|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 09 2015 04:01 Eskendereya wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 03:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:54 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist. I never called him racist before that- nor did I even think he was, so I had no prejudicial notions that he was *probably* racist, and now I'm finally fitting this comment into my already predetermined opinion of him, or anything like that. I don't think that his (possibly eventual) fizzling out will really make any huge changes in terms of conservative prejudice. I think people will eventually just vote for a more timid and diplomatic Jeb Bush, and then it'll just be an interesting story about how Trump once ran, just like how people say "Hey remember Palin? Yeahhh..." Is the Tea Party particularly relevant anymore? Trump is kicking everyone else's ass in Republican primary polls for now, until the bubble bursts, and so I think he's currently a serious contender for the nomination. It used to be Jeb's race to lose; now, I think it's Trump's. "I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist". How so? Are you saying he's racist for wanting to stop illegal immigration and secure the border? Almost %70 of the country want the border secured, I guess they are all racists too? It's that sort of thinking that is screwing Europe over right now, at the rate illegal immigration is going on in Europe, most of Europe's original inhabitants are going to be minorities in their own countries within a few generations, like in the UK for example. ...what? You haven't listened to his speeches at all, have you? It has nothing to do with him wanting to secure the border lol. At least Google it  On August 09 2015 03:55 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:48 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:38 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:34 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 08 2015 17:43 zlefin wrote:
Introvert -> I can't make out what you're trying to say well. I'd probably need it spelled out in considerable detail to understand the point(s) you're trying to make. Trump's appeal isn't his "racism" it IS the fact that he's not PC, which is why he keeps talking about it. Much of what he says is repulsive, but much of it is entertaining. On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. What has Trump said that is racist? Quote me something he said that is racist. I use words like "apparently" intentionally. My point is not to debate the exact words he speaks (many of which are repulsive) but to address the other point. They say he's appealing to the underlying sexism and racism supposedly rampant in the GOP and anyone who disagrees with left-wing policies. You'd think that after the War on Women's abject failure as a political strategy recently that they would have dropped it. But they haven't. People like him because he's actually going to secure the US border If anything, it's becoming more and more abundantly clear that he is NOT going to be able to secure the US border, because he has no idea what the fuck he's talking about with Mexico and some bullshit wall that he wants to strongarm Mexicans into building and paying for. Even other conservatives like Rubio were pointing out that Trump's understanding of immigration is extremely limited. On August 09 2015 03:47 GreenHorizons wrote:
Heading to Seattle for the Bernie Sanders Rally. Should be another 10k+er
Hope some of you catch it online. Enjoy  Even if he couldn't get Mexico to build it, you think he wouldn't do it himself? The border would get secured whether Mexico pays for it or the US pays for it. A big majority of Americans want it secured. No one is saying that the American border shouldn't be secure, least of all me. I don't know why you keep looking for that fight. I have watched a lot of his speeches and I haven't found one thing he has said that is legibly racist which is why I wanted you to quote something he said specifically that was. The people who think he's racist have misunderstood what he's said.
Calling all Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers seems to qualify.
|
United States44194 Posts
On August 09 2015 03:55 Eskendereya wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 03:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:48 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:38 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:34 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 08 2015 17:43 zlefin wrote:
Introvert -> I can't make out what you're trying to say well. I'd probably need it spelled out in considerable detail to understand the point(s) you're trying to make. Trump's appeal isn't his "racism" it IS the fact that he's not PC, which is why he keeps talking about it. Much of what he says is repulsive, but much of it is entertaining. On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. What has Trump said that is racist? Quote me something he said that is racist. I use words like "apparently" intentionally. My point is not to debate the exact words he speaks (many of which are repulsive) but to address the other point. They say he's appealing to the underlying sexism and racism supposedly rampant in the GOP and anyone who disagrees with left-wing policies. You'd think that after the War on Women's abject failure as a political strategy recently that they would have dropped it. But they haven't. People like him because he's actually going to secure the US border If anything, it's becoming more and more abundantly clear that he is NOT going to be able to secure the US border, because he has no idea what the fuck he's talking about with Mexico and some bullshit wall that he wants to strongarm Mexicans into building and paying for. Even other conservatives like Rubio were pointing out that Trump's understanding of immigration is extremely limited. On August 09 2015 03:47 GreenHorizons wrote:
Heading to Seattle for the Bernie Sanders Rally. Should be another 10k+er
Hope some of you catch it online. Enjoy Even if he couldn't get Mexico to build it, you think he wouldn't do it himself? The border would get secured whether Mexico pays for it or the US pays for it. A big majority of Americans want it secured.
