Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
There is certainly a lot of things to talk about in this situation. From what a lot of people in my Twitter circle is saying, Warren never tried to claim tribal memebership. On the other hand, quite a few Natives are upset at the whole situation since they feel that this buys into the thought that having a sliver of Native blood suddenly makes one part of the experience faced by Natives, not to mention that tribal membership isn't actually based on blood anyway.
Don't catch you slippin' now.She shared a family story passed down from her mother of them all having some Cherokee roots. She's never actually claimed this makes her Cherokee. Only that her family has these roots.
And, they do have sufficient First Nation genes to argue, yes: the family tale has weight. Even if the family could be wrong about which particular nation supplied the genes (I quite frankly doubt it, though — the family story is on the money enough for me to accept that it's very likely not wrong about the Cherokee angle, even if the tribe won't accept them for insufficient other proof).
Genes are not identity, though. Plenty of Americans of West African decent could trace their genes right back to specific areas if they wanted to: however, they don't have the linage to ever connect back to the records enough to be put into tribal songs and be accepted as tribe, even if they do definitely find genetically related cousins who are.
It's just never going to happen (unless they cough up a huge amount of dosh over quite some time, and even then... they'll never hit high tier for marriage pacts).
I think it's a good thing, frankly: what's worse? Having First Nation blood you never admit you do because there's this bar for entry... or admitting that not all Whites are as White as they think they are?
Don't airbrush the past away. She hasn't. Whatever her however-many-greats-grandparent went through, she's a living testimony of and monument to. ACKNOWLEGE IT, DON'T BURY IT.
And, good on her family: they did acknowledge it to the point it was not nasty surprise, but a welcome affirmation of what they already knew. And, next time anybody wants to tell Elizabeth Warren that she's being un-American, she can rightly point out that part of her is a damned sight more American than some can claim *cough*Trump*cough*.
Edited by Euodiachloris on Oct 16th 2018 at 4:26:38 PM
Let's be clear here: Elizabeth Warren herself never really made any fuss about this or mentioned it in any way in public or tried to claim tribal membership. What happened was that the Republicans really, really wanted to dig up something they could use against her. And after a lot of digging the finally found a Harvard form in which she crossed Native American as one of her ancestries. They used it to conduct a story that she got a job at Harvard by playing the diversity card - which is not true. She filled the form after she already got the job, and even if Harvard had looked for someone "diverse", they would have taken one look at her an picked someone else. She did NOT like the Republicans love to claim take a job away from any Native American.
The story is poisonous for three reasons:
1. The Republicans basically built a whole story around her being overly precise when filling out a damned form, portraying it as if she did something, she never did (meaning, doing the whole "I am so connected to the Native Americans because I have one drop of blood in me" thing some white people do).
2. The whole story is build around the assumption that she couldn't have possible gotten the job on her own merits. No, she got it to fill some sort of imagined diversity quota.
3. And then Trump thought that calling her Pocahontas was cute and not just another way to disrespect Native American heritage.
My big take-away from this is that she must be remarkable clean if THIS is all the Republicans could dig up.
Yes, that's all fair.
But, she chose to run the DNA test and use it to refute Donald Trump. Which was an incredibly bad idea, she could've just rejected his claim and emphasized that good policy and making the nation a better place is a far better way to spend their time.
But she didn't, she ran a DNA test that showed that she has an incredibly small and completely inconsequential amount of Native American ancestry. Thus sabotaging her position by making the Republicans look like they have something. Because 'technically true' is absolutely worthless when we're talking about public optics.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangIf (if) Warren is considering a Presidential run, it's best to get that bullshit out of the way now.
Needless to say, it's a nothingburger that the Republicans have tried to turn into a major issue. The real issue — what people keep going back to — is that Trump kept referring to her as "Pocahantas" on his campaign trail. He's a racist fucking idiot; let's please not defend him by attacking someone else.
Edited by Boston on Oct 16th 2018 at 11:47:14 AM
![]()
![]()
So? She was going to be damned either way.
Frankly, I'd want to know how true the family story actually was if I were in her shoes, and sod everything else.
If only because great-however-many-grandmother deserves being acknowledged and remembered by her descendants in some capacity, if nothing else.
Trump can go swivel. The curiosity alone would itch at me...
