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 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: [quote]
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.
If you have followed what he's been saying in his speeches, you'd know he doesn't mean all illegal immigrants. Instead of focusing on one poorly worded thing he said on illegal immigration, you should look at the bigger picture and realize that he has a good point. Many illegal immigrants bring a lot of unnecessary crime across to the US simply because the US government doesn't want to secure the border.
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
I asked you a great many specific questions about this planned wall but you refused to reply, probably because you knew it was nonsense.
In case this hasn't occurred from you you can't simply go "build us walls or we won't trade with you anymore". Hell, even Trump hasn't suggested that and Trump will say anything. They're your third largest trade partner, you need them as much as they need you. Furthermore you have a bunch of trade agreements with them. Furthermore this entire discussion of Mexican rapists and building wall is pissing off your third largest trade partner. This isn't good politics, this isn't good diplomacy, these are the words of a madman.
You can say you disagree with trump all you want. There's enough people in your party who wholeheartedly agree with him that you cannot marginalize them at this point in time. They don't want a Ron Paul. They don't want a Bush. They sure as hell won't elect a Carson or a Fiorina or a Jindal. They want a republican Kim Jong, a conservative Khamenei. They want Trump, and your best hope is that Trump is just a clown being paid by the GOP to take the flak for all the other candidates while "energizing the base".
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
I asked you a great many specific questions about this planned wall but you refused to reply, probably because you knew it was nonsense.
In case this hasn't occurred from you you can't simply go "build us walls or we won't trade with you anymore". Hell, even Trump hasn't suggested that and Trump will say anything.
Oh, I'm sorry, you made one post replying to something I said that I did not see. I think you're too fixated on the word "wall" or maybe you think that I am. The idea of securing the border isn't just building a "wall" across it and expecting that to do the job all in itself. A wall would only be one of the measures the government could take to secure the country's border. The idea is to secure the border, perhaps it will never be %100 secure, but anything is better than how it is now. I don't think it's the impossible task you make it out to be. And no, I certainly don't have all the answers you're looking for, but I'm going to choose a candidate that I believe will at least TRY to fix that country's problems. Not a candidate that will talk a big game and then do the opposite like Obama because he was bought and paid for before he even ran for office.
On August 09 2015 04:54 Jormundr wrote: You can say you disagree with trump all you want. There's enough people in your party who wholeheartedly agree with him that you cannot marginalize them at this point in time. They don't want a Ron Paul. They don't want a Bush. They sure as hell won't elect a Carson or a Fiorina or a Jindal. They want a republican Kim Jong, a conservative Khamenei. They want Trump, and your best hope is that Trump is just a clown being paid by the GOP to take the flak for all the other candidates while "energizing the base".
I'd take a Ron Paul over Trump but the corporations that own and fund the mainstream media would never allow that, just like how they will try their best to keep Trump from winning as well. Just another reason people will vote for Trump because he isn't another bought and paid for politician like most of the others.
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
I asked you a great many specific questions about this planned wall but you refused to reply, probably because you knew it was nonsense.
In case this hasn't occurred from you you can't simply go "build us walls or we won't trade with you anymore". Hell, even Trump hasn't suggested that and Trump will say anything.
Oh, I'm sorry, you made one post replying to something I said that I did not see. I think you're too fixated on the word "wall" or maybe you think that I am. The idea of securing the border isn't just building a "wall" across it and expecting that to do the job all in itself. A wall would only be one of the measures the government could take to secure the country's border. The idea is to secure the border, perhaps it will never be %100 secure, but anything is better than how it is now. I don't think it's the impossible task you make it out to be.
You're insisting that this wall is a viable plan while I think it's the ravings of a madman. When called out on how dumb it is you're the one arguing that it's definitely a viable plan and can definitely be done and will really solve rape. Describe this wall for us.
On August 09 2015 04:54 Jormundr wrote: You can say you disagree with trump all you want. There's enough people in your party who wholeheartedly agree with him that you cannot marginalize them at this point in time. They don't want a Ron Paul. They don't want a Bush. They sure as hell won't elect a Carson or a Fiorina or a Jindal. They want a republican Kim Jong, a conservative Khamenei. They want Trump, and your best hope is that Trump is just a clown being paid by the GOP to take the flak for all the other candidates while "energizing the base".
I'd take a Ron Paul over Trump but the corporations that own and fund the mainstream media would never allow that, just like how they will try their best to keep Trump from winning as well. Just another reason people will vote for Trump because he isn't another bought and paid for politician like most of the others.
Right. He's one of the buyers and payers. Being on the other side of the game doesn't mean you don't play the game...
I've read somewhere that about half of the labour in the Californian farming industry is done by illegal immigrants, so it's seems pretty shitty to insult the people that quite literally put food on your table for pathetic wages. I'm not an expert on the US but if you want to throw out the guys who come to the US to pursue a better life and you celebrate the guy who runs idiotic TV shows, puts his name on casinos that he's inherited while calling women dogs I really think you've got it the wrong way around.