Just to clarify, the wall will stretch from coast to coast? Or will it be further in case Mexico gets boat technology? How high will this wall be? I hear Mexicans have ladder technology. And how far down into the earth will it go? I ask because I fear they'll achieve spade technology. Will it be manned? If so who will man a wall the length of a continent? Where will these people live and how will they be funded? That's normally the kind of low paid work we use Mexicans for. Will Mexicans man the Mexico wall? If so how will we stop them raping our precious white women? What will the wall be made out of? Will we consult with the Chinese regarding building of walls? Will ours be Mongol proof? Will it be visible from space? Is building a wall bigger than China's what Trump is referring to when he threatens that he will beat China? Will Texas be inside our wall or will they make their own that fully surrounds their state? What if Mexico builds a wall right back? Will we build another on the Canadian border and if we do, will it keep out the white walkers?
I need to know how this wall will work before I vote for the guy. It's not enough to call Mexicans rapists and declare that Mexico will build walls, we need specifics.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. At least he didn't. As his numbers go up on the whole it could change. But still early, which is my point. But you see racism everywhere. So of course this looks like it again to you. It must be nice to be able to make such easier arguments. Pick one- sexism racism homophobia xenophobia and BAM! Done! No more needs to be said.
Hell, I forgot. I'm feeding a troll. Ignore.
|
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party.
|
United States44194 Posts
In a system with two very broad coalitions that each include a lot of very embarrassing idiots I think it's unfair to try and pin Trump on all Republicans. The Republican establishment is trying very hard to disown the guy and while it is hilarious to watch from the other side it's a little disingenuous to insist that they're all the same. If a coalition of ignorant and parasitic welfare queens whose baby daddies were incarcerated at the expense of the state suddenly took over the Democratic party I'd not want people pinning that shit on me.
Nobody is fighting Trump harder than the Republican party establishment. That said, if he keeps polling well there will at some point need to be a little soul searching about the degree to which he's a fringe candidate.
|
On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again.
It's a strong argument, hence why you won't argue against it.
I never said he polled well with the tea party. Conservative media just started to go further right once they became popular, leading conservative media down the rabbit hole of anti-intellectualism.
On August 09 2015 04:17 KwarK wrote:
In a system with two very broad coalitions that each include a lot of very embarrassing idiots I think it's unfair to try and pin Trump on all Republicans. The Republican establishment is trying very hard to disown the guy and while it is hilarious to watch from the other side it's a little disingenuous to insist that they're all the same. If a coalition of ignorant and parasitic welfare queens whose baby daddies were incarcerated at the expense of the state suddenly took over the Democratic party I'd not want people pinning that shit on me.
Nobody is fighting Trump harder than the Republican party establishment. That said, if he keeps polling well there will at some point need to be a little soul searching about the degree to which he's a fringe candidate.
Oh of course he isn't ALL republicans. But suggesting he doesn't represent a large portion of them is ludicrous. Basically to do so you have to say that all of his votes are liberals and that jet fuel can't melt fiscal conservatism.
|
On August 09 2015 04:01 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 03:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:43 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist. I never called him racist before that- nor did I even think he was, so I had no prejudicial notions that he was *probably* racist, and now I'm finally fitting this comment into my already predetermined opinion of him, or anything like that. I don't think that his (possibly eventual) fizzling out will really make any huge changes in terms of conservative prejudice. I think people will eventually just vote for a more timid and diplomatic Jeb Bush, and then it'll just be an interesting story about how Trump once ran, just like how people say "Hey remember Palin? Yeahhh..." Is the Tea Party particularly relevant anymore? Trump is kicking everyone else's ass in Republican primary polls for now, until the bubble bursts, and so I think he's currently a serious contender for the nomination. It used to be Jeb's race to lose; now, I think it's Trump's. I don't much care to debate his exact words- I don't care for him or for what he says. But I think your understanding of people on the right is (like so many others) simply too limited. Trump could emerge the front funner, but saying it's his race to lose is simply wrong, if history is anything to go by. These polls, for instance, mean very little. The fact that you and GH pour so much into them could come back to bite you. Now it may not, but history says it's a dangerous game. Therefore, so is using them to prove some sort of point about your political opposition. I don't understand what you mean by "come back to bite you" or warning that it's "a dangerous game". All I'm saying is that you can't completely write him off, especially since the media and news aren't ignoring him. Trump doesn't just magically disappear from anything. I think it'd be much smarter to take him as seriously as any other candidate, weigh his pros and cons, and decide if he's worth voting for (either in the primary or the general election). The polls will certainly change in the upcoming year, but keep in mind that even these early polls dictated who was allowed into the "real" Republican debate and who was stuck on the JV happy hour team, so they're still going to set the pace until some candidates find a way to step up or fizzle out. You are using Trump's words (as you see them) to back up your point about many people on the right. To do this you are reading far too much into the polls as they stand now. If Trump goes away, then either one has to acknowledge that the polls were a bad metric to use in the first place, or come up with some alternate explanation. I've dealt with other instances of perceived GOP racism, and this Argument from Trump is bad, just like all the others. I'm, not writing him off, just like I don't write off Sanders winning his primary (although I feel like in that case it would be more about Hillary imploding). Anything can happen. But it's best to accept the most reasonable explanation and work from the most likely outcome.
I think you're the only one who would insist on the former, considering plenty of people have already talked about how he could piss off the wrong people (corporations and sponsors have already been cutting ties with him because of his rhetoric) and he could certainly begin to implode or pull out when he realizes he's losing too much business. THAT would be the most reasonable explanation for why a businessman would pull out of the race- if he loses favorability and starts losing money, then it might not be worth it financially for him to continue running. He's not going to keep running if he thinks he's going to lose, and the early polls certainly defend the notion that he's doing just fine right now. It's a complete non sequitur to say that he's going to do poorly eventually because these polls are a bad metric; they could only suggest the opposite, at best.
On August 09 2015 04:01 Eskendereya wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 03:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:54 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist. I never called him racist before that- nor did I even think he was, so I had no prejudicial notions that he was *probably* racist, and now I'm finally fitting this comment into my already predetermined opinion of him, or anything like that. I don't think that his (possibly eventual) fizzling out will really make any huge changes in terms of conservative prejudice. I think people will eventually just vote for a more timid and diplomatic Jeb Bush, and then it'll just be an interesting story about how Trump once ran, just like how people say "Hey remember Palin? Yeahhh..." Is the Tea Party particularly relevant anymore? Trump is kicking everyone else's ass in Republican primary polls for now, until the bubble bursts, and so I think he's currently a serious contender for the nomination. It used to be Jeb's race to lose; now, I think it's Trump's. "I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist". How so? Are you saying he's racist for wanting to stop illegal immigration and secure the border? Almost %70 of the country want the border secured, I guess they are all racists too? It's that sort of thinking that is screwing Europe over right now, at the rate illegal immigration is going on in Europe, most of Europe's original inhabitants are going to be minorities in their own countries within a few generations, like in the UK for example. ...what? You haven't listened to his speeches at all, have you? It has nothing to do with him wanting to secure the border lol. At least Google it On August 09 2015 03:55 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:48 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:38 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:34 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 08 2015 17:43 zlefin wrote:
Introvert -> I can't make out what you're trying to say well. I'd probably need it spelled out in considerable detail to understand the point(s) you're trying to make. Trump's appeal isn't his "racism" it IS the fact that he's not PC, which is why he keeps talking about it. Much of what he says is repulsive, but much of it is entertaining. On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. What has Trump said that is racist? Quote me something he said that is racist. I use words like "apparently" intentionally. My point is not to debate the exact words he speaks (many of which are repulsive) but to address the other point. They say he's appealing to the underlying sexism and racism supposedly rampant in the GOP and anyone who disagrees with left-wing policies. You'd think that after the War on Women's abject failure as a political strategy recently that they would have dropped it. But they haven't. People like him because he's actually going to secure the US border If anything, it's becoming more and more abundantly clear that he is NOT going to be able to secure the US border, because he has no idea what the fuck he's talking about with Mexico and some bullshit wall that he wants to strongarm Mexicans into building and paying for. Even other conservatives like Rubio were pointing out that Trump's understanding of immigration is extremely limited. On August 09 2015 03:47 GreenHorizons wrote:
Heading to Seattle for the Bernie Sanders Rally. Should be another 10k+er
Hope some of you catch it online. Enjoy Even if he couldn't get Mexico to build it, you think he wouldn't do it himself? The border would get secured whether Mexico pays for it or the US pays for it. A big majority of Americans want it secured. No one is saying that the American border shouldn't be secure, least of all me. I don't know why you keep looking for that fight. I have watched a lot of his speeches and I haven't found one thing he has said that is legibly racist which is why I wanted you to quote something he said specifically that was. The people who think he's racist have misunderstood what he's said.
Oh come on. We've been over his bigoted remarks (both racist and sexist), but here are a few, since apparently you don't want to look them up yourself:
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best," he said. "They're sending people that have lots of problems...they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."
"The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese."
