Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobTheCoward said:
It is a claim about the claim she made on that document. Her evidence at the time was flimsy.
Click to expand...

Her evidence at the time was exactly the same evidence used by everyone during all of history before DNA tests became a thing. :rolleyes:
 
pgwenthold said:
I've been seeing responses saying things like, "Oh, but she's not actually part of the tribe" and stuff like that.

And the answer is, of course not. And she never claimed to be.

But yeah, knock down that straw man.

She's going after Trump to give the million dollars. His response is .... weird. It's one thing to say, "I wasn't serious" when your bluff gets called. Or "that's not good enough." But the whole, "I didn't say that" is just mental.

I mean, who are the supporters stupid enough to buy that?
Click to expand...

She should just now keep going on and on about he's a welcher, when anyone asks her anything about anything just say "I'm not a welcher like Trump". So asked about the economy - "Trump welched on his bet with me", asked about healthcare "I've never welched but Trump welched on his bet with me".


Seems to be the new USA way!
 
She provides proof she lied and Dems declare victory. Nothing unusual about that. A large dose of confirmation bias mixed in with some nebulous DNA results and we finally have "proof" that Fauxcanontas is indeed a squaw. Give me a break.
 
BrooklynBaby said:
She provides proof she lied and Dems declare victory. Nothing unusual about that. A large dose of confirmation bias mixed in with some nebulous DNA results and we finally have "proof" that Fauxcanontas is indeed a squaw. Give me a break.
Click to expand...

What was the lie?
 
crescent said:
If the intermarriage from the family story occurred in Oklahoma, it can still work - the marriage in question might have been with someone who was themselves mixed race. Many of the Cherokee were themselves of mixed race generations before the expulsion to Oklahoma.

Remember, we are looking at the marriage of Warren's parents, nearly a century ago. The "one drop" rule was still a thing, in culture at least. So Warren's mother's family was suspected of being part native American. that could easily mean that they just knew that Warren's mother's grandmother married a Cherokee who might have had predominantly white ancestry to begin with

(I know that legally, the "one drop rule" didn't apply to Native American ancestry. But culturally, it probably still did in many circles.)

I gotta add, one of the whitest white people I've ever known (fair skin, blue eyes, white-blonde hair) had an ancestor on the Dawes role and was an active member of the Cherokee tribe. You can't miss those strong twangy Okie accents. You don't need to look even remotely Native American to actually be Native American, in the sense of having shared ancestry and culture.
Click to expand...

And there is no reason to think that any of this has to do with "how much Native American blood" she had. No one was basing it on the "one drop" rule. They were basing it a) the fact it happened (someone's ancestor somewhere was a Native American" and b) bigotry.

Family stories work that way. Here's one from my family, that I have known most of my life

I had some grandparent who "went west, and was never heard from again." This was the family story. My grandmother knew it very well. My dad used to give her a hard time because Dad said he probably hooked up with some Indian squaw. My very religious (and bigoted grandma) was very, very offended by it, but Dad teased her about it all the time. The family's belief is that "the Indians got him."

Well, in recent years, I have done the digging into the family tree, and figured out who it is. The person in question appears to have been my Grandmother's great-grandfather.

So what's the point? If I told people that I have an ancestor who was killed by Indians, does it matter that it's 5 generations back? That's my family story. And just 1 - 2 generations ago, it was sufficiently scandalous to suggest that the guy hooked up with an Indian squaw. Despite the fact that none of those people actually knew him, the family lore is enough.

It's not about how much Native American blood anyone had. It's that someone had an Indian ancestor, and that was all that mattered for the bigots on the other side.

It's not complicated.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Her story seems clearly describing relations that occurred in Oklahoma. If the source of Cherokee blood is pre Oklahoma and they just so happened to end up in Oklahoma with the Cherokee, I don't think that aligns.
Click to expand...

What evidence is there that she ever used her Native American ancestry cynically to benefit from affirmative action or other similar schemes? Seems to me it's just a piece of family trivia that's been passed down the generations. An amusing anecdote about ancestors running off to have a taboo marriage, nothing more. It's like people bragging about how they can trace their family back to a small town in Ireland, or the Mayflower, or some president. It's largely pointless anecdotes that people rarely care about enough to verify beyond "that's what grandad said".

I don't see any character flaw in that.
 
Last edited:
pgwenthold said:
I've been seeing responses saying things like, "Oh, but she's not actually part of the tribe" and stuff like that.

And the answer is, of course not. And she never claimed to be.

But yeah, knock down that straw man.

She's going after Trump to give the million dollars. His response is .... weird. It's one thing to say, "I wasn't serious" when your bluff gets called. Or "that's not good enough." But the whole, "I didn't say that" is just mental.

I mean, who are the supporters stupid enough to buy that?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
What evidence is there that she ever used her Native American ancestry cynically to benefit from affirmative action or other similar schemes? Seems to me it's just a piece of family trivia that's been passed down the generations. An amusing anecdote about ancestors running off have taboo marriage, nothing more. It's like people bragging about how they can trace their family back to a small town in Ireland, or the Mayflower, or some president. It's largely pointless anecdotes that people rarely care about enough to verify beyond "that's what grandad said".

I don't see any character flaw in that.
Click to expand...

I see a huge character flaw.
 
BobTheCoward said:
What was the lie?
Click to expand...

The lie is that she is of Native American heritage - Cherokee, I believe. One study showed that everyone in the world can trace their DNA back to four black women who left Africa a long, long time ago. But, that doesn't mean we can all claim we are Africans. Wait, according to Fauxcahontas maybe that's exactly what it means. She's black, too!
 
BrooklynBaby said:
She provides proof she lied and Dems declare victory. Nothing unusual about that. A large dose of confirmation bias mixed in with some nebulous DNA results and we finally have "proof" that Fauxcanontas is indeed a squaw. Give me a break.
Click to expand...

The only lie that it proved was Trump's. He promised he would donate a million dollars to charity if she took a DNA test and now he's denying he said that.

It sort of like Trump saying he'll release his taxes if nominated or Ithat he didn't pay off Stormy Daniels, he didn't fire Mueller because of Russia, the check is in the mail and drain the swamp.
 
Last edited:
BrooklynBaby said:
She provides proof she lied and Dems declare victory. Nothing unusual about that. A large dose of confirmation bias mixed in with some nebulous DNA results and we finally have "proof" that Fauxcanontas is indeed a squaw. Give me a break.
Click to expand...

Care to expand on that?
 
BrooklynBaby said:
She provides proof she lied and Dems declare victory. Nothing unusual about that. A large dose of confirmation bias mixed in with some nebulous DNA results and we finally have "proof" that Fauxcanontas is indeed a squaw. Give me a break.
Click to expand...

Careful. You might injure your back doing the logical contortions necessary to put that spin on it.
 
Last edited:
BrooklynBaby said:
The lie is that she is of Native American heritage - Cherokee, I believe. One study showed that everyone in the world can trace their DNA back to four black women who left Africa a long, long time ago. But, that doesn't mean we can all claim we are Africans. Wait, according to Fauxcahontas maybe that's exactly what it means. She's black, too!
Click to expand...

A) it is only a lie if she didn't believe those stories. Claiming something you think is true even if it isn't actually true is not a lie.

B) yes we can all claim it.
 
Say... what is the margin of error on these tests anyway?

First of all you have the DNA test

Then comparing those results to cultural groups....

Hmmm, I am sure betsy's expert addressed it but I can't find it?

What did her sciectician say about the margin of error?

Certainly it is larger than 1/1024, right?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom