Why do conservatives think liberals are pissed that there is a black man running as a republican?

[rdean]

It's another one of those fables that republicans believe because it just sounds like something that makes sense to them. The same can be said for a number of stupid things republicans buy into like all democrats being socialists. First, they come up with an idea in their heads that sounds like it could be true and validates their pre-conceived notions about liberals, and then they accept it as fact.

Okay so the idea is that it's blasphemous in the liberal mind that any republican would be black. Sure it's unusual, but why would liberals give a shit? I don't. I don't understand why anyone would be republican let alone just a black guy.

Perhaps the thinking is that black voters would turn to Carson if he got the nomination. Okay, that very well could happen to some small degree, but I can't imagine that would be nearly enough to secure a republican win. Only republicans and perhaps a minority of black people would vote for him. He is as big of a threat as Trump in the general match up.

So what gives?

Uhmmmmm Billy here is a tiny teeny hint.

Just look dofous at all the damn Ben Carson threads here alone on USMB?

Is it just me or are most all liberals just as retarded as Billy?????

Its like with that damn video and Rice going on Sunday talk shows...we seen it week after week...and liberals would post after....Uhm no you didn't look /gaze into my magic wand...you didn't see nothing it was all in your mind.


Gawd I hate retarded liberals

Thank God there are so few. Unlike Republicans.

 

[rdean]

Why do conservatives think liberals are pissed that there is a black man running as a republican?

Who knows? Republicans think so many odd things. They think, no really, they really think this. They think if you cut taxes on rich people and end all corporate taxes, corporations will magically create jobs for some charitable reason. True story. I told you it was weird.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Food Stamps are the only welfare program we have in the US today?

We don't have a lot of people that are trying to support themselves or their families on minimum wage. Most of those people are kids going to college, high school kids making some money doing part-time work after school, retirees who are either bored or trying to bring in some extra income to supplement their government checks, part-time mothers earning extra money for the family while the kids are in school.

You're not going to end poverty by raising minimum wage. It will effect very few people.

Oh Christ as usual you people only harp on the federal minimum wage. The real crisis is that 18 million people make less than 10.00 per hour. How many more do you think make less than 15? Raising the minimum wage high enough will alleviate poverty for 10s of millions. How many of those people have kids? 83% of all food stamps funding goes to households with kids.

Raising the minimum wage will destroy jobs, cut hours for workers, and create inflation. All that for the select few that are trying to support themselves or their families?

$15 minimum wage would cost N.Y. up to 588,800 jobs: report

Bowing To Demands Of Wall Street, Walmart Cuts Hours To Trim Costs

I'm not going to have this same damn debate with you but I will tell you that your first link is based on a plan to raise it to 15 in NY by the end of the year. A realistic proposal is raising the minimum wage over the course of a few years. Bernie's plan would raise the federal minimum wage to 15 gradually by 2020. Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

How will it increase consumer spending? Spell it out.

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however. Something at McDonalds will go up 10 cents but the usual consumer could afford a lot more on the menu regardless.

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

 

[Billy000]

Oh Christ as usual you people only harp on the federal minimum wage. The real crisis is that 18 million people make less than 10.00 per hour. How many more do you think make less than 15? Raising the minimum wage high enough will alleviate poverty for 10s of millions. How many of those people have kids? 83% of all food stamps funding goes to households with kids.

Raising the minimum wage will destroy jobs, cut hours for workers, and create inflation. All that for the select few that are trying to support themselves or their families?

$15 minimum wage would cost N.Y. up to 588,800 jobs: report

Bowing To Demands Of Wall Street, Walmart Cuts Hours To Trim Costs

I'm not going to have this same damn debate with you but I will tell you that your first link is based on a plan to raise it to 15 in NY by the end of the year. A realistic proposal is raising the minimum wage over the course of a few years. Bernie's plan would raise the federal minimum wage to 15 gradually by 2020. Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

How will it increase consumer spending? Spell it out.

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however. Something at McDonalds will go up 10 cents but the usual consumer could afford a lot more on the menu regardless.

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Raising the minimum wage will destroy jobs, cut hours for workers, and create inflation. All that for the select few that are trying to support themselves or their families?

$15 minimum wage would cost N.Y. up to 588,800 jobs: report

Bowing To Demands Of Wall Street, Walmart Cuts Hours To Trim Costs

I'm not going to have this same damn debate with you but I will tell you that your first link is based on a plan to raise it to 15 in NY by the end of the year. A realistic proposal is raising the minimum wage over the course of a few years. Bernie's plan would raise the federal minimum wage to 15 gradually by 2020. Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

How will it increase consumer spending? Spell it out.