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
I asked you a great many specific questions about this planned wall but you refused to reply, probably because you knew it was nonsense.
In case this hasn't occurred from you you can't simply go "build us walls or we won't trade with you anymore". Hell, even Trump hasn't suggested that and Trump will say anything.
Oh, I'm sorry, you made one post replying to something I said that I did not see. I think you're too fixated on the word "wall" or maybe you think that I am. The idea of securing the border isn't just building a "wall" across it and expecting that to do the job all in itself. A wall would only be one of the measures the government could take to secure the country's border. The idea is to secure the border, perhaps it will never be %100 secure, but anything is better than how it is now. I don't think it's the impossible task you make it out to be.
You're insisting that this wall is a viable plan while I think it's the ravings of a madman. When called out on how dumb it is you're the one arguing that it's definitely a viable plan and can definitely be done and will really solve rape. Describe this wall for us.
Describe then how you would secure the border without some kind of wall or object that keeps people from simply just walking in? Who ever said it's going to solve rape? You can lower the risk or chance of rape by making sure you keep criminals from coming into your country illegally. You know that many of the illegal immigrants that commit crimes with rape being one of them simply walk right back into the US after being deported right? If they are even deported that is.
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
I asked you a great many specific questions about this planned wall but you refused to reply, probably because you knew it was nonsense.
In case this hasn't occurred from you you can't simply go "build us walls or we won't trade with you anymore". Hell, even Trump hasn't suggested that and Trump will say anything.
Oh, I'm sorry, you made one post replying to something I said that I did not see. I think you're too fixated on the word "wall" or maybe you think that I am. The idea of securing the border isn't just building a "wall" across it and expecting that to do the job all in itself. A wall would only be one of the measures the government could take to secure the country's border. The idea is to secure the border, perhaps it will never be %100 secure, but anything is better than how it is now. I don't think it's the impossible task you make it out to be.
You're insisting that this wall is a viable plan while I think it's the ravings of a madman. When called out on how dumb it is you're the one arguing that it's definitely a viable plan and can definitely be done and will really solve rape. Describe this wall for us.
Describe then how you would secure the border without some kind of wall or object that keeps people from simply just walking in? Who ever said it's going to solve rape? You can lower the risk or chance of rape by making sure you keep criminals from coming into your country illegally. You know that many of the illegal immigrants that commit crimes with rape being one of them simply walk into the US after being deported right?
Wait a minute, is your argument here that most of the rape in the US is done by illegal immigrants? I think a fact check is in order here...
On August 09 2015 05:04 Nyxisto wrote: I've read somewhere that about half of the labour in the Californian farming industry is done by illegal immigrants, so it's seems pretty shitty to insult the people that quite literally put food on your table for pathetic wages. I'm not an expert on the US but if you want to throw out the guys who come to the US to pursue a better life and you celebrate the guy who runs idiotic TV shows, puts his name on casinos that he's inherited while calling women dogs I really think you've got it the wrong way around.
Yes, illegal immigrants are taken advantage of. Another reason why the border won't be secured, corporations want to use them as cheap labor. Something they wouldn't be able to do if they were legal citizens. While you worry about the little things and about being PC, I'm more worried about the bigger problems and how someone like Trump can help solve them rather than another bought and paid for career politician who won't do shit.
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
I asked you a great many specific questions about this planned wall but you refused to reply, probably because you knew it was nonsense.
In case this hasn't occurred from you you can't simply go "build us walls or we won't trade with you anymore". Hell, even Trump hasn't suggested that and Trump will say anything.
Oh, I'm sorry, you made one post replying to something I said that I did not see. I think you're too fixated on the word "wall" or maybe you think that I am. The idea of securing the border isn't just building a "wall" across it and expecting that to do the job all in itself. A wall would only be one of the measures the government could take to secure the country's border. The idea is to secure the border, perhaps it will never be %100 secure, but anything is better than how it is now. I don't think it's the impossible task you make it out to be.
You're insisting that this wall is a viable plan while I think it's the ravings of a madman. When called out on how dumb it is you're the one arguing that it's definitely a viable plan and can definitely be done and will really solve rape. Describe this wall for us.
Describe then how you would secure the border without some kind of wall or object that keeps people from simply just walking in? Who ever said it's going to solve rape? You can lower the risk or chance of rape by making sure you keep criminals from coming into your country illegally. You know that many of the illegal immigrants that commit crimes with rape being one of them simply walk into the US after being deported right?
Wait a minute, is your argument here that most of the rape in the US is done by illegal immigrants? I think a fact check is in order here...
No, I never said that and am not implying that. I've said a lot of unnecessary crime is committed in the US by illegal immigrants that endangers its citizens. The government's job is to protect its citizens and is failing to do so by not securing its border.
