UCLA now…Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First we have to get rid of all the maga idiots. There are more Americans than there are maga. There’s no reason our country, and the world, needs to be impacted by these fleas.

You realize Trump won the popular vote, right?

If "Did Not Vote" had been a presidential candidate, they would have beaten Donald Trump by 9.1 million votes, and they would have won 21 states, earning 265 electoral college votes to Trump's 175 and Harris's 98
https://www.environmentalvoter.org/updates/2024-was-landslidefor-did-not-vote

This election had the highest voter turnout in history.

Trump won the popular vote so the notion that everybody actually agrees with you is silly as phack.

Instead of denying reality perhaps you should consider why normal every day people would vote for someone like Trump and then take responsibility for your role in driving votes in his direction.

Repent and stop being an egotistical self righteous nimrod.

Nobody made those idiots vote for Trump. Regardless of whatever irrational excuse they made, they chose him fully knowing what he is capable of.

Yes, because YOU made him the more palatable option.

A random anonymous poster made the Democrats so unpalatable that it led people to think that Trump was the better option? Fascinating!

Yes, YOU and people like YOU are the reason Trump won.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UCLA will countersue and win.

Facts not on Trump's side.

I'm sure you think so.

Objective reality is UCLA has been discriminating on the basis of race.
Their admissions practices are designed to achieve racial diversity.
You might think racial diversity is a laudable goal but it is illegal.
Perhaps we can put these colleges on something like the pre-clearance plan we had in the civil rights act for the next 50 years to make sure any changes in their admissions methodology doesn't run afoul of the Civil rights act and the 14th amendment.

They will sign a consent decree, pay a fine in the hopes of getting their funding back.

[Anonymous]

This is great news.
Destroying Harvard as a cautionary tale would have been costly to America's educational landscape but crippling the UC system which has already crippled itself with the test blind policy is a relatively low cost way to make an example.

The Ivy+ might escape significant harm if we can just turn the UC system into the scapegoat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA will countersue and win.

Facts not on Trump's side.

I'm sure you think so.

Objective reality is UCLA has been discriminating on the basis of race.
Their admissions practices are designed to achieve racial diversity.
You might think racial diversity is a laudable goal but it is illegal.
Perhaps we can put these colleges on something like the pre-clearance plan we had in the civil rights act for the next 50 years to make sure any changes in their admissions methodology doesn't run afoul of the Civil rights act and the 14th amendment.

They will sign a consent decree, pay a fine in the hopes of getting their funding back.

Except the data says opposite. Black students make up 6.5% of the population, about the black overall population. Latino 22% - far less than the state population. Asian 35% - far more than the state population. Females make up more than 60% of students.

UCLA can rigorously defend its practices.
Whereas other universities trying to carefully curate their classes and hand select students to make a “balanced class” - UCLA does none of that. It’s stats and geography driven. It VERY carefully follows the law.

Please consider that this is politically motivated pure & simple.

Trump wants retribution. If you don’t see that, you are blind.

[Anonymous]

Good. Get rid of DEI and shrink the budget deficit. Win-win for the American people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is he working his way down the list of schools that rejected Barron or something?

I genuinely think this is the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is he working his way down the list of schools that rejected Barron or something?

I genuinely think this is the case.

Highly doubt he applied to UCLA..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA lost in court before it settled. The chancellor testified he knew there was a "jew exclusion zone" on campus.

I am not denying that they are selectively enforcing but that isn't a legal defense.

You know what. This is a fair point. However, did the court also ask for $1B as part of that settlement. The point is that it is up to courts to settle civil suits. It is not within the rights of US Government, under the direction of a dictatorial president, to selectively cut funding and ask for extortion money to double down on a court case loss.

Also, why would an attack on antisemitism require changes to trans-gender policy and DEI usage in admissions? This has absolutely nothing to do with allowing protesters to restrict the access of Jewish people on campus.

