say nothing about improving education, making going to the doctor more affordable, and the overwhelming targeting by police in black areas.
But they don't want them to be educated or healthier. They want them stupid, fat, and poor so they don't fight back. It was and new will be about trying to win them over by helping them.
If conservative group need cheap disinformation tricks to suppress black vote in order to win South Carolina, repubes have already lost the plot. Bigly.
Serious question. When was the last time republicans had a good grasp on "the plot"? That is to say, when was the last time these people exhibited at least a modicum of actual governance?
Was it around the beginning of Obama's second term when they all went off the rails obstructionist and party-before-country?
Those were the days when Romney was considered the looney tune of the GOP, now he's the one talking sense. And his stance hasn't really changed.
That was over 10 years ago... Have republicans really not had the plot in over a decade?
Au contrare, Republicans never leave a rat un-fucked. This is just one among many methods they've been using for years to suppress southern black votes.
A conservative group funded by anonymous donors sent mailers to approximately 75,000 Democratic primary voters in South Carolina, a heavily Black electorate, ahead of the Feb. 3 primary there, criticizing Biden over his administration's push to ban menthol cigarettes. Black smokers are more likely to use menthol cigarettes, according to research cited by the FDA, and the potential ban has divided civil rights groups.
I read it. As I said, it makes no mention of the number of black people in South Carolina who smoke. Is it a significant number? The article doesn't say that either.
So, again, why is this newsworthy? You won't answer that question, which makes me think you realize it isn't.
Nearly 85% of Black smokers smoke menthol cigarettes.
I didn't deny that.
Again: How many black people in South Carolina smoke cigarettes? Do you actually know? That second article also does not say how many.
If it is a tiny number of people, this does not matter. Feel free to give me an article that actually says there are a huge number of black smokers in South Carolina.
Absolutely not. This particular person posts article after article that is not newsworthy but agrees with what they think. For example, lots and lots of 'Biden is an old man' articles as if none of us were aware. Sometimes multiple articles about it a day.
Not if they only affect a tiny number of voters. Which is why I've been asking how many voters this will affect, which apparently is a really unfair question for some reason.
Doesn't it make a difference whether this has an effect on 3 people or 300,000 people?
Fwiw, the rough numbers say about 600k smokers in the state, and a little more than 25% of the state population is black. If all things were equal, it would be about 150,000 black smokers in South Carolina
They're targeting black voters in S. Carolina over a proposed ban on menthol cigarettes. Setting aside that the state is almost certainly going red regardless, I doubt this will be a terribly effective strategy with anyone but the oldest black voters. Even then, it seems like a stretch.