*Pretty much the entire Obama birther fail, which Trump was the posterboy for.*
"Because president Obama has done such a poor job as president, you won’t see another black president for generations.”
Calling women "dogs", "slobs"; saying “must be a pretty picture, you dropping to your knees", claiming that Megyn Kelly must have been on her period during the debate, etc.
|
On August 09 2015 04:17 KwarK wrote:
In a system with two very broad coalitions that each include a lot of very embarrassing idiots I think it's unfair to try and pin Trump on all Republicans. The Republican establishment is trying very hard to disown the guy and while it is hilarious to watch from the other side it's a little disingenuous to insist that they're all the same. If a coalition of ignorant and parasitic welfare queens whose baby daddies were incarcerated at the expense of the state suddenly took over the Democratic party I'd not want people pinning that shit on me.
Nobody is fighting Trump harder than the Republican party establishment. That said, if he keeps polling well there will at some point need to be a little soul searching about the degree to which he's a fringe candidate.
Trump existing isn't the problem as you said. Its the fact he is polling well that is the problem.
Apparently some part of his message is resonating with the base.
Either its such a big deal to his supporters that they are willing to accept his insulting comments in exchange.
Or the comment themselves are the reason.
|
On August 09 2015 04:20 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. It's a strong argument, hence why you won't argue against it. I never said he polled well with the tea party. Conservative media just started to go further right once they became popular, leading conservative media down the rabbit hole of anti-intellectualism.
Nope, others here will defend his words. I personally think he's a egomaniac who lies about a great many things to try and win, so I don't bother. But when you try and foist him upon everyone else and then ascribe blanket racism to everyone on his "side" of the aisle, then we have a problem.
|
On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. At least he didn't. As his numbers go up on the whole it could change. But still early, which is my point. But you see racism everywhere. So of course this looks like it again to you. It must be nice to be able to make such easier arguments. Pick one- sexism racism homophobia xenophobia and BAM! Done! No more needs to be said. Hell, I forgot. I'm feeding a troll. Ignore.
I don't understand why you think that liberals only need to drop the phrase "He's a racist/ bigot/ sexist" and then we feel smugly superior and don't need to debate anything else. We still point out the rest of Trump's/ other candidates' flaws, not just that they might be racist. Case in point: The Mexican wall idea that Trump has to secure the border is ridiculous, regardless of what he's said about the Mexican people.
|
On August 09 2015 04:24 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:20 Jormundr wrote:On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. It's a strong argument, hence why you won't argue against it. I never said he polled well with the tea party. Conservative media just started to go further right once they became popular, leading conservative media down the rabbit hole of anti-intellectualism. Nope, others here will defend his words. I personally think he's a egomaniac who lies about a great many things to try and win, so I don't bother. But when you try and foist him upon everyone else and then ascribe blanket racism to everyone on his "side" of the aisle, then we have a problem.
And when you try to pretend that there isn't a large problem with racists on your side of the aisle you get more Trumps, so ultimately it is only YOUR problem  .
|
On August 09 2015 04:23 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:17 KwarK wrote:
In a system with two very broad coalitions that each include a lot of very embarrassing idiots I think it's unfair to try and pin Trump on all Republicans. The Republican establishment is trying very hard to disown the guy and while it is hilarious to watch from the other side it's a little disingenuous to insist that they're all the same. If a coalition of ignorant and parasitic welfare queens whose baby daddies were incarcerated at the expense of the state suddenly took over the Democratic party I'd not want people pinning that shit on me.
Nobody is fighting Trump harder than the Republican party establishment. That said, if he keeps polling well there will at some point need to be a little soul searching about the degree to which he's a fringe candidate. Trump existing isn't the problem as you said. Its the fact he is polling well that is the problem. Apparently some part of his message is resonating with the base. Either its such a big deal to his supporters that they are willing to accept his insulting comments in exchange. Or the comment themselves are the reason.
According to Introvert, we aren't supposed to care about polls though.
|
On August 09 2015 04:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. At least he didn't. As his numbers go up on the whole it could change. But still early, which is my point. But you see racism everywhere. So of course this looks like it again to you. It must be nice to be able to make such easier arguments. Pick one- sexism racism homophobia xenophobia and BAM! Done! No more needs to be said. Hell, I forgot. I'm feeding a troll. Ignore. I don't understand why you think that liberals only need to drop the phrase "He's a racist/ bigot/ sexist" and then we feel smugly superior and don't need to debate anything else. We still point out the rest of Trump's/ other candidates' flaws, not just that they might be racist. Case in point: The Mexican wall idea that Trump has to secure the border is ridiculous, regardless of what he's said about the Mexican people.
