What would it take for Donald Trump to be a racist?

Author: Barney

Posts

Total: 91
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Daily mantra on CNN is that your life will be better exponentially as your hatred toward the Orangeman increases.
trump has hurt alot of people and significantly damaged america. I agree they are WAY over the top with it. but the underlying point that trump is a terrible person and is a threat to america is accurate. 

HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@bmdrocks21
Lmao, I thought you were a history buff. Didn't you know that only White landowners could vote when the country was founded?
yes, because they were the only one's they considered to be people. So unless you are considering illiterate people to be non-persons, your point doesn't have much merit. 

I plan on barring stupid people from voting. If you can't even do something as simple as read, why should you impact highly complex issues by voting?
because the power of the vote is the primary thing that gives people a voice in a democracy. Politicians have to at least pretend they are listening to you because your have power over them. As soon as a group is removed from the voter pool, they lose all importance. No politician is going to lift a finger to help someone who has neither the money to help them or a vote they can cast for them. It guarantees they have no voice and no power. It ensures that they are forced into an underclass that no one will help and no one will listen to. A free society should not allow that to ever happen. 

I am not against the government funding education. In fact, I support school choice, so my policies would result in better literacy than whatever you would propose.
that makes no sense. People who are forced to or choose to drop out of school are not going to be in a position where whether or not they will be able to vote will be a critical factor. If you have to drop out of school to get a job to feed your family, then losing your right to vote in the future is a small price to pay to protect those you love. You aren't going improve literacy by punishing those who fall through the cracks. 
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,465
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Admittedly, Fox News employing Chris Wallace (third hobo in that dumpster fire of a presidential debate last week) has made me dislike them even more.
ironically, Chris Wallace is one of the Fox employees I despise the least. He is one of the very few people working for fox who will ever, under any circumstances, even lightly criticize trump or the republicans. Virtually everyone else employed there are non-stop republican sycophants who do nothing but ass kiss. Wallace isn't alot better, he ass kisses about 95% of the time. But that's better than almost everyone else on fox. 
I dislike such obvious fake news as Fox. I likewise morally find Trump to be repulsive. However, having watched the debate, it was clearly an attempted two on one. Fox News continuing to employ him, suggests they are ok with him trying to someone sabotage the integrity of the election.

While not as bad as previous debate issues, such as when seeking the Democratic Party nomination, Hillary Clinton getting spoon fed the questions ahead of time (why the DNC wanted Trump as president, is a mystery that will haunt me until the day I die). Or George W. Bush wearing a wire (and ironically botching it anyway).
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Barney
I dislike such obvious fake news as Fox.
I think I only actually watch Tucker Carlson, cause the rest of the shows are clearly prepackaged and canned for consumption. Especially Hannity.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Barney
Watch this and tell me Fox isn't mostly influenced by elites, some of the same ones that influence MSM.


At least Tucker is still allowed to mention his name.

Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,465
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Wow! So much awkward! So much wow!
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
yes, because they were the only one's they considered to be people. So unless you are considering illiterate people to be non-persons, your point doesn't have much merit. 

Well damn, guess you consider 5 year-old to not be people because you don't think they should be allowed to vote. I guess voting is validation of your humanity. Let's let foreign nationals vote while we're at it!

because the power of the vote is the primary thing that gives people a voice in a democracy. Politicians have to at least pretend they are listening to you because your have power over them. As soon as a group is removed from the voter pool, they lose all importance. No politician is going to lift a finger to help someone who has neither the money to help them or a vote they can cast for them. It guarantees they have no voice and no power. It ensures that they are forced into an underclass that no one will help and no one will listen to. A free society should not allow that to ever happen. 

Well, we were never meant to be a democracy because that amounts to "mob rule". You learn to read in like first grade. If you are an adult and cannot read at a fifth grade reading level for some literacy test, then I'm sorry but you have shown such little care for yourself and have neglected your civic duty to not be an imbecile.

that makes no sense. People who are forced to or choose to drop out of school are not going to be in a position where whether or not they will be able to vote will be a critical factor. If you have to drop out of school to get a job to feed your family, then losing your right to vote in the future is a small price to pay to protect those you love. You aren't going improve literacy by punishing those who fall through the cracks. 

I don't think anyone is expecting you to read Shakespeare to be allowed to vote. If you are at the age at which you can work, and you cannot trudge through a few sentences (I don't know how you are getting jobs to feed your family if you are illiterate), then who is to even say that you will be voting correctly? They can fill out ballots completely wrong by not understanding directions. Seems quite hazardous to me.
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
A nintendo ds is all he needs.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Barney

My personal test is simple.

If the individual person accusing someone of being a racist would not hate him even a tiny bit less were he to actually be non-racist, then the charge is absolute bullshit and a cover for the other reasons why that individual hates a person.

At that point, it just descends into the realm of "yo-momma" slurs and taunts.

