Here's a start. It's not an advantage to have these criminals try to tell everyone what to think.
Anybody with half a brain wants to see them in jail, rather than in a position to curate our realities.
There’s a high burden of proof for such a statement. Surely you don’t believe every single Trump voter would do such a thing.
Certainly there is a contingent of his voting base that represents what you describe, but to ascribe those characteristics doesn't hold, not least of which because voters had two choices, not many.
Direct your ire at Trump all you want since by definition he holds all the views you describe, but leave the stereotyping somewhere else.
That is a really silly statement. What group are you talking about?
Ohh please, you do realize the calling 70 million people nazi's is one of the reasons they reject the democrat party right? and it is delusional to believe.
There is wide range of policies the people in the "evil red states" reject from the democrat platform that has nothing to do with race, sex, or sexual orientation no matter how much the identity politics people want to make people believe these are the only reasons they reject democrat polices
how about you take the some time to step out of your bubble and learn about some of the actual reasons people reject democrats, as a start take a stroll over to Reason Foundation... Read a Few things, start with https://reason.com/2020/11/06/socialism-2020-trump-biden-reb...
Here's a compilation of 38 times he condemned racism and white supremacy.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd0cMmBvqWc
I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it appears you've been systematically misled on this issue.
The Charlottesville protest was a racist, bloody affair that ultimately resulted in a counter protested being killed after a white supremacist drove their car into the crowd of protestors. But, Trump felt it was very important to defend the protestors and in particular defend Robert E Lee, a man responsible for leading the war to keep a state's rights to slavery. The idea that this is somehow not racist and Trump is a man of equality, is again, absurd.
I also won't give a pass to the deeply ignorant. They are demanding a right to be treated like foolish children, somehow innocent of the decision they're making to remain ignorant of the fact Donald Trump is a racist. I mean come on, of all the difficult things to do on planet Earth, admitting Trump is a bigot is difficult? Grow up.
American society continues to give racists a pass. This includes Nixon's Southern Strategy as told by Lee Atwater in his 1981 interview. It's called plausible deniability. The idea some people are so ignorant they cannot be aware Trump is a racial bigot, and thus they can support a racial bigot while simultaneously denying they are one themselves. It's not believable. And I won't believe it. It's not my burden to take people's word at face value. Grow up. Stop being an infant, stop demanding that people treat you like you don't know better or can't know better.
I am 100% confident there is a Republican out there you can support instead, who has all the boilerplate Republican policies you like, without the bigotry.
Protesting the removal of a statue commemorating Robert e Lee is fundamentally racist, Trump defending this is racist. Equivocating it with Washington is an absurd statement that lacks any historical context or nuance.
And again Trump the thinking that it’s okay to protest and give support to Neo nazis by protesting with them, is a racist incredibly privileged stance to take. How do you watch this speech and come away thinking Trump is not racist here?
I will fully agree that tearing down a statue of Ulysses Grant is ridiculous. But Robert E Lee was a man who was willing to lead a nation into a civil war for the right to own black people. And Trump thinks the people who want a statue to this man to commemorate him are very fine people?
When people tour Dachau they are not exhibiting support for Nazis.
When I was growing up in the South and all my black friends and schoolmates were wearing "No Fear" brand shirts with confederate flags on them, I doubt they were supporting slavery.
To your other argument, Dachau was never a monument to the Nazis. It was left standing as a testament to the horror of the Nazi regime and is a historical place.
The Robert Lee statue was erected sixty years after the end of the civil war. And this statue was erected as part of the historical revisionist “lost cause” movement, that has tried to frame the south’s decision to secede from the union as just. So, the origin of the statue is racism, the man the statue represents is also racism. And this is entirely consistent with the kkk and Nazis protesting the statues removal.
To compare this to a person of color who has reclaimed a symbol of hate, such as the confederate flag. Makes no sense. In order to make your argument you need to explain what the statue means to these people. And how that can possibly be worth it, given what this statue represents to people of color and the fact that they’re supporting Nazis and the kkk while protesting this.
The "lost cause" is an uncivil demand to remain an infant, and an uncivil demand that others shoulder a disproportionate burden of coming to terms with the sins of this country.