Lastly, I agree with a PP who said that the colleges need to grow a pair and stand up to this BS. It may take a few years, but as a united group - I think they have a very strong case against the government. And that is even with this gerrymandered Supreme Court that the dictator set up.

+100. Because as was shown with Columbia, it won’t stop here. This is not now or has it ever been about anti-semitism. And each time people fight them that is shown in court.

DP

Regardless, searing resentment toward our Jewish communities will likely be the lasting product of this outrageous encroachment on the independence of our colleges and universities.

This won’t be forgotten. It doesn’t matter what the “real reason” turns out to be.

It’s being done in their name. It reinforces just about every negative stereotype in the book. And after we’ve been lectured over and over again about the evils of cancel culture and DEI, it ironically reeks of selective cancel culture and selective DEI - you know, the same exact ideas but only for “chosen people”.

How far behind China will be when this idiocy is finally derailed?

This may be the most disheartening part of the last couple of years. I genuinely don’t get how “Never Again” became “It’s okay to perpetrate genocide if we are the ones doing it in Gaza” and “we have no issue with being used as the excuse for bringing fascism to America”. In my mind— worse than MAGA because the Jewish people know exactly where this is leading. They just don’t care unless they are the victims. As hypocritical as the Christian right— maybe more so.

Genocide usually doesn't give the victims an opportunity to unconditionally surrender and sue for peace. That is called a war.

First of all, as it relates to UCLA, the anti-semitism argument is a ruse that is really around punishment for DEI. Even you seem to be saying that. But as for what is happening in Gaza, get your information straight and THINK. Don’t just stick with a position because it fits your political party or chosen leader. Hamas was indeed given a chance to “unconditionally surrender”, but the people of Gaza are not the same as Hamas. That’s like saying, the Proud Boys are a danger to society, so we are going to commit genocide on the communities where they have a large presence — innocent citizens, elderly, and children be damned. Hamas made up less than 1% of the population for the Israelis started killing the population off, so ironically that percentage is probably higher now.

It’s sickening, and anyone with a hint of compassion or empathy (especially for those unlike themselves) would see it. Anti-DEI, anti-trans, anti-Gaza, anti-immigrant (non-white only)….you really don’t see that this is a pattern? Not only is it a pattern, it is one that has literally shown itself the entire life of a person by the initials of DJT, who grew up the child of a racist slumlord, and used considerable resources to go after innocent kids in Central Park due to their skin color.

In this moment, it is under the ruse of tackling anti-semitism, but make no mistake that this is all part of a sick pattern against people physically unlike him and led by a man with the initials DJT. America needs to Wake the F’ up! Actually, maybe that is what woke means….so I guess I am woke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good. Get rid of DEI and shrink the budget deficit. Win-win for the American people.

UCs have not had a DEI or affirmative action policy for decades so they already "got rid" of it. They admit more Asian candidates due to qualifications than the ivies. But UC application system is holistic and that's very subjective, save for GPA, which varies significantly by school anyway so it's really up to context. But they haven't admitted by race for decades.

Side note: I have been a reader for UC admissions in the past and I have gone through the training.

They will win their case when they sue Trump.

[Anonymous]

Hats off to UCLA & California for suing Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is he working his way down the list of schools that rejected Barron or something?

I genuinely think this is the case.

Highly doubt he applied to UCLA..

They probably expected schools to send him a letter of acceptance without even having to apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA will countersue and win.

Facts not on Trump's side.

I'm sure you think so.

Objective reality is UCLA has been discriminating on the basis of race.
Their admissions practices are designed to achieve racial diversity.
You might think racial diversity is a laudable goal but it is illegal.
Perhaps we can put these colleges on something like the pre-clearance plan we had in the civil rights act for the next 50 years to make sure any changes in their admissions methodology doesn't run afoul of the Civil rights act and the 14th amendment.

They will sign a consent decree, pay a fine in the hopes of getting their funding back.