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however. Something at McDonalds will go up 10 cents but the usual consumer could afford a lot more on the menu regardless.

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus.

Right. A $600 increase in paychecks. And a $700 decrease in disposable income. You moron.

If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it.

Obviously. And that's an extra dollar they can't spend on something like groceries or entertainment.

Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

No need to repeat your economic ignorance.

 

[Billy000]

I'm not going to have this same damn debate with you but I will tell you that your first link is based on a plan to raise it to 15 in NY by the end of the year. A realistic proposal is raising the minimum wage over the course of a few years. Bernie's plan would raise the federal minimum wage to 15 gradually by 2020. Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

How will it increase consumer spending? Spell it out.

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however. Something at McDonalds will go up 10 cents but the usual consumer could afford a lot more on the menu regardless.

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus.

Right. A $600 increase in paychecks. And a $700 decrease in disposable income. You moron.

If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it.

Obviously. And that's an extra dollar they can't spend on something like groceries or entertainment.

Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

No need to repeat your economic ignorance.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work? I don't think you even know what you are saying.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Jobs would be lost initially , but even more would be gained through an increase in consumer spending.

How will it increase consumer spending? Spell it out.

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however. Something at McDonalds will go up 10 cents but the usual consumer could afford a lot more on the menu regardless.

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus.

Right. A $600 increase in paychecks. And a $700 decrease in disposable income. You moron.

If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it.

Obviously. And that's an extra dollar they can't spend on something like groceries or entertainment.

Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

No need to repeat your economic ignorance.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work? I don't think you even know what you are saying.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work?

Where did I say that?
And why would you count the higher income of the employees and ignore the lower disposable income of the customers?
Is it because you're stupid or because you don't understand economics?

I don't think you even know what you are saying.

I know exactly what I'm saying when I point out your ignorance.

 

[Billy000]

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however. Something at McDonalds will go up 10 cents but the usual consumer could afford a lot more on the menu regardless.

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus.

Right. A $600 increase in paychecks. And a $700 decrease in disposable income. You moron.

If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it.

Obviously. And that's an extra dollar they can't spend on something like groceries or entertainment.

Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

No need to repeat your economic ignorance.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work? I don't think you even know what you are saying.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work?

Where did I say that?
And why would you count the higher income of the employees and ignore the lower disposable income of the customers?
Is it because you're stupid or because you don't understand economics?

I don't think you even know what you are saying.

I know exactly what I'm saying when I point out your ignorance.

I don't know how else to explain this to you. A few hundred extra a month easily pays for single dollar raiees in prices.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus.

Right. A $600 increase in paychecks. And a $700 decrease in disposable income. You moron.

If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it.

Obviously. And that's an extra dollar they can't spend on something like groceries or entertainment.

Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

No need to repeat your economic ignorance.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work? I don't think you even know what you are saying.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work?

Where did I say that?
And why would you count the higher income of the employees and ignore the lower disposable income of the customers?
Is it because you're stupid or because you don't understand economics?

I don't think you even know what you are saying.

I know exactly what I'm saying when I point out your ignorance.

I don't know how else to explain this to you. A few hundred extra a month easily pays for single dollar raiees in prices.

Perhaps I can explain this:

You can't increase the income of just one group of people. If government comes along and does that, it's a domino effect and everybody gets an increase in income.

When that happens, eventually the people that were provided the increase find themselves in the exact same position they started. Yes, their salary increased, but so did the salary of others, and the cost of everything increases. You're right back to where you started.

 

[Billy000]

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus.

Right. A $600 increase in paychecks. And a $700 decrease in disposable income. You moron.

If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it.

Obviously. And that's an extra dollar they can't spend on something like groceries or entertainment.

Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

No need to repeat your economic ignorance.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work? I don't think you even know what you are saying.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work?

Where did I say that?
And why would you count the higher income of the employees and ignore the lower disposable income of the customers?
Is it because you're stupid or because you don't understand economics?

I don't think you even know what you are saying.

I know exactly what I'm saying when I point out your ignorance.

I don't know how else to explain this to you. A few hundred extra a month easily pays for single dollar raiees in prices.

Perhaps I can explain this:

You can't increase the income of just one group of people. If government comes along and does that, it's a domino effect and everybody gets an increase in income.

When that happens, eventually the people that were provided the increase find themselves in the exact same position they started. Yes, their salary increased, but so did the salary of others, and the cost of everything increases. You're right back to where you started.