Being stupid and insensitive is when you complain you’re not sure how to spend your bonus to your cash strapped friend. Protesting with Nazis and the kkk to defend a statue of the leader of the confederate army, is a blatant act of white supremacy. I see there’s a fundamental disagreement here, where you think this act is not racist and I do. I don’t think either of us are going to be convinced by the other ones argument.
To add some more color here anyway. These people marching through Charlottesville were also chanting “Jews will not replace us”, again I don’t see how a very fine person hears people around them chanting that, sees people carrying nazi flags, sees members of the kkk and continues to protest with them. This is not stupid and insensitive, this is white supremacy.
White nationalists do not typically advertise themselves as such. They recruit by gentle indoctrination. If you look at the posters for the event, they seem pretty innocuous if you weren't already woke to the names of the speakers. You're taking information you know after the fact and assuming that everyone there had that information at the time they showed up.
There were more than two groups there. It was a public event. While there were Nazis there, it wasn't advertised as a Nazi event. Nazi flags doesn't make everyone there bad in exactly the same way Hammer and Sickle flags and some Che Guevara shirts don't make everyone at a left wing rally bad.
It also doesn't matter if you threaten to kill me once, then say you didn't 38 times, I still won't believe you, I just know you're a lying.
His worst response on this issue was the debates where he said "sure" to whether he'd condemn white supremacy. And then he was asked about the Proud Boys which are a multi racial group with a black leader.
>According to a transcript of a press conference on 15 August, President Trump did say - when asked about the presence of neo-Nazis at the rally - "you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."
During the same press conference, Mr Trump went on to say "I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally."
Trump just suddenly throws this in that line at a totally unrelated contractor permitting press conference for one sentence. It's really crazy, if Trump says one thing to the people of Charlottesville and a totally contradictory thing later in the most obscure circumstance, are we to give him the benefit of the doubt? I don't, there is no doubt.
The idea that literally dozens of times he directly and clearly denounced white white supremacy, that he practically couldn't shut up for four years about all the great things he was doing for black people, that he passed the criminal justice reform bill, that he funded historically black colleges more than any administration in history, that he created opportunity zones to bring investment into black communities... He's going around the country bragging about these things constantly, but his off the cuff response in a press conference where he reaffirms his belief that there were some non-racist statue supporters... That's when the real truth came out, that was his big signal to the white supremacists that he was on their side in spite of significant policies and repeatedly proclaiming the opposite. That's a wild belief.
Where are these opportunity zones? Where are these educational opportunities, where was the crime reform, a fantasy. You are taking a known lier at face value. Why? I can just easily dismiss anything you say because Trump accomplished nothing all empty words.
https://www.eda.gov/opportunity-zones/data-disclaimer/
Signed a bill instituting permanent funding for HBCUs.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-12-19/tru...
>And under the Trump administration, federal funding for HBCUs has increased by more than $100 million over the last two years, a 17% increase since 2017.
https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2019-09-...
The criminal justice reform bill was called the First Step Act.
Use your critical thinking skills.
Listen to yourself talk. He a 100% said Nazis are fine people, you were debunked. As Trump would say "You know it, I know it, everybody knows it!"
Because of what Trump has done regarding Yemen he is a war criminal who deserves to be in prison for the rest of his life.
Also, he never once said Nazis are fine people.
That's a good website, I had literally never seen that video before. That's kind of what I mean by my comment, it's downright hilarious to come here onto forums and watch people argue about their respective perceptions of reality, while the vast majority of people think they are actually arguing about reality itself (which is what your video shows). That it has zero effect on most people (well, maybe makes them even angrier) is what is so mysterious about the working of the mind.
1) I'm being misled systematically
2) I've been misled since school
3) They are fully aware of what they are doing
4) Given the choice, they would prefer me dead over defiant
In my estimation this is clearly establishing 1 & 3. The people arguing on this forum are victims of their trusted information sources. But there is no way the Biden campaign and professional media whose job it is to suss these things out had no idea.
The hard part is not falling into Gell-Mann amnesia. We saw this with our own eyes and know they misled us. When the next news story comes out, will we just accept it as fact? Most will, I admit I catch myself struggling with this.
> But there is no way the Biden campaign and professional media whose job it is to suss these things out had no idea.
