Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

71 Percent Say Keep Redskins Name

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    With all the press over the last year I expected a bigger change

    Originally posted by FuriousXGeorge View Post
    It was 79% a year ago, 89% in 1992. I doubt the "liberal media" (lol what kind of douche uses that term?) was that surprised. Momentum is definitely behind change, but ignorant racist traditions take some time to crumble.
    I don't attribute the high number to racism though, I think most people just don't give a damn what name some stupid football team calls its team. Especially with all the shit going down around the world and in this country, this issue doesn't crack the top 1000 in most people's priorities.
    "I could buy you." - The Village Idiot

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Riccardo View Post
      I don't attribute the high number to racism though, I think most people just don't give a damn what name some stupid football team calls its team. Especially with all the shit going down around the world and in this country, this issue doesn't crack the top 1000 in most people's priorities.
      The league is incredibly popular mass entertainment, people care way more about much more trivial shit surrounding the sport. But anyway, 9% is a massive change in national opinion over a year. This is a decades long process that is now hopefully snowballing.

      Something like a player refusing to play for them over it would be a tipping point, but I doubt anybody would actually do that besides a Kluwe like shit stirrer.

      Comment


      • #18
        Exactly

        Originally posted by Riccardo View Post
        I don't attribute the high number to racism though, I think most people just don't give a damn what name some stupid football team calls its team. Especially with all the shit going down around the world and in this country, this issue doesn't crack the top 1000 in most people's priorities.
        My thoughts exactly.

        I guess the liberal media thing definitely came off as hugely douchey to a few people...Point taken. I truly thought the numbers would be a lot higher for the name change based on the media coverage.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Sugar12 View Post
          My thoughts exactly.

          I guess the liberal media thing definitely came off as hugely douchey to a few people...Point taken. I truly thought the numbers would be a lot higher for the name change based on the media coverage.
          Not making an equivalence between the topics, just using this to illustrate what I am talking about with slow change.

          Representing one of the largest shifts of public opinion in Gallup history, 87% of Americans approve of marriage between blacks and whites, up from 4% in 1958. Older Americans are the least likely to approve.




          You don't get majority support for interracial marriage until the late nineties. People hold on to racist attitudes. Racists die off more than they change their mind, though it does happen. Changing 9% of minds is a big deal in this process.

          And honestly, it's not like the controversy got wall to wall coverage. It came up because a Native American group fed up with the racist name released a great ad and a trademark suit was decided. Occasionally media guys get on a soap box about it. It's not like it was some huge coordinated political campaign.

          Comment


          • #20
            Bullwinkle was a six sigma blackbelt

            At least he said he was
            John Erlichman, one of President Richard Nixon's closest aides, has admitted America's "War on Drugs" was a hoax designed to vilify and disrupt "the antiwar left and black people" when it was launched in 1971.

            Comment


            • #21
              Technically, I am one of those. I just don't give a shit about any of it.

              Comment

              Working...
              X