Trump's Silent Endorsement of White Supremacists

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't lie, break contracts and dare people to sue if they don't like being stiffed.

Now, please don't take this the wrong way, but you are hardly going to admit that you do otherwise, right? This is going to be much more so for a very public businessman and politician.

To your question though - I can only HOPE that popularity might better correspond with electability next time. Last time, Cheato lost the popular vote, yet ended up in office. Republican gerrymandering, their fake news, and help from Russian trolls, bots and financiers helped make that possible, and they'll do it again if Cheato gets his way.

The left needs to also stop playing the victim of the right and seriously get a candidate that will bring the party and the American people together a lot better than last round.

Well, the Democrat has won 6 of the last 7 popular votes, so not exactly failing poorly in that respect.

 

[blastula]

Trump’s political career has been marked with both subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to white racists. He rode to the top of the Republican presidential polls in 2011 in part by embracing the “birther” movement that questioned whether the nation’s first black president was born in the United States. Trump also blew dog whistles at a every opportunity during the 2016 campaign, and attacked a Mexican judge and called to ban all Muslim immigrants to the United States.

Oh, nice objective reporting used here.

What was false or unfair about it?

 

[laughing dog]

Trump’s political career has been marked with both subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to white racists. He rode to the top of the Republican presidential polls in 2011 in part by embracing the “birther” movement that questioned whether the nation’s first black president was born in the United States. Trump also blew dog whistles at a every opportunity during the 2016 campaign, and attacked a Mexican judge and called to ban all Muslim immigrants to the United States.

Oh, nice objective reporting used here.

What was false or unfair about it?

It is an accurate portrayal of Trump.

 

[RavenSky]

Trump’s political career has been marked with both subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to white racists. He rode to the top of the Republican presidential polls in 2011 in part by embracing the “birther” movement that questioned whether the nation’s first black president was born in the United States. Trump also blew dog whistles at a every opportunity during the 2016 campaign, and attacked a Mexican judge and called to ban all Muslim immigrants to the United States.

Oh, nice objective reporting used here.

What was false or unfair about it?

She's just trying to bait me :rollingeyes:

 

[whichphilosophy]

Trump’s political career has been marked with both subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to white racists. He rode to the top of the Republican presidential polls in 2011 in part by embracing the “birther” movement that questioned whether the nation’s first black president was born in the United States. Trump also blew dog whistles at a every opportunity during the 2016 campaign, and attacked a Mexican judge and called to ban all Muslim immigrants to the United States.

Oh, nice objective reporting used here.

What was false or unfair about it?

It is an accurate portrayal of Trump.

Did he question Obama's citizenship during the last election campaign or the one before? That was resolved long before.

The actual bans in place as I understand cover 7 Muslim countries but he omitted Saudi Arabia from the list.

There's nothing wrong with insisting people entering the USA do this legally. I know the Marxist mantra is no human is illegal. There is nothing wrong with temporarily restricting people for national security reasons.

In the UK a worse problem is housing everyone where housing construction is about 2 million behind our requirements. We also have a security problem where radicalized individuals have been travelling back and forth to Libya (thanks to US foreign policy disasters) Iraq and Syria some of whom fought for ISIS. Banning everyone is nonsense but addressing security risks on a temporary basis would make sense.

 

[Opoponax]

Now, please don't take this the wrong way, but you are hardly going to admit that you do otherwise, right? This is going to be much more so for a very public businessman and politician.

To your question though - I can only HOPE that popularity might better correspond with electability next time. Last time, Cheato lost the popular vote, yet ended up in office. Republican gerrymandering, their fake news, and help from Russian trolls, bots and financiers helped make that possible, and they'll do it again if Cheato gets his way.

The left needs to also stop playing the victim of the right and seriously get a candidate that will bring the party and the American people together a lot better than last round.

Well, the Democrat has won 6 of the last 7 popular votes, so not exactly failing poorly in that respect.

Were it not for the electoral college backfiring, the last Republican President may very well have been George Bush Sr.

That says a lot. I'm too fakakta to expound though.

 

[SLD]

Fuck Trump.... totally and completely and utterly fuck Trump.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-defends-all-sides-comment-n793001

This little fucking moron might as well blame both sides in WWII. After all, those fighting fascists invaded France. The Germans were just peacefully occupying it when we did so. Lot of blame to go around, right you dumbfuck?