Edited by Euodiachloris on Oct 16th 2018 at 4:41:56 PM
Of course, one should also look at the optics of refusing to do the test at all. It'd be way too easy for the GOP to spin it as proof that she's lying and has something to hide.
For all my past criticisms of Warren, I'm not going to hold her being meticulous on an application form against her.
Edited by M84 on Oct 16th 2018 at 11:42:38 PM
Disgusted, but not surprisedI see no reason to believe this, furthermore, even if it were true that doesn't mean she would be equally damned. By refusing to play his farcical game her position would not be changed, Trump would just have that pathetic method of attack and nothing would be different.
But by responding she gave him ammunition thus making his claims stronger, there is no practical difference between "not actually Native American" and "barely Native American".
If only because great-however-many-grandmother deserves being acknowledged and remembered by her descendants in some capacity, if nothing else.
Trump can go swivel. The curiosity alone would itch at me...
This is irrelevant, she could've easily gotten an ancestry test without publicly responding to Trump.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangSomething worth noting about the the Cherokee Nation is that in 2007, they voted to define tribal citizenship as only by blood, which stripped almost three thousand of the decendents of the former slaves owned by members, of their citizenship.
Citizenship was granted to the Freedmen and their decendents of the tribe as part of a treaty in 1866, and a federal judge ruled that they must abide by that just last year.
Edited by megaeliz on Oct 16th 2018 at 11:56:44 AM
Say Elizabeth Warren didn't ever have a DNA test... Trump and his Republicans would argue she didn't because she knew she was lying and trying to hide it. Also, she doesn't have the guts to refute him, even if she does. Because women, ammirite?
Say Elizabeth Warren did have a secret DNA test because of being curious... If she was lucky, it'd not get out that she did, so no brouhaha. But, who are we kidding: it would get out.
So... she has her test in secret and it gets out: the spin machine goes into overdrive about 1) how embarrassed she must have been was at how low her Native American DNA count actually was because she's actually always been white and knows it even though she claimed to be a Cherokee princess (which she didn't), 2) how she didn't have the guts to go public about her Native American heritage and is actually embarrassed to have any of it at all because she's actually always been white and knows it, 3) how she is a lying, scheming, untrustworthy bitch who doesn't disclose everything on forms... and has always been white and knows it (pick any and/or all or add something else).
As it is... she had it, she went public... and they're still trying the "and has always been white, and she knows it: silly woman not having the guts to ignore us" angle.
Trust me: every woman knows. You can't beat the idiots at this game (and, they will say you're playing the game by their rules, even if you're not), so you may's well highlight how stupid they are with whatever choice you run with. And, staying silent? Is letting them know that they were right: you're a good little girl who will keep her mouth shut whatever happens to her, so you can do whatever you please and say whatever you want to with no repercussions whatsoever.
Edited by Euodiachloris on Oct 16th 2018 at 5:25:12 PM
They've been calling her a liar since this came out, I see no evidence tha it was ever particularly effective.
But guess what is effective? Responding by showing that you're barely Native American. Technically true is worthless if you're trying to respond to smears.
No, it's not, he was completely American while she was barely Native American. Frankly to compare the two is offensive, he was 100% Citizen while she has barely any Native American ancestry. It's just not comparable.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 16th 2018 at 12:31:26 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang.......
Her barely being Native American would matter if she’d claimed to be Native American, but she didn’t, she claimed to have Native American ancestry, which she does.
Now there’s a point to be made that she should have realised that the public and the press can’t understand that level of nuance, but that’s an argument abitu her understanding how this would play out, not what the facts are.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran![]()
Exactly this. She's never claimed to be Cherokee. But, she has said she likely has Cherokee ancestors.
Having ancestors from a tribe doesn't make you part of that tribe. But, you still are still related to the person who was.
Pretty much. And, it ain't over. Not by a long chalk. Not if I've gauged Daniels and Avenati even close to right.
Edited by Euodiachloris on Oct 16th 2018 at 5:37:13 PM
Regardless of what ancestry she does or doesn't have it doesn't change the fact that her response greatly benefited Trump's attack and could result in future attacks being more effective. It was pointless and unnecessary and really shouldn't have been done.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang

She proved she had Native American ancestry. Trump is just using Exact Words to get out of donating money to charity.
And to be blunt, Trump is the last person who should demand of others to prove anything.
Edited by DrunkenNordmann on Oct 16th 2018 at 4:37:50 PM
We learn from history that we do not learn from history