It’s always projection. They pre-empt criticism by taking whatever words are (rightly) being directed at them or could be used against them in the future and just flipping them around, making them lose their original meaning in the eyes of their adherents.
If you’re actually serious, literally just google voter turnout numbers in texas. Also look at how close some races were and compare that to the nonvoting registered voter population. I’ve seen several analyses of that recently
Here is the TX government record of voter turnout: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/historical/70-92.shtml
Here is the TX government reporting of election results: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/historical/presidential.shtml
2020 Presidential: 66% turnout, 52% of the VAP (voting age population) voted. Trump won by 600k votes, 4.5M of VAP was not registered.
2018 Senatorial: 53% turnout, 42% of VAP turned out. Ted “I posted incest porn on twitter on 9/11” Cruz won by 215k, 4.1M of VAP was not registered.
2018 Gubernatorial: 53% turnout, 42% of VAP turned out. Abbott won by 1.1M, 4.1M of VAP was not registered.
2016 Presidential: 59% turnout, 46% of VAP turned out. Trump won by 800k votes, 4.2M of VAP was not registered.
2012 Presidential: 59% turnout, 44% of VAP turned out. Romney won by 1.2M, 4.6M of VAP was not registered.
2008 Presidential: 60% turnout, 46% of VAP turned out. McCain won by 900k, 4.2M of VAP was not registered.
2004 Presidential: 56% turnout, 47% of VAP turned out. Bush won by 1.7M, 3M of VAP was not registered
2000 Presidential: total blowout for Bush, no two ways about it. He might have plunged us in to a 20 year long war and completely ravished innocent civilians in the middle east, but dont you just want to have a beer with the guy?
44% do not care, 27% intended to register but didn’t, 11% are paranoid about voter roles, 9% say it isn’t convenient (and Republicans sure have made it inconvenient), and 6% literally don’t know how to register. From that same article and polling data, 35% of unregistered voters do not believe their vote will affect the political process, and 30% don’t think it’ll change election results. AND 40% of these care who wins political races, but don’t vote.
These races are not close compared to the number of non-registered VAP. Young people are more left-leaning and show up to the polls at shockingly low rates. Minorities are typically more likely to vote Dem, but turn out at lower rates (partially due to disenfranchisement). If the non-voters voted, many races of the past 30+ years would’ve been close or Dem.
As a flaming red socialist, I will say that (while it seems to have been effective), the “black jobs” rhetoric is disingenuous.
Saying that [x group] will take [y group] jobs is a standard thing. You could say, “California expats will take Texan jobs,” for instance. This doesn’t mean there is a specific class of job that Texans are suitable for. It means there are jobs that could be held by Texans that would be taken by California expats instead. In Trump’s case, there is no evidence for such job-taking, but he clearly means to say something specific - and it isn’t that jobs should be/are segregated.
So, anyway. It doesn’t really matter so long as it hurts Trump, but this type of rhetoric is misleading, disingenuous, and ultimately harmful to the state of political discourse.
Edit: This caused a shit storm. This is the point I’m trying but apparently failing to make:
When we make criticisms of the other side, those criticisms are usually stronger in the long run if they’re based on the actual positions they take rather than straw-manned ones. And I think this is “black jobs” rhetoric is a straw-manned critique.
Yeah those LIEbrals are always pRoJeCtInG! Probably because they’re fascists.