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 15 2017 01:45 Adreme wrote: It doesn't matter what he says now. His initial response showed where his heart lies and people now know that. His initial response was to actively try to avoid condemning white supremacists just like it was in the past and that speaks volumes more than whatever he does afterwards.
Ridicolous. You guys are never, ever, ever happy.
It's not exactly unreasonable.
Terrorist attack a few days ago. On the day of the attack Trump refuses to condemn the terrorists who support him. After a few days of outrage Trump offers a weak condemnation.
Imagine this were a situation that involved you. Let's say someone hit your dog with their car and then spent a few days refusing to say sorry. If they then gave you a bullshit apology after everyone was calling them an asshole would you be happy with that apology?
more mental gymnastic? It's pathetic to what extent people on this forum go to legitimize their views.
On the day of the attack, Trump condemned all violence. Ivanka wrote on Twitter 'There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis.' Now Trump condemned the names you hate so much and it's still not enough. He could literally resign from POTUS and you guys would still not be happy.
Your example is non-sense. Trump didn't do the act. To post a more relevant one, it would be like someone hit your dog with their car and you getting mad because the mayor (insert X figure here) condemned all violence on animals and not your precise accident. Anyways, this is what it is for next four years - so better take some stress medications or you guys will not last that long.
I think everyone would be glad if he resigned. That's stupid to suggest otherwise.
And no, it's not enough to come out days later and condemn them when you're silence on the matter already emboldened them. Also, who gives two flying fucks what Ivanka thinks? She's not president.
On August 15 2017 01:45 Adreme wrote: It doesn't matter what he says now. His initial response showed where his heart lies and people now know that. His initial response was to actively try to avoid condemning white supremacists just like it was in the past and that speaks volumes more than whatever he does afterwards.
Ridicolous. You guys are never, ever, ever happy.
It's not exactly unreasonable.
Terrorist attack a few days ago. On the day of the attack Trump refuses to condemn the terrorists who support him. After a few days of outrage Trump offers a weak condemnation.
Imagine this were a situation that involved you. Let's say someone hit your dog with their car and then spent a few days refusing to say sorry. If they then gave you a bullshit apology after everyone was calling them an asshole would you be happy with that apology?
more mental gymnastic? It's pathetic to what extent people on this forum go to legitimize their views.
On the day of the attack, Trump condemned all violence. Ivanka wrote on Twitter 'There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis.' Now Trump condemned the names you hate so much and it's still not enough. He could literally resign from POTUS and you guys would still not be happy.
Your example is non-sense. Trump didn't do the act. To post a more relevant one, it would be like someone hit your dog with their car and you getting mad because the mayor (insert X figure here) condemned all violence on animals and not your precise accident. Anyways, this is what it is for next four years - so better take some stress medications or you guys will not last that long.
Except he didn’t condemn the Nazis, who celebrated that he didn’t condemn them directly. They said it was good and Trump was with him. All he had to do with condemn the Nazis and it would have been fine. But now it is three days later and they think they have an ally in the White House. Which is what they have been saying since 2016.
Yeah, it's almost as white supremacists are trying to push their agenda no matter what. Really strange right? If Trump condemned the white supremacists as you wish he did, you know what would happen? That you guys would be shouting 'he condemned them but the words were not clear...not a powerful message...this leaves too much room'. ANd white supremacists would simply say 'he condemned us on some points but we can still twist this narrative'. And you know it.
Bannon, Breitbart, and/or some of that crew have a great saying that really sums of modern Conservatism:
"Politics is downstream from Culture."
Whatever existed behind the mirage of the reasonable conservative who only cared about the efficiency of the welfare state is long since gone. Conservatism is about cultural and demographic dominance. If for some reason you thought this was about government efficiency then they would be getting some that efficiency done with their total control of government from the county to national level. Any and all debates about the CBO estimates on some complicated healthcare bill are really just debates between reality oriented liberals. The arguments across the divide are meaningless posturing.
EDIT: wow I found a great example for my argument just bubble up on that Twitter feed. Trump gets it. Conservatives don't care about law and order and due process. Those are just cudgels to be used against the hated enemies. Arpaio is found in contempt for flouting the laws? Who cares! He is a friend and is on the culturally good side. He needs a pardon.