Particularly look at the 1:35 mark of the video.

There are people out there that would stand to lose a lot, both financially and with the status of their peers were they to even question if Trump were a racist. 

Do these opinions even matter?

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
Trump: “I’ve rejected the KKK from the time I was 5 years old"

CNN headline: "Trump shockingly admits he was a white supremacist at age 4 in a rare moment of honesty."

HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@bmdrocks21
Well damn, guess you consider 5 year-old to not be people because you don't think they should be allowed to vote. I guess voting is validation of your humanity.
5 year olds do not have the legal right to make decisions for themselves. They have a legal guardian for that. If they can't decide what they will eat, they obviously can't decide who to vote for president. You are advocating for taking the vote away from adults of sound mind who should have every right to a voice in decisions that will very much affect them. 

Well, we were never meant to be a democracy because that amounts to "mob rule". You learn to read in like first grade. If you are an adult and cannot read at a fifth grade reading level for some literacy test, then I'm sorry but you have shown such little care for yourself and have neglected your civic duty to not be an imbecile.
ahh, so it's victim blaming time? gotcha. Most people who can't read have reasons that is the case. They couldn't attend school, their school failed them, a medical issue etc. It does not mean they are are incapable of deciding what is best for themselves. 

I don't think anyone is expecting you to read Shakespeare to be allowed to vote. If you are at the age at which you can work, and you cannot trudge through a few sentences (I don't know how you are getting jobs to feed your family if you are illiterate), then who is to even say that you will be voting correctly?
Why not require shakespear? Or an IQ test? or a DNA test? I mean you don't want "the wrong people" voting. You are saying that we need an arbitrary cutoff line where anyone under that line is not good enough to have a say in how their country is run. It used to be that natives and women were under that line. Obviously slaves were under that line. You now want to add a new one. 


They can fill out ballots completely wrong by not understanding directions. Seems quite hazardous to me.
lol tons of people (who can read just fine) fill out ballots incorrectly. If that is your concern, then we should work on improving the voting process to make it clearer, like say with a photo or something. But we both know that isn't your real concern. 


Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
You are advocating for taking the vote away from adults of sound mind who should have every right to a voice in decisions that will very much affect them. 

Bullshit. There are millions of non-taxpayers voting on how to spend taxes. That's a large reason why pandering is a contact sport in DC.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Bullshit. There are millions of non-taxpayers voting on how to spend taxes. That's a large reason why pandering is a contact sport in DC.
Your argument is exactly the same one that the rich and powerful used to keep the poor from voting in the 19th century. IE , they don't have a stake in the state because they don't own land. Therefore they should not get a vote. This was used to ensure that only the rich and powerful were represented in government and the government would virtually never do things to help or protect the poor.

You want the same thing. To create a sub-class that has no right to a voice because you consider them to be unworthy of being heard. It is super elitist and exclusionary. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Everyone now has private property. Not everyone pays taxes on it though.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Everyone now has private property. Not everyone pays taxes on it though.
true. And the nobles in the 19th century said if you didn't own a sufficient amount of land then you shouldn't get a vote. I mean, if you don't at least 2 large estates, are you even paying taxes?!?!?

You are now making the exact same argument. You want the poor or people with less education to be forced into a sub-class that can be safely ignored. This way, the government only needs to listen to the rich and powerful and can safely ignore and step on the poor because they don't get a voice.  You are advocating for an elitist society where only a certain chosen group of people are worthy of having an opinion on how their country will be run. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Actually, I just want the poor to be taxed like they do in Nordic countries, It's harder to pander when it's your own money purchasing your own vote.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Actually, I just want the poor to be taxed like they do in Nordic countries, It's harder to pander when it's your own money purchasing your own vote.
I absolutely agree. The Nordic model is better than america's. The poor should pay in their fare share and get back proper services like universal healthcare.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
To be a racist, Trump would not need to express it; plenty of closet racists out there, but virtually all of them, sooner, or later, cannot help the open expression, such as "If you don't vote for me, you ain't black," or "the Hispanic community, unlike the black community, is diverse." Really? However, there are too many examples of Trump's open expressions of well-wishes for other races that go beyond words. For example, until Trump came along, the HBC's went begging for funding every year. Oba'a could have solved that in any one of his eight years, but did not. Trump has privately benefitted many individuals because he has a compassionate heart; more so than his father. These charitable acts have too much documentation to ignore.
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,465
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Greyparrot
re: #69

My personal test is simple.

If the individual person accusing someone of being a racist would not hate him even a tiny bit less were he to actually be non-racist, then the charge is absolute bullshit and a cover for the other reasons why that individual hates a person.

At that point, it just descends into the realm of "yo-momma" slurs and taunts.

Particularly look at the 1:35 mark of the video.

There are people out there that would stand to lose a lot, both financially and with the status of their peers were they to even question if Trump were a racist. 