Well you know perhaps it's better you hear it from a letter signed by 600 economists, 7 of which are Nobel Prize winners.

Over 600 Economists Sign Letter In Support of $10.10 Minimum Wage: Economist Statement on the Federal Minimum Wage

Dear Mr. President, Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Reid, Congressman Cantor, Senator McConnell, and Congresswoman Pelosi:
July will mark five years since the federal minimum wage was last raised. We urge you to act now and enact a three-step raise of 95 cents a year for three years—which would mean a minimum wage of $10.10 by 2016—and then index it to protect against inflation. Senator Tom Harkin and Representative George Miller have introduced legislation to accomplish this. The increase to $10.10 would mean that minimum-wage workers who work full time, full year would see a raise from their current salary of roughly $15,000 to roughly $21,000. These proposals also usefully raise the tipped minimum wage to 70% of the regular minimum.

This policy would directly provide higher wages for close to 17 million workers by 2016. Furthermore, another 11 million workers whose wages are just above the new minimum would likely see a wage increase through “spillover” effects, as employers adjust their internal wage ladders. The vast majority of employees who would benefit are adults in working families, disproportionately women, who work at least 20 hours a week and depend on these earnings to make ends meet. At a time when persistent high unemployment is putting enormous downward pressure on wages, such a minimum-wage increase would provide a much-needed boost to the earnings of low-wage workers.

In recent years there have been important developments in the academic literature on the effect of increases in the minimum wage on employment, with the weight of evidence now showing that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market. Research suggests that a minimum-wage increase could have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, raising demand and job growth, and providing some help on the jobs front.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Hey BillyFail (a.k.a. Billy000),

This thread isn't about the minimum wage.

 

[Billy000]

Hey BillyFail (a.k.a. Billy000),

This thread isn't about the minimum wage.

Neither is you saying it's not.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Hey BillyFail (a.k.a. Billy000),

This thread isn't about the minimum wage.

Neither is you saying it's not.

Read the OP moron.

What's the matter ?

Critical thinking skills failed you....again ?

 

[sealybobo]

It's another one of those fables that republicans believe because it just sounds like something that makes sense to them. The same can be said for a number of stupid things republicans buy into like all democrats being socialists. First, they come up with an idea in their heads that sounds like it could be true and validates their pre-conceived notions about liberals, and then they accept it as fact.

Okay so the idea is that it's blasphemous in the liberal mind that any republican would be black. Sure it's unusual, but why would liberals give a shit? I don't. I don't understand why anyone would be republican let alone just a black guy.

Perhaps the thinking is that black voters would turn to Carson if he got the nomination. Okay, that very well could happen to some small degree, but I can't imagine that would be nearly enough to secure a republican win. Only republicans and perhaps a minority of black people would vote for him. He is as big of a threat as Trump in the general match up.

So what gives?

They know a black like Ben ain't gonna win over blacks with his positions and beliefs.

Knowing that the rich use wedge issues like God gays guns and racism to divide us, I can only assume the GOP are using Ben so they can use race to divide us.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

People with bigger paychecks spend more money.

Where does the extra money come from?

It's obvious if you just gave it some thought. People with bigger paychecks spend more money. And yeah, I know, prices will go up too. Not enough to offset the extra hundreds a month people would be making however.

If you raise the price of a hamburger by a buck (just pulling a figure out of thin air) and sell 700 burgers, your consumers now have $700 less to spend on other things. Now you give the $700 to your employees, and after you deduct taxes, they have, at most $600 to spend.

So how much did you increase consumer spending?

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus. If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it. Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

Um people in general would have higher paychecks you doofus.

Right. A $600 increase in paychecks. And a $700 decrease in disposable income. You moron.

If they like the hamburger, they will obviously pay an extra dollar for it.

Obviously. And that's an extra dollar they can't spend on something like groceries or entertainment.

Obviously they could still easily afford it because they make a few hundred extra bucks per month. More disposable income.

No need to repeat your economic ignorance.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work? I don't think you even know what you are saying.

Lol where are you getting this idea that employees only shop at the places they work?

Where did I say that?
And why would you count the higher income of the employees and ignore the lower disposable income of the customers?
Is it because you're stupid or because you don't understand economics?

I don't think you even know what you are saying.

I know exactly what I'm saying when I point out your ignorance.

I don't know how else to explain this to you. A few hundred extra a month easily pays for single dollar raiees in prices.

I don't know how else to explain this to you. A few hundred extra a month easily pays for single dollar raiees in prices.