President Trump may soon issue a pardon for Joe Arpaio, the colorful former Arizona sheriff who was found guilty two weeks ago of criminal contempt for defying a state judge’s order to stop traffic patrols targeting suspected undocumented immigrants. In his final years as Maricopa County sheriff, Arpaio had emerged as a leading opponent of illegal immigration.
“I am seriously considering a pardon for Sheriff Arpaio,” the president said Sunday, during a conversation with Fox News at his club in Bedminster, N.J. “He has done a lot in the fight against illegal immigration. He’s a great American patriot and I hate to see what has happened to him.”
Trump said the pardon could happen in the next few days, should he decide to do so.
On August 15 2017 02:36 SoSexy wrote: Yeah, it's almost as white supremacists are trying to push their agenda no matter what. Really strange right? If Trump condemned the white supremacists as you wish he did, you know what would happen? That you guys would be shouting 'he condemned them but the words were not clear...not a powerful message...this leaves too much room'. And you know it.
You're trying too hard. This is trump we're talking about. Not a physicist. He's pretty clear on where he stands and his words reflect that.
On August 15 2017 02:36 SoSexy wrote: Yeah, it's almost as white supremacists are trying to push their agenda no matter what. Really strange right? If Trump condemned the white supremacists as you wish he did, you know what would happen? That you guys would be shouting 'he condemned them but the words were not clear...not a powerful message...this leaves too much room'. ANd white supremacists would simply say 'he condemned us on some points but we can still twist this narrative'. And you know it.
this is why "dog-whistle" racism exists; it's hard to prove whether it did or did not happen. it's similarly hard and complicated to fight. do you have a solution for the very real problem of dealing with it? and of establishing when it is and isn't occurring?
On August 15 2017 01:45 Adreme wrote: It doesn't matter what he says now. His initial response showed where his heart lies and people now know that. His initial response was to actively try to avoid condemning white supremacists just like it was in the past and that speaks volumes more than whatever he does afterwards.
Ridicolous. You guys are never, ever, ever happy.
It's not exactly unreasonable.
Terrorist attack a few days ago. On the day of the attack Trump refuses to condemn the terrorists who support him. After a few days of outrage Trump offers a weak condemnation.
Imagine this were a situation that involved you. Let's say someone hit your dog with their car and then spent a few days refusing to say sorry. If they then gave you a bullshit apology after everyone was calling them an asshole would you be happy with that apology?
more mental gymnastic? It's pathetic to what extent people on this forum go to legitimize their views.
On the day of the attack, Trump condemned all violence. Ivanka wrote on Twitter 'There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis.' Now Trump condemned the names you hate so much and it's still not enough. He could literally resign from POTUS and you guys would still not be happy.
Your example is non-sense. Trump didn't do the act. To post a more relevant one, it would be like someone hit your dog with their car and you getting mad because the mayor (insert X figure here) condemned all violence on animals and not your precise accident. Anyways, this is what it is for next four years - so better take some stress medications or you guys will not last that long.
I think everyone would be glad if he resigned. That's stupid to suggest otherwise.
And no, it's not enough to come out days later and condemn them when you're silence on the matter already emboldened them. Also, who gives two flying fucks what Ivanka thinks? She's not president.
Complete intellectual dishonesty. If she would have written 'white supremacists are good' you guys would be all over it. Wanna bet?
That being said, I believe that conservatives are totally necessary in a democracy. Power structure are meant to evolve, but it's a good thing there is a balance between people who want to undermine them and people who want to preserve them.
More than that. Conservatism is necessary to stop and reverse or at the very least slow down the power creep of the state. Honestly, the more I read back, the more I realize there was a good reason for a swing into conservatism in the 80s: my own government running oil companies, gas stations and farms!!!? But the worst offender I discovered this last week while trying to investigate some aboriginal claims on racially based forced sterilization, from the thirties until 1979 my province had forced sterilization legislation as part of our government subscribing to eugenics (BC Eugenics). The government deciding who is fit to procreate... that could never be a problem. It's a good thing the conservative coalition that coalesced in the reborn Socreds under Bill Bennet came in to knock that out.
On August 15 2017 01:45 Adreme wrote: It doesn't matter what he says now. His initial response showed where his heart lies and people now know that. His initial response was to actively try to avoid condemning white supremacists just like it was in the past and that speaks volumes more than whatever he does afterwards.