Trump is worse than even I could have imagined.

Impeach the shit.

SLD

 

[SLD]

Trump’s political career has been marked with both subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to white racists. He rode to the top of the Republican presidential polls in 2011 in part by embracing the “birther” movement that questioned whether the nation’s first black president was born in the United States. Trump also blew dog whistles at a every opportunity during the 2016 campaign, and attacked a Mexican judge and called to ban all Muslim immigrants to the United States.

Oh, nice objective reporting used here.

What was false or unfair about it?

I think it's grossly unfair. To those of us who oppose him. It's way too nice a view of this fucktard. I'd call him a cunt but he lacks the depth and warmth.

SLD

 

[whichphilosophy]

Fuck Trump.... totally and completely and utterly fuck Trump.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-defends-all-sides-comment-n793001

This little fucking moron might as well blame both sides in WWII. After all, those fighting fascists invaded France. The Germans were just peacefully occupying it when we did so. Lot of blame to go around, right you dumbfuck?

Trump is worse than even I could have imagined.

Impeach the shit.

SLD

Impeach because some ultra left wing and ultra right wingers went around seeking trouble and resultant publicity? In this case it involved violence causing death. This is not Germany invading another country and those opposing represent the people.

The equation is as follows:

Self-serving Ultra-Leftist/Anarchist Hoodlums + Self-serving Right-wing Hoodlums = Hoodlums

This event didn't involve the American 'people' but a few fringes

 

[jab]

Are you ready to blame the Jews for their 'participation' in concentration camps, too?

Uh, have you ever heard of a similar question used about one beating his own wife?

Are you referring to the question about wasn't the wife to blame for getting beaten, didn't she somehow provoke it?

 

[jab]

Trump’s political career has been marked with both subtle and not-so-subtle appeals to white racists. He rode to the top of the Republican presidential polls in 2011 in part by embracing the “birther” movement that questioned whether the nation’s first black president was born in the United States. Trump also blew dog whistles at a every opportunity during the 2016 campaign, and attacked a Mexican judge and called to ban all Muslim immigrants to the United States.

Oh, nice objective reporting used here.

What was false or unfair about it?

It is an accurate portrayal of Trump.

Did he question Obama's citizenship during the last election campaign or the one before? That was resolved long before.

The actual bans in place as I understand cover 7 Muslim countries but he omitted Saudi Arabia from the list.

There's nothing wrong with insisting people entering the USA do this legally. I know the Marxist mantra is no human is illegal. There is nothing wrong with temporarily restricting people for national security reasons.

In the UK a worse problem is housing everyone where housing construction is about 2 million behind our requirements. We also have a security problem where radicalized individuals have been travelling back and forth to Libya (thanks to US foreign policy disasters) Iraq and Syria some of whom fought for ISIS. Banning everyone is nonsense but addressing security risks on a temporary basis would make sense.

"marxist mantra"? Actually most Marxist regimes control immigration tightly. "no human is illegal" sounds more like an anarchist mantra to me.

 

[starwater]

He's defending the neo nazi's

http://www.cnn.com/

It's getting really bizarre.

Can you point out exactly where he defended Nazis. It is clear that from his first speech he condemned all involved but did not specify which groups (on both sides).

The press may do a spin on it but also it is a long process to specify each group that was involved.

He said there were "good people on both sides".

Duh.

 

[SimpleDon]

Fuck Trump.... totally and completely and utterly fuck Trump.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-defends-all-sides-comment-n793001

This little fucking moron might as well blame both sides in WWII. After all, those fighting fascists invaded France. The Germans were just peacefully occupying it when we did so. Lot of blame to go around, right you dumbfuck?

Trump is worse than even I could have imagined.

Impeach the shit.

SLD

Impeach because some ultra left wing and ultra right wingers went around seeking trouble and resultant publicity? In this case it involved violence causing death. This is not Germany invading another country and those opposing represent the people.

The equation is as follows:

Self-serving Ultra-Leftist/Anarchist Hoodlums + Self-serving Right-wing Hoodlums = Hoodlums

This event didn't involve the American 'people' but a few fringes

I don't think that you understand what the full extent of the problem is. He has established a moral equivalence that has not existed before. He equated fascists with the anti-fascist. He equated racists and anti-racists. He equated people who maim and kill with people who throw water balloons. He has equated the motivations behind these beliefs with the other, put them on the same moral plain. You do too.

