US Politics Mega-thread - Page 208

On May 18 2018 02:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Friendly reminder that Clinton made this remark a bit more than 20 years ago ;
"Just as in a previous generation we had an organized effort against the mob. We need to take these people on. They are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators — no conscience, no empathy. "

Granted, she does say they are people, first. But then she says they are not gangs of kids, but superpredators. To me that sounds like 'a particularly bad and dangerous type of animal'.

I don't ever want to defend Trumpian discourse, because it is indefensible, but using the description of M13 members as animals as evidence of him cheapening the level of discourse in america seems flawed. I mean, he does. But this statement is not the best example of it; evidently leading democrat politicians were using comparable language more than 2 decades ago. I'm with Igne, this pile-on on Introvert isnt really warranted imo. I've rarely if ever agreed with a political point introvert was making, but in terms of posting style he is completely fine.

On May 18 2018 02:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Friendly reminder that Clinton made this remark a bit more than 20 years ago ;
"Just as in a previous generation we had an organized effort against the mob. We need to take these people on. They are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators — no conscience, no empathy. "

Granted, she does say they are people, first. But then she says they are not gangs of kids, but superpredators. To me that sounds like 'a particularly bad and dangerous type of animal'.

I don't ever want to defend Trumpian discourse, because it is indefensible, but using the description of M13 members as animals as evidence of him cheapening the level of discourse in america seems flawed. I mean, he does. But this statement is not the best example of it; evidently leading democrat politicians were using comparable language more than 2 decades ago. I'm with Igne, this pile-on on Introvert isnt really warranted imo. I've rarely if ever agreed with a political point introvert was making, but in terms of posting style he is completely fine.

On May 18 2018 03:03 IyMoon wrote:


The way you bring this up makes it seem like HRC was not attacked for calling people superpredators.

Even trump attacked her for it
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/293419-trump-raises-clintons-super-predators-remark

Bringing up the fact that a dem said the same thing so maybe we should just realize this isnt so bad falls short when you realize people called her out on it and she has apologized for that language

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico’s Foreign Minister said on Thursday that recent remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump describing some undocumented immigrants as “animals” were unacceptable, and that a formal complaint would be filed with the State Department.

“President Trump referred to some immigrants, perhaps he had criminal gangs in mind, I don’t know, as animals, not as persons,” Luis Videgaray said in an interview with local TV station Televisa. “In the opinion of the Mexican government this is absolutely unacceptable and we are going to formally communicate this to the U.S. State Department today,” he said.

On May 18 2018 03:05 Kyadytim wrote:
Drone, I have two replies to two completely unrelated items you brought up.

First, I don't think what Clinton said was acceptable, either.

Second, the pile-on on Introvert is something that has happened to most if not all of the conservative posters at one time or another. They making statements that either support or detract from opposition to something objectionable, and eventually people start wanting to know where they stand on that specific issue.

Introvert's posting style is fine, but his arguing style is consistently deflecting the discussion from whether what Trump said was something we're okay with the president of the United States saying. A few of us realized that we'd ended up in a different discussion, about whether Trump was talking about MS-13 or not, with the implication that what Trump said was okay if he was talking about MS-13. We vocally pointed out that we never actually agreed with the idea that it's okay to call MS-13 animals and moved the discussion back to the topic of whether it's okay for Trump to call human beings animals.

This is a different discussion from whether its acceptable for people in general to call people animals, which Introvert and Igne have tried to shift the discussion to now. I, and a few other people, have disagreed with the idea that it is acceptable for the president of the United States to say that people are animals, and would like Introvert to clarify where he stands on that subject.

Now that Igne is here, I'm curious as to where he stands on the subject, as well.

On May 18 2018 03:05 Kyadytim wrote:
Drone, I have two replies to two completely unrelated items you brought up.

First, I don't think what Clinton said was acceptable, either.

Second, the pile-on on Introvert is something that has happened to most if not all of the conservative posters at one time or another. They making statements that either support or detract from opposition to something objectionable, and eventually people start wanting to know where they stand on that specific issue.

Introvert's posting style is fine, but his arguing style is consistently deflecting the discussion from whether what Trump said was something we're okay with the president of the United States saying. A few of us realized that we'd ended up in a different discussion, about whether Trump was talking about MS-13 or not, with the implication that what Trump said was okay if he was talking about MS-13. We vocally pointed out that we never actually agreed with the idea that it's okay to call MS-13 animals and moved the discussion back to the topic of whether it's okay for Trump to call human beings animals.

This is a different discussion from whether its acceptable for people in general to call people animals, which Introvert and Igne have tried to shift the discussion to now. I, and a few other people, have disagreed with the idea that it is acceptable for the president of the United States to say that people are animals, and would like Introvert to clarify where he stands on that subject.

Now that Igne is here, I'm curious as to where he stands on the subject, as well.

On May 18 2018 03:20 IgnE wrote:


here's my opinion: trump is an idiot unfit to be president and i'd rather not waste time parsing his meaningless speech

On May 18 2018 02:41 IgnE wrote:
plansix are you arguing that a majority of the US population have serious qualms about referring to vicious criminals as animals? how about serial killers? how about terrorists?

On May 18 2018 03:47 Splynn wrote:


The term superpredator is actually a phrase coined in the early 1990s to describe particularly violent teenage criminals. She was talking about this term, not labeling them as animals.

The phrase itself does equate teenage criminals as predatory, but predatory behavior is not necessarily animalistic behavior.

Sources:
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/they-were-sentenced-as-superpredators-who-were-they-really/
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/03/very-brief-history-super-predators/


I'm sure that Hillary Clinton has said a lot of other stuff that isn't so nice. I have a hard time equating her phrasing here with Donald Trump's latest remarks, though.

On May 18 2018 03:03 Introvert wrote:
I am debating whether or not to answer the question now presented because to me it doesn't seem to overlap enough with the actual objection of yesterday.

The minority leader of the Senate said

https://twitter.com/SenSchumer/status/996892735989780480

This is the garbage I objected to, and to people in this thread who seemed to think this way.

I think the phrase "not even human" or whatever it was is more objectionable than "animals." How's that for a half answer?

On May 18 2018 04:47 iamthedave wrote:


Maybe I've had a brain fart here... what's your exact issue with what Schumer said there? The sentiment itself? Or is there something contextual that tweaks your angry bone?

The term superpredator is actually a phrase coined in the early 1990s to describe particularly violent black teenage criminals. She was talking about this term, not labeling them as animals.