Reading this thread, it certainly feels that "Democrats" want Trump to win the primary just as badly as actual bigots would, if only to prove some point about this big scary boogieman that represents the other side.
|
On August 09 2015 04:04 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:01 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:54 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist. I never called him racist before that- nor did I even think he was, so I had no prejudicial notions that he was *probably* racist, and now I'm finally fitting this comment into my already predetermined opinion of him, or anything like that. I don't think that his (possibly eventual) fizzling out will really make any huge changes in terms of conservative prejudice. I think people will eventually just vote for a more timid and diplomatic Jeb Bush, and then it'll just be an interesting story about how Trump once ran, just like how people say "Hey remember Palin? Yeahhh..." Is the Tea Party particularly relevant anymore? Trump is kicking everyone else's ass in Republican primary polls for now, until the bubble bursts, and so I think he's currently a serious contender for the nomination. It used to be Jeb's race to lose; now, I think it's Trump's. "I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist". How so? Are you saying he's racist for wanting to stop illegal immigration and secure the border? Almost %70 of the country want the border secured, I guess they are all racists too? It's that sort of thinking that is screwing Europe over right now, at the rate illegal immigration is going on in Europe, most of Europe's original inhabitants are going to be minorities in their own countries within a few generations, like in the UK for example. ...what? You haven't listened to his speeches at all, have you? It has nothing to do with him wanting to secure the border lol. At least Google it On August 09 2015 03:55 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:48 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:38 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:34 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 08 2015 17:43 zlefin wrote:
Introvert -> I can't make out what you're trying to say well. I'd probably need it spelled out in considerable detail to understand the point(s) you're trying to make. Trump's appeal isn't his "racism" it IS the fact that he's not PC, which is why he keeps talking about it. Much of what he says is repulsive, but much of it is entertaining. On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc.
Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. What has Trump said that is racist? Quote me something he said that is racist. I use words like "apparently" intentionally. My point is not to debate the exact words he speaks (many of which are repulsive) but to address the other point. They say he's appealing to the underlying sexism and racism supposedly rampant in the GOP and anyone who disagrees with left-wing policies. You'd think that after the War on Women's abject failure as a political strategy recently that they would have dropped it. But they haven't. People like him because he's actually going to secure the US border If anything, it's becoming more and more abundantly clear that he is NOT going to be able to secure the US border, because he has no idea what the fuck he's talking about with Mexico and some bullshit wall that he wants to strongarm Mexicans into building and paying for. Even other conservatives like Rubio were pointing out that Trump's understanding of immigration is extremely limited. On August 09 2015 03:47 GreenHorizons wrote:
Heading to Seattle for the Bernie Sanders Rally. Should be another 10k+er
Hope some of you catch it online. Enjoy Even if he couldn't get Mexico to build it, you think he wouldn't do it himself? The border would get secured whether Mexico pays for it or the US pays for it. A big majority of Americans want it secured. No one is saying that the American border shouldn't be secure, least of all me. I don't know why you keep looking for that fight. I have watched a lot of his speeches and I haven't found one thing he has said that is legibly racist which is why I wanted you to quote something he said specifically that was. The people who think he's racist have misunderstood what he's said. Calling all Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers seems to qualify.
He was referring to illegal immigrants, not all immigrants legal or illegal or all Mexican immigrants. Look up the crime statistics that a lot of these illegal immigrants bring, what he's saying is true. What kind of government allows a practically open border where illegal immigrants can come across and commit crime and murders that put its own citizens at risk? Government is supposed to protect its people, it's not doing a good job in that respect.
|
Elections are like golf. The lower your score, the better chance you have of becoming elected. Trump is in last place.
|
On August 09 2015 04:30 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. At least he didn't. As his numbers go up on the whole it could change. But still early, which is my point. But you see racism everywhere. So of course this looks like it again to you. It must be nice to be able to make such easier arguments. Pick one- sexism racism homophobia xenophobia and BAM! Done! No more needs to be said. Hell, I forgot. I'm feeding a troll. Ignore. I don't understand why you think that liberals only need to drop the phrase "He's a racist/ bigot/ sexist" and then we feel smugly superior and don't need to debate anything else. We still point out the rest of Trump's/ other candidates' flaws, not just that they might be racist. Case in point: The Mexican wall idea that Trump has to secure the border is ridiculous, regardless of what he's said about the Mexican people. Reading this thread, it certainly feels that "Democrats" want Trump to win the primary just as badly as actual bigots would, if only to prove some point about this big scary boogieman that represents the other side.