Do these opinions even matter?
Sounds like your standard is just a rejection of tribal ethics (which color of necktie, then decide if all good or all evil based on shared affiliation or otherness).
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Barney
Not at all.

If your opinion doesn't matter of a person whether or not the person is a racist or not. Then the charge itself does not matter. Simple logic.

What I pointed out with the video clip is that there are real tangible harmful consequences these days to being labeled a "Trump racist denier" which makes the charge worth much less when people are being coerced into adopting that position. Especially if you live in a leftist echo-bubble with Marxist Karens all around you in your job.

Trump thoughtcrimes are real and curiously morbid.
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,465
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Greyparrot
To me that really sounds a lot like further rejection of tribal ethics. Which yes, leads to arbitrary assignment of otherness with tangible harmful consequences.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Barney
Thought crimes.

sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,198
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
The word racist doesn't mean anything anymore. Everyone and everything is racist. Just make the accusation and you are a racist. You cant prove you are not. You are all fucking bigoted racists, every last one of you. No you can say or do will prove otherwise.

Danielle
Danielle's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 2,049
3
3
4
Danielle's avatar
Danielle
3
3
4
-->
@Greyparrot
Trump: “I’ve rejected the KKK from the time I was 5 years old"

CNN headline: "Trump shockingly admits he was a white supremacist at age 4 in a rare moment of honesty."

Lol, true. I just don't get the focus on CNN though when every single media outlet is biased. There are so many right wing rags and bullshit punditry by bitch ass conservative momos, including ya boy Tucker Carlson whose commentary is flat out garbage. I can't stand his pearl clutching outrage predicated on straw mans even more annoying than his stupid face. He's a fucking idiot.

I get why people are upset at "fake news" and all - I just don't get the hyperfocus on CNN.  And I can't take it seriously from conservatives who don't acknowledge the fact that Trump put Steve Bannon, former editor of BREITBART, in his inner circle. Like we're gonna criticize CNN but turn a blind eye to giving a position to the guy who spearheads Breitbart? Mmk. More reasons right wing faux outrage can't be taken seriously.  

Danielle
Danielle's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 2,049
3
3
4
Danielle's avatar
Danielle
3
3
4
Trump is racist. One pretty clear example of this (there are many, some more obvious than others) was when he told four brown Congresswomen, three of them born in the U.S., to "go back to the countries they came from" if they wanted to criticize the US. Meanwhile Trump's campaign  was literally predicated on criticizing the U.S. (Make America Great Again implies it was no longer great). 

If anything Trump's constituents are anti-American. They believe the wrong side won the Civil War. They openly fly the flag of the enemy. They constantly berate the country and claim that some of our best cities are third world hellish wastelands. They don't care about and often explicitly wish harm on many of their fellow countrymen. They actively oppose liberal democracy and all its institutions, from voter enfranchisement to the separation of powers. They resent the free market and call for the quelling of private enterprise in exchange for nationalist economic populism spearheaded by the government (like Bernie Bros but worse). They shit on immigrants even though we are a nation of immigrants...

Which brings me back to the original point. Telling these Congresswomen they are somehow LESS AMERICAN than Trump and all of his followers for criticizing America is obviously ridiculous, and implicitly racist as Trump has never made this dumb remark to any white person regardless of political affiliation. Why would we assume they are from other countries...? He's such a tool. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Danielle

ya boy Tucker Carlson whose commentary is flat out garbage.

Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,465
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Greyparrot
To me that really sounds a lot like further rejection of tribal ethics. Which yes, leads to arbitrary assignment of otherness with tangible harmful consequences.
Thought crimes.
How is that not tribal ethics? The student in question marked themselves as possessing otherness, so was attacked by her classmates and teacher for everything that had she not made the social media post would have been just fine, but because she's part of the wrong tribe everything about her must be evil (including apparently race-mixing, which through the lense of tribal ethics is evil for being so non-liberal?).

1423 days later

Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,465
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
I'm a speciesist. This is evident by my consumption of cows, but not of dogs.
It is quite strange how some jokes age…

But yes, as an immigrant I must have lied about my exclusionist behavior towards dogs…

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Barney
How the hell do you remember these things.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,356
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Barney
It also gives us another clue to your OP. One must ask themself, if this conspiracy was about immigrants from Sweden would Trump and the right have swallowed it whole the way they did?

So basically, the answer from Trump supporters in this thread is the same as always - that we can't know whether Trump is racist because we're not inside his head. I find it interesting how everytime the debate over what Trump's beliefs or intentions are (like is he a racist) suddenly everyone pretends this is a court of law and convicting him in our minds will result in the loss of his freedom. That's not the standard. Judging the character of others is something we do every day of our lives. We do it when we walk into a gas station and pay for a hot dog. The idea that we can't possibly judge the most visible man on earth over the past decade is preposterous.