On August 09 2015 04:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: [quote]
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.
But the real threat is in the icy north! That's where we need a wall. You know nothing.
In other words, you got nothing to say. I know more than you ever will.
I asked you a great many specific questions about this planned wall but you refused to reply, probably because you knew it was nonsense.
In case this hasn't occurred from you you can't simply go "build us walls or we won't trade with you anymore". Hell, even Trump hasn't suggested that and Trump will say anything.
Oh, I'm sorry, you made one post replying to something I said that I did not see. I think you're too fixated on the word "wall" or maybe you think that I am. The idea of securing the border isn't just building a "wall" across it and expecting that to do the job all in itself. A wall would only be one of the measures the government could take to secure the country's border. The idea is to secure the border, perhaps it will never be %100 secure, but anything is better than how it is now. I don't think it's the impossible task you make it out to be.
You're insisting that this wall is a viable plan while I think it's the ravings of a madman. When called out on how dumb it is you're the one arguing that it's definitely a viable plan and can definitely be done and will really solve rape. Describe this wall for us.
Describe then how you would secure the border without some kind of wall or object that keeps people from simply just walking in? Who ever said it's going to solve rape? You can lower the risk or chance of rape by making sure you keep criminals from coming into your country illegally. You know that many of the illegal immigrants that commit crimes with rape being one of them simply walk into the US after being deported right?
Wait a minute, is your argument here that most of the rape in the US is done by illegal immigrants? I think a fact check is in order here...
No, I never said that and am not implying that. I've said a lot of unnecessary crime is committed in the US by illegal immigrants that endangers its citizens. The government's job is to protect its citizens and is failing to do so by not securing its border.
Please quantify a lot. I believe that illegal immigrants have a net positive influence in the US. Both economically and socially. I expect that imprisoned illegals are a lower percentage of the illegal population as compared to the legal population.
And yes, I have conceded the use of illegal immigration to describe that group of immigrants.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. In my amateur opinion, Bernie Sanders is correct about open borders being a Koch wet dream. That the far-left also wants open borders is regardless. It is a question of outcome, intent, and context. Different intents can pursue the same means if they believe the outcome will be in their favor. Depending on the context, both of them can be right at different times; but, for now, one of them just has to be wrong. When destroying well-paying industry at home to chase cheap, unregulated labor abroad isn't enough, you can let the cheap, unregulated labor come to you. In both instances, you play the working class against itself, and their consciousness becomes instead one of nationalism -- another end-game of the far-right. The idea of international labor is dead if workers in one country are primarily concerned with protecting their piddling slice of the pie from poorer workers somewhere else. One mission of the corporate class is to profit financially from cheap labor while profiting politically from the xenophobia it produces.
It strikes me as a dangerous game, because, if the nationalism goes too far, it will produce protectionist policies, perhaps via a nationalist candidate or movement that, like a marionette, grows too big for its strings. Protectionism was the old weapon of choice before the corporate class went global. Companies no longer need borders to protect their profits -- borders are in the way of profits -- but workers, in an odd way, do need borders. An irony for me to study further; along with the essential question: how can borders be transcended in a way conducive to the happiness of the working class? Under a neoliberal economy, both nationalism and protectionism have to be shoved aside for talk of unity, deregulation, and the kind of globalization for the 1% that leftists do not like. And then we come full circle. The far-left believes in globalization, as does the far-right, but they believe in it in different contexts, and want it at different times in the hopes it will achieve different things. So if someone on the left says they oppose open borders, do not confuse that for opposing the rights of immigrants to travel and work (though, don't assume of them any sense of internationalism, either). In the ever-shifting dialectic of economies, the rights of immigrants to travel and work, without the necessary privileges and protections of the nation-state, are but rights to further exploitation, striding fully with the xenophobic paranoia the corporate class at once wishes to foment and control -- distinctions I imagine they would start a war over.
The open borders of the left are ones which afford equal protection under the law. The open borders of the right look very, very different.
Talk of a wall is stupid; as walls themselves don't help versus illegal immigration. Nor does policing the border do that much anyways; as the biggest issues are overstayed visas. There's also simply far too much legal cross-border traffic to be able to catch the tiny illegal subset of it. Trump won't be able to seriously fix anything; as he clearly lacks the ability to convince enough people to go along with it to accomplish anything. The biggest problem in government isn't finding solutions, its getting people to implement them.
LP, thats unlikely. The "left" in America will slam the borders shut once they believe that enough South Americans have crossed the border to secure them a long-running demographic advantage. This will necessarily happen because having a non-homogenous society, when it comes to income levels, is a burden on the welfare state, when the growth of that is coming in on the low-income, low education, side.
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? Government is supposed to protect its people, it's not doing a good job in that respect.
EPT