I'd much rather not risk such a thing... I really liked Paul's and Kasich's responses during the debate, although I really don't think anyone has a chance at the nomination besides Jeb and Trump.
|
On August 09 2015 04:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. At least he didn't. As his numbers go up on the whole it could change. But still early, which is my point. But you see racism everywhere. So of course this looks like it again to you. It must be nice to be able to make such easier arguments. Pick one- sexism racism homophobia xenophobia and BAM! Done! No more needs to be said. Hell, I forgot. I'm feeding a troll. Ignore. I don't understand why you think that liberals only need to drop the phrase "He's a racist/ bigot/ sexist" and then we feel smugly superior and don't need to debate anything else. We still point out the rest of Trump's/ other candidates' flaws, not just that they might be racist. Case in point: The Mexican wall idea that Trump has to secure the border is ridiculous, regardless of what he's said about the Mexican people.
Mexico makes a lot of money through trade with the US, trade that benefits Mexico much more than it does the US according to Trump. I think Trump intends to use that as leverage to get them to build the wall. I wouldn't doubt his ability to do it. Regardless, it would get done if he becomes President whether Mexico pays for it or the US pays for it.
|
|
|
On August 09 2015 04:30 Eskendereya wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:04 Acrofales wrote:On August 09 2015 04:01 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:54 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist. I never called him racist before that- nor did I even think he was, so I had no prejudicial notions that he was *probably* racist, and now I'm finally fitting this comment into my already predetermined opinion of him, or anything like that. I don't think that his (possibly eventual) fizzling out will really make any huge changes in terms of conservative prejudice. I think people will eventually just vote for a more timid and diplomatic Jeb Bush, and then it'll just be an interesting story about how Trump once ran, just like how people say "Hey remember Palin? Yeahhh..." Is the Tea Party particularly relevant anymore? Trump is kicking everyone else's ass in Republican primary polls for now, until the bubble bursts, and so I think he's currently a serious contender for the nomination. It used to be Jeb's race to lose; now, I think it's Trump's. "I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist". How so? Are you saying he's racist for wanting to stop illegal immigration and secure the border? Almost %70 of the country want the border secured, I guess they are all racists too? It's that sort of thinking that is screwing Europe over right now, at the rate illegal immigration is going on in Europe, most of Europe's original inhabitants are going to be minorities in their own countries within a few generations, like in the UK for example. ...what? You haven't listened to his speeches at all, have you? It has nothing to do with him wanting to secure the border lol. At least Google it On August 09 2015 03:55 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:48 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:38 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:34 Eskendereya wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
Trump's appeal isn't his "racism" it IS the fact that he's not PC, which is why he keeps talking about it. Much of what he says is repulsive, but much of it is entertaining.
[quote]
People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive.
But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one."
And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. What has Trump said that is racist? Quote me something he said that is racist. I use words like "apparently" intentionally. My point is not to debate the exact words he speaks (many of which are repulsive) but to address the other point. They say he's appealing to the underlying sexism and racism supposedly rampant in the GOP and anyone who disagrees with left-wing policies. You'd think that after the War on Women's abject failure as a political strategy recently that they would have dropped it. But they haven't. People like him because he's actually going to secure the US border If anything, it's becoming more and more abundantly clear that he is NOT going to be able to secure the US border, because he has no idea what the fuck he's talking about with Mexico and some bullshit wall that he wants to strongarm Mexicans into building and paying for. Even other conservatives like Rubio were pointing out that Trump's understanding of immigration is extremely limited. On August 09 2015 03:47 GreenHorizons wrote:
Heading to Seattle for the Bernie Sanders Rally. Should be another 10k+er
Hope some of you catch it online. Enjoy Even if he couldn't get Mexico to build it, you think he wouldn't do it himself? The border would get secured whether Mexico pays for it or the US pays for it. A big majority of Americans want it secured. No one is saying that the American border shouldn't be secure, least of all me. I don't know why you keep looking for that fight. I have watched a lot of his speeches and I haven't found one thing he has said that is legibly racist which is why I wanted you to quote something he said specifically that was. The people who think he's racist have misunderstood what he's said. Calling all Mexican immigrants rapists and murderers seems to qualify. He was referring to illegal immigrants, not all immigrants legal or illegal or all Mexican immigrants. Look up the crime statistics that a lot of these illegal immigrants bring, what he's saying is true. What kind of government allows a practically open border where illegal immigrants can come across and commit crime and murders that put its own citizens at risk?
All illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers.... ??? What the fuck.