That's what's so hilarious about reading forums, especially populated with intelligent people. It's like, do you guys really think not a single politician or member of the media can spot the gaping holes in these stories? Or, does it seem plausible that almost half of voters opted for reelecting Trump because they're racist, cult members, etc? But then those questions are answered on the regular in comments and voting.
> The hard part is not falling into Gell-Mann amnesia. We saw this with our own eyes and know they misled us. When the next news story comes out, will we just accept it as fact? Most will, I admit I catch myself struggling with this.
I am really looking forward to the drastic swing we're going to have in narrative, and observing how the masses react to it. Reddit is already well underway, but once the momentum gets going it will be awesome. Will be interesting to see how long it takes before we need to engage in some regretful military intervention in the middle east. Seems like street level terrorism has suddenly reappeared out of nowhere in Europe, seems like a decent enough base for some narrative spinning.
Michael Malice on Youtube
http://michaelmalice.com/ - a few of his articles are here
I have some predictions:
1. Covid is not a big deal anymore. I'm already seeing articles with the narrative change.
2. Assuming Biden is sworn in in January, BLM and police violence against blacks will disappear from the national consciousness before April.
3. 100% agree with you about regretful military intervention
4. Russia definitely did not interfere in the 2020 election
BLM (or at least media coverage of it) died right before the presidential debates got underway, in magical coordination across all media. I don't expect to hear much about the topic again either, depending on the quality of the Republican ticket in the next election of course. Malcolm X explained how that works to us all in the past. That's another weird quirk of this whole production, why were none of the historic speeches of serious black intellectuals entered into the public discourse? I guess not a single person thought of it.
I hope you are enjoying your silent downvotes as much as I am enjoying mine. What a time to be alive! :)
A quote from the ad states "Many New York families — White, Black, Hispanic and Asian — have had to give up the pleasure of a leisurely stroll in the Park at dusk...", so there's reasonable inclusion there.
It does go onto say "Mayor Koch has stated that hate and rancor should be removed from our hearts. I do not think so. I want to hate these muggers and murderers.", which can be interpreted a few ways. Nobody was murdered, so it could be referring more generally to murders which have degraded a sense of public safety as a trend since the death penalty was abolished. Still, it would have been better phrased to temper the trend of guilty until proven innocent to prevent reactive unjust violence, but at the same time you don't want everyone to be so apathetic about reported crimes that nothing gets done.
It's no secret that Trump was not a fan of the Central Park Five which is something he was free to express, but when the guilty charge for rape was lifted there still existed other significant evidence of wrongdoing that makes it harder to justify them being rebranded primarily as victims themselves.
More controversially it states "They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes." The Central Park Five did not kill and as a result, bringing back the death penalty would not have caused them to be executed. It seems more geared towards suggesting the reinstatement of the death penalty as a stronger disincentive to those who would commit violent crimes that could result in death.
The better argument against the ad in general is that the justice system is imperfect and while intense anti-crime passions are understandable, there may be enough noise in the system that the ability to formally execute people is probably something it shouldn't be trusted with.
It's one of those cases where I disagree with a central point the ad is making, but also disagree with people's claims about the ad.
There exists compilation videos of him condemning white supremacy.
> or “very fine people on both sides”.
This is a hoax that has been debunked and can be easily debunked again by anyone who cares by looking up that video, rewind to a few seconds before that quote and listening to a few seconds after the quote.
So this is actually a good proof of what was mentioned above: while Trump wasn't a nice guy he's been under constant misinformation attacks on top of that. No wonder he looks like a really bad guy!
You’re claiming that his racist remarks prove he holds racist beliefs. It’s possible that his racist remarks are driven entirely by his desire to appear blasphemous and be divisive.
> Trump was among the first group of Americans to be given the award, which recognized people from a variety of ethnic backgrounds who have made significant contributions to the country, Otto Coca, communications director for the Ellis Island Honors Society told The Associated Press Monday. But Trump was honored for his work as a successful developer in New York City and his German heritage, Coca said, not for helping inner city youth.
Why would the NAACP give a racist anything?
Trump was different: he really did say outrageous things, like "hell, yeah we should torture them", or saying "Mexicans are rapists", or calling McCain a loser for being captured. Or think about his dismissal of Covid. That's not propaganda. Or his self-dealing in the White House. None of these things were invented.
