Alazen Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Donald Trump has support from Louis Farakkan. Also, Hillary was mentored by a Klansman by the name of Strom Thurmond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipse Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 let's be clear, all religion is bad. islam is not without criticism, but efforts to paint an entire group of people as negatively as that is insane. The other thing that I'd like to be clear on: Turning this into a religious war thread will be grounds for a very heavy warn. In other words, don't continue this point regarding religion being good/bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yojinbo Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Let's not mince words here. Racism and anti-islamic fear mongering go hand in hand [...] Not necessarily. As a largely anti-authoritarian person I'm anti-islam [and also anti-trump] but not pro-racism. I understand that I'm part of an almost invisible minority here but I still think it's important to point out that you can analyze the ideology of Islam much in the same way as you can analyze, say, capitalism and come to ... certain conlusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Person123 Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 how much of that leddit post have you actually read lol. are you trying to say that if you see a muslim in the street, you have reason to fear them or something. i can make more of an effortpost later, as of now that stuff isn't convincing. 87% of EGYPTIANS AGREE WITH AL QAEDA jesus christ I've read all the articles featured in the OP, and have skimmed most of the PDFs. The point I was trying to make was that the fears people have concerning Muslims is not wholly irrational. Like it or not, there are many Muslims who just are not ideologically compatible with the modern world. People can cry "bigot" all they want, but reality remains unchanged. As I've said before, I think a temporary ban on Muslims is the wrong way to go, I don't see how it could be enforced; and it's unfair to the people who are compatible, and American citizens who happen to be Muslim. this may come as a surprise to a number of you, but black people showing up to trump's rallies don't absolve him of the xenophobic rhetoric he continually uses. If you could provide examples of the Xenophobic rhetoric you're speaking of, I'd be happy to attempt and deconstruct them for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blah the Prussian Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 The issue of the goodness of religion is irrelevant because the development of religion was a historical inevitability. Back on topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crysta Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 If you could provide examples of the Xenophobic rhetoric you're speaking of, I'd be happy to attempt and deconstruct them for you. Okay. Explain how the birther movement proudly spearheaded by him was a legitimate thing. What was it that made him doubt Obama was born in the U.S.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBM Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 On the illegal immigrants thing, I believe he's saying that the issue is that they steal jobs because they can be paid less, meaning the companies hiring them don't have to spend as much money on them as they would a legal immigrant/citizen. And I agree that this can be an issue. but, but, if you replace illegal immigrants working under minimum wage with good hard-working Americans working at higher wages, that's essentially the same thing as raising the minimum wage, and that's bad for the economy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solrocknroll Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/275443-sanders-i-would-apologize-for-slavery Here we see white guilt. So apologizing for a horrible atrocity is white guilt? I'm not seeing how. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Person123 Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Okay. Explain how the birther movement proudly spearheaded by him was a legitimate thing. What was it that made him doubt Obama was born in the U.S.? I fail to see how the legitimacy of the "birther" movement is related at all to Trump's alleged "xenophobic rhetoric"; being a natural born citizen is a requirement to be eligible for Presidency in the U.S. In any case, I'm not terribly familiar with the whole birther thing, so I'll just quote Wikipedia. "In April 2011, Trump questioned President Barack Obama's proof of citizenship,[280] alleging that "his grandmother in Kenya said he was born in Kenya, and she was there and witnessed the birth."[281] (Trump's claim derived from a discredited transcript of a telephone interview with Obama's grandmother, produced by a Pennsylvania pastor opposed to Obama's election.)" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryhard Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 (edited) The full quote as he said is thus. "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. Their rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." An argument could be made that he was talking about sending "their" rapists, not that he meant Mexicans are rapists as a whole, and if you listen to him as he's making the speech, from his inflection it's pretty clear (to me; at least) what he meant. Personally I dislike arguing semantics, so watch a Youtube video of him making the quote and come to your own conclusion. That said, is the point he's trying to make valid? If you actually bother to look into it, the data doesn't lie. https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm He is certain of the overwhelming majority of Mexicans being criminals, rapists and smugglers of drugs coming in to the country, he is not sure about this part, but assumes some, perhaps, are good people. I'm not sure how this could construed any other way. He fucking said it. As for criminal data, we've seen many sources with differing opinions. http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mythical-connection-between-immigrants-and-crime-1436916798 (Wall Street Journal is unfortunately not freely viewable but the title alone should tell you) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/02/surprise-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-immigrants-and-crime/ Edited April 8, 2016 by Tryhard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blah the Prussian Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 So apologizing for a horrible atrocity is white guilt? I'm not seeing how. Many people have already apologized for slavery. I'm honestly not impressed by this as it seems like a cheap attempt to curry favor with the black demographic rather than actually talking about current issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Person123 Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 He is certain of the overwhelming majority of