And with that, I'm leaving this thread for a while, because my head is going to explode. I need a break from this.
|
On August 09 2015 04:21 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:01 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:43 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 03:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 09 2015 03:31 Introvert wrote:On August 09 2015 00:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 08 2015 16:43 Introvert wrote:
I wonder what it's like to reject the obvious reason for a phenomenon for one of your own creation. One only the most partisan of hacks actually believe. More useless days of "analysis" from people who think they know their opposition but continually display their ignorance of those they disagree with.
This thread is a good example. Besides one poster, I can't think of a single person expressing a positive view of Trump on the whole. Yet, from what we read here, we are supposed to find the hidden sexism come into play. One must wonder. If the Racist Republicans have gone to so much trouble to hide their bigotry, why support a man supposedly so open about it? Would that not defeat and undermine everything they have worked to accomplish? Why not support one of the secret racists? Someone who talks like they do in public? But such a critical thought doesn't even get a passing consideration- the data must be viewed in such a way that it fits the already believed explanation. I'm not certain if I'm understanding your post properly, but I disagree with the premise that a lot of the conservative party has been even attempting to hide their bigotry. I think that a lot of it has been rather explicit! You look at Fox News with their War On Christians/ Whites/ The Rich/ other stereotypical "Check your privilege" contexts, and it's abundantly clear that they'll say and do anything to keep the status quo. Same with the South and the riots with taking down the Confederate Flag, or Texas and their rewriting of history books to remove the KKK and Jim Crowe laws, etc. Plenty of conservatives aren't bigots or jerks, but the #1 conservative media outlet- and much of the sensationalist news coverage- certainly makes it look like plenty of Republicans have no reservations about saying and doing things that are socially backwards. People keep coming up with any explanation that fits. Before Trump all the hacks said "the GOP is full of racists, they just know they can't say anything racist." Then comes Trump, saying apparently racist things, and we are to believe that his appeal is bigotry and not any of the more likely explanations. Moreover none of those things above point to any sort of racism, it's only because you already believe that those people are racist that such things have a racist motive. But my overall point is quite clear. Morever, this begs the obvious question: what happens if (when) Trump fizzles out? Will a large portion of the party have lost their racism. Will they have a come to Jesus moment? His eventual petering out with be the biggest proof that it's about spectacle. Since GH is apparently so prone to taking random right wing blog comments sections seriously (heaven forbid I do that with the left wing ones) he would see by and large people like him because he's "not a politician and doesn't speak like one." And I understand what you are saying, but he doesn't have high Tea Party support and not one of my relatives or friends that I have talked to is a Trump supporter. I'm calling him racist because he acts and speaks like a racist. I never called him racist before that- nor did I even think he was, so I had no prejudicial notions that he was *probably* racist, and now I'm finally fitting this comment into my already predetermined opinion of him, or anything like that. I don't think that his (possibly eventual) fizzling out will really make any huge changes in terms of conservative prejudice. I think people will eventually just vote for a more timid and diplomatic Jeb Bush, and then it'll just be an interesting story about how Trump once ran, just like how people say "Hey remember Palin? Yeahhh..." Is the Tea Party particularly relevant anymore? Trump is kicking everyone else's ass in Republican primary polls for now, until the bubble bursts, and so I think he's currently a serious contender for the nomination. It used to be Jeb's race to lose; now, I think it's Trump's. I don't much care to debate his exact words- I don't care for him or for what he says. But I think your understanding of people on the right is (like so many others) simply too limited. Trump could emerge the front funner, but saying it's his race to lose is simply wrong, if history is anything to go by. These polls, for instance, mean very little. The fact that you and GH pour so much into them could come back to bite you. Now it may not, but history says it's a dangerous game. Therefore, so is using them to prove some sort of point about your political opposition. I don't understand what you mean by "come back to bite you" or warning that it's "a dangerous game". All I'm saying is that you can't completely write him off, especially since the media and news aren't ignoring him. Trump doesn't just magically disappear from anything. I think it'd be much smarter to take him as seriously as any other candidate, weigh his pros and cons, and decide if he's worth voting for (either in the primary or the general election). The polls will certainly change in the upcoming year, but keep in mind that even these early polls dictated who was allowed into the "real" Republican debate and who was stuck on the JV happy hour team, so they're still going to set the pace until some candidates find a way to step up or fizzle out. You are using Trump's words (as you see them) to back up your point about many people on the right. To do this you are reading far too much into the polls as they stand now. If Trump goes away, then either one has to acknowledge that the polls were a bad metric to use in the first place, or come up with some alternate explanation. I've dealt with other instances of perceived GOP racism, and this Argument from Trump is bad, just like all the others. I'm, not writing him off, just like I don't write off Sanders winning his primary (although I feel like in that case it would be more about Hillary imploding). Anything can happen. But it's best to accept the most reasonable explanation and work from the most likely outcome. I think you're the only one who would insist on the former, considering plenty of people have already talked about how he could piss off the wrong people (corporations and sponsors have already been cutting ties with him because of his rhetoric) and he could certainly begin to implode or pull out when he realizes he's losing too much business. THAT would be the most reasonable explanation for why a businessman would pull out of the race- if he loses favorability and starts losing money, then it might not be worth it financially for him to continue running. He's not going to keep running if he thinks he's going to lose, and the early polls certainly defend the notion that he's doing just fine right now. It's a complete non sequitur to say that he's going to do poorly eventually because these polls are a bad metric; they could only suggest the opposite, at best.