There's a liberal mainstream establishment in the US, which will always want to bash conservatives. Trump presented a very large target to them. They quite fairly took aim at it.
Not really. They twisted his words into the worse possible interpretation and then took aim at that. Like your Mexicans are rapists quote. That's not what he said. Here's the quote:
>The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else's problems. Thank you. It's true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
Thus, when Mexico 'sends' people across, they are, indeed, 'sending you', in that the crowd of presumably-legal Americans he's talking to are just as likely to have rapists among them as a group of illegal immigrants. He's playing on peoples' notion that it's self evident that a bunch of brown people crossing the border will be rabid criminals.
Sure, he's willing to downplay his beliefs to the press, but even mainstream Republicans found his retention of Stephen Miller in a primary influencer position to be abhorrent. If you aren't racist, you don't put a racist in charge of immigration.
Illegal immigrants aren't a race so being anti-illegal immigrants isn't racism.
As to whether or not it's true there's evidence on both sides. Here is a good summary:
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/is-illegal-immigration-lin...
But you and I are not having the same type of argument that Trump is having. You are taking a reasoned and skeptical position. Trump is not. Trump is not going in front of his rallies and saying, "While the evidence doesn't yet support it, I believe for this and that reason that Mexico is sending rapists and such across the border." As far as Trump is concerned, no research is required. He already somehow knows, and he knows with such certainty that he will happily make unmoderated statements to thousands of people, over and over. To him it is self evident that the Mexican illegal immigrants are largely rapists and assaultive criminals. If he paid attention to the same evidence you do, he would moderate his statements--which he does not.
That fundamental disconnect with factual or consensual reality is why I find Trump abhorrent.
I'm not from the US, nor do I live there. As an outsider looking in I felt Trump and all his crazy ramblings to be a real fall from grace for America. I felt very much like "wow, America has really lost its way electing this guy".
Exactly. I think Trump marked the end of America being seen as any kind of "shining city on the hill" (to use Reagan's phrase). He was and is a giant embarrassment for America, even if many Americans don't realize it or don't care. I say that as a relatively nonpartisan American with many immigrant friends.
And that's insanely dangerous, for everyone else too.
BTW, they did change the launch codes, right?
I wonder, have you ever actually listened to him? Have you seen and heard the things he himself has been proud of? Have you seen how he ran his own businesses?
Also grossly incompetent, ignorant, and incurious. It seems the only talents he ever had were inherited wealth and marketing himself.
One of those isn't a talent, but yes. Although he also married wealth, so that might be a talent of sorts.
His business record is a string of failures, lawsuits and bankruptcies, his greatest cultural notoriety prior to election was playing parodies of himself on television, his greatest political accomplishment was running for President in 2000 as a Reform Party Candidate and losing, and he didn't even write The Art of the Deal.
I know. I was making a bit of joke there.
> Although he also married wealth, so that might be a talent of sorts.
He did? I was under the impression he just married models, who I assumed where in to him because of his reputation for being rich.
Calling someone a racist always involves a degree of mind reading that’s impossible to prove.
You’re claiming that his racist remarks prove he holds racist beliefs. It’s possible that his racist remarks are driven entirely by his desire to appear blasphemous and be divisive.
In other words, he was willing to pander to racists for power.
Some examples include:
* Calling Haiti and African countries as "shitholes" * Calling NBA players "very dumb", etc.
His words speak for themself.
Thank you for speaking up.
I actually liked a good deal of his policies and some I found ridiculous and others awful.
But how you speak matters. He set himself up to be mocked and ridiculed. He picked fights as much or more as they came to him.
I get it - he was “playing to his base”. But I don’t think he was. In fact I think it got to a point his base controlled him. He just couldn’t help being repulsive to a lot of people, media or not.
It’s sad too because he could have been great. He was independent and free from obligations to either party. But he couldn't get out of his own way. He couldn’t act “presidential”.
He should have picked his battles better instead of making everything into one. It gets tiring.
And that is why he lost.
It took a huge effort, a strong and widely palatable candidate, a safe platform, a great campaign, a pandemic, mail-in voting, all the pooled power of the tech companies, and a lot of luck to take him down. Seeing how difficult it was just cements it for me that I am in a bubble and that tens of millions of people have very different worldviews and values than I do. It is very hard to admit to myself that my core values might not be widely shared by others.