Mexicans being criminals, rapists and smugglers of drugs coming in to the country, he is not sure about this part, but assumes some, perhaps, are good people. I'm not sure how this could construed any other way. He fucking said it. As for criminal data, we've seen many sources with differing opinions. http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mythical-connection-between-immigrants-and-crime-1436916798 (Wall Street Journal is unfortunately not freely viewable but the title alone should tell you) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/02/surprise-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-immigrants-and-crime/ I see your articles and raise you: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/illegal_aliens_murder_at_a_much_higher_rate_than_us_citizens_do.html I followed the methodology the author used therein and came to the same conclusion. The data he used from the Government Accountability office can be found here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alertcircuit Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 He is certain of the overwhelming majority of Mexicans being criminals, rapists and smugglers of drugs coming in to the country, he is not sure about this part, but assumes some, perhaps, are good people. I'm not sure how this could construed any other way. He fucking said it. Later he sort of elaborates on this. He means to imply that the Mexican government is purposely sending criminals over so they don't have to deal with them. He just words this incredibly poorly because as mentioned, he's not a politician. Many people have already apologized for slavery. I'm honestly not impressed by this as it seems like a cheap attempt to curry favor with the black demographic rather than actually talking about current issues. He's been fighting for black people since the 60s, so I feel like it's sincere and not just a political move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dondon151 Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 The point I was trying to make was that the fears people have concerning Muslims is not wholly irrational. Like it or not, there are many Muslims who just are not ideologically compatible with the modern world. People can cry "bigot" all they want, but reality remains unchanged. the fears people have concerning trump supporters is not wholly irrational. like it or not, there are many trump supporters, such as yourself, who are just not ideologically compatible with the modern world. people can cry "liberal media" all they want, but reality remains unchanged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Person123 Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 the fears people have concerning trump supporters is not wholly irrational. like it or not, there are many trump supporters, such as yourself, who are just not ideologically compatible with the modern world. people can cry "liberal media" all they want, but reality remains unchanged. Contrary to your assumption I don't really endorse Trump. It's true that I believe there is some merit behind a couple of his policies, illegal immigration specifically; I also assert that the media portrays him a bit unfairly at times. His stance on Global warming for example is almost a complete deal-breaker for me. That said, I don't like it when people completely write off a candidates supporters as "stupid racists" or "liberal cucks." That kind of rhetoric just stifles discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blah the Prussian Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Later he sort of elaborates on this. He means to imply that the Mexican government is purposely sending criminals over so they don't have to deal with them. He just words this incredibly poorly because as mentioned, he's not a politician. He's been fighting for black people since the 60s, so I feel like it's sincere and not just a political move. Then why not promise to do an actual thing rather than make an empty gesture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Many people have already apologized for slavery. I'm honestly not impressed by this as it seems like a cheap attempt to curry favor with the black demographic rather than actually talking about current issues. yeah, but many people aren't the president. sorry isn't a word that matters much to me, though. but maybe it does to a lot of people? I see your articles and raise you: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/illegal_aliens_murder_at_a_much_higher_rate_than_us_citizens_do.html I followed the methodology the author used therein and came to the same conclusion. The data he used from the Government Accountability office can be found here. i am having trouble finding that table at all (or those respective numbers) from fbi.gov. also, "(You may try to compare those numbers to the FBI’s numbers for all crimes, but the categories do not match except for murder/homicide. That is part of what makes this analysis so frustrating, and ripe for cherry-picking by pro-immigrant groups.)" is fucking laughable. "there's a huge hole in my analysis, and of course pro-immigration people are gonna pick at it." i don't think this study can be trusted, at least when it comes to undocumented immigrants. especially when that data is iffy to begin with. http://immigrationpolicy.org/special-reports/criminalization-immigration-united-states http://www.pbs.org/newshour/videos/#149597 i'd rather trust the sources of actual experts over the shoddy conclusions of some conservative journalist. The other thing that I'd like to be clear on: Turning this into a religious war thread will be grounds for a very heavy warn. In other words, don't continue this point regarding religion being good/bad. what if i replaced "bad" with "flawed"? If you could provide examples of the Xenophobic rhetoric you're speaking of, I'd be happy to attempt and deconstruct them for you. well, banning muslims is a good start. i'm not convinced trump, the man, is racist. i am convinced that he creates a division of us vs. them via making you fear "them" because they're so much worse than "us." that's an example of xenophobia, because "they" are foreigners. i am convinced that a non-negligible fraction of trump supporters disagree with the emancipation proclamation compared with other candidates. http://www.snopes.com/trump-supporters-pro-slavery/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blah the Prussian Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Fine; the US government has apologized for slavery many times. The time for apologies is over. The time for looking to the future, and making life better for minorities there, is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dondon151 Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Contrary to your assumption I don't really endorse Trump. It's true that I believe there is some merit behind a couple of his policies, illegal immigration specifically; I also assert that the