I'm saying that using this polling as part of your argument is flimsy. I don't think he will win for other reasons.
On August 09 2015 04:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:07 Introvert wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 09 2015 04:00 Jormundr wrote:
According to Intro, it's not worth debating over trump's words, and he does not represent a large part of the conservative base (despite representing a large part of conservatives).
0/10 argument.
According to Danglars, liberals who point out what trump says and how they are received are part of a left wing conspiracy. We're not, it's just really fucking funny.
You two are beautiful. I haven't seen gymnastics like this since the 2012 London Olympics.
Edit:
For two people so vastly concerned with foreign policy (particularly how liberals are bad at it) it's funny that you seem so willing to overlook what would be considered consistent foreign policy gaffes with one of our neighbors in your most popular presidential candidate. I never said they aren't worth debating, just that I am not going to do so at this time. 0/10. It's not gymnastics to point out that an argument is weak AF. I really don't like Trump, so I'm not going to bother defending him. On August 09 2015 04:07 Jormundr wrote:
GUYS THE DIXIECRATS DON'T EXIST
SERIOUSLY
WE'RE NOT RACIST
WE KNOW LIKE 3 BLACK PEOPLE
JEB BUSH HAS A MEXICAN WIFE
~ All the conservatives in this thread right now, trying to deny that Trump is saying EXACTLY what most conservative media has been tiptoeing around since the inception of the tea party. Trump doesn't do as well in the Tea Party as he does elsewhere. Try again. At least he didn't. As his numbers go up on the whole it could change. But still early, which is my point. But you see racism everywhere. So of course this looks like it again to you. It must be nice to be able to make such easier arguments. Pick one- sexism racism homophobia xenophobia and BAM! Done! No more needs to be said. Hell, I forgot. I'm feeding a troll. Ignore. I don't understand why you think that liberals only need to drop the phrase "He's a racist/ bigot/ sexist" and then we feel smugly superior and don't need to debate anything else. We still point out the rest of Trump's/ other candidates' flaws, not just that they might be racist. Case in point: The Mexican wall idea that Trump has to secure the border is ridiculous, regardless of what he's said about the Mexican people.
not you, I've been engaging with you.
based on my past interactions with Jormundr I have come to the conclusion that he is a flame- baiting troll. Though the fact that racism and sexism so often lines of attack (and the only ones) I think shows laziness. That was how they tried to take our Gardner (a moderate Republican) in Co and it failed, thankfully. It's too often appealed to. In this thread it's what is primarily mentioned with regards to Trump, and that's because leftists see the world that way, and assume that's Trump's appeal. Superiority complex notwithstanding.
On August 09 2015 04:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2015 04:23 Gorsameth wrote:On August 09 2015 04:17 KwarK wrote:
In a system with two very broad coalitions that each include a lot of very embarrassing idiots I think it's unfair to try and pin Trump on all Republicans. The Republican establishment is trying very hard to disown the guy and while it is hilarious to watch from the other side it's a little disingenuous to insist that they're all the same. If a coalition of ignorant and parasitic welfare queens whose baby daddies were incarcerated at the expense of the state suddenly took over the Democratic party I'd not want people pinning that shit on me.
Nobody is fighting Trump harder than the Republican party establishment. That said, if he keeps polling well there will at some point need to be a little soul searching about the degree to which he's a fringe candidate. Trump existing isn't the problem as you said. Its the fact he is polling well that is the problem. Apparently some part of his message is resonating with the base. Either its such a big deal to his supporters that they are willing to accept his insulting comments in exchange. Or the comment themselves are the reason. According to Introvert, we aren't supposed to care about polls though.
They aren't worthless, they are just worth less than the data we will see later on down the road.
Anyway, I don't have much more to say on the topic. Trump success is not a sink into which you can pour all your preconceived ideas about people on the right. That really is the essence of what I'm saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