Except the data says opposite. Black students make up 6.5% of the population, about the black overall population. Latino 22% - far less than the state population. Asian 35% - far more than the state population. Females make up more than 60% of students.

UCLA can rigorously defend its practices.
Whereas other universities trying to carefully curate their classes and hand select students to make a “balanced class” - UCLA does none of that. It’s stats and geography driven. It VERY carefully follows the law.

Please consider that this is politically motivated pure & simple.

Trump wants retribution. If you don’t see that, you are blind.

Being over-represented does not mean you aren't discriminated against.
You are too stupid for this conversation if you don't realize this.

This is definitely politically motivated, that doesn't mean it's wrong.
This is going to be a perennial issue. There are almost no negative political consequences for going after colleges for racial discrimination against whites and ORM and a lot of political benefits.
It's not just a matter of waiting the trump presidency.
College admissions is going to be a lot more transparent because nobody is going to put that toothpaste back in the tube and tell collges and universities they can hide their black box from public view.

For generations, colleges could discriminate against whites and ORM without any consequences. Now there are consequences. Good.

They can't fight this. At leat not the disclosure and transparency part of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA lost in court before it settled. The chancellor testified he knew there was a "jew exclusion zone" on campus.

I am not denying that they are selectively enforcing but that isn't a legal defense.

You know what. This is a fair point. However, did the court also ask for $1B as part of that settlement. The point is that it is up to courts to settle civil suits. It is not within the rights of US Government, under the direction of a dictatorial president, to selectively cut funding and ask for extortion money to double down on a court case loss.

Also, why would an attack on antisemitism require changes to trans-gender policy and DEI usage in admissions? This has absolutely nothing to do with allowing protesters to restrict the access of Jewish people on campus.

Lastly, I agree with a PP who said that the colleges need to grow a pair and stand up to this BS. It may take a few years, but as a united group - I think they have a very strong case against the government. And that is even with this gerrymandered Supreme Court that the dictator set up.

+100. Because as was shown with Columbia, it won’t stop here. This is not now or has it ever been about anti-semitism. And each time people fight them that is shown in court.

DP

Regardless, searing resentment toward our Jewish communities will likely be the lasting product of this outrageous encroachment on the independence of our colleges and universities.

This won’t be forgotten. It doesn’t matter what the “real reason” turns out to be.

It’s being done in their name. It reinforces just about every negative stereotype in the book. And after we’ve been lectured over and over again about the evils of cancel culture and DEI, it ironically reeks of selective cancel culture and selective DEI - you know, the same exact ideas but only for “chosen people”.

How far behind China will be when this idiocy is finally derailed?

This may be the most disheartening part of the last couple of years. I genuinely don’t get how “Never Again” became “It’s okay to perpetrate genocide if we are the ones doing it in Gaza” and “we have no issue with being used as the excuse for bringing fascism to America”. In my mind— worse than MAGA because the Jewish people know exactly where this is leading. They just don’t care unless they are the victims. As hypocritical as the Christian right— maybe more so.

Genocide usually doesn't give the victims an opportunity to unconditionally surrender and sue for peace. That is called a war.

First of all, as it relates to UCLA, the anti-semitism argument is a ruse that is really around punishment for DEI. Even you seem to be saying that. But as for what is happening in Gaza, get your information straight and THINK. Don’t just stick with a position because it fits your political party or chosen leader. Hamas was indeed given a chance to “unconditionally surrender”, but the people of Gaza are not the same as Hamas. That’s like saying, the Proud Boys are a danger to society, so we are going to commit genocide on the communities where they have a large presence — innocent citizens, elderly, and children be damned. Hamas made up less than 1% of the population for the Israelis started killing the population off, so ironically that percentage is probably higher now.

