Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

[Dr. Keith]

I understand that when she said that her paternal grandparents were bigoted against her mom because she was "part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware" that she was talking about a distant ancestor or something.

Finally. At least we made some progress on one front.

ETA: your weak attempt at saying that she meant her mother a full blooded Native American was one of the funnier parts of this thread, though. So thanks for bringing it back up. Reading is fundamental, kids!

 

[Dr. Keith]

I've been busy, but just thought I would drop in and remind the Democrats here there is zero evidence Liz is a Cherokee or Cherokee/Delaware hybrid, or any part thereof, and she still hasn't apologized for making the claim. Even fake news is advising her to give it up.

Not even a very good attempt at a fringe reset. But hey, others will pick it up from here and it may get things moving nonetheless.

 

[The Big Dog]

Finally. At least we made some progress on one front.

amen, it is the dumbest damn explanation that the warren apologists have come up with yet, and that is saying alot.

 

[crescent]

I understand that when she said that her paternal grandparents were bigoted against her mom because she was "part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware" that she was talking about a distant ancestor or something.

Set theory is a thing. Most of us grasp the basics by 5th grade or so but....

Her mother can have ancestry that is part Cherokee, and part Delaware, and part white. In fact, the parts that are Cherokee and Delaware can be very small parts relative to the whole, and do not imply that there was any tribal membership.

It's like when I might say that I am part German, even though all of my grandparents were born in the U.S. Two of them were born to immigrants of German ethnicity, and in common use, it was common to say describe ancestry as being "I am part X", even if "X" was some generations back.

The fact that she didn't mention being mostly white does not mean that she was not mostly white. She only mentioned the parts of her ancestry that resulted in difficulties.



ETA: Her mother did not claim to be half Cherokee and half Delaware, which seems to be the gist of TBD's claim. "Half" and "Part" are not fully synonymous.

 

[d4m10n]

Agreed, but they didn't compare her DNA to any North American Plains Indian DNA.

The Five Civilized Tribes didn't make the list of Plains Indians, presumably because they originated from the east coast prior to forcible removals to Indian Territory. Plains Indians would be a nice reference population to have, though. Until then, we'll just have to make do with what we do actually have.

A huge issue is that people are worried about the representativeness of the Native American groups. First, if you are looking for someone with indigenous North American ancestry, Mexican groups are sufficient. If anything this will reduce your power to detect, not produce false positives. Second, look at the plot, Warren’s haplotype is positioned between Canadian and Mexican natives:

 

[The Big Dog]

w: "I have a distance ancestor that was native american."

Republicans "She calling herself a Cherokee Princess!! Pocahontas!!"

False

"You can’t marry her because she’s part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware. And um, after fighting it as long as they could, my parents went off, they eloped."

E. Warren

Sounds like she is saying her mom was that ancestor.

Set theory is a thing. Most of us grasp the basics by 5th grade or so but....

I'm guess that "set theory" is the "thing' you are using to cover up the fact that her actual statement can't be reconciled with the results of the tests or the ridiculous spin her apologists have taken on it.

Claim: "I have a distance ancestor that was native american."
Actual statement: ""You can’t marry her because she’s part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware. And um, after fighting it as long as they could, my parents went off, they eloped."

The actual statement makes zero reference to distant relative, but rather states that her mom was discriminated against because she was partially native american.

The claim that she was only talking about a distant ancestor is a sham.

 

[crescent]

I'm guess that "set theory" is the "thing' you are using to cover up the fact that her actual statement can't be reconciled with the results of the tests or the ridiculous spin her apologists have taken on it.

Claim: "I have a distance ancestor that was native american."
Actual statement: ""You can’t marry her because she’s part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware. And um, after fighting it as long as they could, my parents went off, they eloped."

The actual statement makes zero reference to distant relative, but rather states that her mom was discriminated against because she was partially native american.

The claim that she was only talking about a distant ancestor is a sham.

Her mother actually is partially Native American, so yes, that works. This was the era of the One Drop Rule. All that was needed to arouse bigotry was a local suspicion of mixed race ancestry.

I mean, look at the lynchings that were taking place at the time. Look at the burning of Greenwood just a few years before the marriage. This was not a reasonable time in race relations.

It is really so hard to accept that even a rumor of mixed-race ancestry could upset people?

 

[Elagabalus]

I'm guess that "set theory" is the "thing' you are using to cover up the fact that her actual statement can't be reconciled with the results of the tests or the ridiculous spin her apologists have taken on it.

Claim: "I have a distance ancestor that was native american."
Actual statement: ""You can’t marry her because she’s part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware. And um, after fighting it as long as they could, my parents went off, they eloped."

The actual statement makes zero reference to distant relative, but rather states that her mom was discriminated against because she was partially native american.

The claim that she was only talking about a distant ancestor is a sham.

Next up, TBD starts disparaging Liz and her mom jeans(sic).

 

[Dr. Keith]

Actual statement: ""You can’t marry her because she’s part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware. And um, after fighting it as long as they could, my parents went off, they eloped."

The actual statement makes zero reference to distant relative, but rather states that her mom was discriminated against because she was partially native american.

The claim that she was only talking about a distant ancestor is a sham.

I love this. It is like art.

Maybe you are unfamiliar with how racism plays out in the countryside. Maybe you don't get that just being "known as" Indian was enough for some people to discriminate against your family. It is precious that you never had to worry about your ancestry the way other people have had to. Hang on to that innocence. Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.