Ridicolous. You guys are never, ever, ever happy.
It's not exactly unreasonable.
Terrorist attack a few days ago. On the day of the attack Trump refuses to condemn the terrorists who support him. After a few days of outrage Trump offers a weak condemnation.
Imagine this were a situation that involved you. Let's say someone hit your dog with their car and then spent a few days refusing to say sorry. If they then gave you a bullshit apology after everyone was calling them an asshole would you be happy with that apology?
more mental gymnastic? It's pathetic to what extent people on this forum go to legitimize their views.
On the day of the attack, Trump condemned all violence. Ivanka wrote on Twitter 'There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis.' Now Trump condemned the names you hate so much and it's still not enough. He could literally resign from POTUS and you guys would still not be happy.
Your example is non-sense. Trump didn't do the act. To post a more relevant one, it would be like someone hit your dog with their car and you getting mad because the mayor (insert X figure here) condemned all violence on animals and not your precise accident. Anyways, this is what it is for next four years - so better take some stress medications or you guys will not last that long.
I think everyone would be glad if he resigned. That's stupid to suggest otherwise.
And no, it's not enough to come out days later and condemn them when you're silence on the matter already emboldened them. Also, who gives two flying fucks what Ivanka thinks? She's not president.
Complete intellectual dishonesty. If she would have written 'white supremacists are good' you guys would be all over it. Wanna bet?
Those are two complete different things..... If Obama's daughter said "Islamic Terrorists are good people," you can bet a lot of people would give a shit. But that has nothing to do with the topic at hand, since only he is the president.
On August 15 2017 02:36 SoSexy wrote: Yeah, it's almost as white supremacists are trying to push their agenda no matter what. Really strange right? If Trump condemned the white supremacists as you wish he did, you know what would happen? That you guys would be shouting 'he condemned them but the words were not clear...not a powerful message...this leaves too much room'. ANd white supremacists would simply say 'he condemned us on some points but we can still twist this narrative'. And you know it.
Dog whistle racism has been used since the civil rights movement. Trump is responsible for how people see him. He has gone out of his way to avoid alienating people like David Duke and his ilk.
On August 15 2017 02:36 SoSexy wrote: Yeah, it's almost as white supremacists are trying to push their agenda no matter what. Really strange right? If Trump condemned the white supremacists as you wish he did, you know what would happen? That you guys would be shouting 'he condemned them but the words were not clear...not a powerful message...this leaves too much room'. And you know it.
There have been several similar events under Trump's post, and the general response when he answers well is "surprisingly Presidential response from Trump". In varying permutations.
On August 15 2017 02:36 SoSexy wrote: Yeah, it's almost as white supremacists are trying to push their agenda no matter what. Really strange right? If Trump condemned the white supremacists as you wish he did, you know what would happen? That you guys would be shouting 'he condemned them but the words were not clear...not a powerful message...this leaves too much room'. ANd white supremacists would simply say 'he condemned us on some points but we can still twist this narrative'. And you know it.
Also, the panic is blown way off proportions. Ku Klux Klan has more or less 6,000 active members. That is roughly 0,002% of the American population. 0,002%. Do you believe this is a serious threat to American democracy? Do you believe 6,000 votes made the difference in the election for the POTUS? One sees only what he wants to see - on both sides of the spectrum. This thread is honestly no different from the_donald - just on the other side.
On August 15 2017 01:45 Adreme wrote: It doesn't matter what he says now. His initial response showed where his heart lies and people now know that. His initial response was to actively try to avoid condemning white supremacists just like it was in the past and that speaks volumes more than whatever he does afterwards.
Ridicolous. You guys are never, ever, ever happy.
It's not exactly unreasonable.
Terrorist attack a few days ago. On the day of the attack Trump refuses to condemn the terrorists who support him. After a few days of outrage Trump offers a weak condemnation.
Imagine this were a situation that involved you. Let's say someone hit your dog with their car and then spent a few days refusing to say sorry. If they then gave you a bullshit apology after everyone was calling them an asshole would you be happy with that apology?
more mental gymnastic? It's pathetic to what extent people on this forum go to legitimize their views.