No president in recent history has done these things. This is the exact opposite of what every president in the last seventy five years has done, at least publicly.

We are all anti-fascists, except for a very few fascists in the country who richly deserve our public enmity. We are all anti-racism, except for a few racists who richly deserve our public enmity.

Trump represents the culmination of Republicans moving further to right and ever closer to embracing the fascist creed of anti-democratic authoritarianism and corporate domination of the economy. It is the culmination of seventy five years of the Republican catering to the racists, replacing the Democrats hundred years of doing the same before this period. All of this to enable the Republicans and too many of the Democrats to wage a class war against the wage earners in this country for the sole purpose of further increasing the wealth of the already wealthy. It is really that simple.

The nightmare of the wealthy in the US is that the poor and the middle class whites and the poor and the middle class blacks would realize this and to understand that their logical position would be to stand together to finally fight the economic class war that they have been losing for forty years or so. That they are not enemies but they are victims of this class war. That their wages have been intentionally suppressed to raise profits and that this will continue until it is stopped by the one sure way that it can be, by the ballot box, not by fighting each other.

It doesn't matter if Trump is or isn't a racist. What does matter is that that he and the Republicans have used racism to divide the wage earners against one another, to make them incapable of joining together to improve their lot in life. This is always what the rather artificial division by race has always been about, economics. That, most recently, the government is helping one race to gain an advantage over the other.

The wealthy, through their wholly captive Republican party and their influence that their wealth provides them in the Democratic party, will exploit any division between the workers; race, religion, sex, origin, etc. or in specific issues like abortion, immigration, taxes, flag burning, homosexuality, guns, marriage and divorce, etc. The wage earners have to agree to disagree about these to do what the corporate interests have done, to come together to accomplish the overriding economic issue of the division of the national income between profits and wages.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Now, please don't take this the wrong way, but you are hardly going to admit that you do otherwise, right? This is going to be much more so for a very public businessman and politician.

To your question though - I can only HOPE that popularity might better correspond with electability next time. Last time, Cheato lost the popular vote, yet ended up in office. Republican gerrymandering, their fake news, and help from Russian trolls, bots and financiers helped make that possible, and they'll do it again if Cheato gets his way.

The left needs to also stop playing the victim of the right and seriously get a candidate that will bring the party and the American people together a lot better than last round.

Well, the Democrat has won 6 of the last 7 popular votes, so not exactly failing poorly in that respect.

No, that still counts as a failure. Democrats have lost the Presidency, the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, most of the state governorships, etc.

The fact that more people actually vote for them that the Republicans just makes their failure even worse. They suck.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Impeach because some ultra left wing and ultra right wingers went around seeking trouble and resultant publicity? In this case it involved violence causing death. This is not Germany invading another country and those opposing represent the people.

The equation is as follows:

Self-serving Ultra-Leftist/Anarchist Hoodlums + Self-serving Right-wing Hoodlums = Hoodlums

This event didn't involve the American 'people' but a few fringes

I don't think that you understand what the full extent of the problem is. He has established a moral equivalence that has not existed before. He equated fascists with the anti-fascist. He equated racists and anti-racists. He equated people who maim and kill with people who throw water balloons. He has equated the motivations behind these beliefs with the other, put them on the same moral plain. You do too.

No president in recent history has done these things. This is the exact opposite of what every president in the last seventy five years has done, at least publicly.

We are all anti-fascists, except for a very few fascists in the country who richly deserve our public enmity. We are all anti-racism, except for a few racists who richly deserve our public enmity.

Trump represents the culmination of Republicans moving further to right and ever closer to embracing the fascist creed of anti-democratic authoritarianism and corporate domination of the economy. It is the culmination of seventy five years of the Republican catering to the racists, replacing the Democrats hundred years of doing the same before this period. All of this to enable the Republicans and too many of the Democrats to wage a class war against the wage earners in this country for the sole purpose of further increasing the wealth of the already wealthy. It is really that simple.

