idea that this happened without a backlash or media coverage, and especially the idea that this was broadcast by the media and subsequently erased. Because he (and now Carson) aren't saying some people were happy, they're saying they personally saw the footage. (In which case the most charitable explanation is that they saw some footage of people celebrating the attacks overseas, which definitely did happen, and have conflated it in their mind with Jersey City for some reason.)
It's the same thing as that chart. Pointing out that a black person is 90x more likely to get shot by another black person than by a police officer is a very valid point. Instead you publish a chart that exaggerates at the fringe and puts the focus on Trump being wrong instead of the other point. Same thing here - I wouldn't like it if Trump argued that there were large numbers of Muslims in America who were happy when the Towers came down, but it would make the same point and couldn't be disproven. For whatever reason he feels the need to double down and say he saw the footage which is objectively wrong.
Btw, re: Molson's charts from the top, how was Scott Walker getting between 15-20% for so long? What was I missing with him that ever made him a viable candidate?