 

[jimbob]

Agreed, but they didn't compare her DNA to any North American Plains Indian DNA.

The Five Civilized Tribes didn't make the list of Plains Indians, presumably because they originated from the east coast prior to forcible removals to Indian Territory. Plains Indians would be a nice reference population to have, though. Until then, we'll just have to make do with what we do actually have.

A huge issue is that people are worried about the representativeness of the Native American groups. First, if you are looking for someone with indigenous North American ancestry, Mexican groups are sufficient. If anything this will reduce your power to detect, not produce false positives. Second, look at the plot, Warren’s haplotype is positioned between Canadian and Mexican natives:

Thanks dam10n - this part is pretty important - but should be quite easy to understand

If you are looking for someone with indigenous North American ancestry, Mexican groups are sufficient. If anything this will reduce your power to detect, not produce false positives.

Warren has markers that are found in indigenous American populations but not European populations. The fact that the reference population came from South America means that they can only test for those markers that are common to both populations, which could make her indigenous ancestry seem more remote than it actually was.
​

Given her stated family lore is consistent with her DNA, it's reasonable to accept it rather than a more exotic, and less plausible idea that somehow she has indigenous South American ancestry.

There is every reason for her to have believed her family lore and it seems to be borne out by her DNA. It's silly (or disingenuous) to pretend otherwise.

 

[pgwenthold]

Given her stated family lore is consistent with her DNA, it's reasonable to accept it rather than a more exotic, and less plausible idea that somehow she has indigenous South American ancestry.

There is every reason for her to have believed her family lore and it seems to be borne out by her DNA. It's silly (or disingenuous) to pretend otherwise.

But, you see, it's possible that the DNA markers they discovered could have been implanted by aliens that visited after she got elected to congress.

Did you ever think of that? It just shows that she is making it all up.

 

[Dr. Keith]

There is every reason for her to have believed her family lore and it seems to be borne out by her DNA. It's silly (or disingenuous) to pretend otherwise.

Agreed, but context is everything.

We are posting in the USA Politics section, not Science, Mathematics, Medicine and Technology.

 

[The Big Dog]

Her mother actually is partially Native American, so yes, that works. This was the era of the One Drop Rule. All that was needed to arouse bigotry was a local suspicion of mixed race ancestry.

I mean, look at the lynchings that were taking place at the time. Look at the burning of Greenwood just a few years before the marriage. This was not a reasonable time in race relations.

It is really so hard to accept that even a rumor of mixed-race ancestry could upset people?

There ya go, so all those people claiming that warren just made reference to a distant ancestor are baloney.

Good job, good effort.

 

[theprestige]

Thanks dam10n - this part is pretty important - but should be quite easy to understand

If you are looking for someone with indigenous North American ancestry, Mexican groups are sufficient. If anything this will reduce your power to detect, not produce false positives.

Warren has markers that are found in indigenous American populations but not European populations. The fact that the reference population came from South America means that they can only test for those markers that are common to both populations, which could make her indigenous ancestry seem more remote than it actually was.
​

Given her stated family lore is consistent with her DNA, it's reasonable to accept it rather than a more exotic, and less plausible idea that somehow she has indigenous South American ancestry.

There is every reason for her to have believed her family lore and it seems to be borne out by her DNA. It's silly (or disingenuous) to pretend otherwise.

Turns out Warren is a person of color after all.

 

[Stacyhs]

It's amazing how desperate some people in this thread are to denigrate Warren. The need to misrepresent facts and just downright lie in order to support what this is really about is almost comical. This isn't really about Warren for most of them; it's about supporting Trump and everything he says and does. For at least one other, it's not about Trump and it's not about Warren herself; it's about the opportunity to disparage and insult someone s/he has never met because it's what s/he does.

 

[The Big Dog]

LEAVE ELIZABETH ALONE!

 

[theprestige]

It's amazing how desperate some people in this thread are to denigrate Warren. The need to misrepresent facts and just downright lie in order to support what this is really about is almost comical. This isn't really about Warren for most of them; it's about supporting Trump and everything he says and does. For at least one other, it's not about Trump and it's not about Warren herself; it's about the opportunity to disparage and insult someone s/he has never met because it's what s/he does.

For me, it's nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with the silliness of "diversity" in this country. That Warren ended up in this situation at all. That anyone at Harvard ever for a moment thought it was a good idea to tout her as a person of color. Even if Donald Trump never existed, this situation would still be tragicomedy gold.

 

[Dr. Keith]

It's amazing how desperate some people in this thread are to denigrate Warren. The need to misrepresent facts and just downright lie in order to support what this is really about is almost comical.

I've heard that when people use logical fallacies in their arguments it is because they have no argument. I think misrepresenting the actual facts is an even more telling characteristic of a poorly made argument.

If there were a smoking gun we would have seen it by now. So far: nothingburger and a recipe for a nothingburger.

This isn't really about Warren for most of them; it's about supporting Trump and everything he says and does. For at least one other, it's not about Trump and it's not about Warren herself; it's about the opportunity to disparage and insult someone s/he has never met because it's what s/he does.

Indeed.

 

[theprestige]

LEAVE ELIZABETH ALONE!

Why are you telling us to ignore minorities?

 

[jimbob]

Turns out Warren is a person of color after all.

It turns out that her family history was probably accurate.