media portrays him a bit unfairly at times. i agree that the media portrays trump unfairly at times. considering his predilection towards suppressing free speech, i think he deserves all of the criticism that he gets and then some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Person123 Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 i am having trouble finding that table at all (or those respective numbers) from fbi.gov. also, "(You may try to compare those numbers to the FBI’s numbers for all crimes, but the categories do not match except for murder/homicide. That is part of what makes this analysis so frustrating, and ripe for cherry-picking by pro-immigrant groups.)" is fucking laughable. "there's a huge hole in my analysis, and of course pro-immigration people are gonna pick at it." i don't think this study can be trusted, at least when it comes to undocumented immigrants. especially when that data is iffy to begin with. http://immigrationpolicy.org/special-reports/criminalization-immigration-united-states http://www.pbs.org/newshour/videos/#149597 i'd rather trust the sources of actual experts over the shoddy conclusions of some conservative journalist. I'm not entirely sure which table you are speaking of specifically, it's either the one here, or the table from page 27 of the United States Government Accountability Office. About them "Experts," (immigrationpolicy.org) the data that they were relying on is inherently flawed and cannot be trusted. This pdf highlights in excessive detail why the census data they used to justify their assertion is unreliable. I can go into more detail if you like, but I'd mostly just be quoting from the pdf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipse Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 what if i replaced "bad" with "flawed"? Religion in the context of how our dear Presidential nominees see it (such as Trump/Islam): Fine. Your opinion of religion: Wrong topic. If you want to quickly figure out whether or not it's appropriate, ask "does this statement have anything to do with the presidential race/candidates?" If the answer is "no", then it's the wrong place and time for it. Last thing I want is holy war in the middle of a bunch of already colorful candidates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 i agree that the media portrays trump unfairly at times. considering his predilection towards suppressing free speech, i think he deserves all of the criticism that he gets and then some. Oh, please, tell me all about the no-platformed people due to comments that aren't entirely politically correct, about Tim Hunt losing his career over a joke, or about people in Europe getting arrested over being against Syrian refugees being brought in. It's different to state your opinion than it is to make clickbait lies and sell it as "News", that sounds like a scam to me. When Trump hosts rallies, he does so at private venues. It is fully within his legal right to kick protesters out. I don't see the liberal media outrage at so many countries, a noticeable amount of them Islamic-majority, that suppress basic human rights and get off scot-free, or at most with "trade restrictions" that then they can ignore with no major repercussion. I do happen to see the liberal media outrage at people suggesting that just importing immigrants isn't the best solution (When instead, as previous statements have mentioned, the better solution would be to fix the source of the problem.) I see issue when the media will downplay events or outright twist the titles and wording of it just because otherwise it would disrupt their narrative. I see issue when Hollande got censored when talking with Obama. Because apparently "Islamic terrorism" cannot be said on free air. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dondon151 Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 lmao none of that had anything to do with my post http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/trump-threatens-to-weaken-first-amendment-protections-for-reporters/ http://time.com/4239386/donald-trump-libel-freedom-of-press/ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/26/trump-pledges-curb-press-freedom-libel-laws-first-amendment we know that trump has pledged to curb first amendment freedoms for journalists http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/03/the-lawsuits-of-donald-trump/273819/ we know that trump historically has used the legal system to suppress negative facts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 lmao none of that had anything to do with my post http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/trump-threatens-to-weaken-first-amendment-protections-for-reporters/ http://time.com/4239386/donald-trump-libel-freedom-of-press/ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/26/trump-pledges-curb-press-freedom-libel-laws-first-amendment we know that trump has pledged to curb first amendment freedoms for journalists http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/03/the-lawsuits-of-donald-trump/273819/ we know that trump historically has used the legal system to suppress negative facts It's different to state your opinion than it is to make clickbait lies and sell it as "News", that sounds like a scam to me. (...) I see issue when the media will downplay events or outright twist the titles and wording of it just because otherwise it would disrupt their narrative. Libel laws make sense. If the media has the sources to prove that if it provided false information, it did so without malice of intent due to a honest mistake, then libel laws shouldn't be an issue for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 That's still curbing free speech, and anyone can make the claim that someone said something with false information in it. Our courts aren't as friendly to that kind of thing as they should be, especially if they say things about the POTUS that is not false but the POTUS doesn't like to hear and goes after them on the grounds that it's false. Let's not talk about the less wealthy people who can be targeted for this and will not win any of these libel suits. For instance, he has specifically mentioned he hates certain newspapers and media outlets for digging very deep into his background and his current wealth (which has a lot of very inconsistent information about it) - this includes the New York Times - and he threatens to sue them for saying that they're talking down on him despite them making a conclusion based on actual research on him. You're actually kidding if you think that holding the media accountable is not curbing free speech. It's very clear - based on things he's said, mind you - that he's doing it with the intention that he should not be held accountable for his actions and would sue the shit out of people who criticize him. The whole idea is to make it much easier to sue news organizations, which goes against the first amendment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.