It’s sickening, and anyone with a hint of compassion or empathy (especially for those unlike themselves) would see it. Anti-DEI, anti-trans, anti-Gaza, anti-immigrant (non-white only)….you really don’t see that this is a pattern? Not only is it a pattern, it is one that has literally shown itself the entire life of a person by the initials of DJT, who grew up the child of a racist slumlord, and used considerable resources to go after innocent kids in Central Park due to their skin color.

In this moment, it is under the ruse of tackling anti-semitism, but make no mistake that this is all part of a sick pattern against people physically unlike him and led by a man with the initials DJT. America needs to Wake the F’ up! Actually, maybe that is what woke means….so I guess I am woke.

Just because someone doesn't think like you doesn't mean they aren't thinking straight.
I think you are the one that is letting your biases cloud your judgement.

When Japan Bombed Pearl harvor, they killed 2000 Americans.
The Gazans chose Hamas.
The people of Japan didn't choose their emperor and yet we killed 2 million japanese, many of them civilians that died from privation and the last ones died in from nuclear fallout many years after the war was over.

This is war.
A war Hamas started and Israel has every right to continue prosecuting this war until Hamas surrenders unconditionally.
We can make a political decision about whether we want to support or condemn that war and how it is being conducted but they have the right.

-Being Anti-DEI is being anti-racial discrimination, anti-equality of outcomes.

-What you call anti-trans mostly revolves around 2 things:
1) the fairness of men in women's sports and the decency of men in women's locker rooms.
2) the explosion of trans diagnosis among children, many of them in elementary school, most of them girls (contrary to prior patterns) and a disproportionate share of those girls being neuro atypical.

-I don't think I am anti-Gaza but I am anti-terrorist and there is a lot of FAFO going on in Gaza.
If the Gazans outnumber Hamas 99::1 as you say, then they should throw off the yoke of Hamas by force.
But they don't because most of them support Hamas ort at least the notion that Israsel belongs to them and the jews should be driven into the sea.

I am most definitely not anti-immigrant. I think some of what trump is doing might be necessary but the cruelty is not. I don't think he should be wasting time and resources trying to overturn birthright citizenship. He loses so many lawsuits he should get on the Supreme court frequent flyer plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Get rid of DEI and shrink the budget deficit. Win-win for the American people.

UCs have not had a DEI or affirmative action policy for decades so they already "got rid" of it. They admit more Asian candidates due to qualifications than the ivies. But UC application system is holistic and that's very subjective, save for GPA, which varies significantly by school anyway so it's really up to context. But they haven't admitted by race for decades.

Side note: I have been a reader for UC admissions in the past and I have gone through the training.

They will win their case when they sue Trump.

Maybe so, Trump loses most of the time, as he should.

The UCs have been prohibited from discriminating based on race since the 1990s but they have searched for and found ways around it to try and achieve the desired racial diversity.

At first they were trying to figure out how to maintain standards while achieving diversity but now they just care about diversity and they went test blind in order to get there.

The UCLA medical school at the very least is being racially discriminatory and I would bet the rest of the school is as well.

The students at UCLA are less impressive than they were pre-BLM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Get rid of DEI and shrink the budget deficit. Win-win for the American people.

UCs have not had a DEI or affirmative action policy for decades so they already "got rid" of it. They admit more Asian candidates due to qualifications than the ivies. But UC application system is holistic and that's very subjective, save for GPA, which varies significantly by school anyway so it's really up to context. But they haven't admitted by race for decades.

Side note: I have been a reader for UC admissions in the past and I have gone through the training.

They will win their case when they sue Trump.

Maybe so, Trump loses most of the time, as he should.

The UCs have been prohibited from discriminating based on race since the 1990s but they have searched for and found ways around it to try and achieve the desired racial diversity.

At first they were trying to figure out how to maintain standards while achieving diversity but now they just care about diversity and they went test blind in order to get there.

The UCLA medical school at the very least is being racially discriminatory and I would bet the rest of the school is as well.

The students at UCLA are less impressive than they were pre-BLM.

Say more, with evidence.