On the day of the attack, Trump condemned all violence. Ivanka wrote on Twitter 'There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis.' Now Trump condemned the names you hate so much and it's still not enough. He could literally resign from POTUS and you guys would still not be happy.
Your example is non-sense. Trump didn't do the act. To post a more relevant one, it would be like someone hit your dog with their car and you getting mad because the mayor (insert X figure here) condemned all violence on animals and not your precise accident. Anyways, this is what it is for next four years - so better take some stress medications or you guys will not last that long.
Or to have an even more relevant example, it's exactly like if there was a Jihadi attack in, let's say, France, and Macron took 2 whole days to condemn it clearly. How do you think you would be reacting then ?
On August 15 2017 02:47 SoSexy wrote: Also, the panic is blown way off proportions. Ku Klux Klan has more or less 6,000 active members. That is roughly 0,002% of the American population. 0,002%. Do you believe this is a serious threat to American democracy? Do you believe 6,000 votes made the difference in the election for the POTUS? One sees only what he wants to see - on both sides of the spectrum. This thread is honestly no different from the_donald - just on the other side.
Violent racists don't wear signs and don't sign up for groups that say "hey, I'm an active member of a racist group." Please find a better example.
And this is the US. We have a history of racist groups doing bad things to our nation. Like causing a civil war. Then mass riots throughout the 1950-1960s. Then further problems. Racist police not being held accountable for beating a black man that lead to a huge riot in the 1990s. There is a report from the FBI citing that white supremacists are infiltrating law enforcement. And so on.
On August 15 2017 02:47 SoSexy wrote: Also, the panic is blown way off proportions. Ku Klux Klan has more or less 6,000 active members. That is roughly 0,002% of the American population. 0,002%. Do you believe this is a serious threat to American democracy?
Violent racists don't wear signs and don't sign up for groups that say "hey, I'm an active member of a racist group." Please find a better example.
Are you dismissing KKK violence? They committed violence, they are violent racists and sign up PRECISELY for that...
Edit: saw your edit. Can you provide some data or it's just small talk? I remember an user that used to do that everytime, just replying with 'citation needed'. But he was on your side.
my own government running oil companies, gas stations and farms
With the exception of the farms, that sounds like the model of Norway, one of the very best countries to live in in the world, by almost any measurable: income, standard of living, healtcare, corruption, violence... They actually have a conservative/populist-right government now, but the core social-democratic priciples of the country are barely touched, they work too well, and are far too popular...
Less than 24 hours after Charlotte trump released this ad that contains a list of people he identifies as the enemy.
Woah there no need to go full Nixon. He's trying to change the narrative and identify people obstructing his agenda (which is massive massive bigly success already apparently). List of people he identifies as enemies my ass, Nevuk.
When the “President’s enemies” line is spoken, there’s an image of Congress in the background, followed by images of a lot of media figures (mostly from CNN and MSNBC). Anderson Cooper, Jake Tapper, Don Lemon, Erin Burnett, Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes and more show up there.
American Urban Radio Networks White House Correspondent April Ryan was featured in the video as well
It isn't like the text says "my enemies", but the audio does.
And none of them are listed and the ones flashed for "enemies" stay on for less than three seconds.
What it actually and clearly was is present from the start: "Democrats obstructing, the media attacking our president, career politicians standing in the way of success" "But president Trump's plan is working"
It's the normal populist drivel about obstruction (Obama relic reused) and establishment figures slowing down his reforms for the people, the little guy. But people like you have to remind everybody that it's no longer read and react in the era of tribalism, but it's now take everything up to 11. Fifteen overlapping photos with "the presidents enemies don't want him to succeed, but Americans say let President Trump do his job" is not even close to your hot take.
On August 15 2017 02:47 SoSexy wrote: Also, the panic is blown way off proportions. Ku Klux Klan has more or less 6,000 active members. That is roughly 0,002% of the American population. 0,002%. Do you believe this is a serious threat to American democracy? Do you believe 6,000 votes made the difference in the election for the POTUS? One sees only what he wants to see - on both sides of the spectrum. This thread is honestly no different from the_donald - just on the other side.
Intolerant groups can punch way above their weight if civil society and the 'moderate' part of the population does nothing. If demographics were of any concern Trump wouldn't be president in the first place.
EPT