The nightmare of the wealthy in the US is that the poor and the middle class whites and the poor and the middle class blacks would realize this and to understand that their logical position would be to stand together to finally fight the economic class war that they have been losing for forty years or so. That they are not enemies but they are victims of this class war. That their wages have been intentionally suppressed to raise profits and that this will continue until it is stopped by the one sure way that it can be, by the ballot box, not by fighting each other.

It doesn't matter if Trump is or isn't a racist. What does matter is that that he and the Republicans have used racism to divide the wage earners against one another, to make them incapable of joining together to improve their lot in life. This is always what the rather artificial division by race has always been about, economics. That, most recently, the government is helping one race to gain an advantage over the other.

The wealthy, through their wholly captive Republican party and their influence that their wealth provides them in the Democratic party, will exploit any division between the workers; race, religion, sex, origin, etc. or in specific issues like abortion, immigration, taxes, flag burning, homosexuality, guns, marriage and divorce, etc. The wage earners have to agree to disagree about these to do what the corporate interests have done, to come together to accomplish the overriding economic issue of the division of the national income between profits and wages.

The problem is largely a media hyped political one which started before the election.
When left wing and right wing extremists clash then you find they come from violent groups who are as bad as each other.
I don’t know of the incidents of people throwing water balloons but if it is at people there is some form of assault though milder. It depends on the circumstances.
The recent presidents have been warlords and we are still seeing the fallout from the Middle East.
Most of us and Americans are non-Fascist and anti-Fascist. The Nazis and Fascists are a minority, some of whom are violent.
BAMN, ANTIFA and the Workers’ party amongst others are vocal minorities also out to create mayhem and anarchy. In this sense it is correct to equate the left and the right together.
Trump is right of centre while Obama is left of Centre. They do not however meet the criteria for extremists in the sense of Nazi or Communist.
ANTIFA and BANM claimed they are in war with Fascism. One BANM leader called a Zionist a holocaust denier.

At the moment boths. The USA has been spiraling further into debt and Government bonds can only last so long.
sides of the extremes are exploiting race, immigration, race (people’s opium). This is politics.

In my own view the election was to determine which lunatic would win the presidency.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

In my own view the election was to determine which lunatic would win the presidency.

Then your view is completely divorced from reality. I'd explain the whys further, but there's only so far one can go arguing with a table.

 

[whichphilosophy]

In my own view the election was to determine which lunatic would win the presidency.

Then your view is completely divorced from reality. I'd explain the whys further, but there's only so far one can go arguing with a table.

The last person called me an illiterate baboon so table's not so bad (or maybe baboon's better).
Hilary is a war lord. The US action in Libya made it a much worse place.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Then your view is completely divorced from reality. I'd explain the whys further, but there's only so far one can go arguing with a table.

The last person called me an illiterate baboon so table's not so bad (or maybe baboon's better).
Hilary is a war lord. The US action in Libya made it a much worse place.

And Trump's airstrikes are currently killing four times as many innocent civilians as Obama's did. Any issues that you'd have with the possibility of what Clinton might have done have an actuality which is much worse under Trump.

Your argument makes Donald Trump look at your statements and blast them for unwarranted levels of false equivalence.

 

[funinspace]

In my own view the election was to determine which lunatic would win the presidency.

Then your view is completely divorced from reality. I'd explain the whys further, but there's only so far one can go arguing with a table.

Do not try to argue with the table. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth. There is no table

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There's nothing wrong with insisting people entering the USA do this legally. I know the Marxist mantra is no human is illegal. There is nothing wrong with temporarily restricting people for national security reasons.

Except what His Flatulence is after isn't ensuring they are entering legally, but to ban then from entering legally. It was supposed to be a "temporary" ban but the time period is long since over and it hasn't been dropped as moot--thus it's obvious it wasn't intended to be temporary.

In the UK a worse problem is housing everyone where housing construction is about 2 million behind our requirements. We also have a security problem where radicalized individuals have been travelling back and forth to Libya (thanks to US foreign policy disasters) Iraq and Syria some of whom fought for ISIS. Banning everyone is nonsense but addressing security risks on a temporary basis would make sense.

I have no problem with banning the radicals. The thing is it's obvious that His Flatulence is interested in banning Muslims, period. The 90 days to develop better procedures is long past. Furthermore, the list of countries on the ban has zero correspondence with the citizenship of those who have carried out attacks in the US. It does, however, have a very high correspondence with Muslim nations that His Flatulence doesn't have business dealings with.