I don't know how else to explain simple math to you.
You're not paying for a few hundred in monthly raises buy buying a single burger.

The extra money has to come from somewhere. If you sell 1000 burgers a week and raise prices by $1, you can earn $1000 more to give to your employees. They now have an extra $876, maximum, to spend.
The people who spent the extra $1000 on your burgers have $1000 less to spend at other stores.

So the burger customers spend less, the burger employees spend more.
How much have you increased consumer spending with your plan?

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Most of the attacks have came against a presidential candidate that isn't going to win but is black. Isn't it interesting that the national media has dug up more dirt on Ben Carson than any other white republican canidate so far. What explanation is for the fact most of the negativity has came against him and no othef canidate. Hillary has yet to answer any questions at all. Trump has been pounded a little but not nearly as much as Ben.

 

[MarcATL]

Blacks wouldn't vote for him. They are too savy to vote GOP. Only whites are that dumb.

A very small percentage of blacks vote Republican. Teeny, tiny, incy, wincy percentage.

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

[Liminal]

It's another one of those fables that republicans believe because it just sounds like something that makes sense to them. The same can be said for a number of stupid things republicans buy into like all democrats being socialists. First, they come up with an idea in their heads that sounds like it could be true and validates their pre-conceived notions about liberals, and then they accept it as fact.

Okay so the idea is that it's blasphemous in the liberal mind that any republican would be black. Sure it's unusual, but why would liberals give a shit? I don't. I don't understand why anyone would be republican let alone just a black guy.

Perhaps the thinking is that black voters would turn to Carson if he got the nomination. Okay, that very well could happen to some small degree, but I can't imagine that would be nearly enough to secure a republican win. Only republicans and perhaps a minority of black people would vote for him. He is as big of a threat as Trump in the general match up.

So what gives?

Because progressives seem to think that a black man can't be a conservative is my interpretation of the repub mind. They do seem to have a point though. Whenever a black person comes out as a con the progressives go ape shit with their attacks calling them Uncle Toms etc. So, in my opinion it's a legit opinion.

And who says the Pyramids didn't store grain anyway.

 

[westwall]

It's another one of those fables that republicans believe because it just sounds like something that makes sense to them. The same can be said for a number of stupid things republicans buy into like all democrats being socialists. First, they come up with an idea in their heads that sounds like it could be true and validates their pre-conceived notions about liberals, and then they accept it as fact.

Okay so the idea is that it's blasphemous in the liberal mind that any republican would be black. Sure it's unusual, but why would liberals give a shit? I don't. I don't understand why anyone would be republican let alone just a black guy.

Perhaps the thinking is that black voters would turn to Carson if he got the nomination. Okay, that very well could happen to some small degree, but I can't imagine that would be nearly enough to secure a republican win. Only republicans and perhaps a minority of black people would vote for him. He is as big of a threat as Trump in the general match up.

So what gives?

Because progressives seem to think that a black man can't be a conservative is my interpretation of the repub mind. They do seem to have a point though. Whenever a black person comes out as a con the progressives go ape shit with their attacks calling them Uncle Toms etc. So, in my opinion it's a legit opinion.

And who says the Pyramids didn't store grain anyway.

Pretty much everyone. The whole pyramids are grain storage was a rapidly discounted theory from over a century ago.

 

[Liminal]

It's another one of those fables that republicans believe because it just sounds like something that makes sense to them. The same can be said for a number of stupid things republicans buy into like all democrats being socialists. First, they come up with an idea in their heads that sounds like it could be true and validates their pre-conceived notions about liberals, and then they accept it as fact.

Okay so the idea is that it's blasphemous in the liberal mind that any republican would be black. Sure it's unusual, but why would liberals give a shit? I don't. I don't understand why anyone would be republican let alone just a black guy.

Perhaps the thinking is that black voters would turn to Carson if he got the nomination. Okay, that very well could happen to some small degree, but I can't imagine that would be nearly enough to secure a republican win. Only republicans and perhaps a minority of black people would vote for him. He is as big of a threat as Trump in the general match up.

So what gives?

Because progressives seem to think that a black man can't be a conservative is my interpretation of the repub mind. They do seem to have a point though. Whenever a black person comes out as a con the progressives go ape shit with their attacks calling them Uncle Toms etc. So, in my opinion it's a legit opinion.

And who says the Pyramids didn't store grain anyway.

Pretty much everyone. The whole pyramids are grain storage was a rapidly discounted theory from over a century ago.

I had no idea there was any theory like that until I saw the video of Dr. Carson's anthropological lecture.